I've heard nothing to that effect. Its driven by David Hughes and Gus MacKay as far as I can see.

So this is when they'll be telling us about becoming Broncos again then I take it.

Quite. Most likely explanation IMO.

I think Bloodgate had a bit more of an effect.

Well I will disagree with The Penguin, what a total waste of money it would be to retain the same name and then do an intense marketing campaign, it totally baffles me this complete bonding by a few with the harlequins name the quicker it goes the better, it has been a complete anchor around our necks and add that to performance on the pitch it leaves us in the position we are in.

Remember even with the low attendances we currently are getting, opinion here on this forum must only count for about 3% - so to answer The Penguin, it must be the clear majority who are fans had the Sense to vote for a change of name!

I suspect the name change is driven by the longer term aim to move away from the Stoop to a ground we we have some ownership stake.

Having said that,we have totally wasted the opportunity to use the Harlequins brand. What makes you think the club would have any more success in marketing a new unknown name. The early signs are not good as we should have had the branding ready for the publicity surrounding the franchise announcements.This would have helped build awareness for next season.

Genuis idea, build up a decent following at The Stoop and then move somewhere else

Can't disagree with that. But how to achieve it?

Alienate our club from the branding that encompasses the whole stadium.

Good idea. Being associated with the branding that encompasses the whole stadium seems to have achieved just about nothing in 6 years.

I know, Leeds have been at their stadium for 120 years yet only manage to get around 15k supporters at home games. Relatively, it's a disgrace.

The club hasn't ever to my knowledge executed an "intense" marketing campaign. So we don't know how well it would work. There's no reason to suggest that a successful, well marketed Harlequins Rugby League club wouldn't be as appealing as a successful, well marketed All New London Broncos 2012 RLFC (or whatever we are called next).

I could say it might stand a better chance as Harlequins Ruby League is associated both with the sport we play (Rugby League) and our location (Quins It totally baffles me this complete bonding by a few with the Harlequins name the quicker it goes the better, it has been a complete anchor around our necks and add that to performance on the pitch it leaves us in the position we are in.'"

The current state of the club, with a team that is the worst in the league, an average attendance that is only just over 3,000 and the reliance on 1 mans belief and generosity has absolutely nothing to do with:
1. The name and the association with the Union lot
2. Where they play their home games

Rupe1 is the only loon I know of who would actually think that the tuie in with one of the most recognised teams in world rugby, regardless of code, is a bad thing. As for the Stoop? Londoners are spoilt! If they have to walk farther than the end of their own road to get a tube, bus or train they complain. The Stoop is easy to get to by car and is a 10 minute walk from a busy railway station...in addition to being in an area served by 31 bus routes.......

Either the club spend in excess of 250k in 2012 on marketing or they win The Grand Final AND The Challenge Cup for the next 3 seasons! Failure to do either of these will se the club on a sub 4k average in 2014....