ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
But as you say, Wigan Warriors are the tenants.
Huddersfield Giants / Huddersfield Town and Hull City / Hull FC are 50/50 split shared Stadiums ...that's why they pay so much.
Stadium is looking shabby
- Thread starter GT1978
- Start date
Huddersfield Giants / Huddersfield Town and Hull City / Hull FC are 50/50 split shared Stadiums ...that's why they pay so much.
Jonnysking
Vital 1st Team Regular
That would be the best result possible, maybe that's what we are trying to do with a bit of luck. They paid £241,000 in 2019, in the grand scale of things, that is not a massive sum of money to either lose or replace.
ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
I get the impression that's what everyone wants.
I suspect the only thing holding it back is, The Egg Chasers will be financially worse off IF they decide lodge at the UniBol.
Also, regarding the 2019 figure... Was that the 1st season they moved all the pre-match food and drink to Robin Park?
Maybe that's why the prices have shot up at the Stadium (offset the losses in revenue).
Last edited:
You are my sunshine
Vital Reserves Team
If that rat Lenegan would've got his way with the stadium we could've ended up being liquidated or at best a much much weaker version of the club we currently find ourselves today.We would've lost our most valuable asset,which could've put off our current owners.He is a **** saying he did what was best for the town.You did the best for your precious rugby club with your disgraceful intentions you utter snake and you didn't give a toss what your actions would have on our club.
They've got away with paying peanuts for too long now.It's time they started paying market value rent and not whinging to their mates at the Council about the increase like Radlinski is(They only have a case IF the rent increase is extortionate,say over 1.25m per year,which I very much doubt is the case).If the increase is fair market value and they don't like it,they know where the door is and good luck getting better value for money at another Premier League standard stadium.
They've got away with paying peanuts for too long now.It's time they started paying market value rent and not whinging to their mates at the Council about the increase like Radlinski is(They only have a case IF the rent increase is extortionate,say over 1.25m per year,which I very much doubt is the case).If the increase is fair market value and they don't like it,they know where the door is and good luck getting better value for money at another Premier League standard stadium.
ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
The trouble is, most people on here think £900k is a fair market valuation.
That's a 200% rise.
The Egg Chasers would crawl to the UniBol on their hands and knees out of spite, than pay that to us.
And they would choose the UniBol over LSV every day of the week, because they're hated in Leigh just as much as we hate 'em.
Only to crawl straight back when Bolton quote exactly the same price. If not, then even better, good luck in Bolton. I wonder how many "home fans" Wigan Warriors would attract at Horwich? I'd guess 3k max. Best of luck paying the bills on those gates.
You are my sunshine
Vital Reserves Team
But surely market value rent is something similar to what Hull and Huddersfield rugby clubs are paying to rent their stadium?I've seen that is around 900K,but I'm not sure if both football clubs own 100% of the stadium as their councils may have a stake and maybe even the rugby clubs a minority stake.
We need to establish what market value rent is.I'm sure our owners have done thorough,in depth research and will want to charge that to the rugby.That is definitely going to be a lot more than the peanuts that they have got away with paying all these years.
Surely Bolton would also quote them market value rent too if they enquired about going to Horwich.
OnLoanfromEnfield
Vital 1st Team Regular
Unless the freehold of the stadium was handed over or the lease renegotiated due to administration, then the Council could well be involved if the rent was massively increased.
The lease apparently did stipulate that both the Rugby and Football team have access to the stadium.
I had a look in the latest draft council accounts and there is no mention of the freehold being given up.
In those accounts the stadium is mentioned. The Council lost the 15% shareholding and the assumed value.
"Wigan Football Company operated the DW Stadium at Robin Park, Wigan. During 20/21 the Company went into liquidation. The Council held 4,499,492 ordinary £1 shares in Wigan Football Company which are 15% of the total issued. The shares had a notional value £0.538m. Following advice from our eternal lawyers the shares have been written out. "
Also of interest ... The rates bill for the stadium was eye watering compared to other stadiums (as is/was the case with the Reebok).
"Wigan Council is part of the Greater Manchester 100% business rates pilot. Authorities receive 99% of their business rates income in lieu of Revenue Support
Grant and Public Health Grant. "
The lease apparently did stipulate that both the Rugby and Football team have access to the stadium.
I had a look in the latest draft council accounts and there is no mention of the freehold being given up.
In those accounts the stadium is mentioned. The Council lost the 15% shareholding and the assumed value.
"Wigan Football Company operated the DW Stadium at Robin Park, Wigan. During 20/21 the Company went into liquidation. The Council held 4,499,492 ordinary £1 shares in Wigan Football Company which are 15% of the total issued. The shares had a notional value £0.538m. Following advice from our eternal lawyers the shares have been written out. "
Also of interest ... The rates bill for the stadium was eye watering compared to other stadiums (as is/was the case with the Reebok).
