Sky Sports halves offer for TV rights

[redjonn]

7 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I’d have thought students would be a great option for clubs with a Uni in town. When I lived in Sheffield (albeit years ago) both football clubs did huge student discounts and a lot of people took advantage of it. I remember paying £2 to watch Norwich play at Bramall Lane one Sunday (we won 3-2 ). There’s no reason why the same can’t happen with the Rhinos, Bulls, Giants, Hull clubs etc, that is if they don’t already. 

yep sure they offer discounts - well Leeds do student such discounts.  Could take it a step up by looking how  can package offers together that gives more than a discount to the game.  e.g. don't know if they use text books or whatever stationary or memory sticks or whatever someone with more of an idea than me can think up as part of the package.  Obviously in the hope they take to watching the game or getting a passion for the sport. Sure some technology apps/focus can be thought that includes the wider offer.

[Moove]

13 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I’d have thought students would be a great option for clubs with a Uni in town. When I lived in Sheffield (albeit years ago) both football clubs did huge student discounts and a lot of people took advantage of it. I remember paying £2 to watch Norwich play at Bramall Lane one Sunday (we won 3-2 ). There’s no reason why the same can’t happen with the Rhinos, Bulls, Giants, Hull clubs etc, that is if they don’t already. 

I suppose the challenge for individual clubs doing that is they're short term attenders - through holidays (particularly the summer when most of our games are played) and when their course finishes they move away again.

Targeting universities at a wider sport level might be more beneficial longer term though. For example the social side of the non-contact variations of the sport in particular seems ideal for student clubs and might help broaden the profile of our supporter base when these guys eventually end up as doctors, politicians, business owners etc. Coupling something like that with club specific initiatives would give us the best of both worlds there.

[Scotchy1]

The breakdown seems to be, all these rough numbers, 

£32m per year, £6m going to the RFL basically for negotiating them and its 'governing body activities', leaving £26m. £2-2.5m to the RFL for basically management services, £1.5-2m to the championship and L1 as basically a gift, and £0.5-£1m to the lower leagues to fund youth systems. Leaving around £20m split between the SL clubs

I would guess that the services from the RFL wont change. The governing body activities and 'negotiation fee' are up for debate, the lower league funding too. 

If the deal is around £20m, then take out the £2.5m to the RFL for services, and its £17.5m for the clubs, which would be around £1.45m. That isnt 'death' for SL. It probably continues around the level it is. But it would necessitate a shrinking of RFL activities and the lower leagues 'going it alone'.

[Spidey]

7 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

The breakdown seems to be, all these rough numbers, 

£32m per year, £6m going to the RFL basically for negotiating them and its 'governing body activities', leaving £26m. £2-2.5m to the RFL for basically management services, £1.5-2m to the championship and L1 as basically a gift, and £0.5-£1m to the lower leagues to fund youth systems. Leaving around £20m split between the SL clubs

I would guess that the services from the RFL wont change. The governing body activities and 'negotiation fee' are up for debate, the lower league funding too. 

If the deal is around £20m, then take out the £2.5m to the RFL for services, and its £17.5m for the clubs, which would be around £1.45m. That isnt 'death' for SL. It probably continues around the level it is. But it would necessitate a shrinking of RFL activities and the lower leagues 'going it alone'.

Well it’s an increase for Leigh if they stay up

[iffleyox]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

Which Brits perceived Oxford as legitimate for that reason other than the minority who already followed RL?

In fairness, given I was there and I didn't already follow RL... all of them in Oxford who they were trying to promote to. It was an easier sell to say 'come down this Saturday, they're playing Oldham' than 'come and watch Oxford play London Skolars in a sport you don't know much about.'

The one thing I don't think you've grasped (a lot of what you're advocating makes sense over the years) is the cultural position of RL in England outside the 'heartlands'

It gets joked about, and it's irredeemably northern, but at the same time that's the authenticity. Selling RL in general to the non-heartlands English audience is difficult enough, but selling it to them between two flatpack non-northern teams.... Oxford got higher gates *of locals* when it was playing established northern sides that people might have heard of (or at least could tell from the name that they were northern) than they did playing Hemel, South Wales, etc.

So I would say that *you* advocate a big city league in the northern hemisphere but need to square that with people in England who don't watch RL questioning it's authenticity and being reluctant to be won over unless it's recognisably northern.

Which is nearly an argument for your big city league not to involve England, and probably another reason it could never happen...

