SL Clubs are deep in the red with huge losses

[iffleyox]

17 minutes ago, Pulga said:

Glad to see Wakefield got a good ROI on those recycled chairs.

money's money though

[Big Picture]

20 hours ago, Stanley30 said:

Okay thanks. Still not sure of his relevance to the article, has he said somerhing recently? 

Tony Collins has interviewed Sean McGuire four times on his Rugby Reloaded podcast.  In the first of those interviews, he stated that in his view the root cause of the chronic lack of money in the game is that with the possible exception of Leeds the traditional pro clubs (including the clubs in SL) are all located in what he described as "smallish, economically disadvantaged towns" in the North of England where the sort of money needed to support major pro sport doesn't exist and therefore they have no access to it.

A few forum members scoff at that.  However the losses described in the report I linked in my OP and the failure of the World Cup matches played in such towns to get anywhere close to full houses at the bottom-end event prices charged are evidence that McGuire is right about it.

Edited December 15, 2022 by Big Picture

[Big Picture]

2 hours ago, Saint Toppy said:

Most professional sports clubs run at a loss, its not that much of an issue as long as they have owners / directors who can cover those losses year on year.

The likes of Saints, Leeds, Wigan, Wire, Hudds all have wealthy owners & boards of directors capable of covering these losses, at least in the short term while everyone recovers from the Covid shutdowns and the current financial climate. I'd be more worried about the clubs without these wealthy owners who are making big losses and have to borrow money to survive

To the extent that's true, it's only true in the sports where the top leagues are plagued by the instability of P & R.  Under the North American franchised model owning those franchises is profitable for the owners, not just in the major leagues but in minor leagues too.  That's why when franchises change hands it's invariably for more money than the owners selling them paid for them previously and the prices charged for expansion franchises are always going up.

[Stanley30]

3 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Tony Collins has interviewed Sean McGuire four times on his Rugby Reloaded podcast.  In the first of those interviews, he stated that in his view the root cause of the chronic lack of money in the game is that with the possible exception of Leeds the traditional pro clubs (including the clubs in SL) are all located in what he described as "smallish, economically disadvantaged towns" in the North of England where the sort of money needed to support major pro sport doesn't exist and therefore they have no access to it.

A few forum members scoff at that.  However the losses described in the report I linked in my OP and the failure of the World Cup matches played in such towns to get anywhere close to full houses at the bottom-end event prices charged is evidence that McGuire is right about it.

Not 100% correct. As all this is doing is chasing investment and putting a plaster over the issue. 

The main crux of it is that we don't have enough youth links from acadamey/amateur through to pro rugby. This would generate more players and also more kids playing the game. Which in turn generates more fans through the kids themselves and their families wanting to watch the game

To get more focus on the game, it needs to make people want to invest in it and not just chase it. There needs to be a step change in thinking away from this constant marketing drivel and throwing money at stupid initiatives such as Toronto, for example. 

Limit overseas player and coach quota to 3 and make the acadamies more important to driving people into the game. 

The finance of the clubs have been hit because of covid as expected, but there needs to be more focus on crowds and getting families in and not on gimmicks to get TV money, which would follow anyway. 

 

Sorry for the ramble, probably doesn't make any sense anyway as I'm sick

 

Merry Xmas all

[Roughyed Rats]

1 hour ago, Stanley30 said:

Not 100% correct. As all this is doing is chasing investment and putting a plaster over the issue. 

The main crux of it is that we don't have enough youth links from acadamey/amateur through to pro rugby. This would generate more players and also more kids playing the game. Which in turn generates more fans through the kids themselves and their families wanting to watch the game

To get more focus on the game, it needs to make people want to invest in it and not just chase it. There needs to be a step change in thinking away from this constant marketing drivel and throwing money at stupid initiatives such as Toronto, for example. 

Limit overseas player and coach quota to 3 and make the acadamies more important to driving people into the game. 

The finance of the clubs have been hit because of covid as expected, but there needs to be more focus on crowds and getting families in and not on gimmicks to get TV money, which would follow anyway. 

