Jump to content

Attendances (Multiple Merged Threads)


Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

It's sad because they're pretty much the only example of a club that didn't see a boost from being in a better facility. Many clubs went up by thousands overnight (Wire, Hull, Saints). I remember when they opened the stadium for the first time for a friendly and only got a couple of thousand, thinking that something wasn't right.

When we moved to the LSV our attendances dropped , but it coincided with the introduction of licences , and what even more frustrated the fan base was that we'd finally managed to get SL quality facilities only to see several other clubs ( CAS,Wakey,Salford and even Celtic Crusaders ) all be given licences on yet more promises and artists impressions , it was only when P and R returned with the 8 s that the home numbers at the LSV started to grow 

Covid and then our I'll fated offer to bail out SL has put us behind again , work to be done 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


13 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

When we moved to the LSV our attendances dropped , but it coincided with the introduction of licences , and what even more frustrated the fan base was that we'd finally managed to get SL quality facilities only to see several other clubs ( CAS,Wakey,Salford and even Celtic Crusaders ) all be given licences on yet more promises and artists impressions , it was only when P and R returned with the 8 s that the home numbers at the LSV started to grow 

Covid and then our I'll fated offer to bail out SL has put us behind again , work to be done 

Leigh have been really unfortunate when it comes to SL. You've actually been promoted more times than Widnes, but for some reason never managed to make a decent stab of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maximus Decimus said:

 

The AJ Bell was badly designed IMO. You have the majority of home fans behind the posts, and two stands of completely different sizes. I've been in the biggest stand and it is weird looking out at a small stand that is mostly empty. It also is terrible on TV for this reason. 

Yes, it is a good example of a project being downsized badly. Originally you'll remember the idea was to have a big 'iconic' stand that would like shiny and exciting to people driving by. As they scaled back the spec due to finances, they should have gone to a flat pack style ground with four sides of equal height (like Leigh, Wire etc) but tried to hold onto the 'one big stand' idea. It looks daft with a basic spec and it is a shame.

  • Like 1

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Maximus Decimus said:

The AJ Bell was badly designed IMO. You have the majority of home fans behind the posts

Is the same not true at Wigan, Saints and Cas? The stand behind the posts is always the most full at these clubs I believe. It was a mistake by both Salford and Saints not to put terracing in the stand that runs  along the side of the pitch as is the case at Headingley and Warrington. But it’s not an excuse for Salford, the fact is they can only attract 4000 home fans and that’s not good enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that each club faces different challenges. In Wigan’s case, league has very deep roots in schools, clubs, families and in the sense of identity for Wiganers. So, league as a game is well developed and understood. When it comes to crowds there are a few things the club can - and must - do around community initiatives, school visits and the like, but above all people want to see entertaining rugby. People will pay money to watch a player like Field in person. The buzz around the town, and the extended support base, around this new style - with KPP and Mago getting mentioned in dispatches - has given the club a far better chance of increasing the crowds again.

We have had to put up with some of the most unwatchable rugby I can remember for the last 7/8 years where winning was prized above flair. It is no wonder people preferred watching on TV, because the performances, even the ground out Waneball victories,  were no longer events. It has taken them ages for the penny to drop, but Peet seems to get it. 

Edited by Exiled Wiganer
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Is the same not true at Wigan, Saints and Cas? The stand behind the posts is always the most full at these clubs I believe. It was a mistake by both Salford and Saints not to put terracing in the stand that runs  along the side of the pitch as is the case at Headingley and Warrington. But it’s not an excuse for Salford, the fact is they can only attract 4000 home fans and that’s not good enough. 

Not good enough for who? If they had zero fans yet could put a good enough team out to stay up they’d be good enough for Super League. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I think that each club faces different challenges. In Wigan’s case, league has very deep roots in schools, clubs, families and in the sense of identity for Wiganers. So, league as a game is well developed and understood. When it comes to crowds there are a few things the club can - and must - do around community initiatives, school visits and the like, but above all people want to see entertaining rugby. People will pay money to watch a player like Field in person. The buzz around the town, and the extended support base, around this new style - with KPP and Mago getting mentioned in dispatches - has given the club a far better chance of increasing the crowds again.

We have had to put up with some of the most unwatchable rugby I can remember for the last 7/8 years where winning was prized above flair. It is no wonder people preferred watching on TV, because the performances, even the ground out Waneball victories,  were no longer events. It has taken them ages for the penny to drop, but Peet seems to get it. 

Good, even if Wigan can increase their crowds by 2k it would be great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I think that each club faces different challenges. In Wigan’s case, league has very deep roots in schools, clubs, families and in the sense of identity for Wiganers. So, league as a game is well developed and understood. When it comes to crowds there are a few things the club can - and must - do around community initiatives, school visits and the like, but above all people want to see entertaining rugby. People will pay money to watch a player like Field in person. The buzz around the town, and the extended support base, around this new style - with KPP and Mago getting mentioned in dispatches - has given the club a far better chance of increasing the crowds again.

We have had to put up with some of the most unwatchable rugby I can remember for the last 7/8 years where winning was prized above flair. It is no wonder people preferred watching on TV, because the performances, even the ground out Waneball victories,  were no longer events. It has taken them ages for the penny to drop, but Peet seems to get it. 

We must ride it at the minute and grow anticipation for the warmer months. I’m worried about these next few home games with them being on Thursdays and would really like to see the club push some incentives to get people in, with the ambition that if they see Field and Mago entertaining like they have been doing and with the promise of French to come, they’ll want to keep coming back.
 

I remember the buzz at Castleford in 2017. People just seemed to be waiting for the home games to come around so they could get down to the games. I’m not saying we’re playing like that or will have a season like that but hopefully we can get the place buzzing like that. 
 

