Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

London Broncos to appoint administrators

London Broncos London Broncos

  • Please log in to reply
395 replies to this topic

#81 Methven Hornet

Methven Hornet
  • Coach
  • 9,496 posts

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:26 PM

I'm back after my computer broke down. missed me have you ...,Thought not... ;)

 

I have been trying not to allow this slow motion car crash to spoli my RL World Cup. However what is going on is bizzare business logic

 

For the record there are two investors according to Gort who are interested

 

http://www.sportingl...-talks-continue

 

IMO for Tony Kleanthous read Moss and Roberts at Crusaders. Kleanthous is not an RL fan at all and the fact that Hughes favours him is yet another poor decision from the man who as another poster pointed out about John Wilkinson has run the club into the ground

 

If you are going into adminstration - unlike Bradford, why let go of your only assets (i.e the Players) such as Tommy Lee and Antonio Kaufusi by releasing them from their contracts and not getting a fee. Come to think of it was the "undisclosed fee" allegedly paid by Wigan for Tony Clubb used to pay up the contracts of Michael Robertson and Shane Rodney who were both contracted for 2014 ?

 

Perhaps Gus Mackay can tell us, now en route to Wrexham with another Broncos fan who has Gus Mackay's e-mail and number I was informed he is uncontactable. Our CEO's wherabouts now being on a par with Lord Lucan and Shergar's.

 

We are told that the move from Harlequins was down to the rent for the ground no longer fitting the club's financial model, the move to the Stoop being partly trigged by the Club's inability to afford the rent to Brentford FC. Kleanthous the "shrewd businessman" will not come cheap

 

As for alternative venues to Barnet, there are a few which would work out cheaper but would find favour with Mr Hughes, who is the man responsible for the club's decine into irrelevance. His legacy being :

 

A club without secure tenure at a home ground

A club with about five contracted players allegedly.

A club with no active Website, Facebook or Twitter account

A club with no staff to either market the club or sell tickets

A club with a fanbase of approx 600 season ticket holders last year and stands to lose at least 33% of those due to the move across London and disgust at the management of the club.

 

Marytn Sadler got it right in stating on Backchat the problems faced by the game could be sumed up nin two words London Broncos. For those of you suggesting the club gives nothing to the game, I would point out the benefits of a club in the Capital have always been predicated upon a successful RL club in terms of expanding the games gene pool, attracting more media attention and a higher class of sponsor. But that's not what we have. 

 

Organic Growth does not work as Parky has pointed out without a substantial stack of money, though I have to laugh at the hypocracy of posters who come on here and say my small Town / Village is dying because it cannot get into Super League and then say Broncos should drop down into the same KPC championship they are currently in to "rebuild".  

 

The approach of building demand advoced by Exiled Wiganer and Ray French is also the successful approach being adopted by the NFL with its International Series games at Wembley increasing from 1 to 2 and then 3 creating deamnd for the sport to the point at which within 5-10 years people will say "wy dont we have our own team". This of course is too radical an approach for a deeply traditionalist sport. So in the absence of that I would suggest that anyone with spare cash puts it into the London Skolars with a view to building a club so that when the more enlightened seize power within the game probably a couple of years of chaos and despair caused by the new RFL flatcap friendly masterplan. there is a club that would stand a better chance of making it in the big league than flogging a dead Bronco.

 

As for SKY well when Super League began Rugby League was high on its lists of properties, it is not now, SKY has more sporting "crown jewels" to promote in the summer months now so a geographically limited filler sport can indeed by shunted across the schedule to a "dead" evening such as Thursday nights as I predicted a few months ago. Such a sport will of course be one of those taking a hit in TV rights fees as SKY competes with BT Sport for the market will only take subscription to rise to a certain level. So SKY has no interest in the Broncos and is currently showing less interest in the game full stop.

 

I am afraid the decline of the Broncos mirrors the decline in the game as a whole in the Northern Hemisphere for once the tab of ecstacy that is the World Cup has worn off there will be a reckoning.

 

An excellent post.