 

Sorry for the ramble, probably doesn't make any sense anyway as I'm sick

 

Merry Xmas all

Whilst clearly COVID has hit clubs, clubs have consistently had operating losses for years. Take Wigan as a prime example, the last time it didn't operate at a loss was back in 2013 where they made a small operational profit of £108k. In 2018, they made an operational loss of £1.4m and have consistently run at a loss each year; despite their annual turnover ranging between £6-7m and largely propped up by Sky revenue during that time.

Saints have not made an operational profit in the last 16 years (2005 was £44,679); their biggest losses being in 2010 (£1.35m), 2011 (£2.42m), 2013 (£2.17m), 2017 (£1.14m) and 2021 (£1.65m). These losses incurred despite an increase in turnover from around £5m to £7m (£6.94m in 2021).  

Completely agree with the rest of your comments - they make complete sense to me. Hope you are feeling better soon. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Roughyed Rats

[Eddie]

16 hours ago, Josef K said:

Full credit to Wakey for making a healthy profit. Well done the Trin. 

Not spending anything on the ground will have helped (and yes I know they are now). 

[Jughead]

Sean McGuire is the saviour. 

[Griff]

2 minutes ago, Jughead said:

Sean McGuire is the saviour. 

IMG will soon have this fettled.

[ELBOWSEYE]

17 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Latest Super League club accounts for 2021 show huge losses with only one making profit according to The Examiner which also says, "It's grim reading on the financial front for the game's top clubs."

So those of you think that Sean McGuire and I are wrong, read that and then tell me why we're wrong — if you can.

Is that the overall picture because in some clubs there are 2 organisations, the rugby side and the stadium side. They are seperate but part of the same club,  the overall club may be making a profit I know Warrington invested plenty in off field projects, stadium upgrades, training facilities and the stadium as with saints is used for non rugby activities. 

[Kirmonds pouch]

39 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Not spending anything on the ground will have helped (and yes I know they are now). 

Beyond idiotic.

So how do you think they found that money?

We have not incurred one penny in debt to build either the East or North stand. We saved our money and when we had what we needed we paid on the nose.

When the East stand opens it will make money from minute one, with no loan repayments every penny comes to us. Wonderful though Headingley is it will be years before Leeds can say that whilst the Likes of Wigan and Hull never will, because they are just tenants.

It's a long game, and we will get our rewards for doing it the right way.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Kirmonds pouch

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Beyond idiotic.

So how do you think they found that money?

We have not incurred one penny in debt to build either the East or North stand. We saved our money and when we had what we needed we paid on the nose.

When the East stand opens it will make money from minute one, with no loan repayments every penny comes to us. Wonderful though Headingley is it will be years before Leeds can say that whilst the Likes of Wigan and Hull never will, because they are just tenants.

It's a long game, and we will get our rewards for doing it the right way.

Wakefield Council funded your buyback of the Ground to the tune of a £3+ million loan, the council also gifted you £2 million as part of the RL Resilience Fund grant package, and they got Yorkcourt to stump up £8.8million in exchange for building on the city's Greenbelt. Wakefield MDCs charge over the ground may have been for a modest sum compared to the backing Leeds City Council had to give to the Rhinos and Yorkshire CCC as guarantors for Legal and General, but its ultimately still a mortgaged property. If a mortgaged property makes you a tenant, well that is a philosophical question. I also won't get into the circumstances and pricing of that purchase.

In short however, Wakefield have incurred debt buying the ground, and spent very little if any of their own money developing 2 sides of it. 

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

4 hours ago, Eddie said:

Not spending anything on the ground will have helped (and yes I know they are now). 

How much did the others spend on their grounds during that period?  I don't recall seeing that info in the report nor anything specifying that Wakefield actually paid £zero during that year. 

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, Kirmonds pouch said:

Beyond idiotic.

So how do you think they found that money?

We have not incurred one penny in debt to build either the East or North stand. We saved our money and when we had what we needed we paid on the nose.

When the East stand opens it will make money from minute one, with no loan repayments every penny comes to us. Wonderful though Headingley is it will be years before Leeds can say that whilst the Likes of Wigan and Hull never will, because they are just tenants.

It's a long game, and we will get our rewards for doing it the right way.

