Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Eagles for SL


  • Please log in to reply
549 replies to this topic

#481 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:28 AM

You mean the ones who warned that Bradford face a tough financial future and that was without knowing the bank was going to withdraw their overdraft facility. :rolleyes:

Lets not get off topic into another Bradford discussion.

Yes, the ones that said all that and still gave them a B licence, when they budgeted to lose £100k a month.

#482 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:46 AM

What's to say that there isn't somebody involved at the Eagles with considerable wealth? They may have chosen to do things differently and try and build a business over a long period of time. Just because there's no one person bankrolling the club doesn't mean that all the directors are skint. The Eagles business plan has always been built on keeping a tight ship and only spending what they can afford. Given the trouble that many clubs with backers get into when said millionnaire leaves, I'd argue they're doing the sensible thing.If this means that realistically it will make it tougher for them to be accepted to SL, so be it. At least they stand more chance of avoiding administration etc than many clubs.


Point taken, and as Padge says " If they have chosen to do it that way, and like Widnes do have a rich backer reluctant to splash and dash, then they are going about it the right way for me. Slowly slowly catchey monkey as the saying goes".

Again if they have someone bankrolling them it ought to show somehow, but maybe it is a matter of using the slow growth no risk invest what you can afford model. I know people who started in their garage, with a couple of machines and a van and they turn over several million now. I also know people who could not do that. To get where they wanted to get to it meant the bank, or a rich partner who could just dump in the money, as circumstances differed.

And so happily we are away from the "secret millionaire" thing and onto a subject that has been raised before. How exactly do clubs grow in the Championship to ready themselves for Superleague??

Superleague entry is of course a box ticking exercise. You need the ground in place, you need the academy churning through young players, you need your marketing and commercial arm staffed and looking to bring the fans and sponsors in. Three major ticks and you are in, however once in it's time to compete.

The rich mans splash the cash model is certainly there for all to see at Huddersfield. Just go on shoving money in. After all these years what would happen if Mr & Mrs Davey did walk away. I wonder?

The "careful" model may be represented by HKR and Widnes, the last entrants to SL. Mr. Hudgell and Mr. O.Connor have been able to tick all the boxes pretty quickly and any holes in the business plan could be plugged by "directors (non-refundable) loans". Mr. Hudgell I assume (because he said he's had enough of plugging the gaps) banked on his investments into the club in terms of academy, facilities, and marketing/commercial operations providing a return that would "balance the competitive books".

The jury is out, but his playing roster has been raided by the richer clubs, impetus is lost and the core fans are rallying round to the cause. New facilities are due soon but whether facilities alone bring in the fans that remains to be seen. There isn't a good record of this happening particularly to the dismay of Mr. Wilkinson at Salford's new stadium and it's sub 6K crowds.

The jury will be out for some time at Widnes. Boxes ticked, recruitment in SL was difficult for them and the increase in the fan base was there but again sub 6K crowds. I recall Mr. O'Connors desire for the fans to sustain Widnes and not his wallet. I recall him setting a 8K fans target like Mr. Wilkinson. Neither are there.

Growth in the Championship is restricted. You can set up your academy, but any SL quality players will be picked off so you have to wait to get in Superleague to build your competitive team. You can market to your public to build the fanbase if you have the money, but second tier semi pro RL has a restricted market even in the heart of heartlands. You have to get into SL via the initial growth, but for further growth towards sustainability and survival in SL you have to compete. That brings in the fans that take you to sustainability.

Certainly Mr. Davey has taken Huddersfield from 4,700 to over 7,000 averages over the last nine years. In one way that is impressive, however in another way that may have taken several £million making up the shortfall between what this attendance level generates and full salary cap. The option is there not to spend the cap. The option is there for the fans to drop away and the players to leave. The problem with any business model is it can go two ways.

So back to just how far you can ready for Super league outside Super league. I think it's clear you could not have 5,000 crowds and a professional side playing. That happened - when Cas dropped down the fans stayed and the club found the money for the one season and up they went. But today, without enough investment to put the product on the pitch and the bums on the seats, they are a sad and sorry case.

