Will the encouraging signs lead to increased attendances?

[Scubby]

14 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Because they became lazy and took success for granted.

The Iestyn Harris saga took up all their marketing budget 

[GUBRATS]

21 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Classic!

And I've now answered it after reading it , the reason I didn't read it was that I wanted to see if I could guess what was in it , and yes , it contained what I expected it to do 

[GUBRATS]

23 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Because they became lazy and took success for granted.

So why didn't they restart it ? 

[GUBRATS]

20 minutes ago, Dallas Mead said:

Yes buddy.  Season ticket holder since 1991. Every single year since then.

Who ?

[GUBRATS]

10 minutes ago, Scubby said:

The Iestyn Harris saga took up all their marketing budget 

Surely if it was paying off in bigger crowds it pays for itself ?

[paulwalker71]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So why didn't they restart it ? 

Going into Administration didn't exactly help, although it had gradually been cut back in the previous few years.

The kind of 'event' that was being staged at Odsal in the early 2000s doesn't come cheap. I don't know enough about the budgets at that time to know if it was cost effective.

And, yeah, signing Harris didn't help either 

[GUBRATS]

Just now, paulwalker71 said:

Going into Administration didn't exactly help, although it had gradually been cut back in the previous few years.

The kind of 'event' that was being staged at Odsal in the early 2000s doesn't come cheap. I don't know enough about the budgets at that time to know if it was cost effective.

And, yeah, signing Harris didn't help either 

It either pays for itself or doesn't ?

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

It either pays for itself or doesn't ?

Signing players who weren't good enough, or rather, relying on the action on the pitch, didn't pay for itself it seems. Indeed it sent the club into a downward spiral. 

[GUBRATS]

6 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Signing players who weren't good enough, or rather, relying on the action on the pitch, didn't pay for itself it seems. Indeed it sent the club into a downward spiral. 

 

It either pays for itself or it doesn't , I fully understand marketing budgets having set up and ran businesses 

Id suggest it didn't , that's why they stopped 

[Big Picture]

3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It either pays for itself or it doesn't , I fully understand marketing budgets having set up and ran businesses 

Id suggest it didn't , that's why they stopped 

Are you suggesting that when Peter Deakin managed to attract all those bumper crowds to Odsal in the early years of SL his marketing was costing more than the extra spectators were paying into the club?

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It either pays for itself or it doesn't , I fully understand marketing budgets having set up and ran businesses 

Id suggest it didn't , that's why they stopped 

By contrast, I'd suggest they got lazy and complacent, which is backed up by players of the time too on their comments about the club more generally.

[GUBRATS]

7 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

Are you suggesting that when Peter Deakin managed to attract all those bumper crowds to Odsal in the early years of SL his marketing was costing more than the extra spectators were paying into the club?

You do know about the various ' offers ' being made at the time to entice people into Odsal 

[GUBRATS]

5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

By contrast, I'd suggest they got lazy and complacent, which is backed up by players of the time too on their comments about the club more generally.

Or they just ran out of money because they were losing it hand over fist from the start 

[ELBOWSEYE]

2 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Or they just ran out of money because they were losing it hand over fist from the start 

Never going to make money long term with that stadium, losing money fast just trying to make it safe, and for one day a fortnight. So I admire the bulls early days with the match day entertainment and some of the crowd figures they got (regardless of how they achieved it). But the ground was a weight around their necks. 

[Tommygilf]

5 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Or they just ran out of money because they were losing it hand over fist from the start 

Got lazy, thought a few big name signings could keep people interested, stopped trying. Reverted to type.

[Scubby]

2 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Never going to make money long term with that stadium, losing money fast just trying to make it safe, and for one day a fortnight. So I admire the bulls early days with the match day entertainment and some of the crowd figures they got (regardless of how they achieved it). But the ground was a weight around their necks. 

Yes, had they wanted to be a huge club they had to leverage their position in the early 2000s to make a new stadium happen. Pretty sad, a super 20k stadium with Bradford City 10+ years ago could have seen a different outlook.

[GUBRATS]

52 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Never going to make money long term with that stadium, losing money fast just trying to make it safe, and for one day a fortnight. So I admire the bulls early days with the match day entertainment and some of the crowd figures they got (regardless of how they achieved it). But the ground was a weight around their necks. 

The stadium isn't the point of discussion , did all the stuff they did ( much of which many clubs cannot do even if they wanted to do ) repay them with a profit ? , If it did they were stupid to stop , if it didn't , well ?

[GUBRATS]

57 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Got lazy, thought a few big name signings could keep people interested, stopped trying. Reverted to type.

Or it wasn't paying off and they were losing money on it , nobody only the owners/board at the time know 

Nobody on here knows for certain 

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Or it wasn't paying off and they were losing money on it , nobody only the owners/board at the time know 

Nobody on here knows for certain 

For someone who doesn't "know for certain" you do seem awfully insistent on telling everyone it was because they spent all their money on off field gimmicks and freebies.

[ELBOWSEYE]

43 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

The stadium isn't the point of discussion , did all the stuff they did ( much of which many clubs cannot do even if they wanted to do ) repay them with a profit ? , If it did they were stupid to stop , if it didn't , well ?

Surely it is part of the overall picture, if clubs are doing their upmost to increase crowds but ultimately the base they work from is a bottomless pit of a money drain it is a losing battle. On reading the op again it was if the upcoming WC and more live matches on terrestrial tv going to help increase a crowds, when increasing crowds starts at the clubs first. And the Bulls were the first big club to actively put on an event feel for games which helped increase crowds and profile, but ultimately the ground itself with other factors ensured it would mot be long term. 

[paulwalker71]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

The stadium isn't the point of discussion , did all the stuff they did ( much of which many clubs cannot do even if they wanted to do ) repay them with a profit ? , If it did they were stupid to stop , if it didn't , well ?

Except is part of the discussion. As a business person yourself you will know there are many moving parts. You can’t take the marketing budget in total isolation.

In our case it was a mix of Peter Deakin moving on, Chris Caisley not understanding that crowds couldn’t keeping expanding infinitely, the millstone of increasing ground costs, other teams ‘catching up’ the Bulls on the field, Caisley signing Harris just to pee off Hetherington, and lots of other things I’m sure.

The first Administration in 2009 was proof that we didn’t get the balance right. By the time Caisley handed over to Peter Hood the ship was already holed beneath the waterline.

[GUBRATS]

Ask Wellsy , he brought up the Bulls , and as usual we get bogged down on Odsal 

Everybody says we need to do more ( and all the club owners are idiots ) , but nobody ever has any genuine idea of what to do , online experts

[GUBRATS]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

For someone who doesn't "know for certain" you do seem awfully insistent on telling everyone it was because they spent all their money on off field gimmicks and freebies.

So they didn't give out daft offers , and all the dancing , flags ,fireworks ,go carts and full size Bejeweled Elephants worked then ?

[Dallas Mead]

4 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Who ?

Warrington?  You?

[sentoffagain2]

5 hours ago, Dallas Mead said:

Ridiculous.

Why would you not want more supporters at a game?.