We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:16 am  

. . . if we want SL.

This is now obvious more than ever after yesterdays events. Wakefield's recent past and failed promises had no effect on their bid whatsoever, however the plans given by a new wealthy backer obviously did though, rightly or wrongly. And then Crusaders - a lesson to be learnt.

This is not to denegrate the fantastic work our BOD do but - a backer. Any on the horizon? Show yourself now!

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:38 am  

the next round of SL franchise will see SL increased to 16 teams. wakey and cas still have no ground but given another 3 years if they promise to build(with fingers crossed of course)

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:38 am  

Or another 2,000 fans

But I'll tell you something , get the 2,000 fans first and a ' backer ' will turn up

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:39 am  

swifty62 wrote:

the next round of SL franchise will see SL increased to 16 teams. wakey and cas still have no ground but given another 3 years if they promise to build(with fingers crossed of course)

Which is probably too many teams , SL is already at least 2 teams too big now

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 6:53 am  

Starbug wrote:

Which is probably too many teams , SL is already at least 2 teams too big now

Because of the dearth of young talent. But surely the franchise system and the many excellent youth systems out there will mean there is an excess supply of youth players, and more full time environments will be required to ensure there players are not lost (sic)

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:45 am  

Fourteen teams is right.

It fits the length of the season.

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:47 am  

griff1998 wrote:

Fourteen teams is right.

It fits the length of the season.

Who do you support?

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:54 am  

I have It on very good authority that the reason the RFL gave to us regarding our application failure is our lack of a single big money backer. If you read Mike Rileys post he alludes to this I believe several times within his statement if you re-read it. I find this truly appalling as surely a stable RL club not reliant on a single benefactor is a more sound business option than one that is. Crusaders, londequins are testament to that. If O'Connor gets bored and pulls his cash where does that leave Widnes. It just stinks if you ask me!!

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 9:56 am  

Quite an interesting quote from MS here:-

“At the moment, all I can think is that Wakefield and their new owner have made promises regarding money in the future.

“The RFL suggested to us that were we able to pledge additional investment, if there was ever a shortfall to make up, it might make the whole process easier.

“We were not prepared to promise something we did not know whether we could deliver: Our financial projections were based on running the club as a viable business, which we have always regarded as an important principle of the licencing process.

So the RFL are saying this system is ment to stop boom or bust but it looks like their requirements are actually encouraging it.

Re: We need a backer : Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:20 am  

So at least we know what is needed, along with ticking a box. It doesn't have to be one single backer though. Looks like we're in the Championships for the long haul.