In this instance, I mean 'us'.

Harold,

I fully agree with what you say. I was facilitating a Communications group at the Centurions, (Centurions Radio, LCTV, Matchday magazine, Social media, etc) when Keith Freer was chairman, and Trevor Barton was CEO. We had the same issues with LSV then. They used to deduct their "agreed" charges from matchday receipts, before passing us our share, (presumably they aren't doing that now, or we couldn't have 'withheld' any payments to them?) and we had constant queries over agreed percentages, stewarding costs etc. It was never easy to arrange meetings, let alone reach an agreement on a 'fair' pricing mechanism.

In the early days of our Group, Trevor took me to meet the LSV management staff, and they asked if I had any questions for them. "Just one, I replied - is it true that you are looking to get the Centurions out of LSV?" (remember our financial crisis at that time?) They were horrified, pointing out that it wasn't at all in their interests - financial, or 'political' - to boot us out. I would like to think those interests are just the same now. I realise that they are committed to making a go of the Sports Village complex, financially. But, which is worse - Leigh paying a 'reasonable', affordable rent, or LSV receiving nothing at all, with the anchor tenant playing elsewhere?

So what happens if the restructure in Championship is increased to 14 teams and funding is divided equally? Wouldn't that give funding of over £1M to each Championship Club?

This is what I was led to believe also !

I have been trying to work that out. I think it’s s lot less. Not sure what the top 4 teams make but let’s say it’s 2.5m, then the other 8 get 1.6M. The total of 4.1m equates to just shy of 300k each for a 14-team League. Enough for all the teams to survive but nowhere near enough to ever challenge for SL without a seriously wealthy backer.

Or, would they all get about £200k - isn't that what the teams in places 5-12 get now? I reckon the extra funding for teams who finished 1-4, would then go into the SL pot.

Today's daftest idea.

Why don't LSV take a financial interest in Leigh RLFC?
Probably as a new club in league 1. At least it would remove the conflict of interest that has bedevilled us since the start.

Yes indeed Maple it equates to around £2.9M each season, £210k. Not sure if there will be an increase in funding to support the two additional clubs but if they do,that would make it around £240k each.

Without additional central funding, this could be catastrophic for many a club.

Why should council tax payers have to foot the bill for the financial mess Derek has created.

I’m fairly certain when the Leigh Sports Village was built, a long term rental agreement will have been agreed. The Leigh club need to stick to that agreement and not expect the council (taxpayers) to bail them out and subsidise the club.

Leigh Centurions have an open ended licence to play at LSV and do own 11% of it as referred to earlier

No official rental agreement or 'rate card' is in existence. Fee's are agreed season by season on an incenticised agreement.

We should naturally expect to pay more for the facility in Super League on gates of 7,000 than on 1,400 in League one.

It is not a X amount set fee , for Y amount set years. Hence the managing of the relationship being crucial.

Harold is this 11% worth any money that we could use to pay off debts?

Not sure of the details or if is transferable. 11% of any LSV operating profit should be due to the club.

It is important to remember, the club gave up a 75 year lease on land worth £millions that used to be Hilton Park to enable the new stadium for Leigh RLFC to be built for free, debt free.

The second part to remember is that additional land in Leigh was also handed over for free for commercial purposes, ie Morrisons, to also enable the stadium to be built for Leigh RLFC for free, debt free.

It is vitally important then, and still remains so for the LSV to have Leigh RLFC positioned and operating out of the LSV.

What happens, if as seems increasingly likely, we go bust. LSV can then claim they have no obligation to a new Leigh club?

Then given how and why it was built, every Leigh councillor sitting on Wigan Council as elected representatives of Leigh borough should be voted out of office immediately.

The same goes for our MP.

The working man still thinking they have a voice for change. Naive

The Hilton Park land is/was essentially worthless , the council made it quite clear if Leigh Centurions / Sporting Club Leigh Ltd didn't agree to move to the LSV under any terms they would reduce the capacity of Hilton Park to 1,000 by use of the safety certificate

I haven't suggested anything of the sort , I was just being devils advocate in demonstrating how the various parties involved will be looking at it from different angles

If LCRLFC is an 11% shareholder of the LSV Stadium then surely the Club is remunerated 11% of all profits arising from sell on rental of the facility i.e MUFC, Elton John, Lionel Richie & any International's or other events, or will it not work this way ?

The only way of a very bright future is in owning the Stadium 100% outright !

Great idea Ste and I 100% agree with it. How is it ever going to happen? Never thought we might be getting 11% of all LSV income though!

Is it 11% of all income, or 11% of profits? There is quite a difference there, especially if LSV isn't making a profit!

That’s how I always thought it worked, it’s what I would do if I was the Landlord and had the opportunity to take my money prior to handing over the balance.

Isn't it the Batley game in 2016 that is still in question, where the matchday receipts was zero?

I've no idea, but even if it is only the Batley game, if I was the Landlord (LSV) and DB had decided to offer a free game without my consent, I’d tell him for every other game thereafter I’m taking my usual X amount plus Y every game until you’ve paid your arrears.

I don't know either, 'Leythig'.

Nevertheless, presumably LSV were still entitled to charge for stewarding, which was always separate from the % rental. The stewarding presence that day would have had to be higher than usual, with all four stands in use. However, to offset that extra cost to LSV, they would have surely had increased income, in the form of much higher food & drink sales?

Was it without consent ?

If it was , then why ? , maybe because approaching them with a realistic marketing idea of offering a recently promoted anchor tenant to let the population of the town in for free would have been received how ?

" Cracking idea Derek , yes we'll run with that , we should be able to cover costs on food and drink sales , and it'll hopefully see a few more through the door next year in SL "

Or more likely , " No Derek , you know we don't work like that , it's our job to run the stadium for maximum income and potential profit for ourselves and the council , not some poxy RL club "