Playing established northern sides gave the flat pack clubs their legitimacy and a sense to the interested bystander that they *might* be worth an hour and half and a tenner, rather than just being pub teams of local enthusiasts and northern exiles.

[Big Picture]

37 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

In fairness, given I was there and I didn't already follow RL... all of them in Oxford who they were trying to promote to. It was an easier sell to say 'come down this Saturday, they're playing Oldham' than 'come and watch Oxford play London Skolars in a sport you don't know much about.'

The one thing I don't think you've grasped (a lot of what you're advocating makes sense over the years) is the cultural position of RL in England outside the 'heartlands'

It gets joked about, and it's irredeemably northern, but at the same time that's the authenticity. Selling RL in general to the non-heartlands English audience is difficult enough, but selling it to them between two flatpack non-northern teams.... Oxford got higher gates *of locals* when it was playing established northern sides that people might have heard of (or at least could tell from the name that they were northern) than they did playing Hemel, South Wales, etc.

So I would say that *you* advocate a big city league in the northern hemisphere but need to square that with people in England who don't watch RL questioning it's authenticity and being reluctant to be won over unless it's recognisably northern.

Which is nearly an argument for your big city league not to involve England, and probably another reason it could never happen...

Interesting, thanks for the information.  I'd already reached the conclusion that the sport would probably have to be rebranded and called something other than Rugby League for my concept to work, this reinforces that conclusion.

Addendum.  I just checked Oxford's home crowds for 2017.  Their average home crowd against traditional clubs that year was 157.6 and against other new non-traditional clubs were only slightly lower at 119.

[sweaty craiq]

1 hour ago, Scotchy1 said:

The breakdown seems to be, all these rough numbers, 

£32m per year, £6m going to the RFL basically for negotiating them and its 'governing body activities', leaving £26m. £2-2.5m to the RFL for basically management services, £1.5-2m to the championship and L1 as basically a gift, and £0.5-£1m to the lower leagues to fund youth systems. Leaving around £20m split between the SL clubs

I would guess that the services from the RFL wont change. The governing body activities and 'negotiation fee' are up for debate, the lower league funding too. 

If the deal is around £20m, then take out the £2.5m to the RFL for services, and its £17.5m for the clubs, which would be around £1.45m. That isnt 'death' for SL. It probably continues around the level it is. But it would necessitate a shrinking of RFL activities and the lower leagues 'going it alone'.

Too many non producers living off doing nothing in our ivory towers. I have stated previously the CEO of the business we owned was paid £150-250k basic over the period, bonus paid on increased profits. £180m t/o, £19m ebitda. What the RFL pay is stupid for the caibre we have. A good impartial review of our costs is well overdue - it even took 500k to get of Nige!!!!!

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, redjonn said:

irrespective I do think you make a fair point in your other comment regards the numbers of millions living up North so to speak.

I am not sure clubs/the sport have made a real effort to broaden the sports demographics.  

I just think people expect more facility wise. Leeds for me is a good example of significantly improving facilities aimed at the hospitality - of which the older facilities were far better than any other SL. Now they are light years ahead. 

Leeds corporate/hospitality revenue is far beyond other SL clubs. Plus they organise trips to other type of events for those hospitality customers which enhances the social engagement and interaction that that demographic enjoy. e.g. Wimbledon, Ascot, Albert Hall, etc etc.

They target that demographic with more monies to spend.

That's just one example but their are other demographics to be targeted some of which is done, e,g, families, students, 18-25 year olds... or whatever. Just basic marketing of putting packages and activities that target those specific groups.

  

 

Yes , but 

Leeds are unique in Sport in sharing a facility with another sport that relys almost solely on its corporate facilities 

[sweaty craiq]

52 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Interesting, thanks for the information.  I'd already reached the conclusion that the sport would probably have to be rebranded and called something other than Rugby League for my concept to work, this reinforces that conclusion.

Addendum.  I just checked Oxford's home crowds for 2017.  Their average home crowd against traditional clubs that year was 157.6 and against other new non-traditional clubs were only slightly lower at 119.

So 25% lower!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[GUBRATS]

3 hours ago, Eddie said:

I’d have thought students would be a great option for clubs with a Uni in town. When I lived in Sheffield (albeit years ago) both football clubs did huge student discounts and a lot of people took advantage of it. I remember paying £2 to watch Norwich play at Bramall Lane one Sunday (we won 3-2 ). There’s no reason why the same can’t happen with the Rhinos, Bulls, Giants, Hull clubs etc, that is if they don’t already. 

