Salford financial issues(again…)

[Sports Prophet]

16 minutes ago, LeeF said:

I would guess that, if the potential investors are serious, they have been undertaking some form of due diligence with that identifying new, previously unknown, issues

You would expect an investor’s due diligence would far exceed that of IMG’s points grading, which begs the question of IMGs DD.

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, binosh said:

On another note if this doesn’t give the likes of Bradford, York, London and Toulouse a kick up the backside to get their house in order NOW and find some IMG points from somewhere nothing ever will, could potentially see 2 changes to SL for 2026. 

Exactly, I don't think it's possible to complain about "closed leagues" or anything like that when there clearly is an opportunity there it just takes serious investment of time, money and effort. Any one of those clubs could really go all in to win the Championship and 1895 Cup, plus boosting as much elsewhere as possible, and find themselves in SL next year.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

I reckon Paul Rowley could get the academy side at Salford to play better than Hull did last year.

[Josef K]

1 hour ago, Archie Gordon said:

Yeah.

Salford are being set up as the 2025 version of London. Crazy that we find ourselves here a few weeks out from the start of the season.

It’s very Rugby League sadly, or it feels like that. 

[LeeF]

Just now, Sports Prophet said:

You would expect an investor’s due diligence would far exceed that of IMG’s points grading, which begs the question of IMGs DD.

Two different scenarios. The financials used for the grading were year ended November 23. These will have been subject to the appropriate level of rigour hence the poor financial score.

Any investor will expect more upto date information covering the time since the last accounts

[Sports Prophet]

5 minutes ago, LeeF said:

Two different scenarios. The financials used for the grading were year ended November 23. These will have been subject to the appropriate level of rigour hence the poor financial score.

Any investor will expect more upto date information covering the time since the last accounts

It’s not two different situations at all. I highly doubt Salford were in a glowing financial position in Nov 23 either, regardless, shouldn’t IMG have obtained the same “more up to date” financial information you speak of and perhaps weighted scoring clubs on their financials far more than what they have done for number of likes on twitter?

Edited January 15 by Sports Prophet

[Worzel]

8 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

You would expect an investor’s due diligence would far exceed that of IMG’s points grading, which begs the question of IMGs DD.

Your daily reminder that IMG don’t undertake the gradings, they just designed the bundle of metrics (and even those were watered down by the clubs). The RFL measure the clubs. 

[Sports Prophet]

13 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Your daily reminder that IMG don’t undertake the gradings, they just designed the bundle of metrics (and even those were watered down by the clubs). The RFL measure the clubs. 

My “daily reminder”? 

Furthermore, it is a scoring system designed by IMG and… ahhh forget about it. I’m too disillusioned to care. I’m surprised I bothered to post in the first place.

[Dave T]

I'm surprised people are quite so animated about this to be honest. Salford are a weak SL club, they were ranked lowest in the leafue. They pretty much have been weak in all their years in SL. 

The financial environment is horrible, another similar sport has seen 3 clubs go under, we've seen other clubs in the Championship, we saw TWP go, Fev struggle, Toulouse under threat 12m ago, London touch and go and so on.

Times are hard, Salford were not in a strong position, we've said for a while that clubs are in a precarious position, is this really a surprise that Salford are the ones that are in trouble?

Hopefully they survive and nobody else goes through this, but this is hardly like the Bulls shocker.

I think the real discussion here is around how we as a sport protect our brand/comp as both Martyn and Worzel have highlighted throughout. And it's clear many of us disagree on what the best approach should be.

[daz39]

10 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Marsters was on a hefty wage at the Giants, and Salford 'enticed' him over............he will be on a 6 figure deal for sure

A prominent member of our club actually told me that they'd no idea how Salford manage to afford this on their finances as we offered him a very, very good deal and they easily beat it.....I think we now know how.

[Pie tries]

1 hour ago, Worzel said:

Those aren’t good things if you don’t have the money to do them. They’re ridiculous. I’d like a 6 bedroom detached house in Oxford, and a new Porsche 911. I’m not going to just go and buy them though knowing I don’t have the money. 

Those are things for the future, aspirational goals. They needed to do the work, or attract investors, before they did those things. 

This constant sulking that other clubs have “sugar daddies” as if life isn’t inherently unfair for everyone in some way is immature nonsense. It is what it is, and you deal with the world as it is today not as you’d like it to be. 

They are all good things. Can’t win - they’ve been slagged off in past for not having pathways. Building the club up is good  and not reason for their meltdown. 

Im a pie eater - with soft spot for SRD. It’s a fact that as sole SL club without a rich an owner they can’t complete.

Time for them to regroup division below and come back stronger.

Bradford  back ?

[Gooleboy]

14 minutes ago, Pie tries said:

They are all good things. Can’t win - they’ve been slagged off in past for not having pathways. Building the club up is good  and not reason for their meltdown. 

