The actual financial side of the redevelopment is fiendishly complicated with stand owning companies being set up and Leeds council being involved for various reasons almost all to do with Yorkshire and their existing debt burden and a desire to structure the new debt in a particular way plus get favourable interest rates.
But Leeds own the RL ground and are the only party putting any cash into it direct - this article in the Yorkshire Post gives details if you're really interested and suggests the amount Leeds are putting in up front figure is £5m which sounds about right:
FWIW the benefits of ground ownership are huge IF you can generate other revenue from it, like Leeds, Warrington and Saints can. On the other hand I doubt the other ground-owner in SL, Cas, generate that much in the way of non-gameday revenue so their benefits are less marked and they probably have some pretty chronic ongoing maintenance costs notwithstanding the size of the ground.
Lots of incorrect info on here about Leeds
The actual financial side of the redevelopment is fiendishly complicated with stand owning companies being set up and Leeds council being involved for various reasons almost all to do with Yorkshire and their existing debt burden and a desire to structure the new debt in a particular way plus get favourable interest rates.
But Leeds own the RL ground and are the only party putting any cash into it direct - this article in the Yorkshire Post gives details if you're really interested and suggests the amount Leeds are putting in up front figure is £5m which sounds about right:
FWIW the benefits of ground ownership are huge IF you can generate other revenue from it, like Leeds, Warrington and Saints can. On the other hand I doubt the other ground-owner in SL, Cas, generate that much in the way of non-gameday revenue so their benefits are less marked and they probably have some pretty chronic ongoing maintenance costs notwithstanding the size of the ground.
"Brian McDermott, with a wry smile, nods when asked if he remembers a specific incident which made him realise he was a prick. 'I do', he murmurs."
The question of KCom stadium ownership will be a hot potato if rumours regarding Allam shifting City for a quid after the parachute payments expire. Stadium Management Company loaded with debt and no doubt the football club also. Stand up Pearson’s mysterious partner.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29802 Location: West Yorkshire
It's an interesting one. Rovers don't own their ground and made £100k last year on events but that period included the Paul Heaton concert and obviously the sum was dwarfed by the loss of half a million on the rugby. Odd that they keep the revenue from events in a separate company with separate shareholdings. It's obviously good to generate income but only seems a money spinner to the same extent as putting 500 on pass sales.
As has been said already the real opportunity for us is to get 1-2k back on the gate and bigger commercial sponsorship.Maybe the supporters being advocates of what the club are trying to achieve could help.
Joined: Aug 01 2005 Posts: 5913 Location: Definately not in the Cuddle Crew
The reason FC are stagnating despite consecutive CC finals is quite frankly indifferent form
Over the last three years i have on a number of times built up games to my wife and kids, bought tickets, bought more gear, got a taxi into town so we can have a few dinks, food out Prinny Ave (or Clarendon as weve started to like). The excitement builds, we get in the KC, feels great to be there.................and FC are completely dire.
Happens too many times especially with games they seem to build up - so thats a loss against Saints coming up and KRs first win in ages too
Mrs Barista wrote:It's an interesting one. Rovers don't own their ground and made £100k last year on events but that period included the Paul Heaton concert and obviously the sum was dwarfed by the loss of half a million on the rugby. Odd that they keep the revenue from events in a separate company with separate shareholdings. It's obviously good to generate income but only seems a money spinner to the same extent as putting 500 on pass sales.
As has been said already the real opportunity for us is to get 1-2k back on the gate and bigger commercial sponsorship.Maybe the supporters being advocates of what the club are trying to achieve could help.
To be fair to the club on crowds I think the game as a whole has an issue, crowds are down across the league compared to what they were in say 2010. The club has improved its marketing massively over the last few years particularly on social media, and the team have lost one game at home all year, I can’t see what more they can do.
The problem is the general public have lost interest in RL, and I don’t think this format has delivered the crowds it has meant to. We face a summer of dead rubbers, we may not even leave 5th place at all and that doesn’t shift tickets. Even the derby may be a damp squib if Rovers are down and may as well rest players.
Now that of course that could still happen under a normal league structure, but with an easier run against lower ranker teams you’d still think we had a chance, against fellow top8 teams it becomes harder to win points and move up the table.
