The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Oh hang on, I remember now. Wasn't there something about an IPO and Sonny Bill given shares in the club? There must be an exit strategy for Argyle other than burn $100 bills in perpetuity. 

I think he has the same exit strategy as Ian Lenegan, Eamon McManus, Simon Moran and Neil Hudgell - to leave the game eventually with a much lower bank balance. 

[Derwent]

9 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Oh hang on, I remember now. Wasn't there something about an IPO and Sonny Bill given shares in the club?

Yep.

The Canadians have not disclosed details of Williams' deal, but chairman Bob Hunter confirmed that their marquee signing has been given equity in the club.

"He was offered as part of his package, a significant number of shares in the parent organisation and the intent long term is to take that whole company public," Hunter said.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/sport/rugby-league/sonny-bill-buys-shares-in-toronto-wolfpack/ar-BBZg4ja

[Man of Kent]

4 minutes ago, Derwent said:

Yep.

The Canadians have not disclosed details of Williams' deal, but chairman Bob Hunter confirmed that their marquee signing has been given equity in the club.

"He was offered as part of his package, a significant number of shares in the parent organisation and the intent long term is to take that whole company public," Hunter said.

https://www.msn.com/en-nz/sport/rugby-league/sonny-bill-buys-shares-in-toronto-wolfpack/ar-BBZg4ja

Well, there you are. The plan.

Those shares aren't going to be worth much!

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The one thing that does seem rather odd about TWP's approach here is that they really could have gone down the route of trimming as many costs as possible, agreeing pay cuts, offloading players where possible, and using loans as was proposed and seeing the season out i survival mode ready for next year, as relegation was scrapped. 

We know that TWP has been losing money since it started, and for a relatively modest loss in the scheme of things they would have automatically retained their Super League spot to go again next year. Even if they didn't get a penny income, they would possibly lose around £7m this year, before you trim any costs to reduce that number.

To potentially give up the spot as easy as they have, it suggests that Argyle has financial issues and can't cover these relatively modest losses (in sporting world terms).

They did agree pay cuts. At a guess they probably have to pay overs as it is to attract players too, due to being in Canada and being newly promoted, so it wouldn't be easy to just offload players. This is particularly so when everyone else is cutting costs and not playing games. I'm not sure why any club would recruit players for now when they themselves have players furloughed, on pay cuts and aren't even playing games. Under normal circumstances they would have had a lot more leeway but again in normal circumstances they would not have been in this position anyway.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

They did agree pay cuts. At a guess they probably have to pay overs as it is to attract players too, due to being in Canada and being newly promoted, so it wouldn't be easy to just offload players. This is particularly so when everyone else is cutting costs and not playing games. I'm not sure why any club would recruit players for now when they themselves have players furloughed, on pay cuts and aren't even playing games. Under normal circumstances they would have had a lot more leeway but again in normal circumstances they would not have been in this position anyway.

I'm not saying it would be easy, but ultimately if they trim every single cost they can, their loss is modest in the sporting world, especially for a supposed billionaire who has already invested millions, and has committed to guaranteeing the wages of players for the rest of the year.

Ultimately, I'm not sure how much they are saving by stepping down this year versus carrying on playing. I suggest the numbers won't be that different.

[Loup]

 

56 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I expect TWP's approach was twofold 1) to prove that they were a valuable member of SL, make headlines, win some games, win people over with the positive experience of Toronto and the crowds they bring; and 2) Keep working on NA tv deals to prove commercial value to SLE. But if not getting central funding was such an issue they wouldn't have spent £5m on wages (and wanted to spend more with dispensations).

 

 

43 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

3) To sell the club. Surely the exit strategy was to sell to a big Canadian sports cheese pumped up by the Sonny Bill Williams Show at Lamport? But who would want to buy a SBW-less Wolfpack in a Covid world? 

 

I go back to Argyle's stated objective, which was to build a global brand. He is a businessman who owns a number of diverse businesses and continues to build out. Whether or not you think this was astute or foolish doesn't interest me. But from his perspective, he wanted to reach Super League as early as possible, because owning a top-tier pro sports team gives him leverage in his other business interests.

Why buy a team in the RFL? Because he could, because he wanted to, because he's absolutely passionate about the sport. He could have spent 15 million on a yacht. So I don't think MoK has it right - I don't think Argyle has any interest in selling the club.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Loup said:

 

 

 

I go back to Argyle's stated objective, which was to build a global brand. He is a businessman who owns a number of diverse businesses and continues to build out. Whether or not you think this was astute or foolish doesn't interest me. But from his perspective, he wanted to reach Super League as early as possible, because owning a top-tier pro sports team gives him leverage in his other business interests.

