Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:48 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

I could not disagree more.

If we prioritise some games.as big and important. By definition we declare some games as less big and less important. From a marketing point of view that makes no sense whatsoever. You have just made any attempt to sell Wakefield v Salford a million times harder. As we are finding we cannot sell some games as the pinnacle of sport, a huge clash between titans. World class players squaring up against world class players and hen others as a bargain basement day out for people who can't afford proper top quality sport.

The view our a me puts out cannot be 'hey come watch Super League, a fair amount of games are a bit poop but some are good'.

There is no intrinsic reason that Cas v Salford cannot be a big game, Salford are the Man City of RL, rich middle eastern owner v the green bay packers of RL the small town team punching above its weight. The clash of styles, the highly paid mercenaries v the home grown talent from the heartlands.

That's your pitch for Cas v Salford, not we know this game is a little poop so we have made it cheaper, don't worry though Wigan will be along soon.

We don't just need to improve the product, we don't just need to improve how we tell people about it. We need to decide what the hell the product is first. Is it the best Rugby competition or is it a cheap and cheerful day out for people who can't afford the football? Are we standing chest puffed out against any rugby competition in the world or are we happy being a cheap way to kill a few hours. We can't be both.

During the WC, the rfl said we were offered the chance to see world class sport from £5 per ticket. We need to know if we are selling the tickets on the basis they are £5 per ticket or because it's world class sport because people know world class sport doesn't cost £5 per ticket. Crap sport does. Those two messages we put out contradicted each other.

Your marketing has to be credible a game between two lowly ranked sides without any local rivalry cannot be marketed as an equal to two top sides playing each other. What you are saying is Cas v Salford should be marketed on a par with Wigan v Saints - that is simply not credible. The public will not swallow that message.

The sport needs to find its market its an elite sport trying to attract families primarily in the north of England. As a result pricing needs to be at a level that is affordable for your target audience. Soccer has huge quantities of single males attending with disposable income who will sacrifice everything for their weekly fix. RL has more family attendees with different priorities it needs to be priced accordingly.

I would suggest Leeds Rhinos are in a good position to charge top dollar yet they are freezing prices, offering interest free credit on season tickets etc. You may think the sport is worth more and should be marketed/priced at a premium level if the public were prepared to pay more then the clubs RFL would be doing so.

Look at the CC final despite cheap tickets the stadium is 20k light of being full. Are you suggesting putting prices up and marketing it as an elite occasion would fill the stadium?

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:55 am  

PopTart wrote:

I agree with your marketing point but they don't need to improve the product, just the message telling people about it. The product has always been looked after. The marketing has not.

To improve the product you need to increase participation at junior level - that is the RFLs job. We need to be able to get some of the better Aussies to do that we need to increase revenue into the game - that is to large extent the job of the RL. Same goes for losing star players to the NRL and RU.

[PopTart]

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:07 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

To improve the product you need to increase participation at junior level - that is the RFLs job. We need to be able to get some of the better Aussies to do that we need to increase revenue into the game - that is to large extent the job of the RL. Same goes for losing star players to the NRL and RU.

Ah, that I agree with.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:50 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Your marketing has to be credible a game between two lowly ranked sides without any local rivalry cannot be marketed as an equal to two top sides playing each other. What you are saying is Cas v Salford should be marketed on a par with Wigan v Saints - that is simply not credible. The public will not swallow that message.

But people aren't going to buy a poop product just because you are honest about it being poop. In fact 2 hat you are describing is the antithesis of marketing. It is antimarketing. If Cas v Salford isn't and isn't ever going to be a big game then it shouldn't be an SL game. Having a game that isn't elite in an elite league damages the competition.

The sport needs to find its market its an elite sport trying to attract families primarily in the north of England. As a result pricing needs to be at a level that is affordable for your target audience. Soccer has huge quantities of single males attending with disposable income who will sacrifice everything for their weekly fix. RL has more family attendees with different priorities it needs to be priced accordingly.

