Very good post.

On the 'household names' front I've long thought they could do a lot more with reality TV. I don't watch crap like Love Island and Celebrity Big Brother or whatever but many do, and the level of fame needed to get on these shows doesn't seem high, so no reason we couldn't get a player or ex-player on there. In turn the TV viewers are made aware that RL exists and that is a good starting point to then hit them with more advertising.

SKY seem to aim to just stop loosing subscriptions now, the growth is long gone, everyone who wanted SKY has got it or has had it. RL provides a consistent audience to them which is a good thing, but we struggle to post amazing audience numbers. Doesn't help that regularly games take place on a Friday night while the TV game is on. On Friday for example 5.5k Hull fans were at the stadium and not watching England on SKY. Some weeks it can be approx 40k sat in stadiums while a TV game is going on.

Its a real shame that RL isn't big in Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle three massive northern cities where we have minimal presence. There's also odd quirks like RL being massive in Cumbria but not Carlisle, in Wigan but not Bolton. Without loads of money we don't have I can't see how we can change that.

There's even more of a motivation to get into paid/salaried sport than there was in the days of the mills/pits and trawler work (nd associated industries)
Some obviously see sport as an 'out', an alternate away from other avenues to earn money, avoiding working in the equivalent mills/pits/fishing vessel.
The 'culture' of what, comraderie of those whom worked together, yes there was an element of that, but rich owners of teams soon figured out they could earn more miney by buying the better players from other teams. What Wigan did in the 80s/90s was no different to what they and other clubs did at other times.

As to where we have teams, if that keeps the financial lure for (predominantly) young men to want to play, that there is a certain prestige in being good at something, then that 'elite' level can be a catalyst for teams elsewhere IF there is an honest investment from the monies made and time/effort put in from these elite clubs including through the players not just in the communities where the teams are located but elsewhere. This is why having the Cumbria connection and that which other teams have is a part of that connectivity.

In some ways playiing RL needs to be seen as aspirational, not just from a monetary POV, but that it's seen as a lifestyle that works as part of bettering communities, making people happy, healthier and making closer bonds, sometimes to those that might ordinarily be excluded from other parts of society, being inclusive is massive, it helps those that can be pushed to the periphery, and from that it makes the game/sport more popular, having that appeal that it offers holistic benefits is undervalued.

Currently it's survival, and whilst the RFL is still the adminstrative and rulers of the sport and chairmen continue to fail to come to agreeances, that status quo will continue. The latter is one of the primary reasons why spreading the sport further afield in the 40/50s/60s failed, this insular notion that popularity beyond would diminish their income and success, which in turn actually helped put a nail in the coffin regards rugby union being the more popular sport and the situation the sport finds itself in, IMO it wouldn't be as dire if the sport was more national, IMHO I think that ship sailed a long, long time ago.

Does that mean we should sit back and give up, no, but it makes the job a heck of a lot harder and much longer timescale to improve things.

You make a good point about the aspirational career. The salary cap has helped keep the league competitive (but crucially only 4 teams have ever won it and Bradford are currently out of the picture) and a downside to that has been starting salaries for young players has remained low and with a short career they need higher salaries than average. We are no where near Football where young players can be set for life after a couple of years (which also has its downsides of course)

The insanity of the money at the top end of football has many downsides, tax avoidance is one of them both at club and player level which has a knock on effect to the public purse (as do other tax dodging types).
Football is insideous, it's grown to a oint that it actually harms society because of the wealth creation for a few at the cost to most others in one way or another.

Anyway, I understand the lower salary aspect that could be seen as problematic in RL circles, however the encouragement to learn other skills should become the norm for semi/fully professional clubs, not necessarily from a scholarly POV, vocational qualifications are far too often ignored (as we see in schools all the time)

You can't force players to do this of course, but recognising that for some players they are not going to be big earners and how to help them down other avenues is important. Additionally I think there could be a voluntary salary sacrifice for clubs biggest earners and that be invested in community RL projects, if they are bonefide registered charities then that salary sacrifice is non taxable.
Players earning the bigger salaries should see it, if they are to do this, that it is part of the bigger picture of community and well being of the people that we live amongst and ultimately help pay their (players) wages. Earning respect and being a positive role model can give you far more than 'money', but that's a different discussion.

