1. Moore Lane, the proposed new home for Salford Red Devils holds 5k with 2,200 seats. Ealing holds 4,000 with 2,200 seats....and is looking at being increased by the start of the 22/23 Onion season....but we're arguing a straw man here.
The reality is Hughes asked where the crowds and revenue was and when the CEO and Commercial Gimp had no valid excuses, they blamed the Landlord/Ground.
Let's be clear here. 5,000 fans at Harlequins RL delivered far greater a}revenue than anything at the Hive, trailfinders or plough lane and b} far greater chance of upselling corporate packages than anything at the Hive, trailfinders or plough lane.
The Owners Dummy Spit, which was preceded by the hiring of Gus and then Powell is 100% why we are teetering on the edge.

The % of the bar take we got at Trailfinders v Plough Lane is a non debate because both are minimal amounts

On the 2nd Point. Visuals sell. A few snaps of sponsors being presented with shirts in a packed bar, people sat around busy tables of 8 eating their pre match meals, Mustard being interviewed in an open forum and not in the corridor, player of the day award etc would all help sell the corporate packages. The fact that these PREMIUM tickets were dropped to 35 quid inside 2 games, along with other prices tells you EXACTLY how that is going.

Hughes needs to admit that he's messed up. Loubser I am afraid has presided over 2 moves, neither of which went well. He was gifted a huge 3rd opportunity when we fluked our way back to SL and they still did little to market it. I care little for Hughes "belief" that RL is THE GREATEST GAME........what he need to understand is that for his decades at the club all he's presided over is a steady decline in interest and associated revenues to the extent that we are worthless to any proposed investor......and that means all Hughes can do is look to hand the keys to either the RFL or someone with the work ethic and charisma to attract the fans back by returning the London Broncos to be a club and not just a team.

This is from his statement at the start of the season. I believe it shows how disconnected he has been from how badly the club has been run for the last decade.

There are plenty who have walked away dismayed at his incompetence, but there are also some who have been driven away by his appointees.........but he blissfully expects reboot#5 to magically work

But we are debating all of the wrong issues here. Without funding we have no team, so the reality was how to get ourselves to the magical 5,000 fans per game paying 1.3 million over the season to watch the team? I had some answers back in 2009......I'm not sure I do now.

Hi,

I am just trying to explain what I think they were trying to do, although it sounds disjointed, and hard to follow.

I suppose I can offer more of a detailed narrative.

1. There is a guy who I think first showed up about 10 years ago. I believe he had some background in coaching at Wakefield, and plenty of connections. He's quite a charming and talkative bloke. Runs his own sports business. Been in the Director's Box for many years. A bit superficial but highly persuasive. However, he isn't capable of media relations, isn't organized, and is erratic and inconsistent. From a pure commercial side he can rightly see that there is limited opportunity at Trailfinders. There's limited opportunity to offer a premium experience at a premium price. But I also saw him as short term and limited in some ways. He was too much of a small business man. If a product line didn't sell he would want to discontinue it, but if you close the shop then you sell nothing. I felt he would close the shop given the chance to stem the losses.

2. The club had a Chief Executive who I like but don't know that well. I think the club had rebuilt quite well from his arrival at Barnet to 2019. I think he became much less influential when person 1 appeared.

3. David Hughes, I have known superficially since about 2006. I understood he was putting in around a couple of million a year as recently as 2 to 3 years ago. I've never got a real view of his wealth, though I have heard suggestions that it may be £80 million. He has seemed to lurch between paying six figure salaries to poor quality and known to be often injured players to seemingly being incapable or unwilling to secure obviously quality players with a good career to come. I could give countless examples where he has described how the academy is vital only for him to end up with all the no one wants whilst his best players left for free or near free. He just doesn't seem to want to provide a 3 year contract or protect his assets. In truth, I think he's given up on the club 4 or 5 times only to be like a drug addict who suddenly gets his heart restarted. Each time it happens the club weakens. He flushes everything. Loses good managers, good players, supporter goodwill. I think the AFC Wimbledon move was to a plan, he had approved. But then he seems to get ed off. I think he gets to the point he feels cheated and like a cards player pushes the table over. I think also he puts a lot of pressure on his coaches. There seems a lot of relationship breakdowns in his tenure.

