The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, RugbyFan99 said:

Slight digression on this - we heard a lot about Mr Argyll's personal guarantee, accepted by the RFL/SL so that players could be paid. Is this now worthless? If so, what form did it take? Who did the due diligence on the guarantee?

Honestly don't know, my instinct would be that with the takeover bid and him essentially having to step aside and write off his own personal debts from the club is that events have overtaken that proposal.

[yipyee]

39 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

Until we go down the really strict 'Return on investment' model and exclude Catalans as they bring zero commercial money in versus the 10 UK clubs bringing in £30m.

Be careful what you wish for Matthew. 

Do catalans bring in no commercial money?

Please elaborate as I dont understandcthis comment

[tuutaisrambo]

I don't really blame Super League owners for Voting against TWP if it means their clubs (who will be already at a very real risk of going to the wall due to the economic effects of Covid) would lose money short term by letting TWP rejoin SL.

Now isn't a great time to take risks unless you have the financial clout to absorb the fallout if things go wrong again.

Maybe the new TWP owner is happy to pay some kind of security bond?   None of us know

Will SL clubs have to commit to pay their own travel costs to Toronto if they vote in favour?  None of us know

Will they let them in and offer the place to Toulouse/London/Leigh etc as back up if covid doesn't improve?  No of us know?

Will RL have enough money, players and clubs to even exist next season if covid doesn't improve or god forbid gets worse?

It's a mental time to be making a decision on TWP regardless of your opinion of them.

IMO It's not a case of just not wanting to expand or not showing ambition this time.  
It's about dealing with the practical reality of the situation now.

[Man of Kent]

20 minutes ago, tuutaisrambo said:

It's a mental time to be making a decision on TWP regardless of your opinion of them.

IMO It's not a case of just not wanting to expand or not showing ambition this time.  
It's about dealing with the practical reality of the situation now.

Good questions and I agree, there does seem to be little recognition of the virus-dominated world we now live in. 

[Dave T]

55 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Its not all about money brought in though is it Dave or we'd only have 5 or so teams who actually add value to the competition. Success of academies, quality of stadia, commercial size of club, success, and any other USPs are beneficial.

As I've pointed out previously, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. We've got clubs that have literally done nothing bar maybe making a final or two in the past 30 years calling the odds on standards.

I was being challenging intentionally mate. But I clearly value existing clubs more than you. I don't think any of our clubs have done nothing. 

We need to chill out with the self loathing. 

[Dave T]

46 minutes ago, yipyee said:

Do catalans bring in no commercial money?

Please elaborate as I dont understandcthis comment

They bring in no commercial money directly. Where are our sponsors and tv deals from? 

Not France, we give it away or pay them. 

I love Catalans and would have them in every day of the week BTW. 

[Robin Evans]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

They bring in no commercial money directly. Where are our sponsors and tv deals from? 

Not France, we give it away or pay them. 

I love Catalans and would have them in every day of the week BTW. 

I would have toulouse in instead of Toronto right now..... if we were doing the shoe in expansion thing.... as much as losing that fixture for my club would seriously hack me off

[Derwent]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

Honestly don't know, my instinct would be that with the takeover bid and him essentially having to step aside and write off his own personal debts from the club is that events have overtaken that proposal.

A PG is a legally binding document not just a proposal. It was stated a couple of years ago that Argyle had lodged a PG with the RFL. In simple terms it is a document that agrees that should a business default on its obligations then the individual assumes personal liability for them.

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, Derwent said:

A PG is a legally binding document not just a proposal. It was stated a couple of years ago that Argyle had lodged a PG with the RFL. In simple terms it is a document that agrees that should a business default on its obligations then the individual assumes personal liability for them.

Of course, but that means its in Argyle's interest for the new bid to take over.

[whatmichaelsays]

52 minutes ago, Dave T said:

They bring in no commercial money directly. Where are our sponsors and tv deals from? 

Not France, we give it away or pay them. 

I love Catalans and would have them in every day of the week BTW. 

On the Catalans point, I would make the suggestion that the RFL's / SLE's relationship with Dacia is stronger for having a French presence - given that they're part of Renault and France is a much larger market for Dacia and Renault than the UK is, but I don't know the specifics of that contract.

