I agree, I can't see how the running costs could be covered just selling food and drink. The council should offer it to someone like O&C management who have done Westgate and are doing the old Halifax Bank building. A local firm that know the area, have capital and could probably make it pay for itself.

I got rid of Sky completely due to prices and now get it through their NowTv platform linked to my TalkTalk phone and band package and I believe NowTv is available through other providers as well.
Saved a lot but the downside is you can’t record anything so it’s either live or catch up which is a bit sp on replaying rugby league but most if not all are on the Tube within a day or so at least to see the highlights.

Warrington have now filed their 2023 accounts. They made a loss of £1.6 million, have net liabilities of nearly £3 million and have 131 employees. Another RL club up to its eyeballs in debt and having to be supported by a sugar daddy: "The club continues to require additional funds for the foreseeable future which will be provided by the majority shareholder and directors".

As has been mentioned before, what if SKY either ditch SL or significantly reduce funding? When will these sugar daddies get fed up of pouring millions into a black hole?

Just waiting for London now which is 10 days overdue, then I'll summarise this mess called "Super" League.

It's very precarious isn't it? What do SL clubs get from SKY as annual payment?

I think it's £1.5 million a year.

I thought it was £1.8m, basically matching the salary cap. Although that was the previous deal, might have reduced a little

If SKY pulled out then the game would be up the creek.

When you see how the financial health of the game here has deteriorated in comparison with down under, especially over the past 20 years it's sobering stuff. In the "old days" we used to get top quality stars from Australia because we could pay similar salaries - now there's no chance. Comparing NRL with SL is like comparing SL with Championship.

If the TV money dries up or reduces any more then you wonder if maintaining fully professional SL is viable - could we be going back to the days when the top division only had one or two fully pro clubs?

Leeds disclosed a detailed turnover note showing 2023 central funding as £1,586,339 compared to 2022 of £1,934,193. This seems consistent with SKY's reduced contract as from 2023.

Saints chairmen saying they have lost 1 million and is calling for more central funding to fix it.

So by my maths spread that equally across the current 12 Super Greed teams they just need another 12 million from central funding to fix it.

Does anybody these days at any level in rugby league know what there doing?

The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................

The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................

Quote ="Tony Fax"The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................'" So, he's saying the reason they lost £1.3m is because central funding reduced by £300k? Is that correct? And if central funding were to go back to that level, everything would be fine again? He's still ed that the championship is getting £3.50. If that £3.50 went back to Saints, they would obviously make £2m profit next year, by that arithmetic.

Quote ="Tony Fax"The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................'" So, he's saying the reason they lost £1.3m is because central funding reduced by £300k? Is that correct? And if central funding were to go back to that level, everything would be fine again? He's still ed that the championship is getting £3.50. If that £3.50 went back to Saints, they would obviously make £2m profit next year, by that arithmetic.

What grade license do Rochdale get for being the only profitable club there then?

Quote ="Tony Fax"The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................'" And we wouldn’t ever stand for anyone blaming everybody else so sort yourself out McManus.

Quote ="Tony Fax"The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................'" And we wouldn’t ever stand for anyone blaming everybody else so sort yourself out McManus.

Still waiting for London's 2023 accounts which are now over 2 weeks overdue. I'm guessing they won't make pretty reading as in 2022 they lost over £1 million and had net liabilities of over £27 million (!!!!)

Talking of struggling clubs, Fev's important top 6 game against Sheffield attracted just 1,246 fans. Reduce admission to £12 tops and significantly reduce player contracts and salary caps accordingly, in my view. That's the only way to stop the rot.

The Championship Salary Cap used to be significantly lower than super league, and over the years it has gone up and up. As have gate prices, I remember in the not too distant past paying £12 to get in at the likes of Whitehaven.

I have seen an argument that "making players poorer" isn't the answer. And RL for a long time has had this ideology that if you pay people more, they will be better players. While you can argue making them full time makes them fitter, few get better as a result.

Commercially the game is on its backside. So many clubs living hand to mouth, and propped up by backers happy to throw money away. Few if any are commercially viable businesses and the game should be working towards making clubs be that. And if that means drastic cuts to spending, then that is what has to be done.

