Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Blind side johnny

NZ Test Series - ticket sales

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jim Prendle said:

Don't worry mate, this is RL, and we will very soon be spiralling back down into the pit of despair.

If you are looking for positivity, I would suggest a rugby league ticket sales thread isn't the place to come when sales are down series-on-series.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dave T said:

If you are looking for positivity, I would suggest a rugby league ticket sales thread isn't the place to come when sales are down series-on-series.

I think England have played fantastically well so far, and have won the series.

I prefer to take my positives, and negatives, from what happens on the grass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jim Prendle said:

I think England have played fantastically well so far, and have won the series.

I prefer to take my positives, and negatives, from what happens on the grass.

Well that is exactly my point - there is a match thread to discuss what happened on the grass. 

Very positive threads on the back of two excellent wins. But that isn't what this thread is about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dave T said:

Well that is exactly my point - there is a match thread to discuss what happened on the grass. 

Very positive threads on the back of two excellent wins. But that isn't what this thread is about.

The very fact that this thread even exists, never mind that it has run to epic proportions, is a negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

The very fact that this thread even exists, never mind that it has run to epic proportions, is a negative.

People discuss what they are interested in. Coming on telling us you aren't interested in this discussion is odd.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

2021 is an interesting one. 2013 was a success on the back of crazy offers and dirt cheap pricing. And we filled modest grounds. To move to a more expensive model and increase crowds by over 50% would be an outstanding success - but a hell of a challenge.

This is what I am concerned about. What sort of capacity grounds are we looking at. With the stated aims of the RFL any ground less than 20k probably won't be enough. 

There was some great deals in 2013. Perhaps that may be the way to go as I don't expect the RFL to sell corner seats at Elland road for Lebanon vs France for 50 quid a pop (like RU did for Italy v Canada). Host city deals could be the way to go, or "follow your team".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

People discuss what they are interested in. Coming on telling us you aren't interested in this discussion is odd.

OK, if that's what you think, then fine.

However, I think it's odd that some posters are far more interested in what is happening in the seats than what is happening on the pitch. RL is a great sport, and if those guys are willing to continue to put their bodies through it, then I would turn up on my own to watch them do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

OK, if that's what you think, then fine.

However, I think it's odd that some posters are far more interested in what is happening in the seats than what is happening on the pitch. RL is a great sport, and if those guys are willing to continue to put their bodies through it, then I would turn up on my own to watch them do it.

I'm sure that many of us would do that too but the point of this thread, and the general negativity surrounding the subject, is that ticket sales are a major contributing factor to what those guys who put their bodies on the line get paid.  Besides, packed stadia are good for everybody including, one might say especially, the players.  The well-being of the very sport we love is at risk if we can't get people to come and watch it.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

OK, if that's what you think, then fine.

However, I think it's odd that some posters are far more interested in what is happening in the seats than what is happening on the pitch. RL is a great sport, and if those guys are willing to continue to put their bodies through it, then I would turn up on my own to watch them do it.

Posters are not far more interested. As has been pointed out there is loads of discussion on the matches, team selections etc. 

There has been far more discussion about the Rugby over the ticket sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

If you are looking for positivity, I would suggest a rugby league ticket sales thread isn't the place to come when sales are down series-on-series.

There are plenty of ways to look at the Anfield attendance, are you aware that this is the largest Eng/GB v NZ attendance in the famous RL M62 corridor since 1951. Only two games in that time period have been larger and they were both held in London.

I would suggest that it is an improvement, which may very well be surpassed by the attendance at Elland Rd on Sunday.

The only reason series on series sales are down is due to the test in London

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

This is what I am concerned about. What sort of capacity grounds are we looking at. With the stated aims of the RFL any ground less than 20k probably won't be enough. 

There was some great deals in 2013. Perhaps that may be the way to go as I don't expect the RFL to sell corner seats at Elland road for Lebanon vs France for 50 quid a pop (like RU did for Italy v Canada). Host city deals could be the way to go, or "follow your team".

I've said before one thing I would like them to do, and do early, is try and use the gravity of the bigger games to pull people in for the lesser games by hosting them in the same area.