Why buy a team in the RFL? Because he could, because he wanted to, because he's absolutely passionate about the sport. He could have spent 15 million on a yacht. So I don't think MoK has it right - I don't think Argyle has any interest in selling the club.

My post was about the rugby objectives and getting into SL, not the ancillary business benefits (or not). 

[Man of Kent]

5 minutes ago, Loup said:

Why buy a team in the RFL? Because he could, because he wanted to, because he's absolutely passionate about the sport. He could have spent 15 million on a yacht. So I don't think MoK has it right - I don't think Argyle has any interest in selling the club.

The plan is/was to go public. So maybe I was wrong about selling to Rogers (although apparently there was an opportunity to sell to them last year) but the stated objective is an IPO.

[Chrispmartha]

During the CV pandemic with no certainty about when things will resume and no revenue coming in Wolpack signed Kallum Watkins, and looks like they signed Ryan Hall, Stevie Ward, Richie Myler and Ben Flower all whilst they struggle to pay their existing players, you can blame the RFL all you want but that doesn’t look like the actions of a well run club, neither does assuring the governing body they were good to fulfil the fixtures then a week later pull out.

[ATLANTISMAN]

My forecast is that TR will remain in SL next year and an announcement will come PDQ (Todays SL meeting is going to be an interesting one to say the least)

Fly on the wall anyone 

No need its a leaky bucket we will know everything by this time tomorrow folks:)

 

Paul

[Loup]

Just now, Man of Kent said:

The plan is/was to go public. So maybe I was wrong about selling to Rogers (although apparently there was an opportunity to sell to them last year) but the stated objective is an IPO.

Companies often spend years planning for an IPO and waiting for the right market conditions to do so. In optimal circumstances, that made sense for Argyle to consider. No need to mock this in hindsight ... Virgin Atlantic were doing great one minute and struggling the next. We don't know the impact of covid-19 on Argyle's other businesses and despite people saying "but he's a billionaire", he seems to be having trouble shifting assets to free up liquidity.

I hadn't heard about Rogers (MLSE) wanting to buy Wolfpack. Honestly doubt it - they don't make their move until clubs are much more established.

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, ATLANTISMAN said:

My forecast is that TR will remain in SL next year and an announcement will come PDQ (Todays SL meeting is going to be an interesting one to say the least)

Fly on the wall anyone 

No need its a leaky bucket we will know everything by this time tomorrow folks:)

 

Paul

I think they’ll stay in SL too but with a points reduction and a don’t pay your players again and you’re out clause.

[Michael1812]

56 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

100%. My friends dad is/was a part owner at a Super League club, said to me "no one gets involved in a sports club to make money".

That may be different in the USA, but here not so.

The old saying goes, “How do you make a small fortune from football? Start with a large fortune”. 

[Derwent]

19 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm not saying it would be easy, but ultimately if they trim every single cost they can, their loss is modest in the sporting world, especially for a supposed billionaire who has already invested millions, and has committed to guaranteeing the wages of players for the rest of the year.

Ultimately, I'm not sure how much they are saving by stepping down this year versus carrying on playing. I suggest the numbers won't be that different.

Yes that is the bit that doesn't make sense. Given that the bulk of expenditure is players' salaries and they are going to continue paying those anyway (so they state) then the cost saving of not playing is quite minimal. They already have a squad based here and their training infrastructure etc in place so its difficult to see what significant difference carrying on would have made.

Had they said we can't afford to pay the players and made them all free agents then fair enough, but to withdraw and keep paying the bulk of costs is pretty strange. I guess the acid test is if they do actually pay the players what they are due.

[Loup]

9 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

During the CV pandemic with no certainty about when things will resume and no revenue coming in Wolpack signed Kallum Watkins, and looks like they signed Ryan Hall, Stevie Ward, Richie Myler and Ben Flower all whilst they struggle to pay their existing players, you can blame the RFL all you want but that doesn’t look like the actions of a well run club, neither does assuring the governing body they were good to fulfil the fixtures then a week later pull out.

I don't fault them for thinking ahead to the 2021 season, given everyone and his dog has been giving them stick for having the wrong squad. My take is that everything was looking positive enough to make these preparations, and then cash flow suddenly choked up. It's been reported that Argyle was selling assets and covid-19 has devalued many businesses overnight. Signing players for 2021 is also a way to indicate to potential investors that you're running a viable business.

[fcl]

19 hours ago, CanadianRugger said:

Perpignan is Catalan, not French.  

