OK am interested in the fan owned club! So your estimate of about 1500£ each, based on how many fans? Considering we are probably down to what was it 250 fans, so in reality you might get say 100 people that might show an interest and be able to fork out that money! So running a club on 1500000£ a year is not viable even if you got 200 to sign up that's only 300k

Where's Gutterfax when you need him?

I'll try & track down his detailed costings later.

So let me get this right.
You think that anyone who chooses to pay between £100 and £200 a year to watch rugby at the Broncos is by default an "apologist" and can't be a fan".
Only people who are prepared to pay £1500 a year can be a "fan" (and assumedly £3000 for a couple, and more for a family).

Tell me, at what point did you decide that rugby should only be for the relatively wealthy?
And how much will you be prepared to pay at your new adopted club?

How many times do I have to explain my POV.

David Hughes is a serial failure so any monies paid to out to him endorses that failure.

Whereas a fan owned club is exactly that.

An investment in the club by the fans.

Are there examples where fan owned sports clubs have been successful ?

AFC Wimbledon and Green Bay Packers spring to mind.

Isn't Barcelona a fan owned club, technically speaking?

F C Manchester is owned by the supporters.

As are most German football clubs. In League we have Rochdale, Hunslet and Hemel. In soccer the list includes AFC Wimbledon, Exeter City, Wycombe Wanderers, Swansea City (part), FC United. I think Hearts is moving towards supporter ownership as well. Brentford were saved by a Supporters Trust.
Funnily enough Acton and Willesden, who folded in 1936, did so because the RFL would not allow the supporters to take over the Club and run it themselves!

I didn't ask you to explain your POV.

I asked you at what point you decided people only qualify as a "fan" if they have an extra £1300 a year of disposable income available to put toward watching rugby?
I also asked you how much you are putting toward watching your new team?

If you're looking for a self appointed spokesman on who is & isn't a fan I suggest you speak to Ronniequin.

I may think anyone helping Hughes fund the club is an apologist (at least by default) but that's a different matter entirely.



Considerably more than you it would seem.

Perhaps we might need to revisit the freeloaders debate as lots of people seem happy for Hughes to foot the lion's share of the bill.

I couldn't give a monkeys what Ronniequin thinks, I'm asking YOU to back up YOUR statements. Stop hiding behind other posters.
These are your statements on page 20 of this threadYOU are the one who said "fans" like me are apologists because we aren't interested in a fan owned collective, before glibly quipping that I'd need £1500 a year of dsposable income to fund such a thing.

What if people haven't got £1500 a year? People are apologists because they haven't got money?

Given that you seem to think £1500 is the minimum buy-in price to be considered a real fan I asked how much you were putting toward your new team, you saidHow can you state this? You've no idea what I've commited to for next season, and we don't know what you're putting in beacuse like all politicians/hypocrites you've avoided the question three times.

Answer the question. How much are you paying? Let us all see if you meet your own funding criteria.

I'm not obliged to disclose that information.

& certainly not at the request of a dishonest debater like you.

You're quite happy to ride Hughes coattails no matter how much you pretend otherwise.

You hypocrite.
Says the man who won't answer questions or back up his own statements.
So if I'm freeloading off Hughes how am I also helping him fund the club? The net financial benefit can only be in one direction.

I'm prepared to answer the question.

I'm just not prepared to answer you as you manifestly have no interest in a fan owned club.

Or do you deny it?