Warrington have now filed their 2023 accounts. They made a loss of £1.6 million, have net liabilities of nearly £3 million and have 131 employees. Another RL club up to its eyeballs in debt and having to be supported by a sugar daddy: "The club continues to require additional funds for the foreseeable future which will be provided by the majority shareholder and directors".

As has been mentioned before, what if SKY either ditch SL or significantly reduce funding? When will these sugar daddies get fed up of pouring millions into a black hole?

Just waiting for London now which is 10 days overdue, then I'll summarise this mess called "Super" League.

It's very precarious isn't it? What do SL clubs get from SKY as annual payment?

I think it's £1.5 million a year.

I thought it was £1.8m, basically matching the salary cap. Although that was the previous deal, might have reduced a little

If SKY pulled out then the game would be up the creek.

When you see how the financial health of the game here has deteriorated in comparison with down under, especially over the past 20 years it's sobering stuff. In the "old days" we used to get top quality stars from Australia because we could pay similar salaries - now there's no chance. Comparing NRL with SL is like comparing SL with Championship.

If the TV money dries up or reduces any more then you wonder if maintaining fully professional SL is viable - could we be going back to the days when the top division only had one or two fully pro clubs?

Leeds disclosed a detailed turnover note showing 2023 central funding as £1,586,339 compared to 2022 of £1,934,193. This seems consistent with SKY's reduced contract as from 2023.

Saints chairmen saying they have lost 1 million and is calling for more central funding to fix it.

So by my maths spread that equally across the current 12 Super Greed teams they just need another 12 million from central funding to fix it.

Does anybody these days at any level in rugby league know what there doing?

The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................

The losses are worse (as I reported) than quoted in the BBC article after stripping out the revaluation on the property. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-leagu ... 8d91d1z22o I think McManus bleating is preparing Saints for a massive shock in 2024 if they fail to make the top 6 play offs which could hit them hard, Just the tip of an enormous iceberg. I reckon Salford could be the first ....................

What grade license do Rochdale get for being the only profitable club there then?

Still waiting for London's 2023 accounts which are now over 2 weeks overdue. I'm guessing they won't make pretty reading as in 2022 they lost over £1 million and had net liabilities of over £27 million (!!!!)

Talking of struggling clubs, Fev's important top 6 game against Sheffield attracted just 1,246 fans. Reduce admission to £12 tops and significantly reduce player contracts and salary caps accordingly, in my view. That's the only way to stop the rot.

The Championship Salary Cap used to be significantly lower than super league, and over the years it has gone up and up. As have gate prices, I remember in the not too distant past paying £12 to get in at the likes of Whitehaven.

I have seen an argument that "making players poorer" isn't the answer. And RL for a long time has had this ideology that if you pay people more, they will be better players. While you can argue making them full time makes them fitter, few get better as a result.

Commercially the game is on its backside. So many clubs living hand to mouth, and propped up by backers happy to throw money away. Few if any are commercially viable businesses and the game should be working towards making clubs be that. And if that means drastic cuts to spending, then that is what has to be done.

It's not about taking money off people, it's about realising where the sport stands and operating at that level, It isn't football

One thing that has happened with the clubs and players is the following scenario.

You have a player who stands out so club A offer X amount to sign him.

Club B also want him so offer XX amount club A counter bid XXX etc etc.

Another player comes along of a similar quality and the bar has been raised higher by the precedent set by the player A deal so his agent says he wants the same and the bidding starts again.

You only need 1 club with any ambitions and a bit of money to set it off and you only need 2 clubs for the price to be bumped up and then in varying degrees the rest are forced to follow in an attempt not to be the whipping boys club.

Everyone ends up spending more for the same batch of players playing at the same standard that either stay where they are or just move around from club to club with the better ones going to the highest bidder but with all the rest getting paid more to do it and the clubs putting up the prices to try and pay for it.

Its hard to know what the answer is especially with everything that is going on with the Shay. Even as a base figure season tickets hardly cover the cost of the rent on the stadium and a couple of the top earners salaries and thats before the rest of the squad and staff. There is no doubt the rent on the stadium is very reasonable but in the grand scheme of things we simply can not afford it along with running a competitive squad. Ive often thought that lowering prices might be an option but when it has been done in the past it has not shown a significant increase on the gate which must make it hard for the club to justify doing it. The problem is paying over £20+ entrance fee is disproportionate to the standard of rugby on offer.