As for "when the more enlightened seize power within the game" it is going to be a lot longer than two years, An iron curtain is descending over British rugby league, and the consequences aren't going to be pretty.


"There are now more pandas in Scotland than Tory MPs."

#82 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 22 November 2013 - 10:34 PM

 

 I and spectators who also have a background in other sports, including one sporting club historian, always felt while watching Bronquins geting hammered  in the wide open space of the Stoop "How on earth do they pay the bills?".

 

In the same way Salford, Gateshead, Huddersfield, Paris, Bradford, Crusaders, Wakefield, HKR, Sheffield, Oldham, Leigh, Castleford, Keighley, Barrow, Widnes etc paid/pay theirs.

 

As long as they can until Mr. Richie Rich decides he's had enough.

 

The only thing that enables our game to be professional without Richie is to accept that strategic planning, mergers (outright or by stealth) and a 10/12 club SL competitive from top to bottom through whatever contrivances achieve this is a last throw of the dice.

 

If that sounds mean the fair enough, split the SKY money 37 ways and let's enjoy our descent back into the brave minority sport that made us all love it in the first place.  IMVHO of course....



#83 Big Picture

Big Picture
  • Coach
  • 1,167 posts

Posted 22 November 2013 - 11:06 PM

THE RED ROOSTER, on 22 Nov 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:snapback.png

I'm back after my computer broke down. missed me have you ...,Thought not... ;)

 

I have been trying not to allow this slow motion car crash to spoli my RL World Cup. However what is going on is bizzare business logic

 

For the record there are two investors according to Gort who are interested

 

http://www.sportingl...-talks-continue

 

IMO for Tony Kleanthous read Moss and Roberts at Crusaders. Kleanthous is not an RL fan at all and the fact that Hughes favours him is yet another poor decision from the man who as another poster pointed out about John Wilkinson has run the club into the ground

 

If you are going into adminstration - unlike Bradford, why let go of your only assets (i.e the Players) such as Tommy Lee and Antonio Kaufusi by releasing them from their contracts and not getting a fee. Come to think of it was the "undisclosed fee" allegedly paid by Wigan for Tony Clubb used to pay up the contracts of Michael Robertson and Shane Rodney who were both contracted for 2014 ?

 

Perhaps Gus Mackay can tell us, now en route to Wrexham with another Broncos fan who has Gus Mackay's e-mail and number I was informed he is uncontactable. Our CEO's wherabouts now being on a par with Lord Lucan and Shergar's.

 

We are told that the move from Harlequins was down to the rent for the ground no longer fitting the club's financial model, the move to the Stoop being partly trigged by the Club's inability to afford the rent to Brentford FC. Kleanthous the "shrewd businessman" will not come cheap

 

As for alternative venues to Barnet, there are a few which would work out cheaper but would find favour with Mr Hughes, who is the man responsible for the club's decine into irrelevance. His legacy being :

 

A club without secure tenure at a home ground

A club with about five contracted players allegedly.

A club with no active Website, Facebook or Twitter account

A club with no staff to either market the club or sell tickets

A club with a fanbase of approx 600 season ticket holders last year and stands to lose at least 33% of those due to the move across London and disgust at the management of the club.

 

Marytn Sadler got it right in stating on Backchat the problems faced by the game could be sumed up nin two words London Broncos. For those of you suggesting the club gives nothing to the game, I would point out the benefits of a club in the Capital have always been predicated upon a successful RL club in terms of expanding the games gene pool, attracting more media attention and a higher class of sponsor. But that's not what we have. 

 

Organic Growth does not work as Parky has pointed out without a substantial stack of money, though I have to laugh at the hypocracy of posters who come on here and say my small Town / Village is dying because it cannot get into Super League and then say Broncos should drop down into the same KPC championship they are currently in to "rebuild".  

