The club got 100k for Wilson which put into perspective gets you a Ryan Brierley for 1 year.

Quote ="JohnQ"The club got 100k for Wilson which put into perspective gets you a Ryan Brierley for 1 year.'" /> This. Hence no one wanting to take him, Leigh paid a nominal amount for his services for 5 games. /> He's been offered a payout by Toronto but wants considerably more.

Quote ="JohnQ"The club got 100k for Wilson which put into perspective gets you a Ryan Brierley for 1 year.'" /> This. Hence no one wanting to take him, Leigh paid a nominal amount for his services for 5 games. /> He's been offered a payout by Toronto but wants considerably more.

Quote ="paulwalker71"All of which seems fair comment. It shows that Beaumont has hopefully learned his lessons from his last tilt at SL. /> It does make me wonder what's happened to the money that has 'rolled in' for us this year? I'm pretty sure Chalmers didn't budget for the Cup run, including a home game against Leeds, nor for Huddersfield to give us £100K for one of our Academy players. /> And yet we don't seem to be giving John Kear 'more budget to play with'. It suggests either we are not actually ahead of budget (the extra money is actually just covering losses somewhere in the balance sheet) or we are banking the money for possibly making a big push for promotion next year.'" /> I think the difference between this year and previous ones is the owner realises its highly unlikely we would make a serious push for SL regardless of any level of investment. I understand folk will want us to "spend" the money from the Wilson transfer but in a way we have as we have brought in Roche who I would expect would be on more wages than the younger exiting player. /> Reality is, just as an example we could be spending something like £600k on the cap (purely made up figure) and commit to another £100k for rest of season... if the benefit of this is securing an extra place or twon the league but that only benefits us to the tune of £50k why would you do it? Instead you'd pocket it, and invest next year when its more likely we will need a clear out (there are plenty of players who are just not value for money or doing a job at the level we need) and can have a good go at promotion without a big spending Toronto in our way, surely?

Quote ="paulwalker71"All of which seems fair comment. It shows that Beaumont has hopefully learned his lessons from his last tilt at SL. /> It does make me wonder what's happened to the money that has 'rolled in' for us this year? I'm pretty sure Chalmers didn't budget for the Cup run, including a home game against Leeds, nor for Huddersfield to give us £100K for one of our Academy players. /> And yet we don't seem to be giving John Kear 'more budget to play with'. It suggests either we are not actually ahead of budget (the extra money is actually just covering losses somewhere in the balance sheet) or we are banking the money for possibly making a big push for promotion next year.'" /> I think the difference between this year and previous ones is the owner realises its highly unlikely we would make a serious push for SL regardless of any level of investment. I understand folk will want us to "spend" the money from the Wilson transfer but in a way we have as we have brought in Roche who I would expect would be on more wages than the younger exiting player. /> Reality is, just as an example we could be spending something like £600k on the cap (purely made up figure) and commit to another £100k for rest of season... if the benefit of this is securing an extra place or twon the league but that only benefits us to the tune of £50k why would you do it? Instead you'd pocket it, and invest next year when its more likely we will need a clear out (there are plenty of players who are just not value for money or doing a job at the level we need) and can have a good go at promotion without a big spending Toronto in our way, surely?

I think we all understand the idea of "investing" in just about any sport is mainly about gifting money to your favourite club, but I wonder if there is a tax difference?



If you wish to [igive[/i the club n£ per annum it's no different from buying super (extra super?) expensive gifts for someone out of your own, tax paid, income, but if you say it's an [iinvestment[/i, no matter how wild, then it's not a gift but a business deal and would that not convey any tax advantage?