Yakstorm

There is nothing wrong with the RFL wanting to test the waters with a subscription service and to grow OurLeague registrations, and honestly well played to them that they now have a service which they are slowly starting to grow. That said, I agree with Tex, that for events like England v France, the aim should be to get as many eyeballs on it as possible and thus Facebook and YouTube are a must. England v France is the perfect style of event to educate people all about OurLeague and why they should register, etc whilst they are still on a platform they use regularly, added to that they can use the event to grow their social audiences / etc, which they can use for future marketing. If more than 20K will ASEAN v Latin Heat at around 2pm on a Tuesday, then England v France would easily comanf a few hundred thousand at least.

Grown revenues and participation in his time in Wales despite funding and staff cuts from the RFL. Has also overseen increase in Junior teams, and increased the number of Wales Rep teams playing year in, year out. For having so little to work with, to achieve growth, is encouraging. That said Danny K had glowing references when he left Lebanon and whilst in my opinion, I felt he did a good overall role, there are plenty who would disagree.

Firstly, I never said these types of brands don't sponsor clubs in the UK or Australia, I said that some of the proposals that some 'professional' teams put together are rather poor and that it is no surprise that some big name brands will ignore these. Secondly, supplier deals are very different than sponsorships, you will find for most of these deals the supplier (ie. Coca-Cola Amatil in the A/NZ market) will not actually part with money, they will usually: Provide more 'affordable' per unit costings Provide facilities like fridges, drink dispensers, etc In the rare case that they will actually provide funds to a 'leagues club' or 'venue', it will be the installation of say lines, which will be tied to the period of exclusivity (so they make their money back). It is worth noting that NO League's Club or Junior League deals include the NRL team or vice-versa. They are seperate legal entities, it's why Parramatta Eels have a alcohol agreement with Fosters / CUB, whilst ParraLeagues actually has an agreement with Lion Nathan at the moment. This changes a bit when you get down to say QCup or NSW Cup, where the two are the same legal entity, however some of these clubs actually put forward more professional and attractive proposals to potential partners. Thirdly, that Manly example only highlights how as a sport we haven't kept up. The Sea Eagles previous Major Sponsor, CocoJoy, only paid $1m per year, whilst URM, currently Front of Jersey, is around the $800K mark.... Shows negative growth after 32 years...

Well since being in the role, Elstone promised to get rid of the Super 8's and implement Super League's preferred way to handle promotion / relegation / etc, and despite many saying that he couldn't / wouldn't / etc, here we are, it is in play, as such considering he is 1 from 1, I'm happy to give him the benefit of the doubt when it comes to attracting bigger sponsors to RL. With his background and the connections he has built over the years, he is better placed to attract the larger brands. He also would know what is expected when it comes to asking for sponsorship from these brands. From my own side, some of the proposals I've seen from RL clubs (both in UK and Australia) for what should be Professional organisations is rather amateur, it is no surprise the likes of a Coke, McDonalds or whoever would rather not part with their money.

I feel like the RFL's strategy at the moment isn't to grow / attract new audiences, it is instead trying to actually understand the engaged audience that it already has. Now on one hand, this is a sensible move, and as they say in business retaining an existing customer costs far less than attracting a new one, and you can never not understand your customers enough, however I feel the RFL's issue has been that they keep drawing from the same pool time and time and time again. As such, I hope that in the future the RFL, consider a two tier approach, teasing some games via social channels in the hope that it drives subscription back on the Our league app, whilst also growing the social channels, etc

In 2017 Tonga played Japan in Toulouse, France. In 2016 they played USA in San Sebastian, Spain and in 2014 played the USA in Gloucester, England. In fact pretty much every year for the past decade Tonga, in Rugby Union, play at one or more opponents in completely neutral locations. Same happens all the time in Football as well. Considering there are more Tongans in Auckland than Tonga, the location of the match makes a lot more sense than what some other sports do.

It's an interesting move by the RFL... As they are still selling parts of the Upper Bowl (so they are still having to pay to open up the area), and when you click through the available bays, there aren't that many tickets left for sale. They are honestly creating a scenario where technically they may sell out and still be 25K-odd short of capacity... Maybe their strategy is, by 'upgrading' fans to arguably more 'expensive' seats (excluding Coupon offers) they can then consider opening up areas in the top tier for even more heavily discounted prices... Especially as they still have over a week to move tickets...

