Crowds for semis and final

[Big Picture]

If they'd spent a bit of the upfront money on marketing, they could have sold more tickets to bring in more revenue and make a bigger profit.  Not doing that is where they fell down.

[Exiled Wiganer]

7 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

If they'd spent a bit of the upfront money on marketing, they could have sold more tickets to bring in more revenue and make a bigger profit.  Not doing that is where they fell down.

They only "fell down" if making a bigger profit for the RLIF was an NRL aim.

[Dave T]

I think we are verging on conspiracy theory tbh. Im sure those running this tournament wanted the WC to be a roaring success.

I just think they underestimated the challenge and made bad decision after bad decision. 

[Mattrhino]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we are verging on conspiracy theory tbh. Im sure those running this tournament wanted the WC to be a roaring success.

I just think they underestimated the challenge and made bad decision after bad decision. 

Its a strange one, as I said earlier on in the day. You could get 30k in Suncorp for the Broncos vs Broncos 'B' or a QLD cup GF. Yet they struggle to get 20k for a kangaroo SF. I can't  see how any effort was put into marketing this game.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Mattrhino said:

Its a strange one, as I said earlier on in the day. You could get 30k in Suncorp for the Broncos vs Broncos 'B' or a QLD cup GF. Yet they struggle to get 20k for a kangaroo SF. I struggle to see how any effort was put into marketing this game.

But we have been there before in the UK where Eng v Aus in Wigan has had less than Wigan v Saints.

Clearly the marketing hasnt been effective, and 2013 is now lauded as some kind of template, but i recall the week before that tournament everybody was complaining there had been no promotion there.

[Scubby]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we are verging on conspiracy theory tbh. Im sure those running this tournament wanted the WC to be a roaring success.

I just think they underestimated the challenge and made bad decision after bad decision. 

It would be that same as John Dutton resigning 15 months out from the 2021 World Cup and them just giving it to Ralph Rimmer.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Scubby said:

It would be that same as John Dutton resigning 15 months out from the 2021 World Cup and them just giving it to Ralph Rimmer.

Could it be seen as similar to Sally Bolton getting the gig last time and Dutton himself next time?

Both long term RFL employees.

[Scubby]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Could it be seen as similar to Sally Bolton getting the gig last time and Dutton himself next time?

Both long term RFL employees.

Don't get me started on Dutton. He is only as good as his last gig and that was sub standard. Then Wood claims it a success. He has a lot of work to do. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Random tiger]

14 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think we are verging on conspiracy theory tbh. Im sure those running this tournament wanted the WC to be a roaring success.

I just think they underestimated the challenge and made bad decision after bad decision. 

I think it is a success. Ask whether rugby league is bigger in Australia than in the UK. Can anyone really suggest otherwise? The money in the game. The media interest in the game. 

Have a crack at the crowds but financially given to stations compete to broadcast on free to air and that so much of multicultural Australia has been on display this will only continue to grow the game. 

The Brits got good crowds in 2013. Did that mean London embraced the game? Are London Broncos riding that success? 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Random tiger said:

I think it is a success. Ask whether rugby league is bigger in Australia than in the UK. Can anyone really suggest otherwise? The money in the game. The media interest in the game. 

Have a crack at the crowds but financially given to stations compete to broadcast on free to air and that so much of multicultural Australia has been on display this will only continue to grow the game. 

The Brits got good crowds in 2013. Did that mean London embraced the game? Are London Broncos riding that success? 

Im not really sure of your point.

[GeordieSaint]

2 minutes ago, Random tiger said:

I think it is a success. Ask whether rugby league is bigger in Australia than in the UK. Can anyone really suggest otherwise?

The Brits got good crowds in 2013. Did that mean London embraced the game? Are London Broncos riding that success? 

Nobody is suggesting otherwise - but we are rightly slating the organisation of the Australian (and Wellington) elements of this tournament as they’ve been poor.

The success of 2013 also doesn’t mean we don’t underestimate the ineptitude of our governing body and some club leadership.

[Random tiger]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Im not really sure of your point.

I’m saying that crowds are not the barometer for success for the World Cup. The revenues were upfront so after that it was how the players engaged parts of Australia like Darwin and Melbourne to spread the game. 

There are 5 NRL clubs in the west of Sydney and not one game was played there. A decision was. Made to play games in Darwin Cairns Perth and Melbourne. Not rugby league strong holds. That was because they wanted to promote the game. On that score it has been successful. 

[Dave T]

Just now, Random tiger said:

I’m saying that crowds are not the barometer for success for the World Cup. The revenues were upfront so after that it was how the players engaged parts of Australia like Darwin and Melbourne to spread the game. 

There are 5 NRL clubs in the west of Sydney and not one game was played there. A decision was. Made to play games in Darwin Cairns Perth and Melbourne. Not rugby league strong holds. That was because they wanted to promote the game. On that score it has been successful. 

