What is it with all these Trinity fans getting all touchy because some of us dont even note their pathetic existence?

From a financial perspective yes, he loses the ground back to the bank, so £1.7m is quite a bit of money. That is all I meant, that is why he was so desperate towards the end to retain control... it will hit him in his already empty pockets.

You'll excuse me - given his chronic mismanagement along with the rest of the Wakefield board - if I don't weep quietly into my pillow thinking about his plight.

I'm more likely to be concerned with the small businesses who could face having to lay off staff or close because they're going to get shafted along with other creditors, yet who magically see the business back up and running again with new investments and free of debt a few days later.

I'm sure they'll have a collection between them just to make sure Ted doesn't fall on hard times.

I take no pleasure from the financial problems of what was once a truly great club. Some of the best games I can remember were against Trinity in the 60's and 70's when they had some of the greatest rugby league players.

I no nothing of how they got into this mess but the club is bigger than the (miss)managers and they have certainly been a worthy SL team.

IMO the solution is a merger with Cas to create a sustainable SL franchise at the very least a ground sharing arrangement. To embark on 2 new stadiums within a few miles is just plain crazy for both clubs.

Come on Andy, you know me better than that... I won't be crying for Ted either but neither is he the villain he is being made out to be by some Wakey fans. It was just a comment that financially Ted is going to be hit hard, that is all. Also, to borrow a line from Starbug... have you tried running an RL club? I think they have sailed close to the wind for years yes, but people are making out that Ted has managed the club badly! I think he is a wheeler dealer and a chancer but clearly he has put more money in than he has ever got out... I think he has done the best he can given his own financial position and skill as Chairman BUT Wakefield did and do deserve better... no argument.

As for these small business you speak of, who are they exactly and why are their staff singularly more important than the 40+ staff who would lose their jobs if the administrator attempted to liquidate Wakefield to give them some money. They might still get some money from the sale and 40+ people get to keep their jobs, but according to you and others, the totally theoretical threat that it is possible that some creditor companies may, or more likely may not, have to lay some people off is more important. There is no logic to this argument whatsoever, this is not a Crusaders pre-pack deal here mate, when the exiting owner dump their debt and move over to a new company to avoid their commitments, this is new owners buying the business from the administrator and his job is to get as much money as possible and secure the future of the company... simple as that!

Finally, you question the financial mismanagement of the Wakey BOD but any small company that put themselves into a credit situation with Wakefield, so much so that it puts at risk the future employment of a member of staff or at the worst, the fall of the company, could equally be accused of exactly the same thing could they not?

The reality mate is that I doubt any independent business is owed money so substantial as to bring their business down and if they are, that is problem they have taken a risk and reward gamble on... just like every company!

Well said.

And those with short memories who are gloating at Wakey's current position, would do well to remember our own financial plight in the mid 90's.

My sentiments exactly.

I don't recall that we ever went into administration so as to walk away from the debts created through our failure to be prudent with the taxman's (ie our) money.
I take no delight whatsoever in Wakefield's plight nor that of the Crusaders, but it's those people who have done business with them that I really feel sorry for.

Don't be.

If you want to go into any business that is not serving the general public in a cash payment only situation (ie a shop) then you will be doing business to business on credit and if you can't take that risk then you shouldn't be running that business.

I lost money on a deal that I did with a former Leeds Rhinos player who had been allegedly backed in his venture by a Leeds Rhinos director and who did a runner (literally) and left lots of people out of pocket - we all had to stand that as part of the game, its what happens.

Every well run business will make provisions to cover losses incurred through credit not honoured. Alternatively don't offer credit terms and take cash up front. If you don't do either of the above, then frankly you are not smart enough to be in business for yourself. Cashflow is the biggest killer of new startup business in the country and is mainly because of lack of business acumen. Running a business is about more than just having a great product or service to sell.

I don't think anyone willingly and maliciously takes other companies down with them when they go, and that administration / liquidation is always the last resort for any company because of the changes in credit risk that it will bring with it for those involved.

It's not too difficult to tell those who have run businesses from those who have not on this thread.

McF and batley you are indeed both correct. I actual don't except any business to be put into any difficultly because Wakefield owe them money, some might be a little hacked off, but nothing more. Also, as you both say, if someone has taken a credit risk on Wakefield to such an extent as to put their business in jeopardy, then that is just as poor management.

As for HMRC then even £300k is small beer and the Wakefield club will pay substantially more in tax and NI in it's first year as a new company than £300k, as well as 40 or so employees putting into the tax system that would otherwise be out of a job. Also given that a large amount of that £300k is off-shore image rights back-tax that may turn into a bill much lower sum, if Leeds wins in the high court.

Unfortunately, some posters don't get it and I suspect much of this is just bitterness, and complaining about Wakefield versus the pre-pack of Crusaders to purposefully prevent them from £500k owed to HMRC, then I think it becomes ever clearer that it is just Wakefield bashing!

There is no chance in hell that we, Cas, will merge with Wakefield and to suggest that is so wrong. Wakefield fans would say exactly the same thing as I.

DMW - You are dead right, the two groups of supporters in the main do not want this to happen and would indeed both rather go down the league and out of SL for good and carry on watching lower league RL than merge. However, both clubs are fully entitled to fight like hell to stay in SL and that is what you are both doing!