Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 3:48 pm  

agent wrote:

After watching the Wakefield V Leigh game yesterday. I would love to hear what utter S**t Eorl Crabtree would come out with if he had to commentate on the Leeds V Turdersfield game.

Absolute gobshite

Could you elaborate please. It's difficult to make a meaningful comment when I don't know what you are talking about. Something has obviously upset you to bring out such comments.

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 4:08 pm  

Turdersfield? wow lol

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 5:16 pm  

Jo Jumbuck wrote:

I agree with this, I also thought we were spending the full cap, which makes the often repeated" we are punching above our weight" sound a bit hollow.

The Mason fiasco and some of the player sales and purchaces beggars belief.

dont be naive, theres ways around the salary cap... they can pay the players in other ways.. for example employing the wife in the club shop

or you could be like wigan and pay big transfer fees like they have done to bring tomkins back, we dont have the resources to do this... we have even had to bring loan players in like cox recently and offload the likes of o'donnell who was on a big salary.

think we have changed the way we go forward now, we have gone for a full time academy and putting out money into the youth system now so we may have to wait a few more years for it to bear fruit.

the days of signing players like carney (which fell through) and o'donnell are gone.

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 6:03 pm  

We have to recognise that we have to pay over the odds to attract good players. Would a player rather play for Leeds or hudds? wigan or Hudds? (Ask larne!) so in order to get players to sign we would have to pay a little more than those other teams, their squads will be better value for money than ours. Players would rather go to the big sides. Same goes for attracting the right youngsters.

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 6:20 pm  

brearley Anderson has said we have money for players when Lunt went to Hull KR like most on here not a clue on our fiances as the club don't publish them. all i know is we get around 1,8 million from sky if the club cant match that with shirt sponsorship; ticket sales merchandising ect then there should be mass sackings

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 6:25 pm  

jools wrote:

We have to recognise that we have to pay over the odds to attract good players. Would a player rather play for Leeds or hudds? wigan or Hudds? (Ask larne!) so in order to get players to sign we would have to pay a little more than those other teams, their squads will be better value for money than ours. Players would rather go to the big sides. Same goes for attracting the right youngsters.

Some clubs will always find a way around the salary cap but proving it will always be extremely difficult.

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 6:31 pm  

40 year old giant wrote:

brearley Anderson has said we have money for players when Lunt went to Hull KR like most on here not a clue on our fiances as the club don't publish them. all i know is we get around 1,8 million from sky if the club cant match that with shirt sponsorship; ticket sales merchandising ect then there should be mass sackings

Why mass sackings and who?It always beats me when people think they know better on how to run a business be it a sports club or a factory.Leave the running of the Giants to the people in the know. I have no doubt that the money saved would have been Lunts wages and would have gone towards paying to run a full time academy set up amongst other things which in my opinion is vital for continuity for a Super League Club.

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 6:45 pm  

40 year old giant wrote:

brearley Anderson has said we have money for players when Lunt went to Hull KR like most on here not a clue on our fiances as the club don't publish them. all i know is we get around 1,8 million from sky if the club cant match that with shirt sponsorship; ticket sales merchandising ect then there should be mass sackings

Do you realise we have to pay the stadium company £5 for every spectator that goes through the turnstiles. So we make nothing on kids- in fact Up until last year when it was free for kids we were PAYING for all the juniors to attend! Add to that salary for ticket staff, design costs, printing, marketing.... How much of that 1.8m do you think is matched right there?

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 7:57 pm  

the point i am making jools is the sky money covers the cap the club should be able to generate enough income to pay for the running of the club as accounts are not published we don't know if we are still making a big loss the last accounts my account friend could find we lost around 450k and that was around 5 years ago .

Re: That performance : Mon May 18, 2015 8:05 pm  

jools wrote:

Do you realise we have to pay the stadium company £5 for every spectator that goes through the turnstiles. So we make nothing on kids- in fact Up until last year when it was free for kids we were PAYING for all the juniors to attend! Add to that salary for ticket staff, design costs, printing, marketing.... How much of that 1.8m do you think is matched right there?

I thought it was £3 per head which aint too bad