When FC owed £2.4m in 2004, you didn't hear any bleating about the net liabilities number being £600k, did you? What a laugh!

Seriously, if FC directors then, or KR's directors now, wanted their cash back tomorrow, there would be no club. Fortunately for Rovers Hudgell has said that the directors have "underwritten" the financial position, which presumably means that in the event of them wanting out they'd just waive the loans. And fortunately for FC we've got a sustainable business model that's reduced the debt number each year so our reliance on directors is reducing. Everybody wins.

I can feel the Christmas spirit wearing off a bit now, mind.

But is the £2.2 million owed in the next 12 months owed just to the 'directors' or is it to other people. Surely if it's mainly owed to others that's even more loss to the directors?

No way of telling. Although it does say that there is £364,000 of the creditors for which security has been given. I think you could guess that there aren't many banks that would loan hundreds of thousands without security in which case you'd imagine most would be owed to directors, plus usual trading creditors, accruals, HMRC etc.

The "within 12 months" figure merely relates to any debt which isn't structured over a longer period. I presume any director's loand are repayable on demand. Does anyone know if interest is being paid on the director's loans?

It's entirely factual. Total liabilities are a shade over £3m - this money is still owed regardless of how much is balanced out by assets. That would only make a difference if those assets were converted to cash and used to pay off the debt.

As I've said before the only people that seem to 'stress' about Rovers accounts are FC fans!
If we go tits up then so be it but we've had fun on the way.
Perhaps it is the fun that we have had in the recent derbys that have hurt many FC fans more than we know!

Maybe having a 1.6 million bail out package was the good business start FC needed as apposed to the CVA Rovers had.

Does anyone know if the Rugby League still own shares at Hull?

Roll on the season when FC fans can focus on pitch-side matters!

I'm far from stressed about them. Amused, possibly.


Hi Neil.


It wasn't £1.6m, but facts don't seem to trouble you unduly.


Yes - anyone who was paying attention several years ago. They don't - all bought back by our board, thanks.

Think your right £1m from rfl & £900k from council for boulevard iirc

I think it was £1.2m from the RFL and £750k from HCC.

Not sure of rfl money but definitely think it was £900k for the boulevard which they said hull would have to pay back if they ever went back

Whatever the figures involved, it was a leg up which we never had so it's hardly suprising we owe a few quid while getting established is it.

There are 2 parts to a balance sheet, net assets and shareholders funds, which have to balance. You don't just adjust the P&L reserves (in the shareholders funds section) with no impact on net assets.

Take Rovers 2008 accounts. Loss of 447,462, negative movement on P&L Reserves, plus a £250 increase in Share capital
The turnstile investment (whatever that is) will be capitalised on the balance sheet as a fixed asset and again will have no impact on the P&L account or the level of current liabilities. It is purely a balance sheet item - i.e. reduce cash at bank, increase fixed assets.'"