fcimp wrote:Feel free to grab a quote from me saying that 4 and a half years ago.
Although, i think it's a fair assessment to say that a club who is millions in debt, cannot post a profit and don't look like they will anytime soon isn't beyond going bust. Let's face facts, all these benefactors/creditors won't continually throw good money after bad, at the moment all you're doing is keeping the wolves from the door. The only way you will truly survive is if you are lucky enough to find someone who will buy the club and pay off all the debt.
Our assumption is that much of the debt is to directors, which makes a big difference. It is true that we don't post profits and that it would be much better if we were self-sustaining. However, our situation is far from unusual and if we apply your logic across all clubs, you are describing the end of RL as a full-time professional sport in the UK - not just Rovers' demise.
Someone clearing the debt wouldn't fundamentally change anything either, it'd just re-set the clock. Rovers are one of several loss making clubs trying to become more sustainable by improving/replacing their ground. Salford, Castleford and Saints are amongst the others. This is a model that has worked for Warrington and Hull - imitation is the most genuine form of flattery.
One point for optimism is that a less ambitious board could probably get close to break-even. The last reported losses were £300k. A cheaper coach and two or three fewer top earners would make a big dent in that. A downturn in expectations might effect gates and merchandise, but we'd still be able to compete
in SL, if not
for it. As long as it is benefactors rather than banks underwriting the ambition, I don't share your 'concerns'.