So if you put an England game at St James Park on Saturday evening then have some of the smaller games like USA v Lebanon and Italy v Scotland on at Kingston Park and selling a package of tickets for those games, and also do the same with the none-england games. We could get some decent crowds for say NZ v Fiji at Elland Road with PNG v Samoa and France v Lebanon at Headingley over successive days.

Id also love to see us go really really ambitious for at least one of the group weekends, maybe two, and put at least three big games in Manchester or London. Say NZ v Tonga, England v France, Australia v Fiji all on successive days at the Etihad selling a package to those.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, St Etrigan said:

There are plenty of ways to look at the Anfield attendance, are you aware that this is the largest Eng/GB v NZ attendance in the famous RL M62 corridor since 1951. Only two games in that time period have been larger and they were both held in London.

I would suggest that it is an improvement, which may very well be surpassed by the attendance at Elland Rd on Sunday.

The only reason series on series sales are down is due to the test in London

The fact that all of the exceptions are in London makes this thread all the more important. Someone, somewhere, has had the bright idea that the right approach for this series is not to have a game in London when, as your figures show, history shows that London is the best market for a GB/Eng v NZ test match.


I can confirm 30+ less sales for Scotland vs Italy at Workington, after this afternoons test purchase for the Tonga match, £7.50 is extremely reasonable, however a £2.50 'delivery' fee for a walk in purchase is beyond taking the mickey, good luck with that, it's cheaper on the telly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

The fact that all of the exceptions are in London makes this thread all the more important. Someone, somewhere, has had the bright idea that the right approach for this series is not to have a game in London when, as your figures show, history shows that London is the best market for a GB/Eng v NZ test match.

You are not wrong, I did this exercise for something else but the average attendance for games played in London v NZ or Oz is 45.5k (granted there are finals and semi finals in that list)

In total the average attendance for all games has been

NZ 21k

Oz 36.7k

These are for all matches played since 1990

Does make you wonder what is being done to make these games more appealing than games in the heartland, my suspicion is (with no hard facts) that it is the demographic of the audience who will attend these games and not the marketing being applied

Edited by St Etrigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, St Etrigan said:

There are plenty of ways to look at the Anfield attendance, are you aware that this is the largest Eng/GB v NZ attendance in the famous RL M62 corridor since 1951. Only two games in that time period have been larger and they were both held in London.

I would suggest that it is an improvement, which may very well be surpassed by the attendance at Elland Rd on Sunday.

The only reason series on series sales are down is due to the test in London

We got a larger crowd in Bolton in 1998.

Why are we excluding good crowds to make this one look better?

And the obvious point here is that if internationals get better crowds in London, maybe we should be holding internationals in London. Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We got a larger crowd in Bolton in 1998.

Why are we excluding good crowds to make this one look better?

And the obvious point here is that if internationals get better crowds in London, maybe we should be holding internationals in London. Just a thought.

Not intentional, missed that thanks for pointing it out, still one out of 48 games doesn't change the conversation much

Breaking news is that ticket sales for Elland Rd have already passed the Bolton Crowd, making Sundays match the biggest attendance since 1951 outside London (I was just a week early)

Edited by St Etrigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, St Etrigan said:

Not intentional, missed that thanks for pointing it out, still one out of 48 games doesn't change the conversation much

The problem is that it ignores the context of what has happened over the last few years.

It ignores that we have grown the international game to the point where we can go and get 44k versus the Kiwis in London (remember it was in that 1998 series that we got 12k in Watford).

It ignores the fact that the last game staged at Anfield (Aus v Kiwis) got 40k - even taking away novelty and prestige, the fact that this was now an England game should have delivered at least the same. 

It ignores what happened in 2013, when we got 24k versus Ireland, 67k at Wembley for the semis, and 74k for the WC final, sold out in advance. NZ v PNG got 18k in Leeds.

It ignores the fact that we have had 4 24k sellouts on the bounce in the North versus the Kiwis, once capacity is lifted, surely we should expect more than a 5% uplift?

It ignores the fact that we are going to see a 10-20% drop in series numbers versus the Kiwis last time.

