the club will own a lease to use the stadium, the expenses paid on the stadium would be treated as improvements to leasehold and capitalised and then depreciated over there useful economic life

Perhaps the club would have shown a profit in the 2009 figures, were it not for the restructuring, which took place?



As we are dealing with a tax year which runs from April 2009 – April 2010, this means that the majority of the figures will be made up from the 2009 season.

It was a light hearted joke and you all seem so jealous.How do you all know how much Stobarts,JST nutrition,Land Rover,Oneills,Tetleys,Riverside College,Halton Borough Council,Halton Buses,Halton Housing Trust, and viqi are putting in each month?Ste oconnor could be putting £10,000 each month towards viqi so it is all possible.Merchandise from 2 rail finals and gate receipts.So jog on and congratulate the next super league team.

I'm not surprised at all by those fantastic results. It's great for the fans of Widnes who must love reading a set of financial results like that. What the club fails to deliver on the pitch they certainly make up for it with a sexy balance sheet and P&L.

It's all good. It's all Super League. (Well, apart from the massive profit of course - that's very un-super leaguey)

absolutely correct griff.

And by the way, this has nothing to do with Widnes getting a franchise - they fully deserve it in my opinion...just not overly convinced by these figures..thats all....

if anyone can get hold of a copy of the accounts let me know..its a bit hard to get them from Canada.,..

Companies house shortly like Every business figures will be... Why lie and risk all the hard work done?

Widnes made a loss of £950k in the year ended 30th November 2008 on turnover of close to £1m. This was the first year of the new regime and included significant costs incurred in re-structuring many of the clubs activities. The expenditure (close to £2m) was funded by the £1m turnover and the remainder by money put in by SOC which in those accounts, was not included as turnover.

The results reported yesterday would be for the year ended 30th November 2009, when Widnes average crowd was still 3,900. In addition to this the club shop (and relationship with O'Niells) was fully functioning. The Dream ticket lottery had had a full year running and new sponsorships had been obtained. Costs were cut by the release of several head office staff (Mike Banks, Pat Cluskey etc) aswell as a reduction in first team costs.

It is entirely feasible that Widnes could have achieved a break-even/small profit position on ordinary trading in the twelve month period.

The headline results of £2.5 million "Turnover" and £1 million profit will almost certainly have been achieved by the inclusion in the Turnover of funds injected by SOC (in years one and two) previously carried as Directors loans but now written off as no longer requiring repayment. This would be an "extraordinary" item in the accounts and , though included as "income" in the accounts would not be included as "turnover". However in press releases and reports such as those we have seen in the last day or two, the term "turnover" will have been used disingenuously to "spin" the figures for License bid purposes.

I would suggest the accounts are not incorrect but that the reporting of them is purposefully designed to make the club look better for the forthcoming bid. Not unusual in these days of "Artists impressions" of new stadiums and 5,000 crowds for meaningless games against Batley Bulldogs!

The above post is pretty much what we have all been saying , let's hope some people calm down a bit now

i actually have a copy of the submitted accounts with me at the moment, and the related parties note is rather telling,

while theres not enough information to either prove or disprove whats written above, given the in theory material amount of 1 million pound being written off, i'd expect that to have been disclosed in order to give a "true and fair" view to anyone reading them. given the lack of disclosure i'd still conclude the press release is correct until concrete evidence to suggest overwise

Reply to ' trash ' not me

Starbug, to descibe your recent postings to be tedious would be an understatement greater than saying the Pope is slightly catholic. It's all well and good picking apart this one press release but to do it with the volume you have says the following. One, you can't claim it doesn't bother you or that you are quite the neutral in this matter. You've been posting about this every place there has been a post, and often. You haven't really added anything since the first post, just repeating the exact same speculation and suspicions you have. Two, you have about the same evidence as anyone else at this point. One press release. You are going over old ground and your initial ground is flimsy. Whether we made one million in profit is largely irrelevant anyway. We have hit the target required and also cleared our debts, debts which recently kept us in dire straits might I add. Anything over that is a bonus.

Stop moaning, stop repeating the same old guff and get over it. You have been attempting to douse a very positive financial statement ever since it has been released and like I said, TEDIOUS.