Players union demands a slice of the pie following government loan

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Not knocking him at all, as I made clear in my posts. Just suggesting that "increasing income" was missing from his statements. 

How ?

[JohnM]

How did he miss that out? I don't know. 

[PREPOSTEROUS]

Well he's set things up to increase income, tv subscription service, monthly magazine, revised lottery scheme, increased commercial involvement and subsequently revenue, re(vert)branded the club with great success and has a commercial team that gets the most out of challenging facilities. A redeveloped stadium is the next, and probably the most difficult aspect to improve, but I believe that task is being headed by the chairman rather than Carter.

As an accountant by trade he is naturally conservative and is reluctant to spend what he doesn't have so he's not going to break any pots for innovation. 

[dboy]

13 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

Marginal business like leeds? The one you spend hours telling all and sundry on here are run brilliantly? Make a profit most years, have a massive asset in their stadium?

The one owned by a man whose wealth is measured in the hundreds of millions?

Maybe he should have saved for a rainy day? 

I'm so glad he is altruistic enough to not pay his players.

 

Yorkshire Post - “We will be applying,” Hetherington revealed. “As I said right at the outset, clubs like ours who have got big, diverse businesses and a lot of employees, normally that would give you an advantage in sporting terms.

“But in the situation we are in now, we – in many ways – have got the biggest problem. Our problems probably contrast quite sharply to some other rugby league clubs and sport businesses.

[dboy]

2 hours ago, JohnM said:

Not knocking him at all, as I made clear in my posts. Just suggesting that "increasing income" was missing from his statements. 

It's not missing - he has said that the economy has dried up. People won't have cash spare, sponsors won't have cash spare, crowds are expected to dip...

TBF, Wakefield have been very successful in building up aspects of their business during lockdown e.g. TrinityTV, squadbuilder, lottery etc.

[RigbyLuger]

I'd rather an accountant run my club and not worry we will go bust through stupid business practices or chasing unattainable dreams.

[Saint Toppy]

On ‎03‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 20:29, Total Rugby League said:

The Rugby League Players’ Association has told its members that they will demand they are paid in full once rugby returns, following last week’s announcement...

View the full article

Stupidity & arrogance from the players & unions here. They need to understand they live in the real world like the rest of us and taxpayers money isn't so they end up with no inconvenience or sacrifice like the rest of the country.

The vast majority of workers across the UK are having to make some sort of financial sacrifice during this pandemic and why should professional sportsmen get any sort of exemption, particularly as the majority of full time professional players earn well in excess of the national average wage ?

Quit whining players (and union), take the hit like everybody else is and get on with things

 

[RigbyLuger]

I'd love to know what improvements the union has done so far for their members.

[Angelic Cynic]

5 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

I'd love to know what improvements the union has done so far for their members.

 The aims are outlined in the link below.

  Just having a voice seems a sensible idea.Linking with the GMB and Parliamentary group also seems sensible.

  https://www.sthelensreporter.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/parliamentary-group-welcomes-rugby-league-players-association-parliament-291286

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

On 07/05/2020 at 11:23, scotchy1 said:

Yes, that Leeds. The ones taking a loan, the ones who have made millions over the past decades, the ones whose owner's wealth is measured in the hundreds of millions, the ones with assets worth tens of millions. 

The ones not paying the players what they owe them

If you’d hadn’t noticed £44M of building work took place at Headingley recently, Leeds are paying off a significant portion of that and will be for a long time to come, they are not sitting with millions in the bank.

With Leeds attendances been the biggest in Super League their income will have reduced by the most, far more so than Salford or Wakefield, all clubs are down solely to Sky money for income.

[gittinsfan]

On 10/05/2020 at 10:09, scotchy1 said:

How much of that £44m asset do the players own?

I'm really interested in this.

I'm assuming all players at the club should own some of the assets.Please correct me if I am wrong.

So SL players,reserve team players,and Acadamy players.Thats quite a few players.

Would you please explain how all those people would be given a share of those assets.

Simple question,just give us the benefit of your wisdom.

[whatmichaelsays]

On 04/05/2020 at 17:00, dboy said:

Still waiting for you to justify this.

 

Wrong link - my bad and apologies.  

Here you go https://www.blmforum.net/mag/two-wakefield-companies-named-and-shamed-for-underpaying-workers/

Quote

• Wakefield Trinity, under its trading name of Spirit of 1873 Ltd, failed to pay £12,370.45 to 27 workers, with average arrears of £458.16 each

Was that the justification you're looking for?

[gittinsfan]

8 hours ago, SL17 said:

Well I’m assuming they are claiming for the hit on season tickets.

No. Scotchy claims the players should own some assets of the club regardless of any wages.

[gittinsfan]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

A share congruent with the amount of money they are being asked to give up seems fair. 

