How long have you been supporting our club for? On a time horizon of the last 30 years the current position we're in to me isn't in the upper quartile of consternation. That's just a personal opinion BTW.

Been a supporter since 1978 but that's irrelevant.
TODAY - I am very concerned that we may well finish 6-8th this season. I don't bask in the past glories and use that to appease today's form.

Do Wigan look back at CC final losses and think oh well we won 9 on the trot ?

I am very concerned with the here and now. I don't want the Club to finish low and have the season fade out. I want the fan base to build and for us to become truly self - financing etc as does AP.

I loved the CC wins - LOVED them. This season we currently don't look like we could defend the Cup based on performances. I truly hope I'm wrong but our defence looks weak and we have little to offer in the attacking stakes, in that we don't look 'electric' with the ball in the red zone.

As I have said there are many different opinions on here and we are a broad church of fans. I'm on one end of the spectrum that's all.

no Super League club is selft financing as far as I know?

leeds and warrington are

are you sure?, Caddick and Moran appear to put money in, but I may well be wrong.

I don;t think that caddick puts a penny into leeds. They dwarf any other club in SL financially.

moran put cash in previously but wire now self sustaining and profitable I believe

And Cas for the last 3 years.

And Hull FC of course

Might explain why Hetherington is so against developing the game!

Think you may well have a valid point there and could well be a major factor in Hetheringtons reluctance to develop the game as the control he has had on the game and Leeds being as strong as they are financially in their own right has been a big part of the success they've achieved.

taking my RL fan hat off, I can't criticise him, it works for Leeds as it is, why would he want to change it. I imagine if we were self sufficient AP would be happy with it "as is".

Can see both sides of the argument.

Its a very myopic view though (not yours but the point in general) and is a bit short termistic. Look at the late 80's and early 90's when Wigan dominated. It nearly broke the game as a whole as interest dwindled as people knew Wigan were going to win everything. It took their chairman (Maurice Lindsey) to realise things had to change for the good of the entire game.

Hetherington is no doubt happy with the situation for Leeds, but is it good for the game??

I agree and can understand his reluctance to let go of what has been a key part of their success, however the game as it is as a whole is not sustainable long term in its current form and needs to move forward and adapt.

So for me even if I was in the position of Hetherington for example I would be looking to be a key player in the changes to make sure I was still a major part of what goes on for the benefit of my club.
Unfortunately I think Hetherington and his ilk are why the game hasn't moved forward as it should and is a reason why RL is still classed by many as a northern sport for flat cap and whippet types!

They turnover of Leeds is massive compared to other clubs, including Wigan. As said, the status quo clearly suits!

benefit of owning your own ground I guess

Spot on Mr W Crane

£11.9m turnover for Leeds, £7.0m for Wigan based on last accounts.

Interesting Mrs B, Do you have this info for the other SL clubs of last year and the margin also.
For Toronto and HKR too ?
Cheers

No. Most clubs, including us, didn't file full accounts as our turnover, assets and employee numbers weren't high enough to require us to do so (Turnover threshold of £6.5m for example); only 4 clubs reported turnover and a profit and loss account. All can these can be accessed on companies house website (although I couldn't find Wakefield's for some reason). Let me caveat that they might not have been transposed correctly here, I'm watching Homes under the Hammer and have got bored with both, an hour of my life I won't get back

Interesting the correlation to league position, isn't it? Don't know about Catalans, try google - obviously not registered in the UK.

Leeds Turnover £11.9m, Profit of £148k, Net assets £16.3m
St Helens Turnover £7.5m, Loss of (£717k), Net assets £7.7m
Wigan Turnover £7.0m, Loss of (£623k), Net liabilities (£1.8m)
Warrington - Turnover £7.2m, Loss of (£75k), Net liabilities (£0.8m)
Hull - Profit of £285k, Net assets £0.4m
Castleford Profit of £287k, Net assets £38k
Widnes Profit £6k, Net Liabilities (£1.4m)
Hull KR Loss of (£497k), Net liabilities (£4.2m)
Salford Loss of (£728k), Net liabilities (£8.9m)
Huddersfield Loss of (£1,056k), Net liabilities (£12.6m)

Under AP Hull look to be moving in the right direction with a tidy profit (no doubt bolstered by recent success etc) and as he alluded in the press recently on a sound foundation and becoming self sufficient.

What is a shock in those figures is that Huddersfields net liabilities are so big.

Well, Ken Davy has deep pockets clearly, but that's a long way from sustainable. I think I've picked up the right Widnes accounts; had a quick look and James Rule said he was focussed on getting them to around breakeven so sounds right. They're doing well IMO, cutting their cloth but surviving the relegation scrap on what must be a minimal budget. As with anything like this what's not declared is as interesting as what is, but you've got Leeds and Saints with huge assets through ground ownership, and high turnover clubs Wigan and Warrington seemingly propped up to the tune of £600k a year by rich and ambitious owners. You've got us, Cas and Widnes who are finding different ways to turn a small profit. And then Rovers, Salford and Huddersfield with much bigger net liabilities. All in all though you have to say the top flight is a bag of financial spanners.

Please stay on topic - no drift

feel free to not read it, there is an interesting thread developong here.

No there really isn't.

maybe not to you...