 

The approach of building demand advoced by Exiled Wiganer and Ray French is also the successful approach being adopted by the NFL with its International Series games at Wembley increasing from 1 to 2 and then 3 creating deamnd for the sport to the point at which within 5-10 years people will say "wy dont we have our own team". This of course is too radical an approach for a deeply traditionalist sport. So in the absence of that I would suggest that anyone with spare cash puts it into the London Skolars with a view to building a club so that when the more enlightened seize power within the game probably a couple of years of chaos and despair caused by the new RFL flatcap friendly masterplan. there is a club that would stand a better chance of making it in the big league than flogging a dead Bronco.

 

As for SKY well when Super League began Rugby League was high on its lists of properties, it is not now, SKY has more sporting "crown jewels" to promote in the summer months now so a geographically limited filler sport can indeed by shunted across the schedule to a "dead" evening such as Thursday nights as I predicted a few months ago. Such a sport will of course be one of those taking a hit in TV rights fees as SKY competes with BT Sport for the market will only take subscription to rise to a certain level. So SKY has no interest in the Broncos and is currently showing less interest in the game full stop.

 

I am afraid the decline of the Broncos mirrors the decline in the game as a whole in the Northern Hemisphere for once the tab of ecstacy that is the World Cup has worn off there will be a reckoning.

 

An excellent post.

As for "when the more enlightened seize power within the game" it is going to be a lot longer than two years, An iron curtain is descending over British rugby league, and the consequences aren't going to be pretty.

I agree with both of you, this really does underscore the weakness of RL in the UK at the very time when the World Cup ought to be raising the sport's profile and commercial prospects.

 

It seems to me that the "M62 brigade" if I can call them that have extremely unrealistic ideas about what the sport needs in order to have a national profile and national media coverage and attract big money sponsors.  In short they harbour the fantasy that RL can remain a minor, regional sport and still deserve those things, when in reality only major, national sports do.

 

The big-money sponsors want national exposure for their sponsorhips, which implies national media coverage.  The national media want to print/broadcast stories of interest to people throughout the country, i.e. not just in Leeds and Hull but also in London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Newcastle, Southampton, Nottingham, Bristol, etc.

 

To get the big-money sponsors, RL first needs to demonstrate that national appeal.  To demonstrate that national appeal it must demonstrate that it's a national sport and not just a regional one at the pro level.  That's been the challenge since before the SL era began and it remains so today, and a pro team in London is only the beginning of what is needed to meet that challenge.

 

How the game's administrators can tackle it is hard to see in view of their past blunders, but unless they do you'll have a hard time keeping up with New Zealand internationally let alone Australia.


Edited by Big Picture, 22 November 2013 - 11:06 PM.


#84 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 07:20 AM

I agree with both of you, this really does underscore the weakness of RL in the UK at the very time when the World Cup ought to be raising the sport's profile and commercial prospects.

 

It seems to me that the "M62 brigade" if I can call them that have extremely unrealistic ideas about what the sport needs in order to have a national profile and national media coverage and attract big money sponsors.  In short they harbour the fantasy that RL can remain a minor, regional sport and still deserve those things, when in reality only major, national sports do.

 

The big-money sponsors want national exposure for their sponsorhips, which implies national media coverage.  The national media want to print/broadcast stories of interest to people throughout the country, i.e. not just in Leeds and Hull but also in London, Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Newcastle, Southampton, Nottingham, Bristol, etc.

 

To get the big-money sponsors, RL first needs to demonstrate that national appeal.  To demonstrate that national appeal it must demonstrate that it's a national sport and not just a regional one at the pro level.  That's been the challenge since before the SL era began and it remains so today, and a pro team in London is only the beginning of what is needed to meet that challenge.

 

How the game's administrators can tackle it is hard to see in view of their past blunders, but unless they do you'll have a hard time keeping up with New Zealand internationally let alone Australia.

 

My word how very well put indeed.

 

Again the success of the World cup in terms of media interest and crowds against the dying championship fought out in secret somewhere in the north of England only tells us one thing IMVHO, which is we need to have as elite a product as we can get with some geographical width.

 

To get one the World cup was largely a contrived tournament with contrived teams, which IMVHO tells us another thing, that preserving local village clubs creates a nice warm feeling, as does adding tiny clubs outside the M62 to the third tier, but the rest of the world just passes us by.


