It IS ridiculously expensive to live in or around London. There must be a massive difference in the cost of running a Super League club.

As a point of comparison, I was living in 'rough' area of Surrey (Woking) and paying 550 for a ROOM in a shared flat. My sister was paying the same for a HOUSE in a nice area of Blackpool. As someone who'd been teaching for three years, I earned about 28 grand...my sister did the same job and earned about 23...and, she could afford a MUCH more comfortable lifestyle in the North than in the South....I was so tired of the extra expense of living in the South (where you're competing against people in the private sector with BIG salaries) that I seriously thought about going back North....but then jacked it all in and moved to China, where everything is cheap as chips. If Broncos want to relocate here, they'll have one fan at least! 10% is not London weighting....it might just be enough for the 'fringe' weighting that people in places like Surrey get. And yes, the further you move away from London, the more wages and living costs start to fall in to line with the rest of the country....Hemel Hemsptead and Watford would be more in line with the rest of the UK, but living costs would still be marginally more expensive.

I don't know what to suggest re. Broncos. I feel for the long suffering fans, who, yes, whilst being small in number, do exist. There is no easy solution and every possible one you could suggest has already been debated, at great length, by fans and by the club themselves. What I take issue with (and I've to correct my Warrington-based dad on several occasions about this) from Northern fans is this fallacy that the club have been bailed out and given preferential treatment. They haven't. Indeed, many other Northern clubs HAVE received the preferential treatment and RFL aid that London supposedly have had (e.g. Bradford).

As for the the current situation, I can't see London existing next season. If any new team is to succeed, they need an area where they are not swamped by competition from other local sport, they need some success on the field, some big signings and, importantly, lots of money dedicated to marketing the game. I think the Crusaders had some of this and I think this is why, initially at least, they had some success in Wrexham. How to do that with London, I don't know....I think the RFL/the rest of the Super League has to stump up the cash and make a go of it. If they don't want to do that, then, fair enough, back to the M62, Home of a 'national sport', Rugby League!

My Bad

Still, Harlequins RL were "sponsored" by Sports Café and Workplace Systems long after IL was told to leave the club by the RFL, so I would counter he has had something to do with development, given it was his cash that set up and funded the academy that has started to churn out SL players (notice I didn't say SL standard)

Are they still in SL next year then? :\

I'm not against the RFL helping out any clubs when they can. It is however a little two faced and hypocritical to claim membership of SLE and abrogate the Sky funds and refuse to share ANY with non SL members but when falling on hard times get out the begging bowl for assistance from he very organisation they refused to share with when pigging at the trough of Sky and SL.

As well as being massively financially hit when 1. Being booted out of the original Sl and 2 and 3 being forced into relegation twice when not in a relegation spot.