Let me give you a "french" point of view.

First, Paris isn't and wasn't a rugby desert. In the 80's, the racing club de France has been RU french champion. This team was known as the "show biz" team beacause many players worked in bars and discos. They played with bow ties, drank champagne on the field at half-time,...it was Paris and it was already different. In the 1950's the Celtic de Paris was a famous Rugby League team. Nowadays, the RU comité de Paris is the largest comité in France!

Second, Paris is Paris! In France, you have Paris and all the rest, called La Province. Paris is the for ideas, TV, money. If you want to exist, you have to be in Paris. So, a Paris SL team would be a great thing for the game in France and in Europe. The transaction is far from Stade Français money limits. A rasonable SL budget would be around 6 to 8 M€ while RU is aroud 18M€.

Third, this project is not only a league project but a part of a Stade Français global project. The club has been struggleing for few years for the renovation of his stadium. Two teams is always better that one to amortize

Four, project's leader is Bernard Laporte, former France RU manager and former secretary of sports. Laporte is a person open on the future. He has always been interested on Rugby League, most of all on NRL, because he understood the inovation process made in the game. He never took part of the french RU inteligentia, the Barbarians, and today he has no real place in the RU family. However, Laporte Family is still Rugby Union!

Five, a guy in Toulouse has been struggleing for years for increase quality of the game. He hasn't been all the time really helped. But today, he has a solid project in the pipe, more than 200 private partnairs, the public instittutions, a new stadium in view...Toulouse is the 4th french city and the rugbys capital. This guy don't receive all the support he would have.

So, as the fans say: "Paris is magic" but for the moment, Paris is "Show biz" and Toulouse exists...

no it isnt, an impartial view is one based on objective criteria,

and that would be criteria that wouldnt be biased in favour of English heartland clubs or objective criteria that allowed for the intrinsic bias for English heartland clubs,

if you want to pretend all clubs are in the same position, face the same issues, have the same opportunities and challenges go ahead, but it does make you look like an idiot

You sad get

Self sustaining as in Breaking even , you know , like a REAL ' business , you pay money to your employee's , they provide a product , your customers pay for that product and your business doesn't lose money

Stop acting thick , you have no need to

For once in your sad boring life , answer a simple bloody question

no, i dont expect them to have to break even i their first year, or even second year,

i would fully expect that the first couple of years at least would be loss making

i dont expect any club promoted to be breaking even or making a profit within its first couple of years

had you meant the club were in a position where that loss comes from internal rather than external sources, then yes, i woudl expect the club to budget to make a loss, and already had this covered with comfortable wiggle room

Excellent , have you got that from the RFL 's Franchise section

You can't really expect a sport club to be breaking even in their first year (some in 10 years) of a higher division. It's not important that they break even straight away. What is important is whether they have plans in place to eventually break even, when that will be, and how much investment it would need up until that point.

What I would also find important is how attractive that business would be to be taken over should the current owner decide enough is enough (i.e. what is rumoured to be happening at Crusaders). If they're losing too much and don't look like they'll ever see a return, no-one will take it, and hence the plug is gone. At least Harlequins have attracted backers.

If there is a high risk at a club, maybe a guarantee of some sort would be a good idea? We can't take a risk too big with nothing to come out of it if something goes wrong. If Crusaders go under it would be awful, and the RFL would be foolish to take a similar risk again.