But when people see us wearing the Coke (Harlequins) colours, the most common response seems to be that isn't Coke, that's Pepsi and then seem to storm out of the metaphorical restaurant, saying well the rugby union metaphorical restaurant may serve $h1t but at least they have got Coke.

Can we become Coke Zero or Diet Coke, yes, but we do need to get the message out there if we are going to to continue to have two clubs who operate at the same location and are usually refered to as Coke.

You lost me there.

It depends if we want to appeal to the kind of people who are likely to be attracted to RL or not! Let's not kid ourselves we never gave away 5000 tickets for a Broncos game at GP and ove been able to get countless friends in for free at the stoop with other free giveaways etc. Paying customers must be well down.

The noise from the home fans is nothing like what it was either. New players would often comment on the noise generated by Broncos fans, and ill never forget the look on NBQs face
when he first heard it from his wing by the main stand. As far as I'm concerned we've lost a lot more than just fans by changing our name. But if it is brought down to that level I'm certain we have lost a significant number of them.

:3h7i1smx

Scary, being in agreement with GF does nothing for my street cred

but he is spot on, no amount of looking back fondly disguises the facts that we lost little :3h7i1smxwhen we were forced to Quins RL.

While the overall vision of Nic, David, Ian and Mark Evans has not specifically worked and we are back as tenants, that is no different to when we played at GP except perhaps we lost atmosphere in return for top quality facilties and no loss of home games for a large chunk of the season.

You and Dave)the latter only at times} make yourselves look fools enough with the stupid name calling! and personal attacks, so why do I need to lower myself? or even worry any longer.

To see a single brand of a rugby league club in London with a good team and first class marketing.

Never liked Griffin Park! so looks like we may never agree lol, for me I enjoyed it at The Valley, which I presume you will come back and say you hated! lol

What a bafflingly vain point of view.

I've got no problem with associating ourselves with QRU - initially I did, its true, but I grew out of it - largely because I think the stoop is excellent and also because we've gained a few fans of the type described above, Quins RU fans who have either got STs or come to watch the odd game. What an attitude like this does is tell them that we think we're better than them and we want nothing to do with them. That's not an attitude we can afford with the club in such a precarious position.

On the other hand, I had to laugh when Andy Wilson wrote in his 'set of six' this week that being called Harlequins RL alienated fans of Saracens, Wasps et al. If its that much of a problem for these people, here's an idea - GROW UP! pmsl as well at the idea of such an intercine 'rivalry' in London club rugby union - I know of Surrey Championship cricket clubs who have greater rivalries than that. Its pathetic.

A change of name and ground can't be judged on 5 years, especially 5 years when we've had sod all money. I don't know how many times I can keep going over this.

What's 'bafflingly vain' about a fiercely proud RL fan wanting to support an RL club with it's own identity? All you guys trying to act like you're writing a thesis on metaphysical modernity in the modern sporting marketplace make me laugh. Get your head out of your backsides. We're RL fans and we're all entitled to an opinion. Mine is that I want to support an RL club not a union club.

I loved the Coke Pepsi analogy. It is true without RU co-operation at a local club level the Summer Conference would never have got of the ground to which we are grateful, they must have been grateful for the rent and bar takings, but good on 'em. But Union and League are clean separate things as King Charles once said, you can like either, neither or both, but it sure confuses a lot of people who don't know what rugby is. We should be targeting the soccer fans with whom there is more affinity that RU.

nb I have nothing against Union, as with tennis and golf, I just don't like it, and lord knows I have tried to.

I have no issues with your point about supporting a club with it's own identity, where I do have issues is that there is also a point being made that having done this, we would suddenly increase our gates from all those supposed stay away supporters who hate the current identity, and the facts don't support that thesis

as for the likelyhood of loads of London Irish, Sarries et all supporters suddenly jumping on board cos we are not longer using their rivals tag..............well I am not holding my breath.

People, regardless of what primary or secondary sports they like, will come along if what is put in front of them is something they can enjoy & is value for money, much like a good few QRU supporters have done for our sport.

Well we are exactly the opposite then, I HOPED the change of name was going to work and I thought we would bring on board the same major sponsors as the RU Club, but it is has not worked, you say we have had little money, lets put it this way David Hughes and his Bank Manager will not agree when they look at his private accounts!

I rate Andy Wilson as one of our best rugby league journalists, he is from the younger end of the range and looks at everything with a real open mind, I don't always agree with him but that is the same with any sports debate.

