Fev player wages

[Guest]

Just now, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I imagine at least 10 of the clubs in Super League rely on Directors loans in order to underwrite their next 12 months. In all cases their audited accounts will include a comment from the auditors that this is a need going forwards, and that Directors have said they'll support the business. So now you want IMG to guess whether they change their minds at some point in the following year? That's what happened at Newcastle. And do you want IMG to predict whether the Directors will be unable to manage monthly cashflow to ensure they can make regular payments in that following year? Because failing to do that is what has happened at Featherstone. 

In your search to lay the blame at IMG's door you're twisting yourself into some many knots I guess it's Houdini you've got in mind rather than Meg 

Featherstone's issue is the result of doing things the old way: Spending money the business doesn't generate, in order to use financial doping to get promoted. It's what we're moving away from with IMG. Not a moment too soon it seems. 

 

Feels like a Strawman.

If the system does not take into account financial risk adequately it is not much of a system is it.

Of course the larger sides have more of a business to underpin them - compared to London, Fev and Thunder. So not an adequate comparison really.

"And do you want IMG to predict whether the Directors will be unable to manage monthly cashflow to ensure they can make regular payments in that following year?"

If they aren't doing a detailed review of exactly that and the risks attributable for the next year and forecasts, then they should be.

[graveyard johnny]

1 hour ago, Monkeymagic22 said:

The Club have said that players will be paid. 

IN KIND! by big beryl who works behind the bar at fev miners welfare club - on her nights off

Edited November 1, 2023 by graveyard johnny

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Chrispmartha said:

Agreed, the mess featherstone are in is because of the current system not the grading system 

Never mentioned the grading system being the cause - was commenting on how the risk should be reflected in the grading system, which appears not to have been for a number of clubs.

 

[Midlands hobo]

58 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

They are late it doesn't say they WON'T get paid.

Oh brilliant they can take the nugget of joy to mortgage company.

[Griff]

34 minutes ago, Leonard said:

All audited accounts include  going concern note - i.e. able to trade for 12 months post year end.

So if they look at Fev and see income - costs = screwed and the Directors don't underpin and/or are shaky on committing finance for 12 months, probably with cleared funds, to cover the shortfall then the rating should be negligible for that score - and arguably the whole rating should be hammered, as finance underpins a whole lot more in a club. 

For example, Newcastle now has no ground, will likely have less fans etc.

Shouldn't be too hard.

Fev aren't big enough to have their accounts audited.

Few Rugby League clubs are.

[Vyvyan]

Worrying news for Fev fans.  Obviously the directors had adopted a "poop or bust" business plan.

Hope this is as far as it goes and that there are no creditors not being paid.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

27 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Feels like a Strawman.

If the system does not take into account financial risk adequately it is not much of a system is it.

Of course the larger sides have more of a business to underpin them - compared to London, Fev and Thunder. So not an adequate comparison really.

"And do you want IMG to predict whether the Directors will be unable to manage monthly cashflow to ensure they can make regular payments in that following year?"

If they aren't doing a detailed review of exactly that and the risks attributable for the next year and forecasts, then they should be.

It's not a strawman. Quite the opposite. Featherstone's issue this month is a result of the old way of doing things. Spending money a club doesn't yet generate on a squad of players, in order to financially dope their way to promotion rather than qualify on merit - be that fair sporting merit, or a wider measure of value-added to the elite comp. 

Pretending that the issue instead is an IMG one, rather than the fault of the current system IMG's model replaces, is Gaslighting. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

It's not a strawman. Quite the opposite. Featherstone's issue this month is a result of the old way of doing things. Spending money a club doesn't yet generate on a squad of players, in order to financially dope their way to promotion rather than qualify on merit - be that fair sporting merit, or a wider measure of value-added to the elite comp. 

Pretending that the issue instead is an IMG one, rather than the fault of the current system IMG's model replaces, is Gaslighting. 

I haven't said it was the fault of IMG.

I said IMG should have considered potential issues like this in their grading.

So yes - a strawman.

You can keep repeating the same point.

[Ovenden Grunt]

What a horrific situation but in hindsight perhaps people should have seen this coming?

[Chrispmartha]

16 minutes ago, Leonard said:

I haven't said it was the fault of IMG.

I said IMG should have considered potential issues like this in their grading.

So yes - a strawman.

You can keep repeating the same point.

How do you mean considered potential issues in the grading?

for a start Grading isn’t even implemented yet? 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

16 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

How do you mean considered potential issues in the grading?

for a start Grading isn’t even implemented yet? 

