Jump to content


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Oldham /Salford


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
835 replies to this topic

#641 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,124 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 11:47 PM

Picking up the attendances totals from previous posts :

SL has increased by 18.47% from 93/94 to 2011 - 1,364,056 to 1,615,939

All attendances have increased by 9.79% - 1,679,897 to 1,844,398

Remainder = championship - from 315,841 down to 228,459

Does that mean the Championship (the remainder) has decreased by 27.67% or have I missed another set of stats in a post? These are League games only, excluding Challenge cup and play-offs?

Interpreting these type of figures is difficult.

One thing I have noticed, and I think this why the RFL have looked to go for the format for the second/third tier they have done, is that every time we split into a third tier we bleed support in the lower division. By grouping together teams that have traditionally low figures with new clubs who will naturally have low figures it allows the better supported clubs to form a second tier that will be naturally stronger.

Despite the championship supporters seeing them as the ones put on by the big SL, they are in fact attempting to do the same, get the lower supported clubs together in their own division and bring together the better supported clubs.

Its easy for supporters to dismiss what the RFL do, but just looking at a few simple charts and playing with some numbers can show what works and what doesn't, the RFL will be employing people (and software) that can analyze this stuff far better than me or others sitting behind a keyboard on a forum (unless you are working for the RFL doing this stuff), what is happening I see is part of a long term strategy (novel in RL) to help all levels of the game to maximize resources and potential for the level they are at.

Yes, these figures are league games.

Edited by Padge, 05 December 2012 - 11:59 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#642 Keith T

Keith T
  • Coach
  • 8,869 posts

Posted 05 December 2012 - 11:52 PM

Do the clubs give season ticket holders money back for games they don't attend, thought not, their seat is sold, it can't be used by anyone else it is therefore occupied whether there is a bum on it or not.


I don't know what happens with SL clubs but under Championships Salary Cap Relevant Income regulations 4.4.5, it does state :- "Although the majority of season ticket sales will be made during October to February, the total income from all season ticket sales should be apportioned evenly over the number of home league games during the season. The proportion equivalent to the total number of home matches played to the end of the quarter should be shown in the return".

Whilst no monies are returned as you say the numbers for each home game are not necessarily the correct number on the attendance figures.

I remember when .............................

"It is impossible not to feel a twinge of sympathy for Workington Town, the fall guys this season for the Super League's determination to retain it's European dimension, in the shape of Paris. While the French have had every assistance to survive, the importance of having a flagship in a heartland area like West Cumbria has been conveniently forgotten." - Dave Hadfield - Independent 25th August 1996.


#643 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,124 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:07 AM

I don't know what happens with SL clubs but under Championships Salary Cap Relevant Income regulations 4.4.5, it does state :- "Although the majority of season ticket sales will be made during October to February, the total income from all season ticket sales should be apportioned evenly over the number of home league games during the season. The proportion equivalent to the total number of home matches played to the end of the quarter should be shown in the return".

Whilst no monies are returned as you say the numbers for each home game are not necessarily the correct number on the attendance figures.

Attendance figure is a bit of red herring, it should be ticket sales, none season ticket holders could pre-buy a match day ticket and not turn up, it doesn't matter, they got the cash and if they booked a specific seat that seat could not be re-sold and if they were part of a sell-out crowd then the fact that their seat is empty doesn't stop it being a sell-out.

The actual numbers who don't turn up are so small in the scheme of things I don't see why anyone even considers it an issue of relevance in any way shape or form anyway. Crowd of 12,000 and 12 people don't turn up. A massive 0.1% error.

Edit:

Just to add, last season I was attending a game and bumped in a girl I know leaving the ground with her two kids, she had gone in but one of the young lads had taken ill and so she had to leave before kick-off, I carried on into the ground and watched the game. Her seat was empty throughout the game and she finished up watching the game at home on TV, had she and her sons attended or not?

Edited by Padge, 06 December 2012 - 12:34 AM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#644 keighley

keighley
  • Coach
  • 5,478 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:32 AM

Interpreting these type of figures is difficult.

