My original point though was in response to numerous posts suggesting that clubs wanting to be promoted should find someone to ' bankroll ' them, when in reality, it wont happen, as Stevo pointed out tonight, just confirming how difficult it is outside the top flight to gain corporate support

Also the lack of a single financial backer was part of the RFL s criticism of Fax in their SL application

Doesnt matter,

You said it was the nature of sport that caused Bradford to overspend under pressure for success, that was your premise, not mismanagement, not fortune, but overspending under pressure for success which caused Bradfords problems, that would apply to them wherever they were, the only thing which would change would be the measure of success, i.e promotion if they were in the championships, titles if they were in SL. So regardless of which league they were in, Bradford would have overspent under pressure of success.

And on your point about Halifax, were they regularly making a profit under P+R? Did relegation help them? after their financial meltdown in 2003 and subsequent relegation were their financial troubles sorted? were they financially stable between 2004 and 2008, their time in the championship post relegation pre franchising?
Is it not possible that Fax can post a profit now because the 'pressure for success' is less or at least less immediate, under a franchised SL? This despite the championships apparently not being able to find sponsors or investors?

Isnt the lack of a financial backer what has caused these issues at Bradford? Wouldnt a financial backer be able to cover this, what you would hope would be temporary, issue? Aren't Bradford right now absolutely desperately trying to search for a financial backer to give them the necessary investment to change their fortunes? It seems like having someone to cover the bad times is pretty much absolutely necessary if you are to survive.

I think your wrong there. If P+R were in place, it would be a lot easier to demote any club to the lower divisions who found a team with misdemeaners. Instead we have thousands of posters telling the rest of the RL community why their team must not lose their licence.

That was the essence of the discussion on the TV programme, essentially if the RFL dont guarantee the Bulls continued membership of SL past the end of this season, they will struggle to find a new owner

Chairmen might not agree with you, but by the same token they're not insane. A lot of people believe, with a fair amount of justification it has to be said, that what you say above is contradictory. By far the biggest draw for fans and sponsors is the team on the pitch. It simply comes down to good investment decisions. For example, take Jonny Wilkinson in his prime. It's not an insane argument to claim that signing him (which would have bust the cap of any club) would have been an investment rather than a cost. Not in terms of performance (he'd be no better than average, although a great goal kicker), but bums on seats, sponsors, and general profile of League. Our 'peak' in terms of media interest was during the years that Union players such as Davies were coming into the game.

I said 'not an insane argument' deliberately - I'm not saying it would have worked out as *good* idea - it could easily have gone wrong ...my point is simply that saying 'cut costs and bring in more sponsors' is way too simplistic. Money and names attracts more money, more names and more sponsors. Its a tight-rope, but spending (even on players salaries) isn't the same as wasting money if its done with commercial insight. And, yes, mistakes happen too, but 'cut', 'cut', 'cut' is the road to ever-dwindling income, and ultimately a worse state of affairs. Tories are slowly learning that too.

Would it? how many times did this happen during the P+R experiment?

I know. How jealous those clubs must be of all the corporate support that has flooded into top flight club Bradford these past few years.

So you’re argument is that investors are staying away because they don’t want to invest in a Bradford which isn’t in SL, despite the fact that Bradford havent been able to find anyone after about 4 years looking for investors whilst they were guaranteed to be in SL.

Are you under the impression there is someone waiting in the wings to put the necessary funds in to Bradford, but only on the proviso they get relegated, lose all their young players, decimate their youth set-up, spend a year paying and playing players not good enough SL, So they can get promoted and try and rebuild their youth set-up, wait for it to pay dividends again, and completely rebuild their playing squad all with the spectre of relegation happening again, and the whole cycle starting again, constantly hanging over them?

With P & R would Widnes be able to stick to there X year plan to build. No they would now be panicking and bringing in players.

As would London who are currently playing far to many youngsters, which is there stated strategy to bring through Londoners

Then there is Cas. Seeing London and Widnes panicking would bring about panic there too.

Spend spend spend.

Fax, Leigh, Fev are yesterdays teams. Accept what you have its your level.

Under P&R Widnes wouldn't be in SL as they never won th CC Grand Final. HTH

I have , thats why I dont go anymore

It happened with Widnes and Celtic Crusaders, so somebody would.