Fev not paying staff

[dboy]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

So you do and good luck to you. But you have had your moments, not paying for the block of flats at the back of the posts wasn't your finest hour.

Indeed. That was the "Pearman" era. Promised the Earth, then ran away abroad.

Wakefield certainly have not been the best run club by any stretch, but at least when Carter took over, he stabilised the business, paid off all the debts (over time of course), and ensured that the club didn't spend more than the earned.

We've definitely had our downs, now we dream ever so slightly.

And keep paying our bills.

[Gooleboy]

Just now, dboy said:

Indeed. That was the "Pearman" era. Promised the Earth, then ran away abroad.

Wakefield certainly have not been the best run club by any stretch, but at least when Carter took over, he stabilised the business, paid off all the debts (over time of course), and ensured that the club didn't spend more than the earned.

We've definitely had our downs, now we dream ever so slightly.

And keep paying our bills.

And as I said before, good luck to you.

[RigbyLuger]

6 minutes ago, dboy said:

Wakefield certainly have not been the best run club by any stretch, but at least when Carter took over, he stabilised the business, paid off all the debts (over time of course), and ensured that the club didn't spend more than the earned.

It's why those Wakey fans who continue to slag off Carter haven't got a clue. He may have been  miserly at times, but the club needed him to be. Some have sort memories of the Glover/Elston debacle.

[dboy]

10 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

And as I said before, good luck to you.

We are enjoying getting carried away a little on our new-found stability, and I'm sure we'll need lots of luck as well as Mr Ellis's cash, if it is to bear serious fruit later.

I was thinking of who has broken into "top clubs" and in reality, it's bloody hard.

Leigh chucked loads at it, had success, but still aren't quite there.

HKR had a rise, a fall back, but seem ready to be in there.

Cas briefly flirted with success.

Salford flirted with success, but just don't have the finance - sacrifice the rent for big time Charlie players. Simply not sustainable.

Hudds flirted with success, yet despite Mr Davy's generosity, will never be a big club.

It's hard to break Wigan and Saints hold on the game.

Even Leeds and Wire are pretenders now.

Edited June 5, 2024 by dboy

[Wollo Wollo Wayoo]

5 hours ago, DEANO said:

Don’t forget fev were kept down to make way for the failed experiment in Paris. Perhaps if they’d been promoted instead they may still be mixing it with the greedy boys

According to Wiki, 24 clubs have competed in SL since its inception so plenty have managed to achieve promotion despite being excluded at the start.

[Fevrover]

18 hours ago, Gooleboy said:

Have you forgotten the mess clubs such as Wigan, Hull, London and Huddersfield to name just a few got into in the not too distant past? Even things at Leeds were precarious before Caddick took over.

Selective memories iam afraid.

[Fevrover]

15 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

Yes a great history, but how long ago was it ? Teams like Barrow and Hunslet also had wembley appearances back then, however the game has changed and moved on. As a Wakey supporter my club also has a great history but again it was all back then. At Wakey many of our supporters remember those past glories and like to dream that they will return. We have a long way to go to get there but things now seem in place to give us hope at least. However at Fev ,I really don't think reality has yet dawned and your first sentence sums it up, a little pit village. There is no doubt Fev have a place in the game, but I am certain it will never be in the top league anymore, unless the game reverts back to part time as it was back in those glory days for the club.

EX pit town like many more towns.

[Fevrover]

14 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

2003 ? I must have missed that one. 

2023 ?

[Fevrover]

8 hours ago, Griff said:

The boys who generate the income and share it with the lower divisions ?

A pittance and they even begrudge giving that.

[Fevrover]

6 hours ago, dboy said:

No.

See there's the thing - Wakey were ###### on the field because the last owner couldn't afford to spend money the club didn't have. It made us uncompetitive and led to our relegation. We paid our bills rather than chase dreams.

Now we have a wealthy owner, so we can pay the bills AND chase dreams.

 

Enjoy while it lasts ,nothing lasts forever. 

[dboy]

3 hours ago, Fevrover said:

Enjoy while it lasts ,nothing lasts forever. 

Oh, our bubble will burst at some point, but it won't (shouldn't) be a money issue.

If ever Ken Davy / Matt Ellis / Salford Council get fed up of bankrolling a club, it's a different situation!

[sheddingswasus]

35 minutes ago, dboy said:

Oh, our bubble will burst at some point, but it won't (shouldn't) be a money issue.

If ever Ken Davy / Matt Ellis / Salford Council get fed up of bankrolling a club, it's a different situation!

But wouldn’t it be the same at Wakefield?  Not trying to argue, but any club that is bank rolled is always at the mercy of that person 

[dboy]

16 minutes ago, sheddingswasus said:

But wouldn’t it be the same at Wakefield?  Not trying to argue, but any club that is bank rolled is always at the mercy of that person 

Yes - that's why I put Matt Ellis.

[The Blues Ox]

11 hours ago, dboy said:

No.

