Fev not paying staff

[JohnM]

28 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

The business world is full of spreadsheet compilers having a bout of creative accountancy.

Is that a fact?

[JohnM]

15 minutes ago, Griff said:

There's not much detail in accounts these days.

Quite so. And even fewer people able to interpret them. It really is a specialist task. 

[RBKnight]

43 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

So very true Phantom, had they done what I suggested speculated made SL and recieved the appropriate funding, would these recent problems have arisen?

 

The situation Fev currently face provides a justification for the new IMG rules, and shows how a straightforward promotion and relegation between a full-time SL and a part-time Championship doesn't work.

Without a very rich sugar daddy available (like Leigh and now Wakey), Fev, if promoted last year, would have found themselves having to use their fresh SL income to cover the previous losses incurred in trying to gain entry to the top table. They would have been at the back of the queue (inevitably) in recruiting a full-time squad, largely from cast-offs and fringe players from other SL teams, hamstrung by their starting financial position. Like Toulouse the season before (but probably financially worse off) they would be odds-on to go straight back down again.

Back in the Championship, Fev would then have the task of offloading all the players they signed on two year contracts that they then couldn't afford, which would make their current financial problems look trifling.....

[Damien]

It's always the fans that suffer and I really feel for the Fev fans.

On the plus side Fev should be in a stronger position than many who have been in this situation due to owning their own ground from which they can generate revenue, while obviously cutting back on wages to get to a more sustainable level again.

Edited March 21 by Damien

[Padge]

7 hours ago, Blind side johnny said:

Of course. But when operational rules read as if nobody has accountability within the organisation they are almost worthless, other than as self-protection.

But that is not how they read, they put obligations on everyone who signs up. That includes the originators.

You should find another sport to hate. The RFL has been recognised as a leader in sports governance, it may get up your craw but it is a rare thing RL is respected for.

Perpetual whingers like yourself, who whinge with no reason, or evidence, do more damage to the game that the RFL has ever done.

 

[Harry Stottle]

14 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

This is the RL equivalent of Liz Truss saying she should have cut the income tax rate for top earners by even more.

No it is the equivalent of what Leigh did and your near city neighbours are doing, albeit Wakey will probably be in SL irrespective but they are not sitting on their laurels.

[The Phantom Horseman]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

No it is the equivalent of what Leigh did and your near city neighbours are doing, albeit Wakey will probably be in SL irrespective but they are not sitting on their laurels.

It's also the equivalent of what Leigh did in 2018, when Beaumont admitted that he hadn't envisaged that the club might fail to reach the play-offs and couldn't honour contracts as a result, with the club going into special measures.

Harry, you were spectacularly wrong in your assessments about Fev last year from start to finish and it does you no credit to be doubling down now.

[RigbyLuger]

22 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

It's also the equivalent of what Leigh did in 2018, when Beaumont admitted that he hadn't envisaged that the club might fail to reach the play-offs and couldn't honour contracts as a result, with the club going into special measures.

I think we've supposed to have forgotten that bit.

[phiggins]

37 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

It's also the equivalent of what Leigh did in 2018, when Beaumont admitted that he hadn't envisaged that the club might fail to reach the play-offs and couldn't honour contracts as a result, with the club going into special measures.

Harry, you were spectacularly wrong in your assessments about Fev last year from start to finish and it does you no credit to be doubling down now.

The bit in bold is quite a significant difference between Leigh in 2018/19 and Fev now. Leigh didn;t sign any players until the final two player disputes in 2018 had been settled. Fev have just brought in a new overseas half back amongst others.

[Griff]

Hoping to pay off your huge Championship debts with Superleague money is flawed from the start.

You'll need your Superleague money to pay your Superleague players.

[roversspud]

1 hour ago, phiggins said:

The bit in bold is quite a significant difference between Leigh in 2018/19 and Fev now. Leigh didn;t sign any players until the final two player disputes in 2018 had been settled. Fev have just brought in a new overseas half back amongst others.

I don't think that Fev have ever said they're not going to honour the contracts. They had a dispute about one , and they're late paying the others although some or all may have been paid recently. The agent's fees issue has been addressed by the RFL who have told the agent there are proper channels to go down which he has not done according to the RFL.