One thing I have noticed, and I think this why the RFL have looked to go for the format for the second/third tier they have done, is that every time we split into a third tier we bleed support in the lower division. By grouping together teams that have traditionally low figures with new clubs who will naturally have low figures it allows the better supported clubs to form a second tier that will be naturally stronger.

Despite the championship supporters seeing them as the ones put on by the big SL, they are in fact attempting to do the same, get the lower supported clubs together in their own division and bring together the better supported clubs.

Its easy for supporters to dismiss what the RFL do, but just looking at a few simple charts and playing with some numbers can show what works and what doesn't, the RFL will be employing people (and software) that can analyze this stuff far better than me or others sitting behind a keyboard on a forum (unless you are working for the RFL doing this stuff), what is happening I see is part of a long term strategy (novel in RL) to help all levels of the game to maximize resources and potential for the level they are at.

Yes, these figures are league games.


I agree that the realignment of the cc Divisions seems to be designed to create a CC of bigger teams to increase competition and attendances and leaves a CC1 of smaller teams, mostly expansion teams. This will prevent too many blowout scores. If it s part of a plan that will be a first and if it s part of a plan why has it not been released for public consumption. Why would it need to be secret.?

The thing about it though that the new, bigger CC with the better, more well supported clubs is desirable, it is not ring fenced, set in stone. No drawbridge has been raised. There is still p and r between CC1 and CC and this gives the CC clubs an incentive to improve, compete and get into CC. This should result in some increased attendances at the top end of the division. This will happen every season, not every three years if you re very lucky.

Similarly, the CC clubs cannot relax,especially the weaker ones,or they will be relegated.

The problem will be at the top of CC. Apart from winning the Championship, what is the incentive. They are denied a place in SL.

An aspect of this which has not been considered is the feeder club business. This could result in teams being promoted or relegated and then the team is ripped apart by call ups from it s SL parent which leave it totally unprepared for the changed statusof being in a new division without the team that got it there.

#645 Lobbygobbler

Lobbygobbler
  • Coach
  • 5,797 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 07:27 AM

Vic Wakelin, one of Murdoch's trusted and dependable lieutenants wrote in the book "Super League - The First Ten Years" by Phil Caplan and Jonathon R Dodge, - "Twice during the initial negotiations in 1995, the RFL went back to Sky and raised the ante, partly to assuage clubs outside the initially proposed structure that they would not be cut financially adrift. Many assume that it was the conductor who was leading the orchestra down the road of mergers and a broader geographical base to Super League. There was certainly never any requirements from Sky's point of view to have a European element to Super League."

Wakelin also says that the RFL already had a document "Framing the Future" which proposed taking the game from winter to summer and he says, "the RFL approached us and told us what they were doing." He adds that Maurice Lindsay went down to London for meetings and asked would Sky still be interested if they switched the game to summer. Wakelin says that their stance was to say to Lindsay, "yes, if you make the switch we will bid for the rights".

The initial breakdown of clubs was to merge 15 clubs in to Cheshire (Warrington & Widnes); Cumbria (Barrow, Carlisle, Whitehaven & Workington); Humberside (Hull & HKR); South Yorkshire (Doncaster & Sheffield); Mancjester (Oldham & Salford); Calder (Castleford, Featherstone & Wakefield) plus Bradford, Halifax, Leeds,London, Paris, St Helens, Toulouse, and Wigan, with talk of adding future clubs in Barcelona, Newcastle, Wales and even Rome. So that was the distribution of the original Sky money to 23 clubs and up to 27 clubs.


Why were there no plans to merge Wigan and Saints? Effectively two medium sized towns which are no bigger combined than Humberside

#646 shaun mc

shaun mc
  • Coach
  • 1,674 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:20 AM

To me the main advantage of the 2nd tier going to 14 clubs is a much better fixture list.
The last few years must have been a nightmare for clubs with 9 home games and sometimes 6 weeks between home games. Supporters are creatures of habit at times.
If attendances increase because of i) a more even, regular fixture list then great, or ii) because of more competition then that is also good.

