We could always sell the roofs to raise funds?
Since we don't need it anymore!

yes so everyone buy their season tickets where financially able or even go buy one thing in the shop ..surely everyone could do with one extra T shirt

.

Only Mr Carter knows how quickly he needs the £400k shortfall. After the Cas match there is no further gate income for months.

So it looks like he will have to raise £200k in player sales very quickly & remember there are few clubs out there with big fat wallets.

I wish the Wildcats all the best but I fear the family silver will have to be sold ......................unless somebody speaks to Sir Rodney?

To Eric France? Oh wait...

Well so far Carter has been honest and we will be selling a couple of more players but Im told Warrington and Leeds will be letting us have some players on loan for next season if that happens.It might not be the end of the club if they let us have a few good players and we will owe them both a massive thank you.

You say that Bren but didn't the actual Eric France hand over the company to his son in the late 90's do wasn't part of the bankrupsy. I'm sure I was told that. Could he do a personal loan to the club??

As far as I understand it, both are involved in an absolutely ginormous unpaid VAT bill; sufficient amounts to make your eyes water.

Seems like we're not the only club who's new owners spent more than what they had. Bulls issued a winding up order now. They've done it in a year less than us which is truly remarkable! Maybe we need to heap praise on ag and je for lasting so long! In all seriousness the games in a sorry state financially. It's only the sugar daddy clubs who can survive and be successful (Leeds apart). The rest of us just seem to struggle from crisis to crisis

Me being the cynic I am: Warrington have lost Morley/Carvell/Cooper and require a prop, Leeds needing a hooker - just a coincidence and nothing to do with largesse?
If they are genuine offers without strings, they just want game time for fringe players, I will apologise, but...

It would be a shame but that's where we are I'm afraid.
Would be great to keep them, and even though Aiton is one of my favourite players I'd let him go before Amor.

But if I were a Leeds fan, I'd prefer to stick with their own youth prospects rather than going for overseas players.
We are not short of hookers in this country. It's Stand offs and centres we find hard to produce

Is that really the case, or are we just too risk-averse when it comes to filling these key positions, preferring what is considered to be the safe overseas option over our own young players? We may yet find that the necessity of now giving the likes of young Bobby Goulding a run in the team pays great dividends in the future. Just a thought.

I know, I just find it a bit rich of the club to moan about that when Belle Vue has been a dump for decades and has needed work doing to it. To be honest, I'm sure I posted at the time asking about the point if we were so confident on moving into a new ground anyway.

I thought that too but Trinity Metals is opening soon and it will be very interesting to see who owns that company so as they say watch this space.

You are right of course but don't forget its not that long ago Leeds were in trouble and bailed out by Paul Caddick.

I understand that there are only 2 Super League Clubs that "make money" and I guess Leeds are one of them and maybe Wigan the other. Both however have the security of Sugar Daddies. I'm also led to believe that Ken Davy puts in around £2m a year into Huddersfield. Saints are heavily in debt but as the debt is in the form of Director's Loans and not a problem unless the loans are called in but that tends to be unlikely as they are fans themselves.

Clubs like us without a Sugar Daddy will always have it hard. Does anyone know any Sugar Daddies ?

I agree with you. That's not really what I meant.

From a Super League point of view, the teams have lots of hookers around that Leeds could go for before they need to go for Aiton as an overseas player, including their own kids.

Mr Carter sed in his interview that Paul Aiton is on a really good deal and is real value for money!
We need more like him?
I hope he wouldn't be sold!

It seems to me upon reflection that Big Ted did a fine job keeping Wakey afloat for all those years

js

Which is good but I wish he hadn't broadcast it to the world. Cue a couple of offers thatc greatly increase his income and all of a sudden he is 'unsettled'.

Yes, but he had the luxury of selling off the crown jewels in order to keep the club afloat, whereas AG has just dipped into his piggy bank time & time again.

I’ve no idea what AG is worth but if I had about £5m stashed & I blew £1.5m in a couple of years I would have to call time on my philanthropy. If on the other hand I was worth say £100m, it wouldn’t be a problem.

Having had some time to reflect on recent events, I think that to a certain extent player retention and recruitment will be taken out of the clubs hands.

On our existing squad, you couldn't blame any of them (particularly those wih families) in asking the club to listen to offers now (afterall in 2 months they may have lost the opportunity to move on and may be left with no income.

On player recruitment, how can we expect any player to agree to join us when there is currently a huge question mark over the clubs predicament?

Don't want to sound unduly negative but one thing that cannot be overlooked in this debacle is the players. There just like any of us, trying to make a living and due to others incompetence they have been put at risk.

I bet a certain Wigan second row forward is thinking "have I done the right thing".

Not personally Ian but what about more dialogue with Steve Parkin. Surely it's worth a punt?

Absolutely right. If my company was on the edge, I'd look elsewhere.
I love doing what I do and I really enjoy where I work.....but I love my family more and they would always be first priority. No different for the players.
I hope we can give them some assurance soon.

Quote ="PHe"If MC buys the shares that AG currently holds then money isn't being put into WT. It just means that MC will have less money to 'invest' in the club. The better route would be for MC, if he wished to benefit the club, is to buy additional shares, increasing his shareholding and therefore his 'say' in the club - but this would be dependant upon other shareholders 'allowing' this. Another problem of buying up the shares of AG, is the amount of money loaned by WY Windows. If AG was no longer a shareholder then this debt would then have to be protected, as AG has stated that this debt would not be called in, but what if he was no longer a shareholder?'" To do this would need there to be unallocated shares available, which would be unusual for a private company. The company could choose to issue more shares, but the existing shareholders would see their existing number of shares increased to make sure their existing stake isn't diluted. The net effect of this is that AG would still own the same percentage of the shares before any transaction with MC. The likelihood is that the "deal" will see the shares transferred for a relatively nominal sum and some structuring around repayments of the loan(s) from AG and/or WYW. Video of the questions from the BBC in the press conference on the link below. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/23946220

Quote ="PHe"If MC buys the shares that AG currently holds then money isn't being put into WT. It just means that MC will have less money to 'invest' in the club. The better route would be for MC, if he wished to benefit the club, is to buy additional shares, increasing his shareholding and therefore his 'say' in the club - but this would be dependant upon other shareholders 'allowing' this. Another problem of buying up the shares of AG, is the amount of money loaned by WY Windows. If AG was no longer a shareholder then this debt would then have to be protected, as AG has stated that this debt would not be called in, but what if he was no longer a shareholder?'" To do this would need there to be unallocated shares available, which would be unusual for a private company. The company could choose to issue more shares, but the existing shareholders would see their existing number of shares increased to make sure their existing stake isn't diluted. The net effect of this is that AG would still own the same percentage of the shares before any transaction with MC. The likelihood is that the "deal" will see the shares transferred for a relatively nominal sum and some structuring around repayments of the loan(s) from AG and/or WYW. Video of the questions from the BBC in the press conference on the link below. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/23946220

I think that ship may have sailed and I'm sure that if there was any interest from him we'd know about it. As you are probably aware one of our Directors manages Guisley FC so will know him very well.