Sadofsky's have prepared a balance sheet for Rovers as at the 30th November 2008 which shows total liabilities of £3.16m. Whether this money is owed to the directors, or to trade creditors, say for maintenance work or merchandise for the shop, or to season passholders or sponsors for cash they've put in for which they've not had any consideration yet, or the bank, or whether they're accruals for services received not yet invoiced, is beside the point. The definition debt is "Duty or obligation to pay money, deliver goods, or render service under an express or implied agreement." which would cover all the above, hence from the balance sheet, the headline about Rovers having £3m of debt (at 30th November 200icon_cool.gif would seem accurate.

I think for your "Real number is only £1m" statement, when Rovers have lost a further £450k since the 2008 accounts, to be true, one of the following might have to be correct:
The directors have waived their loans
The "real number" includes asset valuations, in which case it's not a measure of debt, but a measure of net worth, which is different, and not what the HDM reported on anyway
The "real number" is a selective subset of total liabilities and therefore irrelevant due to the definition of debt mentioned above
The published balance sheet is incorrect.

income greater than expenditure = profit
income equal to expenditure = parity
Income less than expenditure = deficit/debt etc.

That I realise to some is a hard concept to grasp but work with it for a while and the concept may begin to be understood.






















There is a rumour that some banks may be considering the idea and how it works

This is something I constantly need to explain to people Leaguefan , both in ' real life ' and in relation to RL

Lock it!

hey i walked it.

a community stadium is for the whole community, east and west

crowds - lower than cas who are the other potential for expulsion. salford dont count as they offer the potential of manchester

finances - arent wakey have troubles paying tax.

its good to see you value my opinion so much

no the nature of the liabilities is crucial

directors loans arent proper debts.

what are Hull FCs debts like ?

im sure st helens have large directors loans too

its a non issue

If they are in the accounts , yes they are , otherwise they could have taken them out

It was once, it is not now under the user agreement. KR where asked if they wanted to join the other two clubs at the KC and they declined. KR where given the ground that Craven park is built on for a nominal price ( £1 IIRC ) and they then sold it off to pay of debts.

The only way KR could play at the KC is[size=200 IF[/size both City and FC agree to let them use it. If either one disagrees then it does not happen as these two are the major uses of the stadium, so thats the end of that one



Hull FC s debts are deminishing and are being serviced well by the board, they can get credit quite easily unlike another team that has to pay for everything up front and this is killing them.

why would tenants have any say on who uses a council built stadium?

its not like Hull FC could stop the decision to host test matches there recently?

The potential of Manchester!

Is that like the potential of London?

Potential doesn’t pay the wages.

Finances! Check the thread, I don’t think Wakey have the problems of H.K.R.

Hull KR were offered the chance to play at the KC and they declined ....any decisions regarding the stadium are not made by the council they are made by the SMC.

The council own the stadium and have passed on its running to SMC on a fifty year lease. Both clubs have the option to prevent an other user coming in and using the pitch on regular basis. the pitch being of a woven and grass type is designed for around 55 matches a year and anymore would cause damage.

The international match was not at the KC last year due to a certain SMC boss at the time making it difficult for the RFL to arrange. The new SMC boss is Adam Pearson who is a lot more RL friendly then the last and has already stated he will ensure that International RL returns to the KC.

No. It's different. It's a potential that's been as yet untapped by Salford and Swinton. Give them time .............

Nice

wakefield are planning a new stadium, along with salford, cas ,and st helens.

stadiums cost huge money. far more than any rl team can afford. so very difficult to realise

wakefield not in millions of £ in debt
wakefield first team in play offs
wakefield academy champions
promotion of junior players into first team this season

hull kr are the only team playing in a dump who are making no plans to move out of it!

If they will never crystallise, why not waive them and reflect the adjustment in the accounts? Wigan had an amount owed to one of Lenegan's company that was written off in 2008 and disclosed as such.


Total of £1.4m thanks. They were £2.4m in 2004 but have reduced signifcantly after 5 years of profit.


Indeed, as do virtually all RL clubs. Saints do have the advantage of a £8.1m freehold asset also.

At the moment though - they are still at the same place on the starting blocks - in terms of stadia. I am "planning" to run the 100 meters in 9.78 seconds this year. I've got a diet, some new running shoes and a new athletics vest.

this is precisely what i mean. you have to start somewhere. at least you are making plans. unlike some



maybe you will get on tv then DM will see you and know everything about you

Sorry your post is absolute nonsence.

To use a recently used quote, your post is "written by someone with a basic knowledge of accounting and a little else"

Either repayment MUST be made within a 12 month period or there has to be some formal agreement for deferrment, which on the basis they are still current, would not appear to be the case.

The Article concerned is about as factual as you can get. It clearly states the date the accounts relate to and accuratly quotes figure from the accounts submit to companies house.

In short, you post was a pointless waste of effort.

OK, question time.

At what point did hullkr issue shares to the tune of £2m in the last 18 months?
or
At what point did hullkr take out long term loans the tune of £2m in the last 18 months?

If they didn't do either then you are talking nonsense.

You started plans more than 10 years ago .We have been in sl 3 years and made massive strides .Concentrate on you own club rather than slagging off others

You will be judged on what you have done not what others have done

The same as they are currently!

Do you think there is a warehouse full of rovers fans waiting for a new stadium before they go again? rovers have done well in exploiting their SL status to grow their fan base, AND YET THEY STILL LOSE MONEY HAND OVER FIST



rovers have been on the up for the last 4 season. I am sure we will see the true loyalty of some of these new found fans (not the 2500-3000 hardcore who stuck with them in the barron years) when thing really go pear shaped during the coming season

No set of financial statements will tell you that.

That being said its not difficult to guess who / what the current liabilities will include. There will be a fair amount of VAT owing to HMRC. There will be a fairly large amount of PAYE / NIC payable. There will be a certain amount of deferred income from season ticket sales for future matches. On the basis of the East stand extention, there will be a fair amount of monies owning for its construction. There will inevitably be a degree of directors loans. Going on past performance, you know that historically hkr have been very slow payers to their creditors leading to some small companies and business being put into their own financial difficulties, there will be a fair amount of smaller creditors who historically rovers have treated very poorly.