Re: Sky losing interest. : Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:36 pm  

Tre Cool wrote:

I think Leeds in particular should get much better attendances than they do, they never seem to grow them and they are in a massive city and have had a lot of success.

Headingley should sell out every home game.

Smokey's response is probably close to the mark. Also, a fair chunk of the ground's unused capacity is in the South Stand. When the attendance is at, or close to, 21k there will likely be just as many newbies who are put off by the experience as there are those who decide to try it again. I suspect that without major improvement work - in itself likely to reduce the ground's capacity - Leeds will never draw capacity crowds on anything other than an intermittent basis.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:44 pm  

Clearwing wrote:

Smokey's response is probably close to the mark. Also, a fair chunk of the ground's unused capacity is in the South Stand. When the attendance is at, or close to, 21k there will likely be just as many newbies who are put off by the experience as there are those who decide to try it again. I suspect that without major improvement work - in itself likely to reduce the ground's capacity - Leeds will never draw capacity crowds on anything other than an intermittent basis.

I think there is a bit of a timing issue aswell with both the north and south stands due for improvements it doesn't really make sense to set out on a big attraction campaign when that is happening

Re: Sky losing interest. : Mon Jan 05, 2015 2:52 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Oh no doubt that clubs are failing massively in this respect, but it's hard to criticise leeds or Wigan getting 15k when we will likely get that for CC semis and international games.

I'd also argue that we get a lot more 'bang for our buck' by marketing more centrally, I certainly think the build up for the start of the season is down to the RFL or Super League. Now the RFL have parachuted their man in to run SL they can't really complain that people expect something from them. Right now the RFL seem intent in controling as much as possible and being responsible for as little as possible. It's not a sustainable position.

Super league needs to be treated as a single entity where a rising tide lifts all boats. Leaving each individual club to just do their own thing just doesn't work.

The problem is that different clubs have different challenges. The whole "Leeds should be getting 20k" argument demonstrates that.

The leisure market in Leeds is very different to the leisure market in St Helens or Castleford. Yes, Leeds is a much bigger catchment area, but Leeds also operates in one of the most competitive night-time economies in the UK. It also has a much more transient population than most other towns and cities in RL land. The people living within 10 mins walk of Langtree are probably lifelong St Helens residents and supporters. The same catchment area around Headingley is made up of people who live there for six months of their lives or Yuppies who have moved to work in Leeds from elsewhere.

The clubs should know their business and their target audiences better than anyone else, which is why an RFL mandated 'one size fits all' approach to marketing is not the way to go IMO. A club like Leeds may decide that they have enough 'families' and want to focus their efforts and budget on attracting high-value corporate supporters, whereas another club may feel that they don't have the facilities or capacity to achieve the same and would instead prefer to attract the 'family day out' dollar.

When we still have games of our supposed elite competition being watched by less than 6,000 people, the blame has to lie at the foot of the clubs rather than the RFL.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:27 pm  

bramleyrhino wrote:

The problem is that different clubs have different challenges. The whole "Leeds should be getting 20k" argument demonstrates that.

The leisure market in Leeds is very different to the leisure market in St Helens or Castleford. Yes, Leeds is a much bigger catchment area, but Leeds also operates in one of the most competitive night-time economies in the UK. It also has a much more transient population than most other towns and cities in RL land. The people living within 10 mins walk of Langtree are probably lifelong St Helens residents and supporters. The same catchment area around Headingley is made up of people who live there for six months of their lives or Yuppies who have moved to work in Leeds from elsewhere.

The clubs should know their business and their target audiences better than anyone else, which is why an RFL mandated 'one size fits all' approach to marketing is not the way to go IMO. A club like Leeds may decide that they have enough 'families' and want to focus their efforts and budget on attracting high-value corporate supporters, whereas another club may feel that they don't have the facilities or capacity to achieve the same and would instead prefer to attract the 'family day out' dollar.

When we still have games of our supposed elite competition being watched by less than 6,000 people, the blame has to lie at the foot of the clubs rather than the RFL.

this is partly true. But there are different types of marketing we are looking at, and as much as some is at the grass roots, some is necessarily centralised. Of course clubs are responsible for their own marketing, but they can't market SL as a whole and even a single match has too parties to it. That needs a certain amount of central control simply because we have numerous parties involved.

also whilst I agree that clubs may have different strategies for their market, we dilute and even undermine our efforts if we are all going in different directions. Leeds can't sell their game against Cas as a premium event when Cas are selling theirs against Leeds as a discount family day out. Wire can't try and sell theirs as the biggest sporting event in the area if Salford are selling it as knock down Nigel's cheap and cheerful game.

We need our strategies to be coherent. Yes clubs are responsible for getting people spending and making them fans, but we need a central strategy and outlook otherwise we will be swimming with one arm going one way and one going the other and wondering why despite all our efforts all we are achieving is keeping our heads from going under.

The fact is we will have a lot more success with 12 clubs pulling in one direction towards common goals than we will have with 12 clubs running around doing their own thing and sometimes deliberately undermining and downplaying each other.