But how are they given these assets.Answer the question.

[gittinsfan]

32 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

A share of the business which owns the assets

Or more preferably Imo a share of SLe

Exactly what is this share and how will it be apportioned?

Yet again,answer the question or admit you don't have a clue.

[GUBRATS]

Why would SLE give shares to a player that they don't employ ?

[gittinsfan]

5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

I have pretty clearly answered it. The amount apportioned would be congruent with amount players give up

No.You were arguing that players should have a share of their clubs assets even when being payed full wages.You also say they should have shares in SLe.So when players are paid in full how should they be given a share of the clubs assets and a share of SLe?

Again a simple answer will suffice if you are capable.

[Derwent]

Today’s news that the Premier League is facing a minimum £360m repayment to its broadcast partners for not meeting contractual obligations is real cause for concern. It’s reported that not completing the season will cost them £750m and a “behind closed doors” rushed end to the season will cost £360m. 

If Sky are taking such action against other sports then it’s not inconceivable that they will also adopt the same approach to RL. In which case the clubs are going to need every penny of this money just to survive if broadcast income is greatly reduced.

The game really is on a knife edge at the moment.

[dboy]

4 hours ago, whatmichaelsays said:

Wrong link - my bad and apologies.  

Here you go https://www.blmforum.net/mag/two-wakefield-companies-named-and-shamed-for-underpaying-workers/

Was that the justification you're looking for?

This was due to a test case regarding the incorrect implementation of the Minimum Wage.  Hundreds of companies across the country were used. I think, but may be wrong, that Leeds Rhinos were done too.

As a result, businesses across the UK changed the way wages were calculated (most usually the calculation of holiday pay).

It wasn't a case of financial mis-management, or not paying bills/wages - it was a case of an incorrect wage calculation practice.

However, your original link cited St Helens - any comment on them?

 

[gittinsfan]

3 hours ago, scotchy1 said:

They havent been paid full wages, they wont paid be paid full wages when the game resumes.

In return they can be given either a share of the clubs (and hence the assets) or a share of SLe.

They will then own that share.

In the future they may be 'paid in full' but they will still own what they own.

I also think players should own a share of SLe in recognition  that even when they were 'paid in full' they werent due to the salary cap.

So every SL player over the last 20 years or so,should own a share of SLe.Care to explain how that would pan out.

[Marty Funkhouser]

2 hours ago, Derwent said:

Today’s news that the Premier League is facing a minimum £360m repayment to its broadcast partners for not meeting contractual obligations is real cause for concern. It’s reported that not completing the season will cost them £750m and a “behind closed doors” rushed end to the season will cost £360m. 

If Sky are taking such action against other sports then it’s not inconceivable that they will also adopt the same approach to RL. In which case the clubs are going to need every penny of this money just to survive if broadcast income is greatly reduced.

The game really is on a knife edge at the moment.

Not sure about the "game" as an entity Derwent but full time professionalism is absolutely, wholly, dependent on SKY. 

How RL got in this mess is for another day but the game has had over half a billion pounds since the advent of SL in rights payments and we have no more a solid base than we did in 1995. All directly involved in spending that money bear some culpability.

Not at all confident that we will access anything like that amount of money over the next 25 years even if coming through this period relatively unscathed. Even the wealthiest owners could/will not plug all the gaps and in any event they will not be around forever.

 

 

[dboy]

1 hour ago, scotchy1 said:

Yes. It would pan out well

Shouldn't the mods be sitting this clown down for a period?

It's just trolling! Stupid trolling.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 minutes ago, dboy said:

Shouldn't the mods be sitting this clown down for a period?

It's just trolling! Stupid trolling.

The ignore option is the only sensible one - I'm at a loss as to why anyone (particularly regulars) continue to engage.

[cookey]

Rugby league has wasted vast amounts of money over the past 25yrs and I have little doubt that this money will also be wasted. The game moves from one crisis to another but one day there will be no one left to help further. To be fair,the same could be said of other sports but league has far fewer billionaires who would be prepared to throw money at the game,when compared to football,union and cricket.

I suspect Leeds,because of their off field hospitality business is the only viable club,with perhaps Warrington and Saints a little further back. They cant play each other 15 timesa season.

[dboy]

1 minute ago, cookey said:

Rugby league has wasted vast amounts of money over the past 25yrs and I have little doubt that this money will also be wasted. The game moves from one crisis to another but one day there will be no one left to help further. To be fair,the same could be said of other sports but league has far fewer billionaires who would be prepared to throw money at the game,when compared to football,union and cricket.

I suspect Leeds,because of their off field hospitality business is the only viable club,with perhaps Warrington and Saints a little further back. They cant play each other 15 timesa season.

How is hospitality a viable income source now or in the foreseeable future?