Spot on, football is insidious. Players invariably have been in teams systems from a very early age, and know nothing else than being a footballer. Many probably earn more than a lot of Super League players, before being even getting near first team football.

Football is just an unstoppable juggernaut. We’re competing for corporate money with not just football, but women’s football. It’s a battle we won’t win. There’s no real kudos from sponsoring a mainly Northern, working class, sport for many companies now.

Just on APs original piece, do you think it was also done in the hope it may smoke out some additional help / investment for the club?

I think sports in general aren't near as popular as they were 20/30 years ago

Due to more things able to do in today's world look how obsessed people are with things like ( smart phones, ipads, Netflix, facebook, YouTube etc ) none of that was even around in early 2,000s!

Even sports like boxing how many boxers can people name today apart from Joshua and fury not many

Even Harry kane on pointless only scored 38 out of 100 when his face appeared on a round that's a guy who was top scorer at last world cup!

Sponsorship is partly about kudos and profile, and community for local sponsors. The other element is return on investment and RL fans are not perceived as having much disposable income, so premium brands don’t consider us. The general economic head winds, going back to the financial crisis 13 years ago have made growth very difficult.

On AP’s quotes, certainly he is advertising his openness to investment or even a buyer. If they don’t happen, then he might be preparing the ground for necessary-to-survive cost cutting.

I think the fact one of our more prominent sponsors is for mushy peas tells you all you need to know.

I think AP is very clever, with a clear agenda, when he comes out with statements like this. See the story about what he told the VP's about the Allams, and how the council then came out with a statement as proof of that.

Agree and disagree. Other sports all have flagship events that generate big media attention. Wimbledon, British Grand Prix, Euros & World Cup, 6Nations etc. RL's equivalent was the Challenge Cup final but that has declined since the move to August and the launch of the Magic Weekend and decline of 'coach trips' from working man's clubs and pubs. The Grand Final is a successful event but TV audience will always be limited behind SKY's paywall. The RL World Cup is a massive chance for attention and I cross my fingers it will take place on time as for once the setup and organisation has been great so far.

Other sports have invested heavily to create events, most notably American Football. I don't remember anyone even mentioning the Super Bowl when I was young, but they've now ingrained it in the UK sport calender, and arranged London based league games around it. The NFL have got it right that the public want big hyped up events in big stadiums. RL often goes for the approach of 'whats the cheapest stadium we can find?' like the farce of holding the cup Semis at Leigh the other week.

I actually don't have a problem with that, the parent company Premier foods is a near billion pound operation and has its headquarters in St.Albans.
Far better than gambling and other dodgy concerns, it's oft certain types that seems to drag down some sponsorship brands because of their pre-concieved ideas as to what it represents.

Interesting updates coming out on twitter about a meeting on Salford's stadium. Salford similar to us face an uncertain future with Sale wanting to buy the ground off the council, and they can't generate much revenue from the ground.

Seems they budgeted for 8k crowds originally but have only hit 3k (that was very optimistic!) and are now in talks with Gary Neville about moving into Salford City's stadium which only fits 5k, or face being homeless and leaving Salford (unrealistic to expect the council to build another new ground)

Really is worrying times for RL at the minute

It is indeed worrying times for RL in this country as a whole and shows the need to really have an independent review and move away from the idea of the clubs running SL as it just isn’t working. Everyone shares the same goal in terms of wanting the sport to grow and flourish and that can only be done by working together which doesn’t happen. I think the in fighting shows why Elsom left as it was a task he could never succeed at. As owners looked at what was best for them not as a whole.

I actually think a move by Salford to the football ground would be very good for them and the sport as it gives a SL team a home and more stability financially. You never know a closer association with someone like Gary Neville etc may be advantageous down the line.

