To take that a bit further. There are 2, maybe 3 sweating on their own finances. If they’d have come out forcibly in favour of us not being stripped of the P share they may have safeguarded themselves. But they’ve hunkered down, praying that someone joins us and Wuss. They know full well once the 10 are in place PRL/RFU etc etc will sweat blood to protect their slimmed down elite.
Equally they have a fair argument that if clubs are able to use administration to wipe their debts and come back into the fold unscathed, it sets an unwelcome precedent. We did vote for the 'closed shop' after all.
I read Massey-Phillips comments around that and thought it was a nonsensical argument - it’s full of holes and was just a backside covering piece of bluster…
“There is a scenario where a club could just write off all of its debt,” he said. “But then if it retains its P share you then have a league where the vast majority of teams still have significant debt, playing against a team that has no debt but retains the same income as them from the P share. So you have another form of disruption and inequality.”
So how does he explain clubs currently playing with significant debt against the likes of clubs in the black like Exeter and Saracens? Is he saying it’s unfair for clubs in the black to have a P share and play clubs in debt full stop?
The PRL and RFU have already stated that they don’t get involved in individual club finances and consider them as businesses out of their remit, so why does it matter if they find a way to clear it and take the relegation hit? This especially as not including the P share means buyers pull out of saving us and effectively signs our death warrant.
Why didn’t it matter with the Cheats when they had an unfair financial advantage over a number of years with their method of financing breaking the cap?
Obviously you cant have clubs going in and out of administration regularly to clear their debts, but his words above sound like a load of bluster to cover the sudden U turn from a 14 team competition to 10 teams, which is a decision that has emerged out of the ether since Baxter first touched on it last week and feels driven by some clubs with an interest in sharing the spoils. The bigger return from less shares allowing some clubs to profit more over others with significant debt!