I would suggest Leeds Rhinos are in a good position to charge top dollar yet they are freezing prices, offering interest free credit on season tickets etc. You may think the sport is worth more and should be marketed/priced at a premium level if the public were prepared to pay more then the clubs RFL would be doing so.

Look at the CC final despite cheap tickets the stadium is 20k light of being full. Are you suggesting putting prices up and marketing it as an elite occasion would fill the stadium?

Leeds Rhinos cannot and do not operate in a vacuum. They cannot charge premium prices when everyone else around them is selling it as a bargain basement deal.

you say pricing needs to be affordable and We need to be the elite sport for the North of England. Yet you also state that despite cheap tickets we can't sell out Wembley. We cannot sell out an elite sport at a cheap price because people know that a elite does not come cheap.


A guy meets you in the street, offers to sell you a rolex for a fiver. It's not got its proper box and has some cheap looking packaging do you buy it and get it insured and make sure you take care of it and treat it as a treasured possession? No because you know rolex watches don't cost 5 pounds and they aren't presented in cheap packaging. Best case scenario you buy it and treat it as disposable and unimportant, worst case you don't buy it because you aren't desperate for a watch and even 5 pound is a waste if it turns out to be as crap as you expect a 5 pound knock off to be.

I'm not stating that we can simply market the product ad premium and raise prices. I'm saying we sell a premium product at a premium price.

Our product isn't simply 26 men on the field. It's everything surrounding it. We don't just need improved junior development, we need bigger better stadiums with better more modern facilities, we need a better match day experience, We need better marketing, we need a better image, we need higher visibility.

None of those things can or will be achieved by lowering prices.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:57 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

To improve the product you need to increase participation at junior level - that is the RFLs job. We need to be able to get some of the better Aussies to do that we need to increase revenue into the game - that is to large extent the job of the RL. Same goes for losing star players to the NRL and RU.

the product we are selling is soooooo much bigger than the 26 men we have on the field.

I can watch a better RL game, played by better players and better athletes for a few pounds a month in the NRL premier sport. I can watch it on a big fancy LCD TV. I can even watch exactly the same Super League product on Sky for a price per month less than 1 ticket. I can sit on my sofa and watch the game in glorious HD and pay for some nicer beers and a takeaway for less than going to the match.

If the product is simply 80 mins of RL I can do it more comfortably and cheaper on my sofa at home. So why would anyone go?

The answer is because we aren't selling 80 mins of rugby.

So I think Pop tart is massively wrong. The product hadn't been looked after. The game itself is great but sadly it is played in awful facilities, the surrounding entertainment is generally working mens club level, and to top it off the quality isn't always great.

We have the greatest sport in the world, but we present it terribly and we surround it with things which are cheap and unimaginative. And people in large have responded by valuing us low. So we get cheaper, invest less and wonder why people still aren't turning up

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:19 am  

Only read the last page
I'm with smokeyta on a lot of points.

People don't realise it but making something cheaper does automatically make it less appealing in some ways. It's just the way the mind works. Although we are mainly dealing with northerners who want everything for free and then it's still too expensive.

Also we have reduced the amount of teams so I completely agree the attitude should now be. If the bottom two sides cannot be as good a game as the top two. Why not. Should they be in super league?

There's a lot of arguments for and against everything. Salary cap etc..
But no one can argue we want superleague full of great teams that can all compete for the big prizes.
That will never happen overnight. But look at cas. What an amazing season and hopefully they will keep that quality up for years to come.
If it's not going to be saints to win anything. I would love to see cas win a trophy.

I like the magic weekend idea. Letting other parts of the country watch the sport.
I think everything should be done to fill whatever stadium is used.
Travelling fans will fill a certain percent. Then free tickets for every student in the local area.
But not spouting about it on sky, that free tickets have been given out to fill the stadium.

The pre match entertainment seems to have died on it's booty in recent years too.
This all ads to the hype. Bradford had a real good hype years ago with what they were doing. Why did that fade?