So cheap tickets is your answer to the games problems ?

 

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Moove said:

I suppose the challenge for individual clubs doing that is they're short term attenders - through holidays (particularly the summer when most of our games are played) and when their course finishes they move away again.

Targeting universities at a wider sport level might be more beneficial longer term though. For example the social side of the non-contact variations of the sport in particular seems ideal for student clubs and might help broaden the profile of our supporter base when these guys eventually end up as doctors, politicians, business owners etc. Coupling something like that with club specific initiatives would give us the best of both worlds there.

My daughter recently graduated from Edge Hill , the attitude to the ' rugby lads ' was they were the biggest bunch of ######s at the uni , causing more trouble than all the others put together

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

Well it’s an increase for Leigh if they stay up

If 

[GUBRATS]

1 hour ago, iffleyox said:

In fairness, given I was there and I didn't already follow RL... all of them in Oxford who they were trying to promote to. It was an easier sell to say 'come down this Saturday, they're playing Oldham' than 'come and watch Oxford play London Skolars in a sport you don't know much about.'

The one thing I don't think you've grasped (a lot of what you're advocating makes sense over the years) is the cultural position of RL in England outside the 'heartlands'

It gets joked about, and it's irredeemably northern, but at the same time that's the authenticity. Selling RL in general to the non-heartlands English audience is difficult enough, but selling it to them between two flatpack non-northern teams.... Oxford got higher gates *of locals* when it was playing established northern sides that people might have heard of (or at least could tell from the name that they were northern) than they did playing Hemel, South Wales, etc.

So I would say that *you* advocate a big city league in the northern hemisphere but need to square that with people in England who don't watch RL questioning it's authenticity and being reluctant to be won over unless it's recognisably northern.

Which is nearly an argument for your big city league not to involve England, and probably another reason it could never happen...

Playing established northern sides gave the flat pack clubs their legitimacy and a sense to the interested bystander that they *might* be worth an hour and half and a tenner, rather than just being pub teams of local enthusiasts and northern exiles.

Excellent post , got to say it's an aspect I'd never thought of 

[redjonn]

13 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes , but 

Leeds are unique in Sport in sharing a facility with another sport that relys almost solely on its corporate facilities 

I guess its cricket that you refer too. 

Never-the-less the overriding point is/was about need to broaden the demographic that watches or has an interest. How ever one wishes to identify sub demographics.

For sure I anticipate some cross-over from both sports referred too but whatever it is I guess Leeds have focused on it and invested to improve it.

[redjonn]

22 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So cheap tickets is your answer to the games problems ?

 

I guess the underlying discussion that brought discount up was not so much what the promotional approach was but more packaging promotions to suit a target demographic - I did add comment that it had to be more than just discounting and in fact if that's all a club can stretch their thinking too it would be a poor example, but typically it's sometimes all they do...

[iffleyox]

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

Interesting, thanks for the information.  I'd already reached the conclusion that the sport would probably have to be rebranded and called something other than Rugby League for my concept to work, this reinforces that conclusion.

Addendum.  I just checked Oxford's home crowds for 2017.  Their average home crowd against traditional clubs that year was 157.6 and against other new non-traditional clubs were only slightly lower at 119.

I'm still astonished we played any matches in 2017...

that was playing in Abingdon*, with a running track round the pitch, and virtually no one watching from Oxford or the away side....

I think the average gate in 2013 was more like 270, the highest was pushing 500. 

They were never going to set the world on fire, but the move to Abingdon, and the stuffing of League 1 with Championship sides, killed them.

*by public transport, with walking, over an hour from Oxford, and getting on for two from the parts of the city where the fans, such as they existed, tended to live.

 

[GUBRATS]

2 minutes ago, redjonn said:

I guess the underlying discussion that brought discount up was not so much what the promotional approach was but more packing promotions to suit a target demographic - I did add comment that it had to be more than just discounting and in fact if that's all a club can stretch their thinking too it would be a poor example, but typically it's sometimes all they do...

Students are generally only interested in 2 things 

[Bleep1673]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Students are generally only interested in 2 things 

Their Loan debt, and passing exams?

[Scotchy1]

1 hour ago, iffleyox said:

In fairness, given I was there and I didn't already follow RL... all of them in Oxford who they were trying to promote to. It was an easier sell to say 'come down this Saturday, they're playing Oldham' than 'come and watch Oxford play London Skolars in a sport you don't know much about.'