And this remains the difficulty for all championship clubs. Quality profesional players do not want to be part of a championship clubs growth, paying fans who want to watch Championship rugby are limited in number, and they can only be sustained at a higher level by paying semi pro players to win things. We all saw how low Featherstone's crowds dropped when they were losing regularly. Funding a successful team to keep crowds up removes valuable investment monies that could go towards Superleague - we saw how Mr. O'Connor abandoned team building once he had his boxes ticked. Would Sheffield or Featherstone dare do that?

With respect I appreciate the slow growth thing, and I see it every day, but you cant slow grow a corner shop into a Supermarket.
That is to me the problem Championship clubs face. To get from £1M turnover to £4M turnover has to have significant outside investment from somewhere in a business where there is a massive gap between the two levels you can trade at. That gap needs heavy investment funding.

#483 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 09:59 AM

The same people who commented on the Halifax business plan, gave Bradford a C licence, so i wouldnt say their comments had any credibility.


You add nothing to the debate with this with respect. As Padge says they waved through a club with a poor business plan. I can't see the business plans of Widnes, Castleford, HKR or Salford bearing much fruit either.

But who were they supposed to waive through instead? Leigh Fev, Sheffield and Halifax?

It's now your turn to explain how these four would have done any better??

Especially Halifax......

#484 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 10:04 AM

Yes, the ones that said all that and still gave them a B licence, when they budgeted to lose £100k a month.


So if Halifax had come in to Superleague with no rich backer and attempted to compete with an existing £1,000,000 turnover, a £1,200,000 SKY funding and another £500K from higher attendances and sponsors what loss would they have had to budget for? Or would they have re-used their famous 2003 budget to remain solvent and ensure their outgoings did not exceed their income, thus seeing no league points gained and attendances falling back to Championship levels?

Edited by The Parksider, 20 October 2012 - 10:06 AM.


#485 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 10:51 AM

You add nothing to the debate with this with respect. As Padge says they waved through a club with a poor business plan. I can't see the business plans of Widnes, Castleford, HKR or Salford bearing much fruit either.

But who were they supposed to waive through instead? Leigh Fev, Sheffield and Halifax?

It's now your turn to explain how these four would have done any better??

Especially Halifax......

If you start quoting what the RFL said about a bid, i think its right that it should be pointed out that they dont really have much credibility when it comes to the licence comments and grading following the bulls going under after receiving a grade B licence. Just stating facts.

#486 a.n Other

a.n Other
  • Coach
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 11:01 AM

So if Halifax had come in to Superleague with no rich backer and attempted to compete with an existing £1,000,000 turnover, a £1,200,000 SKY funding and another £500K from higher attendances and sponsors what loss would they have had to budget for? Or would they have re-used their famous 2003 budget to remain solvent and ensure their outgoings did not exceed their income, thus seeing no league points gained and attendances falling back to Championship levels?


You add nothing to the debate with this post. Its about the credibtility of the RFL i made comments about. Not about weather Halifax were ready for SL or not.

#487 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 11:16 AM

Are we really down to this?

An argument that no matter how far we can measure attendances, or playing strength, or the level of recent investment to date at a club or the level of losses showing on their balance sheets, or the level of their turnovers none of this matters in us assessing whether a club could compete and prosper in Superleague.......

Because I don't know if a rich man, and a series of rich sponsors are just waiting in the wings to show themselves once the club is given a license?

Are we really going to see some small club be awarded a superleague licence, and then they set up a launch party, invite the press and some very rich people nobody including the RFL has ever heard of before, who have not even been rumoured to exist, line up and say how they are all delighted this small club is now in Superleague and they will be joining forthwith.

Are you serious or have you being watching that TV programme "secret millionaire".

Look at how it really works. In comes your O'Connor or your Davey, or your Hudgell and they invest money into the club and it takes off from that, the impetus grows, the fans get on board and the RFL/Superleague take note. If they don't O'Connor slaps £500K on the table and they eventually take note.

