Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 9:30 am  

Faxlore wrote:

I’m not sure if you have discussed this already but the gate money is not just for paying players wages. Has electric, washing kit, purchasing kit, paying rent for the ground, medical cover, insurance and on and on. There is so much financial out put even before the budget for playing staff..

Agree, faxlore, but my argument is that the admission has got well ahead of itself and needs to be redressed along with the players' wages.

Season tickets are also becoming less appealing, and not just because of what's happened this season, which incidentally could have serious repercussions gong forward in season ticket sales. Which in turn could see even more fans getting out of the habit of going as they might pick and choose their matches. Maybe other ideas could include a £15 admission with a £5 off voucher for the next game?

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:06 am  

FWIW I think admittance should be cheaper but also FWIW I don not think that by lowering the price we will get more people, or at least not enough to make the difference, through the gate.

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:24 am  

I wonder what the cost of admission was in 1998 when we finished third. Unfortunately my brain cannot recall that. It would be interesting, as a few minutes research shows that the median wage in Calderdale has risen by 70% between then and 2019.
I hardly watch SL anymore as I found it tedious and much prefer the competitive Championship where most teams can beat any other. The skill levels are pretty good just at a slightly lower pace and with smaller athletes than SL . I think the Championship is value for money.
I realise that the cost for a family can add up but the club do deals for families. Never forget if a supporter pays £19 the Vat man takes 20% of this to pay for NHS etc.

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:25 am  

Fuzzy Duck wrote:

Looks like just me and thee having this debate, faxcar, even though I'd like to think others are looking in either nodding their head in approval or shaking their head in disagreement.

You come up with some very valid and interesting points, and even though I disagree with some of them, I fully respect your opinions therefore I'm not "retorting" with a scowl on my face.

I did say I don't think the clubs "will" work together multilaterally, but I think they "should". As you have gathered (!) I feel VERY strongly about having to reduce the admission. I know it will be extremely difficult in getting ALL the clubs to do this, but it just has to be done. Maybe carry out some kind of survey asking ex fax fans and potential fax followers for a SENSIBLE price they would pay to resume watching again, then take it from there. A survey carried out through email shots, the Courier or some geezer stood at the entrance of the Piece Hall. We need to be proactive about this and not just sit on our hands expecting people to continue to turn up and/or there to be a sudden interest surging out of the blue.

As for your point regarding "banning" full time players being illegal. A low salary cap restriction (a salary cap is legal remember) will prevent clubs from being able to employ full time players to a certain extent. So the Championship will essentially be part time which MUST be the case, we cannot afford to be anything else. We have to accept our league won't be as entertaining as full time Super League (which incidentally isn't always the case anyway, I've seen some awful one sided matches in that league, even though it was funny seeing big prop Walmsley running 50 yards through Leeds' full time defence ). Part time rugby can still be entertaining, you know. RL as a whole coped very well in the "old days" before the advent of over hyped Super League.

PS - Just seen your post, Hxsparky. Personally I'm basing my own tenner suggestion as being inline with salaries inflation over the past 25 years. £19 now is a commitment rather than what used to be loose change. From my own personal view point, the cost of going to a match never used to be an issue 30 years ago (I went to all home and away matches) but now it is an issue - I won't attend away matches because of the admission price (and I'm not short of a few bob, I just think it's bad value for money).

We're all just exchanging views FD all with good intentions and trying to think of a way forward and there's bound to be different views.
Again £19 is a lot of money and I would love to see it at a tenner or £15, just saying the clubs are caught in the dilemma of pricing people out or reducing it and running at a loss.
We have mentioned "on the gate" a lot but it would also have to be implemented pro rata across the season ticket prices as well.

I'm sure the club have a better vantage point to see the overall picture over me for example and must have considered it.

I remember standing down at the Shay next to a former director during a game and saying to him "you look tense, we're winning and playing great what's up with yer."

He replied yes that bit is great but I spend more time these days worrying about how many empty seats and spaces there are and how to keep it going and him mentioning this very subject of how to get it right and get more people in, that was a good few years ago and still remains.

As I mentioned, at the moment they must base any current and future planning on what the state of the game is now.

Regarding this from what DG said in the last statement from the club they have a plan in place for the next 2 or 3 years, to survive, consolidate and then grow based on the current situation.

Across the game and certainly at our level I don't think there will be a better time to implement some of the reductions we've discussed if the clubs can come together and with the inevitable less central funding they will be forced to operate on lower income and get some parity and I'm just as sure the BoD will be revising their planning in any case, they have said they are continuing to scrutinize every last detail.

Players will be willing or forced to accept less if only less is available but as mentioned there are other overheads that will only go up and there's not much we can do about that without opening other areas that will stop fans going like mergers and moving out of the town etc.

