What were/are we paying at trailfinders

Listy,
Just a few things, all i have done is stated the obvious.
If the club make a signing thats the clubs choice i am a fan not a lot i or you can do about it, so yep see how they get on. Example being sammut! First stint with us he got critisised massivley, now he is seen as vital by some so let em get on and see what happens.

Same with the owner spending the money the way he chooses, again, unless me you or anyone else on here comes into some serious family money, not a lot any of us can do about it. As for new investment and owners, like most business deals they are very seldom public domain until nearly done, bit like the wimbledon move, club were in discussion with several grounds, if you announce that openly then deals fall through and costs change.
Fans have the right to whinge and moan as much as they want, it aint going to change anything though.
But your "jesus wept" comment was in relation to a simple statement of where i think the club is possibly going, its noticable that you dont have an opinion on that thought.

If the cost we are paying for wimbledon / rosslyn park and richmond in 2021 is less than trailfinders would be in 2021 then moving was the correct choice, if the funds saved then can be repurposed towards the squad

If we are paying more for this, considering we are at least 2-3 years away from being SL ready unless somebody spends alot more on the squad we should not have moved.

Thats my only point here

Forgive me. But werent we told £250,000 year at Harlequins was too much.
At least we'll get a.lonfon derby next year when were down with skolara

I thought we payed Quins 400k???

Your second paragraph is spot on.

Yeah I've had that feeling for a few months that this might be it.... Or League 1 status.....at least we'd get the competitive London derby

Agreed

You claim you only state the obvious but in reality Wimbledon fans have been asked to vote on the groundshare deal based on finances that depend very much on numbers through the gate.

Specifically:

[iThe range given was between £200k and £500k per full London Broncos season. The primary reason for such a wide range is that the higher end will only occur if the London Broncos are in the Super League. The lower end is the minimum net amount based on the Broncos playing in the Championship and for a full season at Plough Lane with attendances slightly higher than they have currently....in essence, the more people attend Broncos games, the more revenue we are likely to generate. And the more successful the Broncos are, the more rewarding the deal is for us. [/i

The accounts that were "leaked" back in 2012 showed £257,000 as a figure for facilities hire. This could have included the training facilities and I'm not sure when the desk space at Quins was given up, but there's not a chance it was £400k at the end.
It would seem that one of two things, or maybe both are true here.
1. Mr Hughes falls out with partners and landlords and decides to leave
2. Mr Hughes employs peoe.out if their depth who then scurry to.find a distraction that will make their shortcomings secondary. Like moving grounds.or changing names.
My theory is that we are being touted to wimbledon as a potential addition to their stable when Mr Hughes steps down.
I'm no fan of David Argyle, but what he and his marketing team did in attracting fans to a new sport in decent numbers on a regular basis, regardless of free tickets or not is a beacon of what London could have achieved. Especially at Trailfinders, where there was room for a beer tent/festival scenario.
Now all we have to look forward to at best is being called Wimbledon Broncos, playing in the 3rd tier and praying for the end.

Where in the deal we have seen is there any statement on numbers?

My theory is that we are being touted to wimbledon as a potential addition to their stable when Mr Hughes steps down. And that would be a bad thing why?
Is a new owner not what everyone is suggesting is needed?

This bit should give you a clue as to how the deal is structured [i.in essence, the more people attend Broncos games, the more revenue we are likely to generate[/i.

Apologists gotta apologise.......it's in their nature.
1. 257k was what we paid 9 years ago.....apparently it was too much.
2. Wimbledon RLFC isn't the issue.....but that won't happen in the 3rd tier....maybe not even the second.
But you keep banging the it's all ok drum

The information has come out via AFC Wimbledon, it's been on this forum and the other one. You can ignore it, or pretend to, if you want.

As to AFCW taking over the Broncos, well they don't have enough money to fund themselves and have built up debts on the stadium that will impact their ability to compete on the field. The fans of a struggling football team are not going to be impressed by the management taking on board a loss-making rugby club - even more so when it is a fans-owned football club. AFCW are looking at us as an easy pay day, £200,000+ for doing nothing, just like Fulham FC did back in the 80s, that all it is. The chances of them buying the Broncos are infintesimally small.

Yep, it is far from obvious why a football fans trust would want to take on losses of around £1M per year to run a RL team.

I think the Wimbledon owners struggle to fund them, zero chance they would look at us. We are simply a revenue stream for them. The more we pack in, the more they make

The Broncos are doing their level best to pee off the fans that they already have. Attracting new fans does not seem to be on the agenda, as usual.

Not sure that ticketing revenue has been part of any previous ground deals. Maybe DH thinks Wimbledon will do the work of attracting new fans that he has never shown an interest in doing himself.

Give some credit please! the amount of money David Hughes has put into Our Club! There are not many owners in Super League who have invested more, what have such as The RFL invested into spreading the game into Our Capital City? but put money into keeping the ground in Bradford going when it should have been filled in years ago!

We should get an Anxiety Charity' to support our pages currently, anyone new coming to the pages would need to call them after reading through what has been posted.

Yes express our disappointments, but to keep dragging it out over and over again, just gets boring. If I had invested the money David Hughes has, I would be thinking of calling it a day.

If I had mad the poor decisions DH has, I would be thinking of calling it a day. It gets repeated because it keeps happening. I wont knock the bloke for paying the money, but at the same time, the reason we are so dependant on him is due to the numerous mistakes he has made

Excuse me?

Which is strange for a bloke who made his fortune doing deals you would assume.

Indeed. You dont make the kind of money he has by not knowing your onions. Thats why I am baffled about where the club finds itself

Not really.
Good sales people are often narcissists as are some bad ones pretending to be good. A trait of such people is that they like to be praised and take criticism badly and over the years it has become apparent that some people have manged to gain and retain employment at the club for which they were in no way qualified for by massaging Mr Hughes ego.
Mr Hughes is quoted in A PASTEL REVOLUTION as being in favour of the broncos and charlton being a sporting club and that this idea was shot down by the football side.....I can think of 2 employees who might have played on this when touting moves to football clubs.....as in
"You were right at Charlton Sir. This could be your chance to show everyone how right you were"
Just my opinion. I can't deliver proof, but as. Theory, it holds water.

David Hughes business was trading energy. There is massive demand for energy, it basically sells its self.
The key thing in that business is getting the best price that you can.
In addition his company did not have too many scruples as to whom it was selling too.