It's not about taking money off people, it's about realising where the sport stands and operating at that level, It isn't football

One thing that has happened with the clubs and players is the following scenario.

You have a player who stands out so club A offer X amount to sign him.

Club B also want him so offer XX amount club A counter bid XXX etc etc.

Another player comes along of a similar quality and the bar has been raised higher by the precedent set by the player A deal so his agent says he wants the same and the bidding starts again.

You only need 1 club with any ambitions and a bit of money to set it off and you only need 2 clubs for the price to be bumped up and then in varying degrees the rest are forced to follow in an attempt not to be the whipping boys club.

Everyone ends up spending more for the same batch of players playing at the same standard that either stay where they are or just move around from club to club with the better ones going to the highest bidder but with all the rest getting paid more to do it and the clubs putting up the prices to try and pay for it.

Its hard to know what the answer is especially with everything that is going on with the Shay. Even as a base figure season tickets hardly cover the cost of the rent on the stadium and a couple of the top earners salaries and thats before the rest of the squad and staff. There is no doubt the rent on the stadium is very reasonable but in the grand scheme of things we simply can not afford it along with running a competitive squad. Ive often thought that lowering prices might be an option but when it has been done in the past it has not shown a significant increase on the gate which must make it hard for the club to justify doing it. The problem is paying over £20+ entrance fee is disproportionate to the standard of rugby on offer.

That's why there needs to be a strict LOW salary cap to stop this player gazumping. I'm still waiting for 4 championship clubs to release their 2023 results, but if we exclude French club Toulouse and SL bound Wakey, and include relegation bound London, of the 9 clubs so far only Batley and Swinton are solvent - Batley because they own their ground and Swinton's balance sheet is helped by some useless goodwill and they tapped Salford Council for some money after the year end.

As for players being"poorer" ..... are they actually "poor"? It's their choice to play RL, if they don't like the money then do something else. As for "richer" players giving more entertainment ....... watching the Wakey v York game on the sportsmen it was far more entertaining than full time Hull v Salford and York's efforts put Hull's to shame.

I've no idea where we're going from here. We'll just plod along and I see a big dip in season ticket sales after the recent drama, with the floating fans choosing their games more and more, Not just Fax, but all the clubs. I foresee Fev being the next championship club to plead poverty, and as I've said before Batley selling their ground to survive. The sport is in its biggest mess in its history.

There's no way new fans will be attracted at £20, not a chance. There have been several occasions in the pub after a match when I've been asked by an "interested" rugby non-attending fan how much it costs to get in nowadays and my "20 quid" reply is greeted by "HOW MUCH????" and to be honest I'm fairly embarrassed by it, especially when I've watched some really drab games wanting to leave before the end.

But if the clubs think lowering the admission is simply not affordable then so be it, but the current option will also eventually be unaffordable as the fan base will gradually diminish over time anyway.

At championship level your standard mainstay squad player has a trade as his primary job - earning him somewhere around £30k +/-
He then plays part-time RL for an additional £10-£15k per year.
And that is it. You can build a 22 man squad for about £250k from that premise. And RL is a simple enough game that it will be competitive.

The younger ones who have come through an academy without being picked up will dream of playing well enough to "make it" and be offered £50k to go full time with an SL club.
The older ones will be happy to build their job up as the priority and look for a decent part-time club to earn enough for all the family extras that make a difference when cost of living is so high.

Is this pool of players getting smaller? Is it wage growth due to inflation? Putting their bodies on the line does have a risk towards their main job so they will want to maximize their part-time earnings. The championship clubs have just had their central funding axed and the fans are feeling the pinch as well.

[i[Part quote="Highlander"At championship level your standard mainstay squad player has a trade as his primary job - earning him somewhere around £30k +/-
He then plays part-time RL for an additional £10-£15k per year.
And that is it. You can build a 22 man squad for about £250k from that premise. And RL is a simple enough game that it will be competitive." End.
[/i
Not having a go and a serious question.
When has Bradford's playing budget past and present ever fitted into the financial figures mentioned above.
How much was Dec Patton on, how much did it cost to get Gaskell to sign, how much is Joe Keyes going to be paid.
How many other players are being paid between £10-£15 k per year and what is the likely hood of that ever happening?
It's all too deeply rooted and too far gone and now events are catching up and it's difficult to know what or if there is an answer.