"Wigan Council is part of the Greater Manchester 100% business rates pilot. Authorities receive 99% of their business rates income in lieu of Revenue Support
Grant and Public Health Grant. "
Last edited:
ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
As I said before, Hull & Huddersfield are a 50/50 split share, which was never the case at Wigan.
If we put the rent up 200%, The Egg Chasers won't finish this season at the DW.
N"Zogbia's fan club
Vital Squad Member
Can I have the link to the draft council accounts please.
That can't be true though because Wigan Warriors did not originally rent the DW Stadium, Orrell Rugby club were the original renters with Wigan Warriors joining just afterwards?
I could be wrong here, but didn't the stipulation state the phrase "two sporting clubs" as opposed to naming Wigan Warriors directly? If this is true and the small print on the lease doesn't name check the Rugby directly, that means the two sporting clubs using the DW could be Wigan Athletic and say a Wigan Athletic Women's football club for example? This is a potential loophole Latics could exploit and the council wouldn't be able to do anything as the phrase "sporting clubs" is used on the lease rather than "rugby clubs". This lease really does need to be made public as to its exact details.
Regarding the rates bill, we know this was a problem that stemmed from the Premier League days and that Whelan/Sharpe tried and failed to get them reduced. Surely though now the stadium is owned by a brand new company, those business rates can be reviewed and significantly lessened in cost?
I think any rent increase would only come in to effect in 2024. The worriers have a rent review then in their lease.
Even though a different company now own the ground from when the lease was given they would have to honour the terms of that lease.
I wonder if Bolton would have the rugby as tennents. Charge them say 600k per annum and let them keep all their gate receipts and other matchday profits.
At the end of the day it's money bolton currently don't receive. It may be ideal for them.
I find it interesting that the council have been asked to get involved. It shows my comments last week that there's a feeling in the council the rugby have to be looked after are correct.
Talal has said that Latics intend to expand at the Soccerdome with more pitches etc.
I wonder if the council will help out financially with it being a community facility?
Even though a different company now own the ground from when the lease was given they would have to honour the terms of that lease.
I wonder if Bolton would have the rugby as tennents. Charge them say 600k per annum and let them keep all their gate receipts and other matchday profits.
At the end of the day it's money bolton currently don't receive. It may be ideal for them.
I find it interesting that the council have been asked to get involved. It shows my comments last week that there's a feeling in the council the rugby have to be looked after are correct.
Talal has said that Latics intend to expand at the Soccerdome with more pitches etc.
I wonder if the council will help out financially with it being a community facility?
As much as there is animosity between the fans it's in our best interests to keep them here. It's money coming in to pay for upkeep. We should definitely increase it but not to a point where we lose the tenant. That would be silly, because that's money we'd have to take away from somewhere else.
In no way does that stop us putting our stamp on the ground. Blue and white seats and what not, make it clear who the senior partner is.
In no way does that stop us putting our stamp on the ground. Blue and white seats and what not, make it clear who the senior partner is.
Mighty Bongsmon
Vital Squad Member
That's coz the agreement is that their rent is a set percentage of their gate receipts. As Latics was under the old ownerships (no idea what it is now)
As they've acknowledged, their attendances are on a long term downward trend hence why their rent is decreasing
Personally I've no desire to see them booted out and just want them to pay a fair rent for the facilities. If the stadium company was previously losing £1mill a year that to me indicates it wasn't generating enough income and therefore (amongst other things) the rent it received was nowhere near enough
To use the housing landlord analogy again, if your buy to let mortgage is £700 a month you wouldn't charge a tenant £500 a month to live there
As for the RL getting in touch with the council I think at this stage they can only make representations to Phoenix. As I understand it, the only time they could start to threaten withdrawal of the lease is if Phoenix were to put the rent up to an artificially high and unjustifiable amount but why would they? As someone else has pointed out, the RL is a major income stream for the stadium. Trying to get rid of them would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face
Mighty Bongsmon
Vital Squad Member
I agree
Mighty Bongsmon
Vital Squad Member
I don't think that was why. They just didn't want to buy the stadium - the proposal to move to Leigh was to show the EFL they had somewhere to play and could function without the DW as it could have proved to be a stumbling block in their ratification of a tskeover
For whatever reason though the admin didn't budge in saying that whoever was buying Latics would be buying the stadium. Or more precisely whoever was buying the stadium would have to buy Latics
rumjocky
Vital Reserves Team
Ok let's cut off our nose to spite our face .if it gets um out. nothing but trouble that lot
ExiledViking
Vital Squad Member
No one is trying to get rid of them.
The point I'm trying to make is, if the annual agreement rises above what they consider a fair amount, they would consider other options.
That has already been alluded to, in the transcript from the secretive fans forum.
