Yes - the same club and they are in the process of going full time next season even if LB don't fold and the said club stay in NL1.

I think this can go one of three ways:

1.The move to Barnet falls through.Broncos have no Plan B at all and they go out of business
2.The move to Barnet goes ahead,the team gets hammered every single game next season and gets relegated
3.The move to Barnet goes ahead,rather than lose 27 games next season the Broncos drop into the Championship and Featherstone leap into their place.

I dont think there are any other possibilities.Take yer pick from the great ones on offer!

So prey tell, is this a pit village that is a set of traffic lights between Cas and Wakey? Or a small town near Bradford?

Just what RL needs another couple of M62 slip road teams.

If this is the RFLs plan B then the game will be dead in 20 years, it is on its knees as it is without more narrow minded professional Northerners involved.

Where would we be today if we had recruited Michael McGuire as coach rather than appointing Rob Powell.

Full SC etc It would be a different place.

Or maybe something along the lines of the League of Gentleman's 'this is a local game for local people'!

Thats good then back to 2500 crowds -Real progress and more Foxy bingo sponsors.

Maybe they will be like the green bay packers and get 10K crowds from 14K

Errr, not so fella.

The sport is dying a death as a professional game. The World Cup will be a poorly supported disaster and if London folds an even bigger joke.

What should happen is have London as a club with no foreign player cap and a larger salary cap. Get in good players and be competitive. Forget everything else. If kids in London want to earn money from rugby, play Union. If we want Superleague in London, open the doors wide and make London a real on the field success which would benefit the game as a whole.

It wont happen, too many vested interests and short sighted Chief Execs at other clubs

No that I disagree with you buddy, but I am keen to hear the benefits to the comp of a bigger home average attendance and also the benefits for the other teams with Featherstone replacing London.

Home attendances are the problem of the home tea,. Sky have visited London twice this year if IIRC, so it's hardly an image thing given 90,000 or less tune in when we are on the box.
Away attendances are an urban myth perpetuated by the people at the top of clubs who should have more fans...like St Helens and HKA.
If a visiting team bring 1,000 fans that pay 20 quid each, then London Broncos and Catalan Dragons cost the northern mafia 20 grand at best. 1.3 million is the TV revenue and at an 8,500 average another million in ticket sales is a starting point fro clubs incomes...so London cost a team like St Helens about 0.009% of their annual turn over because our fans travel on a skateboard to away games.
Will Feathersone Rovers deliver 1,000 more fans to St Helens than London? Tell you what, if they deliver 2,000 more then St Helens will be 1.7% better off.....and Pit Village Rugby will become more of a northern Hobby and less of a national sport.

Hey, the game will live on without us, but as a professional sport, it will struggle. No London team will effect the TV deal next time.....NATIONAL REACH is important to advertisers and the fact that London games on SKY attract 30% less viewers than other games shows that the "50% of viewers in the South" claim is flawed at best.

As for London?

I've said it elsewhere.....cut our cloth accordingly at the Hive in SL next year with a view to dropping down a division in 2014 but (surprise surprise) bust a gut trying to attract a new set of fans to the club. I believe many ST holders would not desert the club if they were to drop to the Championship, but the community feel needs to be reintroduced and a fa greater level of openness delivered. The Volunteers that were so shoddily treated a few years back will need to be re-engaged and when it comes to the clever marketing needs to be done, no ads in Walkabouts, no liveried Taxis, no bloody Oyster card holders and no flowers on round-a-bouts either.

Yes, a winning team would help, but let's face it, you still have to let people know we exist

The attendances aren't key but they do reflect spending power. London's income is very small and this means that for them to flex their wallet, they need a very generous backer. Fev have higher income and lower costs, their backer doesn't need to be quite so generous.

I think for me the key is that non-SL clubs continue to dream the dream. In inviting an unfashionable club like Fev into the top ranks (even if they don't last very long), we allow fans of other unfashionable clubs to buy into the idea that their club might also do the same. Something that is vital for the health of the game.

The WC will be fine.

You miss the problems that LOndon has, the main one being money. Raise the cap, double it, treble it, does this mean that they will have any more money to spend? Nope not a penny more.

I am quite okay about the idea that the cap should include London weighting but it's a moot point because they can't afford to spend the full cap anyway.

And foreigners...this is out of date. You can't get decent Australasians now because of the strength of the Aussie economy and the recent NRL Tv deals. The NRL clubs have so much muscle now that SL players move south not vice versa. And you can't get decent up and coming Aussies from below the NRL because of the clamp-down on visas under Cameron. The bulk of London's squad will have to be home grown, it is a shame that Broncos couldn't have held on for another 5 years or so as a SL club.

2,213 Average this year and we spent to the cap.....Wigan average 14,699 and spend the same amount on players salaries. Attendances are not the reason London are teetering on the edge.....the ability to invest the benefactors money wisely is 100% why we are on the edge.

10,000 average is often spoken about as the break even figure for a SL club.......although I believe the figure was first mentioned in respect of HKA and they own their own ground, so maybe 10,500 average to cover the rent.

5 Clubs currently hit the magic 10k, with 2 of them paying rent to a soccer stadium....Wigan and Hull are generally very good at marketing themselves so should be right, whilst Leeds, Saints and Wire are all pretty safe for now.
The Next 4 are 75% or better of the way there and can probably get themselves there.....but whinging CEO's complaining and making excuses for their marketing departments failings and the apathy of their fans don't help....if they get over the 10k mark they'll have another 500k to spend!

The Bottom 5 are the concern....London is a given, Salford will have to bus kids in for free to get close to 5k next year and if they don't challenge for honours, the Dr may walk, Widnes and Castleford are cutting their cloth accordingly but will struggle to see real improvement without 3rd party investment and Huddersfield are not dissimilar to London with the exception that Northern Lads will sign for them so they can carry on living at home.