I've heard that their financial problems are really coming to a head, and if their friendly against Wigan on Sunday doesn't go ahead and make a big profit then they are at risk of going bust.

I doubt that very much. Pre-season friendlies are never massive money spinners for clubs. As well as Wakey's financial "problems" have already been addressed by the club from what I understood. It only came out after the fact, in the same way that story about Bradford's financess came out and everyone said we were going under blah blah blah simply because they didn't understand exactly what the reports actually ment.

Actually, they can be reasonable money spinners. Whilst crowds are quite low and the price is a bit lower, virtually everybody coming through the turnstile is paying and so more money can be taken than some league games - where a lot of the fans are on season passes.



They are also profitable days for the club shop as plenty of people pop in to pick up their new season's gear.



Certainly hope this isn't the case with Wakey.

that's as maybe, but i doubt any club requires the profits of a single game to save them

I doubt this is true, they may be in trouble financially, but I cannot comprehend that a SL club would rely on a friendly to stay afloat. Plus if it was as bad as being made out, surely Brough would be out with cash coming in?

Yes. I realised that although I was probably technically right, I was completely missing the point.



And as for Brough - if this was true, nobody would pay for him now when they could get him for nowt 'when' they go belly-up.

From what I was told, they have an agreement with Wigan that the home team keeps 100% of the gate (Wigan got it all at the JJDW last year), =#FF4000Woooooooaaaa! Content, at the mo, to let this flow . . . . except this little bit that's just been deleted - BP .

Despite the spin from the Wakey hierarchy, you don't face a winding up hearing following petition by HMRC for nothing.



You face it because you have not paid over taxes (usually monies that were never even yours to hold on to in the first place, like PAYE deducted from employees and VAT collected from customers on behalf of HMRC, although there was suggestion of CGT being involved at Wakey?) you owe, and have seriously defaulted on agreed payment plans.



And if the High court grants the petition, you are dead.



Wakey were given a stay of execution of just over 80 days. That period must be well on with by now. The club told the world that this was a little local difficulty already resolved, and that this was akin to a technicality which would be fully dealt with. Hmm...guess we'll know for sure soon enough, but their board did sound confident.



ps. Beefy1...you need to be pretty sure of your facts on this one so the Mods don't have to concern themselves with possible libel, I suggest? =#FF4000Ta Addey - underpants now changed and "dubious" bit deleted

BP

as sure as he was with these quotes from last year?

Wasnt aware that we played against them in a friendly last season, but then what do we know your mate is obviously more clued up than us. Please keep us imformed if anything else crops up in your mates dreams'

A lot of friendlies form part of a transfer deal, as I understand it, where the promise of gate money for a few seasons can be a way of paying another club for a player without releasing funds they don't have to hand. Our annual friendly against Featherstone is, I think, part of the deal that brought Rooney to Wakefield.



If you are in difficulty, you sell assets. We have sold none, and instead have recruited proven Super League players like Newton, Jeffries and Morrisson, as well as some proven NRL players like Tronc and Millard. The only asset of value we have sold is Atkins, who would have gone anyway, as he went as far as he could with Wakey. The remaining players have not had their contracts renewed, which is normal RFL business. Our playing squad is stronger this year than last year.



There is no evidence of financial meltdown and the taxman is being repaid. Perhaps have a word with that bloke down the pub who supplies you with these gems.

Without seeking to take issue with most of what you say - which seems entirely reasonable, although I would observe that you did sell your biggest asset, your ground - I venture to suggest that failing to pay HMRC and being under the sword of Damocles of winding up as a result is indicative of a few financial difficulties?

I think the ground was sold some considerable time ago and so that has little to do with the current situation. As I understand it, it has more to do with movement to a new ground than debts. Insofar as the taxman is concerned, a schedule of payments was agreed, and people in the know seem to state that the schedule has been stuck to and so the debt will be virtually repaid. I don't entirely know what the issue was in relation to the taxes, but there have been recent changes involving image rights that perhaps caught us on the hop.



I reckon most Wakey fans would imagine that running the club is like spinning plates with not much financial slack, and we know we don't have the financial clout of some clubs, but to suggest that we rely on a pre-season warm-up game to save us is just ridiculous. If there was any truth in it, we would have looked at fielding a young and cheap squad (and it has to be remembered that Wakey won the Academy Grand Final) rather than recruiting a number of high-earners. Newton, BJ and Morrisson won't be playing for pin money, and even if we released him for nothing, the loss of Brough's salary alone would provide more cash than the gate for a friendly.



The facts don't stack up, I'm afraid.

Must admit, I find the suggestion that the future of the club depends on one pre-season game somewhat hard to believe too.



Re the tax...SOME payment schedule cannot have been adhered to (or some other bill disputed) for HMRC to take the action they did. If you agree a payment schedule with HMRC, and stick to it, that is contractually binding and they cannot and will not seek a winding-up order. But you are not the first to raise the Image Rights issue in this context. Without going over what is my pet issue all over again, if Wakey copped a big assessment for tax and NIC that HMRC contended should have been deducted from/paid in respect of image rights payments, something they are tackling various other clubs with and IMO rightly so, then that could easily have led to a bill the club simply could not pay. As I have said on previous threads, I hope this action is concluded by HMRC going away and Wakey still being in existence.



One of your lot suggested that, alternatively, the tax bill could have arisen from Capital Gain on sale of the ground. IMO that is eminently plausible too.

Quality!! l cant wait for his response!!!

Care to elaborate on where you heard that??? Let me guess..........that will be a no!!