I was absolutely amazed when the majority of SL clubs (not ours) voted to turn down hard sponsorship cash in return for a (very) few freight trailers liveried with pictures of SL players. I couldn't, and still can't, understand it. Maybe if economically things were tickety boo and the good times were rolling along it would have made more sense to effectively buy publicity in this way. But in the current climate it seems to me that the game needs all the hard cash it can get and Betfair wanted to give us some.

Hudgell has some points worth debating but essentially as far as I can see he wants more central handouts as a result of a smaller full time professional league and less money being invested away from the heartlands. I think there is a debate to be had reference the relatively small amount of money that the game has being spread too thinly however he seems to ignore the fact that it is he who has failed to meet his own target of 10K break even crowds (or even the max capacity that NCP can hold) over several seasons. Perhaps if this target had been met and/or his club's cloth had been cut accordingly his bottom line might have been healthier. Ditto this for Bradford and others in a similar boat. I don't see anywhere in his letter where he acknowledges any shortcomings of his own in this area ? Seems to be an increasing trait across departments at KR of late.

On a separate note who was the 'Gentleman' he was sending the letter to ? If all the other chairmen were the intended recipients as [iThe Sun[/i suggests wouldn't it have been better to address it to these 'Gentlemen' ?

Said the same thing. Bad times.

Was the letter sent to Allam?

How much money do you think Hull FC are losing on gates of 11,600?
I think they are due to post losses in excess of £300,000 based on an average over 12,600 for last season.
It's a good job Rover are in the SL to help Hull FC out once a year.

Try telling that to Bill Kenwright at Everton !!

Hudge complains that he needs 10,000 to break even yet figures show Castleford are posting profits when they both have similar attendances. Am I missing something here or is Rovers a poorly run club that over spends?

We are due to post losses of circa £300k based on an extraordinary and unforesenn at the time of Pearson's take over, tax demand.

Do make even a hlf-ar[is[/ied attempt at accuracy

Although what he says may well have truth in it I am afraid this is what annoys me so much about Hudgell. There are ways and means of dealing with issues of a sensitive nature behind closed doors of which I would say this is. Doing what he has done has been done without any thought of consequences or damage it can do to the sport he says is in trouble. Any possible sponsor may now be wary of putting money into the game at any level, SKY may also take a dim view on this as no doubt will the RFL themselves.

He is only interested in No.1 and with this has done the game no favours at all infact quite the opposite.

Heres and idea for Mr Hudgell why doesn't he offer to merge with Bradford!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you actually think about sporting clubs just about all of them are owned by major benefactors.

The RFL need to seriously look a calling a halt to the expansion and concentrate of getting the sport on a sound financial footing, the old saying walk before you can run. However if clubs persist on spending more than they get in the RFL are not totally accountable more the club themselves.

How do you know that Hudgell did not follow protocol when penning the letter?

I think you have a hatred for the author and not the content.

It will make you ill. Lighten up a bit.

I do...

Same could be said for Hull FC on averages of 11,600 when they need 14,500 to balance the books.

I know what you are saying but Bill Kenwright cannot take them 'to the next level' and has been trying to sell for a long time. Moneymen are important as seen at Chelsea and Man City - clubs historically at the same level as Everton. Warrington have been just ordinary for many years until a moneyman took them on.!!

of course moneymen are important but its still up to the club to run it correctly with the funds they have.

Still dont get that deal myself particularly in todays economic climate it would be better to have cash in your pocket instead of gambling on advertising which is no guarantee of increasing income unless you throw serious money at it. Even then the cost of that against what then comes in isnt always worth the efforts.

What the likes of Hudgell need to realise is you need to cut your cloth accordingly and with money hard to come by then attendances will drop and also sponsorship due to having less available expenditure and until he realises as with other clubs that you can't keep spending what you haven't got with problems arising down the line.

He could also sell Craven Park and rent it back....................... oh hang on a minute no as they've already done that last time they were in a mess

.

Look this may come as a shock but continually repeating the same mantra doesn't necessarily make it true

To be fair to Kenwright, he seems to be very cautious about who he hands his club over to. I'm sure there's plenty of wealthy people willing to take Everton off his hands. He doesn't want to put his club at risk, fair play to him.

Mainly down to the SMC ripping us off. We are nowhere near making losses like you are though. We have potential to increase gates but IMO your just a small minded club that will never reach 10,000. You still didn't answer my question. Hudge complains he needs to reach 10,000 people but clearly that isn't the case as Cas have similar gates, if not less for some games yet post decent figures compared to your huge losses. Unless your stadium costs are a lot higher than Castleford's. Still a poorly run club with poor ambition and drive.

I can only go by what Adam Pearson stated. He needs to get back to crowds of 14,500 to balance the books.

No he doesn't, he can reduce the amount he spends on wages.

Balance which books? Was it including the payment made to HMRC?

I dont remember him saying he needed that to 'Balance the books' seem to remember it being more along the lines of that being the figure to be able to continually heavily invest in the team.

The deal worked for Hull FC when they moved to the KC in 2003. Attendances increased by 5000 overnight.
They were not averaging 7,500 before moving to the KC. I cannot see how Pearson can negotiate a new deal with the SMC. What have the SMC to gain from a reduced rent? If they could drop the ticket prices, Hull FC would still need to attract more fans just to generate the same amount of revenue.

However, with much more investment still needed, Pearson says the club must get back towards the peak of 2007 – when the club averaged more than 14,500 fans – to balance the books.

[urlhttp://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/HULL-FC-Shocked-Pearson-blames-300k-loss/story-14379069-detail/story.html[/url

Wtf is your point?

It's the same at every club, if you can't afford to spend the full cap DON'T.

Just had a quick look down all the other forums, no one else seems to have a 'Hudgells at it again' thread, I wonder why that is......

SOME very bitter and twisted fans out there.