And if we want to ignore context to put a brave face on it, fine, but stripping out games that delivered higher crowds just to create a weird record is surely clutching at straws.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We got a larger crowd in Bolton in 1998.

Why are we excluding good crowds to make this one look better?

And the obvious point here is that if internationals get better crowds in London, maybe we should be holding internationals in London. Just a thought.

Since 1994 the England attendances at Elland Road have been 39k, 39k, 39k, 31k, 34k, we got 26k for NZ v Australia there. Yet in 24 years we have only held 6 internationals there.

In London we have seen attendances of 42k, 67k, 44k and 35k since 2009.

Since 2009 we have played more England games in Leigh than either Leeds or London, for some reason we look at the areas we get good crowds and ignore them and go to areas we get poor crowds.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The problem is that it ignores the context of what has happened over the last few years.

It ignores that we have grown the international game to the point where we can go and get 44k versus the Kiwis in London (remember it was in that 1998 series that we got 12k in Watford).

It ignores the fact that the last game staged at Anfield (Aus v Kiwis) got 40k - even taking away novelty and prestige, the fact that this was now an England game should have delivered at least the same. 

It ignores what happened in 2013, when we got 24k versus Ireland, 67k at Wembley for the semis, and 74k for the WC final, sold out in advance. NZ v PNG got 18k in Leeds.

It ignores the fact that we have had 4 24k sellouts on the bounce in the North versus the Kiwis, once capacity is lifted, surely we should expect more than a 5% uplift?

It ignores the fact that we are going to see a 10-20% drop in series numbers versus the Kiwis last time.

And if we want to ignore context to put a brave face on it, fine, but stripping out games that delivered higher crowds just to create a weird record is surely clutching at straws.

No its just comparing like for like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, St Etrigan said:

No its just comparing like for like.

You get to the point that the comparison becomes meaningless, you could say that the England v NZ attendance at Anfield was the largest ever attendance for any Rugby game played on a Sunday in Liverpool that included at least 2 of the Burgess brothers in the history of Rugby. It would be true and would be comparing like for like but its not really of any use.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, scotchy1 said:

Since 1994 the England attendances at Elland Road have been 39k, 39k, 39k, 31k, 34k, we got 26k for NZ v Australia there. Yet in 24 years we have only held 6 internationals there.

In London we have seen attendances of 42k, 67k, 44k and 35k since 2009.

Since 2009 we have played more England games in Leigh than either Leeds or London, for some reason we look at the areas we get good crowds and ignore them and go to areas we get poor crowds.

This game at Anfield was the highest EVER crowd*

*South of Bolton, West of Manchester, North of Watford Gap.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, St Etrigan said:

No its just comparing like for like.

So it's the highest ever England crowd versus the Kiwis at Anfield.

In fact, it's the highest ever England crowd at Anfield.

 

Edited by Dave T
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, scotchy1 said:

You get to the point that the comparison becomes meaningless, you could say that the England v NZ attendance at Anfield was the largest ever attendance for any Rugby game played on a Sunday in Liverpool that included at least 2 of the Burgess brothers in the history of Rugby. It would be true and would be comparing like for like but its not really of any use.

I am not trying to gain any points here, I was comparing games mainly due to the fact that most people were stating that Anfield looked half empty and a poor advert for the game, I was quite surprised that the attendance was as high as it was when compared to other games against NZ, it then stood out that the only higher games attendance (except the one in Bolton that I just missed) were all in London.

It just tries to bring into perspective the size of the crowd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

So it's the highest ever England crowd versus the Kiwis at Anfield.

In fact, it's the highest ever England crowd at Anfield.

 

Bit more to it than that if you see the post above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, St Etrigan said:

I am not trying to gain any points here, I was comparing games mainly due to the fact that most people were stating that Anfield looked half empty and a poor advert for the game, I was quite surprised that the attendance was as high as it was when compared to other games against NZ, it then stood out that the only higher games attendance (except the one in Bolton that I just missed) were all in London.

It just tries to bring into perspective the size of the crowd

But its a comparison of no use because of its specificity. It takes something where there is a limited data set and narrows it down further and further until its useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...