Jump to content

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, The storm said:

Sale sharks are vultures 

Have a fairly rich owner, but not that rich 

 

I presume Salford could get a 100 year mortgage off the council or something 

The council are one step removed from the stadium management company, through which all discussions regarding purchase, lease, rents etc are channelled. The owners of the other 50% are Peel holdings who certainly wouldn't sell if they believe there to be a medium-term advantage in retaining the property.

Sport, amongst other things, is a dream-world offering escape from harsh reality and the disturbing prospect of change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Clever move by Salford with the Salford City Council elections due to 6th May 2021 as it puts pressure on the politicians who own 50% of the stadium to block a sale and helop out the club with rent.

Could Salford not move in with the football team? It's a smaller ground and they'd probably appreciate the financial support!

So another Lancashire clubs looks likely to fade away because they believed unless they got a new ground they would be kicked out of the top flight. They should have just followed  the same model as W

Posted Images

5 hours ago, moorside roughyed said:

You could throw Swinton into the mix as well. Having their own ground then losing it. The amateur situation in Oldham isn't too bad with Saddleworth Rangers (my club), St Anne's, waterhead and the others doing OK. The problem is that kids want to support big teams eg Leeds, Wigan etc. The same as soccer with kids wanting to support united, City, Liverpool etc. They don't seem to be interested in their own town team. 

Fair enough Moorside and good to hear.

I really thought it was slowly dying out. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Frying Scotsman said:

Fair enough Moorside and good to hear.

I really thought it was slowly dying out. 

I can only speak about what I see in Oldham. It's getting the kids to stay with the game into adulthood, they seem to fall away which is a real shame. Obviously as you get older and bigger the game gets tougher, some of them might find it too tough. Like I say most kids follow Leeds, Wigan etc (big clubs). The crowds at Oldham, if you can call it that are getting smaller and older. This I feel is the biggest shame, not supporting your local club, which I have always done. If I was a soocer fan it'd be Oldham athletic. I fear for the game as a whole as I feel it is contracting and getting smaller, the crowds at Wembley in recent years tell a story. I find in particularly worrying. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, moorside roughyed said:

I can only speak about what I see in Oldham. It's getting the kids to stay with the game into adulthood, they seem to fall away which is a real shame. Obviously as you get older and bigger the game gets tougher, some of them might find it too tough. Like I say most kids follow Leeds, Wigan etc (big clubs). The crowds at Oldham, if you can call it that are getting smaller and older. This I feel is the biggest shame, not supporting your local club, which I have always done. If I was a soocer fan it'd be Oldham athletic. I fear for the game as a whole as I feel it is contracting and getting smaller, the crowds at Wembley in recent years tell a story. I find in particularly worrying. 

Problem again is one of infrastructure.  What crowds do you need to compete in SL and what ground size helps create it.  I'd argue 6-6,500 ground with 3g is the sweet spot.  RL seems to have these horrible soulless grounds (Hud,  Sal,  Wigan bar big games) or no ground at all. 

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

Problem again is one of infrastructure.  What crowds do you need to compete in SL and what ground size helps create it.  I'd argue 6-6,500 ground with 3g is the sweet spot.  RL seems to have these horrible soulless grounds (Hud,  Sal,  Wigan bar big games) or no ground at all. 

If a 6k ground is a sweet spot for one of only two fully professional RL competitions in the world then we are ###### We need to aspire to raise standards not lower them. A decade ago we were averaging 10k per game in SL, why isn;t it 12-15k now? That is how growth works - with ambition.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scubby said:

If a 6k ground is a sweet spot for one of only two fully professional RL competitions in the world then we are ###### We need to aspire to raise standards not lower them. A decade ago we were averaging 10k per game in SL, why isn;t it 12-15k now? That is how growth works - with ambition.

generally I would agree, but... always a but... may be more advantageous to grow the revenue spend per person... attracting a demographic that can spend more money.. of course assuming improved facilities.  Plus of course attracting more commercial even if local hospitality and sponsorship...

