Fev not paying staff

[sentoffagain2]

              Featherstone always had to sell their star players to survive.The years when we finished 2nd to Salford and then beat them to finish top in the late 70's i think attendances were just over 4000.MC was unlucky two years ago we beat Leigh in the first game of the season.Then Beaumont got the brass out and recruited some really good players to improve the team.And it came off for them they dominated the league and won promotion.MC had to have another crack at it with Leigh out of the way and only Toulouse as stand out challengers.We won the league with 12 points without really playing very well in most games.I repeat the players were good enough but when the pressure was on failed to perform as hoped.We blew it big time and overspent by about 500k on budget.Featherstone own the ground and some surrounding land.All profit from the bars and club house should go into the budget.They are a lifeline to so many in the local community and aslways offer the ground for amateur finals of all ages.Debts must be settled in full and whoever decides to take a punt in investing in the club probably wont see much return.But their knuckles will be white from the roller coaster ride.

[LeytherRob]

11 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

              Featherstone always had to sell their star players to survive.The years when we finished 2nd to Salford and then beat them to finish top in the late 70's i think attendances were just over 4000.MC was unlucky two years ago we beat Leigh in the first game of the season.Then Beaumont got the brass out and recruited some really good players to improve the team.And it came off for them they dominated the league and won promotion.MC had to have another crack at it with Leigh out of the way and only Toulouse as stand out challengers.We won the league with 12 points without really playing very well in most games.I repeat the players were good enough but when the pressure was on failed to perform as hoped.We blew it big time and overspent by about 500k on budget.Featherstone own the ground and some surrounding land.All profit from the bars and club house should go into the budget.They are a lifeline to so many in the local community and aslways offer the ground for amateur finals of all ages.Debts must be settled in full and whoever decides to take a punt in investing in the club probably wont see much return.But their knuckles will be white from the roller coaster ride.

There were some very questionable decisions that prevented Fev being promoted in 2023 IMO. Choice of Long as head coach was a gamble, removing him right at the business end of the year and replacing him with a fairly average coach was an even bigger gamble, and then there was a scattergun approach to recruitment. Signing Aekins was a great move for instance, but signing Aekins whilst retaining MK and BP then playing him in the centres/halfback was mind boggling. Leigh's best signing going in to 2022 was Chris Chester, he has arguably one of the best records of anyone in the UK for identifying talent from Oz when you consider his Leigh and Wakey signings and he's absolutely nailed the recruitment side for us.

[sentoffagain2]

         Agreed our player selection was poor and to play through the season without a settled half back partnership was suicidal.MC will have had the main say in players and coaches.But if the players had put in same effort that the present ones did against Wakefield and Batley we may well have succeeded.

[ATLANTISMAN]

1 hour ago, sentoffagain2 said:

              Featherstone always had to sell their star players to survive.The years when we finished 2nd to Salford and then beat them to finish top in the late 70's i think attendances were just over 4000.MC was unlucky two years ago we beat Leigh in the first game of the season.Then Beaumont got the brass out and recruited some really good players to improve the team.And it came off for them they dominated the league and won promotion.MC had to have another crack at it with Leigh out of the way and only Toulouse as stand out challengers.We won the league with 12 points without really playing very well in most games.I repeat the players were good enough but when the pressure was on failed to perform as hoped.We blew it big time and overspent by about 500k on budget.Featherstone own the ground and some surrounding land.All profit from the bars and club house should go into the budget.They are a lifeline to so many in the local community and aslways offer the ground for amateur finals of all ages.Debts must be settled in full and whoever decides to take a punt in investing in the club probably wont see much return.But their knuckles will be white from the roller coaster ride.

Nice sensible post

[RigbyLuger]

Owning the ground/land, means Fev are an attractive proposition, just hopefully not for someone to come in and buy them for that. A right and proper person, if you will.

[David Shepherd]

8 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

Pontefract, Knottingley and Ackworth, come on ! Ponte and Knottingley have far more Cas fans. Why not really scrape the barrel and add Purston and Wraggby. Fev never has and never will have a bigger fan base than those four clubs you mentioned. But like you say, no harm in dreaming

That's true now. I'm a Ponte lad, only one Cas fan at Carleton High in the 80s and he was a lad that had been kicked out of Freeston High in Normy.

