How nice it is to have Harlequins decorating National One these days.
Even after one game in the division their fans, players and coaching staff have already brought light to a league where the darkness is usually so impenetrable.
It is, therefore, equally sad that their stay will be short-lived. They are, of course, head, shoulders, torso and waistline above the rest of the division but, frustratingly, their supremacy is not wholly merited.
They might be in the same league as Pertemps Bees, the team they beat but failed to subdue last Saturday, yet for the purposes of the mandarins at Twickenham theirs is a privileged position.
While the paupers at Sharmans Cross Road have to be grateful for their annual £180,000 hand-out from the Rugby Football Union, the sport's foundations are so inequitable that 'Quins' finances are underpinned by a massive parachute payment.
Perhaps that was the intention all along. Force 'Quins to take their medicine but let them do so with a £1.5 million sweetener. Even Mary Poppins would struggle to lift that silver-spoonful of sugar.
I accept that there will always be the Manchester Uniteds and Halifax Towns in any sport but such institutionalised favouritism makes a mockery of the Union's claim that two decades of league rugby have introduced meritocracy in the game.
Incredibly, Harlequins' grant is as big as Bristol's and Worcester's the year before and they're both in the Premiership.
I'm not sure which is the more laughable situation - whether the promoted clubs who need it most are denied a full RFU subsidy or the fact that a relegated team is given such a blatant foot-up.
Indeed, the whole principle of parachute payments, grants designed to soften the blow of losing top-flight status, is flawed.
The ramifications of demotion are severe indeed, even more so than those that exist in football between the Premiership and the Championship, but placing a fiscal landing mat under the fallen club does not address the real problem.
Put simply, level two is neglected by both the central policy-makers and the purse-string holders. Proper funding would mean that relegation would not be so catastrophic and that, in turn, would enable the governing body to codify movement between the leagues without the big kids throwing their balls out of the playpen.
It's no use the RFU saying there isn't a viable product outside of the top flight, the world of commerce is replete with successful rebrandings which means that, given the right level of investment, i.e., more than £180,000 per club a year, National One could be turned into a serious going concern.
There are, after all, only 12 teams in the Premiership and their geographical spread is rather piecemeal, leaving large areas of the country without a full-time union club.
If National One sides were given enough financial help for them to go at least semi-professional, the sport's representation would be far wider and could seriously rival other more localised versions of football.
Worcester are living proof that you can build an organic fan base without a deep-running union tradition. Although they have relied on the vision of one man to write their remarkable success story, is it too much to expect the people in charge of rugby to be equally ambitious?
Instead, I suspect, we are destined to see Harlequins promoted, though not with an unbeaten record, a couple more years' jostling and then the trapdoor slamming shut.
Maybe there'll be 12 clubs on the inside, maybe there'll be 14, but my big fear is that hard-working outfits like Bees and Moseley will be left with just a window to peer through and visits from Harlequins would return to being as rare as they were in the days before league rugby.