Your turn Jack or are you going to lose all credibility and stay in your box?

No issue here, Mr Cools spin on events would do Tony Blair credit.

You really believe that don't you - I despair.

He did better than most but he isn't mother Teresa - give over.

Read your post to which I replied.

You said Glover had to honour a massive amount of debt from the previous regime

Of all those above he had no obligation to honour anything other than the bit regarding the RL which I admit I know nothing about. I would be interested to know what that was.

He chose to honour season tickets and box sales as a good will gesture and obviously for sound business reasons.

Shirt sales, well he missed the boat on those for that season, however he also missed having to run the club for the off season. That period between October and Feb is the most difficult of all to manage and the shirt sales and season tickets are used to fund that gap. So I would say they cancelled each other out. However which ever way you look at shirt sales they are only a missed business opportunity and not a debt, so knock those off your list.

The point is AG is a business man he will have known that when he took over the club exactly how much it would cost him. He will have also have known about the loss of shirt sales and all the other points you raised.

Knowing all this he obviously thought he was paying a fair price considering he had missed the commercial opportunities from the earlier part of the season. So I would say he went into it with his eyes wide open and happy with the terms of his purchase and he has not been saddled with anything from the previous regime.


I will simplify the situation, you buy a second hand car, you know it needs a service and some money spent on paintwork and you can see a couple of tyres are worn. You therefore factor those costs into the buying price.

I know for a fact, AG & one other director in particular have pumped a small fortune into the club to a.) pay off some of the existing debt and b.) to keep the club running from month to month.

That small fortune is well well into 6 figures from both of them. They must be off there rockers!!

I am not disputing AG and others have put large amounts of money into the club since it was purchased.
However what I can't understand is this myth about debt from the previous regime. When Ted and Co went
into liquidation all the debt ended with them.

decisions may have been made for business reasons to give money to people who had lost out to Ted purely on commercial grounds. However there is no obligation to do this and it would have been voluntary.

Without honouring the rugby related debts the rfl wouldn't have granted spirit of 1873 the golden share rugby licence. So there would have been no Wakefield trinity if he hadn't agreed. Simples.
And I'm not saying he didn't know these things. My point was that he spent a fortune honouring the old regimes debts. You disagreed.

Agreed! I must be!

Correct, no obligation, but i think part of the reason AG was given the green light by the RFL was down to his agreement to pay some of the debtors, particularly those that were rugby league related.

We'd all do it if we could.

It isn't a debt its a purchase cost.

I have never heard of this one so I will have a guess the figure was £20K for the sake of argument.

When AG negotiates the club from the administrator He is told It will cost £40K and he also needs to pay the RFL £20K
So he knows this at the time. He either agrees thinking its a fair price or he negotiates to a price that is acceptable. If he thinks he is paying to much for the overall 'package' then he doesn't buy.

There is a thing called due diligence and if done correctly all extra costs should have been highlighted. This includes all missed business opportunities like the shirt sales etc. AG will have known these and gone in with eyes wide open.

What I am fed up of hearing about is the old regime, all their influence finished when the club was liquidated.
Likewise everything that's happened since AG took over is down to him.

One last point I agree AG has pumped loads into the club and without him we would not be here today.

Are we at cross purposes here. Whether its a debt or a purchase cost it's still cold hard cash he had to pay to get a super league licence. And don't kid yourself it was 20k!!!

Agreed - I don't know all the details, but I know with certainty that it amounted to WAY more than £20k; AG's contribution to keeping this club afloat should never be underestimated.

Look at it this way, whatever the figure it was known at the outset. I believe people are doing AG an injustice.
The guy is no mug and very hard nosed when it comes to business, the way he held his ground with the CCJ's has shown that.

The £40K he purportedly paid is all a red herring. He will have worked out his other liabilities in buying the club
and come up with a TRUE cost figure. This will have included your RFL costs. We shall never know this figure and
like some have said it could be considerable.
If he wasn't happy paying the true amount he would not have bought, however to blame things on debts from the last regime is fantasy. He has not been saddled with these at all.

So all the money that had to be paid to other clubs and individuals that the old regime hadn't paid, was none of their fault, and because AG knew about them it isn't a problem? I think you're missing the original point which was if he hadn't had to pay them we would be in a far better cash position right now!

All irrelevant because if this club had had a clean slate with no financial liabilities prior to purchase, all season ticket sales to come and all shirts still to sell. Do you seriously think he would have bought it from the administrator for £40K or £60K (I forget true figure). The admin figure was related to the true package costs known at the time.

If you're original post had said that overall AG paid too much for the club and if he hadn't paid as much as he did we would be financially better off, I would not have replied because the statement is that obvious. So I am going to leave it at that and go and watch the cricket.

I agree with Jack, clearly the purchase price from the administrator was low to factor in items the new owner would need to pay

Ok, I apologise, I got it all wrong. The past regime had no bearing on the new one financially. Sorry for my mistake.

I'm glad thats settled



Keith Mason anybody?

Not before and not now!!

Only for the same money Molloy was getting!

You could just admit you're wrong?

I thought I did? I'll tell all the other board members too just for you