1 valve

ACU licenses can be withdrawn & the FIM. Would support such actions. small “ankle biter” riders and events are not of a concern. Different matter if clubs want to promote & riders want compete in significant alternative league and solo events in opposition to BSPL organisations.

As they do now.

Yes indeed, and none of the riders who ride for those teams will be able to ride speedway, grass track & long track on any other tracks anywhere in the world. Not sure the Aussies, Danes, Poles etc would like that ever mind Brits who ride abroad in speedway and similar.

And what punishment will be heaped on the said accountable’s and by whom?

The Leicester promotion does not own the stadium. It is owned by a company with one director, David Helmsley who was the original promoter when speedway returned to the City. I believe the current promoting company has a long term lease agreement for use of the facility.

Yes, for £1.00 he purchased the clubs name and £1.5 million of trade debt & banking liabilities. The purchase did not include the freehold of Stamford bridge itself which the then majority owners (a development company) wanted to develop. To his credit, Bates took on the developers, obtained the full leasehold and saw the developers go bankrupt. When he sold the club for £170million he made £17million profit. Today Chelsea FC have debts of circa £1.2 billion having had the benefit of former owner Roman Abramovich writing off £1.5 billion personal loans to the club.

My post was a response to a previous thread.

My post was a response to a previous thread.

Err don’t the riders use the same bikes, vans & mechanics for both Prem & Championship meetings? Im really talking cost v benefit. Championship clubs feature significantly less top stars than the Prem but by comparison do not reduce their prices accordingly.

I don’t think so. That means 25 years of trading to get the original cost of purchase back. If a business is being sold as a going concern the rule of thumb is to establish a suitable multiple of the companies EBITA. The majority of deals fall somewhere between a paltry four whilst x ten is possible for a company owning decent IP and growth prospects covered by a believable plan. If it’s an asset sale the buyer gets everything but the accounts, customer list & purchase records of the company.

You are correct, but only until the rider makes that choice which for next year all three have done so. The outcome therefore is the same as per my post.

They cant just "join" as there will be insufficient riders to make up a team...Take Leicester's 2025 team as an example. Fricke, Douglas & Becker, gone from the UK if one league comes along as Poland has first claim. Howarth, Masters, Kemp & J Thompson ride for existing clubs. A similar scenario exists at the other remaining 2025 Prem clubs Remember doubling up disappears in "one big league" and the only source of new riders is at the bottom of the capability chart - NDL riders - some of whom cannot get anywhere near place in a current championship club.

How does 9 teams running in 2026 make it larger than the 9 team league in 2025? I guess you could build teams of 3 or 4 established riders plus 3 or 4 NDL riders and then presuming the ensuing watering down of team strengths is evenly spread across all teams then mathematically there could be eleven teams.

The directors (or the top table as you refer) are five (now four) folk out of a collective of fourteen people (one club one person) who run the sport. However, rather than blaming the five/four you should look more closely at the majority of the members and their unwillingness to bend and work together to support the directors as to where the shenanigans are created. Speedway promoters as a majority - there are is a small number of exceptions. share common characteristics. 1. They can't promote the sport successfully at the local level to make their business profitable. 2. They steadfastly think of themselves first and endorse nothing that could potentially mean change for them. 4. They refuse to let go of the controlling strings to an independent commissioner. 5. They all think they can run the sport better than each other. 6. They actually shouldn't be promoters at all - Its a hobby to some and an ego satisfier to others. And this has been the situation for many years.

You have it the wrong way around. The directors decide and the members rubber stamp or not as the case maybe in which case it goes to a vote of the members. Notwithstanding, as of 18th November CL is no longer a director.

Good point. As we only see 30 or 40% of current Premier league riders in the Championship why do championship clubs charge so much I.e. 85/90% of Prem prices

You could well be correct but rather than quitting because he has failed to get his own way the likelihood is CL has stepped down because the alternatives proposed by his BSPL colleagues went well against his own beliefs and he has simply decided not to support such initiatives with his own hard earned money. Sometimes a person has to stand by what he believes is right. Ipswich can still go on, just need to find somebody who believes in the new super future of UK speedway far more than CL.

