Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dkw

Widnes problems

Recommended Posts

As i see it all contracts will have been voided upon relegation so it looks like they have built a new squad based on promised incoming funds from a potential new investor who has changed his mind..........if that isn't poor management then i don't know what is.

  • Like 3

england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

Yes, seen the statement now. Looks like they've budgeted based on money they were promised which never appeared. 

They're not the first club to make financial commitments based on an investor promise but nothing concrete. We really are going to need some sort of rule to stop this happening. It's an unnecessary crisis. A club of Widnes size should never be bankrupt, even after relegation. 

How can you have rule "to stop this happening". Surely it is the responsibility of the clubs financial directors and the banks, to investigate and verify the strength and intentions of prospective investors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

It is the inevitable end product of relegation. Sadly.

The mismanagement of the club in the past couple of seasons and the large sums paid out to some directors are much more to blame than relegation, in my opinion. Widnes have spent significant amounts in recent years on "non-core" activities - walking rugby for the elderly, mental health & schools partnerships for example and in 2019 are running full academy, womens team, learning disability team etc. If there'd been anyone actually trying to run the business as a going concern, you'd assume that those would have been cut in the last couple of months.

As always with these things, you have to view this statements with a pinch of salt. The current owners have been negotiating with several interested parties, including the council for some time and this has the feel of a bargaining position. Clearly some of the statements made by James Rule before he left about the club being debt-free are at odds (to be polite) with the council's assertion that stadium rent had not been paid for over 12 months. I'd view any statement from the club's current board as being of similar accuracy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Hull KR

Salford

Castleford

huddersfield

Hull, Wigan and Wakefield havent been relegated in the professional era and London were relegated and now play in a park in front of hundreds and are kept alive solely on David Hughes kindness.

Think you should consider a name change to "Stretchy"...the "professional era" started in 1895...ALL have been relegated in modern times buts that irrespective of your original comment...Relegation has no "inevitable end product" at all...if we are stretching as much as you like to then ask Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea or even Juventus,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JonM said:

The mismanagement of the club in the past couple of seasons and the large sums paid out to some directors are much more to blame than relegation, in my opinion. Widnes have spent significant amounts in recent years on "non-core" activities - walking rugby for the elderly, mental health & schools partnerships for example and in 2019 are running full academy, womens team, learning disability team etc. If there'd been anyone actually trying to run the business as a going concern, you'd assume that those would have been cut in the last couple of months.

As always with these things, you have to view this statements with a pinch of salt. The current owners have been negotiating with several interested parties, including the council for some time and this has the feel of a bargaining position. Clearly some of the statements made by James Rule before he left about the club being debt-free are at odds (to be polite) with the council's assertion that stadium rent had not been paid for over 12 months. I'd view any statement from the club's current board as being of similar accuracy.

Id be very surprised if the costs of the womens team, PDRL, walking rugby etc are anything but incidental. I wouldnt be surprised if things like that with sponsorship, grants etc would actually be a revenue stream rather than a cost.

debt, like profit, is generally a fungible thing. It could be perfectly true that the club was debt free, and that it hadnt paid its stadium rent in 12 months.

The simple fact of the matter is that a club like Widnes loses about half its revenue at a stroke when relegated. It also loses that revenue from a revenue stream that had no congruent outlay. A profit centre with no costs just disappears. Then they have to deal with the lower sponsorship revenues, ticket sales, merchandise sales, concession sales etc etc as all that falls in line with lower attendances and visibility.

Now you can very validly say that at that point a club must cut its cloth accordingly. Thats perfectly reasonable and understandable. And i wouldnt argue that they don't need to cut their cloth accordingly or against the idea that the directors failed to do so and thats why they went bust.

However whilst all that can be true, it can also be true that restructuring a business to go from operating at an SL level to a championship level in a matter of months is a very difficult job, one proving, far more often than co-incidence, to be an impossible job, beyond those in charge at our clubs.

If you want to say Widnes' struggles here are because their directors failed, i would say yes, but what they are failing to do is a herculean task with a very small chance of success.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Id be very surprised if the costs of the womens team, PDRL, walking rugby etc are anything but incidental. I wouldnt be surprised if things like that with sponsorship, grants etc would actually be a revenue stream rather than a cost.

debt, like profit, is generally a fungible thing. It could be perfectly true that the club was debt free, and that it hadnt paid its stadium rent in 12 months.

