Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Wakey in bother again......


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#41 Lee

Lee
  • Coach
  • 5,115 posts

Posted 10 September 2010 - 11:13 PM

QUOTE (mick wilson @ Sep 10 2010, 11:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Agreed & to be fair Fev,Fax,Leigh & Barrow would take big numbers away with them also, compared to French or London teams.

Out of curiosity ( not a dig at ) how many do Saders take on average ?


1000 tickets for us tomorrow

How many would Barrow bring, 150?





A lot of Yorkshiremen believe that when God created the world, he made it with perfect balance.
He balanced the hot areas with the cold areas. the dry areas with the wet areas.
And, in creating Yorkshire, he created the most glorious place on earth - full of majestic beauty and sporting giants.........and for balance he created....... Lancashire.

#42 StevieM13

StevieM13
  • Coach
  • 182 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 12:05 AM

QUOTE (Red Willow @ Sep 10 2010, 02:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Contracts, good will, the name, all teh stuff you mention loads of stuff really


Contracts become null and void if a club drops from SL. After London were allowed to write off over 2m the rules were changed so that no other club could follow what the RFL allowed London Broncos to do. No continuity for any club that goes under. Very little goodwill can be attached to a failed business that has to be started from scratch in a lower division.

#43 StevieM13

StevieM13
  • Coach
  • 182 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 12:09 AM

QUOTE (Kenilworth Tiger @ Sep 9 2010, 04:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>


When was the previous occasion a winding order was issued against the Wakefield club?

It's incredible to think that Murdoch money was hailed by the likes of Lindsay, and others who supported the acceptance of the deal, as being the saviour of the game in this country.
How many clubs are actually self sufficient and not reliant on directors putting money in? I would guess every SL clubs relies on director support to varying degress, and that the numbers the numbers differ very little from pre SL days.

#44 Bulletproof

Bulletproof
  • Coach
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 12:31 AM

QUOTE (Lee @ Sep 11 2010, 12:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
1000 tickets for us tomorrow

How many would Barrow bring, 150?


For the first ever super league playoff game?

Bit of an arrogant assumption to suggest they'd only take 150 for that don't you think? Don't start looking down on teams just because you've made the playoffs.

#45 Lee

Lee
  • Coach
  • 5,115 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 12:47 AM

QUOTE (Bulletproof @ Sep 11 2010, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
For the first ever super league playoff game?

Bit of an arrogant assumption to suggest they'd only take 150 for that don't you think? Don't start looking down on teams just because you've made the playoffs.


Compared to some of the ###### you lot come out with, i thought it was a pretty good educated guess

You missed "again" off at the end of play offs



A lot of Yorkshiremen believe that when God created the world, he made it with perfect balance.
He balanced the hot areas with the cold areas. the dry areas with the wet areas.
And, in creating Yorkshire, he created the most glorious place on earth - full of majestic beauty and sporting giants.........and for balance he created....... Lancashire.

#46 Bulletproof

Bulletproof
  • Coach
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:10 AM

QUOTE (Lee @ Sep 11 2010, 01:47 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Compared to some of the ###### you lot come out with, i thought it was a pretty good educated guess

You missed "again" off at the end of play offs


This post made no sense whatsoever. Try again.

Please note: What some of "our lot" (whomever you mean) come out with is completely irrelevant in terms of how accurate your guess is.

Calm down and like I've said, stop being arrogant. Jesus. This game used to have a good spirit about it. Wakefield might be potential rivals down the road - but I wouldn't wish them financial problems, as is the nature of our game compared with some others. You seem to be forgetting this.

#47 Lee

Lee
  • Coach
  • 5,115 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:15 AM

QUOTE (Bulletproof @ Sep 11 2010, 02:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This post made no sense whatsoever. Try again.

Please note: What some of "our lot" (whomever you mean) come out with is completely irrelevant in terms of how accurate your guess is.

Calm down and like I've said, stop being arrogant. Jesus. This game used to have a good spirit about it. Wakefield might be potential rivals down the road - but I wouldn't wish them financial problems, as is the nature of our game compared with some others. You seem to be forgetting this.


Dont recall mentioning wakey

I havent wished Wakey anything, they'll sort it out no doubt

A poster predicts widnes will take 2000 to some away games, seems about as sensible as my 150 barrow guess.

As for me being arrogant and pent up, ok laugh.gif





A lot of Yorkshiremen believe that when God created the world, he made it with perfect balance.
He balanced the hot areas with the cold areas. the dry areas with the wet areas.
And, in creating Yorkshire, he created the most glorious place on earth - full of majestic beauty and sporting giants.........and for balance he created....... Lancashire.

#48 mick wilson

mick wilson
  • Coach
  • 4,484 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:18 AM

QUOTE (Lee @ Sep 11 2010, 05:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
1000 tickets for us tomorrow

How many would Barrow bring, 150?


