Mrs Barista wrote:Hull have had more income over the last few years but have also had much high outgoings including a players wage bill of £1.6m vs one of £0.4m.
I agree that neither club is in a brilliant state financially but the size of the loss Rovers made in 2007 is pretty worrying considering the playing roster that season when Paul Cooke and Mick Vella were pretty much the only big names. The payroll costs will have increased in 2008 with Newton, Galea, Crossman, Jake Webster, paying James Webster for a full season and Dobson for half - this isn't speculation as the club are on the record that they were much nearer the salary cap in 08 than 07. Crossland has also said you've increased youth development expenditure so that's an extra drain on resources. The point is that unless something startling has happened to Rovers business model it's unlikely that 2008 accounts will show a much improved position so the debt figures could well increase.
I agree that FC's level of debt will increase with the new training centre, but depending on how any ground developments at Rovers are funded, so will theirs.
Now the accounts are finally available and a bit grim, I would challenge Hudgell's claim dismissing people speculating about Rovers finances as mischief-makers.
Some fair and valid points there.
Should the long term liabilities at be mostly made up of directors loans from their 'wealthy backers' as i am lead to beleive they are then the accounts, though not ideal, are not as grim as they appear and are indeed much more healthier than the majority of S/L clubs.
Also worth noting that these accounts are for a 15 month accounting period with the extra three months (sep,oct & nov) being months where income would have been virtually non-existant. So again this will have adversely impacted on the profitablility of the company.
Next years accounts will certainly make interesting reading
Now any chance of a cuppa
