Re: Bradford at risk of Administration... : Thu Jun 21, 2012 7:34 am  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: Wind your neck in, I have no axe to grind with Leeds, I'm sure they run a pretty tight ship, and if they manage to turn a profit, once in a while, even if purely technical, then good luck to them. Wish every club did. However . . 1. What is this "profit" in ££s and what figure, in ££s was received from Bradford re Harris? I'd like to compare the two. 2. It's good to know you make all this money. When did you repay all the investment your investor put in, by the way? Or didn't you? If a club is making a "profit", but still technically is indebted to a person, body or investor for a few millions, it isn't the sort of "profit" I would like to make myself. Surely, any annual surplus should be going to chip away at these debts? More here boss. The Harris cash, whatever it was, cycled through Leeds' accounts some years ago and is irrelevant to the recent profits. Leeds had cash in hand of £2.23m and were owed £1.4m by the RU club which it has been funding in recent years. No amounts are owed to Caddick who does not put cash into Leeds RLFC other than marginal sponsorship.

Ferocious Aardvark wrote: Wind your neck in, I have no axe to grind with Leeds, I'm sure they run a pretty tight ship, and if they manage to turn a profit, once in a while, even if purely technical, then good luck to them. Wish every club did. However . . 1. What is this "profit" in ££s and what figure, in ££s was received from Bradford re Harris? I'd like to compare the two. 2. It's good to know you make all this money. When did you repay all the investment your investor put in, by the way? Or didn't you? If a club is making a "profit", but still technically is indebted to a person, body or investor for a few millions, it isn't the sort of "profit" I would like to make myself. Surely, any annual surplus should be going to chip away at these debts? More here boss. The Harris cash, whatever it was, cycled through Leeds' accounts some years ago and is irrelevant to the recent profits. Leeds had cash in hand of £2.23m and were owed £1.4m by the RU club which it has been funding in recent years. No amounts are owed to Caddick who does not put cash into Leeds RLFC other than marginal sponsorship.

Re: Bradford at risk of Administration... : Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:50 pm  

Him wrote:

An interesting point that I'll shamelessly steal from MjM on the Leeds board -
Bradfords wage bill is apparently £2.3m whereas Leeds' is £4.8m.
So either Leeds is very high and inefficient or, as I think is more likely, Bradfords is way too low for a team spending at or near to the salary cap.

But is that just salaries for the playing staff, or does it include all the support staff (coaches, kitmen, physios, office workers etc)

Re: Bradford at risk of Administration... : Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:39 pm  

Roofaldo wrote:

But is that just salaries for the playing staff, or does it include all the support staff (coaches, kitmen, physios, office workers etc)

It includes everyone - but to me it does not suggest the Bulls were in any way recklessly run on the expenditure side, at least in terms of expenditure they could control as better informed folk than me keep telling us about the onerous nature of the Odsal upkeep. But overall theirs looks more like a revenue-based problem - that is hardly a new issue to face RL clubs but is one with which the previous board wrestled for perhaps too long.

Re: Bradford at risk of Administration... : Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:21 am  

MjM wrote:

That's a remarkably simplistic analysis of the Bulls finances. Season ticket prices were IIRC on a sliding scale depending on how many were sold. You appear to bizarrely think along the lines of halving the prices halved the revenue.

There's also added to that the fact that depending on where in the stadium you wanted your ticket for also had an affect on the price.

The cheap season tickets were an attempt to arrest the slump in attendances which was the main reason for the drop in revenue and to recoup the lower cost in terms of concession sales etc. It was a gamble that seems to have back fired