The RFL would no doubt create some sort of dispensation if Wigan asked.

Is David Hughes unwell

He's fskin' insane!! Don't ya think?

Glad to see you did not miss a chance to make yourself look obsessed there...

Bren - Spot on but unfortunately too many Bulls fans can't see this at the moment. Hopefully when the initial emotions fade they will realise that this is the way forward to secure the longer term future of the club, just as the Wakey fans did!

Q:What's the difference between eccentricity and insanity?
A: About £25,000,000



London Broncos, who "saddo" had mentioned a number of times in this and other threads, are 100% debt free. No bank loans, no overdraft facility, no mortgage or any other form of debt.
David Hughes "invests" between £1,000,000 and £1,500,000 a year with the full realisation that he will probably never see a penny of that money again.

He could take up golf if he wanted to waste a bit of money getting depressed

But that isn't sustainable in the long run is it????? If i took an AK47 to David's head tomorrow what would happen to London Broncos? If i planted a bomb under Ken Davy's car - what future for Huddersfield?

Pack of cards lad - that's what SL is standing on right now. But we've got 200 adverts on some lorries, so we're alright. In the ill-fated words of a would-be Prime Minister - "We're alright!!!" [size=150"We're alright!!" [/size[size=200We're alright"!![/size

Not at all...but that's a different subject entirely.
I have, for over 10 years now, banged on and on and on and on and on....about the way to become self sufficient...
1 Attract fans. 2. Turn these fans into regular Fans with Season tickets. 3. Keep repeating points 1 & 2 until you have a stadium that is 2/3 full....
4. This will appeal to sponsors and investors alike, as there is a product, an audience and room for growth and expansion.

I have watched the club systematically fail to even attempt the above in awe at the naivity of those supposedly in charge of this and often wondered if there is a business anywhere in the UK that is as badly run.

Well, it seems I may have an answer to this now.....Bradford it would seem are even worse than London.

Every bit of that is total bollox. And I can prove it, if I could be bothered. Just go get the accounts since 1997 from Companies house. I have them all, and am quite familiar with them. Do you? Are you?

Just for starters: the bank is/was a secured creditor. Not a "preferred" (sic) creditor. Crown preference was abolished years ago, so the tax man is unsecured like every other creditor. The Bulls did not borrow money, apart from some early-doors modest advances from directors, for years - up until around three years ago they were essentially debt-free and cash-rich. They have never had any long term debt beyond a tiny bit of HP. The club did not have an overdraft until very recently. A bank cannot wind a club up. The reason the bank has pulled the facility is precisely BECAUSE the club has sold off the principal asset over which its facilities were secured.

SO, now we have demonstrated you are talking out of your backside as usual, I suggest you shut the fekk up until you can get a few facts marginally right?

I've seen you mention on another thread - Is David Hughes quitting this year?

As you admit, that's only relevant for as long as Hughes remains interested. And lets face it, with 2,000 crowds, the team bottom, the lack of sponsorship and absolutely no positive signs at all, how long will that be? He'll get bored soon enough and I don't think the Broncos could survive a month and they would be mighty lucky to find another buyer. For London, it's case of when rather than if.

So they did follow their rule book then,your just pi44ed that the rules they followed were new ones.
And yes the new rules inadvertently,along with the gash quality of Halifaxs application,enabled Wakefield to retain a franchise.

But not as ' gash ' as the Bulls application it would seem?

Right now, i'm glad it was gash. I read the Widnes forum - nothing but misery, and they've got a millionaire backer!!! Fax in SL without a backer?. No thanks

David Hughes will invest for 2 more years after this....then, as he has told us the fans and the RFL, he will cease to in a position to continue with the level of investment he currently contributes.
At this point, either the club will step down a grade, or the RFL/News Ltd will grow a set of bollox and do what they should have done in 1996 and/or 2005.....take ownership. Whichever happens, the London Broncos at that time will be debt free.
All of the other clubs and scenarios you mention will be as a result of DEBT and Insolvency/administration.......this will not be the case in London.

If the RFL want to press ahead with expansion and development of TGG, then it is my opinion that a professional team in London is key, but, if on the other hand, they decide to step back and strengthen their position along the M62, then it will be time to cut London loose and risk undoing the years of development work that is only now starting to pay dividends.

What a shame a long term vision was sold to everyone, when in actual fact it was more like Greek farmers spending subsidies on Porsches. Drip drip drip............
The Red Hall cupboard will be bare if this continues. Major reality check needed and people in the SL Ivory towers will need to see beyond their benefactors papering over the cracks in flimsy business models, it could be anyone next. It's Bradfords turn just now.

But you shouldnt have been put in the position in the 1 st place

The same 'pack of cards' as every other sport in this country at a professional level. We are no different from football, rugby union, ice hockey or whatever, 1% of clubs would survive without people throwing money into the big bonfire.

That's why it makes me laugh people blaming the sponsorship deal. Do you think Bradford would have paid off debts with the money or spent it on more players? I know what most clubs would do!

Apart from not been sure that a bank cannot wind up a club, the rest of your last point I fully agree with if you sell the asset the bank has as security generally this needs to be replaced which I would have thought would be difficult to do and a guarantee may not have been enough! In simple terms you he a mortgage you sell your house you expect to pay the bank back with the proceeds of sale and not just pocket all the cash

Banks don't pull overdrafts without good reason. They have to treat customers fairly and consider the reputational risk of their actions. Any business that says their bank just pulled their od without warning is just blaming an easy target and not taking responsibility for its own failings (and breach of covenants). What I don't understand is why the bank would have agreed to the sale of the lease for odsal to the rfl if it was securing their overdraft. They would have had to release their security...and i would've thought they would only agree to this in return for alternative security or a substantial reduction in debt. Unless rfl had first charge over the lease?

Presumably any funds pledged by fans will be held in a trust account to give them some protection. Still, I would have thought admin or cva is the more sensible option.

Is it time to take a big step back, take a long look at the game, and suggest that perhaps all but our very best 50 players or so should go back to being part time? I've no suggestion as to how those 50 players would be distributed, but we can't afford to go on paying full time wages across SL on part time income.
Perhaps if the general financial situation ever picks up, then we can go back to full time, but at the moment the game must be losing money from every club.

I can't see how the game can keep on surviving on this level of income for ever.


In the meantime - and more on topic - I fully believe the best way forward is to fold the current Bradford club and relaunch. Anything else is just postponing the inevitable.

As someone else has stated above, the idea that professional sports teams exist to make money is a nonsene. There isn't an RL club in existence that doesn't owe its existence to benefactors of some sort or other, and RL is not alone in that either. If a Russian billionaire decided to bankroll the sport the vast majority of any new money would go to players. The chances of clubs using significant extra cash to safeguard their longterm future are negligible.

I suspect that London's finances, being underwritten for two years, are more solid than most SL clubs.

Spot on!