Edited by The Parksider, 23 November 2013 - 07:22 AM.


#85 tw15

tw15
  • Coach
  • 105 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 08:28 AM

It's quite fun to be completely dismissive of all the hullabaloo there is around soccer and say you're only interested in RL, but the disinterest I have in soccer is reflected by many people's disinterest in RL. 

 

A 12 team league with more teams outside of the M62 is the way to go. Otherwise it's like watching Scottish football, Aussie Rules or NRL, in that for most people there's no association or attachment to clubs playing in places you barely know. In the South East, places like Castleford, Wakefield, St Helens, Wigan and Huddersfield are places somewhere up north. They could probably point to Leeds, Hull and Manchester on a map, but again they can seem far away.

 

For the press to pay attention, the sport needs a successful Super League team in the South East.


Edited by tw15, 23 November 2013 - 08:29 AM.


#86 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,740 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 08:56 AM

How much of the debate can be informed by the origins and development of the Auckland Warriors\NZ Warriors? Lessons? Parallels?

Edited by JohnM, 23 November 2013 - 08:56 AM.


#87 yipyee

yipyee
  • Coach
  • 1,362 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 09:35 AM

Do you think that the Magic weekend could work in London?

And given the other sporting events at Wembley, and the need to keep it apart from the Challenge Cup final, when would you have it on?


Olympic stadium,?
Utilise the running track between games?
Mascot races fastest man in super league, fastest fan in super league. ..etc

#88 westlondonfan

westlondonfan
  • Coach
  • 518 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 09:37 AM

Rugby league can work in London.
Super League isn't an achievable dream in anything but the long-term

And how would you define long-term?

#89 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 2,003 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 09:43 AM

That's simply not true.

 

The number who are prepared to turn up week in week out to watch woeful football played at a club that has lacked direction, drive and ambition for far, far too long is declining but that would be true anywhere.

 

I've read this a couple of times re-writing a clever reply and then it dawned on me it's a contradiction. All the first line needs to state is agree with my post and it would make sense.



#90 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,457 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 09:53 AM

I've read this a couple of times re-writing a clever reply and then it dawned on me it's a contradiction. All the first line needs to state is agree with my post and it would make sense.

 

It's not a contradiction.  "London Broncos" mean a lot to a substantial number of people.

 

The proportion of those people who, having endured season after season of poor, uncommitted performances, terrible marketing and promotion, strategy-less decision-making and clueless communication, are prepared to part with their hard-earned money and time, let alone trust the current administration, is getting close to zero.

 

The Broncos can still be saved but it requires two things that seem unlikely to happen.  It requires a commitment from the RFL for stability and, given how late in the day we are, it requires dispensation on salary cap and quota(*).  Get both those and it appears that London will be playing at The Hive in Super League next season - get neither and Super League will have 13 teams next year.

 

(* = I'm not saying London deserve this by the way, just that that's what it's going to take.  I also don't see how any club from the Championship can step up now without a similar agreement.)


  • abd likes this
Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#91 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,705 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 11:19 AM

And how would you define long-term?


I think that is as long as it would take for hemel hempstead and london Skolars to build up their playing rosters from local talent, their paying attendances, their advertising and sponsorship revenues, their off the field operations like marketing etc. without recourse to a private investor gifting them shedloads of money. So my guess is infinity?

#92 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,829 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 11:36 AM

This administration could be the best thing to happen for London RLFC. David Hughes just didnt have sufficient time, money or strategy to take the Broncos forward and the club would have gone under. Lets hope the clubs stays alive somehow even if they end up playing on Mitcham Common

#93 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,752 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 12:41 PM

It's not a contradiction.  "London Broncos" mean a lot to a substantial number of people.

 

The proportion of those people who, having endured season after season of poor, uncommitted performances, terrible marketing and promotion, strategy-less decision-making and clueless communication, are prepared to part with their hard-earned money and time, let alone trust the current administration, is getting close to zero.

