Mark Bowen

[RoyalBlue]

Regardless, there's nothing about Dai's finances that have been the problem for Reading.

Failure to pay the staff's wages on time twice in the last 6 months........

Not because he doesn't have the money, but because he fails to move it quickly enough around bank holidays.

And I suspect he leaves that to his minions anyway!

[AthleticoSpizz]

? Who knows….and who particularly cares right now?

I thought he (Bowen) was meant to be the mouthpiece for our shy chingaling owners?
Apart from his lengthy ‘missive from a few weeks ago’….

“IT’S ALL GONE QUIET OVER THERE”…as the SB used to sing

Has been quiet since Ince’s blessed release.

[Royal_jimmy]

I have to say, this thread seems to have diverted away from Mark Bowen....which is sad because surely if we need a reset and a clear out he should be one of the first out of the door. As director of football our academy failed, scouting has failed, and basically everything has failed. Why did he not push for Ince to be sacked. He said that he wanted him gone last February, so why didnt he speak to Dai?
So is he part of the problem also?

I couldn't disagree more with this post.

As discussed earlier the academy downgrade is nothing to do with Bowen.

Dai clearly didn't take Bowens advice to sack Ince in January. It's Dai who's to blame, not Bowen

[Vision]

I have to say, this thread seems to have diverted away from Mark Bowen....which is sad because surely if we need a reset and a clear out he should be one of the first out of the door. As director of football our academy failed, scouting has failed, and basically everything has failed. Why did he not push for Ince to be sacked. He said that he wanted him gone last February, so why didnt he speak to Dai?
So is he part of the problem also?

I couldn't disagree more with this post.

As discussed earlier the academy downgrade is nothing to do with Bowen.

Dai clearly didn't take Bowens advice to sack Ince in January. It's Dai who's to blame, not Bowen

How has this become a thing? There's nothing to suggest Bowen wanted anything of the sort other than the usual "I heard that..." bollox we read on social media. Bowen is very good at making people think anything good came from him and anything bad was someone elses doing.

That being said, I think he's done about as well as could be expected in his (second time) current role. The squad he helped put together in trying circumstances should have been good enough to stay up. It looks like we're at least trying to build some infrastructure behind the scenes that resembles a functioning football set up so we'll just have to wait and see what transpires from here on in.

Being in League 1 is shit but it's not the end of the world.

[Lower West]

Dai clearly didn't take Bowens advice to sack Ince in January. It's Dai who's to blame, not Bowen

Unless Dai breaks his silence. We'll never know the truth. Suspect there's far more going on in the background than has been told. What now follows is likely to speak volumes.

[Snowflake Royal]

I have to say, this thread seems to have diverted away from Mark Bowen....which is sad because surely if we need a reset and a clear out he should be one of the first out of the door. As director of football our academy failed, scouting has failed, and basically everything has failed. Why did he not push for Ince to be sacked. He said that he wanted him gone last February, so why didnt he speak to Dai?
So is he part of the problem also?

I couldn't disagree more with this post.

As discussed earlier the academy downgrade is nothing to do with Bowen.

Dai clearly didn't take Bowens advice to sack Ince in January. It's Dai who's to blame, not Bowen

How has this become a thing? There's nothing to suggest Bowen wanted anything of the sort other than the usual "I heard that..." bollox we read on social media. Bowen is very good at making people think anything good came from him and anything bad was someone elses doing.

That being said, I think he's done about as well as could be expected in his (second time) current role. The squad he helped put together in trying circumstances should have been good enough to stay up. It looks like we're at least trying to build some infrastructure behind the scenes that resembles a functioning football set up so we'll just have to wait and see what transpires from here on in.

Being in League 1 is shit but it's not the end of the world.

If something gets repeated enough people forget to remain skeptical about it and it just 'becomes' truth.

We could do with getting out of the cycle of heroes and villains where everything is the villain's fault and the hero can do no wrong. Bowen's imperfect just like the rest of us and will get stuff wrong and screw up at times. Doesn’t mean he can't be, on the whole, doing a positive job, or have done good work previously if things fall to shit.

The job we have to do is very hard and there will be slip ups along the way even if we succeed.

[Millsy]

As above, while he may be imperfect, the problem at this club isn't Bowen it's Dai.

The absolutely best case scenario is him somehow takign a hit and fking off for someone else to step in. Sadly unlikely so we're a bit stuffed.

On the other hand too many people are hailing Bowen as some sort of God who can fix all our issues if only Dai listens to him. He can't and won't.