Well considering we took approx 1800 to Cas & 2000 ish to Saints in this seasons CC then id guesstimate a fair few more than 150. laugh.gif

You lot taking a 1000 is very good for your club and for the game in general, good effort.

#49 Bulletproof

Bulletproof
  • Coach
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:24 AM

QUOTE (Lee @ Sep 11 2010, 02:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Dont recall mentioning wakey

I havent wished Wakey anything, they'll sort it out no doubt

A poster predicts widnes will take 2000 to some away games, seems about as sensible as my 150 barrow guess.

As for me being arrogant and pent up, ok laugh.gif


You're showing your ignorance here. We regularly took 2000 to super league games. We're the best supported club in this division, and have a very healthy away following. If we had an away following of 1000 in a super league play offs, people would be asking what went wrong.

You may not have mentioned wakey, but I used that as an example of the rugby league family atmosphere, or what used to be of it. Now we have too many fans who seem to be nasty all the time.

You know absolutely nothing. You've proved it. The precedents have been set in almost all of what you've said, you've been proved wrong by history.

#50 Lee

Lee
  • Coach
  • 5,115 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 06:43 AM

QUOTE (Bulletproof @ Sep 11 2010, 02:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You know absolutely nothing. You've proved it. The precedents have been set in almost all of what you've said, you've been proved wrong by history.


Ok, you aint half a precious lot over there, i can almost feel the love







A lot of Yorkshiremen believe that when God created the world, he made it with perfect balance.
He balanced the hot areas with the cold areas. the dry areas with the wet areas.
And, in creating Yorkshire, he created the most glorious place on earth - full of majestic beauty and sporting giants.........and for balance he created....... Lancashire.

#51 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,747 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 07:09 AM

QUOTE (StevieM13 @ Sep 11 2010, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
When was the previous occasion a winding order was issued against the Wakefield club?

It's incredible to think that Murdoch money was hailed by the likes of Lindsay, and others who supported the acceptance of the deal, as being the saviour of the game in this country.
How many clubs are actually self sufficient and not reliant on directors putting money in? I would guess every SL clubs relies on director support to varying degress, and that the numbers the numbers differ very little from pre SL days.



were you around in the 1990s to witness the state of some clubs? Yes, Mo's deal brought much needed money into the game but it didn't bring that many brains. Licensing is an much needed though belated attempt to make up for that to create a "best practice" framework.

#52 Dirk Diggler

Dirk Diggler
  • Coach
  • 1,218 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 10:51 AM

Well as a taxpayer I have to be happy that HMRC are serious about collecting our money from whom so ever. Obviously I would prefer them to get it right first time rather than wasting our money correcting their own foul ups.
But I am starting to worry about the amount we, as tax payers, are spending on (not usually cheap) lawyers in what seems to be an increasing amount of brinkmanship played out in court. Presumeably the various sports clubs/businesses are also incurring costs in defending these actions and again that will have an impact on their ability to pay.
It could be that HMRC push this case through and get a result only to be told that they get nowt at the end of the day because some lawyer has just taken the money that was left for defending the case he just lost.
Whatever the rights of the case it seems to me that the only way HMRC are going to get anything out of Wakefield Trinity is if the business gets to take its share from SKY next year and that won't happen in adminstration.
We, as tax payers, might soon be witnessing HMRC trumpetting its victory over the folding Wildcats with no mention of any money recovered and only the lawyers getting well on the experience.
If Wakefield's directors have fouled up the business then so be it but I do get the feeling that our supposedly skint government is spending too much of what little we have on posturing and lawyers.

#53 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 12:47 PM

QUOTE (StevieM13 @ Sep 11 2010, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How many clubs are actually self sufficient and not reliant on directors putting money in? I would guess every SL clubs relies on director support to varying degress, and that the numbers the numbers differ very little from pre SL days.


I'm going to guess at Wigan, Hull and Leeds.

The other 11 indeed need directors money putting in, up to 1.5M a season.

The SKY money is important to provide another 1M a club a season to try to put a competetive side on the field.

The difference between pre and post 1996/SKY is that before we had a semi pro game, now we have a fully professional one.

Something beyond my wildest dreams for many years.

I think we can be self sufficient from top to bottom Steve, it will mean playing at NL level........


#54 Bulletproof

Bulletproof
  • Coach
  • 2,242 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:00 PM

QUOTE (Lee @ Sep 11 2010, 07:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ok, you aint half a precious lot over there, i can almost feel the love


Who are you even talking about?