Edited by shaun mc, 06 December 2012 - 09:22 AM.


#647 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,902 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:30 AM

I know it's 2 pages since the attendance figures were posted but this includes games in France for 2011 but not for 1995.

The attendance figures do not show a significant increase in the fan base in the UK over the period of SL. It's about 20k, or 60 per game. It's not worth tackling the play-off figures either as it might highlight a significant drop in actual fans.

#648 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,124 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 09:51 AM

I know it's 2 pages since the attendance figures were posted but this includes games in France for 2011 but not for 1995.

The attendance figures do not show a significant increase in the fan base in the UK over the period of SL. It's about 20k, or 60 per game. It's not worth tackling the play-off figures either as it might highlight a significant drop in actual fans.

???

There was no French club in 1995, and if you are referring to the totals I posted I didn't post a figure for 1995.

You can't pick and chose the teams that are in and out of the figures, if France is ignored do we also ignore Wales.

What about Essex should that be included or ignored.

Maybe you should have a word with the RFL as you could be on to something, part of their operating profit should be ignored as a French team has contributed and their figures don't count. The tax man owes tthe RFL some cashback.

Edited by Padge, 06 December 2012 - 10:11 AM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#649 saints10coach

saints10coach
  • Moderator
  • 1,675 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 11:52 AM

Talking about attendances, you must also look what has happened to the Challenge Cup. The advent of SL has totally undermined what used to be our Blue Ribbon event.

#650 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,877 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:24 PM

Talking about attendances, you must also look what has happened to the Challenge Cup. The advent of SL has totally undermined what used to be our Blue Ribbon event.

Presumably then the teams that are not in SL still draw cracking crowds for this comp?

#651 intheshed

intheshed
  • Coach
  • 408 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 12:55 PM

???

There was no French club in 1995, and if you are referring to the totals I posted I didn't post a figure for 1995.

You can't pick and chose the teams that are in and out of the figures, if France is ignored do we also ignore Wales.

What about Essex should that be included or ignored.

Maybe you should have a word with the RFL as you could be on to something, part of their operating profit should be ignored as a French team has contributed and their figures don't count. The tax man owes tthe RFL some cashback.


I don't really see that the Wales/Essex analogies are relevant. Surely the key difference is that pro RL was not being played or watched in Wales or Essex in '93/'94 so it is accurate to represent any current audience in those areas as being 'new' or growth.

Catalans Dragons may not have existed back then but St Esteve & xiii Catalans certainly did, as such any set of stats which represents the entirety of the dragons' attendance as growth is misleading to some degree.

Personaly i think it would be more accurate to either compare like with like and look only at UK attendance, this would still show growth. Or find a way of determing what proportion of catalans' crowd is actual growth.

#652 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,902 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:25 PM

???

There was no French club in 1995, and if you are referring to the totals I posted I didn't post a figure for 1995.

You can't pick and chose the teams that are in and out of the figures, if France is ignored do we also ignore Wales.

What about Essex should that be included or ignored.

Maybe you should have a word with the RFL as you could be on to something, part of their operating profit should be ignored as a French team has contributed and their figures don't count. The tax man owes tthe RFL some cashback.


I didn't think it was that hard.

in 1994 (or whatever) the attendances in the UK were X
in 2011 the attendances in the UK and in Catalans was Y (including the playoffs I presume)

Attendances have gone up (Y-X).

However to determine whether SL has "boosted gates" in the UK we need to find out how much the Catalans (Z) have contributed to last years figures.

It seems to me that Y-Z-X = not much. So the claim that SL has boosted gates is only true if we include a French team.

I do not contest that including the French in the competition has increased SL attendances, however I do contest extrapolating that fact to claim SL is increasing attendances at clubs in the UK.

Since your post and to add weight to the argument, by concentrating our efforts so much on SL, we have undermined attendances for the Challenge cup, and removed other domestic cup competitions, which I'm sure someone will prove will show a net loss in attendance in the UK.

However I concede you never argued SL was anything other than a vehicle to give a few clubs enough money to dominate the game for as long as SKY is the benefactor.

