Re: Please Explain : Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:36 pm  

Hedgehog King wrote:

Agreeing to pay the Crusaders' wages for November. Not to forget that Crusaders are being allowed to sign players whilst Batley are not.

The RFL aren't paying crusaders players wages you idiot, They have just given them the money the RFL owe Crusaders from TV revenue a month early etc.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:42 am  

captain blackbeard wrote:

I don't know how you Crusaders fans put up with these 'retards' mostly from Yorkshire. They really are becoming very tedious with the 'Barrow and Batley should be in Super League' CRAP! Why should Blackpool be in exactly? In fact, don't answer!

Harlequins,Crusaders and Catalans. You're all doing a good job so please don't let the same old goats dribble affect your judgment on what the average fan thinks. Well from Warrington anyway. None of the teams who the moaners would like in your place should be allowed any where the Super League. After hundreds of years of existence there is simply no desire in there local areas for a rugby team. SIMPLE AS THAT

SIMPLE AS YOU SIR ARE A TWIT

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:48 am  

tb wrote:

As someone said on another forum

There's nothing like RL Fans ability to take 2, add another imaginary 2, come up with 76 as an answer and then offer it as evidence of some RLF conspiracy.

and tb as an above average intelligence poster you should know in your head if not your heart statisticst/numbers are a load of bull where the rfl are involved anyway

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:06 am  

Crufan94 wrote:

The RFL aren't paying crusaders players wages you idiot, They have just given them the money the RFL owe Crusaders from TV revenue a month early etc.

Good plan can I have the money I'm owed a month early... its nearly Christmas and I do have presents to buy.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 10:55 am  

Crufan94 wrote:

Blackpool could not come up with viable financial plans for the future.
Crusaders could. Ergo sadly Blackpool got kicked out while Crusaders remain
Hopefully The pamnthers can find a new financial backer and be reinstated back to the leagues

Is this the same plan they used when they moved to Wrexham.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:17 am  

Crufan94 wrote:

The RFL aren't paying crusaders players wages you idiot, They have just given them the money the RFL owe Crusaders from TV revenue a month early etc.

I'm no idiot fellow, I have a degree in Economics. I understand what "book value", "net present value" and "internal rate of return" mean but I doubt you do. Advancing money ahead of when it is earned is effectively giving money away. It is generally called "a loan" for which interest payments are usually expected.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:44 am  

If it is a loan it is not 'giving money away' , anyway as far as we know the RFL is advancing money to the club from Sky as each club will get at some point. The way the situation with the Crusaders differs from Blackpool and Batley is that the two don't have the potential to pay back such sums of money through normal expected trading, I would have thought this might have some baring on the club coming to an agreement with the RFL and HMRC about transfer embargo/administration as Batley and Blackpool unfortunately cannot given their relative economic value. I may be wrong , I wait to see and hear what the RFL and the club has to say next week. The RFL need to give a definitive answer on where we all stand quickly.

The club has been crippled by the debt accrued by Samuel and the previous club in Bridgend, in Wrexham the club seems to have faired well in its first year. It shouldnt be paying for someone elses mistakes.

The players signed by the Crusaders were also signed before the club went into administration , they have not signed anyone since.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:53 am  

cardiffcrusaderrob wrote:

If it is a loan it is not 'giving money away'

It is when no interest is requested.

The players signed by the Crusaders were also signed before the club went into administration , they have not signed anyone since.

No, but Batley haven't entered administration at all and still got blocked.

edit: and I understand that whilst Blackpool don't have the cash; Batley do and there is no reason why they should have been blocked.

[tb]

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:34 pm  

Hedgehog King wrote: It is when no interest is requested. No, but Batley haven't entered administration at all and still got blocked. edit: and I understand that whilst Blackpool don't have the cash; Batley do and there is no reason why they should have been blocked. Is this a reference to this? Because if it is, you should stop boasting about your economics degree and try and get some basic education in English comprehension.

Hedgehog King wrote: It is when no interest is requested. No, but Batley haven't entered administration at all and still got blocked. edit: and I understand that whilst Blackpool don't have the cash; Batley do and there is no reason why they should have been blocked. Is this a reference to this? Because if it is, you should stop boasting about your economics degree and try and get some basic education in English comprehension.

Re: Please Explain : Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:57 pm  

tb wrote: Is this a reference to this? Because if it is, you should stop boasting about your economics degree and try and get some basic education in English comprehension. If you could point out where the Batley statement contradicts what I said that would help. Ta.

tb wrote: Is this a reference to this? Because if it is, you should stop boasting about your economics degree and try and get some basic education in English comprehension. If you could point out where the Batley statement contradicts what I said that would help. Ta.