IF more money is going to be invested and the RFL are going to put in even more output (depending on us getting another 3 year licence) then we have to get it right this time! we can't risk giving it five years with the Quins brand, we need a complete new re-launch. Yesterday it was reported that we are close to an agreement with Sky for the next period and it is even more money when I was thinking along with many others that they may have made a reduction like with parts of football, we don't know all the facts there may be some conditions?

We are not all going to agree whatever the decision is! but we have got to Unite and get behind the choice made as it could be the last throw of the dice for London with Super League!

Sorry mate but I've now got image in my head of Dave Lister marching up and down Oxford St with the sandwich boards like that bloke years ago (I think he's dead now) - do you remember him ? I think his problem was along the lines of 'less lust from meat , nuts and sitting down!' I remember going past him once while he was in full rant mode saying ' you taxi drivers know what I mean oh yes!'

It is good to see someone giving feedback the same view I receive from Union fans in the London area I know, regards the name Harlequins RL, no way would they appreciate being told to "grow up" as it is their personal feeling/opinion. IF we had converted just 10% of the regular Harlequins Rugby Union base/match attendees then perhaps we could have just said it is life we have alienated other rugby union supporters, but I would bet we are lucky if we have brought in many more than 100!

At the end of the day there is going to have to be some compromise and that may be staying at The Stoop until we can achieve our own ground or even as part owners which should be the aim for the next licence application submission.

coming along at that time.

is a different matter to changing our name and staying at the Stoop in the hope it beings in many more seat warmers.

In an ideal world of course we would own our own ground, be branded under our own identity and have enough investors on board in order to help fund a winning side, but all of those steps are unlikely to be achieved at once.

Ps, the Valley was souless.

I remember him well. I worked in Oxford Street for a couple of years in the late 80's and he was always there then. He had pamphlets for sale (presumably expanding on the theme of his sandwich board) at a really odd price, like 11p or something. Around the same time I remember seeing an old film made around 1970 with a scene shot in Oxford Street, and the same bloke appeared in the background at one point. I haven't seen him for many years now though.

That's right I remember - I also remember the missus actually going up and buying one of his leaflets just to see what he was on about! She was working at the old Middlesex Hospital at about the same time as you say, and often used to go to Oxford St in her lunch break. And it was an odd sort of price for his pamphlet! I'm pretty sure I read that he had died a few years ago.

Some were, some were more 'armchair' Broncos followers.

I know I've been out of the loop for a while but where is this 'change of name ' talk coming from?
The Super League Show had five minutes about it at the weekend and the RL Express is running something on it.
Is it that we will have yet another new administration to go with the new franchise David Hughes is so sure we'll get? Just for the record I think we should have London somewhere in the name.

Quote ="Homer"Trouble is thats moving the goalposts a bit............ changing the ground [for which I am in favour is a different matter to changing our name and staying at the Stoop in the hope it beings in many more seat warmers. In an ideal world of course we would own our own ground, be branded under our own identity and have enough investors on board in order to help fund a winning side, but all of those steps are unlikely to be achieved at once. Ps, the Valley was souless.'" I see it Homer as expanding the goalposts, as all must be looked at in the same re-launch package, yes I understand the ground will as I said be the real aim and part of our development for the next licence application, but if serious money is to be invested in marquee players to look at making progress on the pitch with real commitment to marketing then we have to start now and not wait until the new ground to start branding the new name and strip. You are correct when you say these aims will not be achieved all at once but we need to begin! As I stated earlier the possible increase in Sky investment may be part of all this re-launch? The Guardian, www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ju ... CMP=twt_gu

Quote ="Homer"Trouble is thats moving the goalposts a bit............ changing the ground [for which I am in favour is a different matter to changing our name and staying at the Stoop in the hope it beings in many more seat warmers. In an ideal world of course we would own our own ground, be branded under our own identity and have enough investors on board in order to help fund a winning side, but all of those steps are unlikely to be achieved at once. Ps, the Valley was souless.'" I see it Homer as expanding the goalposts, as all must be looked at in the same re-launch package, yes I understand the ground will as I said be the real aim and part of our development for the next licence application, but if serious money is to be invested in marquee players to look at making progress on the pitch with real commitment to marketing then we have to start now and not wait until the new ground to start branding the new name and strip. You are correct when you say these aims will not be achieved all at once but we need to begin! As I stated earlier the possible increase in Sky investment may be part of all this re-launch? The Guardian, www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/ju ... CMP=twt_gu

Someone posted up the pictures of an RU shirt and a RL shirt and said that people were stupid if they couldn't tell the difference. There is so much wrong with that. I wouldn't be able to tell you were the colours were on a RL shirt or a RU shirt but I'd be able to tell you black, green, grey, magenta and brown made up the shirts and I'm a fan. The shirts are so similar (obviously), there's no way you can label people "morons" or what not based on this.

