Other than give the odd pointer to good odds with the bookies, this column has steered clear of financial advice, but these are volatile times not only in rugby, but across the whole spectrum of sport. If Manchester United almost lose a sponsor, you know things are bad.
Formula one, rallying, cricket and football have all felt the pinch and rugby union is not going to be an exception. There are gaps on the terraces where last season the full-house signs might have been put up and the bars and restaurants at grounds don't seem to be the hive of activity they once were.
There are some notable exceptions but generally it seems time for belt tightening and closer financial control in the professional game. We have to batten down hatches and wait for better times and if that means cutting back then so be it. The secret is not to throw away the best of what we've got — a fiercely competitive league — which is why the salary cap and its possible reduction in size is so important.
Rugby has never been a level playing field. Even before the game went professional clubs like Leicester and Northampton always had a strong fan base and with that came financial clout. When the millionaire benefactors arrived that powerbase widened. However, a salary cap was needed to stop the worst excesses and it is even more necessary now.
If the professional side of the game is to remain vibrant there must be tighter control over the clubs with deep pockets otherwise the powerful will just hoover up the cream of the available talent.
With rumours whipping around the game about the possible demise of some clubs, there are suggestions that the salary cap of £4.2m should be reduced to £3.5m. If that is what's needed, then fine, bring it in, but it has to be policed. I'm not pointing fingers, but you don't have to be a financial whiz to figure out that the recruiting done by some clubs is either out of kilter with the current cap or they have discovered a way of defying financial gravity.
Bath have been pretty vocal in the matter and independent scrutiny has been suggested. I would go further and say that if we are to have a watchdog, it should have real teeth. The financially secure won't blanch at paying a small fine but they may think twice about stepping over the mark if the penalty is a deduction of points. That is what already happens in rugby league.
Over the years Wigan (three times), Halifax, St Helens and Bradford Bulls have all fallen foul of the compliance officer who has the power to call in club records and accounts. Initially the cap was to ensure clubs didn't spend more than 50% of turnover on salaries and was seen purely as a tool which ensured good management. Now it's much more sophisticated with an upper ceiling imposed while making allowances for youth players and incentives. The aim is to create a better spread of talent; it is monitored through the season and next year the plan is to double the penalties.
I can hear the voices of concern saying that such a scheme in union will make English rugby even less competitive with the free-spending French. If we can't compete in the marketplace when it comes to hiring the likes of Dan Carter does that matter if it saves clubs from the scrapheap?
Far better that clubs like Wasps are around in 10 or 15 years time — something that could possibly have been in doubt before the arrival of Steve Hayes, a real sports fan who also runs our ground-share partners at Adams Park, Wycombe Wanderers.
No doubt the key to survival is owning your own ground, but even then there are suggestions that the financial squeeze might see some of the higher paid foreign stars pack their bags before their contracts are up. That exodus would no doubt be accelerated were the salary cap policed aggressively. However, while it might take some of the glitz from our game, it might also open up a few more holes for home-grown talent to fill.
If a few England stars of the future are uncovered, we might come to regard the current pain in a different light.
