Amazing what you hear at AA meetings

Of course the directors aren't going to write off the loans and why should they? But it has to be better to owe money to people who have the best interests of the club at heart rather than an outside commercial organisation driven by the need to make profits and subject to other pressures who could choose to call in the loans at any time.

Clearly there is not a lot of money kicking around in RL at the moment. It would be great if all (and I really do mean ALL) SL clubs could be profitable and debt free but its not going to happen.

Is it true the council paid for the new pitch at caravan park then?

It is better to owe money to directors rather than financial institutions as a director is much less likely to recall the loans until they are able to repay them and these loans will not have many of the covenants that banks impose. Having said that I am not aware where rovers debt lies, chairman / banks? But the banks do not lend large sums without seeing evidence of future cashflows that will enable its repayment, especially in light of the economic conditions over the last couple of years. Similarily a business man would not unless he was prepared to write some off over time.

I admit the losses posted do not look good on paper but these have to be viewed in context. I might have to take the plunge and order the last few financial statements unless anyone has them? I find it amusing that most fans (both fc and rovers) have now turned into financial experts, some with educated opinions, most with not.

I think hudgell has done a great job so far and achieved a hell of alot, only rovers fans will appreciate this as we see it week in week out. He has achieved the last 3yr business plan (whether it was to budget or not i dont know but it is very possible they forecast making losses) and now rovers are entering a phase wher the business has to and has been re written with a different stratgey. These losses are magnified in hull with the intense fan and media scrutiny which both clubs receieve in every aspect. I think he's right to lobby for what funding is available, who wouldn't, and the vision to turn the area into a real community centre is admirable and is something i think the area needs and would be good for many people over many years. However some comments recently in too quick succession maybe could come across not as intended but the intention is correct in my opinion.

I for one cannot wait for the rugby as this topic is fuelled by the fact there isn't anything else to debate at the moment

Seems to me that the nudger believes that improved facilities would see a 25% increase in the support base and is pinning the existence of teh club on this assumption. Is there any evidence to suggest this is likely? Have the dobbins ever averaged over 10k before? (genuine question, I don't know). You've already seen a 500%+ increase in your average gates in the last 5 years so are there really any rovers fans who don't go to games when teh club are their most successful in over 20 years? Whilst Hull have seen an increase since the move to the KC, the biggest rise has been since rovers were promoted, and crowds now are only where tehy were at teh Boulevard in the early 80's. Although crowds are generally up in SL, I don't think any club is averaging more than they have at times in the past

It is apparent the directors of Hull SL are taking back their loans over a period of time and have been doing for some time. This means that the club must keep up the financial returns for the next six years or so.You have to hope they have as you put it "the best interest of the club at heart" then you should be OK. I doubt it!

You're right! I guess you'd be a bit of an expert on civil law, ex-Councillor Webster. I believe unlawful discrimination under the terms the Disability Discrimination Act would also be covered by civil law?

rlhttp://www.choicesandrights.org.uk/webdocs/docs/pdf/press_release_final.pdfrl

I think road rage, thoughhttp://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-15420044.htmlrl

is a criminal offence?

People who lend money in "wanting it paying back at a reasonable rate of return and over an affordable period" shocker.

What makes you doubt Hull FC's shareholder's intentions?

You've been keeping your powder dry.



There isn't even any evidence that your assessment is accurate. The RFL and fans generally want better facilities. See Wakey and Salford's efforts to build new stadia. Look at the upturn in support after Hull's move to the KC. Aim high (especially if you can persuade someone else to help foot the bill), but have a plan B (ie cutting costs).



Setting aside the franchise criterion and trying look at your question dispassionately - do Rovers need the new the North Stand?
Certainly better facilities would be very desirable, but the issue of capacity is valid. Will better facilities bring in more fans rather than just making the existing ones more comfortable? I can't see a massive upturn in away support as it is the journey which is a turn off for many I suspect. Certainly there is a shortage of available covered seating with an unobstructed view. The effect of the new east stand extension will be interesting, but won't be very informative in that respect. There is just no way of knowing without building it.

To put the losses into a different context. Rovers spend near the cap. Knock £200k of the wage bill and they'd still be competitive. If you can then get just £30 more from each existing, regularly-attending fan each year (about 60p/week), you are at break-even. There is potential to improve the merchandizing and retail side of things. If trimming the squad budget for a couple of years to invest in the business, as helpful Hull fans have selflessly suggested, that'd be fine by me. Difficult to balance on a 3 year license, but it used to be one year at a time, so can't complain. Self-funding major stadium improvements is always going to be a big ask without a strong commercial case, but if everybody else finds 'partners' Rovers need to too.

Were rovers near the cap last year? There have been contract increases for a number of players, 3 new players in on lower end contracts plus clinton's imminent arrival on a fair wedge. That all in must be £250k ish. Do you think the players who have left were on that much?