Look at how it works with applications from Barrow, Leigh, Fax, they talk the talk but if they can't show they can walk the walk then out they go.

I find it absurd the idea that the RFL/SLE will swallow "promises"

Now go back to the days of the Keighley bid for Superleague. You were close enough to the club - name the rich sponsors. Who were they going to be??


None of that process was in place when SL was founded in 1995. O'Connor, Hudgell , Hughes were not on board at their respective clubs. I am not even sure if Davy was there yet but he might have been. Hull KR were not in SL, Widnes were shafted. None of the criteria to which you allude were common practice. Don't forget Workington, Oldham, Paris, Halifax and London ( a very minor 2nd div side at the time) were allowed into SL. SL sugar daddies were pretty rare.

Keighley were not about to organise a press conference to announce that they had been given a SL licence because 1. SL licences did not exist and 2. They thought a place in SL was a done deal for them as they had won promotion on the field and the whole issue of their being denied a place in SL did not come up until very late in that promotion season.

Lastly, I was not close to the inner workings of the Keighley club either then or now. I only know that the board stated they had a large sponsor lined up to inject finances when they were in SL, which, of course , never happened. As I stated in my post either the sponsor existed or he did not. You, nor I, am in a position to know the facts but you are coming pretty close to calling some people liars based on your gut feelings and little else.

#488 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 03:07 PM

You add nothing to the debate with this post. Its about the credibtility of the RFL i made comments about. Not about weather Halifax were ready for SL or not.


OK I'll agree the RFL have a credibility problem with the licensing system, as the record is they choose who they want despite it at times. Bradford and Wakey shoved back in Catalans, Crusaders, London and now Toulouse given free passes etc etc......

#489 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

I only know that the board stated they had a large sponsor lined up to inject finances when they were in SL, which, of course , never happened. As I stated in my post either the sponsor existed or he did not. You, nor I, am in a position to know the facts but you are coming pretty close to calling some people liars based on your gut feelings and little else.


"when they were in SL" :D

This mystery man was going to jump out from behind a curtain was he?.

Never mind the "liars" stuff, that's too strong a word, but plenty of club chairmen and directors are full of complete Bull.

You know that as well as I do.

Don't ask me to show respect for the Keighley board at the time, you showed little enough for the Bradford board.

Edited by The Parksider, 20 October 2012 - 03:13 PM.


#490 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 03:24 PM

"when they were in SL" :D

This mystery man was going to jump out from behind a curtain was he?.

Never mind the "liars" stuff, that's too strong a word, but plenty of club chairmen and directors are full of complete Bull.

You know that as well as I do.

Don't ask me to show respect for the Keighley board at the time, you showed little enough for the Bradford board.


Despite all that bluster, the gact remains that you just do not know.

This is just the same situation that exists at present in Toulouse. They claim they have investors ready and waiting if they get a SL licence but they are not saying whom. Does that mean they don't exist. Who knows. I would not say that it does.

#491 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 03:43 PM

Despite all that bluster, the fact remains that you just do not know.


Of course I know. Keighley spoke of rich sponsors but nobody turned up.

You can play that game all day long.

BTW I have heard someone deadly rich is ready to back Hunslet, but he won't do that unless the RFL give them a Superleague place :lol:

I can't however tell you who they are.........

Do you get it now???

Am I a liar??

Edited by The Parksider, 20 October 2012 - 03:45 PM.


#492 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,462 posts

Posted 20 October 2012 - 07:00 PM

Growth in the Championship is restricted. You can set up your academy, but any SL quality players will be picked off so you have to wait to get in Superleague to build your competitive team. You can market to your public to build the fanbase if you have the money, but second tier semi pro RL has a restricted market even in the heart of heartlands. You have to get into SL via the initial growth, but for further growth towards sustainability and survival in SL you have to compete. That brings in the fans that take you to sustainability.