Edited by Ackroman, 06 December 2012 - 01:29 PM.


#653 Padge

Padge
  • Coach
  • 18,124 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:24 PM

There is no reason to exclude Catalan, unless of course you would like to skew the figures more to your own liking.

Should Crusaders be taken out of the figures, they didn't exist in 93/94 and they existed in 2011, should any club who hasn't existed since 1895 to present be excluded from any historic analysis after all they skew the figures for the period they existed.

The question was how many watched RL pre SL and how many now. Whether its France or Wales, Lancashire or Yorkshire or even Essex is irrelevant. The RFL had no authority over and got no money from the previous incarnations of Catalan, they are however responsible for Cataln and make money from Catalan. That is the big difference.

Edited by Padge, 06 December 2012 - 06:26 PM.


Visit my photography site www.padge.smugmug.com
Radio 5 Live: Saturday 14 April 2007
Dave Whelan "In Wigan rugby will always be king"

 

This country's wealth was created by men in overalls, it was destroyed by men in suits.


#654 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:26 PM

However to determine whether SL has "boosted gates" in the UK we need to find out how much the Catalans have contributed to last years figures.

By concentrating our efforts so much on SL, we have undermined attendances for the Challenge cup.


Why not just look at the simple figures.Look at how crowds have gone up from 1995 to date instead of looking for contrivances that are simply silly.

Just like the idea SL has destroyed the Challenge cup. Wasn't it Wigan who won it ad nauseum for several years before Superleague??

#655 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:31 PM

Why were there no plans to merge Wigan and Saints? Effectively two medium sized towns which are no bigger combined than Humberside


More contrived nonsense.

What's "medium sized towns" got to do with it. These are big clubs that attract fans from a whole region including into major cities like Manchester and Liverpool and who each run a big stand alone youth development programme that keeps them giants of the game.

People when contriving stuff don't see how the other argument defeats their own. Why don't we have TWO SL clubs in Manchester/Salford then? It's big enough??

#656 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:40 PM

And if you believe that rich men dont invest in Championship clubs then you clearly have no idea. Try reading about Tony Abbott and Reactivmedia http://www.halifaxco...lland-1-3889323 .


You read about Tony Abbott. The point is simple - very rich men have come into the game to support Superleague clubs with large amounts of money from £500K a year to up to a £1,000,000.

If Abbot ever decides he wants Superleague he can fill all the massive holes in Fax's SL application found by KPMG and be another one, same with Nahaboo.

The big investors want Superleague, not a semi pro club. Hence Superleague attracts major private investment which is one of it's big achievements.

#657 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:45 PM

Whether my club is in SL or not is not that important, but you seem to think for me it is.


I have to take people's word for it that they have no axe to grind.

I also have to look at how all the attacks on Superleague by some of the most twisted contrived arguments I have ever seen come exclusively from fans of clubs who were refused SL or ended up slipping out of SL or have the chance to be in SL but feel blocked.

#658 thundergaz

thundergaz
  • Coach
  • 2,727 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:50 PM

I have to take people's word for it that they have no axe to grind.

I also have to look at how all the attacks on Superleague by some of the most twisted contrived arguments I have ever seen come exclusively from fans of clubs who were refused SL or ended up slipping out of SL or have the chance to be in SL but feel blocked.


It doesn't matter to me as long as we have a team to watch every matchday. But what I would like to see is a breakaway like they have in darts so the CC clubs can get a decent stream of income.

#659 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:53 PM

It doesn't matter to me..........

But what I would like to see is a breakaway....


If it doesn't matter your not in SL .why do you want to breakaway Gaz??.

your letting the team down mate.......

#660 The Parksider

The Parksider
  • Coach
  • 17,229 posts

Posted 06 December 2012 - 06:56 PM

The advent of SL has totally undermined what used to be our Blue Ribbon event.


Here's another one. Was this the Challenge cup won by the same club 8 years in a row BEFORE superleague, the challenge cup won since SL by SIX clubs

Another major anti-SL contrivance

Grind that Axe lad.....




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users