Sign in to follow this  
The Future is League

Leeds still Super Leagues most profitable club

Recommended Posts

redjonn    381

I guess the salary cap stops Leeds and other similar clubs taking all the top talent. Never-the-less I'm still not sure that we should hobble the best run clubs... but I guess that's another discussion

Edited by redjonn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wellsy4HullFC    1,589
4 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I guess the salary cap stops Leeds and other similar clubs taking all the top talent. Never-the-less I'm still not sure that we should hobble the best run clubs... but I guess that's another discussion

If they're making money and are still successful, what's the issue?

Unless they wanna join the NRL, there's not really much else the big clubs can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redjonn    381
Just now, Wellsy4HullFC said:

If they're making money and are still successful, what's the issue?

Unless they wanna join the NRL, there's not really much else the big clubs can do.

More money for development maybe... better teams to entertain fans, bigger names to attract commercial and media interest... etc etc etc.... no need to list all the benefits to club or sport...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wellsy4HullFC    1,589
Just now, redjonn said:

More money for development maybe... better teams to entertain fans, bigger names to attract commercial and media interest... etc etc etc.... no need to list all the benefits to club or sport...

They have money for development don't they?

If they're successful, surely they're entertaining? If they were stuffing everyone every week, that wouldn't be very entertaining.

They have a marquee place (2 now, isn't it?) to attract big names but choose not to use it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redjonn    381
4 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

They have money for development don't they?

If they're successful, surely they're entertaining? If they were stuffing everyone every week, that wouldn't be very entertaining.

They have a marquee place (2 now, isn't it?) to attract big names but choose not to use it. 

maybe... but why not more money to do more of whatever... spending it on gold taps in the ladies..whatever more money is better than a shrinking income

Edited by redjonn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wellsy4HullFC    1,589
15 minutes ago, redjonn said:

maybe... but why not more money to do more of whatever... spending it on gold taps in the ladies..whatever more money is better than a shrinking income

What on earth are you talking about here?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redjonn    381
12 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

What on earth are you talking about here?!

I just found not wanting a club in the sport not wanting to maximise its revenues odd.... so being facetious - sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wellsy4HullFC    1,589
2 hours ago, redjonn said:

I just found not wanting a club in the sport not wanting to maximise its revenues odd.... so being facetious - sorry

But if one club maximises, it is often at the expense of the others so the sport as a whole is worse off.

Edited by Wellsy4HullFC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redjonn    381
2 hours ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

But if one club maximises, it is often at the expense of the others so the sport as a whole is worse off.

Potentially yes... but maybe provide a template for other clubs to be better.

At the moment it doesn't greatly matter how well run and successful administrative side of Leeds is they are shackled team wise by a restrictive cap even with the marque player rule. All-be-it that those poorly run clubs can have almost as good a team as per the goal of making the competition more competitive - the only way being to restrict the best run clubs so that the poor run clubs can match them on the field.

Might be a good thing but my concern is always what is the incentive for the best run clubs. 

But as I say maybe a debate for another time/thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M j M    307
1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

Some of the bigger clubs were very anti raising the cap?

Including Leeds although I seem to recall Hetherington voted for at least one of the marquee player rules. From a financial point of view Leeds aren't interested in vastly increasing the salary cap as they have been pretty successful under the current rules. And whilst more spend on players would/could increase revenues, the club would not be keen on player cost inflation such that it might require Caddick to put money in (is he the only British club owner to pay himself a dividend?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave T    5,145
11 hours ago, redjonn said:

Potentially yes... but maybe provide a template for other clubs to be better.

At the moment it doesn't greatly matter how well run and successful administrative side of Leeds is they are shackled team wise by a restrictive cap even with the marque player rule. All-be-it that those poorly run clubs can have almost as good a team as per the goal of making the competition more competitive - the only way being to restrict the best run clubs so that the poor run clubs can match them on the field.

Might be a good thing but my concern is always what is the incentive for the best run clubs. 

But as I say maybe a debate for another time/thread.

