Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kenilworth Tiger

Wakey in bother again......

73 posts in this topic

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, you aint half a precious lot over there, i can almost feel the love

Who are you even talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The costs involving both Bankruptcy and Winding up isn't too great. The law costs are usually less than

Edited by Red Willow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"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.

Believe it or not DD legal expertise is needed in HMRC on a permanent basis, not just for prosecuting cases, whether you or I like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's called a 'Sale', most retailers have them.

Clearing out stock from the old supplier as next year there is a new one. A similar sale happened a couple of years ago when they changed suppliers (Kooga) to the present one.

Move along, nothing to see in this one.

Frankly I'd be amazed if more clubs were not having a sale during the off season. Apart from the clue being in the title, the off season, last years stock becomes pretty much obsolete when new kits come in so you need to shift it. As you say, nothing to see here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wakefield issue a statement

Wakefield Trinity Wildcats Statement

Wakefield Trinity Wildcats have come to an agreement with HMRC that the case be adjourned.

If required a date for the hearing will be arranged in due course. The club will fulfil their tax liabilities and continue to work with HMRC to resolve this issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenilworth your abit obsessed with us...

There's 3 wakefield topics and you've started all three..

I hope to see one created by you on 22nd of october :happy: ^_^ :P :P :D :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenilworth your abit obsessed with us...

There's 3 wakefield topics and you've started all three..

I hope to see one created by you on 22nd of october :happy: ^_^ :P :P :D :D

nope - just so happens that 2 signings were made today aong with the news that you've adjourned the winding up petition.

Perhaps they choulD have all gone into one thread TO STOP "BOMBARDING" you and upsetting Bulletproof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nope - just so happens that 2 signings were made today aong with the news that you've adjourned the winding up petition.

Perhaps they choulD have all gone into one thread TO STOP "BOMBARDING" you and upsetting Bulletproof

New poster here

Don't let them get you down,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenilworth your abit obsessed with us...

There's 3 wakefield topics and you've started all three..

I hope to see one created by you on 22nd of october :happy: ^_^ :P :P :D :D

Mopsey coming over? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017