The likelihood of Saracens, Irish and Wasps fans jumping aboard is something I don't understand. Not one of these teams plays in London, I imagine their fan base is largely made up of people from Watford, Reading and Wycombe respectively. I can't see thousands flocking through the gates because the name is now "London Broncos" again.

The club is a small business. Small attendances means small income and money has to be spent correctly. I fully understand the point of view that Harlequins and the whole brand is a working point. The colours are recognisable, the club is recognisable but unless there's some exposure of the club, we'll forever be "oh, they have a league team" or "Aren't they a Union team". I was convinced a name change was the way to go but I'm not so sure now, the problem is the "m" word. I know its the main subject of debate on here but its true. Marketing is a big factor. If you don't advertise your business how do you expect to gain any custom? Some exposure is desperately needed, another big name like Martin Offiah or Shaun Edwards or even a crazy publicity stunt like Dwain Chambers, its all column inches.

I would much rather we followed the Huddersfield model of signing experienced players such as Robbie Paul and Mick De Vere to add to the young talent of Wild, Brown, etc that began their upward spiral. Year on year they have built on that squad and consistently attracted larger crowds.

Players come because they see growth and building things, the stunt players only come for the money, and that is no model for progression. We do need to sign better Aussies that Nick Koups, but at the same time Chris Bailey has been a breath of fresh air for the club. We need to bite the bullet pay for the type of loanees we have brought in, pay that extra £10k a year that is quoted for living in and around London, although I'm sure we can find ways to better that with the houseshares that some already do.

Marketing the 2010 side must have been a knightmare, 2011 has seen us at least put some feelers out there with free tickets (the ground should be full every time Sky roll into town for a game, because many have been put off by the 1 stand position that was in place over recent seasons) and 2012 will be even more positive with a competitive side that can realistically challenge for the 8.

Sean Long or Leon Pryce along with young Aussies Adam Cuthbertson Dane Laurie may well be the type of names that can produce the sort of kick-start that the Giants have experienced over recent seasons.

Moneyball players over names has to be the way to go, but we should, as Gus Mackay seems to be saying, that 2012 will be year we make contact, with the rest of sporting world, on and off the field.

David Hughes interviewed on this topic here [urlhttp://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/13881855.stm[/url

Well it looks like it is nailed on then. Yet again the club shoots itself in the foot. Absolute joke. How about addressing the fundamental problems before fannying about tinkering with the main asset that we have. Useless.

I can just imagine it now.

"London Broncos eh, I'm sure I remember that name from years ago"

"That's right, they went into liquidation several years ago"

"Oh right, so why are they back?"

"Yeah, we were Harlequins RL last year, but we decided we didn't want to be associated with Harlequins anymore and go back to an era of failure and go through it all again, rather than attempting to establish ourselves"

"

"

"

"

Huddersfield have marketed well, thats also what you missed out on. I know we're back to the dreaded "m" word but they have done their marketing fantastically. They called a fancy press conference at half-time of a game. This led to Sky rocking up, the crowd in, the fans getting an exciting buzz from what the story would be and sending the media into overdrive with mad rumours they were signing so and so. It may have been a damp squib considering it was just reduced season tickets but it did work. I'm not saying lower the current price at the Stoop, maybe make it one price throughout the ground but the marketing at Huddersfield was spot on. The likes of Leon Pryce's and Sean Long's are a little away from the mark but signing a few Keith Mason's, Lee Gilmour's and Gareth Raynor's is a decent idea. The Giants' business plan is the model though.

Also, why aren't the Union fans turning up for the RL? After all its still the Quins club, colours and ground? It would be nice to try and work this out, I can only think of the added cost issue (i.e they have ST's at the RU and paying out more for RL may put some off) or the competition. What does Super League have to offer Quins now? Try and market the Hull KR game would be hard. Quins are out the running for the play-offs (and the Cup) and have nothing to play for and HKR can probably scrape the play-offs, hardly the cut and thrust top four/relegation battles of the Aviva Premiership is it? I'm not blaming the RFL for Quins attendances, its just me having a rant.