[David Shepherd]

Another day, another player owed money by Fev 

 

Edited March 20 by David Shepherd

[sentoffagain2]

10 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

Owning the ground/land, means Fev are an attractive proposition, just hopefully not for someone to come in and buy them for that. A right and proper person, if you will.

   We had that a few years ago,someone who wanted to obtain a majority shareholding in the club in return for investment.I think the supporters saw through it before MC but before any real damage was done the club decided against the move.

[The Phantom Horseman]

13 hours ago, gazza77 said:

I was brought up and schooled in Ponte, before moving away to uni in 95 and never met a Cas fan whilst there until 6th form, when Cas and Ponte schools merged at NEW college. Maybe times have changed, it's 30 years since I left, and tbh what you say wouldn't suprise me given the time Fev have been out of the top flight and that Cas and Pontefract have become far closer in terms of residential development over that time. 

As we both say, no harm in dreaming. 

This is 100% accurate, same comments apply to me about going to school in Ponte, in my year there were reams of Fev fans and only one Cas fan and he was regarded as being a bit of an oddball. As you suggest, long-term SL occupancy for Cas will have had an impact on that as it would for any sport.

[Griff]

13 hours ago, gazza77 said:

Yes, Fev are never likely to be there biggest club. Still no reason that they shouldn't be up there until we reach the promised land of "big city" teams however. It just needs someone with deep pockets and willing to keep throwing money at it long term, same as Huddersfield, Leigh, Warrington and so many other clubs that are benefactor dependent. At the moment however, that just feels like wishful thinking for those of us who dare to dream.

None of those three are cities.

[Griff]

10 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

Owning the ground/land, means Fev are an attractive proposition, just hopefully not for someone to come in and buy them for that. A right and proper person, if you will.

Buy?

Does that mean an offer to the hundreds of shareholders?

[gazza77]

9 minutes ago, Griff said:

None of those three are cities.

I never said they were, just that all of them have a benefactor who appears to be in it for the long haul.

[marklaspalmas]

41 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   We had that a few years ago,someone who wanted to obtain a majority shareholding in the club in return for investment.I think the supporters saw through it before MC but before any real damage was done the club decided against the move.

If you check the list of shareholders and their holdings, many people would be very surprised to find out who really "owns" what %age of Featherstone Rovers shares.

Another thing entirely is who is running the club on a daily basis and taking all the decisions.

[sentoffagain2]

4 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

If you check the list of shareholders and their holdings, many people would be very surprised to find out who really "owns" what %age of Featherstone Rovers shares.

Another thing entirely is who is running the club on a daily basis and taking all the decisions.

   I would think the CEO one Martin Vickers.Been reading up on him and it is interesting from 2013 onwards.The shareholders whoever they are must try to influence the club to pay players owed money.The club shoulder borrow if necessary to clear the debt.

[Trojan]

47 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

This is 100% accurate, same comments apply to me about going to school in Ponte, in my year there were reams of Fev fans and only one Cas fan and he was regarded as being a bit of an oddball. As you suggest, long-term SL occupancy for Cas will have had an impact on that as it would for any sport.

Fev's totally artificial exclusion from the original SL is the cause of all the problems IMO.  There was absolutely no reason from a football point of view why they should not have been in the original SL, but manipulation from Lindsay etc meant they were excluded.  A team that that very year were CC semi finalists, plus former champions, and CC winners.  Had they  been included and failed IMO there wouldn't have been a problem.  Same goes for 1998.  They lost the final somewhat controversially and Wakey were promoted.  On false promises of a new ground and very dodgy financial data. And they somehow survived and have benefitted from that survival.  That's it in a nutshell for me.  Being the best team in the Championship in the 2010's but excluded hasn't helped matters.  It all goes to prove that when you try to manipulate sports comps.  there's usually trouble ahead.  Watch out IMG.

[marklaspalmas]

18 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   I would think the CEO one Martin Vickers.Been reading up on him and it is interesting from 2013 onwards.The shareholders whoever they are must try to influence the club to pay players owed money.The club shoulder borrow if necessary to clear the debt.

I'm definitely not pointing fingers. Plenty other people queuing up to do that. I know nothing of the internal workings of the club. Very few people do.