The way Salford City are flying up the league's means they may need a bigger ground than 5k soon and Beckham and the rest have some rich friends so that may help them. One of Rugby Leagues many problems is barely any clubs own the ground. Only Saints and Leeds own modern grounds in SL. Everyone else is renting or have a crumbling wreck. Limits the opportunities to host concerts, weddings and receive bar takings which are important, clubs can't survive with grounds sat empty for many weeks of the year.

We do very nicely from concerts, bars etc thank you very much. Only COVID-19 has stopped those sources of income. Not only do we utilise the ground but the car park as well.

I agree. Salford’s football team are on a journey. Their ground may only hold 5k presently, but it’s temporary terracing and with their ambitions I’m sure will get extended in the near future, or move to a new site.

The current Salford RL ground is soulless and sits beneath the motorway. With the crowds Salford get, the football ground may be a good interim solution and create a better atmosphere.

Really? I thought Hudgell wanted out because he was fed up with subsidising Rovers?

Also I presume Rovers have now also repaid the £1m they received from that friendly Allam family, who like to support local good causes with ‘Gifts’ from time to time (T&C’s apply)?

No one said a subsidy was still not required. I was responding to your previous post about rented and dilapidated grounds. We are able to raise funds through the events you mentioned.

Classic response. If your post is challenged, bring in another topic. Our owner is still supporting the club financially, just not taking day to day control or acting as chairman.

If you want to troll please check your information first.

Saints and Leeds owe tens of millions on their repsective stadiums, they don't own them outright, and isn't Leeds a part owned consortium incl Hethrington.
The investors/financial institutions will rake it back over a long period including profit and the debts be paid, that's the hope, but in the current climate regards money in the sport, or rather lack of it, and with so much money owed, it's certainly a consideration for those investors to be having a bit of a chat regards how things progress to keep the money coming in.

Right now investing for us and other clubs is a hard sell, getting a new stadium is IMO simply not an option as much as we want to rid ourselves of the Allem's ball and chain.

I wasn’t trolling.

Your post suggested Rovers were financially doing well from various other activities when they can operate outside Covid restrictions. Personally i think that’s great and any rugby league club would welcome other revenue streams. Obviously at Hull, due the the SMC agreement, our hands are tied on many of those options.

With regards Hudgell and the Allam’s, I was just providing balance to your post. Although Rovers may have some additional income streams, it doesn’t address what you owner has publically said about Rovers finances.

It’s like celebrating finding a tenner when you’ve just lost £50.

I did not suggest that we were doing well financially as a club. I said we were able to benefit from the extraneous income streams that you mentioned in your origin post when you said other than Saints and Leeds clubs could not. Looking at other posts you do not even appear to be correct about Leeds’ situation.

No one is celebrating. Once again, your point of view is challenged, hey presto let’s introduce yet another topic.

Rovers have done well in improving what was a poor ground and yes have started to carve out a niche for concerts as there aren't any other 10-15k sized stadiums around, only Donny. The KCOM/MKM is too big for a lot of music acts, even without the Allam issues. I also think Rovers idea of having beer stalls and food at one end is a good idea.

But while you seem to have a good and steady deal with the council, the ownership hasn't been transferred yet and you're in the same boat as most SL teams in needing an owner to cover losses.

I didn’t write the other posts about St Helens and Leeds.

In summary our posts both conclude that Rovers have the ability to generate other income from their ground that other clubs, including Hull, can’t. Rovers, like other clubs, are still financially dependent on owners or other parties.

I think even football clubs are dependent on owners

Huge clubs like man utd running up 100s of millions of debt a year on year due to ridiculous wages/transfers even they can't afford it in the real world

Clubs like Bury, Macclesfield etc going to the wall in recent years

Man United's owners have deliberately saddled the club with debt to then gain an income from loans to themselves, same situation at Hull City on a smaller scale.

Footballs biggest problem is everyone gambling to get promoted or get into the Champions League etc they all think 'one more big signing' and get carried away.

Anyway back to FC: Leeds game moved to Thursday night for TV doesnt help the coffers. First game back not on TV and on a Friday would have drawn another few thousand in. It does however give us another days rest before Saints on the Monday.