Page 1 of 1

Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:32 pm
by southportcdm
The problems at Wigan Athletic are very sad for all concerned and obviously I have great sympathy for anybody who has lost their job. I also wish them all the best with the decision on the twelve point deduction.

As a Warriors fan rather than a football fan I can't decide if it would be better for the Warriors if the lactics were in the championship, league one or if it makes no difference. I don't want this to become an anti or pro football argument so from just a Warriors point of view, what do you all think?

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2020 9:31 pm
by josie andrews
Wigan Athletic: Former owner Au Yeung Wai Kay meets club administrator

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53616070

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:30 am
by the pieman
southportcdm wrote: Fri Jul 31, 2020 6:32 pm The problems at Wigan Athletic are very sad for all concerned and obviously I have great sympathy for anybody who has lost their job. I also wish them all the best with the decision on the twelve point deduction.

As a Warriors fan rather than a football fan I can't decide if it would be better for the Warriors if the lactics were in the championship, league one or if it makes no difference. I don't want this to become an anti or pro football argument so from just a Warriors point of view, what do you all think?
I dont think it makes any difference to be honest.

Wigan RL have a tenancy agreement in place at the DW for x no of years, which will be at an agreed price (poss subject to inflation etc). As long as Wigan RL honour that, and meet the terms of that agreement, then nothing should change.

However, if a new owner comes into the Latics (assuming its not IL) and wants to renegotiate those terms, then that is up to Wigan RL to decide if they want to renegotiate. I could only see a new owner asking for more money as they need to cover off the purchase, losses etc that the Latics are making, and with significantly less revenue in a lower division, should the relegation appeal fail.

As the article Josie attached alludes to, a £6m wage bill is hefty, especially if the relegation is confirmed and subsequently TV revenues etc will also fall, so any new owner will be automatically looking to reduce their cost base and / or trying to increases revenues from other sources i.e. renegotiate with Wigan RL, on the basis that they will own the ground.

With football and team sports generally, and where they are different to everyday life is that the club can command a fee for a player to reduce its wage bill, although the buying club is now in a strong position as they know they need to sell, so that fee is likely to be reduced over what they may have received if they didnt need to sell.

So, as i see it, nothing changes in the short term. Longer term, there may be some negotiations around the terms of the tenancy agreement (assuming the new owner purchases the stadium), but that can work both ways.

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:52 am
by Tricky Dicky1
It makes a huge difference.

Wigan Warriors lease runs out in 2025.

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 10:59 am
by the pieman
Tricky Dicky1 wrote: Mon Aug 03, 2020 9:52 am It makes a huge difference.

Wigan Warriors lease runs out in 2025.
sure it was 50 year lease when it was signed, but could be wrong

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 11:03 am
by pedro
its 2025 but we can extend to 2050 if we want its our choice not theirs

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 11:32 am
by the pieman
pedro wrote: Mon Aug 03, 2020 11:03 am its 2025 but we can extend to 2050 if we want its our choice not theirs
so unless IL has some magic beans at his disposal, i cant see anything other than extending to 2050 at this point in time.

Re: Best for the Warriors?

Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2020 12:36 pm
by jaws1
Thought that we had already renewed the lease from the first Chinese buyers?