There is a difference between Fev and Leigh's situations. The RFL have not got involved in the situation at Fev, so presumably they are content that it will resolve itself.

[Blind side johnny]

18 hours ago, JohnM said:

You could always look at their accounts.

Mostly abbreviated so little to learn from them.

[Blind side johnny]

15 hours ago, Padge said:

But that is not how they read, they put obligations on everyone who signs up. That includes the originators.

You should find another sport to hate. The RFL has been recognised as a leader in sports governance, it may get up your craw but it is a rare thing RL is respected for.

Perpetual whingers like yourself, who whinge with no reason, or evidence, do more damage to the game that the RFL has ever done.

 

Evidence of my "perpetual whingeing" please. Disagreeing with you doesn't count by the way.

[Worzel]

17 hours ago, RBKnight said:

The situation Fev currently face provides a justification for the new IMG rules, and shows how a straightforward promotion and relegation between a full-time SL and a part-time Championship doesn't work.

Without a very rich sugar daddy available (like Leigh and now Wakey), Fev, if promoted last year, would have found themselves having to use their fresh SL income to cover the previous losses incurred in trying to gain entry to the top table. They would have been at the back of the queue (inevitably) in recruiting a full-time squad, largely from cast-offs and fringe players from other SL teams, hamstrung by their starting financial position. Like Toulouse the season before (but probably financially worse off) they would be odds-on to go straight back down again.

Back in the Championship, Fev would then have the task of offloading all the players they signed on two year contracts that they then couldn't afford, which would make their current financial problems look trifling.....

This 100% ^^

Featherstone shows precisely why we need to make Super League entry decisions on a wider basket of measures than “will some local businessman throw a million quid more than other clubs can afford at getting a better squad for a couple of years”. Promotion as a result of doing that is not a fair, competitive selection process either. It’s financial doping. It’s not really decided by performance on the pitch, it’s decided by money. As we can all see now, Featherstone couldn’t even afford to do what they did, let alone then take the next step if the plan had come off. 

I think we’ve dodged a real bullet here. 

[The Phantom Horseman]

18 minutes ago, Worzel said:

This 100% ^^

Featherstone shows precisely why we need to make Super League entry decisions on a wider basket of measures than “will some local businessman throw a million quid more than other clubs can afford at getting a better squad for a couple of years”. Promotion as a result of doing that is not a fair, competitive selection process either. It’s financial doping. It’s not really decided by performance on the pitch, it’s decided by money. As we can all see now, Featherstone couldn’t even afford to do what they did, let alone then take the next step if the plan had come off. 

I think we’ve dodged a real bullet here. 

By getting London instead?

Hmm. I agree with the original post but not this one, at all. Saying Fev couldn't afford to take the next step...well, I think getting £1.4 million instead of £80k might have made a bit of a difference!

And your comment about "It’s not really decided by performance on the pitch, it’s decided by money"  about promotion is laughable, it will be decided MORE by money from now on. Any team that gets somebody prepared to throw big money at a club will be in a very favourable position because so many of the IMG points available are predicated entirely on this. They can literally "buy" IMG points across the board, even through schemes such as heavily subsidised season tickets (eg at Wakefield) to ensure getting high points in that category...they get points for investment...they get points for splashing out on LED advertising boards etc. I'm not even saying that it's necessarily wrong, but let's not pretend that money (and current SL occupancy, with the financial advantages that brings) isn't going to be the ultimate decider in who goes in SL.

I don't disagree at all though with the original point that the old promotion system was flawed in terms of how hard it is for an existing Championship team to build a SL-competitive team in the short window available.

[The Blues Ox]

20 hours ago, RBKnight said:

The situation Fev currently face provides a justification for the new IMG rules, and shows how a straightforward promotion and relegation between a full-time SL and a part-time Championship doesn't work.

Without a very rich sugar daddy available (like Leigh and now Wakey), Fev, if promoted last year, would have found themselves having to use their fresh SL income to cover the previous losses incurred in trying to gain entry to the top table. They would have been at the back of the queue (inevitably) in recruiting a full-time squad, largely from cast-offs and fringe players from other SL teams, hamstrung by their starting financial position. Like Toulouse the season before (but probably financially worse off) they would be odds-on to go straight back down again.

