the maths is not all that hard to believe

2008, turnover 900,000 loss of roughly 1,000,000, means in 2008 we had expenses of 1.9 million
2009 turnover 2,500,000 profit of roughly 1,000,000 means in 2009 we had expenses of 1.5 million

so we cut costs by 400k, and increased revenue by 1.6 million, this would have been helped by the nrc final win, the set up of the lottery, the opening of the club shop and o'neill deals.

takes alot of hard work but the numbers are not the sort that are out of reach

The £million pound debt was down to the massive restructuring the club went through when SOC took over. In addition, the club also paid several debts off from the old regime.

Widnes don’t just rely on their crowds. They have several new sponsorships this season, the shop is doing a roaring trade, the ‘Dream Ticket’ lottery, Viqi and club fundraisers are all getting stronger.

SOC had to hit the ground running when he took over the club. He has now had another year to fine-tune the business.

Perhaps you could put forward some sort of reasonable argument for you accusations. I’m not asking for a link, just a f*****g argument!

or you essentially borrow a million off the club in year one and then pay it
back in year two , all on paper of course

No way have you increased your turnover by 160 percent , even if you had made the Challenge cup final and doubled your attendances you wouldn't,t have done that

i'm sorry, but could you point out exactly which financial reporting standard or international reporting standard allows a company to treat borrowing as turnover? i'll give you a clue, its frs 5

or any accountant on the planet who would even consider allowing the practice given the legal implications involved?

I agree, it all looks very dubious.

there's no way a lottery scheme and a club shop has increased turnover that much.

Plus these are pre-tax profits. If SOC is fiddling the books he is robbing himself of a lot of money that will have to be handed over to the taxman from that £1million profit.

Not on its own no, but that is not all there is to increase profits.

How much are our sponsors putting in?

actually, given the losses last year, its likely that we had large taxable losses brought forward to ofset against this years profit. so tax would be less than you would expect

I'd like to see the naysayers actually spell out and prove how it's not possible rather than just say it's not. I didn't expect anything but bleating from certain quarters but facts are a bit more interesting to argue against, rather than responding to a few miserable tw*ts who have turned hoping something's not true into fact.

Why there mid table fev have won the league they should be promoted why should widnes be giving the right just because they have a good stadium and a very clever acountant that doesn't give them a god given right to go into super league

Did the last two years just pass you by?