Big Dave T wrote:I still dont understand though how the rovers fans can make the assumption that gates will jump up significantly once this extension is built when you cant sell out the existing ground.

Mrs Barista wrote:Au contraire. Your chairman has been very clear that you can't continue to sustain losses of £450k a year and that gates of 10,000 are required. Rovers are in debt to the tune of £3m+ and therefore can't afford to fund getting to 10,000 gates themselves. They have therefore got a handout from the RFL (and the NHS) to get there. Not that this addresses the full £450,000 annual shortfall, obviously, but it's a start. Hope you lot recognise the RFL's generosity next time you're bleating about unfair disciplinary outcomes.

Mrs Barista wrote:cab man said "Build it and they will come". Seems a well thought-through business case to me.

Mrs Barista wrote:Au contraire. Your chairman has been very clear that you can't continue to sustain losses of £450k a year and that gates of 10,000 are required. Rovers are in debt to the tune of £3m+ and therefore can't afford to fund getting to 10,000 gates themselves. They have therefore got a handout from the RFL (and the NHS) to get there. Not that this addresses the full £450,000 annual shortfall, obviously, but it's a start. Hope you lot recognise the RFL's generosity next time you're bleating about unfair disciplinary outcomes.

Big Dave T wrote:I still dont understand though how the rovers fans can make the assumption that gates will jump up significantly once this extension is built when you cant sell out the existing ground.

General Zod. wrote:This is simply not true so stop talking bollox. Directors can be selective about which aspect of the club in which they choose to invest.

Big Dave T wrote:head getting further into the sand there

General Zod. wrote:WTF are you talking about.

You're obviously not a very bright lad. So do one because you're contributing zero to this thread and it's tiresome and boring trying to explain things to thick people like you who simply aren't bright enough to engage in this debate.

General Zod. wrote:That is total bollox. It's common sense to get funding from other available sources other than directors pockets.

At the end of the day you are "Hull SL Ltd" - a manufactured SL franchaise under the guise of a now defunct RL club, created with the aid of a free handout of £1M.