Quote ="Mrs Barista"You're right, it depends on the definition of success. But when Framing the future was written I doubt having a top flight populated with M62 clubs some of which still have gates of 3k and big cuts in Sky funding was a target. The game has contracted since then geographically IMO - no Cumbria or London in the top flight for example and revenues in a downward spiral. The choice is to continue to contract with the comfort blanket that part time/semi amateur preserves sentiment and tradition, or push the boundaries - loads of options here - The Hundred type iseas,.mergers and geographic expansion, ruthless future focus centred on ideas that the under 30s find appealing. Pandering to dinosaurs of my age group who are club centric will sustain the sport at a diminishing level of quality and resource for a period of time and as you imply, we should maybe be satisfied with that. But we're so accustomed to insular thinking, preserving our tiny corridor of familiar and deriving comfort from internal fights and division we are hamstrung in imagining a better future for the sport itself. Bit like the UK ">tbh.'" Aye, no plan survives contact with the next quarter century. But I take your points. Let’s try to imagine something better. What is worth preserving and what do we want that is different? What, fundamentally, is pro rugby league? A game played by professional athletes in front of paying spectators - yep. But also a part of the communities that sustain it and that it represents, imo. Being both selfless in terms of setting aside club-centricity and ruthless in terms of thinking about what could actually work, what would you make your top priorities (and by extension what are we willing to sacrifice or at least compromise on) and what would be your major approaches to achieving them? I shall have a think on mine too. icon_smile.gif" alt="icon_smile.gif" title="Smile" />

Quote ="Mrs Barista"You're right, it depends on the definition of success. But when Framing the future was written I doubt having a top flight populated with M62 clubs some of which still have gates of 3k and big cuts in Sky funding was a target. The game has contracted since then geographically IMO - no Cumbria or London in the top flight for example and revenues in a downward spiral. The choice is to continue to contract with the comfort blanket that part time/semi amateur preserves sentiment and tradition, or push the boundaries - loads of options here - The Hundred type iseas,.mergers and geographic expansion, ruthless future focus centred on ideas that the under 30s find appealing. Pandering to dinosaurs of my age group who are club centric will sustain the sport at a diminishing level of quality and resource for a period of time and as you imply, we should maybe be satisfied with that. But we're so accustomed to insular thinking, preserving our tiny corridor of familiar and deriving comfort from internal fights and division we are hamstrung in imagining a better future for the sport itself. Bit like the UK ">tbh.'" Aye, no plan survives contact with the next quarter century. But I take your points. Let’s try to imagine something better. What is worth preserving and what do we want that is different? What, fundamentally, is pro rugby league? A game played by professional athletes in front of paying spectators - yep. But also a part of the communities that sustain it and that it represents, imo. Being both selfless in terms of setting aside club-centricity and ruthless in terms of thinking about what could actually work, what would you make your top priorities (and by extension what are we willing to sacrifice or at least compromise on) and what would be your major approaches to achieving them? I shall have a think on mine too. icon_smile.gif" alt="icon_smile.gif" title="Smile" />

No, me either now. I don’t think you’re missing much.



The only striking change I noticed was ‘other borrowing’ which increased by roughly £1 million. I guess that might be the emergency govt loan. But it is only a guess, because I don’t have any expertise in this area and even if I did, I’ve a suspicion that there’s not enough detail to say anything very definitive.



One thing I find curious (not meaningful, just an oddity) is how precisely the intangible assets are valued. I presume this is the player registrations and maybe the estimated value of a place in super league - if you wanted to transfer all the assets to a new entity, as a going concern, how much you’d be able to realise for creditors and shareholders of Hull FC. Last year it was £1,777,649 and now it is £1,650,880. Like somebody has really worked it out. Surely it is a bit more like valuing a house, and you’d just round off to the nearest £1000 or £5000. Or maybe they started with a round number years ago and there’s some sort of adjustment they apply each year. Appreciation and amortisation algorithms… possibly. Adopting a rigorous approach to updating a purely notional valuation is… I dunno, there’s a kind of sweetly futile conscientiousness to it.

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"Nah, Hull FC 2011 Ltd is the vehicle Pearson used to acquire the club. It doesn't do much as far as I can tell apart from incur a bit of interest or something each year. All the trade is in Hull Super League Ltd. Things I've noticed from a quick glance (and I'm not a Hull fan) - 1. The club continues to use very dubious accounting policies about player valuations which totally prop up the Balance Sheet but are not in line with accounting standards and would result in qualified accounts if these needed auditing. 2. The other borrowings in long term creditors we can be pretty certain is the RFL-administered government loan. Hull got around £1m to £1.3m, similar to other clubs (Leeds as an example got exactly £1.25m). 3. Check out note 7. The fall in deferred income from £672k to £276k is likely to relate to people paying for season tickets or sponsorship before the end of November for the following season. It looks like these only went on sale in December last year which presumably is rather later than in previous years which will explain most of the fall, hopefully, rather than it being a permanent reduction in ticket holders. 4. Club looks to have essentially broken even on a net profit level for the year but without even a summary P&L and notes or an understanding of what the aim of the business is (most RL clubs aren't really run to make money but one without a sugar daddy like this probably is) and of what, if anything, senior management take out as remuneration it's really hard to understand what is actually going ">on.'" 1 - Yes, although a. club have adopted this approach since pre AP's tenure and b.no impact on the P&L. 2. Agreed, and explains partially increase in cash. 3. Plus more re fans paying by DD than upfront now. 4. Made a profit.

Quote ="The Ghost of '99"Nah, Hull FC 2011 Ltd is the vehicle Pearson used to acquire the club. It doesn't do much as far as I can tell apart from incur a bit of interest or something each year. All the trade is in Hull Super League Ltd. Things I've noticed from a quick glance (and I'm not a Hull fan) - 1. The club continues to use very dubious accounting policies about player valuations which totally prop up the Balance Sheet but are not in line with accounting standards and would result in qualified accounts if these needed auditing. 2. The other borrowings in long term creditors we can be pretty certain is the RFL-administered government loan. Hull got around £1m to £1.3m, similar to other clubs (Leeds as an example got exactly £1.25m). 3. Check out note 7. The fall in deferred income from £672k to £276k is likely to relate to people paying for season tickets or sponsorship before the end of November for the following season. It looks like these only went on sale in December last year which presumably is rather later than in previous years which will explain most of the fall, hopefully, rather than it being a permanent reduction in ticket holders. 4. Club looks to have essentially broken even on a net profit level for the year but without even a summary P&L and notes or an understanding of what the aim of the business is (most RL clubs aren't really run to make money but one without a sugar daddy like this probably is) and of what, if anything, senior management take out as remuneration it's really hard to understand what is actually going ">on.'" 1 - Yes, although a. club have adopted this approach since pre AP's tenure and b.no impact on the P&L. 2. Agreed, and explains partially increase in cash. 3. Plus more re fans paying by DD than upfront now. 4. Made a profit.

https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/sta">https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/status/1431913328784334851?s=19">https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/sta ... 34851?s=19 Degsy has his say.

https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/sta">https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/status/1431913328784334851?s=19">https://twitter.com/GaryCarter_1979/sta ... 34851?s=19 Degsy has his say.

So did we make a profit last season or sneaky accounting?