Not if the money was lent directly to SRLFC Ltd (as opposed to Red City), which presumably it was.

It's concerning that nobody decided to disclose this officially.

And that is the reason the Star has posted the story.

Like someone has said, the council are a key partner in the stadium project, so the money was probably to contribute towards solicitors fees, planning etc. People are probably looking too much into this and are taking it as another way to have a dig at the club!

You'll make an exception in this case?

i guess this is where the myler money went then?

A few more details from the Manchester Evening News: Neal Keeling/M.E.N wrote: 1. The club has until 2012 to pay back the money. It is understood part of the cash was used for day-to-day running of the club. 2. The council has refused to say specifically what the loan is for. 3. The loan is secured by directors' guarantees and a charge on the the existing Willows ground, plus some paintings held by the club. Quote 2. suggests quote 1. is a guess. Also... Neal Keeling/M.E.N wrote:The council's decision to build a new stadium will help the club to retain their Super League franchise... But the club will not be the only tenants if the 15,000-seat stadium is to be viable. Liberal Democrat councillor Mary Ferrer said: "I find it appalling that we can be lending money this way. It is a worrying situation if a loan of this size is required by the club and they are still planning to go to Barton." A council report says: "It is of primary importance to Salford council that the stadium is used outside of match days by organisations other than the rugby club. Not doing so, fails to provide an adequate return on the potential investment." http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... or_salford

A few more details from the Manchester Evening News: Neal Keeling/M.E.N wrote: 1. The club has until 2012 to pay back the money. It is understood part of the cash was used for day-to-day running of the club. 2. The council has refused to say specifically what the loan is for. 3. The loan is secured by directors' guarantees and a charge on the the existing Willows ground, plus some paintings held by the club. Quote 2. suggests quote 1. is a guess. Also... Neal Keeling/M.E.N wrote:The council's decision to build a new stadium will help the club to retain their Super League franchise... But the club will not be the only tenants if the 15,000-seat stadium is to be viable. Liberal Democrat councillor Mary Ferrer said: "I find it appalling that we can be lending money this way. It is a worrying situation if a loan of this size is required by the club and they are still planning to go to Barton." A council report says: "It is of primary importance to Salford council that the stadium is used outside of match days by organisations other than the rugby club. Not doing so, fails to provide an adequate return on the potential investment." http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... or_salford

I would think this money is an outstanding tax bill. If I remember correctly the HM Revenue and Customs tightened the rules regarding payment of money into off shore accounts. They also back dated monies owed. I don't think it is a coincidence that Trinty have problems and other clubs are reporting losses.

The Council can not lend money to Red City as the company no longer exists.

Given that the club haven't made a profit in many, many years there certainly won't be a corpration tax bill!

VAT is of course usually payable quarterly and the PAYE & NI deductions from staff & players wages will also be payable otherwise HMRC do get very shirty (see winding up order against Portsmouth etc.)

All in all, a bit concerning, if a) the club need that much for day to day operations and b) the only place they can raise it is the council

Can't see anything that suggests that the council is the only place the club could get a loan??

A two year loan of £350,000 with reliable assurances would've made a tody profit for any high street lender.

However I strongly suspect the council will charge less interest and will be more understanding/flexible if we need to delay payments so they seem like a better lender.

From the councils point of view the club now 'owe them one' so can try to ensure that they get usage of the stadium once it's built.

Don't see what the fuss is all about to be honest.

The only slight worry is that JAW and Howard Clague seem to be heading towards the bottom of their seemingly bottomless pockets, although even that isn't a huge shock considering the current financial climate.

Maye some of the idiots that frequent these parts should think about this when bleating about cost of tickets, lack of signings, etc.