He thinks there should have been greater weight placed in the gradings on some sort of outside assessment of each clubs ability to continue to trade at present levels. There may well be something in that, although I'd argue that it would involve a huge degree of work, and would still rest on a human assessment of whether a clubs Directors were telling you the whole truth or not (so an inherently meaningless exercise, at significant expense). Unless you want clubs to put a bond up. 

But what's more interesting is the choice to focus on that, rather than make the much more obvious other conclusion: Over-spending to achieve promotion on the previous simplistic first-past-the-post model was dysfunctional, and this is yet another example of the damage it caused. 

[The Blues Ox]

I wonder if this is a full employee wages miss or if it's just the outgoing players that have not been paid and one of them decided to go to the press. Either way is obviously bad but Fev do have previous when it comes to not honoring payments. 

[Hopie]

Inevitable that closing the door to Super League would cause some to gamble on a last roll of the dice. It happened with licensing.

Also inevitable that anybody shut out having financial trouble in the next few years will lead to "ah, you see, that is why we had to shut them out!" from those who are happy with the closed shop.

[Tex Evans Thigh]

2 minutes ago, Hopie said:

Inevitable that closing the door to Super League would cause some to gamble on a last roll of the dice. It happened with licensing.

Also inevitable that anybody shut out having financial trouble in the next few years will lead to "ah, you see, that is why we had to shut them out!" from those who are happy with the closed shop.

Spot on.

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Hopie said:

Inevitable that closing the door to Super League would cause some to gamble on a last roll of the dice. It happened with licensing.

Also inevitable that anybody shut out having financial trouble in the next few years will lead to "ah, you see, that is why we had to shut them out!" from those who are happy with the closed shop.

The door to SL isn’t closed, it isn’t a closed shop, either way featherstone would have been the same as London next year, rolling the dice is not the way to run a club.

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Hopie said:

Inevitable that closing the door to Super League would cause some to gamble on a last roll of the dice. It happened with licensing.

Also inevitable that anybody shut out having financial trouble in the next few years will lead to "ah, you see, that is why we had to shut them out!" from those who are happy with the closed shop.

IT IS EVERYONE'S FAULT BUT OURS

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Tex Evans Thigh said:

Spot on.

Apart from the fact SL isn’t going to be a closed shop.

[coolie]

Probably the last laugh for a chairman that's gone all in for the last few seasons and been rewarded with down right failure for every penny he's sunk in. 

They'll get paid when Campbell sees fit, the mercenaries have fled the bunker, the Gravey train has derailed, the juggernaut has hit the buffers.. 

Next season they'll be no expectation on Featherstone 

Which might do them the world of good

Wakefield the team to beat

[Damien]

6 minutes ago, Hopie said:

Inevitable that closing the door to Super League would cause some to gamble on a last roll of the dice. It happened with licensing.

Also inevitable that anybody shut out having financial trouble in the next few years will lead to "ah, you see, that is why we had to shut them out!" from those who are happy with the closed shop.

Its happened plenty of other times too.

[Tex Evans Thigh]

5 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Apart from the fact SL isn’t going to be a closed shop.

It is for all but a couple of clubs. You're absolutely delusional if you think a club like Featherstone, Batley, Fax etc can get promoted in the new system. The system is designed exactly so they can cherry pick who they want in. It's no surprise that a team with no prospects of promotion going forward would have a real crack in the last year they could actually get promoted. It's left Fev a little short, but sounds like it will be rectified and the budget has been reduced for next year.

[Chrispmartha]

1 minute ago, Tex Evans Thigh said:

It is for all but a couple of clubs. You're absolutely delusional if you think a club like Featherstone, Batley, Fax etc can get promoted in the new system. The system is designed exactly so they can cherry pick who they want in. It's no surprise that a team with no prospects of promotion going forward would have a real crack in the last year they could actually get promoted. It's left Fev a little short, but sounds like it will be rectified and the budget has been reduced for next year.

Feathersone wouldn’t have stayed up if they had got there this year either.

[Gooleboy]

1 minute ago, Chrispmartha said:

Feathersone wouldn’t have stayed up if they had got there this year either.

Do you work for IMG?

[Chrispmartha]

2 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Do you work for IMG?

No but I can understand how the system works 

[Gooleboy]

7 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

No but I can understand how the system works 

They should use you as their PRO.

[gingerjon]

24 minutes ago, Tex Evans Thigh said:

You're absolutely delusional if you think a club like Featherstone, Batley, Fax 

How long is it since any of those were promoted into the top tier?