The simple fact of the matter is that a club like Widnes loses about half its revenue at a stroke when relegated. It also loses that revenue from a revenue stream that had no congruent outlay. A profit centre with no costs just disappears. Then they have to deal with the lower sponsorship revenues, ticket sales, merchandise sales, concession sales etc etc as all that falls in line with lower attendances and visibility.

Now you can very validly say that at that point a club must cut its cloth accordingly. Thats perfectly reasonable and understandable. And i wouldnt argue that they don't need to cut their cloth accordingly or against the idea that the directors failed to do so and thats why they went bust.

However whilst all that can be true, it can also be true that restructuring a business to go from operating at an SL level to a championship level in a matter of months is a very difficult job, one proving, far more often than co-incidence, to be an impossible job, beyond those in charge at our clubs.

If you want to say Widnes' struggles here are because their directors failed, i would say yes, but what they are failing to do is a herculean task with a very small chance of success.

Its also probably worth mentioning that RU clubs often struggled to do this too. Football clubs used to massively struggle from prem to football league and from league 2 to the conference.. this has changed a bit due to the larger parachute payments and size of finishing position payments in the premier league and at the other end the closing of the gap between the conference and the football league (its not longer as semi pro). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

Think you should consider a name change to "Stretchy"...the "professional era" started in 1895...ALL have been relegated in modern times buts that irrespective of your original comment...Relegation has no "inevitable end product" at all...if we are stretching as much as you like to then ask Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea or even Juventus,

Wigan were relegated 39 years ago. Man Utd were relegated 45 years ago. Thats not very modern.

Or we could ask Leeds, Luton, Bournemouth, Rotherham, Southampton, Bradford, Wrexham, Crystal Palace, Wimbledon, Derby, Leicester, Barnsley and so on.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Or we could ask Leeds, Luton, Bournemouth, Rotherham, Southampton, Bradford, Wrexham, Crystal Palace, Wimbledon, Derby, Leicester, Barnsley and so on.

Apart from Wrexham every one of those clubs is probably bigger than Wigan or Leeds Rhinos despite relegations.


england_identity2.jpg1921_button.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, tuutaisrambo said:

Apart from Wrexham every one of those clubs is probably bigger than Wigan or Leeds Rhinos despite relegations.

Possibly so. But they all went bust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Wigan were relegated 39 years ago. Man Utd were relegated 45 years ago. Thats not very modern.

Or we could ask Leeds, Luton, Bournemouth, Rotherham, Southampton, Bradford, Wrexham, Crystal Palace, Wimbledon, Derby, Leicester, Barnsley and so on.

We could certainly ask Leicester...or any of the other thriving clubs in your list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

We could certainly ask Leicester...or any of the other thriving clubs in your list

The Leicester City who went bust, spent a decade out of the top flight and posted a loss of £21m in the year they were promoted...#Thriving.

Edited by scotchy1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

The Leicester City who went bust, spent a decade out of the top flight and posted a loss of £21m in the year they were promoted...#Thriving.

"The earning potential afforded by the Club’s first appearance in the UEFA Champions League helped yield record pre-tax profits of £92.5m (2016: £16.4m) – the long-term reinvestment of which, under the guidance of the Srivaddhanaprabha family and its King Power Group of Companies, will be a catalyst in the Club’s growth and its pursuit of further sustainable success.

Turnover for the year increased to £233m (£128.7 in 2016), owing largely to the Club’s outstanding performance in progressing to the UEFA Champions League Quarter-Finals, further than any other English club that season. The addition of European competition to the fixture schedule also boosted ticket revenue by 42 per cent, despite a third consecutive year of frozen Season Ticket prices."

"Inevitable end product" or thriving...????? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No sympathy for a club that was never promoted in the first place


sometimes you have to take a step backwards to move forward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DEANO said:

No sympathy for a club that was never promoted in the first place

What like London 1996, Paris, Catalan? Widnes were promoted, through the daft licencing system. Those were the rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, doc said:

What like London 1996, Paris, Catalan? Widnes were promoted, through the daft licencing system. Those were the rules. 