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:36 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

But people aren't going to buy a poop product just because you are honest about it being poop. In fact 2 hat you are describing is the antithesis of marketing. It is antimarketing. If Cas v Salford isn't and isn't ever going to be a big game then it shouldn't be an SL game. Having a game that isn't elite in an elite league damages the competition.


Leeds Rhinos cannot and do not operate in a vacuum. They cannot charge premium prices when everyone else around them is selling it as a bargain basement deal.

you say pricing needs to be affordable and We need to be the elite sport for the North of England. Yet you also state that despite cheap tickets we can't sell out Wembley. We cannot sell out an elite sport at a cheap price because people know that a elite does not come cheap.


A guy meets you in the street, offers to sell you a rolex for a fiver. It's not got its proper box and has some cheap looking packaging do you buy it and get it insured and make sure you take care of it and treat it as a treasured possession? No because you know rolex watches don't cost 5 pounds and they aren't presented in cheap packaging. Best case scenario you buy it and treat it as disposable and unimportant, worst case you don't buy it because you aren't desperate for a watch and even 5 pound is a waste if it turns out to be as crap as you expect a 5 pound knock off to be.

I'm not stating that we can simply market the product ad premium and raise prices. I'm saying we sell a premium product at a premium price.

Our product isn't simply 26 men on the field. It's everything surrounding it. We don't just need improved junior development, we need bigger better stadiums with better more modern facilities, we need a better match day experience, We need better marketing, we need a better image, we need higher visibility.

None of those things can or will be achieved by lowering prices.

You might believe the product is worth more the problem is your target audience doesn't. The target audience has a limited amount to spend on leisure and RL has to fit into that budget. I bet for many RL fans the cost of their hobby is a big chunk of their disposable income. If you want to charge more then you need to shift the demographic and as we have seen in London and Wales easier said than done.

Your Rolex image is a good one - Rolex is a tried and tested brand it competes with all its rivals on performance. SL cannot compete with NRL or RU let alone PL soccer. If you were seeing the likes of Greg Inglis/Sam Burgess every week as you are RU and soccer then yes I would agree there is justification for charging like Rolex do. Sadly you are offering a second rate product so how can you charge premium prices? The standard on the field outside of the top 4 clubs is poor so how can you market a game between two average sides as a big game and carry any credibility? If I go to a Mariah Carey concert and the venue is great the lights are great but she can't sing I am not going to be happy - I am there to hear her sing.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:41 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

the product we are selling is soooooo much bigger than the 26 men we have on the field.

I can watch a better RL game, played by better players and better athletes for a few pounds a month in the NRL premier sport. I can watch it on a big fancy LCD TV. I can even watch exactly the same Super League product on Sky for a price per month less than 1 ticket. I can sit on my sofa and watch the game in glorious HD and pay for some nicer beers and a takeaway for less than going to the match.

If the product is simply 80 mins of RL I can do it more comfortably and cheaper on my sofa at home. So why would anyone go?

The answer is because we aren't selling 80 mins of rugby.

So I think Pop tart is massively wrong. The product hadn't been looked after. The game itself is great but sadly it is played in awful facilities, the surrounding entertainment is generally working mens club level, and to top it off the quality isn't always great.

We have the greatest sport in the world, but we present it terribly and we surround it with things which are cheap and unimaginative. And people in large have responded by valuing us low. So we get cheaper, invest less and wonder why people still aren't turning up

50-60,000 people watch the games live - 200-300,000 watch one game on Sky!!

You are selling primarily the quality on the pitch - if its an elite sport it needs elite players playing to elite standards - if you can't offer that then you cannot charge premium prices.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 11:57 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

You might believe the product is worth more the problem is your target audience doesn't. The target audience has a limited amount to spend on leisure and RL has to fit into that budget. I bet for many RL fans the cost of their hobby is a big chunk of their disposable income. If you want to charge more then you need to shift the demographic and as we have seen in London and Wales easier said than done.

