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....

That is your opinion PTB and I fully respect it, but I still strongly disagree, those years or seasons what you call as "glimpses of light" were much better than the dark last few seasons as Quins!

I hold my hands up and say I was all for the change to being named Harlequins RL, but now I see it was the totally wrong decision. I felt we would gain corporate benefits, which was never the case and in the end we were always the poor cousins and are still looked at in that way, that is the heavy Anchor around our necks and I stand by it. The Stoop I also accept worked first time around but not this time. The answer has to be our own ground or sharing as co-owners, were we will have income streams other than gate receipts.

But we are getting close to the last spin of the dice in London, not enough people will see Truth and it is not just here in the Capital but even the M62 heartlands it is No Longer the Greatest Game, Dave mentions Leeds and their attendances are not great, and you also need to look no further than St Helens, it was always a risk playing a season at Widnes, but is is only a few miles down the road and last weekend 6,500 was well under the average 7,000 they seem to be stuck with, add to that the £1,650 million last season in the accounts just released, that is not a thriving concern. Sadly it only Sky that is propping up out game and each and every club is living well beyond their means! I have said it for a long time but are we only a semi professional game?

Our aim

GF to recoup 250K what would you estimate the crowd would need to grow by? Im sure there is more to it than simple maths around tickets ie beer, tops, food etc

The club has decided, once again, to change its name. Some will like it, some will not, but, just like the change to the Harlequins name, it's going to happen. We're all going to have to accept that and either like it or lump it. Canute-like arguing against it will change nothing unless somebody would care to back their arguments with a few million quid.

LOL - what a Big Boy you are, my ramblings as you call them are as relevant as anyone's opinion! I find it funny how you like to stick together in your numbers, is it your gang?

Like what BroncOnIon says, I voiced my opinion on the future of the club but unlike some here I would have accepted whatever decision was made and would not have thrown my dummy out of the pram like some seem to be doing!

Same old persecution complex as ever eh, you've peddled that line since your 'appy 'ammers were actually a succesful football team........nobody is actually throwing dummies, if you could but recognise it you would see that you are contributing to one side of a debate with some support, and others are on the opposing side, doesn't make them a clique or a gang anymore than those supporing your point makes you a crew leader.

I must admit I also find PTB's posts to be rational, well thought out and coherent and I am in total agreement with his posts on this topic.

If we had been watching a team that was winning its home games and challenging for the play-offs, I doubt we would be having these discussions now. Sadly, we've made a right mess of Quins RL and it certainly isn't our landlords fault.

There have been many opportunities for the bigger club to help along the smaller partner but they have rarely been offered.

Thus I would suggest that our landlord can be construed as being 'at fault' because the Harlequins Rugby Union club chose to accept a 'partnership' with the London Broncos Rugby League club - a partnership which was supposed to exist at many levels before the Union club bought in fully - but the reality is that they have not really ever made a sincere effort to integrate.

Not only that, they have willingly condoned organizations like the disgraceful Quinssa association whom have distributed anti-Rugby League propaganda and off-putting anti-RL messaging.

Where? Show us. You're aware you can't possibly make a statement like that without backing it up, aren't you?

Pengy-Fertile imagination springs to mind as posted earlier this week.

Maybe Quins RU just wanted more use of their facility and allowing a RL side to use and pay for the facility was seen as a good business model-Probably not to dissimilar to lots of duel use stadiums- The only difference being the name change possibly, who knows.

Hang on a minute Mark, Quinssa is a very well run supporters club that does lots of stuff for its members and who seem very happy with it. If only we had such a fan club.

It's fair to say that there are a few anti-league QRU supporters, but no more than the idiots we have on board that hate everything RU related.

Re what you say about Quins not making an effort to integrate with us, why the hell should they? It's their club and one would think they have enough on their plate running a successful RU club. Surely it was down to us to show Quins that we were a venture worth getting involved with. Sadly, we have failed miserably.

Dan-Just to add to that they have been through Bloodgate in that time, staff taken to court, coaches sacked, directors standing down, money issues etc. I suspect we were the least of there worries.

We have to stand up and be counted.....and be thankful we get to use a tremendous ground

I think you are way off with your comments MR.

I have often questioned what we were getting out of the so called partnership, but had we not been such a poor proposition both on and off the field in recent times the RU side might well have been encouraged to become more involved. As it turned out, what was in it for them?..........so as a business they have rightly reverted to a landlord/tenant relationship where they can trouser the RL rent money and avoid any risk or investment. Had we been more successful since our return to the Stoop the outcome would possibly have been different.

We should content ourselves with the fact we are continuing to play at a great stadium with excellent facilities, which is something we should be marketing heavily in future seasons as most away fans seem to enjoy their trips to London (and that’s not just because they are nailed on to take home the points of late).

As for the Quinnsa comment…………we should be so lucky in having such an organisation to support RL!!!!! The comments on their message board are no worse than the anti RU rubbish which gets spouted on here.

The only regret we should have is that we could not make more of the opportunity handed to us at Harlequins.

Wire quin and UtS - agree entirely.

I don't think QRL are 100% to blame in it's failure. Unfortunately, we have had our fair share of bad luck with injuries and the loss of key signings, CEOs, Chairmen, and most importantly, a large investor who was wealthy and a passionate league fan.

I often think how things would have gone if Wigan had not come up for sale. IL has no doubt enjoyed his success at Wigan, but how much greater the kudos would have been, if he had been the one to make a success of rugby league in London.

It seems we must wait for another IL to come along and I fear that it's going to take longer than the 3 years that St David Hughes has pledged to support us.