Back in the Championship, Fev would then have the task of offloading all the players they signed on two year contracts that they then couldn't afford, which would make their current financial problems look trifling.....

 

5 hours ago, Griff said:

Hoping to pay off your huge Championship debts with Superleague money is flawed from the start.

You'll need your Superleague money to pay your Superleague players.

This was not the case last season though because if Fev had of gained promotion they could, if they wanted, just keep all their part time players and bank most of the money which would have more than adequatley paid off these debts without the fear of finishing bottom having much barring on which league they would be in the following year.

The belief through the season was that Fev would have been very close to the automatic spots in SL and a lot of people believed that once in there it would be very hard to lose their spot. As it turned out most people were wrong and Fev were nowhere near where they needed to be so even if they did go up then they would have come straight back down like London are doing but again that money would have been a nice sweetener for them.

We can't forget just how dominant Fev were last season, personally I feel getting rid of Sean Long was a huge mistake which in my opinion came back and bit them on the bum as I didn't see Ford as been up to the task. Although I think its awful what Fev have done regarding missing payments I also find it hard to really blame them either as last season was probably their last chance at a shot in SL for at least the 3-5 years until this system has run its course and we try something new.

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

Although I think its awful what Fev have done regarding missing payments I also find it hard to really blame them

Staggering.

Clubs stiffs players but, yeah, it's fine. No biggie.

[The Blues Ox]

16 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Staggering.

Clubs stiffs players but, yeah, it's fine. No biggie.

Great context.

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

Great context.

Your post was justification for that point of view.

[Worzel]

3 hours ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

By getting London instead?

Hmm. I agree with the original post but not this one, at all. Saying Fev couldn't afford to take the next step...well, I think getting £1.4 million instead of £80k might have made a bit of a difference!

And your comment about "It’s not really decided by performance on the pitch, it’s decided by money"  about promotion is laughable, it will be decided MORE by money from now on. Any team that gets somebody prepared to throw big money at a club will be in a very favourable position because so many of the IMG points available are predicated entirely on this. They can literally "buy" IMG points across the board, even through schemes such as heavily subsidised season tickets (eg at Wakefield) to ensure getting high points in that category...they get points for investment...they get points for splashing out on LED advertising boards etc. I'm not even saying that it's necessarily wrong, but let's not pretend that money (and current SL occupancy, with the financial advantages that brings) isn't going to be the ultimate decider in who goes in SL.

I don't disagree at all though with the original point that the old promotion system was flawed in terms of how hard it is for an existing Championship team to build a SL-competitive team in the short window available.

London got promoted under the old system. Fev tried to buy promotion, failed, and now are struggling under the burden of that unsuccessful “investment” 

No model is perfect, but my point is a simple one: Opponents of the basket-of-points-based IMG model say that promotion and relegation has the innate advantage of some sort of sporting moral purity, that promotion is earned, but the reality is that it is anything but that. 

[Fevrover]

10 minutes ago, Worzel said:

London got promoted under the old system. Fev tried to buy promotion, failed, and now are struggling under the burden of that unsuccessful “investment” 

No model is perfect, but my point is a simple one: Opponents of the basket-of-points-based IMG model say that promotion and relegation has the innate advantage of some sort of sporting moral purity, that promotion is earned, but the reality is that it is anything but that. 

So didn't Leigh buy promotion ? Or were they all home grown ?

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

So didn't Leigh buy promotion ? Or were they all home grown ?

You're not buying promotion if you miss out the part where you pay for services rendered.

[Fevrover]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

You're not buying promotion if you miss out the part where you pay for services rendered.

Dress it up how you want it's buying promotion buying lots of players, just didn't work out for Fev.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Fevrover said:

Dress it up how you want it's buying promotion buying lots of players, just didn't work out for Fev.

Maybe if they'd paid them they would have been able to buy promotion.

[Fevrover]

Just now, gingerjon said:

Maybe if they'd paid them they would have been able to buy promotion.

So we didn't win promotion because we didn't pay the players?