Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:48 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

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.

And yet more people paid to go watch Wigan v Hull than England v NZ. Our product is simply bigger than the 80 mins on the field.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:30 pm  

William Eve wrote:

The GB brand secured a Wembley attendance of 73,631 in 1992 against Australia. It didn't require a year long "BIG HIT" double header sales pitch to attract a decent attendance, nor did it require ludicrously cheap tickets on offer either.

Weren't you criticising the RFL for not announcing details of next years test series the other day? I do agree that is embarrassing btw. A crowd of 67,000 for our last international at Wembley (against a less marketable opponent,) isn't that far behind the '92 crowd, despite the mass mistakes made internationally from 1996-2010.

And why is a year long promotion campaign for a match a bad thing? If anything, we need more promotion in order to attract decent attendances. On the ludicrious ticket prices, what price were the tickets for the GB vs Australia game in 1992 by comparison. I'm assuming you knew the prices weren't ludicrously cheap?

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:08 pm  

SRV wrote:

Weren't you criticising the RFL for not announcing details of next years test series the other day? I do agree that is embarrassing btw. A crowd of 67,000 for our last international at Wembley (against a less marketable opponent,) isn't that far behind the '92 crowd, despite the mass mistakes made internationally from 1996-2010.

And why is a year long promotion campaign for a match a bad thing? If anything, we need more promotion in order to attract decent attendances. On the ludicrious ticket prices, what price were the tickets for the GB vs Australia game in 1992 by comparison. I'm assuming you knew the prices weren't ludicrously cheap?

Agree with that. It's also a different age. People have far far more choice of leisure activities today than they did in 92 and a trip to London was still a big deal back then. Its necessary to have a marketing campaign, even football have to market some of the less enticing England games.

There were plenty of mistakes made 96-2010 (and continue to be). The loss of tours and especially 3 Test Series being the major ones in my opinion.
I like the Tri/4 Nations (credit goes to Richard Lewis for getting it up and running) and I think it should be expanded to 5 Nations, but it shouldn't have been at the expense of Test Series. The 3 match series are great for getting RL in the media and getting us noticed.
There could have bee much greater scope for 3 test series from 2003 to now.

Unfortunately a lot of it comes down to the fact that there are (effectively) only 2 governing bodies. If there were more, 4 or 5 say, then we'd have to have a central body like FIFA (hopefully without the rampant corruption) to oversee and organise international affairs. With only 2 governing bodies and effectively 3 nations it comes down to the most powerful/richest governing body having the final say. Sadly the Aussies are quite insular about the international game and whilst their insularity is often overplayed to cover up some problems it is a big issue in the sport. Hence the lack of a set international calendar and the lack of mid-season internationals.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Wed Jan 07, 2015 10:16 pm  

SRV wrote: Weren't you criticising the RFL for not announcing details of next years test series the other day? I do agree that is embarrassing btw. A crowd of 67,000 for our last international at Wembley (against a less marketable opponent,) isn't that far behind the '92 crowd, despite the mass mistakes made internationally from 1996-2010. The official attendance for the BIG HIT double header semi finals event during the RLWC was 67,575 but that figure includes Club Wembley which accounts for 16,532 seats. Anyone who attended knows that very few of those Club Wembley seats were occupied, therefore the real attendance was closer to 53,000. SRV wrote: And why is a year long promotion campaign for a match a bad thing? Who claimed that a year long promotion campaign is a bad thing? SRV wrote: If anything, we need more promotion in order to attract decent attendances. On the ludicrious ticket prices, what price were the tickets for the GB vs Australia game in 1992 by comparison. I'm assuming you knew the prices weren't ludicrously cheap? I don't recall the exact price I paid but it was a relatively decent seat at the old Wembley in the middle to upper tier region behind one of the corner flags and I paid something like £25 for mine. There were cheaper seats behind the sticks but they won't have been a great deal cheaper than what I paid. Factor in historic inflation rates utilising this link and £25 back in 1992 would equate to around £47 today. Here is a more expensive ticket priced at £37 in 1992 which would equate to around £70 today Loads of tickets for the BIG HIT double header in 2013 were on offer at between £10 and £20 including free RLWC beanie hats in some cases.

SRV wrote: Weren't you criticising the RFL for not announcing details of next years test series the other day? I do agree that is embarrassing btw. A crowd of 67,000 for our last international at Wembley (against a less marketable opponent,) isn't that far behind the '92 crowd, despite the mass mistakes made internationally from 1996-2010. The official attendance for the BIG HIT double header semi finals event during the RLWC was 67,575 but that figure includes Club Wembley which accounts for 16,532 seats. Anyone who attended knows that very few of those Club Wembley seats were occupied, therefore the real attendance was closer to 53,000. SRV wrote: And why is a year long promotion campaign for a match a bad thing? Who claimed that a year long promotion campaign is a bad thing? SRV wrote: If anything, we need more promotion in order to attract decent attendances. On the ludicrious ticket prices, what price were the tickets for the GB vs Australia game in 1992 by comparison. I'm assuming you knew the prices weren't ludicrously cheap? I don't recall the exact price I paid but it was a relatively decent seat at the old Wembley in the middle to upper tier region behind one of the corner flags and I paid something like £25 for mine. There were cheaper seats behind the sticks but they won't have been a great deal cheaper than what I paid. Factor in historic inflation rates utilising this link and £25 back in 1992 would equate to around £47 today. Here is a more expensive ticket priced at £37 in 1992 which would equate to around £70 today Loads of tickets for the BIG HIT double header in 2013 were on offer at between £10 and £20 including free RLWC beanie hats in some cases.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 9:48 am  

Him wrote:

Agree with that. It's also a different age. People have far far more choice of leisure activities today than they did in 92 and a trip to London was still a big deal back then. Its necessary to have a marketing campaign, even football have to market some of the less enticing England games.

