So if thats the case and i don't doubt you, do you think he wants to spend the £500K plus on temproary ground imrovements at Belle Vue. Or just sit it out in Championship for a season or two pending newmarket.

Don't think he would do that. Loss of revenue in SL with no guarantee of getting back in.

Could somebody have been promised naming rights on the Newmarket Stadium in return for £500k upfront to tart Belle Vue up until Newmarket is ready.

How's about that for a conspiracy theory.

mmmm yeah I get it................ some one lends AG 5oo k up front on naming rights for a stadium that WTWC or AG will not own Like you say possible

That's because for a number of years leading up to the admin, there was more money going out of the club than there was coming in - that's no longer the case. My understanding is that the deficit has been clawed back mostly by a) getting rid of overpaid staff members b) massively improving the commercial and sponsorship income and c) creating additional income from the now in-house catering and hospitality.

It's not that difficult - AG may not be a rugby expert, but he clearly knows how to run a sustainable business.

what about players wages, we must have also made a massive saving in that area this season.

Absolutely YES. May have been very good reasons I'm not judging but YES.

Would have made absolutely no difference, wake up and smell the coffee.

Wakefield went bust because it's a club that whilst ever it is at BV is unsustainable as a SL club and always has been. This goes way further back than Ted Richardson and if people like you were not forever looking for vilians and White Knights you'd realise that. Ted Richardson for all his faults kept Trinity going for 17 years and in SL 10. I don't blame AG for the loss of franchise but I will be interested to see if he lasts 17 month let alone 17 years.

Oh come on you can't believe that, they are but flee bites in the scheme of things. We have lost most of our most expensive player and all our historical debt, they are your savings. To believe anything else is fantasy.

Was the club with debt when Ted took over? It probably was, but let's imagine for a moment it wasn't. In 17 years (and 2 years of SL without Sky funding, IIRC) the club had amassed debts of 1.9 million when we went into admin - averaged out at roughly 100K per season. If you manage to wipe out most of the historical debt by going into admin, and then improve off-field activities to increase revenue, then these flea bites could very quickly add up to the 100K/season that was the previous average trading deficit. This is deliberately simplistic, I know, and there may be other things I've forgotten to factor in, but is it really inconceivable that we've clawed in our trading deficit (the 100K/year, not the 1.9 million, obviously)?

(I've deliberately ignored the sale of BV and interest payments on debt to the banks in this, because no one really seems to know exactly how much we received for BV in the end or how much we were playing in interest on the debt each year. Would they cancel each other out over a period of 17 years, perhaps?)

I'm not claiming any facts, here, btw. Just questions.

I don't know the details either, but I think you're in the right ballpark.

Vasty - I'm not denying that player wages have also decreased, but it's far from the complete picture. I also don't necessarily see that as a totally bad thing; for me, a cautious season prior to the licence decision is sensible - I'd rather see my Chairman behaving like that, than splashing the cash and risking our future security.