Are you saying that the failure of the RFL to promote these clubs is a restrictment of trade? I know the RFL via Barrie John Mather has restricted these Championship clubs in developing youngsters and telling them they couldnt run scholarships in 2009/10 and has made life difficult for championship teams trying to run academy teams

#493 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:02 AM

So if Halifax had come in to Superleague with no rich backer and attempted to compete with an existing £1,000,000 turnover, a £1,200,000 SKY funding and another £500K from higher attendances and sponsors what loss would they have had to budget for? Or would they have re-used their famous 2003 budget to remain solvent and ensure their outgoings did not exceed their income, thus seeing no league points gained and attendances falling back to Championship levels?


Despite the probably ideal aimof competing inSL on a full salary cap, I think that reality is going to bite soon and maybe half of the SL clubs will have to cut their cloth to suit their budget and this will not include paying full slary cap.If this does happen, it willlevel the playing field a bit for the likes of Halifax and Sheffield.

#494 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 01:10 AM

Of course I know. Keighley spoke of rich sponsors but nobody turned up.

You can play that game all day long.

BTW I have heard someone deadly rich is ready to back Hunslet, but he won't do that unless the RFL give them a Superleague place :lol:

I can't however tell you who they are.........

Do you get it now???

Am I a liar??


The difference is you are not in the adminstation of the Hunslet club.If you were and you made such a statement, I would give you the benefit of the doubt until you were proven wrong.

Have the Toulouse club revealed their many sponsors waiting in the wings.Does that mean they do not exist. If, for some reason Toulouse do not get a SL licence, do you think these sponsors will give a press conference to vent their disappoinment with the process. Their names will probably never see the light of day.

#495 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 06:51 AM

1. The difference is you are not in the adminstration of the Hunslet club.If you were and you made such a statement, I would give you the benefit of the doubt..............

2. Have the Toulouse club revealed their many sponsors waiting in the wings.


1. Even if we had a very rich backer would the RFL let us in?? It's true by the way and I can reveal it's me. I'm going to offer all the best juniors playing in Leeds top money just so Leeds can't have them and I'm going to sell season tickets at half the price they sell them at Headingley. I am sure the RFL will love having two SL clubs fighting for the same players and fans. It works so well in Hull.

2. Do the RFL care? You have picked a shockingly bad example because this is expansion. Expansion clubs don't need rich backers committed to putting in £2M a year ad infinitum do they. Look at the record.

Sugar daddies are now dying out. For some time those who run SL, Lenegan, McManus, Hetherington have said that it's about the business itself balancing the books. The last of the sugar daddies was Hudgell and he's given up now, O'Connor stated he wasn't coming into SL to bankroll Widnes ad infinitum, and he set a policy of getting 8,000 Widnes fans to achieve break even. Then there's Wilkinson. Again no more millions from him but a policy aiming for 8,000 fans to provide the money - it didn't come.

Doesn't look like there's any more £500K cheques from Fulton at Cas, and what about the last two big spenders to bring their newly revived clubs back into SL after administration? There's "I'm just a double glazing salesman like Gary" Glover. Who has come out to say he won't spend millions, and there's Mr. "Two Restaurants" Khan who many people gleefully pointed out won't have the millions to spend what with starters being £3.50 apiece and all you can eat for a tenner.

It's another wake up and smell the coffee moment for you. Would it matter if the Duke of Westminster took over Halifax? Are the RFL really going to have Bradford, Halifax and Fartown chasing the same fans and players? How about the Sultan of Brunei at Featerstone or Cas. He's gonna be pretty cheesed off when he learns he can't spend more than £1.65M

Besides are the RFL really going to allow three SL clubs in the Calder area. Just when Mr, Glover is set to set up a stand alone self sustaining business at Newmarket, are the RFL going to allow local rivals to get in the way of that? After all that is the Leeds model revered throughout RFL and SL. The Hudgell model has had it's day - and even Pearson has said his current spending spree (part aimed at breaking Rovers playing roster up) is temporary.

The fans may have won the battle in 1995 but the war is still not over.

The days of the sugar daddy look to be over now.....

#496 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 07:14 AM

Despite the probably ideal aim of competing in SL on a full salary cap, I think that reality is going to bite soon and maybe half of the SL clubs will have to cut their cloth to suit their budget and this will not include paying full salary cap.If this does happen, it will level the playing field a bit for the likes of Halifax and Sheffield.


