TBF, being £3.2m in debt with a further £450k loss to come, you can see why they'd want to change the subject to an accounting policy that FC have adopted for at least 6 years that impacts neither debt nor profitability.

And with consecutive league positions of 11th and 12th I can understand why Hull fans want to talk about accountancy!

I tell you what is against normal advice , being near to £4m in debt when you only turnover about £2.3m and losing £450,000pa.
When Parasol stop funding you will be halving your wage bill to break even

Rovers primary objective was to get into SL in the first place and stay there , to me regardless of the cost involved with the alternative not worth thinking about. With the downturn it is obvious to everyone including the directors that to manage the business and reduce debts then the long term future revolves around developing the local talent in this area. With a lot of expensive players coming off contract in 2010 next year is going to be very interesting.
The North stand development is critical in my opinion as supporters going through the gate do not cover all the costs . Corporate sponsorship must be increased , this will only take place when the stadium is developed to a suitable standard.
One option that Rovers could do and which has been adopted by other clubs is to not max out on the salary cap however this is a fine balancing act as our friends across the river have found out finishing 11TH & 12 TH .
Merchandising is another avenue which must be improved and I feel that the shop is far too small and apart from the new shirts old stock is still being sold, a missed opportunity for Xmas.
The introduction of Electronic turnstiles and the new membership scheme are all positive things that should be applauded .

Players are employees, not assets. Their contracts would become null and void if FC were to be liquidated, just like any other employee. The Administrator would have a hard time selling players that would become free agents if clubs just waited a few weeks. And even if they somehow managed to con some clubs into paying for a free resource, the valuations achieved would bear no relation to the figures given in the accounts.

Their value while the club is solvent is an asset, though. A club does not need to be in administration for this figure to become of interest. Kath has reputedly had the club up for sale on and off over the last few years - any buyer or investor would want to know the amount they could expect to get if any of the playing staff were transferred during their contracts.

So why do you think Hull include it?

More to the point why do they consistently go against their own accountants advice, why bother employing them if Hull fc know best.

Trying to get back on topic I find it strange that the publication of Rovers accounts has not been mentioned in the Hull Daily Mail or on Radio Humberside sports news. Has Hudge got to them? Was the subject raised on Sportstalk last night?

No mention of a/cs in Wednesday's Mail either , not heard sportstalk though