The cast is there, pulling but not in the same direction.

For Farks sake....."do you think"?
When Hughes inherited the club "again" after IL bought Wigan, he immediately broke off meaningful relationships with both the RFL, the other SL chairmen and most importantly, the Landlord.
Not long after we fans got bounced across to the other side of the pitch and for a while had a great matchday experience in the bigger bar area, but gradually the back office staff left or moved and eventually we were introduced to Blanchard and then Gus.
Blanchard was an operations guy. He understood that a business was various moving parts and each part needed "oiled". When Hughes was having none of that, Gus lucked out and got the job on a salary he wasn't entitled to 10% of.....and he started dismantling the parts that needed oiled and instead blamed it all on Quins....the name, the venue, the revenue share......Hughes snide comments recently about 2nd or 3 rd tier Union grounds expose that MacKay played to this weakness with the name change and ultimate move.
I still have the text on my Phone when Barnet accepted us. Our CEO acted like he'd dragged it over the line.......the reality was Hughes was told accept the ground we've found you or you'll be in L1 in 2014......so he relented. Gus lasted a heartbeat after that, as did Grima.......and the mess was Loubsers to inherit.....including Barnet pocketing the 100k as well as the bar takings......
....loubser then finds Trailfinders and negotiates a deal Hughes described as perfect....including DEVELOPING THE GROUND......yet here we are discussing all the "reasons" when the biggest issue is the OWNER!
Thanks Dave.........but F67k OFF and enjoy your retirement. Put us out of our misery. For too long you'vwe wasted OUR CENTRAL FUNDING as well as your own coin on a vanity project......play with your grandkids....

Why are you even discussing someone who is banned from Fulham football and has attacked 2 opposition RL chairman at Ealing.
He shouldn’t be allowed near a sports arena again never mind being talked up on here. He’s everything modern sport doesn’t need.

Don't believe I know the person.....but being banned from a ground isn't new territory in terms of the broncos.
If there were physical attacks on people I agree a ban is warranted.....if verbal then context is needed.
But again were discussing something other than the elephant in the room....HUGHES.

Or recruitment

The 2 main issues with recruitment are available funds and the recruiter.
Who holds the funds and therefore dictates the standard of players attracted and who selected the person with pursuing these players and convincing them to come to play for us.
In this particular case, the funds were slashed from previous years whilst the recruiter has a 25% win record as a coach which makes him apparently "highly thought of" by the person who recruited him and who holds the purse strings.
Can you see where I am going with this???

Not sure anyone would get that exercised about this iteration of the Broncos. In all seriousness what is the cut off point for number of assaults before you are banned. For a Twitter ban I understand it’s criticising the blue kit. Our club’s priorities might have got muddled here.

Back on thread I suppose a positive is although all quiet on recruitment no one has actually left the club this week so that’s a plus....although some might think not.

I have some info regarding the York match that was shared with me.

Only the Platinum Lounge was used. Fairly full. 6 tables (seating 10) and other seating/table areas. Up to 75 people max.

Coach, two non-playing players and Guest Speaker pre game. Coach and MOM post game.

Gold Lounge not used.

Boardroom used, 6 to 8 present.

By percentage of attendance that is better than AFC Wimbledon, but after costs (food/staff) I doubt there is much profit.

I think one of your ideas, but why not offer some free tickets to hospitality to a few lucky winners who buy a ticket at the previous game. Target the locals generally who would appreciate the hospitality experience. They'll buy drinks as well!

By the time the York game was played, £35 was the offer.....£2,625. Let's say they all paid the full price which I believe was £55 at the start of the season, that's another £1,500.
£4,125 before wages, food costs etc are paid..

I did a similar calculation hence my comment on little profit. The only additional income is the bar.

When you’re right. You’re right.