How do you think Wigan funded the transfers of Matty Smith, Blake Green and Scott Taylor?

The question is still valid. What are we going to do with the money from Hock and Mossop? Fund the wages of a 31 year old ex RU prop?

If there are better players out there than Mossop and Hock who we could spend the cash on why where they not the target?

It's just a race to the bottom. Clubs who sell players are rarely able replace them with ones of higher quality.

If we paid anywhere near the (reported) fees we are getting for Hock and Mossop then we really have been done.

Are you seriously arguing that this is the case?

We'll see won't we. Remember the doom mongers who had us 6th in the League table after losing Finch, Leuluai, Lima, Carmont, Roberts, Fielden and Hock. I have a feeling Powell may surprise many of the doubters on here. His fitness won't be problem, just give him a chance.

Maybe the Hock and Mossop money will be used to bring in one or two more players, or fund the scouting/development systems to find the next batch of players.

You seriously think IL will "pocket" the money? How much has he "pocketed" since he took over the club?

The main reason why we've not generated a significant revenue increase is down to our poor international scene IMO. Sport in the UK is all about the international game - RU, Cricket, Golf, Tennis - in those sports the international game is the one area that keeps them ticking. Football is the only exception to the rule I can find. A thriving international competition projects a very attractive image for potential sponsors, broadcasters and media outlets - that's the quickest way those sports have grown and increased their revenue. In Rugby League this is what we need to follow and get behind. The World Cup this year is massive for the game over here.

Players going to the NRL is inevitable now. IFL's strategy of meeting players halfway and agreeing to let them go for a couple of seasons with the proviso that they come back is making the best of a bad situation. Time will tell but I think this is smart from the man. The implications this has for Super League is obvious it weakens our domestic game over here, but what can we do? The cap hasn't increased in sixteen years, clubs are going bust trying to reach it and we have a governing body who gave away our sponsorship for free to Stobart. Train wreck. However internationally I think we can benefit from the money in the NRL drawing our international players over to a better game, better coaches,in a better competition competing with the best players in the world week in week out. We've now got Graham, Burgess brothers, Mossop, Hock, Reed, Widdop with possibly Tomkins, Briscoe and Watkins set to join them. With Ellis having played there that's nearly a full pack, fullback, winger, two centres and a halfback playing in the NRL. We'll have a stronger international team because of this and that is good for the international scene which is key (IMO) to increasing revenue through tv contracts and sponsorships so that eventually we can increase the cap and begin to improve as a sport.

I disagree.

The way it's going, the only way we are going to see our best players is to subscribe to Channel 9 or whatever it's called in Australia.

That certainly won't improve attendances in this country for GB/England because leaking talent WILL lower attendances in this country ultimately. Our clubs won't have any star players and that will have a 'knock on' affect on attendances. People won't pay hard earned cash to watch mediocrity.

Then when it's international time, UK supporters club allegiances won't help the players picked if they play for Parramatta or whatever Ozzie club.

Let's say they arrange an international match at Headingley, and no Leeds players are picked. Will that affect the attendance ?

I think it will.

Didn't Leeds turnover circa £10m last year? Presumably they've reinvested a significant proportion of their operating profit into ground development, big screen, provisions for future improvements etc.

I think it's a bit short-sighted to assume that Leeds can only afford to spend an extra £300k on wages, just because that was their declared net profit last year. Which in itself is hardly an insignificant amount. Would be interested to read the accounts.

Well if it isn't spent on transfers, and Rogues seemingly can't make up his mind if it had already been spent on Green/Smith et al or if it will be spent on someone else (who?) then where else is it going to get used?

Running the club? Improving facilities? Y'know, stuff not related to the first team

And you think this type of thing should be funded by selling players? Y'know?

Why not?

What? That was the Joel Tomkins money.

It may be used as I said to increase the scouting/coaching network, improve facilities etc It may also be used to bring one or more players into the club, someone like Corey Patterson for example.
It may get used at Central Park

There are lots of possibilities, and up to now IL has done a very good job in turning the club around.

It should be funded through the operations of the business and it's revenues, of which transfer fees received is one.

So you think it's an acceptable financial strategy to fund this type of thing from selling our best players?

So you don't think that there is a differnce between repeatable revenue streams and one-off windfalls?

Apologies, I didn't realise some Wigan fans were so easily satisfied.

Some of our most valuable players for the past 2 years have been Sam Tomkins, Lee Mossop, Gareth Hock, Michael McIlorum, Sean O'loughlin, Josh Charnley & Liam Farrell. These all came from our academy. More money spent on the academy has the potential to produce more players of this calibre.

Yes, especially if adequate replacements are available (Farrell for Hock)

No, I think when one of our players wants to go to the NRL we should let them go for nothing. The running of the club should be financed purely from day-to-day operations. Y'know?

The scouting/coaching set up is a repeatable revenue stream, producing players like Hock, Mossop, Joel and others that we can at some point get a fee for. If some of the money received is reinvested into staff and facilities to improve that conveyor belt, it's just good business sense.

Ive changed my mind on this after hearing we will be committing an extra £100,000 a year to youth development, if we produce an additional player or two from that it will be good for the squad

Hock was already gone from the club. Getting a fee for him is very good business.
Mossop was always going to go to the NRL, it was written into his contract. Getting a fee for him during his contract term is far better business than having his contract run out and him depart and the club not get anything.
We have Powell signed and any number of quality props at the club.
Since the end of the season we have lost Carmont, Leuluai, Finch, Lima & Hock. All have been replaced, we are top of the league and the club is making a profit.

You do get the feeling, from some fans' attitude, that the club is crashing and burning around our ears.

I'm not over the moon by today's developments, but The Guardian newspaper article is a good one (and it's not often I say that), in that it focuses on Wigan's attempts to realistically grapple with the new age and still come out smiling(ish).

It's not like we're going down the pan, yet some fans on the other site are talking as if it's the end of days.

Put it this way, if what both Leneghan and Hetherington have said recently is actually their stance on dealing with the NRL (I can't help but doubt Hetherington is putting on a show of defiance). I'd much happier with Leneghan. The NRL is much more powerful than us now, we can work with it and potentially thrive, or we can fight it and probably get crushed.

I think Hetherington will be very lucky indeed if the NRL doesn't come calling soon for his star players. If he can resist them, good luck to him. But if I was him, I wouldn't bank much on Kallum Watkins's statements about 'my future is with Leeds' etc. We all heard that from Joel.