There are very simple things the RFL (and by that I mean SL aswell, you parachute your man in, you are responsible) could do to raise attendances and to make it easier for clubs to do so, for instance why isn't the first game of the season a replay of the GF on a stand alone weekend? That's simple, easy, free and would attract extra fans. It's something that can only be done by the RFL? Why don't we have a heritage weekend? These are simple easy things and that we don't have lies only with the RFL top brass.

The RFL need to create an environment where clubs are encouraged, able and supported in trying to grow, where ideas are valued and not only implemented but implemented well, where cooperation for the greater good of the game is not wanted but demanded. We don't have that, We don't have a cohesive strategy, and it should come as no surprise that we aren't growing.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Mon Jan 05, 2015 5:21 pm  

Considering the quality of the game as a spectator sport, the history and the level of involvement around the country at various levels the RFL have proven time & again to be the worst marketeers of any sport ever..Even if they checked this thread alone they'd have half a dozen ideas that would be easy & relatively inexpensive to make happen.
It's all well and good saying the responsibility lies with clubs, to a degree and on a local level that's fine but raising brand awareness on a national level to not just increase attendances at SL level but furthering interest throughout every root of the game can only be achieved through a concerted and meaningful effort from the hierachy. There are some good bits but they fall woefully short time & time again spurning huge opportunities that somehow seem to alude the thinking of those supposedly being paid to help further the sport..it just isn't good enough, not by a long stretch.

[PopTart]

Re: Sky losing interest. : Tue Jan 06, 2015 12:13 pm  

It's not the ideas that are the problem. It is the implementation of them.

It needs experienced marketing professionals, not some guy that found social media at 45.
RL is a big business that needs to be marketed properly, at club and league level.
We have always struggled at that.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Tue Jan 06, 2015 12:57 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

I think there is a bit of a timing issue aswell with both the north and south stands due for improvements it doesn't really make sense to set out on a big attraction campaign when that is happening

These projects are so far off that it shouldn't stop the club from attracting new fans - it would be a nice problem to have if they had to move to Elland Rd whilst the improvements were underway.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:03 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

this is partly true. But there are different types of marketing we are looking at, and as much as some is at the grass roots, some is necessarily centralised. Of course clubs are responsible for their own marketing, but they can't market SL as a whole and even a single match has too parties to it. That needs a certain amount of central control simply because we have numerous parties involved.

also whilst I agree that clubs may have different strategies for their market, we dilute and even undermine our efforts if we are all going in different directions. Leeds can't sell their game against Cas as a premium event when Cas are selling theirs against Leeds as a discount family day out. Wire can't try and sell theirs as the biggest sporting event in the area if Salford are selling it as knock down Nigel's cheap and cheerful game.

We need our strategies to be coherent. Yes clubs are responsible for getting people spending and making them fans, but we need a central strategy and outlook otherwise we will be swimming with one arm going one way and one going the other and wondering why despite all our efforts all we are achieving is keeping our heads from going under.

The fact is we will have a lot more success with 12 clubs pulling in one direction towards common goals than we will have with 12 clubs running around doing their own thing and sometimes deliberately undermining and downplaying each other.

There are very simple things the RFL (and by that I mean SL aswell, you parachute your man in, you are responsible) could do to raise attendances and to make it easier for clubs to do so, for instance why isn't the first game of the season a replay of the GF on a stand alone weekend? That's simple, easy, free and would attract extra fans. It's something that can only be done by the RFL? Why don't we have a heritage weekend? These are simple easy things and that we don't have lies only with the RFL top brass.

The RFL need to create an environment where clubs are encouraged, able and supported in trying to grow, where ideas are valued and not only implemented but implemented well, where cooperation for the greater good of the game is not wanted but demanded. We don't have that, We don't have a cohesive strategy, and it should come as no surprise that we aren't growing.

I don't agree with your Cas v Leeds idea. If Leeds played Wakefield it would be one Wakefield's biggest games of the year the reverse fixture at Leeds would not have the same importance. Same if Salford were playing Cas the same weekend Warrington were playing Wigan you can't market the two games in the same way.

What the RFL need to do is work out they can improve the product on the field and then how they can get that message across. Clubs need to conquer there own challenges independent of the RFL's bigger marketing effort.

[PopTart]

Re: Sky losing interest. : Tue Jan 06, 2015 1:25 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

I don't agree with your Cas v Leeds idea. If Leeds played Wakefield it would be one Wakefield's biggest games of the year the reverse fixture at Leeds would not have the same importance. Same if Salford were playing Cas the same weekend Warrington were playing Wigan you can't market the two games in the same way.

What the RFL need to do is work out they can improve the product on the field and then how they can get that message across. Clubs need to conquer there own challenges independent of the RFL's bigger marketing effort.

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.

Re: Sky losing interest. : Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:54 pm  

PopTart wrote:

It's not the ideas that are the problem. It is the implementation of them.

It needs experienced marketing professionals, not some guy that found social media at 45.
RL is a big business that needs to be marketed properly, at club and league level.
We have always struggled at that.

Google rfl employs marketing guru. We've had a guy who apparently turned city into a global entity on board for 2 years now. As far as I can see he has given us some extraordinary cartoons and a decrease in fans at games......
The rfl will have trouble attracting true marketing talent until they understand that in marketing, you really do get what you pay for.