Yep. Don’t have to like the rules though

  • Like 1

sometimes you have to take a step backwards to move forward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Any one of the departed Directors has the personal wealth to pay wages, yet not many are demanding them to do so unlike DB

Maybe because, unlike DB, none of them had committed to provide much of the club's funding for the season?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

debt, like profit, is generally a fungible thing. It could be perfectly true that the club was debt free, and that it hadnt paid its stadium rent in 12 months.The simple fact of the matter is that....................

You haven't a clue and are using a long word out of context to make people think you have. Fungibility only relates to goods and commodities, and the idea you can be debt free with the rent outstanding is ludicrous.

On 2/20/2019 at 8:38 AM, scotchy1 said:

It is the inevitable end product of relegation. Sadly.

It just isn't. Even Dave understands this one.

On 2/20/2019 at 9:12 AM, Dave T said:

Isn't the main issue here the fact that an investor has backed out, leaving a black hole in funding?

Not quite. But it's a better stab at it than your mate Mr. Fungible. The only argument I would have here is these people are rich backers and not investors. They tend to keep shovelling money in until they get fed up then walk away with a much lighter wallet. I wonder what return Moran is getting on the £Millions he "invests"  into Wire? 5%? 10%? Over to you?

22 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

clear evidence it is not an end product at all...

Correct. but Mr. Fungible won't concede. Your point raises an important issue which is Super league doesn't really work on the TV deal alone. Private "backing" is necessary to make up income to be able to operate at a professional level and be one of the clubs who can then secure a TV deal. People like Ken Davey or John Wilkinson made sure Relegation did not produce "an inevitable end product" Jack Fulton made sure Castleford bounced back from relegation, didn't Ken Davey's Fartown bounce back unbeaten in 2002? Then Salford 2003? Anyway it was a stupid comment and it's not worth arguing with him.

What I think is misleading on here is where a club get's a rich owner and is then hailed "The future of RL" the obvious topical example being Liverpool. A couple of £Millionaires roll up invent a club and suddenly they are the saviours of  superleague when in reality Liverpool is devoid of any real interest in playing or watching the game, whilst clubs like Widnes are declared "basket cases" despite a long history of people there supporting the club and playing the game often to International level.

I particularly liked the idea of the RFL suggesting to the Manchester Rangers people Salford and Oldham were available to back. Their choice if they do not want to. Same here, hopefully Widnes will sort things out to the point where they can be touted as available for "purchase". Same for Bradford. We won't exist if we end up allowing real clubs to be gradually overtaken by phoney baloney clubs who produce no players or have no fans or both. Rich backers are pointless if they just fritter it all away on a dream, and that's been done over 50 times....

Edited by The Parksider
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/teams/exclusive-rugby-league-clubs-bold-play-to-bring-sonny-bill-williams-back-from-union/news-story/92a231127d12181ac86d1166d3f79bde

It's interesting that Argyle is also pushing for the Liverpool team.

A question for English folks,

There is a lot of talk about possible Liverpool and Manchester teams and how they're not rl cities. From an Aussie perspective both these cities have rl teams in their outlying suburbs. For example, Salford is less than a few kilometres from Manchester according to Google. The same for Liverpool. I've read so comments on how Liverpool doesn't play rl, yet last year the city had 3 Super League teams within half hour drive. 

My question is how far away from a rl playing area do you need to be before it is considered to be a non rl area?

Also, how much closer to Manchester does an rl team need to be for Manchester to be considered an rl city if Salford isn't close enough already?

Just trying to wrap my head around English rl geographical perceptions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, The Parksider said:

You haven't a clue and are using a long word out of context to make people think you have. Fungibility only relates to goods and commodities, and the idea you can be debt free with the rent outstanding is ludicrous.

It just isn't. Even Dave understands this one.

Not quite. But it's a better stab at it than your mate Mr. Fungible. The only argument I would have here is these people are rich backers and not investors. They tend to keep shovelling money in until they get fed up then walk away with a much lighter wallet. I wonder what return Moran is getting on the £Millions he "invests"  into Wire? 5%? 10%? Over to you?

