Marshy1 wrote:
No it doesn't as If you read properly I stated " no Rugby League Club is a good Investment unless it owns assets such as a stadium". unless I had bag fulls of cash which i didn't want.
If I was wanting a return on my money then I would certainly be looking for a club with assets of which there arn't to many knocking about, including Wigan.
Don't worry this isn't a "knock Salford" comment it is a general comment about pretty much all Rugby clubs.
The trouble with the sport and this applies to a certain degree not only Rugby League but Football and a few others is that they have sold their souls to Sky TV and are now so heavily reliant on that money which because at the moment is regular it masks the mis-management of most clubs.
I think you have to look also at the appeal and potential of the sport to investers. Top flight football is in a different stratosphere financially compared to Rugby League. And as much as it hurts to say, Rugby Union is on a different level also when you consider their clubs get substantially more from Sky.
A lot of blame is rightly directed at the clubs but should the rugby league not be held more accountable for the poor health of our game? For instance they couldn't even find a proper sponsor for Superleague and had to reluntantly agree to a few rugby players/teams being displayed on a small number of HGV lorries. If the RFL can't find a real sponsor for an established, professional and televised sport it doesn't inspire you with confidence that they negotiated the best possible deal with sky, does it?
I think another thing you have to consider is all clubs must be struggling to attract anywhere close to the levels of sponsorship they were getting pre 2008. Plus I've heard stories in the game of companies agreeing to sponsorship deals and then not being able to pay. This must surely affect the best laid plans or budgets.