The General 'Toronto Wolfpack' Discussion Thread

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, POR said:

what's the difference paying rent for lamport in canada and paying rent in england ?

And aren't games being played as triple headers at the moment? That could continue as double headers like they did at Headingley later in the year if they wanted. 

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

Obviously its a mixed bag but aspects of it are encouraging. I think most realists recognise that the loss of every home game and associated revenue probably costs them upwards of £3 million, and this coupled with no £1.825 million in Sky money is obviously catastrophic. No other SL club has had no revenue at all from home games or no Sky money and I doubt that any other club wouldn't be in the same boat.

We shouldn't count the lack of £1.85m, that isn't part of their budget. 

It's as relevant as saying they haven't got £10m from CBC (or whoever). 

Versus the terms they signed up to, the loss of income due to coronavirus is the killer. 

[Scubby]

I think some people need to be careful of taking the moral high ground here. There is no guarantee the other 11 clubs will finish the season. No guarantee at all.

[Tommygilf]

Just now, POR said:

what's the difference paying rent for lamport in canada and paying rent in england ?

Lamport is municipal and costs around 2000 Canadian iirc - around 1600 quid. Times that by at least how ever much you like more than 5 for private stadia in the UK.

[sweaty craiq]

I hope the RFL/SL take this opportunity to bring about the 2 x 10 thats needed to meet domestic player needs and facilitate the expansion opportunities.

TW cannot be lost, neither can Ottawa or New York - if funded. They must be the backbone of a future N American comp

TO and Avignon need nurturing as the catalyst for a FT French comp.

The sport is at a cross roads - the next move is crucial.

 

PS I do normally take the urine but our sport must choose wisely

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We shouldn't count the lack of £1.85m, that isn't part of their budget. 

It's as relevant as saying they haven't got £10m from CBC (or whoever). 

Versus the terms they signed up to, the loss of income due to coronavirus is the killer. 

Well it is relevant when I am comparing them to other Super League clubs and them going without all of their revenue streams, which I was. 

[LeytherRob]

6 minutes ago, RobertAM said:

Oh I see difficulties all right..whinging about flights, accomodation, meals..no away fans. Plain sailing? forget it.

I didn't say it was going to be plain sailing.

[bobbruce]

19 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

A global pandemic is pretty much the only thing Parky didn't predict as the result of letting Toronto into the game.

I’m pretty sure he did you should probably reread all his old posts just to make sure. 

[Agbrigg]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

 I think most realists recognise that the loss of every home game and associated revenue probably costs them upwards of £3 million,

Give over there is no way they could make that amount net from about 14 home games. Also from what I hear half the spectators get in the ground on freebies 

[Smudger06]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I have no idea why he can't fund it, but he can't. 

 

Begs the question why on earth did he green light this project. Best case he's looking extremely idiotic, worst case basically a fraudster with not a care for his players or the fanbase. 

[redjonn]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

Well it is relevant when I am comparing them to other Super League clubs and them going without all of their revenue streams, which I was. 

I thought Leeds had reported loss of £4 million so far... that includes room hire, hotel and the other match sponsorship, commercial etc etc...

[Man of Kent]

Just discovered Betfred returned my bet on Toronto to finish bottom on Friday afternoon. Odd. 

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

Well it is relevant when I am comparing them to other Super League clubs and them going without all of their revenue streams, which I was. 

But clubs dont go bust because of what others have in their bank. TWP have gone down this route because things have changed from their budget. 

TWP signed up for SL this year without the tv money. That is a distraction on why we are where we are. 

We can't look past Coronavirus tbh. 

The one question mark I do have is that if Argyle is still paying the players wages, why not still have them playing instead of sat at home?

[TheReaper]

11 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Why not? If I had the reported 300-600 million£ (some say billion£) id have set aside £150m to achieve what I set out to do with no expectation of a return. Especially to not sh/t on the fans and my players, Or would not have embarked on the project in the 1st place. Especially to not look like a complete kn@b . Some major stuff just doesn't add up. 

Do you really think people who are worth a billion dollars have that sitting in cash in the bank?

Sounds like a pretty logical explanation to me - holdings are down and hard to get out of due to Covid, and it's irresponsible to take cash out of other businesses to fund a sports team.

[Kayakman]

I say an 8 point deduction for next season and a share of the Sky money  plus full membership....lets right the listing ship.

[Man of Kent]

Hakim Miloudi is now on the market. 
Who’s going to snap him up? 

[Robin Evans]

2 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

I say an 8 point deduction for next season and a share of the Sky money  plus full membership....lets right the listing ship.

Aye.... start in league 1 on -8.....

 

[TheReaper]

4 minutes ago, Agbrigg said:

Give over there is no way they could make that amount net from about 14 home games. Also from what I hear half the spectators get in the ground on freebies 

It's not that far off.

3 million /14 games = $214,000

$214,000 / call it 7500 average attendance (being conservative there) = $28.5 income per fan

Considering single game tickets were $30, plus profits from food beer and merch sales, probably pretty close.

 

[Eddie]

8 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

Begs the question why on earth did he green light this project. Best case he's looking extremely idiotic, worst case basically a fraudster with not a care for his players or the fanbase. 

That is a deeply ignorant comment. Have you ever run or business or tried anything with any financial risk involved in your life? Do you think the same about every poor sod who’s business has gone under because of Covid?

[Man of Kent]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The one question mark I do have is that if Argyle is still paying the players wages, why not still have them playing instead of sat at home?

Maybe he figures the better - and most expensive ones - will leave, slashing the wage bill?

[Phil]

23 minutes ago, Copa said:

The NRL are considering allowing the Warriors to play every game at home next year as compensation and a “thank you” for their sacrifices this year. Perhaps SL could have offered something like this to the Wolfpack.

Can you imagine the howling on here and other social media? 

[Copa]

Just now, Phil said:

Can you imagine the howling on here and other social media? 

Yep.

It seems to be different here though as on the main Australian RL forum fans are generally being very supportive about the idea.

[Damien]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We can't look past Coronavirus tbh. 

I've made this point numerous times and this really is what it boils down to. The trouble is some people are doing precisely that and are looking right past it. No Coronavirus and I'm certain this wouldn't have happened.

In my opinion the most promising and exciting Super League season for years has become a disaster due to a once in a lifetime event. I just hope the sport can recover with a great World Cup next year and doesn't retreat into its shell.

[Smudger06]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

That is a deeply ignorant comment. Have you ever run or business or tried anything with any financial risk involved in your life? Do you think the same about every poor sod who’s business has gone under because of Covid?

Poor £David£. 

Never mind the players families. 

Hang on, we've been assured from         d-day it was a fully wedged up operation with intent, get real. 

[The Hallucinating Goose]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The one question mark I do have is that if Argyle is still paying the players wages, why not still have them playing instead of sat at home?

I will add to that as well, if he can carry on paying them now, why was he relying on outsider investment to pay the wages last month? Why didn't he just pay the wages last month?