Even in years such as the last two where we have been top4 at the split I don’t recall crowds turning up in higher numbers. The format just hasnt excited the public.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29802 Location: West Yorkshire
UllFC wrote:To be fair to the club on crowds I think the game as a whole has an issue, crowds are down across the league compared to what they were in say 2010. The club has improved its marketing massively over the last few years particularly on social media, and the team have lost one game at home all year, I can’t see what more they can do.
The problem is the general public have lost interest in RL, and I don’t think this format has delivered the crowds it has meant to. We face a summer of dead rubbers, we may not even leave 5th place at all and that doesn’t shift tickets. Even the derby may be a damp squib if Rovers are down and may as well rest players.
Now that of course that could still happen under a normal league structure, but with an easier run against lower ranker teams you’d still think we had a chance, against fellow top8 teams it becomes harder to win points and move up the table.
Even in years such as the last two where we have been top4 at the split I don’t recall crowds turning up in higher numbers. The format just hasnt excited the public.
Completely agree it's a sport wide issue but not sure the format is entirely to blame. If the comp were decided by who finishes top with 1 up 1 down for relegation that would be worse on the dead rubber front with Saints champions and Widnes down and nothing else to play for - I actually don't mind this format. I agree the club's marketing is good and that's borne out in the merchandise sales. It seems like we're right up to the cap but other clubs with deeper benefactor pockets have bigger backroom staff numbers and money for marquee players.
Mild mannered Janitor wrote:Got to pick you up on a couple of things here. I'll use Leeds as an example.
The lack of our own Stadium - largely irrelevant to be honest. The maintenance cost / replacement cost alone make this more of a burden then a real asset.
Leeds Rhinos do not own Headingley and share it with the RU club. Its owned by YCCC.
Match day income usually correlated with bums on seats. Sadly, I am not sure what the missing FC fans want after 2 wembley wins, there are still around 2000 missing home fans from around 2010 / 2011 - when were were really poor and the recession had bitten hard.
Leeds have 4 large rooms which they use for corproate guests for meals / drinks pre & post game. Each of these room has approx 150-200 guests in. Work on the basis of £100 income per head (concervative est having seen personally how much some will then plough behind the bar / raffles / draws etc). There is an additional £60k per game.
Leeds also have a significant sponsor in the Leeds Building Society as well as a wealthy owner.
Given our merchanide sales are what they are, I am supprised you think we lack in non matchday income. So good are Hull at Generating sales of this nature, Leeds actually head hunter their commercial retain manager a few years ago (not sure if he is still there?)
Large profile sponsor, more corporate tables and more fans coming back throught the turnstyles. Thats the answer.
As has been said, leeds RL owned all of the headingley site and rented the cricket side out to Yorkshire CCC until a few years back when they sold that side but retain ownership of the rugby side. I think caddick also owns the RU side so presume they're not paying rent but it could be a source of income from them
I agree that a stadium comes with upkeep and running costs but with a modern stadium these won't be excessive plus you then get the opportunity to sell the use of these facilities 365 days (and nights) a year rather than 13 Friday nights/Sunday afternoons and have nothing for the rest of the time. A well run, modern stadium with multiple function rooms should be making a tidy profit on non match days.
Which brings me back to my other point about match day income, which we make very little from. I do think the corporate side makes us a reasonable amount (and it's good to see that this has taken off again after it fell away completely under rule/hetherington) but as for the rest of it, we make virtually nothing from food and drink sales. Add in the £1/2m a year or so cost of stadium usage and I have to disagree with your views. Yes, we do OK, but our earning (and profit) potential is way below the likes of saints, wire and Leeds even though our fan base isn;t much different
Armavinit wrote:My info says Rhinos aren’t paying for the redevelopment, YCCC and Leeds Council funding it with Euro/Lottery money??? Caddick’s building company doing the work though. I believe there was an article in the Yorkshire Post when the development was announced.
I'm pretty sure leeds are borrowing several £ millions to fund the rebuilding costs
Armavinit wrote:You state Pearson bought the club ( using his and others money) please explain, who this other generous benefactor is.
An investor is not a benefactor, you need to understand the very significant difference between the two (I actually mentioned a benefactor in my comment and gave you a big clue). Pearson did not have enough of his own money or more accurately did not want to buy the club solely with his money even IF he indeed had that which I do not believe he did given his previous forays. Either way he didn't buy the club on his own and the other investor/s nor Pearson are benefactors, they are in it to make money, hence the word INVESTOR, the same as the Hetherington's were/are. HTH
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
