Whilst that figure is a little disappointing I don't think it's as bad as it seems.
The FA's revenue from "sponsorship & licensing" is only 16% of its income, and their broadcasting and government income is 43% of revenue.

As for net asset value, the RFL doesn't own anything other than Red Hall, so it has few assets. Unless we build a national stadium, which is unnecessary and unlikely then it'll remain that the RFL has few assets.

They own a few places don't they?

Whitebank, Spotland, Cougar Park, Odsal...?

These will be 2011 figures so Odsal won't be on there yet, and IIRC Oldham Council bought Whitebank, Spotland is jointly owned by the clubs and Cougar Park is owned by the co-op. Though I'll happily admit I'm not 100% sure on them all and I haven't had my cake fix for today.

For some reason I can't view the link, but 3% sponsorship after a 4 Nations year is awful and shows why I and others have serious doubts regarding the abilities of the guys running the show to maximise our potential and achieve real value for our product.
They can suck up the freebies from the non producers but can't sell to the real world.

If it were 4% would it be awful?

3% is less than a million and compares poorly with the RFU's £16 million which represented 13% of income for them - don't you agree?

these figures dont include Super League revenue, as that is a seperate Limited company.

So sponsorship income for the RFL is limited to Internationals and the Challenge Cup.

Thats not bad then

I despair of RL fans, they would find some complaint no matter what.

Great figures, great information and hugely positive from the RFL

RL Fans whinge - the games biggest threat is its own fans.

We're Northern, of course we complain

History shows us that some believe anything they are told because they want to believe it, no matter what evidence unfolds before them. Those questioning the propoganda at the time are often persecuted and ridiculed, but ultimately proved right.

The report says 'cost controls are working but sales are poor in comparison to our competition' as a result I would be asking why are sales so poor, and questioning the capabilities of those driving them.

Some people accept mediocrity, some want to be the best they can be. Maybe that's the RFL's problem and those blindly supporting them on here. We are in a competitive market, we do not need non producers leading us.

You haven't answered the question, is 4% of revenue enough for sponsorship or would that be poor as well?

If you haven't noticed there's a recession going on, with a sport based primarily in poorer areas of the country do you think that recession may have an effect? Or is that the RFL's fault too?

They've made record revenue and you're b|tching and whining and calling it pathetic. It beggars belief.

Oh and which non-producer are you talking about? Richard Lewis or Maurice Watkins?

I answered it, you're just thick.