Quote: bren2k " Perhaps Daddycool could explain then, seeing as he's said himself in this article www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/news ... 3/2013/10/ : "are still things coming out of the woodwork, but we have paid a large chunk of the debts we inherited." Even your own chairman says debts. In terms of Bradford, the quote about money next season is because they get the full allocation of Sky money - i.e. £600k more.

Quote: bren2k " Perhaps Daddycool could explain then, seeing as he's said himself in this article www.wakefieldwildcats.co.uk/news ... 3/2013/10/ : "are still things coming out of the woodwork, but we have paid a large chunk of the debts we inherited." Even your own chairman says debts. In terms of Bradford, the quote about money next season is because they get the full allocation of Sky money - i.e. £600k more.

Not going to argue - it's futile when you cannot have a reasonable discussion on here with you Bren. If you prefer to act childish, so be it. However, it has always been mentioned in tandem with debt, as this video also proves www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/23950797 Within first few mins it's said that the club has some immediate and pressing debts left from previous regime that need attention and therefore need £400k. Perhaps it's not meant in that way but all and sundry have reported it as debts and therefore I must question why the club have not bothered to correct this if it is indeed an error. I no doubt expect some other childish response; this hasn't even got anything to do with the other forum. It was a genuine point as to why it's referred to as debt everywhere and, in that sense, you can hardly ridicule people for stating that themselves.

Not going to argue - it's futile when you cannot have a reasonable discussion on here with you Bren. If you prefer to act childish, so be it. However, it has always been mentioned in tandem with debt, as this video also proves www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/23950797 Within first few mins it's said that the club has some immediate and pressing debts left from previous regime that need attention and therefore need £400k. Perhaps it's not meant in that way but all and sundry have reported it as debts and therefore I must question why the club have not bothered to correct this if it is indeed an error. I no doubt expect some other childish response; this hasn't even got anything to do with the other forum. It was a genuine point as to why it's referred to as debt everywhere and, in that sense, you can hardly ridicule people for stating that themselves.

Quote: Fully "Not going to argue - it's futile when you cannot have a reasonable discussion on here with you Bren. If you prefer to act childish, so be it. However, it has always been mentioned in tandem with debt, as this video also proves but all and sundry have reported it as debts and therefore I must question why the club have not bothered to correct this if it is indeed an error. I no doubt expect some other childish response; this hasn't even got anything to do with the other forum. It was a genuine point as to why it's referred to as debt everywhere and, in that sense, you can hardly ridicule people for stating that themselves.'" Did they really?? www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-6003018 www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8898655/ It seems they above reported it as under capitalised.

Quote: Fully "Not going to argue - it's futile when you cannot have a reasonable discussion on here with you Bren. If you prefer to act childish, so be it. However, it has always been mentioned in tandem with debt, as this video also proves but all and sundry have reported it as debts and therefore I must question why the club have not bothered to correct this if it is indeed an error. I no doubt expect some other childish response; this hasn't even got anything to do with the other forum. It was a genuine point as to why it's referred to as debt everywhere and, in that sense, you can hardly ridicule people for stating that themselves.'" Did they really?? www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/s ... -1-6003018 www1.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... 6/8898655/ It seems they above reported it as under capitalised.

That's just a re-hash of the original statement released on the club site. But since then it's been referred to as debt - both from people at the club - and also in national press. www.dailystar.co.uk/rugby-league ... ants-party www.totalrl.com/web/super-league ... -wildcats/ www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/24940791 But besides that, the point of my comments were to highlight - in response to Bren - that this wasn't something dreamt up by people commenting, more it's just what people are reporting from elsewhere. Either it's debt or it isn't debt.

That's just a re-hash of the original statement released on the club site. But since then it's been referred to as debt - both from people at the club - and also in national press. www.dailystar.co.uk/rugby-league ... ants-party www.totalrl.com/web/super-league ... -wildcats/ www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/24940791 But besides that, the point of my comments were to highlight - in response to Bren - that this wasn't something dreamt up by people commenting, more it's just what people are reporting from elsewhere. Either it's debt or it isn't debt.

Goodness me - what are we talking about here?

At the end of last summer we were faced with both an immediate debt - hence the fire sale of players to cash buyers who also, in some cases, took over those players contracts with immediate effect - and also had budgets for the coming season at a level which could not be sustained, hence the requirement to reduce the wage bill.

As I understand it, Bradford were / are in a similar position but have dealt with it differently. Their wage bill will have reduced and their back room staff is much smaller, but given that they are on half the SL money it still beggars belief that they could afford that squad!

All I seek (and I don't know the answer), is the assurance that we will be treated fairly and that we are all operating with the same level of support. If that is so, then let's get on with it!

The problem is, all this is based on half a fact.
Wakefield and Bradford have similar positions in that we both have debt and are under capitalised
But no one knows how close the income streams are, the value of the money from sponsors, the value of the wage bills being reduced.
If Manchester United had twice the debt and cash flow issues of us they'd be laughing. It's all relative.

If Bradford say they have sorted it without getting rid of more players (they have lost some as Bullmania explained) then so be it. Why doubt it and why care.
If they are telling fibs then we'll find out when they have no money left.

THIS ... I agree. They may have got rid of some players but Langley was on his way out the Bulls moaned every match nearly. Lulia wanted to go back to Aus. Look at the players you brought in Carvell won't have come cheap neither will Ferguson. George is a decent winger that won't be on peanuts. IT STINKS