They rely heavily on Uncle Ken's largesse, in much the same way that all the 'top' sides rely on a rich benefactor.

I don't suppose it's a good thing, but I wouldn't say no.

Mate of mine is a Bulls season ticket holder and says their attendances seem to be rather inflated every game.... he said there was around 8k yesterday but the released figures are 14000.. wonder if they are counting the £60 seasons tickets they sold for each game?

If you have a season ticket or a free ticket does it mean you may be counted in the official attendance ?

All the big clubs rely on a rich owner to fund them. I think there is only Leeds who fund their squad without somebody pumping money in although they got to where they are by Caddick putting his money in in the past.

Indeed - that's what I said.

As for the questions about ST holders; my understanding is that clubs are counting ST holders on their attendances whether they attend or not, which would explain the Dulls pledge and other similar schemes.

Essentially, flog a ST for virtually nothing and hope that even a small percentage of those people turn up and spend money when they do - 10% of 10,000 is, after all, better than 100% of nowt. The ability to report massively inflated attendances is of course a significant billy bonus, since it's part of the licensing criteria.

Bradford rec'd around £600k for their season tickets this year. For that they have pretty much given up any 'roll-up' money from their home supporters and are therefore now reliant on the 10k spending their money on merchandise etc. At the same time as running the offer they got a new coach (who wouldn't want shut of McBanana) and invested in several new players. It hasn't all come together yet, but there are signs of things improving.

For £600k they could have just got 4,000 people at £150 each - any more than that and they would have been in more profit! Also, for the big games against Leeds etc, they could have taken a significant amount on the gate from their home fans. It's a massive gamble and, as Hudds have shown, it isn't that easy to hold on to the newer or fickle fans once you try and put the prices back to somewhere like normal.

The only argument for us doing this will be to generate the new set of fans when we have a full salary cap to spend and a better facility to watch SL in - which may be next season at BV, but would work even better at NM. Until then, as a business decision, I reckon it's best to keep an eye on the Bulls and see whether the management consider it a success at the end of a year or two!

Rugby League - how many boxes can you tick ?
This was all about the Dulls ticking one more box on their application, not good business, but a step closer to their licence.
Less about RL than admin and a clipboard, although as you rightly say, detremental to the ovarall business.

Good business practice can go out of the window in a mad scramble for SL franchise survival, i am happy that we are doing things right, and if that isn't what's right by the RFL then it says more about them than us.

Dont like to promote other clubs too much but the Dulls crowd was over 14000???
Good effort, even if it was against FC, who normally bring a few.

The whole point being that the Dulls are probably reporting all their pledge-holders as attendees, regardless of whether they were actually there or not.

What's wrong with just counting ticket stubs anymore???

This is what happens when things become target driven, everyone finds different ways to present a set of figures.