According to the publicly available lists, the biggest shareholder of the club would surprise you given your previous comment.

All clubs have loans and debts. All clubs.

[marklaspalmas]

3 minutes ago, Trojan said:

Fev's totally artificial exclusion from the original SL is the cause of all the problems IMO.  There was absolutely no reason from a football point of view why they should not have been in the original SL, but manipulation from Lindsay etc meant they were excluded.  A team that that very year were CC semi finalists, plus former champions, and CC winners.  Had they  been included and failed IMO there wouldn't have been a problem.  Same goes for 1998.  They lost the final somewhat controversially and Wakey were promoted.  On false promises of a new ground and very dodgy financial data. And they somehow survived and have benefitted from that survival.  That's it in a nutshell for me.  Being the best team in the Championship in the 2010's but excluded hasn't helped matters.  It all goes to prove that when you try to manipulate sports comps.  there's usually trouble ahead.  Watch out IMG.

The launch of SL was a fiasco. But it was 29 years ago.

[Trojan]

1 minute ago, marklaspalmas said:

The launch of SL was a fiasco. But it was 29 years ago.

But the roots of today's problem lies there.  The victimised feeling of Fev fans has been passed down.

[marklaspalmas]

5 minutes ago, Trojan said:

But the roots of today's problem lies there.  The victimised feeling of Fev fans has been passed down.

It hurt me grievously.

But if there are still people who haven't moved on from 1995, that's problematic for them.

[The Blues Ox]

More and more players owed money but the one thing that does not add up is that we have to presume that not a single one of them has approached the RFL over the matter. I mean surely if someone had of gone to the RFL they would have taken action on this wouldn't they?

[sentoffagain2]

13 minutes ago, marklaspalmas said:

I'm definitely not pointing fingers. Plenty other people queuing up to do that. I know nothing of the internal workings of the club. Very few people do.

According to the publicly available lists, the biggest shareholder of the club would surprise you given your previous comment.

All clubs have loans and debts. All clubs.

  Start of 2021 we had a debt of 770k.then 2022 debt increased to 1.3 million.and last years accounts not in yet but i would think the debt would be 1.7 to 1.8 million.The gamble for SL which i was not against has probably cost the club a million pound over the last two years.However the club has a decent credit rating of very low risk.Get the players paid.

[JonM]

16 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

More and more players owed money but the one thing that does not add up is that we have to presume that not a single one of them has approached the RFL over the matter. I mean surely if someone had of gone to the RFL they would have taken action on this wouldn't they?

Various news stories have included claims from the players that when they had spoken to the RFL, they had been told that Rovers were disputing the amounts owed and that the RFL would only act if Rovers admit they are at fault. As players' contracts are supposed to be registered with the RFL, I wonder whether some of the problem is with things that are non-contractual that might not have formed part of the RFL registered contract, which is why the public stories have been over things like receipts from testimonial games, payments to agents, relocation expenses and so on.

[meast]

19 hours ago, RigbyLuger said:

How does Vickers keep getting work?

I was thinking that myself, wasn't he at the wheel when it all went breasts vertical at Salford and Toronto?

[marklaspalmas]

1 hour ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  Start of 2021 we had a debt of 770k.then 2022 debt increased to 1.3 million.and last years accounts not in yet but i would think the debt would be 1.7 to 1.8 million.The gamble for SL which i was not against has probably cost the club a million pound over the last two years.However the club has a decent credit rating of very low risk.Get the players paid.

Neither of us (unlike some keyboard warriors apparently) are financial experts and access to information to able to judge the club's accounts is difficult.

The club may well be near to its maximum level of credit that it can obtain. Simply borrowing more may not be an option.

It is not really clear who the club owes money to and how much. The chairman may be a major creditor.

The land will have been used to guarantee loans.

 

One thing I think we agree on is that everyone should be paid the money that is owed to them. Not to do so is wrong.

Some people are owed some money by Featherstone. That's embarrassing for the club and needs sorting. The reason for that is the club is now itself (for whatever reason that may be) short of money .

 

[Derwent]

1 hour ago, marklaspalmas said:

 

According to the publicly available lists, the biggest shareholder of the club would surprise you given your previous comment.

 

It's not still that Feisal fella is it ? The Probiz geezer ?

Edited March 20 by Derwent