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 11:52 am  

I agree with GRB. lowering the admission price wont bring more people through the door. I know this quite a few years ago but i feel that some of the cause for lower gates was down to the introduction of Sunday trading for shops eyc and (dare i say it) SKY TV. When i started watching Fax back in 1978 there was no Sunday shops open so folk went to watch Rugby League on the afternoon. Then as i lad when i started playing I loved playing on a Sunday morning then going to the game with my Dad in the afternoon. Now, as we all know, everything is open and RL is competing with all the world has to offer. Isnt it strange that RL was born out of workers not getting paid by owners of mills etc for playing RL on a Saturday so they moved to a Sunday. Now the (again) retail get the right to open on Sundays and RL are back struggling while the 'mill' owners a making lots of money off people shopping on Sundays.
Anyway, SKY, When Fax played midweek games back when' there was always a good crowed. 3-4 thousand playing Wigan or St'sor whoever. Now with Thursday and Friday Televised why would someone from Hull bother to get home from work on a Friday and try to travel to Wigan for the match when they can stay at home. and watch it. Yes it was good to have SKY take up RL but I think it has not been as possessive as it could have been.

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 12:08 pm  

Greg - I agree lowering the price will not be compensated by an increase in numbers that's why I am arguing for the "missing " compensation to be filled with a multilateral decrease in wages. But I also think a tenner will see far bigger crowds for the big games, especially Bradford. Recently their presence at the shay has seen very disappointing crowds, probably even being outnumbered by the bullies.

Cowfax - I remember the first time paying over a fiver. It was at saints in the 90s who were always more expensive than every other club for some reason.

Faxcar - in my opinion a merger or move out of town is the same as the club becoming extinct. I for one will stop going. I think Bradford are only getting decent crowds at dewsbury because the move is temporary and they intend returning to Bradford.

Ps - going back to the lowering the admission, I remember fax lowering it to a tenner a few seasons ago against whitehaven (can't remember the reason) and the crowd was unusually high over 2000

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 3:35 pm  

Understandable but a bit sad how this thread on new signings seems now to be devoted almost entirely down to the cost of attending games. I may be wrong but in the past when the club has had spells of success I don't remember any calls for this . I have been daft enough to follow the team, regardless of cost or the quality of play for a long time - and while I fully appreciate the cost of attending games can't be ignored I feel if you gave most wavering supporters the choice of watching a competitive team playing decent rugby for £19 or watching a young team getting battered, you'd get consistently higher gates at the former. Once the club start announcing next seasons signings the excitement this generates will hopefully move peoples thoughts more onto the anticipation of getting to watch some rugby again.

Re: New signing. : Sat Aug 15, 2020 5:32 pm  

Ilkley Fax wrote:

Understandable but a bit sad how this thread on new signings seems now to be devoted almost entirely down to the cost of attending games. I may be wrong but in the past when the club has had spells of success I don't remember any calls for this . I have been daft enough to follow the team, regardless of cost or the quality of play for a long time - and while I fully appreciate the cost of attending games can't be ignored I feel if you gave most wavering supporters the choice of watching a competitive team playing decent rugby for £19 or watching a young team getting battered, you'd get consistently higher gates at the former. Once the club start announcing next seasons signings the excitement this generates will hopefully move peoples thoughts more onto the anticipation of getting to watch some rugby again.

Rarely do posts stay on thread Ilkley, the thinnest of links is that income affects signings which is how it went in that direction.

Another angle of looking at is after cutting the cost of say attending, at the moment you will end up with lower standard players, a losing side because the better ones will go elsewhere.

Then what can the club do to reverse the trend...........nothing you are stuck with it.
Crowds are going to go down because of the poor performances and entertainment value.
You can’t buy any better players because you have no money.
You can’t put the prices back up because that would make the situation worse.

Again it’s this financial dilemma of continually going from hand to mouth all the time.

As you say, what we need are the announcements on new signings and if a couple are exciting as mentioned by DG then it will give us a lift.

Re: New signing. : Sun Aug 16, 2020 8:09 am  

faxcar wrote:

Another angle of looking at is after cutting the cost of say attending, at the moment you will end up with lower standard players, a losing side because the better ones will go elsewhere.

You appear to be losing track of my argument, faxcar. The admission price reduction needs to be multilateral with a low championship salary cap to prevent " the better ones going elsewhere". You can't do it unilaterally, I get that, unless of course the gamble of reducing the admission doubles the crowds.

Incidentally, everyone seems to be poo pooing the last scenario I have mentioned even though it's hardly ever been trialled. But I've already mentioned our own example of letting fans in for a tenner against Whitehaven a few seasons back (when if I remember rightly the admission then was £15) which saw an usually high attendance of over 2,000. Other examples include Huddersfield getting 9,000 against Catalans.

If people think a winning team will attract lots more fans no matter what clubs charge, I'm afraid they'll be disappointed. Aka Salford recently getting to the Grand Final who still had an embarrassingly small knot of fans (albeit noisey) in attendance.

Apologies for high jacking the thread, Ilkley Fax.

Re: New signing. : Sun Aug 16, 2020 11:09 am  

The club have often in the past been able to really push the marketing for an individual game, including cut price admission , as a way of hopefully introducing new spectators to the game. I feel however a longer term drop in admission prices is too big a gamble for the club to take if it still wants to put a competitive team on the field.
I also don't feel a low imposed salary cap is is either workable or even desirable.At the moment Fax obviously don't have a wealthy benefactor, but if a David Brook or Tony Gartland came along again with the possibility of putting together a team capable of getting into and then being competitive in super league I think the vast majority of supporters would welcome them with open arms!!
I won't comment again until we have some positive news on retention/recruitment - something which I think is desperately needed to lift the mood of supporters and get them thinking positively again about the prospects for next season.