The criteria laid down by the IMG, though not known yet, will cover a whole range of things including, but not exclusively on pitch sucess.
A lot of emphasis will be put on such things as finances i.e. debt and long-term sustainability of the clubs. Other criteria will cover such things as home attendances, plus off field activities such as pre match entertainment and clubs' ability to attract good sponsorship. Plus having a good youth set up.
Hull Kr are in a good position regarding long term sustainability. Having recently purchased their own ground and having some exiting long-term plans for ground and surrounding land development. They also get good crowds and have a decent youth set up. Plus, probably the best set up regarding pre match facilities in super league i.e. Craven streat.
Whether that will be enough in the short term to obtain a grade A remains to be seen. But in my opinion, they certainly have as good a chance as most of the others, especially as like I said. There will be a whole host of things likely to be considered as well as on field successes.

I just think you have to pick your poison and go for it.

Franchise or P&R, both have positives and negatives but mixing both will please few.

For me the issue with franchises last time was the cloak and dagger aspect and the fudging of the criteria.

How many clubs actually improved their facilities or made substantial progress last time.

The top league does not need equal fixtures either if it is running a playoff format at the end of the year, so. you could run a more nfl style system meaning if you match the minimum stand you are in.

This is what Martin Samuel, Chief Sports Writer of the Daily Mail thinks about the nonsense:-

It is a horrific plan. Slices at the heart, and soul, of sport. It’s an idea that nobody with any feeling for athletic competition should countenance, the blueprint of accountants and money men, masquerading as a vision.

The Daily Mail and people who write for it are poisonous scum. They have no interest in Rugby League other than to kick it, no interest in anything which changes the status quo other than to denigrate it.

Their opinions are either invalid or we should take any such criticism as good news, because they are invariably wrong about everything.

The daily mail that had a headline last Saturday saying "At last, a true Tory budget" best not to worry about anything they report

Yet many of you Mail haters must admit that he is correct in what he says.

Taking relegation out of the hands of the players and moving the decision to a committee is wrong.

Only if you assume relegation is a necessity of sport, an arbitrary cut off point were sports draw a line saying who can play who.
Licencing or Franchising enables leagues to be more flexible if used correctly.

We already have a situation were the best team over the course of 12 months is irrelevant to the title.

I've heard a few owners in the past say most SL clubs require at least 13 home games to keep their heads above water, so if that's still the case and they want to cut SL to 22 games a season, then they're going to have to find some extra home games from somewhere, so I assume that's the thinking behind having 2 legged cup games.

People didn't like franchising the last time we had it. Went back and found some news reports from when it was ended, and it was referred to as ''the much-maligned franchising system''. It's an interesting insight into the rugby league zeitgeist at the time, people forget. I don't really see that there will be any difference this time.

If you're wanting to increase eyes on the game it will never wash, as it goes against what's ingrained into sporting culture in this country. Stop looking at the US sports model and rugby league in Aus, it does not work over here. Just stop it.

What will most likely happen is that whatever this latest abomination is will be introduced, then after circa 5 or 6 years it will be disbanded amid unrest about things being 'stale' and the game needing 'new direction', and the IMG partnership will be ended early.

Can guarantee it.

With rugby league it always feels like a get-rich-quick scheme. Looking for the next magic bullet, the next shortcut to make it big. A new playoff format, a new competition structure, more teams, less teams, more loop fixtures, less loop fixtures, more games against the top teams (remember super 8's? why did we get rid of that?) The list just goes on and on. Remember club call? It's sad looking back at all these numerous different schemes, ultimately fruitless but never destined to make any difference anyway. I've lost count of the different playoff formats, and it starts to eat away at the integrity of the competition after a while.

If it isn't a 'get-rich-quick-scheme' it's like someone putting in place a 6-month phased training plan to get in shape but quitting it after a month. Supposed long-term plans will be made only to be scrapped after short-term implementation.

I feel like Rugby league had a boost from the introduction of super league for 10-15 years, but then it's gradually started to return to it's pre-super league condition, exacerbated by external socio-economic factors.

Spot on. If the Monorail man from The Simpsons came round RL would be all over it