Sponsors or PARTNERS? There is a massive difference..........RL seems to be attracting plenty of PARTNERS at present.
A sponsor, such as Aviva, pays 5 million a year to have their name attached to the uNION Premiership.....Heineken claim to have invested 100 million pounds in Union over 20 years.....Barclays pay a fortune to have the naming rights to the Premiership, Allianz pay 1.5 million a year for sponsorship and naming rights at Sarries, Bradford are getting 300k a year for naming rights and sponsorship.....02 pay the RFU 5 million a year for the shirt sponsorship of a side that plays 10 times a year....gillette paid 50k for the england shirt sponsorship....for 3 years

PARTNERS on the other hand do a lot of contra work....cross database marketing/promotion etc with very little cash changing hands.....foxy bingo and heinz bigsoup are PARTNERS.

If you think removing the London team from SL will enhance the attractiveness of the SL naming rights to a national/international brand, then you need to have your bumps felt pal........Tetley sponsoring the Challenge Cup for an undisclosed sum pretty much sums up the state of RL in the UK at present....I'd be stunned if they are paying anything more than 50k a year tops. The "we call it cider but CAMRA don't agree" Championship deal is worth a lot less than 50k a year and the Marriott hotel>RLWC 2013 deal is a no cash contra deal......teams stay free, marriott get coverage.

Partners will always be keen....we have about 100k loyal RL supporters and there willalways be someone who wants to market to them....but a sit stands at present, not many want to pay up front to do so.

If Featherstone think they can survive on 4000 home support a game plus travelling fans they are mistaken. They would need a wealthy benefactor to pour £ms into the Rovers.
Wakefield are getting there with crowds of 8100 last year and a first game att of 9200 or so. Glover said he lost money last year but is now around breaking even.
I really hope the Broncos stay, as a presence in the Capital is essential for the sake of the sport and its profile.
The despondency of the fans is awful to read and the crowd of 1800 is terrible.
Where the money would come from to rescue the club I don't know but something has to change.

I've never bought the theory that Rugby League needs London to get more sponsors or income. Where did that ever start? I don't know of any company that has sponsored/partnered the Super League/RFL/Challenge Cup that were a London company. JJB, Stobart, Tetley's, Leeds Met etc etc aren't London businesses are they?

Yes, London is the biggest city in the country and a major player in the business world but what does that actually have to do with Rugby League? Not a lot really. I don't buy that London make the profile of the game any bigger either. Most people now have access to Sky TV or the like and have found the sport that way rather than because of London Broncos.

This London franchise is dead and buried. If someone with the right money came along and started a separate club and had a franchise then who knows but this London club is a wounded animal just waiting for that lethal injection. The away fans don't want to know and the home fans could fit in one room.

R.I.P London Broncos (but not Rugby League in London).

Linkey Linkey...........

spot on I'm sad to admit

In fact....utter bollox.
rlhttps://www.sportspromedia.com/news/tetleys_to_title_sponsor_challenge_cup/rl
Partnership is a whole different ball game to Sponsorship......I stand by my assertion that very little cash will have changed hands...
TotalRL is the only place I have seen 800k...and that was for 2 years....not per year and that was unubstantiated.

If the RLF had nailed on 800k a year they'd have blasted it out to everyone....even 400k a year.......I suspect there's more data sharing going on than exchanging of cheques.

London Broncos aren’t about to go into administration are they. You have a wealthy backer who is prepared to lose millions. If SKY took on this mantle how would it increase attendances ?

The thought of us having "administration" made me chuckle.

If the presence of a club in London is vital for the viability of SL how come we still have no sponsor?

I thought Selco was our sponsor their name is on the front of the shirt.

It was SKY who have insisted on a London outfit in SL, it was part of the original deal. I wonder what their views are now?

Sorry - how come SL still has no sponsor?

i have a belt

SKY would invest money in making the club self sufficient.....the red cross is a charity, News International is not.