The one thing I don't think you've grasped (a lot of what you're advocating makes sense over the years) is the cultural position of RL in England outside the 'heartlands'

It gets joked about, and it's irredeemably northern, but at the same time that's the authenticity. Selling RL in general to the non-heartlands English audience is difficult enough, but selling it to them between two flatpack non-northern teams.... Oxford got higher gates *of locals* when it was playing established northern sides that people might have heard of (or at least could tell from the name that they were northern) than they did playing Hemel, South Wales, etc.

So I would say that *you* advocate a big city league in the northern hemisphere but need to square that with people in England who don't watch RL questioning it's authenticity and being reluctant to be won over unless it's recognisably northern.

Which is nearly an argument for your big city league not to involve England, and probably another reason it could never happen...

Playing established northern sides gave the flat pack clubs their legitimacy and a sense to the interested bystander that they *might* be worth an hour and half and a tenner, rather than just being pub teams of local enthusiasts and northern exiles.

I think you are right. To a point. The small clubs in small town offer that 'authenticity' for a small club. When your crowd is measured in the tens and low hundreds absolutely. 

Its not even just authenticity but legitimacy. Playing against a Hunslet et al creates the image of a legitimate semi-pro RL competition. Something ideas around southern leagues etc would remove.

There is also a point where the balance tips away though. When you are measuring the crowds in the thousands and want to show yourself as an authentic, legitimate, professional sport. Playing against small northern towns, cities and suburbs does the opposite and so the situation is reversed. 

[redjonn]

Just now, GUBRATS said:

Students are generally only interested in 2 things 

it wasn't about students it was promotional packaging to suit different demographics. Students was brought up as I guess an easily identifiable grouping that inhabit Headingly and hence I guess used. That is not solely about students and yes maybe not the best example.

This isn't going to be one of those circular discussions with no exit.

[iffleyox]

Just now, Scotchy1 said:

I think you are right. To a point. The small clubs in small town offer that 'authenticity' for a small club. When your crowd is measured in the tens and low hundreds absolutely. 

Its not even just authenticity but legitimacy. Playing against a Hunslet et al creates the image of a legitimate semi-pro RL competition. Something ideas around southern leagues etc would remove.

There is also a point where the balance tips away though. When you are measuring the crowds in the thousands and want to show yourself as an authentic, legitimate, professional sport. Playing against small northern towns, cities and suburbs does the opposite and so the situation is reversed. 

absolutely agree.

Ideally you've got to try and do both - but it's the reason that people down here's heads explode with frustration every time someone yet again advocates hiving off the league 1 'expansion' teams into a southern conference...

[Scotchy1]

Just now, redjonn said:

it wasn't about students it was promotional packaging to suit different demographics. Students was brought up as I guess an easily identifiable grouping that inhabit Headingly and hence I guess used. That is not solely about students and yes maybe not the best example.

This isn't going to be one of those circular discussions with no exit.

Packages are something the game does poorly. Its generally along the lines of a free beanie. 

And packages aren't around cheap tickets. They are about up-selling and getting people to buy more.

[Scotchy1]

3 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

absolutely agree.

Ideally you've got to try and do both - but it's the reason that people down here's heads explode with frustration every time someone yet again advocates hiving off the league 1 'expansion' teams into a southern conference...

I agree. L1 should be a development league there for development of players and clubs. 

Its reason for being should be to allow expansion clubs to leverage what we have to grow. 

Their entire aim should be kids playing and getting people through the door. 

[emesssea]

6 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

My partner is Spanish and tells me South American accents sound awful (which is apparently how I sound when speaking spanish) except Argentinian which is good 

Its apparently a bit of hangover from the different languages over there but she can even tell where in Spain someone is from when they are speaking English

All sounds exactly the same to me

Hmm, for people I know and including myself the Argentinian accent is the worst... I always joke they're the scottish accent of spanish speaking countries. I've even met Argentinians, who I didn't know were Argentinian at first, who when speaking in spanish I assumed it was there second language and they were speaking with their american accent. Where as at least among Latin Americans, the Colombian accent is considered the 'cleanest'.

[iffleyox]

7 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

I agree. L1 should be a development league there for development of players and clubs. 

Its reason for being should be to allow expansion clubs to leverage what we have to grow. 

Their entire aim should be kids playing and getting people through the door. 

welcome to the dream as sold to the boards/founders/promoters of Hemel, Oxford, and GAG...

It worked, it really did, for a whole season - before suddenly what League 1 was for was changed again...