What's to stop a company owned by Mrs K , or one of his brothers paying TP £48000 a year to wash her cars. As long as he declares it for tax. It would have no connection to Salford? If Salford are found guilty and docked points, arent the players concerned also guilty of trying to get round the cap , and therefore shouldn't they get a ban as well?

Reporting is squarely in the domain of the club and therefore no player will be banned if their club breaches SC rules.

The rules regarding whose payments count:



Even if you successfully argue that Mrs. K doesnt fall under c), e) will forever defeat any attempt to devise a scenario. Same with wags working in the club shop.

Well firstly thats definitely what the turnover was reported as. Secondly you quoted something like 50% or £1.35M as the Salary cap. I was simply correcting you to 50% or £1.85M or whatever the SL salary cap is.

Salfords accounts reported a loss of £1.7M on a turnover of something like £2.3M. Salford are now showing liabilities of £6.8M. This information is publicly available on the gov.uk companies house website.

I think you have mistaken me for another poster on here re the above. On the other matter ignore what was reported as turnover, just do the maths and tell me how Salford's gate receipts, sponsorship, corporate hospitality, programme sales, lottery and merchandising sales wouldn't equate to 275k a year. 14 home games and a very conservative 3000 people (Average 4200 exc free entry game) paying say a very low average of £12 a ticket (Excluding VAT) would equate to £504K in gate receipts alone. Additionally if you had an average of 200 people in hospitality every home game and the club were charging £75 a head that would equate to another 180K sales over the season. You have to agree the turnover figure doesn't tally up does it?

I'm not arguing with you. The figures I have quoted are off the official accounts posted with Companies House. Maybe they need explaining further then.

Meanwhile we wait with baited breath for the RFL to say/do anything which will stop the gazillion threads around the RL internet world

Proof ? or do I call you Marc Green & claim my £5.00 ( tax deductible against my second income .. )

There's a link on the VT thread. I'll donate your fiver to Koukash

Wherever salary or other benefits are expressed as being paid, payable or Accruing:
5.2.1
“to a Player”, such expression will be deemed to include payments that are paid, payable or Accrue:
(a) to the Player himself ;
(b) for the benefit of the Player;
(c) to, or for the benefit of, the spouse, partner, relative or trustee of the Player;
(d) to, or for the benefit of, any person or business entity associated directly or indirectly with the Player;
(e) in satisfaction of all or part of a debt owed by the Player;
(f) to, or for the benefit of, a Licensed Player Agent or other Agent for services rendered on behalf of the Player;
(g) at, or pursuant to, the direction of the Player; and/or
(h) such other transactions as the HSCR determines should be treated as payments to a Player;

5.2.2
“by a Club”, such expression shall be deemed to include payments and other benefits that are paid, payable or Accrue:
(a) by the Club itself;
(b) on behalf of the Club;
(c) by, or on behalf of, any person, business or entity associated or affiliated with the Club (including, without limitation, other sporting clubs, whether linked by common management, ownership, control, directorships, company officers, shareholding, undertaking or otherwise);
(d) by, or on behalf of, a sponsor or other commercial partner of the Club; and/or
(e) such other cases as the HSCR determines should be treated as payments by the Club.



So does that mean that a player cannot earn any extra from ANYWHERE over and above his salary from the club?

There's nothing to stop a player busking every Saturday on Salford precinct with a friend of Marwan's generously throwing in the £50 notes. Could work as long as the player doesn't get mugged on the way back to his car

Just a thought re. Turnover figures.....

I've not seen the financial reports, but wonder whether they show payments to the administrator of the Old Co. for legacy debts?

I'm sure that the RFL pay this directly to the administrator out of Salford's central funding and thus I wonder if any of it (funding in and legacy debt payments out) is recorded in the New Co's accounts?

Just as an aside, looking at those accounts (as a complete novice bearing in mind), although Salford’s total losses in the first two years under Koukash amount to £6.87m, the rate in which the Club is losing money year-on-year has been cut significantly: £5.14m in 2013–14 vs. £1.73m in 2014–15.

That said, the liabilities attached to the previous company were lumped in the first year accounts (c.£3.17m). Circa £25,000 per month appears to be coming out of the Club to service the resulting CVA. Those large liabilities appear to include directors’ loans too i.e. money plowed-in by Koukash himself.

Looking at the debtors there (c.£300k), my totally amateurish guess would be that Salford could even spend between say £1.6m–£1.8m on the cap. This would tie-in with what Wakefield chairman Michael Carter said to [i:e5kf5958League Weekly[/i:e5kf5958 (23 November 2015, p.7) and Salford around that mark, then everybody else gradually stepping up from there up to the big spenders, Wigan, St Helens and Leeds, who probably do spend the cap’.