#55 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,717 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 01:14 PM

QUOTE (Dirk Diggler @ Sep 11 2010, 11:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well as a taxpayer I have to be happy that HMRC are serious about collecting our money from whom so ever. Obviously I would prefer them to get it right first time rather than wasting our money correcting their own foul ups.
But I am starting to worry about the amount we, as tax payers, are spending on (not usually cheap) lawyers in what seems to be an increasing amount of brinkmanship played out in court. Presumeably the various sports clubs/businesses are also incurring costs in defending these actions and again that will have an impact on their ability to pay.
It could be that HMRC push this case through and get a result only to be told that they get nowt at the end of the day because some lawyer has just taken the money that was left for defending the case he just lost.
Whatever the rights of the case it seems to me that the only way HMRC are going to get anything out of Wakefield Trinity is if the business gets to take its share from SKY next year and that won't happen in adminstration.
We, as tax payers, might soon be witnessing HMRC trumpetting its victory over the folding Wildcats with no mention of any money recovered and only the lawyers getting well on the experience.
If Wakefield's directors have fouled up the business then so be it but I do get the feeling that our supposedly skint government is spending too much of what little we have on posturing and lawyers.


Does it need a useless lawyer to serve a winding up order - I doubt it? Some enforcing authorities are capable of prosecuting their own cases from start to finish albeit through a barrister - cheaper than useless lawyers - on the day, if it gets that far which so many cases don't - as you say brinksmanship.

I was trying to find on the web a report about Wakefield actually having sold their ground Belle Vue, and could not find one. Is it the case they have sold the ground to the developers?? It was posted on here.

In 1973 Hunslet sold Parkside to Lenton Properties of Huddersfield at a time when they had published plans to build a new ground on Middleton Road close to their original home, so Wakefield's situation brings back many vivid memories. The new ground never happened and the club folded and I can recall Leeds offering their A team to replace Hunslet, and I can recall planning to become a Bradford Northern fan.

I'm perplexed about the argument over how much is owed. Most business tax affairs are straightforward - you just apply the rates of tax and NI to whatever part of the turnover or profit you are paying tax on. It's just accountancy. If there's confusion it indicates a lack of any monetary control and maybe the tax people have had to estimate the figure.

Anyway it may be everything is fine and as per the PR there is a genuine disagreement (although if Wakeys figure is below the HMRC figure they could just pay that and dispute the extra) but the simple logic is if they've sold Belle Vue pay something on account from the proceeds.........




#56 Red Willow

Red Willow
  • Coach
  • 4,747 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 04:01 PM

The costs involving both Bankruptcy and Winding up isn't too great. The law costs are usually less than 1,000. The petition deposit is on top of this (1,000 plus court fees 190). HM Revenue and Customs have in house lawyers anyway.


Edited by Red Willow, 11 September 2010 - 04:06 PM.


#57 Dirk Diggler

Dirk Diggler
  • Coach
  • 1,218 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 06:22 PM

"HM Revenue and Customs have in house lawyers anyway." which is the people I would rather not have on the payroll if they are not needed. In house is not the same as free or even cheap. Sometimes in house can be very expensive.

#58 StevieM13

StevieM13
  • Coach
  • 182 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 06:31 PM

QUOTE (JohnM @ Sep 11 2010, 08:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
were you around in the 1990s to witness the state of some clubs? Yes, Mo's deal brought much needed money into the game but it didn't bring that many brains. Licensing is an much needed though belated attempt to make up for that to create a "best practice" framework.


There was a KPMG report into the game in the early 90's that detailed the financial state of the game. Relatively speaking the clubs are just as perilously balanced now as they were then. SL clubs and Championship clubs have been wound up and are regularly receiving winding up orders in the SL era. Licensing is a matter of subjective decision making and goalpost shifting to suit the agenda of the RFL. It is not and never has been a rigidly applied framework.

#59 Herbert Splatt

Herbert Splatt
  • Coach
  • 1,026 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 07:52 PM

1) Wakefield have a payment plan that will be reviewed and agreed with the HMRC when they meet next. They will be set a deadline and more than likely will have to pay a fair chunk of it up front.

2) The club are reviewing the 'interested parties' to get involved with the club. Part of these talks will be - 'how do you handle to sort out the financial situation'.

3) Wakefield always get out of jail, they may not deserve to, they always seem to though. Some plucky/lucky clubs have a knack of survival whatever you throw at them. I won't wind people up by naming them.

#60 Jill Halfpenny fan

Jill Halfpenny fan
  • Coach
  • 4,453 posts

Posted 11 September 2010 - 08:17 PM

QUOTE (Bulletproof @ Sep 11 2010, 01:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
For the first ever super league playoff game?

Bit of an arrogant assumption to suggest they'd only take 150 for that don't you think? Don't start looking down on teams just because you've made the playoffs.


You do realise your arguing with a Huddersfield fan.

Probably were the idea of 150 came from. dry.gif
Just because you think everyone hates you doesn't mean they don't.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users