But aside from that, I would question whether that is the responsibilty of Catalans to deliver that central commercial revenue, in the same way that it arguably isn't the responsibility of Toronto to seek out TV contracts. That is, quite literally, Elstone's job description and his responsibility. 

Catalans and Toronto are simply clubs, aiming to be successful clubs in their own right. They're not commerical branch-offices of Super League. We don't expect Leeds to start pitching to Asda, Jet2 or First Direct to be central sponsors of Super League, Bradford Bulls to sign league-wide deals with Morrisons or Salford to start canvassing ITV over at Media City for a TV deal, so we shouldn't expect expansion clubs to do likewise. That is Elstone's job. 

If Super League can't capitalise on it's assets, that being footholds in French and Canadian markets, then that is on Super League as a commercial entity. 

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I was being challenging intentionally mate. But I clearly value existing clubs more than you. I don't think any of our clubs have done nothing. 

We need to chill out with the self loathing. 

I get that now lol.

But its not self loathing Dave, I think my own club and many others are pretty good across the 3 leagues.

What I don't think is fair is that some clubs get to hang on the coattails, or worse hide behind the achievements of, other clubs but face little actual threat to their status because they have the "heartland" tag to them.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Robin Evans said:

I would have toulouse in instead of Toronto right now..... if we were doing the shoe in expansion thing.... as much as losing that fixture for my club would seriously hack me off

As I said before, I would want it sorted on the field of play who goes up from the Championship but given the ultimatum of having to decide Toronto or Toulouse, because I feel Toulouse are 40/50 years ahead of where Toronto need to be in terms of infrastructure - it may be even closer to the actual 90 years of RL in France - I would choose Toulouse everytime.

[TheLegendOfTexEvans]

3 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

 

Maybe if journalists like Shaw had scrutinised the long circulating rumours about TWP's unpaid bills and wages rather than simply acting as cheerleaders........

The man is a clown, typical of journalists who think they have all the answers.  Not a clue about anything that actually goes on in the sport.   Big things happen when people put in hard work with long terms plans not because fantastists will them to happen. 

Accusing anyone who can see what clearly was going to happen as a flat-capper.

The main reason expansion fails in Rugby League is we push a side realistic plans to pursue follies.

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, Robin Evans said:

I doubt there would be a sport left.... but yeah..... equal scrutiny .... especially if licencing comes in

I don't even think it will be licensing if Coronavirus sadly takes its toll it will hard financial decisions. If you're a weak club and your area is "covered" then it becomes a case of prioritising resources.

[LeeF]

4 hours ago, RugbyFan99 said:

Slight digression on this - we heard a lot about Mr Argyll's personal guarantee, accepted by the RFL/SL so that players could be paid. Is this now worthless? If so, what form did it take? Who did the due diligence on the guarantee?

Why would you look to enforce a guarantee when you potentially had another source of repaying the debt that would happen at an earlier date and without having to pay legal fees and/or go to Court?

If Toronto don’t get readmitted then you would look to enforce the guarantee. 

[Harry Stottle]

8 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't even think it will be licensing if Coronavirus sadly takes its toll it will hard financial decisions. If you're a weak club and your area is "covered" then it becomes a case of prioritising resources.

So who gets to play God then Tommy? 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

So who gets to play God then Tommy? 

The super league and RFL board supported by the biggest clubs - Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, maybe Hull FC. As they are the historically most secure clubs and the ones guaranteed to be the basis of a "prioritised resource" solution.

[Harry Stottle]

10 minutes ago, LeeF said:

If Toronto don’t get readmitted then you would look to enforce the guarantee.

If as Derwent informs us the PG from Mr Argyle is legally binding, then the RFL/SL could pay the player's and issue them with 'loan notes' to pay the said monies back, but I fear that time would be a factor until Mr Argyle's assets became liquid again.

[Man of Kent]

15 minutes ago, TheLegendOfTexEvans said:

The man is a clown, typical of journalists who think they have all the answers.  Not a clue about anything that actually goes on in the sport.   Big things happen when people put in hard work with long terms plans not because fantastists will them to happen. 

