Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ian (Pencil) Elliott

Congratulations Featherstone Rovers

65 posts in this topic

RS, on 23 Sept 2013 - 2:48 PM, said: Widnes played the game as the rules were at the time. If the rules had of been different who knows how it would have panned out on the field.

 

 

In any case the reality is a SL place is a key to bankruptcy unless you can get a 7k or 8k home gate average or have a backer.

keighley, on 23 Sept 2013 - 3:05 PM, said:

 

The accepted home gate was 10,000. Are you fudging things to fit the Widnes reality.?

 

 

 

 

No - Widnes have a backer

 

Incidentally where does the 10k figure come from that is required to break even in SL  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In any case the reality is a SL place is a key to bankruptcy unless you can get a 7k or 8k home gate average or have a backer.

keighley, on 23 Sept 2013 - 3:05 PM, said:

 

The accepted home gate was 10,000. Are you fudging things to fit the Widnes reality.?

 

 

 

 

No - Widnes have a backer

 

Incidentally where does the 10k figure come from that is required to break even in SL  

 

It's a figure Parksider made up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In any case the reality is a SL place is a key to bankruptcy unless you can get a 7k or 8k home gate average or have a backer.

keighley, on 23 Sept 2013 - 3:05 PM, said:

 

The accepted home gate was 10,000. Are you fudging things to fit the Widnes reality.?

 

 

 

 

No - Widnes have a backer

 

Incidentally where does the 10k figure come from that is required to break even in SL  

 

 

To be fair, it is a figure pushed by Parksider and Padge who have apprently done their homewok with the figures to justify it but I was just yanking your chain a bit there. I agree that other factors such as alternative revenue streams from stadium use or a guaranteed influx of cash from a longtime backer such as Davy at Huddersfield can alter that scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty when you look at the financial situations and accounts of several clubs if you put together a lower mid table squad then you would be losing money on 7,000 to 8,000 crowds. If you got 7,000 to 8,000 crowds with all actually PAYING through the gate the losses probably wouldn't be too bad and would take a while to accumulate.

 

When you look at say HKRs finances on paying for an upper mid table squad on those gates you can easily see that without outside income the losses quickly become unsustainable. Both Wakefield and Castleford broadly fit into the same category of attendances and they too have racked up losses that threaten their businesses.

 

Those clubs who get gates of 10,000 and over appear to need financial backing as they tend to spend the full cap.

 

Its pretty mind boggling what Salford could lose next year with full cap spending and the prospect of home crowds around the 5,000 mark (or less).

 

My point is twofold the obvious one is that without a backer in SL your on the road to ruin.

 

The second point is that promotion could be the death knell of a club gaining promotion. If a club has an excellent coach and they over perform after promotion say possibly Fev with Powell (assuming he had stayed) its only a matter of time before a richer club lures the coach away.

 

This year it would have been Batley or Sheffield with respect to either you would seriously worry about the future welfare of either club if they went up. A club could take the £1m Sky money and not spend it and ensure the future of the club but in a 12 team SL supposedly reduced to ensure excellence that would devalue SL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This year it would have been Batley or Sheffield with respect to either you would seriously worry about the future welfare of either club if they went up. A club could take the £1m Sky money and not spend it and ensure the future of the club but in a 12 team SL supposedly reduced to ensure excellence that would devalue SL.

Very true. In football's Premier League it's largely accepted that you can go up, spend a minimum amount to up the quality a bit and use sheer determination to hack enough points to stay up. And if not, hey ho, keep the cash and do well again in the championship next season. You simply cannot do that in SL. If you went up with the same squad you would be pulverised and that would devalue SL and not be pleasant for your fans. You can only get so much satisfaction from seeing Wigan, Warrington etc. put 60 points on your team week in week out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true. In football's Premier League it's largely accepted that you can go up, spend a minimum amount to up the quality a bit and use sheer determination to hack enough points to stay up. And if not, hey ho, keep the cash and do well again in the championship next season. You simply cannot do that in SL. If you went up with the same squad you would be pulverised and that would devalue SL and not be pleasant for your fans. You can only get so much satisfaction from seeing Wigan, Warrington etc. put 60 points on your team week in week out.

 

London and Salford managed to do that from an incumbent position in SL. How much worse could it have been for a team of quality which won promotion argumented by a few judicious signings to strengthen the squad. Some teams would do a yo yo but some would survive. It happened when Wakefield, Huddersfield, Hull Kr and Castleford were promoted from the lower division. the only serial failure was  Leigh. 

 

Thrashings after promotion are not inevitable, some teams will make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, it is a figure pushed by Parksider and Padge who have apprently done their homewok with the figures to justify it.....

No homework.

Just listening to Hudge (10K) Bulls chairman (10K) O.Connor (8K) Mr. Wilkinson at barton(8K) etc etc variably needed to run as a fully pro club in all areas or to at least afford full cap.

Below this sugar daddies to make up the shortfall or financial struggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can anyone point me in the direction of some?

 

You could do your own research.  Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could do your own research.  Just saying.

Nothing on Featherstone site, nothing on Batley site, nothing on YouTube. Thought the supporters of the actual clubs involved would have a better idea than me as to where to watch their teams highlights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing on Featherstone site, nothing on Batley site, nothing on YouTube. Thought the supporters of the actual clubs involved would have a better idea than me as to where to watch their teams highlights.

 

Patience .....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing on Featherstone site, nothing on Batley site, nothing on YouTube. Thought the supporters of the actual clubs involved would have a better idea than me as to where to watch their teams highlights.

 

Fev TV don't publish the full highlights, it's generally just a teaser aimed at boosting DVD sales.  Can't imagine there'll be much of a market for those and don't think there'll be a rush to get anything on t'internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all honesty when you look at the financial situations and accounts of several clubs if you put together a lower mid table squad then you would be losing money on 7,000 to 8,000 crowds. If you got 7,000 to 8,000 crowds with all actually PAYING through the gate the losses probably wouldn't be too bad and would take a while to accumulate.

When you look at say HKRs finances on paying for an upper mid table squad on those gates you can easily see that without outside income the losses quickly become unsustainable. Both Wakefield and Castleford broadly fit into the same category of attendances and they too have racked up losses that threaten their businesses.

Those clubs who get gates of 10,000 and over appear to need financial backing as they tend to spend the full cap.

Its pretty mind boggling what Salford could lose next year with full cap spending and the prospect of home crowds around the 5,000 mark (or less).

My point is twofold the obvious one is that without a backer in SL your on the road to ruin.

The second point is that promotion could be the death knell of a club gaining promotion. If a club has an excellent coach and they over perform after promotion say possibly Fev with Powell (assuming he had stayed) its only a matter of time before a richer club lures the coach away.

This year it would have been Batley or Sheffield with respect to either you would seriously worry about the future welfare of either club if they went up. A club could take the £1m Sky money and not spend it and ensure the future of the club but in a 12 team SL supposedly reduced to ensure excellence that would devalue SL.

Cas , richer than Fev you're having a laugh , visit both stadiums as well and see the difference .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try telling nigel wood that!!!! he has a morbid fscination with ruining the game at every level......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017