Im a pie eater - with soft spot for SRD. It’s a fact that as sole SL club without a rich an owner they can’t complete.

Time for them to regroup division below and come back stronger.

Bradford  back ?

Bradford back!!! Have you been to Odsal lately?

[The Masked Poster]

It's nothing like Bradford scenario I agree. They had serious points deductions and had their Sky money shared out amongst other SL clubs, (RL family again) they were treated much harsher than Salford have been. Had they been given as much leeway as Salford had, they might not have gone down the pan quite as far. 

This has been going on for several years and someone, somewhere is responsible for allowing it to get to this stage.

Edited January 15 by The Masked Poster

[DoubleD]

41 minutes ago, daz39 said:

A prominent member of our club actually told me that they'd no idea how Salford manage to afford this on their finances as we offered him a very, very good deal and they easily beat it.....I think we now know how.

I expect he’ll easily be on £150k. Crazy when they’re in their situation 

[Sports Prophet]

Calls to promote a team to replace Salford this year are in my mind off the mark.

Best scenario I see is, let Salford be the fall guys, administered by the RFL if necessary, finish last and demoted and instead of setting one club up to fail with short notice to participate at a higher division, give the four or so existing Championship clubs which should be in the mix, to battle it out over the fore coming season and give them suitable time to prepare to be competitive for 2026.

[JohnM]

5 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

My “daily reminder”? 

Furthermore, it is a scoring system designed by IMG and… ahhh forget about it. I’m too disillusioned to care. I’m surprised I bothered to post in the first place.

"I’m surprised I bothered to post in the first place."

Me too. I'm surprised you bothered.

Seriously, I know how you feel. Here we are, just a matter of days from the start of the Super League season and I'm saying to myself "there's so much ordure being posted about SRD, IMG etc that I'm done with all this nonsense until the game of rugby league takes it's rightful place in the nation's sporting conciousness."

But then, these are serious issues, so, on we go.

[Worzel]

8 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

My “daily reminder”? 

Furthermore, it is a scoring system designed by IMG and… ahhh forget about it. I’m too disillusioned to care. I’m surprised I bothered to post in the first place.

“Your daily reminder” is a meme, it doesn’t mean you literally… you need to try not to take these things too personally.

[Archie Gordon]

7 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

Calls to promote a team to replace Salford this year are in my mind off the mark.

Best scenario I see is, let Salford be the fall guys, administered by the RFL if necessary, finish last and demoted and instead of setting one club up to fail with short notice to participate at a higher division, give the four or so existing Championship clubs which should be in the mix, to battle it out over the fore coming season and give them suitable time to prepare to be competitive for 2026.

I agree on the first part. Absent investment arriving almost immediately, it is now too late to get anything in place for 2025 that works well for club or SL. (It wasn't too late in September - lesson to be learned).

But imagine if a white knight arrives in, say, July. There is a scenario where Salford limp along in 2025 but then retain SL status for 2026 because of this new money. Those 4 Champo clubs could all improve their gradings, one might win the comp, and they may still all end up disappointed. 

[Dave T]

26 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

I agree on the first part. Absent investment arriving almost immediately, it is now too late to get anything in place for 2025 that works well for club or SL. (It wasn't too late in September - lesson to be learned).

But imagine if a white knight arrives in, say, July. There is a scenario where Salford limp along in 2025 but then retain SL status for 2026 because of this new money. Those 4 Champo clubs could all improve their gradings, one might win the comp, and they may still all end up disappointed. 

A problem is that we haven't really got 4 strong clubs sitting there waiting to come into SL. Toulouse scored just below Salford and yet they were predicted to go under last year. They scored OK because they sorted themselves.

I think this is one of the things, not too much has really happened, if a new investor comes in now and replaces the SRD leadership and brings financial stability then a crisis has been averted. I'm not sure if anything that's happened so far triggers a punishment on grading like I believe going into admin would. And that may come to be fair.

Toulouse were poor in SL and financially questionable. Bradford still have that stadium that apparently led to them failing last time. London are still not even a thing really yet. York are unproven, but maybe the least problematic?

My personal preference is a strong Toulouse replacing them, but I find we get a lot of cloak and daggers from them.

[LeeF]

10 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

It’s not two different situations at all. I highly doubt Salford were in a glowing financial position in Nov 23 either, regardless, shouldn’t IMG have obtained the same “more up to date” financial information you speak of and perhaps weighted scoring clubs on their financials far more than what they have done for number of likes on twitter?

It is 2 completely different situations. Salford’s financial score, as previously posted numerous times in this thread, was poor. They scored zero for their accounts. The YE 23 accounts, also as posted above, showed a 6 figure loss. 
 

