Are you referring to "Having budgeted for a crowd of 16,000" from the article? If so, I read that as being a possible attendance for the Bradford-Leeds derby this Friday rather than for several other Bradford crowds.

And that decision, in and of itself, should be enough to dissuade any right-thinking Bradford fan from bailing out the current BoD; my 12 year old manages his pocket money more sensibly than that.

National Advertising is more expensive than regional. Regardless of your rather simplistic view, without a team in the SE, the perception of advertisers would be that Superleague is a Local hobby and not deserving of a National ad rate.....

and the only way to measure the influence of your advertising is to look at the teams on the field and where they play their home games...
I can't imagine these companies doing any other research, say into the viewer demographics, before committing their budgets to advertising during Super league coverage or elsewhere.

You'd be stunned at how lazy some advertisers are, but you make a valid point.

I have no doubt Rupert Murdochs lot own the Storm and plough millions into the club because of the 11,000 fans they get or the 90,000 TV viewers........nothing to do with the perception of the entire state being available as viewers.......simply because they "like the idea" of a team in Victoria

The first season of ESL SKY wanted a London team.......since then, their stance may have changed, but when we went to the wall in 2005 we broke no rules and were admitted back into the league by a democratic vote......and the club have never finished in a relegation position.

I believe the lack of fans and investors will come to the fore in 2013 if not sooner, at which stage, the club will only have themselves to blame....kind of like Bradford now. The difference being that London won't try and blame everyone other than themselves.........unlike Bradford now.

I'm not sure RBS constitute "everyone other than themselves".