Warrington highlighted in their accounts that they reinvest profits to give them a competitive edge in an capped sport - they talked about world class facilities etc. There are plenty reasons we should want clubs to drive revenues, they can then look to spend it on marquee players, facilities, marketing, youth systems etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M j M    307
1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Warrington highlighted in their accounts that they reinvest profits to give them a competitive edge in an capped sport - they talked about world class facilities etc. There are plenty reasons we should want clubs to drive revenues, they can then look to spend it on marquee players, facilities, marketing, youth systems etc.

Exactly - there is no disincentive for clubs to be commercially successful and generate income - they just can't splurge on a squad of players to (theoretically) buy success. In Leeds case they have plenty of reason to maximise revenues - the exec team have been known to get decent bonuses and moreover there is a stadium redevelopment to pay for - those recent years of profits have (had) built up cash reserves which meant the South Stand redevelopment was supposed to be largely funded (I'll come back to the interesting question of where all Leeds' money has disappeared to if I get more time).

The financing scheme dreamed up for the North Stand (structured supposedly to keep the debt off YCCC's books but having the same effect on Leeds for our £18m) offers the clubs the ability to repay down chunks of it earlier than the full term which I imagine is what Leeds aim to do.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
redjonn    381

I guess it comes down to how one see's improving the profile and maybe hence long term health of the sport with the increasing competition from other sports and other entertainment, e.g. Other sports including womens football, netball, cricket & RU etc which seems to be growing and hence use up more media broadcast space over the longer term as their profile grows...

Reinvest in the backroom, administration plus enhanced facilities or playing side to provide an increased spectacle (of course assumption being that more monied clubs could attract or keep some of the stars).

Although enhanced facilities I would for surely agree with.

All a case of balance I guess and how much the balance tips a particular way...

Edited by redjonn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M j M    307
3 hours ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

Should other clubs copy Leeds' set up? Would it work for Salford? I mean Leeds is a one club city and average 15,000 per game in attendence, maybe if Salford tapped into Manchester? 

Although I have a lot of time for Hetherington, to a degree at Leeds it was all sat there waiting for him when he arrived and can't easily be copied elsewhere.

More than anything else Leeds thrive from owning (that bit's important) a near-perfect, easily-accessed suburban stadium with huge corporate facilities on the edge of the UK's northern financial centre. And there's historically only ever been one rival in town for the sporting corporate pound (although YCCC are trying with T20 now, Leeds still win from that as we own the pavilion and the N Stand bars). So Leeds can accommodate and attract more corporate fans spending more per person than any other club in the league.

The rest of it is historic good fortune - a club with a well established fan base and a city-wide identity which has elbowed 'Unslet and Bramley aside. Simple. Hetherington has done a good job over the past 20 years but Leeds are fortunate in lots of ways.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RayCee    137

It's a conundrum. Business is supposed to be profitable and sport is a business. Yet if sport makes money, some wonder why is that so? It's almost as if sports clubs are charitable organisations providing a public service and that means all monies be plowed back into their charitable work. 

Good on Leeds for being financially sound. What will they do with their profit once they have paid all wages and expenses? Build a new stand? So few sporting clubs are in this situation I don't even know myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yipyee    376
On 11/08/2017 at 5:05 PM, Wellsy4HullFC said:

If they're making money and are still successful, what's the issue?

Unless they wanna join the NRL, there's not really much else the big clubs can do.

But talent off other clubs who can then use the money to fund improvements.

Warrington were a selling club pre-cap...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yipyee    376
14 hours ago, West Leeds Riviera said:

Should other clubs copy Leeds' set up? Would it work for Salford? I mean Leeds is a one club city and average 15,000 per game in attendence, maybe if Salford tapped into Manchester? 

Shouldn't they tap into Salford?

Maybe if man Utd go belly up like Leeds Utd did then they would have a chance!

Edited by yipyee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobbruce    676
11 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Shouldn't they tap into Salford?

Maybe if man Utd go belly up like Leeds Utd did then they would have a chance!

Aren't Utd in Salford. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
londonrlfan    621
1 hour ago, bobbruce said:

Aren't Utd in Salford. 

I thought they were in Guildford. Well that's where their fans are from. 

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  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 28th Aug 2017

Rugby League World - Sept 2017