No Mr. K, you seem to be with the utmost respect wishful thinking again.

You could be right. we shall see, but nothing I can see points to this at all. The RFL/SLE still retain their policies of:-

1. An even competition
2. An elite competition
3. A financially sound competition

Unless they are complete idiots (no need to post again you usual suspects, we get the point) they will restructure the business. The clues are there Mr. Hudgells "12 club SL" Mr. Watkins "root and branch review", Mr. Glovers "reduce the salary cap".

How many signals do you want to see what they are considering.

12 clubs will have to include Hull, Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, Fartown, London, Wigan, Saints and Warrington, plus Toulouse and Les Catalans. These clubs represent the people who run Superleague - Moran, Hethers, Lennegan, McManus and pearson will probably get on that board of directors. It represents clubs who have been rescued by RFL/SLE and allocated managers to run them - Wakefield and Bradford, it represents the RFL's "europe wide" policy of two clubs in France and London linking the two heartlands. There is only one oddity and that is Fartown. The record is sustained heavy investment for going on 10 years and as Steve May says that will continue even if Mr, Davey were to shall we say "depart".

If we are going to have a debate about who next for SL then IMHO it COULD end up being about where is that last spot going. If the RFL had their way it'd be Wales, if the French had their way it'd be one of their clubs, if the SLE clubs had their way it'd be nobody on their doorstep.

The SL clubs are a bunch of Nimby's.

Who did I leave out of that list?

CAS - crisis meeting
HKR - rich backer won't part with any more money
SALFORD - rich backer won't part with any more money
WIDNES - rich backer vowed not to bankroll the club but to get it to break even. Work in progess

Whose left in the queue

HALIFAX - three clubs in Bradhuddersfax, no chance
LEIGH - Two clubs in Wigan - what? Third time lucky after Springfield and Highfield
FEATHERSTONE - Three clubs in "Calder"? Is Ian Claytons barmy army really going to be allowed such a triumph?
SHEFFIELD - as Mr Wharing said they didn't even get a mention

If the 12 clubs thing comes off then there may be eight clubs fighting for one place. I'd give it to Fev they deserve their chance.

Edited by The Parksider, 21 October 2012 - 10:25 AM.


#497 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 07:37 AM

Are you saying that the failure of the RFL to promote these clubs is a restrictment of trade? I know the RFL via Barrie John Mather has restricted these Championship clubs in developing youngsters and telling them they couldnt run scholarships in 2009/10 and has made life difficult for championship teams trying to run academy teams


There's no restraint of trade Lizzy. The Championship clubs already trade as Rugby League Clubs and cutting to the chase, they ought to get on with that and set up what will be a wonderful 14 club league, and it would be equally wonderful if they all run some sort of local junior development system. It would need to be SL friendly I'd guess.

However if they want to ape the SL academies, with the motive being to tick a box for Superleague, then I can't see the RFL being interested as BJM displayed. The RFL want the SL clubs to scout their REGIONS and beyond, and bring the best kids into their SL academies. IMHO It's a kind of "don't worry about developing local players, your local SL club will do that" thing. For instance Oldham have been well served with SL clubs developing the best Oldham kids.

Indeed when it comes to junior development the RFL have noted what Fev and Sheffield are up to and gone further than BJM in displaying their distaste for Championship clubs trying to ape SL clubs and allowed SL clubs to tie up Championship clubs into the SL system.

Result Mark Aston and Darryl Powell going absolute ape.

As for the refusal of "promotion" like any organisation with a pyramid you can't promote everyone, but you have to be (seen to be?) fair. You can't argue for promotion if you are not qualified for the job. Qualifications include an average attendance of 2500 for example.

ANYWAY ON THAT NOTE - could you share with us the events surrounding that Halifax.v.Batley attendance of 4795 in 2010. How did that come about and what were Fax up to??