say as distinct from slashing prices to get a bigger crowd..

just making a point that could focus on another path first, that in itself attracts more people to sample the great facilities and hospitality to go with great entertainment on the pitch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, redjonn said:

generally I would agree, but... always a but... may be more advantageous to grow the revenue spend per person... attracting a demographic that can spend more money.. of course assuming improved facilities.  Plus of course attracting more commercial even if local hospitality and sponsorship...

say as distinct from slashing prices to get a bigger crowd..

just making a point that could focus on another path first, that in itself attracts more people to sample the great facilities and hospitality to go with great entertainment on the pitch.

I know what you are saying John but we need new audiences and lots of them. You can't keep going to the same well over and over again until it is dry. If Toulouse get into SL that could be 10-20k full time French RL fans across two clubs spending money, buying merchandise and expanding the game.

As much as I love the history of Salford, Wakefield and Huddersfield etc, you can literally get 3-5k anywhere in the country for a SL team. At the moment, these clubs are living solely on the back of being neighbours to bigger clubs. They have to be able to pack stadiums themselves to show their worth.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ged Mason's company is a major Sponsor of Salford, they are a local firm with headquarters in Eccles. Not sure they would want to alienate the Council.

Salford need to raise their profile, have some real investment and be sustainable. All of which is a big ask.

 The ground is in the expanded city of Salford and saying it isn't is just looking for excuses. Fans don't just live in M3, M5 or M6.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Scubby said:

If a 6k ground is a sweet spot for one of only two fully professional RL competitions in the world then we are ###### We need to aspire to raise standards not lower them. A decade ago we were averaging 10k per game in SL, why isn;t it 12-15k now? That is how growth works - with ambition.

I think you are missing the point.  For clubs like Oldham a 6,000 3g stadium that can generate revenue and would be perfect to rebuild the fanbase. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

I think you are missing the point.  For clubs like Oldham a 6,000 3g stadium that can generate revenue and would be perfect to rebuild the fanbase. 

 

It might work for Oldham but won't work for SL. We have to make a decision who is capable of being top class vibrant full time professional clubs that can attract big audiences, income and growth, or we stay as a local M62 competition which is grateful for 1000 visiting fans. When Oldham were last in SL the RU club competition in England was barely averaging 5,000. Before the pandemic it got close to a 15k average. SL has decreased in the last decade and it largely because it is continually going back to the same fan base and asking them to spend more money.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, redjonn said:

generally I would agree, but... always a but... may be more advantageous to grow the revenue spend per person... attracting a demographic that can spend more money.. of course assuming improved facilities.  Plus of course attracting more commercial even if local hospitality and sponsorship...

say as distinct from slashing prices to get a bigger crowd..

just making a point that could focus on another path first, that in itself attracts more people to sample the great facilities and hospitality to go with great entertainment on the pitch.

All the more reason why Manchester Rangers snub looks unforgiveable. Playing out of City Academy Stadium  (7000 so perfect size), perfect transport links just being 10 mins by metro from centre. Would've had plenty of comercial opportunities as they climbed the leagues... Madness  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Scubby said:

It might work for Oldham but won't work for SL. We have to make a decision who is capable of being top class vibrant full time professional clubs that can attract big audiences, income and growth, or we stay as a local M62 competition which is grateful for 1000 visiting fans. When Oldham were last in SL the RU club competition in England was barely averaging 5,000. Before the pandemic it got close to a 15k average. SL has decreased in the last decade and it largely because it is continually going back to the same fan base and asking them to spend more money.

Two different discussions. 

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

Two different discussions. 