People aren't paying in large numbers for it as this cheap and cheerful day out as we have now either. For a business to work You can either sell lots of things at a low price or fewer things at a higher price. We are selling few things at a lower price. You know what that should tell us? You know what not selling the cc final out with cheap tickets should tell us? What not selling out Wembley for a WC final double header with 3 of the 4 best teams in the world with tickets for a tenner should tell us? You know what RFU selling out twickenham for 50 a head tells us. Price isn't driving demand. That we can't win by being cheap because staying at home is always going to be cheaper. It also tells us, like the premier league does, like the nfl international series does, like the RFU does, people will pay a premium price for a premium product.

boxing is a good example, poor quality fights are cheap as chips to attend. The big fights are incredibly expensive. Yet more people go to the big fights than the poorer ones.

Your Rolex image is a good one - Rolex is a tried and tested brand it competes with all its rivals on performance. SL cannot compete with NRL or RU let alone PL soccer. If you were seeing the likes of Greg Inglis/Sam Burgess every week as you are RU and soccer then yes I would agree there is justification for charging like Rolex do. Sadly you are offering a second rate product so how can you charge premium prices? The standard on the field outside of the top 4 clubs is poor so how can you market a game between two average sides as a big game and carry any credibility? If I go to a Mariah Carey concert and the venue is great the lights are great but she can't sing I am not going to be happy - I am there to hear her sing.

If we sell at a premium price we need to provide a premium product so our first action is to stop selling crap. If the standard outside the top 4 is too poor then we improve the standard outside the top 4.

And if you go to a Mariah Carey concert and there are no big screens, aging speakers, your seat is falling apart, you have to queue for an hour for a poor selection of drinks and food and crap 2nd rate merchandise, but she sings like an angel it's still going to be a bit of a crap evening

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:57 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

People aren't paying in large numbers for it as this cheap and cheerful day out as we have now either. For a business to work You can either sell lots of things at a low price or fewer things at a higher price. We are selling few things at a lower price. You know what that should tell us? You know what not selling the cc final out with cheap tickets should tell us? What not selling out Wembley for a WC final double header with 3 of the 4 best teams in the world with tickets for a tenner should tell us? You know what RFU selling out twickenham for 50 a head tells us. Price isn't driving demand. That we can't win by being cheap because staying at home is always going to be cheaper. It also tells us, like the premier league does, like the nfl international series does, like the RFU does, people will pay a premium price for a premium product.

boxing is a good example, poor quality fights are cheap as chips to attend. The big fights are incredibly expensive. Yet more people go to the big fights than the poorer ones.

If we sell at a premium price we need to provide a premium product so our first action is to stop selling crap. If the standard outside the top 4 is too poor then we improve the standard outside the top 4.

And if you go to a Mariah Carey concert and there are no big screens, aging speakers, your seat is falling apart, you have to queue for an hour for a poor selection of drinks and food and crap 2nd rate merchandise, but she sings like an angel it's still going to be a bit of a crap evening

I agree improve the product - until you do that you can't charge top dollar. RU charges top dollar because their demographic can afford to pay - I went to England v Australia at Twickenham £1,000 a head for corporate, glad I wasn't paying. Can't see many northern folk spending their company's brass like that.

So how do you go about creating a truly elite SL - first reduce the numbers of teams to 10 maximum, increase the salary cap to 2m and ensure those teams left spend to that level if they can't afford then they don't get a franchise. Encourage the RFL to get better and bigger sponsors etc. You can't dress a swatch up to be a Rolex the public are not stupid. If you want to charge more then you have to deliver more.

If Mariah Carey singings well I don't care if I can't get a meat pie or I pay £4 for a pint of beer, I pay that at Headingley. Equally I would be pretty hacked off if she couldn't sing but the pies were great and I paid £2 a pint. It is the main event you are paying for Wigan v Hull was a terrible CC final despite being played in the most superb surroundings. England v NZ WC semi would have been a great game no matter where it was played.