ANTWERP RED wrote:1 major diffrence between hull and salford were in greater manchester where were not the no1 sport were next o the city of manchester the capital of the north we have to compete with a city thats got thousands of things to do of a weekend. unlike hull . you come from a town where there arent much things to compete with rugby league along with cas & wakefield It,ll be the same in 2-3 years excuses why none of your grounds have beenrebuilt.

ANTWERP RED wrote:no progress AGAIN on your stadium ? how do you get away with it? its a disgrace.

RFL blurb from 08 wrote:This is the club’s second year in Super League and it is showing strong potential. The club has invested significantly in improving its facilities, much of which is behind the scenes. Further significant developments are planned. This commendable investment has required, and will continue to require, strong financial management. The club’s commercial plan is well thought through and logical and its community work is achieving results. The assessment of the club’s player performance strategy would have been enhanced by the submission of further evidence, particularly with Academy Reserves but there is a growing infrastructure since promotion to Super League.

SirStan wrote:Given the fact that we were all lead to believe that grading was being scrapped, can anyone confirm that the criteria applied was the same as previous? I'd like to know where we picked up additional point(s) to upgrade.

Anakin Skywalker wrote:We can count out £4M+ turnover