 

The Broncos can still be saved but it requires two things that seem unlikely to happen.  It requires a commitment from the RFL for stability and, given how late in the day we are, it requires dispensation on salary cap and quota(*).  Get both those and it appears that London will be playing at The Hive in Super League next season - get neither and Super League will have 13 teams next year.

 

(* = I'm not saying London deserve this by the way, just that that's what it's going to take.  I also don't see how any club from the Championship can step up now without a similar agreement.)

 

 

Just how would you define or quantify " a commitment from the RFL for stability"?

 

Surely the SL clubs have had this for at least the past six years yet I fail to see how London have capitalised upon this.


Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#94 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,457 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 01:58 PM

Just how would you define or quantify " a commitment from the RFL for stability"?

 

Surely the SL clubs have had this for at least the past six years yet I fail to see how London have capitalised upon this.

 

I didn't say London deserved it.  I said that without it they will cease to exist.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#95 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 03:07 PM

And how would you define long-term?

I wouldn't as a rule but it's going to be a minimum of 20 years.



#96 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,752 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 03:48 PM

I didn't say London deserved it.  I said that without it they will cease to exist.

 

 

But how do you define it, or is it simply some sort of intangible?


Edited by Blind side johnny, 23 November 2013 - 03:48 PM.

Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#97 gingerjon

gingerjon
  • Coach
  • 29,457 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 03:52 PM

But how do you define it, or is it simply some sort of intangible?

 

Personally I would define it in this instance as: "whatever changes we enact to the league structure you will be guaranteed a period in Super League of at least 3 years.  During this time we will review, with a view to removing, the exemptions to salary cap and quota that you enjoy when you enter the league."

 

I'd also expect any Championship club being pitched in for next year (although I believe this isn't an option) to have a similar commitment.  Otherwise, I don't see how any team can be expected to get a squad together or build to exist beyond 2014.


Cheer up, RL is actually rather good
- Severus, July 2012

#98 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,752 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 04:00 PM

Personally I would define it in this instance as: "whatever changes we enact to the league structure you will be guaranteed a period in Super League of at least 3 years.  During this time we will review, with a view to removing, the exemptions to salary cap and quota that you enjoy when you enter the league."

 

I'd also expect any Championship club being pitched in for next year (although I believe this isn't an option) to have a similar commitment.  Otherwise, I don't see how any team can be expected to get a squad together or build to exist beyond 2014.

 

 

OK, fair enough and worth consideration I suppose.


Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#99 Lounge Room Lizard

Lounge Room Lizard
  • Coach
  • 6,575 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 04:03 PM

Melbourne Storm are no longer owned/run by newcorp but by a International group called Holding MS. Funny enough Mark Evans who was once with the Harlequins Rugby group is involved. Whilst it has received millions from Sky that is not the main reason they have been successful. Having a good structure and developing good relationships with AFL clubs, The City of Melbourne as well as the State of Victoria have also been key reasons to the success of Melbourne Storm. Thats something the London Broncos/Harlequins have never had or really tried to do that much with regards to working with key local authorities. Also the Melbourne Storm work very hard with development and with local clubs-again something the London broncos have failed miserably with. Throwing money at something is not the key to success. It may help but there are far more other key parts that often are not noticed or forgotten about



#100 Northern Sol

Northern Sol
  • Moderator
  • 17,307 posts

Posted 23 November 2013 - 04:19 PM

Personally I would define it in this instance as: "whatever changes we enact to the league structure you will be guaranteed a period in Super League of at least 3 years.  During this time we will review, with a view to removing, the exemptions to salary cap and quota that you enjoy when you enter the league."

 

I'd also expect any Championship club being pitched in for next year (although I believe this isn't an option) to have a similar commitment.  Otherwise, I don't see how any team can be expected to get a squad together or build to exist beyond 2014.

Broncos still have one year left on their current three year licence. During this time, their attendances have plummet, they've lost their home and no longer have a team. At the moment, they couldn't even field a sevens side.

 

I really don't see how another period of three years will help.

 

The quota means little since their players would need permission for the UKBA to play. The salary cap means even less since they don't have the money to pay anywhere near the cap.







0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users