Correct. but Mr. Fungible won't concede. Your point raises an important issue which is Super league doesn't really work on the TV deal alone. Private "backing" is necessary to make up income to be able to operate at a professional level and be one of the clubs who can then secure a TV deal. People like Ken Davey or John Wilkinson made sure Relegation did not produce "an inevitable end product" Jack Fulton made sure Castleford bounced back from relegation, didn't Ken Davey's Fartown bounce back unbeaten in 2002? Then Salford 2003? Anyway it was a stupid comment and it's not worth arguing with him.

What I think is misleading on here is where a club get's a rich owner and is then hailed "The future of RL" the obvious topical example being Liverpool. A couple of £Millionaires roll up invent a club and suddenly they are the saviours of  superleague when in reality Liverpool is devoid of any real interest in playing or watching the game, whilst clubs like Widnes are declared "basket cases" despite a long history of people there supporting the club and playing the game often to International level.

I particularly liked the idea of the RFL suggesting to the Manchester Rangers people Salford and Oldham were available to back. Their choice if they do not want to. Same here, hopefully Widnes will sort things out to the point where they can be touted as available for "purchase". Same for Bradford. We won't exist if we end up allowing real clubs to be gradually overtaken by phoney baloney clubs who produce no players or have no fans or both. Rich backers are pointless if they just fritter it all away on a dream, and that's been done over 50 times....

That was a very long way of explaining you didn't know the difference between debt and liabilities.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Omott91 said:

https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl-premiership/teams/exclusive-rugby-league-clubs-bold-play-to-bring-sonny-bill-williams-back-from-union/news-story/92a231127d12181ac86d1166d3f79bde

It's interesting that Argyle is also pushing for the Liverpool team.

A question for English folks,

There is a lot of talk about possible Liverpool and Manchester teams and how they're not rl cities. From an Aussie perspective both these cities have rl teams in their outlying suburbs. For example, Salford is less than a few kilometres from Manchester according to Google. The same for Liverpool. I've read so comments on how Liverpool doesn't play rl, yet last year the city had 3 Super League teams within half hour drive. 

My question is how far away from a rl playing area do you need to be before it is considered to be a non rl area?

Also, how much closer to Manchester does an rl team need to be for Manchester to be considered an rl city if Salford isn't close enough already?

Just trying to wrap my head around English rl geographical perceptions. 

They're really pushing this Liverpool idea.

I really hope they find a way to get more clubs into the structure. The sport is being stopped from evolving. It's a strange that done of the traditional clubs are struggling, and there definitely should be a place for them in the structure, but at present it's either "they're pro or they're dead." There being propped up time and again on life support when they could find their level and investment given to new clubs in bigger locations.

  • Like 2

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Marty Funkhouser said:

"The earning potential afforded by the Club’s first appearance in the UEFA Champions League helped yield record pre-tax profits of £92.5m (2016: £16.4m) – the long-term reinvestment of which, under the guidance of the Srivaddhanaprabha family and its King Power Group of Companies, will be a catalyst in the Club’s growth and its pursuit of further sustainable success.

Turnover for the year increased to £233m (£128.7 in 2016), owing largely to the Club’s outstanding performance in progressing to the UEFA Champions League Quarter-Finals, further than any other English club that season. The addition of European competition to the fixture schedule also boosted ticket revenue by 42 per cent, despite a third consecutive year of frozen Season Ticket prices."

"Inevitable end product" or thriving...????? 

The Leicester city that lost £100m between 2010 and 2014 #thriving 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was interesting listening to Koukash on the BBC podcast saying that he could easily buy into a dieing club and move it but he would always be seen as the person who "killed the club" even though it was pretty much dead before hand. 

You have to sympathise with that and see where he is coming from. If he had bought Widnes last week and said he was moving it everyone would have lambasted him as the man who took Widnes away.. even though 1 week later they could be taken away by the doors being closed and they just disappear. Of course in this scenario the RFL will be the barstewards for not helping out, in the scenario the RFL want the good Dr is the barsteward, so you can see the RFL logic!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...