Jake✔;3020879 said:65k a week. SIXTY-FIVE THOUSAND. PER WEEK. That's £13,520,000, discounting the fee received on signing for them. Mental.
If true, that's insane; yes, the money might balance out because they didn't have to shell out for a transfer fee, but there will be an awful lot of Reading long-timers wondering why he's worth twice their wages if he does not replicate his Fulham form.
Jake✔;3020979 said:What's to say he will replicate that form? Massive gamble.
Fulham fans reckon he was pretty average after that great start.
Anyway, just as long as they have a relegation clause in the contract they will be fine. If they haven't then they are screwed~!
Fulham fans reckon he was pretty average after that great start.
Anyway, just as long as they have a relegation clause in the contract they will be fine. If they haven't then they are screwed~!
Dan‽;3021050 said:Fits in with the rest of his pretty average career... £65k based on a run of form, sheesh
Yes I heard this too. £65k is not realistic! The £13m mentioned, over the course of his contract, will include signing on fee and bonuses, it's not all basic wage.Thought Pogrebnyak was on 35k?
Yes I heard this too. £65k is not realistic! The £13m mentioned, over the course of his contract, will include signing on fee and bonuses, it's not all basic wage.
Let's face it £35k is still smashing their wage structure. But you need to think a bit harder if you think they're paying him £65k basic.
Dan‽;3021118 said:
I posted a link from the reading paper a few days ago saying the same. Have yet to see any papers saying 35k .
Source? Neither of the two links up there say it's excluding add-ons.Jake✔;3021104 said:Erm, the £13.5 million that I mentioned was a calculation of his proposed basic wage per week (65k) over the course of his contract, not including signing on fee and bonuses.
Source? Neither of the two links up there say it's excluding add-ons.