It is above all a commercial argument aimed at the local population. The majority of supporters and spectators come from outside this Catalan area.
the club is financially supported by the Department, the Region and national sponsors.

[Scubby]

43 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The one thing that does seem rather odd about TWP's approach here is that they really could have gone down the route of trimming as many costs as possible, agreeing pay cuts, offloading players where possible, and using loans as was proposed and seeing the season out i survival mode ready for next year, as relegation was scrapped. 

We know that TWP has been losing money since it started, and for a relatively modest loss in the scheme of things they would have automatically retained their Super League spot to go again next year. Even if they didn't get a penny income, they would possibly lose around £7m this year, before you trim any costs to reduce that number.

To potentially give up the spot as easy as they have, it suggests that Argyle has financial issues and can't cover these relatively modest losses (in sporting world terms).

It strikes me as a business move first and foremost. Argyle wants a better deal and is challenging the SL to look at itself and ask what do we actually want over the next few years. I'm not saying it is the smartest or right move - but that is the cards he has decided to play when cornered. When you do lots of deals over many years you do become hardened to letting go of things that don't stack up - or at least risking that for better terms.

[Dave T]

Just now, Scubby said:

It strikes me as a business move first and foremost. Argyle wants a better deal and is challenging the SL to look at itself and ask what do we actually want over the next few years. I'm not saying it is the smartest or right move - but that is the cards he has decided to play when cornered. When you do lots of deals over many years you do become hardened to letting go of things that don't stack up. 

Yeah I did think that, but based on the noise from SLE that they had not had any indication of this course of action, it seems odd that they did not lay down an ultimatum that they get X or they withdraw. They may have actually had some success with that approach tbh.

[Loup]

18 minutes ago, SL17 said:

Transat were out before Covid-19 

Transat's situation has nothing to do with the Wolfpack.

Transat has been in merger/acquisition talks with Air Canada for more than a year now. That means Transat hasn't been in any position to offer sponsorship for 2020 or beyond.

The deal was approved by shareholders before covid-19, but had to go through the regulators (for anti-competition reasons). Deal would have been closed by now, but has been delayed to fourth quarter. And because of the massive slump in air business, Air Canada is wishing it hadn't done this.

Whether Transat continues to exist on its own, or as a subsidiary of AC, or whether Air Canada could become a travel sponsor, is all up in the air. (See what I did there.)

 

[Chrispmartha]

18 minutes ago, Loup said:

I don't fault them for thinking ahead to the 2021 season, given everyone and his dog has been giving them stick for having the wrong squad. My take is that everything was looking positive enough to make these preparations, and then cash flow suddenly choked up. It's been reported that Argyle was selling assets and covid-19 has devalued many businesses overnight. Signing players for 2021 is also a way to indicate to potential investors that you're running a viable business.

Signing players you can’t afford indicates to investors it isn’t a viable business.

Making plans for 2021 should have meant cutting costs not increasing them when you can’t afford the costs you already have

everything was looking positive when they repotadly signed Hall, Myler,Ward and Flower? Give over.

[terrywebbisgod]

SBW  released and signs for the Roosters!

[Loup]

Just now, terrywebbisgod said:

SBW  released and signs for the Roosters!

Pro tip: read more than the headline.

SBW is, possibly, going to the Roosters for the remainder of the 2020 season. Whether to play or be a mentor/coach to be determined.

The article says that SBW wants to return to the Wolfpack in 2021 and so his current contract will be rewritten.

https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/toronto-wolfpack-to-help-sonny-bill-williams-return-to-nrl/181b393b-6641-415e-802a-e50ee60a1547

All assuming Wolfpack continues in 2021.

[Loup]

3 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Signing players you can’t afford indicates to investors it isn’t a viable business.

Making plans for 2021 should have meant cutting costs not increasing them when you can’t afford the costs you already have

everything was looking positive when they repotadly signed Hall, Myler,Ward and Flower? Give over.

Congratulations, you've entirely missed my point.

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Loup said:

Congratulations, you've entirely missed my point.

And you mine it seems.

[Scubby]

17 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Yeah I did think that, but based on the noise from SLE that they had not had any indication of this course of action, it seems odd that they did not lay down an ultimatum that they get X or they withdraw. They may have actually had some success with that approach tbh.

I think the solution they sort was almost like building contractors in a slump. A guarantee that they can carry on building when the sun peeps back through the clouds, everyone in the meantime is either frozen (or frozen out). So they down tools, walk off site and the foundations are there ready to pick back up again. This, and the construction industry will tell you, is pretty brutal on those who have put a deposit on the houses and those poor souls getting a monthly wage to build them.