Calling it mediocre sure is putting some positive spin on it! It wouldn’t be that good ☹️

Thats because many sources of income achieved by NFL properties are amalgamated and divided equally amongst all teams. For those two teams getting a bye for week one of the playoffs they are more than happy because a) they have an extra week off to recover and prepare and b)they are guaranteed home field advantage for their remaining playoff games including the championship game itself prior to the SuperBowl

You are correct re the BT/Eurosport bit - but not because they were dissatisfied with UK speedway but because they were clearing their portfolio of none priority sports. Re the future. You are proposing almost, aka how the original deal with Sky was done...i.e. "if you give us a load of money this is what we will do". Well that boat has truly sailed I'm afraid. Speedway will need to demonstrate it has a useful current product worth promoting and - This is the biggy - a clear answer to the question, "besides just giving the money to riders what are you plans for using some of the funds to developing the sports infrastructure?" Believe it or not, TV companies and significant sponsors do not like to be seen supporting unworthy projects and getting blamed when their tenure ends.

Its absolutely applicable to your post where you said. "I just don’t understand why they insist 2 leagues when we are in the situation were in" So I have, at some length provided the answer.

Sky did - BT didn't. BT transferred the broadcasting rights as part of the new joint venture TNT rebranding . BT are currently finalising a deal to sell their remaining 50% of TNT to their current partner Warner Bros. Discovery and as WBD have yet to finalise a strategy of how to align their over the air (OTA) and streaming strategy their preferred action is not to renew contracts with none priority sports bodies. As you say...at the moment. However, when they or others do come to the table we should not expect them to be jumping up and down with excitement if anything other than that which provides some if not all GP riders AKA a top flight Premier League.

And if you were able to either of the Sheffield teams to Hallam for a challenge match featuring the top line ups from both sides you can be assured of two things - all joking aside. 1. The ground would be filled to capacity. 2. The Sheffield team would win at a canter However, not sure how new fans that would bring in at the following Hallam home game.

Firstly, Its not clear by who you mean as "they" insisting on two leagues- but I presume you mean the current Premiership promoters. Secondly, You say a five team league would be financial suicide. Well instead of painting the Premiership promoters as the bad guys (as you clearly do) why don't you at least acknowledge that losses incurred by the Premiership promoters are covered by each individual promotion/club with no impact on the financial results of the championship promoters. In reality, it most probably helps them as riders doubling up are able to get two sources of income lessening the demands on championship clubs. Thirdly. You say you "don't understand why "they" insist on 2 leagues". Well maybe that's because you just stubbornly refuse to take on board the reasons that have been stated over and over again on this forum. 1. Some promoters are of the belief that a league featuring the very best riders is the best way to promote the sport both at club and national level and they are prepared to foot the bill. This means that in the UK clubs at the "Elite" level have to abide by the globally agreed reserved race nights. Monday & Thursday. 2. If the top tier of speedway as we know it, was to be disbanded and the reserved race nights "ignored" in favor of one league, there would be a significant number of current day riders not available to race in the UK due to their contractual obligations with clubs in other countries. There would also be a removal of riders being available to race for more than one club due to the removal of the Doubling up facility. This would mean sufficient riders (say) of todays championship level to make eight teams possible - No more. 3. An alternative to having one eight team league of championship quality is to greatly reduce the team building points limit so that all existing NDL level of riders could be included which could just about mean twelve teams being created for the one big league. 4. A further alternative is to divide the one big league "talent" of point 3 into two leagues with one comprising (say) six or seven teams operating full time/professional riders and the remainder of six/seven teams running on a semi pro/amateur basis. Point 1. Requires the very best of riders to be available - and promoters willing to "give it a go" with a plan to attract TV/sponsorship at a national level to help with their costs. Point 2. Requires the loss of five or six clubs to professional racing - maybe to run NDL level on an expanded basis. Point 3. Requires a substantial reduction in team building numbers with an ensuing drop in quality of on track racing. Point4. Means a restriction in top tier teams with the quality/ability of riders competing being significantly lower than point 1. reducing the appeal of a national TV deal and significant sponsors.

Utter madness and the perfect example of how the majority of promoters in the UK have only their own self interests at the forefront of their ambition. Of course the majority are championship promoters who have clearly been willing to take the benefit of taking riders from Premiership teams who have underwritten their losses so that UK speedway can see some of the worlds best riders race in this country. If in 2026 there is going to be a watered down version of two tier league speedway or even worse one league incorporating riders who can barely get out of the gate and turn the bike - then lets be clear, this isn't the fault of the riders but a reflection of the promoters capabilities to promote the sport....and still with two teams (Neither who race at weekends) being at the top and by comparison the others floundering in their wake.