#498 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,462 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 10:11 AM

Halifax gave away a load of free tickets at the Halifax Show the week before and were counted in the attendance. The rumour is allegedly Halifax were a few hundred short of what the RFL wanted. The RFL wanted a faceoff between 2 championship clubs as they didnt just want Widnes to just sail through to SL. So the RFL allegedly suggested to Halifax this idea so that Halifax met more requirements. Halifax rightly or wrongly went along with it. In the end of March 2011, Widnes and Halifax were declared meeting the minimum standards for SL http://www.theargus....n_Super_League/ but then just a couple of months later Halifax are found not good enough to be in SL, which Fax found hard to understand when they had publically been told they meet the Standards a couple of months before. The Halifax Chairman then criticized Wakefield because they had failed to meet certain terms of the minimum standards after going in to administration in the February plus were highly expected to be kicked out until Crusaders went under. Because everything was done behind closed doors alot of this cant be proved or denied.

The rumour is Halifax put down what they expected to get in terms of money and were rather conservative rather than thinking thousands would return and living in fantasy world. Halifax couldnt really gauge that well how much they would need to be in Sl and how high gates was as they had been used to travelling supports coming in their 10s maybe a couple of hundred at most, rather than hundreds or even Thousands. With respect Sheffield,Hunslet,Dewsbury,York etc dont bring that many fans. They also didnt expect to make much money being in SL, as who does? It seems other clubs like Bradford, Salford etc live in a dream world and declared they would get X amount of fans in and thought they would make more money than they would. The RFL thought then Halifax shouldnt be in SL. Looking back its clear a number of current SL clubs either lied or the RFL just hoped things would turn out OK rather than have the ball to kick them out. Would Halifax have done well or survived in SL? Who knows, but least today they make a small profit and will continue to run U18 and U23s unlike SL clubs who claim they cant afford it! This is one of the reasons not just Halifax fans but Championship fans dont trust licences or indeed the RFL as things are done and decisions made wth little openness which annoys so many people. The licence situation does not come across as fair and open at all. It comes across as the RFL want to do things their way and want certain clubs in. Whats the point of Championship clubs meeting certain standards yet a number of SL clubs fail miserably and have to get the RFL to help them out and even run the club for a while? For me its just not on and the RFL/SL should be independant and neutral regarding ALL clubs or atleast come out and say what they want and are doing.

#499 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,378 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 10:23 AM

Halifax gave away a load of free tickets at the Halifax Show the week before and were counted in the attendance. The rumour is allegedly Halifax were a few hundred short of what the RFL wanted. The RFL wanted a faceoff between 2 championship clubs as they didnt just want Widnes to just sail through to SL. So the RFL allegedly suggested to Halifax this idea so that Halifax met more requirements. Halifax rightly or wrongly went along with it. In the end of March 2011, Widnes and Halifax were declared meeting the minimum standards for SL http://www.theargus....n_Super_League/ but then just a couple of months later Halifax are found not good enough to be in SL, which Fax found hard to understand when they had publically been told they meet the Standards a couple of months before. The Halifax Chairman then criticized Wakefield because they had failed to meet certain terms of the minimum standards after going in to administration in the February plus were highly expected to be kicked out until Crusaders went under. Because everything was done behind closed doors alot of this cant be proved or denied.

The rumour is Halifax put down what they expected to get in terms of money and were rather conservative rather than thinking thousands would return and living in fantasy world. Halifax couldnt really gauge that well how much they would need to be in Sl and how high gates was as they had been used to travelling supports coming in their 10s maybe a couple of hundred at most, rather than hundreds or even Thousands. With respect Sheffield,Hunslet,Dewsbury,York etc dont bring that many fans. They also didnt expect to make much money being in SL, as who does? It seems other clubs like Bradford, Salford etc live in a dream world and declared they would get X amount of fans in and thought they would make more money than they would. The RFL thought then Halifax shouldnt be in SL. Looking back its clear a number of current SL clubs either lied or the RFL just hoped things would turn out OK rather than have the ball to kick them out. Would Halifax have done well or survived in SL? Who knows, but least today they make a small profit and will continue to run U18 and U23s unlike SL clubs who claim they cant afford it! This is one of the reasons not just Halifax fans but Championship fans dont trust licences or indeed the RFL as things are done and decisions made wth little openness which annoys so many people. The licence situation does not come across as fair and open at all. It comes across as the RFL want to do things their way and want certain clubs in. Whats the point of Championship clubs meeting certain standards yet a number of SL clubs fail miserably and have to get the RFL to help them out and even run the club for a while? For me its just not on and the RFL/SL should be independant and neutral regarding ALL clubs or atleast come out and say what they want and are doing.