[Royal_jimmy]

If Dai won't listen to Bowen then what was the point in even bringing him back to the club?

[NathStPaul]

To make it look like the owner was listening to someone.

[RoyalBlue]

When Bowen was manager, I thought he displayed more than a touch of arrogance about him. Given that character trait I really don't think he would stick around if Mr Dai repeatedly ignored what he said/advised.

I suspect Dai did dig his heels in over Ince but also that it was probably Bowen who finally persuaded him to pull the trigger, albeit that was too late.

[Hiram K Hackenbacker]

Dai clearly didn't take Bowens advice to sack Ince in January. It's Dai who's to blame, not Bowen

Unless Dai breaks his silence. We'll never know the truth. Suspect there's far more going on in the background than has been told. What now follows is likely to speak volumes.

I agree

[Fezza]

The issue throughout has been our owners. Sadly the EFL can't be docked points or relegated for continually failing to adequately do the fit and proper persons checks.

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

[tmesis]

The issue throughout has been our owners. Sadly the EFL can't be docked points or relegated for continually failing to adequately do the fit and proper persons checks.

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

As the expose showed, the guys behind that deal knew exactly how to get round the tests and checks in place, to hide the true source of any financing, or lack of it. There was a whole segment of Samuelson(?) discussing that very subject, unaware that he was being filmed.

That said, it's hard to understand Zingarevich's motivation, given that he didn't have the finances. Maybe he hoped he could make a quick sale with Reading in the premier league.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

The issue throughout has been our owners. Sadly the EFL can't be docked points or relegated for continually failing to adequately do the fit and proper persons checks.

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

It wasn't just the EFL who sanctioned this deal, it was the PL as well. There is more of an argument towards the Dai's taking over as they were blocked of taking over Hull City (then a PL club) and the PL said they were "cautious" about the Dai's taking over ourselves. It seemed they failed the PL's fit and proper person's test at the time.

That's where I have less sympathy for the authorities. They were not cleared to takeover someone in the PL, but the EFL were also quite happy to let them buy us? Yet now we, as fans, have to sit here and suffer because of their mismanagement of the club and are now a league lower and even further in debt? Thanks for investing significant amounts, but they've had a history of throwing it about in the wrong place so they obviously haven't learnt from their past mistakes.

[Snowflake Royal]

The issue throughout has been our owners. Sadly the EFL can't be docked points or relegated for continually failing to adequately do the fit and proper persons checks.

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

On what grounds do the FL not allow Zingaravich?

His billionaire father provided the proof of funds.

[Fezza]

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

On what grounds do the FL not allow Zingaravich?

His billionaire father provided the proof of funds.

A fair point, perhaps there needs to be evidence of commitment to investment or a contractual obligation that that can see loss of a hefty deposit.

[SCIAG]

All they can really do it check on the legality of someone taking over, and request transparancy into the proposed funding of the clubs.

If they bar someone from buying a business that they have a legal right to buy, they could face costly lawsuits. The guy behind Zingarevich came out with that in the AlJezeera expose, and also showed how easy is was to get round transparency requirements.

None of our problems have anything to do with our owner being 'dodgy'. In terms of funding, we couldn't have hoped for a better owner. It's how that money has been spent that's the problem.

I see your point, but our issues didn't begin with DY, Zingarevich had no money of his own and seemingly shafted us on the parachute payments - this was the person that the EFL should never have allowed. The Thai consortium then sold of a number of our assets, leaving us in a perilous state. I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

As the expose showed, the guys behind that deal knew exactly how to get round the tests and checks in place, to hide the true source of any financing, or lack of it. There was a whole segment of Samuelson(?) discussing that very subject, unaware that he was being filmed.

That said, it's hard to understand Zingarevich's motivation, given that he didn't have the finances. Maybe he hoped he could make a quick sale with Reading in the premier league.

It's possible to turn a profit in the PL. Might have hoped we could buy and sell sensibly enough to stay up without him injecting funds.

[Lower West]

I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

DY has removed all the assets from the football club (bar the players). The unanswered question is where the cash came from to fund these accounting manoeuvres.

[Snowflake Royal]

I'd agree that DY has, so far, been a relatively good owner in terms of what he has invested into the club and has been massively let down by his advisors and the people he has employed to structure the club.

DY has removed all the assets from the football club (bar the players). The unanswered question is where the cash came from to fund these accounting manoeuvres.

He's a billionaire?

[WestYorksRoyal]

Not much sign of Bowen turning round the oil tanker yet.