definitely, the costs were huge and the bulls didnt have the cash to cover it and have probably been playing catch up since then.
Harris being terrible on his return just compounded this!

If Bradford had have opted for the dropping down the league system what do people think would have happened for the rest of SL?

Would we have brought say a Halifax or Featherstone up?

Would we have reduced the league numbers?

Would the result have impacted other clubs or would they have managed without Bradford?

I know that Bradford have never been big travellers to Saints, but the impact on other clubs closer to home may have been more significant!

I thought this thread was about how the RFL treated Bradford with favouritism and not a debate as to how they became the shambles of a club we have today? Or is it easier for some to ignore this and instead muddy the waters by hypothesising as to who is to blame for the financial meltdown at the club over a selective period of time?

London have cut back their squad to the extent that they are odds on to finish bottom in 2014, Wakefield have slashed and burnt across their playing roster so as to keep their heads above water but Bradford seem to have retained 90% of their squad, laid off back office and support staff and still have little in the way of a resolution to their exact ownership or a business plan other than a summer concert extravaganza! The RFL are pandering to the club because without Bradford in Superleague, they run a real risk of owning the lease on a ground that the tenants can't afford to pay rent on....a lease they should never have bought and a transaction that has now become a rod for their own back!
It would seem that once the ownership issue is resolved, Bradford will continue to spend based on flawed predictions of income from ticketing and other events, purely in the hope of avoiding the drop.

All of this fiscal suicide is being overseen and approved by the RFL and yet people still question the SL chairmen who have doubts as to the fiscal abilities of the RFL in regards to SL.

Is it being overseen because the sl club chairman want it that way?,Macmannus pretty much made it clear bradford must be kept in sl at all costs.

Indeed, it seems a convenient ' drift ' has occured, which is probably not a bad thing, we established what happened in the pub , and there is little to add that will expand upon it

But just to again confirm the ' timeline ' ,it was a matter of just a few months after being given a B licence that the RFL were loaning them over half a million pounds, and then thinking up some ' cock and bull ' rubbish to justify it, is it any wonder that licencing has failed

Whatever the outcome of the meetings, this type of thing must never happen again

As a fan of London, I am well versed in the benefits associated with any particular club being IN superleague in regards to the fiscal consequences of them NOT being in Superleague.

Let us say Bradford Bulls bring an average of 1,500 fans to their Away games and let us assume that a ticket is £20. If we allow for a further spend of £20 per fan on residuals (beer/food/shop/program) then Bradford Bulls being in SL generates £60,000 in additional match day revenue foe each of the 13 SL clubs they visit over the season.

London Broncos, who I believe it is safe to assume have the lowest turn over of the current 14 clubs, used £4,385,000 to get through the 2012 season. Bradford's £60,000 is 1.4% of their turn over and whilst that 1.4% is welcome, it is hardly a catastrophe if it is lost.

SL clubs are 100% responsible for their own revenue generation methods. Away fans are the sugar on the cherry on the top.....HOME fans are the bread and butter.

MacMannus and the other chairmen who bemoan the lack of away fans do so to get themselves in print. In reality, 10,000 home fans would deliver £4,000,000 a year in revenue (using the generous figures above) and self sufficiency, but rather than go the extra mile and finding them (I believe HKR will get very close this year) then whinge about insignificant statistics. Away fans are a revenue stream a home team has little control over.....they should not be included in any projections or business plans!

Bradford need to increase their average by 17% to get to 10,000. Using the above figures these 20k extra fans over the season would deliver £800,000 in additional revenue and would go a long way to filling the holes that have appeared in their finances.

I accept that £20 a ticket and £20 residual spend may be out slightly, but the maths are sound.....more fans = more revenue. If you have a regular attendance you will also attract more sponsors and corporates. I also accept a winning team helps when it comes to attracting fans, but you need to have a balance in your expenditure and expectations.

I have already said what I was going to say about whether I believe they have been favoured or not and I don't think the lease is a factor in that.

I don't think Macmanus is very concerned about the 'away fans'.

As for the 10k average being enough to support a SL team, I think that is an over simplification.
Saints have hit over that figure for 2 years, but still not turned a profit yet.

I think the loss of Bradford to Macmanus is more about losing a large population base to the game, about losing an iconic team whether that be the Bulls or the Northern, about losing a large name and what that will mean to the sponsorship status of clubs.

Rightly or wrongly, you put a city like Bradford up against a town like Halifax or Featherstone and it's not as an attractive an prospect. But that's part of the madness of a system that's not based on competitive sport but running a cartel where the we look at licences which look at almost everything but on field performances.

Matt Orford got himself injured and buggered off back down to Aus to recover. However, once down there he was linked with every club under the sun. He refused to either admit he wanted a release from the large, long term deal he signed when he joined Bradford or confirm that he was intent to honour his contract with Bradford.

This was done in the off season when Mick Potter took over, meaning his recruitment was heavily impacted as there was an overseas spot a big chunk of the salary cap. Given that this was meant to be a new era for the club coupled with the first season of the cheap tickets, the uncertainty over the future of what was the club's marquee player added to the poor recruitment of half backs following it, mainly due to there not being any OCC players of sufficient ability, leading to continued poor on field performances didn't help the club turn around it's dwindling crowds.

Fair enough.


fair enough again...


They are very close to it and I suspect this year will see them get there....the 10k figure at 30 quid an attendee gives you close to 4 million. Add the sky money and before sponsors or anything else, you have more than enough money to spend the cap and you have 300k left per month to run the club. It may be simplistic, but other than Saints, the other clubs averaging 10K+ are the profitable ones......



Sponsors will care little if a Northern City is replaced with a Northern Town, unless that sponsor is specifically interested in Northern customers. The RFL seem almost fanatical to claim a southern influence in their comp.

Where does this "iconic" business end? When I was growing up Widnes were a massive power club, but they were allowed to drop out without anyone else complying, same goes for HullKR. Both worked hard and got back in the top competition.

I see no reason why if they did go down, Bradford couldn't do the same.

with the tenant/landlord relationship I believe!

Seriously? , a significant reason you are up the swanny is a player getting injured?

No. That's not what I said.

But the pair of you read whatever you want into anything as long as you can twist it to support your agendas.