November is their year end so those are the latest accounts available for grading purposes (not by IMG but I’ll let one pass). If they went into admin or another insolvency process then their grading would have correctly been amended accordingly. They didn’t so it remained at a B and in 12th place 
 

Investors or more accurately purchasers in this instance would do their own due diligence which is different. I assume you understand that part but happy to expand if necessary. 
 

Under the previous system Salford would have been graded 4th. 

[Archie Gordon]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

A problem is that we haven't really got 4 strong clubs sitting there waiting to come into SL. Toulouse scored just below Salford and yet they were predicted to go under last year. They scored OK because they sorted themselves.

I think this is one of the things, not too much has really happened, if a new investor comes in now and replaces the SRD leadership and brings financial stability then a crisis has been averted. I'm not sure if anything that's happened so far triggers a punishment on grading like I believe going into admin would. And that may come to be fair.

Toulouse were poor in SL and financially questionable. Bradford still have that stadium that apparently led to them failing last time. London are still not even a thing really yet. York are unproven, but maybe the least problematic?

My personal preference is a strong Toulouse replacing them, but I find we get a lot of cloak and daggers from them.

Indeed. We haven't got enough strong clubs right now. We ought to have gone with a 10-team SL as part of reimagining the game. I wouldn't want to stick at 10 forever but it's been clear for quite a while that we don't currently have 12 clubs capable of operating in a vibrant SL. 

And, more generally, I am worried about the game's leadership. The attitude to risk is inaction based on 'it'll work out'. We're seeing it with the national teams and the Ashes as well as Salford/SL. We have no-one prepared to set a deadline and then escalate to the next level. To outside parties, we come across as the weak guy who gets sand kicked in his face.

 

[Ackroman]

25 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Indeed. We haven't got enough strong clubs right now. We ought to have gone with a 10-team SL as part of reimagining the game. I wouldn't want to stick at 10 forever but it's been clear for quite a while that we don't currently have 12 clubs capable of operating in a vibrant SL. 

And, more generally, I am worried about the game's leadership. The attitude to risk is inaction based on 'it'll work out'. We're seeing it with the national teams and the Ashes as well as Salford/SL. We have no-one prepared to set a deadline and then escalate to the next level. To outside parties, we come across as the weak guy who gets sand kicked in his face.

 

Not sure about your last comment, we're begrudgingly respected by RU at least, for knowing how to cut our cloth accordingly.

ATEOTD Salford were punching but now we know why. The thing is, did we find out at the right time? Too late? Just in time? Or half way through the season like when clubs used to go pop?

Thus, is the games financial systems working?

 

Edited January 16 by Ackroman

[Archie Gordon]

4 minutes ago, Ackroman said:

... The thing is, did we find out at the right time? Too late? Just in time? Or half way through the season like when clubs used to go pop?

Thus, is the games financial systems working?

We've had a club that has been in special measures within the past 12 months (end of 2023, start of 2024?), (apparently) had/has no stadium deal in place for 2025 at any point, and who scored zero on balance sheet strength at the September 2024 gradings.

If there is a risk register anywhere to be found at the RFL/RLC/whoever/wherever, might we have expected it to be flashing red quite a while ago?

[Dave T]

41 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

Indeed. We haven't got enough strong clubs right now. We ought to have gone with a 10-team SL as part of reimagining the game. I wouldn't want to stick at 10 forever but it's been clear for quite a while that we don't currently have 12 clubs capable of operating in a vibrant SL. 

And, more generally, I am worried about the game's leadership. The attitude to risk is inaction based on 'it'll work out'. We're seeing it with the national teams and the Ashes as well as Salford/SL. We have no-one prepared to set a deadline and then escalate to the next level. To outside parties, we come across as the weak guy who gets sand kicked in his face.

 

I'm coming round to 10 teams more and more, and I hate the idea to be honest. I think another similar sport can get away with it because of the international club comp and extensive international scene.

I'm not sure I see that in the 2nd paragraph, although conscious I'm a bit of an outlier here.bit looks to me that they have taken action, they've advanced funds and set a reduced cap limit. I think there is an element of being careful what we wish for, because we could end up in a sticky place if we go down trying to micromanage business plans that don't stack up.

[LeeF]

10 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

We've had a club that has been in special measures within the past 12 months (end of 2023, start of 2024?), (apparently) had/has no stadium deal in place for 2025 at any point, and who scored zero on balance sheet strength at the September 2024 gradings.

If there is a risk register anywhere to be found at the RFL/RLC/whoever/wherever, might we have expected it to be flashing red quite a while ago?

That’s a Goverance issue which ultimately lies with the RFL.

As stated many times on this forum across various threads this is where the game is particularly weak. Whether this is due to the structure which is driven by clubs and their vested interest or a lack of knowledge either within the game or at the RFL in itself or more likely, a combination of these factors it needs sorting but that will cost a few quid and will upset clubs