See there's the thing - Wakey were ###### on the field because the last owner couldn't afford to spend money the club didn't have. It made us uncompetitive and led to our relegation. We paid our bills rather than chase dreams.

Now we have a wealthy owner, so we can pay the bills AND chase dreams.

 

Which is basically what I said, if the new owner had not come along last season then without the cool central funding million or so you would have to assume that Wakefield would have become a Championship team very much Like Batley for the forseable future. Sometimes a little bit of luck can play a huge part in a teams future.

I'm really not sure why people are blaming Fev for trying to chase the SL dream, the Championship after this year is just going to be a graveyard for clubs who have virtually no chance of playing in SL and by the time IMG disappear in a few years time, I dread to think just how far the gulf will be between the top and second tiers.

[Griff]

5 hours ago, Fevrover said:

A pittance and they even begrudge giving that.

Yet more than the clubs outside Superleague would get from a deal of their own.

[Gooleboy]

5 minutes ago, Griff said:

Yet more than the clubs outside Superleague would get from a deal of their own.

We are not worthy.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, sheddingswasus said:

But wouldn’t it be the same at Wakefield?  Not trying to argue, but any club that is bank rolled is always at the mercy of that person 

It depends. If its bankrolled to improve the club and make them sustainable in the long run, by improving infrastructure and increasing revenue streams, then once that's achieved a club can then be pretty much self sufficient. The likes of Warington and Saints are probably good examples of this. Hopefully Wakefield will progress like that.

Edited June 6, 2024 by Damien

[Damien]

4 hours ago, The Blues Ox said:

Which is basically what I said, if the new owner had not come along last season then without the cool central funding million or so you would have to assume that Wakefield would have become a Championship team very much Like Batley for the forseable future. Sometimes a little bit of luck can play a huge part in a teams future.

I'm really not sure why people are blaming Fev for trying to chase the SL dream, the Championship after this year is just going to be a graveyard for clubs who have virtually no chance of playing in SL and by the time IMG disappear in a few years time, I dread to think just how far the gulf will be between the top and second tiers.

People are not blaming Fev for chasing the SL dream. They are blaming Fev for spending way too much in doing so, and money they obviously couldn't afford. London chased the SL dream too but didn't follow a boom or bust approach. 

Edited June 6, 2024 by Damien

[Fevrover]

45 minutes ago, Griff said:

Yet more than the clubs outside Superleague would get from a deal of their own.

What happened to ALL being part of RL ?

[Click]

13 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

What happened to ALL being part of RL ?

Huh? You say that like ALL clubs are getting the money in. The "pittance" SL gives the lower leagues is more than they would be able to achieve doing their own TV deal. That's what SL gets their money for, being on TV.

[Angelic Cynic]

28 minutes ago, Click said:

Huh? You say that like ALL clubs are getting the money in. The "pittance" SL gives the lower leagues is more than they would be able to achieve doing their own TV deal. That's what SL gets their money for, being on TV.

Veering slightly away from Featherstone - but in the world of Association Football the government are almost at the point of appointing a person in charge of governance to oversee money going down the pyramid from the so called Premier League, and in the other code there is this - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jun/04/glitzy-premiership-final-masks-turmoil-simmering-below-rugby-surface-the-breakdown

All those people wrong but IMG and followers of Super League clubs correct?

[Damien]

9 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

Veering slightly away from Featherstone - but in the world of Association Football the government are almost at the point of appointing a person in charge of governance to oversee money going down the pyramid from the so called Premier League, and in the other code there is this - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jun/04/glitzy-premiership-final-masks-turmoil-simmering-below-rugby-surface-the-breakdown

All those people wrong but IMG and followers of Super League clubs correct?

I'm not sure if anyone is saying that money shouldn't filter down the pyramid, as it has always done. As far as I know Rugby League in percentage terms has always been comparable to other sports for this, and better than some.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

I'm not sure if anyone is saying that money shouldn't filter down the pyramid, as it has always done. As far as I know Rugby League in percentage terms has always been comparable to other sports for this, and better than some.

Money filters down and Fev have done quite well out of it owing to the unbalanced Championship funding model.

It’s not a great example if that money doesn’t pay players or bills owing.

[Damien]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Money filters down and Fev have done quite well out of it owing to the unbalanced Championship funding model.

It’s not a great example if that money doesn’t pay players or bills owing.

Ah yes the infamous unbalanced model that only applied to the Championship and which should only apply if your team was one of the lucky two. That was true Rugby League fairness in operation, as well as double standards depending on whether your team is part of a cosy club or not (and obviously a different model should then apply in SL if your team gets promoted to it).

Edited June 6, 2024 by Damien

[dboy]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

It depends. If its bankrolled to improve the club and make them sustainable in the long run, by improving infrastructure and increasing revenue streams, then once that's achieved a club can then be pretty much self sufficient. The likes of Warington and Saints are probably good examples of this. Hopefully Wakefield will progress like that.

Yes, at the most recent Fans' Forum, Matt Ellis did say that the business needs to be sustainable.

He won't chuck good money after bad.

Edited June 6, 2024 by dboy