exactly..............roughly 1500 per home game down on financial projections at a guess????

you can only pay tax on what you earn so i dont see ya point here, yes crowds were down but dont we get paid when sky covers our games

The ideal scenario:



We have to take that comment on board, there's no other choice, otherwise, start counting down the 84 days (minus a couple) you can still enjoy the Wakefield Trinity Wildcats experience.

It doesn't mean (within reason, of course) that fans shouldn't question why we've got to where we are now, does it?

THEY are the ones?
As has already been said in previous posts, umpteen number of businesses are in a far worst state, because of choices that have to be made. We, WTRLC, have an apathetic public who will relish the front pages of our local comic tomorrow, (I have not bought it for a long time), and a bunch of people trying to make this club work, against a boat load of odds.
As stated, I don't understand taxes stuff etc., so cannot slate the people trying to keep us successful. I just assume that those slagging off the committee do understand that accountant stuff.

NO

Other posters with more knowledge of this kind of stuff than me have commented that the tax relates to what you've paid your employees, not what you've earned.

ok here goes
you set off any business with an expenditure and income projection for a period, in RL the big variable is fan income, salaries are known ground costs known ,they are the fixed costs
who will actually turn up and pay is not, so its a variable.

you therefore have a figure in mind for total income, now with concessions lets say they predicted for 1500 more people per home game...stay with me here.....

1500x15pounds (average including concessions) x 14 home league games =£315,000

i just know that 1500 figure has been discussed before, now the maths makes sense, exp constant, income down by 315,000

basically we did well but didnt get support therefore we kept players and didnt get cash!

I work for a company that budgets from week to week, we have had big job in around 1/4 million pound upwards it was just sat in the shop for six months, could you imagine the interest that could make, budgeting can be a nightmare so rather criticize the club for shuffling finances I would just like the club to be more open in their statements,

I would like to know which are the other clubs that is also in the same predicament

oh and in most businesses the tax you pay goes in to a holding account and is paid over at the end of the tax year.
some companies use the money in the holding account for other reasons??????, like to pay salaries and hope for income based on that!

who knows?

right i get what you are saying, so why didnt the club try and increase revenue by getting more people to games at a reduced cost. the club would of known the figures lets say after 5 games. how can you budget for 1500 more, if we play rubbish then that figure doesnt add up.

but then you offload players!
atkins goes say 150 k
brough 200 k??
book balanced! but core fans disgruntled!


we did well probably paid a lot of win bonuses, performance bonuses and still we had the same core attendance, as for your point re reduced price attendance....well it seems to annoy the core group of season ticket holders!! in short you cant win!

as we both know what didnt happen last year was the "floaters" coming back, me you and all the daft buggers on here will be there anyway! its those in the pubs and clubs that didnt come...too many night games?, sky games....ever bradfords demise, none of it helped.

Because then season ticket holders would quite rightly say, "hang on, why am I paying all this money in advance in order to save money over the season when the cost has now come down?" Net result, no take-up of season tickets next season, even less money to budget with in advance, even more chance of going boobs up financially.

i said that first so your jinxed, and cannot post untill i say your name!

Maybe this is not as bad as it sounds....

My understanding is that it's all about the image rights of the players. Basically the club has been making tax/NIC free payments to players wrapped up as image rights. HMRC has come along done an investigation and identified the problem. What they do then is work out the value of the image rights payments and the value of the tax and NICs owing on them. They can do this for the last 6 tax years. They then charge interest on the total value of the unpaid tax and NIC and then finally assess you for a further penalty for breaking the law.

Quite obviously when HMRC can go back 6 years, then add interest and penalties it all soon adds up to very substantial sum. A number of other clubs are in exactly the same situation.

I can't believe the players have made that much of a cut from that personalised tat on the Wildcats website!

actually that does make sense!

Interesting. I did not have Wakey down as one of the clubs most implicated in the various devices that HMRC have been challenging, although it may explain a few things.