It isn't, clubs like Wakefield/Cas, Salford/Swinton/Oldham should be looking at trying to combine efforts to get 10-15k stadiums. Having a scattergun of 5k stadiums around isn't helping anyone. What is the point of all these clubs having ###### falling to pieces stadiums, or sharing with RU or park fields? The geography here is negligible. 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

All the more reason why Manchester Rangers snub looks unforgiveable. Playing out of City Academy Stadium  (7000 so perfect size), perfect transport links just being 10 mins by metro from centre. Would've had plenty of comercial opportunities as they climbed the leagues... Madness  

Where are Rangers now though? Looks to me they didn’t have the foundations in place 

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

It isn't, clubs like Wakefield/Cas, Salford/Swinton/Oldham should be looking at trying to combine efforts to get 10-15k stadiums. Having a scattergun of 5k stadiums around isn't helping anyone. What is the point of all these clubs having ###### falling to pieces stadiums, or sharing with RU or park fields? The geography here is negligible. 

So now you are well wide of the mark.  Huddersfield play in a 20k stadium which makes it harder to attract fans and commercial partners. Its the big stadiums that are unfilled that make the product look worse. 

Again though, I'm talking about RL in Manchester , not SL so will not respond further on what SL needs to do in this thread. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

RFL said merge with Oldham or no and investors said ok we quit. 

They spat their dummy out a bit. They could have followed say the Coventry model but didn’t want to put the hard work in

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 minutes ago, Spidey said:

They spat their dummy out a bit. They could have followed say the Coventry model but didn’t want to put the hard work in

They were blocked from League 1 so they couldnt and they put more than enough into the amatuer game.  RFL were just stupid. 

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

 

They were blocked from League 1 so they couldnt and they put more than enough into the amatuer game.  RFL were just stupid. 

They did about five seasons in the amateur game. I could list a hundred clubs who did more.
 

They needed to establish themselves more, try the national conference and re-apply to League one. If they hanged around a bit longer I’d expect them to get accepted now. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShropshireBull said:

 

They were blocked from League 1 so they couldnt and they put more than enough into the amatuer game.  RFL were just stupid. 

This opinion about Manchester Rangers seems to get peddled quite a bit. I can’t say I know a lot about them but why were Manchester the golden ticket or is it just another case of people getting a bit too excited about a project ala so many others. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/04/2021 at 02:33, moorside roughyed said:

Sounds a bit grim to me. The question is like a few other clubs around Greater Manchester - is rugby league big enough in these towns anymore? I'm an Oldham fan and we're lucky if we get 700 at a home game, definitely not enough to support a club, ground and wages etc. 

The Benjamin Brandreth philosophy should be tried, where mass advertising is used to make many people as possible of your product. Product awareness it's called and has been used in the past and present successfully for many products in the USA including sports

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, lucky 7 said:

The Benjamin Brandreth philosophy should be tried, where mass advertising is used to make many people as possible of your product. Product awareness it's called and has been used in the past and present successfully for many products in the USA including sports

I've heard of Giles Brandreth. 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Scubby said:

As much as I love the history of Salford, Wakefield and Huddersfield etc, you can literally get 3-5k anywhere in the country for a SL team. At the moment, these clubs are living solely on the back of being neighbours to bigger clubs. They have to be able to pack stadiums themselves to show their worth.

Maybe.

But new teams, let's say Bristol, Newcastle and Nottingham, would not produce the amount of players that Wakefield & Hudds (I really don't know about Salford's record), do for the professional game.

Such places should replace "established" clubs, when they too have a net contribution to the game.

If Hudds and Wakey drop out without being replaced by a something more sustainable, then the game will suffer a net loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dboy said:

Maybe.

But new teams, let's say Bristol, Newcastle and Nottingham, would not produce the amount of players that Wakefield & Hudds (I really don't know about Salford's record), do for the professional game.

Such places should replace "established" clubs, when they too have a net contribution to the game.

If Hudds and Wakey drop out without being replaced by a something more sustainable, then the game will suffer a net loss.

I get what you are saying but Melbourne has a feeder club in Brisbane. Does anyone care there are no locals playing for the Storm?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...