Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:02 pm  

Cowgirl Nostalgist wrote:

It's an ever decreasing circle though.

London is admittedly a busted flush but with only Catalan flying the flag outside the M62 corridor outmoded stereotypes can never be dispelled.

& that is damaging long term for Rugby League.

I think 95% of us agree on that but I thnk we need to build expansion lower down the leagues before we can have outpost clubs like Broncos in the top league. The history of RL shows that there has been about a 98% failure rate with this kind of expansion. There is room for Broncos in the RL family but it probably isn't going to be in SL. We need more semi-pro clubs in London.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:03 pm  

Hedgehog King wrote:

At some point the average RL spectator is going to realise that the RFL simply doesn't have the money to do this or any of the other things that get brought up from time-to-time.

They found the money to bail out Bradford though.

It's a question of priorities & we all know what they are.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:06 pm  

Cowgirl Nostalgist wrote:

They found the money to bail out Bradford though.

It's a question of priorities & we all know what they are.

They found the money because they only have to pay for Odsal once and Bratfut will pay them rent. With Broncos, it means losing millions each year for the foreseeable future.

I don't think a Broncos fan is really in a position to complain about RFL priorities. You got into SL because of those priorities and you won a SL licence (twice) with those priorities. I don't think even Broncos fans think that the club is among the best 14 clubs in Europe.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:24 pm  

Hedgehog King wrote:

I don't think a Broncos fan is really in a position to complain about RFL priorities.

I'm not saying we deserve a hand out just that one would be on offer in different circumstances.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:34 pm  

Cowgirl Nostalgist wrote:

I'm not saying we deserve a hand out just that one would be on offer in different circumstances.

More than likely, Broncos need their own ground but the difference in land prices between Bradford and London made it impossible.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:23 pm  

Cowgirl Nostalgist wrote:

It's an ever decreasing circle though.

London is admittedly a busted flush but with only Catalan flying the flag outside the M62 corridor outmoded stereotypes can never be dispelled.

& that is damaging long term for Rugby League.

No it isn't that's just a myth. There is no shortage of interest, sponsors within the games traditional heartland. A heartland that has a bigger population than many EU countries.

I'd love London to work but the truth is I'm more than happy to support a Northern regional game and so are 90% of RL fans.

RL doesn't need a national presence to survive and prosper, but it does need one to to expand and prosper - there is a subtle difference, RL is only failing IF you think expansion is important. The crux is are there enough people in RL who want and are able to make that happen, the answer seems to be no.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:53 pm  

A heartland that has a bigger population than many EU countries.

What an utter bollox statement. What relevance has that you nugget.

I'm more than happy to support a Northern regional game and so are 90% of RL fans.

Where have you dreamt that cr4p up

The crux is are there enough people in RL who want and are able to make that happen, the answer seems to be no.

Does your measure start and stop with crowds? One billionaire could make rugby league succeed across Europe if he wanted. Its not just crowd numbers

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:27 pm  

vastman wrote:

sponsors within the games traditional heartland.

The game has a truly excellent record of bringing sponsors on board of late after all.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:58 pm  

Sarf Essex Taff wrote:

The game has a truly excellent record of bringing sponsors on board of late after all.

Paying sponsors at any rate.

I bet Stobart are still laughing.

Re: 1,800 : Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:20 pm  

vastman wrote:

There is no shortage of interest, sponsors within the games traditional heartland.

Sponsors or PARTNERS? There is a massive difference..........RL seems to be attracting plenty of PARTNERS at present.
A sponsor, such as Aviva, pays 5 million a year to have their name attached to the uNION Premiership.....Heineken claim to have invested 100 million pounds in Union over 20 years.....Barclays pay a fortune to have the naming rights to the Premiership, Allianz pay 1.5 million a year for sponsorship and naming rights at Sarries, Bradford are getting 300k a year for naming rights and sponsorship.....02 pay the RFU 5 million a year for the shirt sponsorship of a side that plays 10 times a year....gillette paid 50k for the england shirt sponsorship....for 3 years

PARTNERS on the other hand do a lot of contra work....cross database marketing/promotion etc with very little cash changing hands.....foxy bingo and heinz bigsoup are PARTNERS.

If you think removing the London team from SL will enhance the attractiveness of the SL naming rights to a national/international brand, then you need to have your bumps felt pal........Tetley sponsoring the Challenge Cup for an undisclosed sum pretty much sums up the state of RL in the UK at present....I'd be stunned if they are paying anything more than 50k a year tops. The "we call it cider but CAMRA don't agree" Championship deal is worth a lot less than 50k a year and the Marriott hotel>RLWC 2013 deal is a no cash contra deal......teams stay free, marriott get coverage.

Partners will always be keen....we have about 100k loyal RL supporters and there willalways be someone who wants to market to them....but a sit stands at present, not many want to pay up front to do so.