There were plenty of mistakes made 96-2010 (and continue to be). The loss of tours and especially 3 Test Series being the major ones in my opinion.
I like the Tri/4 Nations (credit goes to Richard Lewis for getting it up and running) and I think it should be expanded to 5 Nations, but it shouldn't have been at the expense of Test Series. The 3 match series are great for getting RL in the media and getting us noticed.
There could have bee much greater scope for 3 test series from 2003 to now.

Unfortunately a lot of it comes down to the fact that there are (effectively) only 2 governing bodies. If there were more, 4 or 5 say, then we'd have to have a central body like FIFA (hopefully without the rampant corruption) to oversee and organise international affairs. With only 2 governing bodies and effectively 3 nations it comes down to the most powerful/richest governing body having the final say. Sadly the Aussies are quite insular about the international game and whilst their insularity is often overplayed to cover up some problems it is a big issue in the sport. Hence the lack of a set international calendar and the lack of mid-season internationals.

Mid season internationals between the northern and southern hemisphere sides are impractical the distances are too large - even the world cup in soccer is segregated at qualifying to cut down on travelling.

If we were able to beat the Aussies consistently then perhaps there would be more interest until that happens the international will be a case of here we go again - Australia beat England/GB.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:35 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Mid season internationals between the northern and southern hemisphere sides are impractical the distances are too large - even the world cup in soccer is segregated at qualifying to cut down on travelling.

If we were able to beat the Aussies consistently then perhaps there would be more interest until that happens the international will be a case of here we go again - Australia beat England/GB.

You could have a mid-season international window and it wouldn't have to be Australia coming here every year for instance, just a period where players are made available for internationals. So for instance Samoa or PNG could play England or Wales or even NZ. At the moment they can't because they won't get their NRL players.

I agree but it's still a negative attitude from Australia that holds a lot of international issues back. And Australia, with the media attention they get in Australia and that region could do more than they are to help the game.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:42 am  

William Eve wrote: The official attendance for the BIG HIT double header semi finals event during the RLWC was 67,575 but that figure includes Club Wembley which accounts for 16,532 seats. Anyone who attended knows that very few of those Club Wembley seats were occupied, therefore the real attendance was closer to 53,000. Who claimed that a year long promotion campaign is a bad thing? I don't recall the exact price I paid but it was a relatively decent seat at the old Wembley in the middle to upper tier region behind one of the corner flags and I paid something like £25 for mine. There were cheaper seats behind the sticks but they won't have been a great deal cheaper than what I paid. Factor in historic inflation rates utilising this link and £25 back in 1992 would equate to around £47 today. Here is a more expensive ticket priced at £37 in 1992 which would equate to around £70 today Loads of tickets for the BIG HIT double header in 2013 were on offer at between £10 and £20 including free RLWC beanie hats in some cases. I might be wrong but the club wembley tickets were on General sale and if my memory is right it was pretty full in that section.

William Eve wrote: The official attendance for the BIG HIT double header semi finals event during the RLWC was 67,575 but that figure includes Club Wembley which accounts for 16,532 seats. Anyone who attended knows that very few of those Club Wembley seats were occupied, therefore the real attendance was closer to 53,000. Who claimed that a year long promotion campaign is a bad thing? I don't recall the exact price I paid but it was a relatively decent seat at the old Wembley in the middle to upper tier region behind one of the corner flags and I paid something like £25 for mine. There were cheaper seats behind the sticks but they won't have been a great deal cheaper than what I paid. Factor in historic inflation rates utilising this link and £25 back in 1992 would equate to around £47 today. Here is a more expensive ticket priced at £37 in 1992 which would equate to around £70 today Loads of tickets for the BIG HIT double header in 2013 were on offer at between £10 and £20 including free RLWC beanie hats in some cases. I might be wrong but the club wembley tickets were on General sale and if my memory is right it was pretty full in that section.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:50 am  

dids858 wrote:

I might be wrong but the club wembley tickets were on General sale and if my memory is right it was pretty full in that section.

Yep. I think William is getting mixed up with the 4 nations game v Australia a year or 2 previously.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:19 am  

dids858 wrote:

I might be wrong but the club wembley tickets were on General sale and if my memory is right it was pretty full in that section.

Also attendance is just that, number attending on the day, not number of tickets sold or stadium members seats not filled. But hey ho this is william we are talking about.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:29 am  

JB Down Under wrote:

Also attendance is just that, number attending on the day, not number of tickets sold or stadium members seats not filled. But hey ho this is william we are talking about.

Not necessarily. Pretty sure I've seen attendances given before now that were based on tickets sold rather than bodies through the gate. Have been at Wembley NFL games announced as a sell-out crowd which have been nothing like, for example.