Maybe if enough go bust and enough of them still have the desire they rise from the ashes and form a division that's based on the lower wages / entrance fees that have been mentioned.

Those 3 you mentioned are all halves. Usually a premium on them.

A specific example is recently Thomas Doyle - Bradford offered him £25k to stay but Keighley went for £30k. He had fulltime offer from Leigh in the £45k range which didn't compensate for his job so he stayed part-time.
I'm a Bradford fan, and I can see the issues. Bradford have options for jobs for players - in the foundation, in the academy. Whilst the academy costs low 6 figures, it does provide alternative sponsorship & funding streams. And the 3 newest directors (excluding Wood) do seem to be prepared to fund various areas for IMG points but also the performance side on the pitch.
I would say currently in Bradfords squad - Arundel, Hallas, Davies, Smith, Baldwinson, Butler are all the older type of player who have either been in SL or have no desire for SL and will take a decent part-time wage.
Scurr, Myers, Jowitt, Peposhi are all the second type of player, still trying to prove to an SL club they are worth a shot.
The elephant in the room (which I understand) is that Bradford have signed at least 6 overseas/Aussie players who won't have come over for that kind of wage. They'll have to be on more, possibly split with the foundation.

I had thought of the overseas players but wanted to keep it short and with that it mind the short answer is none of them standard players who play regular first team are on 10-15k and the 25k to 30k bidding scenario is exactly what I was referring to often with much higher amounts involved.

I'll resist the temptation to say who the elephant in the room is but Nigel Wood in this weeks rugby league press says on Bradford's turn over ( income / spending )
that it had increased form £1,715,762 in 2022 to £2,131,351 in 2023 turning a £270,288 a loss into a £21,288 profit for the same period which although it will cover all aspects of running a club still dwarfs and is over 10 times the £250k amount mentioned to be able to run a rugby club on.

Also worth mentioning Bradford are still in the Championship and if and when they do get into SL those figures will no doubt get much bigger.

The biggest problem Fax have at the moment is keeping hold of existing fans nevermind attracting new ones. I know we mentioned the Wakey game which was the lowest attendance that I have seen from a Fax following at a game in a long time. From someone who has gone religiously for around 40 years and even when we moved down to the Shay there was a group of about 20 of us that would go to every game, we would book dining packages, most of us had large sponsorship packages at one time or another, but over the last few years this number has dwindled right down to 4 or 5 if we are lucky, dining is too expensive and poor quality, and none of us sponsor anymore for one reason or another, and the ones who still do go are picking and choosing games.

Last season was the first season I had really picked and chosen games but the games were snoozefests and I could easily go and watch an amateur team on Saturday and have Sunday free and if you pick a decent game it can offer a bit more entertainment than what we have served up in the games over the last couple of seasons. The fact that our games are shown on YT a couple of days after I am not sure helps things as I know I can watch the game a couple of days after anyway if people have said it were a good game.

So I would still class myself as a diehard fan but Im not going to drag my mates down to games for the reason that TF mentions about the price when for the same money you can go and have a few pints at an amateur club and a lot of my mates do now sponsor at amateur teams where it always feels like your money is more appreciated. How do Fax tap in to the area to attract new fans? Its no longer as simple as giving out some free tickets at schools knowing parents will have to take their kids, you can see even when they have the community teams down you might get 7 or 8 out of maybe 25 or 30 players so even on planned days parents are not sending their kids. When I were younger everyone either went to the football or rugby because thats just what you did but there is just so much else that people can do these days. Its obviously not just a Fax problem but it is one that we can see is affecting us massively.

The biggest problem Fax has are the same problems many other clubs are having including losing former supporters and some of their so called fans keep slagging them off on the public platforms, almost every thread is littered with them.

You can just imagine if they were an hotel with the same sort of reviews from those connected to the place how many new visitors they'd have.