Well yes, and not spending any money on the ground (while saving up to develop it) helped you not rack up debts in the interim. Not sure what’s beyond idiotic about that obvious statement. 

[Eddie]

54 minutes ago, Wollo Wollo Wayoo said:

How much did the others spend on their grounds during that period?  I don't recall seeing that info in the report nor anything specifying that Wakefield actually paid £zero during that year. 

I hope they spent less than the other clubs who had well maintained grounds, and for example didn’t have a few chairs thrown out by a church hall as a players bench. 

[WakefieldCityLoyal]

Well done to Wakefield. 
 

Up the Trin 

Love this club 

Love this City

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

2 hours ago, Eddie said:

I hope they spent less than the other clubs who had well maintained grounds, and for example didn’t have a few chairs thrown out by a church hall as a players bench. 

You state that they spent nothing and suggested the other 9 spent something.  I was just asking for a link or reference to these figures, not requesting any inside info on your hopes.  

[Futtocks]

To sum up, the whole of Super League made a loss (in a financially very difficult time) roughly equal to a tenth of Wasps RUFC's debts.

[Tommygilf]

12 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

To sum up, the whole of Super League made a loss (in a financially very difficult time) roughly equal to a tenth of Wasps RUFC's debts.

Its relative levels isn't it? The sum that actually sent Bradford Bulls under was hardly huge, relative to other sporting administrations.

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, Wollo Wollo Wayoo said:

You state that they spent nothing and suggested the other 9 spent something.  I was just asking for a link or reference to these figures, not requesting any inside info on your hopes.  

Just an assumption based on the state of each ground. 

[Mr Frisky]

On 13/12/2022 at 21:44, Big Picture said:

Latest Super League club accounts for 2021 show huge losses with only one making profit according to The Examiner which also says, "It's grim reading on the financial front for the game's top clubs."

So those of you think that Sean McGuire and I are wrong, read that and then tell me why we're wrong — if you can.

Wow, so you predicted that SL clubs wouldn't make a profit during a time when no crowds were allowed in.... did you also predict a buisness selling PPE Masks would do very well??

[Dave T]

Ultimately, this is a nothing story. Surely nobody expected anything less than a spectator sport being played behind Closed doors to lose money? 

It's clearly not good news, but it was an unprecedented event that we just have to deal with. 

[Toby Chopra]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Ultimately, this is a nothing story. Surely nobody expected anything less than a spectator sport being played behind Closed doors to lose money? 

It's clearly not good news, but it was an unprecedented event that we just have to deal with. 

I'd say the fact that all of our clubs survived the financial shock of the pandemic, whereas certain other sports have seen teams fold, suggests English RL has a reasonably solid base. 

[Roughyed Rats]

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Ultimately, this is a nothing story. Surely nobody expected anything less than a spectator sport being played behind Closed doors to lose money? 

It's clearly not good news, but it was an unprecedented event that we just have to deal with. 

It was an unprecedented event....unlike the persistent operating losses of our 'top' clubs over the last 10-20 years. The likes of Wigan and Saints actually made more losses in the years prior to the pandemic despite record turnover!! Therefore, perhaps we should address the underlying problems of the financial state of the game; as opposed to simply brushing it off as a nothing story. Just a thought.

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I'd say the fact that all of our clubs survived the financial shock of the pandemic, whereas certain other sports have seen teams fold, suggests English RL has a reasonably solid base. 

I agree. We shouldn't be complacent, but if in 5 years we have survived this period relatively intact (TWP the exception), then we cane be pleased with our efforts. 

I think it's an endorsement of the sustainability strategy that we have embarked on, (which for me has run for far too long) that will hopefully allow us to survive this extreme shock to the system. 

But now is not the time to cut costs further and demonstrate prudence - we've been through that, we should be disciplined on that front anyway. Without going all Liz Truss, we really should be all about growth now, and it does feel like the IMG partnership is at exactly the right time. 

Whilst Hetherington's release was clearly taking a shot at others, I think he could be right.

We are seeing sports become more and more bold, and I do think we have done some of those things in RL, partucularly with our limited budgets, but I think we need to go bigger and bolder. 

[RigbyLuger]

I think it's less "brushing off" more "this is how a lot of 'professional' sports clubs are run."