WiganWarriorsFans.com

the stains have issued a statement about morrisons objecyions on their website.here are some of the highlights


Morrisons’ Misstatement: St Helens Rugby League Club is a commercial success
and should be reinvesting in its existing stadium.

Fact: Despite its phenomenal rugby success and a highly professional management,
St Helens have posted material operational losses in each of the last 10 years.
This is almost entirely due to the major limitations place on commercial
performance and opportunities by the lack of modern facilities at Knowsley Road.
There are no profits to reinvest in the stadium, only losses to fund.


Morrisons’ Misstatement: The Club has an owner who is not investing anything
in the Club.
Fact: The Chairman has personally funded the losses of the Club for each of the
last seven years and continues to do so. This is in addition to him rescuing the
Club from Administration in 2002. The Club would not trade without this
financial support, which has been principally necessitated by the commercial
limitations placed on the Club by the lack of facilities at Knowsley Road. A
major redevelopment of Knowsley Road is a non-financeable proposition. A new
stadium is the only practicable option to ensure the commercial future of the
Club which cannot continue to be dependant on the financial support of an
individual or individuals.


makes interesting reading doesnt it

just an afterthaught. how can a proffesional management team make a loss 10 years running?

you cant blame a stadium for that, they dont have enough fans, simple as.

over the hill wrote:the stains have issued a statement about morrisons objecyions on their website.here are some of the highlights

Oh goody! Lets take a look, shall we?

Morrisons’ Misstatement: St Helens Rugby League Club is a commercial success and should be reinvesting in its existing stadium.

Fact: Despite its phenomenal rugby success and a highly professional management, St Helens have posted material operational losses in each of the last 10 years.

Good start: a highly professional management that's made losses for the last 10 years. Is this some new definition of good management that banks are unaware of? Elsewhere it's called spending more than ones income, and is not generally recommended in business school classes.

This is almost entirely due to the major limitations place on commercial performance and opportunities by the lack of modern facilities at Knowsley Road.

No, it's because you don't have enough fans. Yours is the only club in SL that showed a DROP in attendances last year. What makes you think they'll start appearing out of the woodwork if you get a new ground?

Morrisons’ Misstatement: The Club has an owner who is not investing anything in the Club.
Fact: The Chairman has personally funded the losses of the Club for each of the last seven years and continues to do so. This is in addition to him rescuing the Club from Administration in 2002. The Club would not trade without this financial support, which has been principally necessitated by the commercial limitations placed on the Club by the lack of facilities at Knowsley Road.

Which means it simply isn't being run properly. If you're not getting the income, don't spend it.
Not to mention your sponsors either dumping you or going bust...not only are you incompetently run, so are the companies you associate with.

A major redevelopment of Knowsley Road is a non-financeable proposition. A new stadium is the only practicable option to ensure the commercial future of the Club which cannot continue to be dependant on the financial support of an
individual or individuals.

And a sloppy organisation like that thinks they deserve a SL franchise?

makes interesting reading doesnt it

It does.
I wonder how the RFL will decide between them and the other C licence clubs?

8,000 on, on Saturday! Pathetic!!!!!!


why have a new stadia?

how can a proffesional management team make a loss 10 years running?

If you post a loss, you don't pay tax (at least that's how I understand it).
I suspect this may be a "paper loss" as opposed to a genuine "money falling out of the door" loss. It's going to be all wrapped up with paying players via off-shore banks, the huge depreciation on the stadium (which let's face it, is a dump of the highest order), as well as their zero marketing ability surrounded by two relatively famous wendy-ball teams.

It's simply more evidence of how they've managed to avoid getting stung by salary-cap infringements whilst our bean-counters are still using abacuses and double-entry paper.

Still, glee abounds - I think I'll start shopping at the Morrisons up the road instead of the Sainsburys on the way home from work :devi:

Sts need a new stadium let them have it ,if they have the funds for it

over the hill wrote: Morrisons’ Misstatement: The Club has an owner who is not investing anything
in the Club.
Fact: The Chairman has personally funded the losses of the Club for each of the
last seven years and continues to do so. This is in addition to him rescuing the
Club from Administration in 2002.

I can't remember, but were st helens docked any points for being in administration in 2002 or 2003? They should have been if this was true!

rescue it says means stoped them going in to receivership ,no diffrence to wat whelan did 4 us

Do not know about anybody else but I do not care for the Saints Chairmnan. He looks shifty. They make me chuckle though in terms of how they think big companies are going to bow down to them.