What about the £150,000 transfer fee then ,how true is that

And if that's true it was an incredible piece of business by Ted and Eric!!!!

Yeh its unbelievable ,really unbelievable maybe TRB can share some of his wisdom on this

Why - who has said anything like that?

when we first announced that we where talking to hudds
it was said it would a deal that would benifit wakefield i cant see how that has happend,we have extended the deal of a player we already have in korki and loaned a player who is just returning from a major injury.i feel that the giants cant belive there luck in loaning us one player they dont want and another who its going to take a few months to get anyway near the form he was in last season.saying that letting db go was right he didnt want to be here no more due to money to made else where i dont for a second believe that db wants to play for hudds and feel he could have made a big mistake remember he as only been a succsess under kear in sl.
i for one hope we do go out and spend db wages on a new player(i very much doubt we will)as cooke is here on newtons.

you seem a little unstable judging by your emotions .

BTW your not the only poster with a link to a player and you certainly are not the smartest so go to beddybuys and mummy will be up soon to read a bit of enid blyton.

nighty night

MC.TRB,

It's a figure that has been bandied about over the last few weeks ,if its not true how much was it really,also what about the rumour doing the rounds that
the Giants paying 50% of Korki and Kirmonds wage, can you confirm these figures are true oh wise one

yes he can

It's the amount that Brough was alleged to have been offered by Wakefield to sign a new contract. I don't recall TRB (or anyone else, for that matter) claiming this was the amount of the transfer fee. You seem a little confused...

one person who i know will not be happy about Brough turning up at the Giants is Scott Grix. Apparently he can't stand him. He wasn't too chuffed when he found out both clubs were in talks.

Send Grix back then.


Maybe JK can find a position where he can play week in week out.

not for me thanks...did ok when with us but jack of all master of none imo

I reckon common sense tells you that Boyd2 is right in what he says - think about it. We know for absolute certainty that Broughy is bankrupt - its a fact and proof is available in the public domain.

Now I am no expert in bankruptcy but I reckon its a fair bet that a condition of it is that you are obliged to pay your creditors a certain percentage of your income for a set period of time - lets assume 3 years, so say for example Wakeys offer was (complete guess work on frigures by the way):

£120k per year for 4 years, say for arguments sake (and easy rounding) that he is obliged to pay 50% to his creditors for 3 years.

Year 1 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 2 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 3 £120k Danny "sees" £60k
Year 4 £120k Danny "sees" £120k

Total contract value = £480k
Total value to Danny = £300k

Then for arguments sake say that Hudds offer looks something like this:

Year 1 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 2 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 3 £60k Danny "sees" £30k
Year 4 £140k Danny "sees" £140k
Year 4.5 £140k Danny "sees" £140k

total contract value = £460k
Total value to Danny = £370k

Less money, but the contract is structured in such a way that benefits the player despite it being "worth" less on paper in total.

The there is the possiblitity of other "incentives" that maybe Ted wouldn't offer but somebody else might?

Whether he's gone for less or not is of little interest to me. It matters not, he's gone. Look forward not back.

Do we really need to rake over the personal financial details of anyone on here? Brough has gone, end of. Or shall we rake over the details of every person that left this club - for example Julian O'Neill?

How about, and here's a novel thing, concentrating now on who is still in Wakefield colours than those who are not?

Not often I agree with you t-r-i-n-i-t-y but I agree 100%.

Lets move on and look forward to the future, we are still in a great position.

See, sometimes I can speak sense…seriously though, whether it is in the public domain or not, I would not like my finances being discussed in a public forum, nor do I see it as anything other than sticking the boot in to a former player.

It's as silly as cheering for Korkidas when he was playing against us at Belle Vue.

Some are more bitter than John Smith's brewery. Move on, they all leave eventually!

What's bitter? The figures are pure speculation - don't see the harm in discussing it, I am not critisizing anybody or suggesting they have done wrong.

He's gone, not really fussed about him either way now -he has one us plenty of games and is a hell of a good player when he wants to be and we will miss him - but I think the discussion is a valid one as it might be a potential reason why he has chosen to leave us for another club. It could mean, if true of course, that our board could have been finacially "out manouvered" maybe? Its worthy of discussion at the very least I reckon.

You don't want to get involved or like the topic then don't read it or post - its fairly simple in my opinion.

Thanks for the time you spent with us not all good I might add, but no player is bigger than the club and better players will come and go and life goes on, cooke could be a good signing and gives us more options with Obst and BJ , hopefully we can pull together and get a result at Warrington.

As you say though its speculation, we will never know. Its a bit pointless really IMO.
Better to move on and look forward. However if you do want to continue the discussion I shall butt
out and leave you to it!

No different to the vast majority of threads then, all speculation... It's fairly interesting, as is the other side of the deal involving Kirkmond and a certain member of our board "over-rulling" a certain somebody else, thus delaying the deal and making us look a bit daft in the process.

Interesting to see how Kirkmond goes when he gets in the side, really liked the look of him for Hudds and if he gets over the injury continues to improve then we could have a serious player on our hands - shame we will have to hand him back though.

This is a hard 1. Brough did not want to play for us anyway so i would rather get rid of someone who doesn't and this saves creating unrest for the rest of the year. Dale Morton can start playing well again now without a impetulant so so getting in his way.As for getting Korki Hudds would not play him anyway and Kirmond back from a broken leg so we train him up for a year to help Huddersfield out. Glad Brough has gone but as for the deal it is not great.