Are Ealing a sustainable club?

Again an interesting point @Blues,

The key question though for me would be ‘which’ entity are you talking about? I hope you’re not saying Bedford are still using a single club model for its incorporation and reporting. That would be a worrying choice IMO.

It is unfortunate, but given the era of professionalism and the costs associated with it CLUBS need to think very carefully about the financial structure of their operations.

Shaking buckets to raise money for the Minis and Youth doesn’t really work if it is paid into the same P&L that might be carrying pro players - Finn Russell is reputed to be playing for £750k+ a season. How many tag belts or mini rugby resources would that pay for? The Club Exec has to balance the interests of members, but doing this equitably in the age of professionalism is difficult unless some clarity and focus on relevant issues can be maintained.

IMO there is a critical need to protect the tradition and heritage of clubs. Too many have fallen foul of mismanagement and run into debt due to creeping costs and a desire to win more games.

This means that you have to split out all elements of professional rugby and the related costs/income. You then have transparency for all Club members, especially at the AGM, and everyone can see what money is going where.

This also means sponsors can see what their money is doing for the club. Some might want to support the pro side, others the kids side of the game. This is a win-win for everyone and if done properly helps build long term sustainability and reflects the members AND sponsors interests.

I think you are wrong to say the investment is for Championship status. It is obviously for Premiership status .

Edited by No 7 - 15 Jan 2023 at 16:08

Apologies for the slight digression but I'd like tp know what "sustainable" actually means

Runitback wrote: The more important principle is that there needs to be promotion and relegation, if any individual wants to spend all their money on a vanity project then fine but if they fail then they should return to the bottom of the pyramid . .  LS, LW and Richmond and not the like Wasps and Worcs . . although I expect Wasps to fail again and most likely Worcs!

Good player costs X very good player costs Y

Runitback wrote: The more important principle is that there needs to be promotion and relegation, if any individual wants to spend all their money on a vanity project then fine but if they fail then they should return to the bottom of the pyramid . .  LS, LW and Richmond and not the like Wasps and Worcs . . although I expect Wasps to fail again and most likely Worcs!

Runitback wrote: Absolutely no disrespect to Sir M Gooley, but unless he can find a way to make the club sustainable without Trailfinders underwriting it’s losses every year then it is in effect a vanity project. He has built an amazing business and his passion is rugby, so he can do as he chooses with his vast wealth , and he has invested in infrastructure. But what is ETs average attendance, probably similar to most Nat 1 sides !

dropout22 wrote: How is this even a thread. If you class a very rich owner as not being sustainable. Then every club in Prem are not sustainable & the majority of L2 aren't sustainable. Most clubs in L2, can't even plan for longer then 6-12 months...  ET whatever happens on the pitch, at least it's fair to say they are trying to make it happen off the pitch  Academy, Womens, Ground, Education Links Whilst some clubs cut back, they are ploughing unforseen amounts into the community game.

To be clear I’m now attacking Ealing here. What we all want is Ealing to thrive, but if you remove one man there appears to be very little to fall back on. Each company is standalone with no long term obligation to the other. 

I think the title of this thread is incorrect.