Outside of the exceptional players who can jump from Academy to Firsts, Reserves provides another opportunity for young players to develop their skill sets, whilst still being part of the same coaching structure as the First team. Unlike Dual Registration, which creates a scenario where players are jumping between different teams, working with different players and not necessarily learning the structures the First team might be trying to implement, Reserves usually train with the Firsts and usually the Reserves Coach is part of the First team coaching setup (sometimes as an assistant coach, other times they are part of the wider coaching team). That's not to say it is necessarily better for a player to learn in Reserves versus say DR, however a good Reserves structure provides more opportunities for players to get game time, which in turn means they are more likely to develop as a player. Considering there are scenarios currently where some players are contracted to First teams, but are only getting a game every 4-6 weeks or so (between DR and Reserves) because of their age and just where they sit in the squad is a terrible situation. Unless injured, you want your players on the field every week. Reserves also gives an opportunity for older players to keep involved, which adds depth to the overall squad. It can serve as a good opportunity for older players, not only to share their experience and help younger players develop, but to refresh as players. You only have to look at Benji Marshall in Australia, his form in 2018 was helped by him playing Reserves for Redcliffe in 2017.

So what part of the RFL release is BS? The RFL has not said that everyone who has bought one of the 28,723 sold will turn up, let alone stay for two games, just that they are sold and that the only way to watch the match (unless you had already bought a ticket) was to watch on BBC One. As already pointed out by other posted, the total sold for today's game is greater than most Semi Finals in the past decade, most of which were played in half full stadiums. At least for today there will be a peak in the second half of the first game and first half of the second where the ground is likely to be 80%-oddish full. Whether that extends or not, who knows, but a 50% full Macron won't look too bad on TV...

No, but it limits the seperation of the haves and have nots. Currently, the haves (whether by luck, fortune or management) are rewarded with more, whilst those stuck at the bottom are stuck with the same. It also curbs unnecessary speculative spending when clubs overspend one season in the hope of getting upwards to 500K+ more the next. Honestly, I am surprised by the reluctance by Championship clubs for the removal of the Super 8s. The proposed 1 up / 1 down actually makes it easier to qualify for SL and to stay there. There is no requirement to have to beat multiple teams who get more in central funding and then when you get up, you just need to aim to finish 11th or better, rather than 8th. Sure the Super 8s does bring some nice attention to the Championship, and the MPG does command media attention, however a finals series for the Championship (rather than just minor premiers being promoted) will also create some interest and maybe the Championship could try and get SL to allow an MPG between team 11 in SL and the 2nd placed Championship game if we must have the jepody element. As for the crowds element, the stats show that Super 8s hasn't helped crowds.

Regardless of who's idea it was, long may it continue. Considering the CC Semi Finals are always played at neutral venues and has a six week lead in, it makes it such an easy property for the game to sell to venues around the country, especially as a Double Header. Works well for any 25K - 35K venue which are arguably a bit too small for Magic, plus has the added bonus of national TV coverage on BBC. This is the types of games we should be trying to sell to say Coventry, etc.

Hong Kong Super League Grand Final kicks off tonight with the Pacific Toa hosting the Oreana Storm. Pacific Toa will go in as favourites, after going through the regular season undefeated, whilst the Storm defeated the Wanchai Warriors in the major Semi Final to qualify Third and deciding match in the Women's Battle of the Hemisphere 9s will be curtain raiser.

RFL are saying under 2,000 now: http://www.rugby-league.com/article/53005/less-than--tickets-remain-for-ladbrokes-challenge-cup-semi-finals So with more than 25,000 set to converge on Macron, you would have to say the venture has been a success, especially as now the RFL arguably have created an event they can 'sell' now to other venues in the future, will look better on TV than what past Semi's have, and has drawn a better crowd that most of the Semi's combined over the past few years (2017: 25,322 / 2016: 20,846 / 2015: 24,156 / 2014: 24,137 / 2013: 16,895 / 2012: 22,333 / 2011: 25,871)

The bid isn't for all games, but it would be for a significant majority of 'premium' matches. Anyway, regardless of whether or not the bid is the right strategic choice for the code, the great news is that people are already wanting to talk about RLWC2029 and put forward money for it. Provided 2025 remains in North America, then really both Europe and the Pacific will be up for hosting 2029. The more competition, the better. NSW will have some great stadiums in the next few years, would not complain about watching some RLWC matches at some of them.

The one plus we have is despite RU havimg a more established presence, they pour all their efforts and funds into the big cities, meaning there is a real opportunity to carve out presence in the more neglected regional zones, establish a foothold and take it from there.