The South African cricketer and fieldsman [iextraordinaire[/i Gus McKay delivered the news of London's relocation to Barnet on the BBC. Does that mean that he remains CEO for 2014?

Yep.
He is the only back office staff member with all administrative and marketing duties taken over by the team at the Hive in return for a fee and a share of the gate revenue and ALL the bar and food revenue.
The move protects nothing about top flight RL in the capital, but does give him a chance to brush up his CV,

Gutterfax's last posting could be written about so many RL clubs.

Maybe one day someone will bite the bullet and say enough is enough.

If that means the end of sacred clubs then so be it.

RL is touted as a business, so deal with it as a business and make the decisions that need to be made.

If some clubs disappeared I don't think many would be at the wake as things stand at the moment.

Gutters, or anyone else for that matter - A few genuine questions here, given the situation the club are in at the moment do you think moving to Barnet is a good move? Either as a stop gap or as a firm relocation to build from?

If a place to build from do you think they'd be better off renaming themselves after the local area? Barnet Broncos? Rather than as London?

The Stoop was costing £200k a year (in the 2012 report I have been shown). This cost represents 9% of the loss made by the club that year (£2,200,000) and when you take into account that ticket sales and ST revenue generated £323,000, then it is hard to fathom exactly why the move has happened? Administration costs of £630,000

David Hughes cares little for the £14,000,000 or so he has "lost". He does not accept any form of criticism or critical advice, he employed and then stuck with Powell, he employed the Current CEO with little in the way of formal interviews or background checks, he stands toe to toe with the RFL on a number of issues and essentially treats the club as HIS hobby. Some fans will accept this and to be fair, he is a ing legend for propping the club up, but a 5yr old could tell you that it is not a business model that would deliver any sustainability.

So in order to get Mr K involved in 2015 the club needs,by the end of 2014,to be getting close to 4k or 5k gates with an average admittance price of £40 a month ,and Mr K ,Barnet fc and the Hive have been given the Task?

in a nutshell? Yep!

A big job on there hands,lets hope the locals buy into it

Just to clarify the long term prospects for the London Broncos thanks to the new deal:

1. No club with an average under 10,000 in SL is self sufficient. They ALL make losses.
2. TK (guy at barnet) we are reliably informed does not invest.....he expects his teams to pay their own way
3. The Hive is currently a 5,200 capacity stadium.
4. See points 1 & 3 then re-read point 2.

Feel free to use a calculator if necessary!

Directors of clubs should IMO pay basic salaries they can afford under any scenario and then, on top, agree a schedule of player bonuses that increase in line with the home crowd they they play in front of. [A bit like the rental deal London Broncos has with Barnet FC].

Don't misunderstand me. I think RL players 'deserve' all the money they get and more (especially when you see what soccer players are paid).

But it stands to reason that directors can only afford to pay them more as crowds go up.

When the potential of relegation comes in under the 2x12, 3x8 structure, it will be up to club directors to decide if they want to try to 'speculate to accumulate' by paying higher salaries using their own money. If they fail and the club does get relegated (for which they have to be REALLY poor given the way the 2x12, 3x8 structure will work) another club will step up from the league below and see what they can do with the £1m+ Sky money each year (& the crowds they will then get).

There needs to be much clearer penalties for entities owning clubs suffering an insolvency event including points deduction for going into Administration and relegation to the bottom division for going bust.

THEN the Salary Cap nonsense can be scrapped. It costs a fortune in time, effort, avoidance activity and money to adminster. And it is serving no purpose. Apart the the game in this country shooting itself in the foot.

If an owner wants to boost his club (and the game here in general) using his own money to sign Billy Slater, Cooper Cronk, Shaun Johnson, Leigh Halfpenny or whoever, let them.

Sadly it would appear so.

I think the move is potentially a good one. Looking increasingly like another stop gap, though as the 'deal' is utter speculation, unless someone can point to real and public information on what it actually is?

As for a name any specific geographic name of an area within London could as equally limit the interest as a non specific name does. Problem is Barnet are currently based in Harrow! So which are we rebranding as?

They should NOT be in SL until they have at least capital of £3million per year to manage the club. This should be for all SL clubs.

How many clubs would be left in SL if that was applied?

Genuine question, I really do not know.