Giants 1.05 million
Salford 1.35 million

Well you turned a Leeds £148,199 profit in to a £260k loss so I can only assume Huddersfield made about half a million in profit

Not sure where you've got that from. Leeds made a profit in 2016, for the 13th time in 15 years.

Yeah I know that's the point I'm making nobody gets into sport to make a profit because so few teams make one PL teams are loss making status symbols really RL teams in SL are propped up by people who expect to make a loss and do it for the love of the club really it would help if sky paid a decent amount for he rights

Financially the scariest competition is the Football Championship (the BBC online ran a great article a while ago showing the revenues, profits and losses for every team). Its basically a big casino where owners are betting on making the Premiership. As a result its massively loss making almost across the board to an extent that literally dwarfs RL. That's fine so long as the owners can afford the losses, which is exactly the same for RL, RU and probably almost all pro sport outside the US.

Quote: fun time frankie "Manchester City won the league and posted a loss of 300 million nobody is saying it doesn't bode well for football there are hardly any sports teams that run at a profit'" 2/3 of PL teams made a net operating profit in 2015/2016 https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ub-by-club Totals for all clubs 2015-16 Turnover £3.649bn (up from £3.4bn in 2014-15) Wages £2.247bn – 61% of turnover (Up from £2bn, 60% of turnover, in 2015) Profit/loss Twelve clubs made profit: £153m Eight clubs made loss: £270m Overall loss: £117m (was a £113m profit overall in 2015) Obviously some teams have a mountain of debt, however quite a few teams have no debt at all. What would be interesting is how much tax is taken by HMRC from the Premiership given most of the owners have their holdings of the clubs registered in tax free havens, then you have the players at the top of the pile all no doubt with crafty accountants and companies set up so they can evade paying full tax on their ludicrous wages. Soccer literally sucks massive amounts of money out of the countries coffers more ways than one. Whilst some clubs in RL are in the quag, I'd take our sport and how relatively 'clean' it is over that grimy corrupt business anyday. I'd never give soccer my money knowingly. (I acknowledge that some taxpayers money goes into all sorts of aspects of sport including that lot)

Quote: fun time frankie "Manchester City won the league and posted a loss of 300 million nobody is saying it doesn't bode well for football there are hardly any sports teams that run at a profit'" 2/3 of PL teams made a net operating profit in 2015/2016 https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ub-by-club Totals for all clubs 2015-16 Turnover £3.649bn (up from £3.4bn in 2014-15) Wages £2.247bn – 61% of turnover (Up from £2bn, 60% of turnover, in 2015) Profit/loss Twelve clubs made profit: £153m Eight clubs made loss: £270m Overall loss: £117m (was a £113m profit overall in 2015) Obviously some teams have a mountain of debt, however quite a few teams have no debt at all. What would be interesting is how much tax is taken by HMRC from the Premiership given most of the owners have their holdings of the clubs registered in tax free havens, then you have the players at the top of the pile all no doubt with crafty accountants and companies set up so they can evade paying full tax on their ludicrous wages. Soccer literally sucks massive amounts of money out of the countries coffers more ways than one. Whilst some clubs in RL are in the quag, I'd take our sport and how relatively 'clean' it is over that grimy corrupt business anyday. I'd never give soccer my money knowingly. (I acknowledge that some taxpayers money goes into all sorts of aspects of sport including that lot)

How rich are Premiership and Championship football club owners compared to Super League club owners?

How many rich people would like to own a football club compared to how many would like to own a rugby league club?

That's our problem with most clubs losing lots of money.

Frankly I don't know where any of you are getting your figures from.

There is operating profit and loss which I assume is what most of you are on about. However it's a fairly meaningless figure as it encompasses all sort. Transfers and prize money and anything else that happened that financial year. Truth is a good accountant can make those figures look any way you want them to look. So mr Cas fans or Leeds fans who think they know probably don't and would probably be better getting off their high horses.

So long as taxes are paid and the overdraft is serviced it's basically a so what issue.

The one that matters is historic debt. That's the one that really counts, that's the one that takes clubs down.

The minute Ken Davy or Marvin or whoever pull the plug or worse call back their loans then you are stuffed. That's what sunk the Bulls and what did for Trinity when Ted bailed and Glover soon after. I wish anyone all the best trying to find out what any Limited companies historical debt really is.

If that's not about to happen at Wigan then their current operating loss/debt is very serviceable. It's not great but that's pro sport.

Isn't Ian Lenegan worth like 200-300million? That's more then the owners of Hull City who were a premier League club last season.

I know for a fact that certain league one owners are richer than all the super league owners put together

Regards

King James

Sorry but that's rubbish - you can learn a lot from the financial statements which are all lodged and freely available from Companies House, especially if the company is outside the small company disclosure regime. Accountants can't massage the figures that much - if a club is losing money year after year like Wigan tend to do that can't be massaged into recurring profits without it being obvious (e.g. Lenagan writing off loans). Likewise at Leeds the underlying position is that the company is profitable. You can get odd things going on but it's really pretty easy to spot them if you know how to read a set of accounts, moreso if you look at the same company or the same industry over and over.

The problem at Wigan almost certainly starts with them not owning their own stadium - they don't have the scope to generate all the non-gameday revenue that rival big clubs like Warrington, Saints and Leeds do which subsidise the football operation. Obviously those clubs also have the cost both capital and maintenance of creating the stadia but all things considered owning is much better than renting.

Obviously not.

Between 2009-15 we were profitable 5 out of 6 years. Owning a stadium has absolutely nothing to do with it. Investment on and off-field has everything to do with it.

Saints own their ground and had slightly higher turnover than us but lost £700k.

Except it would be obvious because you would disclose it as an extraordinary item. At least a decent accountant would anyway. So wigans problem is that that they don't own their own their stadium? Tell me then Mr Grant price Waterhouse, How come saints own their own and are in the same predicament?

Regards

King James

Saints losses are driven by depreciation of around £500k a year on a stadium they own - at an operational level they just around break even.
Wigan own hardly any assets so their depreciation is almost zero and their losses are entirely operational - or, if you swallow the Wigan PR blurb, "due to investments on and off field" (but which go straight to the P&L apparently).