I am a little shocked that during all this squabbling about Hudge and 'will he / won't he stay' and the state of the clubs finances ect ect. That no one has picked up on the substantial loss of revenue and financial implications to the club from not making the play offs (not done and dusted yet I know!)
I am sure ill be corrected if I am wrong but I believe all monies are split 8 ways all the way to the final (even if a team gets knocked out in round 1). The final is split 50/50 between the finalist, less the RFL taking their cut off course.
I have no idea about any additional Sky revenue but just on gate receipts that's got to be well over 200k in lost revenue?! That's surely going to put a dent into next seasons spending money!
I'm not his biggest fan but thought Hudge spoke well on the radio today, honest and frank. I would not be to worried about him walking though, although I think he would walk tomorrow if he had someone to take over from him. However, him being a fan he'll stck it out!

What have you found out about the companies that Pearson owns?

From what I have seen Hull Super League is the only one that is worth talking about.
A £1million (including tax bill) loss in the first year. Good start.

[urlhttp://company-director-check.co.uk/director/907726211[/url

He was upset at the loss but he was spot on about the situation at the Bulls with what he said.He was right when he said if you get 7000 gate you spend to that gate not 10,000.Im with the guy when he says Bulls should not get away with the situation and the RFL not playing to their own rules.The RFL have gone out of their way before helping certain clubs above and beyond before.

Did Hudge say he wants Ben back?

Sorry to say but thats the biggest load of codswallop i've heard yet.

Judging by your post you're the definition of a complete idiot.

you're almost there, all the playoff gate receipts are pooled and shared out among the eight but on a pro rata basis with the teams getting a bigger percentage the further the go in the play offs, so it is a loss of revenue but if a team goes out in the first round it's not as big a sum as you'd think.

Totally agree, Bradford should be left to sort their own problems out, didn't see all this hand wringing when Wakey were in trouble. As Hudge says the rule clearly state that administration means loss of licence, so why not just strip them of it?

Your poor response and lack of a counter argument suggests that deep down you know I'm correct.

London are bankrolled by their owner. Although he's said that won't continue indefinitely.

The Bradford situation is a tricky one. The rules as they stand don't allow for a team to be automatically ejected from SL just for going into admin, and removing a side from the competition mid season creates all sorts of problems anyway. I can see why assistance has been provided to keep them going until the end of the season. It's how they're dealt with going forward that will be the real test. Despite what people think, they are far from certain to be playing in SL from 2013 onwards.

The rules do not state that administration means loss of licence, otherwise Wakey would not have been awarded one. The rules regarding administration were changed in the run-up to the last round of licence applications. Now the loss of licence is an optional penalty.