Accusing anyone who can see what clearly was going to happen as a flat-capper.

Clown is harsh but I agree that Shaw personifies the thinking that anyone who questions Toronto is automatically some sort of small-minded idiot whose never been abroad other than Benidorm.

[Tommygilf]

3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Clown is harsh but I agree that Shaw personifies the thinking that anyone who questions Toronto is automatically some sort of small-minded idiot whose never been abroad other than Benidorm.

He doesn't though does he he's a Halifax fan for christ's sake he's hardly a big city slicker 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, whatmichaelsays said:

On the Catalans point, I would make the suggestion that the RFL's / SLE's relationship with Dacia is stronger for having a French presence - given that they're part of Renault and France is a much larger market for Dacia and Renault than the UK is, but I don't know the specifics of that contract.

But aside from that, I would question whether that is the responsibilty of Catalans to deliver that central commercial revenue, in the same way that it arguably isn't the responsibility of Toronto to seek out TV contracts. That is, quite literally, Elstone's job description and his responsibility. 

Catalans and Toronto are simply clubs, aiming to be successful clubs in their own right. They're not commerical branch-offices of Super League. We don't expect Leeds to start pitching to Asda, Jet2 or First Direct to be central sponsors of Super League, Bradford Bulls to sign league-wide deals with Morrisons or Salford to start canvassing ITV over at Media City for a TV deal, so we shouldn't expect expansion clubs to do likewise. That is Elstone's job. 

If Super League can't capitalise on it's assets, that being footholds in French and Canadian markets, then that is on Super League as a commercial entity. 

It is absolutely not the responsibility of Catalans, 100% agreed, and I have made the same point about our failure as an organisation to capitalise on territories we are present in (and those we aren't). 

But Matt's point is all rather Hollow, and a bit of a sulk because his preferred option may not be forthcoming. 

We are where we are, with a certain value for 11 UK teams and a French team in SL. Nobody wants 5 teams in SL so all the points about only 5 bring value are nonsense. We should remember that TWP were in SL, they walked away, this isn't just a normal decision based on value. People want them to be treated differently when it suits, but not when it doesn't. 

The challenge should be for fair treatment, not equal treatment. Everyone is different. 

[Dave T]

59 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I get that now lol.

But its not self loathing Dave, I think my own club and many others are pretty good across the 3 leagues.

What I don't think is fair is that some clubs get to hang on the coattails, or worse hide behind the achievements of, other clubs but face little actual threat to their status because they have the "heartland" tag to them.

Are you seriously suggesting weak clubs don't face threat? Look how many have been relegated (survival of the fittest), with a fair few ousted by choice. 

[Oxford]

16 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

 maybe Hull FC. As they are the historically most secure clubs

Things don't seem to support this Tommy.

Maybe people will only learn to be supportive of TWP when it is their own clubs having a problem.

[Man of Kent]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

He doesn't though does he he's a Halifax fan for christ's sake he's hardly a big city slicker 

Shaw has always been a cheerleader for Toronto. Phil Caplan is also one-eyed on Toronto. This week he said the takeover doesn't need due diligence because a quick Google seems to prove LiVolsi is rich and therefore trustworthy     

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

The super league and RFL board supported by the biggest clubs - Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, maybe Hull FC. As they are the historically most secure clubs and the ones guaranteed to be the basis of a "prioritised resource" solution.

Wigan and Hull will be better off maybe as they are in rented accommodation, who know's with Leeds, Saints and Warrington they are losing money all the time with their stadia not earning, Leigh may have to step in to plug the gap this side of the Pennines.

Funnily enough I had not considered this previously, but the latter 3 are where the SL fixtures have been played, do they get recompensed for it I wonder? It has puzzled me why the LSV has not been utilised, it has a playing surface to match anything in the country and I think 12 changing rooms on the complex, perhaps the other tenant being Manchester United - it is the home venue of MU Ladies and a number of U'23's fixtures - perhap's they have made it worthwhile for the LSV company to turn away any offers.

Just a thought. 

Where's Gubrats or LeytherMatt they may know the answer.