Crowds are always a barometer of success for a tournament.

They have also admitted they will miss their profit target too, so they flunked there too. The crowds were expected to bring more money in too.

There are plenty of bits of success for the tournament, but overall it would be no more than 5 or 6 out of 10 for me.

[Spidey]

Let’s just play at 10k grounds. They’ll be cheap and sure to make a profit if that’s all that counts. 

Can’t believe how many apologists there are for #### crowds. 

[RabbitRhinoovOZ]

6 hours ago, Random tiger said:

I’m saying that crowds are not the barometer for success for the World Cup. The revenues were upfront so after that it was how the players engaged parts of Australia like Darwin and Melbourne to spread the game. 

There are 5 NRL clubs in the west of Sydney and not one game was played there. A decision was. Made to play games in Darwin Cairns Perth and Melbourne. Not rugby league strong holds. That was because they wanted to promote the game. On that score it has been successful. 

To be fair Cairns is a RL town.

[RabbitRhinoovOZ]

Sorry but I just do not understand why anyone is surprised by the low crowds, Why would you pay good money to watch Australia win by 50 against Fiji etc? Not for me thanks I'll have a passing glance at it on the TV and that'll do. A Final with any combination of Australia, England or NZ has my interest and if in Sydney or the ACT will get my money through the gates because there's proper rivalry there and I know the game will be competitive.

[IM2]

20 hours ago, Big Picture said:

If they'd spent a bit of the upfront money on marketing, they could have sold more tickets to bring in more revenue and make a bigger profit.  Not doing that is where they fell down.

totally agree they could have had sell outs and half full grounds a month before the whole thing kicked off

[IM2]

10 hours ago, RabbitRhinoovOZ said:

Sorry but I just do not understand why anyone is surprised by the low crowds, Why would you pay good money to watch Australia win by 50 against Fiji etc? Not for me thanks I'll have a passing glance at it on the TV and that'll do. A Final with any combination of Australia, England or NZ has my interest and if in Sydney or the ACT will get my money through the gates because there's proper rivalry there and I know the game will be competitive.

people do it all the time in international union and football so why not. its called national pride or curiosity & supporting the growth of the sport you love.

[Mattrhino]

10 hours ago, RabbitRhinoovOZ said:

Sorry but I just do not understand why anyone is surprised by the low crowds, Why would you pay good money to watch Australia win by 50 against Fiji etc? Not for me thanks I'll have a passing glance at it on the TV and that'll do. A Final with any combination of Australia, England or NZ has my interest and if in Sydney or the ACT will get my money through the gates because there's proper rivalry there and I know the game will be competitive.

Funny England will sell out at Twickers to watch England smash Samoa.

[Mattrhino]

17 hours ago, Dave T said:

Crowds are always a barometer of success for a tournament.

They have also admitted they will miss their profit target too, so they flunked there too. The crowds were expected to bring more money in too.

There are plenty of bits of success for the tournament, but overall it would be no more than 5 or 6 out of 10 for me.

I think without Tonga which fell right into to lap of the RLIF it wouldn't even get that high a rating imo.

[deluded pom?]

13 minutes ago, IM2 said:

people do it all the time in international union and football so why not. its called national pride or curiosity & supporting the growth of the sport you love.

We need the Bunnies in the WC. Then RROZ would attend.

[DoubleD]

8 minutes ago, deluded pom? said:

We need the Bunnies in the WC. Then RROZ would attend.

I’m not convinced he would judging by their crowds 

[Tongs ya bas]

11 hours ago, RabbitRhinoovOZ said:

Sorry but I just do not understand why anyone is surprised by the low crowds, Why would you pay good money to watch Australia win by 50 against Fiji etc? Not for me thanks I'll have a passing glance at it on the TV and that'll do. A Final with any combination of Australia, England or NZ has my interest and if in Sydney or the ACT will get my money through the gates because there's proper rivalry there and I know the game will be competitive.

Because it's the biggest competition in world rugby league, playing in a country where the sport is big

Because it's a chance to rub shoulders with like minded people from all over the world

Because it's an opportunity to have a good time.

Because it's an opportunity to celebrate your sport for its own sake.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Mattrhino said:

I think without Tonga which fell right into to lap of the RLIF it wouldn't even get that high a rating imo.

Yep. And the expected fixtures this weekend were Aus v Tonga in Brisbane and NZ v Eng in Auckland which probably wouldnt have done as well as Tonga in Auckland.

[Scubby]

28 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Yep. And the expected fixtures this weekend were Aus v Tonga in Brisbane and NZ v Eng in Auckland which probably wouldnt have done as well as Tonga in Auckland.

Agreed. That second half performance from Tonga against NZ pretty much dumped the WC on its head and provided unforgettable memories for many (not least TV viewers, England players and travelling fans)