Thank you ever so much for the effort. Very very interesting.........

Edited by The Parksider, 21 October 2012 - 10:24 AM.


#500 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,682 posts

Posted 21 October 2012 - 11:19 AM

1. Even if we had a very rich backer would the RFL let us in?? It's true by the way and I can reveal it's me. I'm going to offer all the best juniors playing in Leeds top money just so Leeds can't have them and I'm going to sell season tickets at half the price they sell them at Headingley. I am sure the RFL will love having two SL clubs fighting for the same players and fans. It works so well in Hull.

2. Do the RFL care? You have picked a shockingly bad example because this is expansion. Expansion clubs don't need rich backers committed to putting in £2M a year ad infinitum do they. Look at the record.

Sugar daddies are now dying out. For some time those who run SL, Lenegan, McManus, Hetherington have said that it's about the business itself balancing the books. The last of the sugar daddies was Hudgell and he's given up now, O'Connor stated he wasn't coming into SL to bankroll Widnes ad infinitum, and he set a policy of getting 8,000 Widnes fans to achieve break even. Then there's Wilkinson. Again no more millions from him but a policy aiming for 8,000 fans to provide the money - it didn't come.

Doesn't look like there's any more £500K cheques from Fulton at Cas, and what about the last two big spenders to bring their newly revived clubs back into SL after administration? There's "I'm just a double glazing salesman like Gary" Glover. Who has come out to say he won't spend millions, and there's Mr. "Two Restaurants" Khan who many people gleefully pointed out won't have the millions to spend what with starters being £3.50 apiece and all you can eat for a tenner.

It's another wake up and smell the coffee moment for you. Would it matter if the Duke of Westminster took over Halifax? Are the RFL really going to have Bradford, Halifax and Fartown chasing the same fans and players? How about the Sultan of Brunei at Featerstone or Cas. He's gonna be pretty cheesed off when he learns he can't spend more than £1.65M

Besides are the RFL really going to allow three SL clubs in the Calder area. Just when Mr, Glover is set to set up a stand alone self sustaining business at Newmarket, are the RFL going to allow local rivals to get in the way of that? After all that is the Leeds model revered throughout RFL and SL. The Hudgell model has had it's day - and even Pearson has said his current spending spree (part aimed at breaking Rovers playing roster up) is temporary.

The fans may have won the battle in 1995 but the war is still not over.

The days of the sugar daddy look to be over now.....


1. That's not the point I made. The point was that you did not know whether Keighley had a backer or not and you still don't know. You only have your gut feelings.

2. Yes, I think the RL do care. After Paris, no backers, complete failure : Crusaders, Mark1 and Mark 11, insufficiently well heeled backers, failure : Sheffield Mark1, no backers, failure : Gateshead, no backers, failure : . London, several disasters until a stable backer has been found :. After that dismal record, I think there will be no further entries, expansion or not to SL without the money being in place.

3. You have too high a regard for the virtues of the SL movers and shakers. If those mega rich investors, you half jokingly throw out there for the championship clubs were available, they would let them join the party in a heartbeat. The 2 restaurant type lower level investors wouldn't last until the next SL management meeting. There is no loyalty. Money talks with these people.

4. It's you who need to wake up and smell the coffee. By the examples you have listed, many clubs presently in SL are not going to be sustainable businesses going forward. What will they do when their SL is reduced to a 4 or 5 team rump of profitable clubs.? The game is going to have to re organise at a lower financed level or die. This will allow the Sheffield's and Castleford's to compete. The present SL set up is a house of cards and unsustainable in the long term.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users