Pathetic attendence, never going to work unfortunately.

I think the Quins should keep going until there is a viable London replacement coming through the ranks. All are dependent on Quins existing, but in the next 10-15 years it's possible that either the Skolars or the South London Storm could be the genuine RL article within the capital.

i live in barnet north london
it takes me 2hours to get to the stoop by car in west london

Working for Transport for london i have to say that west london is the worst part by far for traffic congestion and being so close to Heathrow doesn't help either.

part of the reason i think the crowds are low is it just doesn't seem to connect with Londoners and gets little or no exposure

Greater London is about 40 miles N/S
and 50 miles E/W
think how many pro teams in the north west there are in the same radius?

It has no identity, no ground and it's trading off a union name which in itself is detrimental.
Any one that might have been slightly interested in RL but supports say Saracens or London Irish isn't going to support what they now see as a rival team. When they were the broncos they had their own identity.

Fair points (remember the Broncos getting fairly good crowds in the mid-90's in SL), but why did they change to Quins then if they already had a good formula?

Because it wasn't a good formula

That is why it failed

The ' Quins ' formula was going to work

But it isn't

So what next ?

I was brought up on Union and I find the absence of scrums and line-outs a glorious relief. Total waste of time as a spectator.

I can't understand the frustrating lack of traction. I think the Quins brand is a good idea, as they are the runaway success in Union in London. I don't think the name is going to put off fans of other clubs if the Quins fans themselves aren't much interested. I have brought the parents of some of the kids I coach in mini-Union, many of whom are regular Quins Union fans, to the RL. They all claim to enjoy it, both the game and the livelier atmosphere despite the much smaller crowd, but they don't go back.

Not only do I feel it is a much more entertaining spectacle than Union, but I find the lighter spirits in the crowd a great relief after the bile and histrionics of football. I think there is a great deal of disaffection among football fans at the direction and expense of their game which could also be tapped (or is it just QPR?!) and newbie football fans would certainly find RL more accessible than Union.

Don't despair (yet). If the connection with Union gives us nothing else (apart from a superb ground of course) it is the model of a recognised name suddenly exploding in popularity and support. As has been pointed out, the RL side is so skint that the marketing spend has been slashed and the results are with us. One last push, please?

I'm not saying it doesn't happen.

Personally I find there is an actual dislike of RL from Union people of my age group. Not just the game itself but in the same way we have Union-haters there are plenty of League haters. I met plenty traveling who just looked down their noses at RL.

I just think the days when people would see a massive difference between the two have gone. 20 years ago you couldn't help but notice a difference in standard. Now that has gone. Plus people are protective of their own games, they are often reluctant to admit something else is better.

If somebody managed to create a hybrid of the two and it was much better than RL or RU, do you honestly think it would stand much chance of converting people on here? They would be openly hostile to it.

Is there a case (not just in London) for suggesting that with SL games now costing £17-£20 upwards, we are pricing out the "speculative, potential new fan"? I've brought work colleagues (lower league football fans) to occasional games in the past and they've enjoyed it, but they now see current prices as more than they want to pay for something that they are not "in to" yet.

By jove he's got it! Nobody has ever thought of marketing before!

Marketing is a cop out word that fans use to kid themselves that that is the problem. The Bulls drop is down to marketing, National League clubs need to market better, NRL clubs are crap at marketing. Of course it has a place but its massively overrated in my opinion and the logistics of it are often forgotten. Its amazing how many clubs don't understand how to run clubs as well as many keyboard warriors on here do.

On a separate note I'm glad people have stopped replying to your insane ramblings as are noticed on the other thread.

the trouble with Quins now is that even the loyal ones are moaning (as seen on many RLFans threads) about the ticketing arrangements (being forced into one stand) and about the lack of marketing, you have to fear for what will happen if even just a few of these give up on their season tickets next season. They seem to be annoying their existing support, without attracting anyone new.

When I lived in London ( for 18 years through the 70s and 80s ) I went to watch all the previous manifestations of the London club regularly, despite being a Wire by birth. I now live in Northamptonshire, not far on paper from The Stoop, but it takes more-or-less the same time to get to the Stoop from here as it does to get to Warrington, so there's no reason for me to follow my 'second team' any more.

Quins may have to stay at The Stoop for another ten years while RL continues to grow slowly at grass roots. It's tough surviving on such low crowds, but let's not forget ( as one Giants fan alluded above ) that Hudds - the 'home town' of Rl struggled for years with poor attendances, and Salford, another heartland club, still do.

I don't think ease of access should be underestimated. The Giants have managed to increase their crowds but it is easy to get to their ground.