Do you have this on good authority?

I've been puzzled about why this all seemed to have blown up now when it was supposedly resolved in September. Some further research (or more to the point being pointed in the right direction by a legal Southstander) has now clarified for me that:

1. The high court hearing was only yesterday
2. The hearing was merely adjourned, so the petition is still live
3. It seems if Wakey do not find the rest of the money within the time frame then the petition could still proceed and the club could still be put into compulsory liquidation.

This is not quite the spin that your club are putting on it.

Conventional wisdom has it that Wire Stains and Pies are most in the frame over the tax on image rights issue, although the majority of SL clubs were believed to be implicated in some way.

If it IS down to (deemed to be) excessive proportions of player packages being paid as image rights (usually to offshore personal service companies) then you might have another potential problem looming. HMRC "grosses-up" the net payments made to their pre-tax equivalent, and treats the difference as being unpaid tax and NIC (together with adding employers' NIC). As well as a tax bill, this means a sudden retrospective increase in what the club has paid to players. Which would retrospectively increase your salary cap player spend. (See the RFL Operational Rules regarding "grossing up"icon_wink.gif. This could send clubs so affected over the salary cap, retrospectively (maybe not you guys if you had enough margin?). Will be very interesting to see how the RFL deal with this, especially if any clubs who are NOT implicated cry foul?

Incidentally, I have been assured by the club that Bulls are not exposed here. Guess we'll see, cos sounds like most clubs are in some measure.

It looks like they've been paying the installments so far lets hope this continues and if the club is touch and go with the money then ASK us the fans.

Secondly, we wont be anywhere near going over the salary cap with the tax implications resulting in higher salaries. We have a considerable margin re the salary cap, I believe where 500k+ under the salary cap.

Hopefully in three months we will pay it all off, but what will the implications, it is quite evident we didnt have this money stashed away, did we get it from the richardson family so will the profits (if any) go to the family and not towards the upkeep / funding for the stadium issues.

Has Mr France injected some more capital ? has he guaranteed the sponsership of an up & coming stadium or ground naming rights?

Anyway .... We need good news when is this planning application going IN .

First september then october now middle of november any further set backs, It'll be intresting to see what John Huxley reacts to these issues.

Anyway .... We need good news when is this planning application going IN .

First september then october now middle of november any further set backs, It'll be intresting to see what John Huxley reacts to these issues.'"

The figures I seem to remember are £2.3 mill now i dont know if thats the total amount for the ground or what we have been paid so far, or what we are due in the future.

Where has this money gone have we seen it all. ?

Id like rebelrebels question answered. TRB


This is your field.

I wish I had all the answers - I don't.

We have NO long term liabilities and there is funding still to be drawn from the sale of the ground - when that happens, who knows?

We have had a very poor season in terms of actual vs anticipated attendences and therefore revenue.

We will come through this. The major players - the developer and the RFL - were aware of this situation long before we were and, as PB suggests, we are far from the only ones with difficulties - just the only ones in the media!

Lets hope JK and the playing staff have been kept fully informed. Assuming they have, then I cling to the fact that Millard Tronc etc.. having still signed means they must have been satisifed with the clubs ability to sort this out and be able to pay their contracts going forward.

It is still not clear how the bill was amassed. If it is a "one-off" hit which includes money due over a number of years, then should we pay this off, hopefully we can move on. The concern has got to be if the debt relates to a relatively short period and indicates an inabilitiy to pay our yearly costs.

I await with interest details of the other 5 clubs who have had similar problems.

Not good at all. We need a takeover of this club . Once again there is no reason for us to be in trouble unless someone is taking rather than giving. OR they are terrible with maths. Bad news with the new ground assesment coming up . Typical Wakey cock up !

isn't due to the fact that if you want to keep competitive you have to spend and then hope the crowds and sponsorship follow?

the worst thing the rfl did was scrap the 50% of your income could go on players salarys.