I just hope these next three home fixtures don’t put a pin in our chances. It doesn’t make more people want to get down looking at a ground with sub 10k on, in poor conditions. The club linked up really well with the community clubs last season to start growing the crowds again, by offering cheap tickets they could sell to their players and families. It’s something I hope they consider in the coming weeks to help build the good feeling and buzz about the place but it’s not something you can do forever. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Is the same not true at Wigan, Saints and Cas? The stand behind the posts is always the most full at these clubs I believe. It was a mistake by both Salford and Saints not to put terracing in the stand that runs  along the side of the pitch as is the case at Headingley and Warrington. But it’s not an excuse for Salford, the fact is they can only attract 4000 home fans and that’s not good enough. 

In principle it isn't a problem, but it is when you don't have enough fans to go round the ground. The current situation at Widnes works because we close the two end stands meaning the capacity is effectively 8,000. It probably also helps that because the ground was built step by step, there was a time when only those two stands were open so again it doesn't feel like we're having to close stands. Against Worky we had 3,600 in and if we were set up like Salford with say at least 2,500 in the ends and 1,100 in the main stands it just wouldn't work the same. 

I personally wouldn't put the blame at Salford's door, they are in a very difficult position. They were a small club at the Willows but a move should've seen them getting attendances similar to say Hull KR but the whole thing just didn't work. They are now in a situation where even when they get people to attend, it probably isn't an appealing experience. 

I agree, that the best solution is probably terracting down the side as it is more forgiving than seating, but they always seem to face it away from the cameras. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I think that each club faces different challenges. In Wigan’s case, league has very deep roots in schools, clubs, families and in the sense of identity for Wiganers. So, league as a game is well developed and understood. When it comes to crowds there are a few things the club can - and must - do around community initiatives, school visits and the like, but above all people want to see entertaining rugby. People will pay money to watch a player like Field in person. The buzz around the town, and the extended support base, around this new style - with KPP and Mago getting mentioned in dispatches - has given the club a far better chance of increasing the crowds again.

We have had to put up with some of the most unwatchable rugby I can remember for the last 7/8 years where winning was prized above flair. It is no wonder people preferred watching on TV, because the performances, even the ground out Waneball victories,  were no longer events. It has taken them ages for the penny to drop, but Peet seems to get it. 

If I was a club owner , the only instruction to my coach would be , at home , entertain , away , win 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

In principle it isn't a problem, but it is when you don't have enough fans to go round the ground. The current situation at Widnes works because we close the two end stands meaning the capacity is effectively 8,000. It probably also helps that because the ground was built step by step, there was a time when only those two stands were open so again it doesn't feel like we're having to close stands. Against Worky we had 3,600 in and if we were set up like Salford with say at least 2,500 in the ends and 1,100 in the main stands it just wouldn't work the same. 

I personally wouldn't put the blame at Salford's door, they are in a very difficult position. They were a small club at the Willows but a move should've seen them getting attendances similar to say Hull KR but the whole thing just didn't work. They are now in a situation where even when they get people to attend, it probably isn't an appealing experience. 

I agree, that the best solution is probably terracting down the side as it is more forgiving than seating, but they always seem to face it away from the cameras. 

I desperately wanted the terracing at the LSV to be along the side ( East Stand ) rather than at the end , it works on all levels as the home fans can influence the refs as we see at Leeds 

Edited by GUBRATS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Just Browny said:

Yes, it is a good example of a project being downsized badly. Originally you'll remember the idea was to have a big 'iconic' stand that would like shiny and exciting to people driving by. As they scaled back the spec due to finances, they should have gone to a flat pack style ground with four sides of equal height (like Leigh, Wire etc) but tried to hold onto the 'one big stand' idea. It looks daft with a basic spec and it is a shame.

Was it the ' Armadillo ' design , or was that one of Cas's drawings ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

How will Salford pay for the expansion of Moor Lane? They won’t even own the ground will they? If Salford can afford to pay for Moor Lane to be expanded I’m sure they could afford to pay the rent at the AJ Bell Stadium 

Again. Have you bothered to read any of the now extensive detail on the Moor Lane thread before asking these questions?

You, and any other poster, have every right to think whatever you wish with regards to Salford. I have no interest in changing that. All I do ask is that you stop telling Salford fans and the people of Salford what they do or don't think and what they can or can't do without even pretending to engage in the substance of any of it.

It's a forum at the end of the day so you can do as you like but I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it tedious.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ray Cashmere said:

Again. Have you bothered to read any of the now extensive detail on the Moor Lane thread before asking these questions?

You, and any other poster, have every right to think whatever you wish with regards to Salford. I have no interest in changing that. All I do ask is that you stop telling Salford fans and the people of Salford what they do or don't think and what they can or can't do without even pretending to engage in the substance of any of it.

It's a forum at the end of the day so you can do as you like but I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it tedious.

I understand your frustration Ray, but you seem to be confusing people giving their view with telling Salford fans what they think. That isn't what people are doing at all. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

I understand your frustration Ray, but you seem to be confusing people giving their view with telling Salford fans what they think. That isn't what people are doing at all. 

Not in this instance tbf, no. But it has been a theme of the last few pages. 

It's just the statements of personal opinion as fact highlighted above and elsewhere by people unwilling to do the most basic of research that becomes irksome. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salford centre of attention again.

Keep it going kids!

Said this before, but increasing attendance should be a priority now. 

We need a collective effort to do so. it makes sense.

More punters-more money-less dependence on TV money.

It being RL we will get dinky little half efforts and countless distractors.

Owning your ground is cute, but owning all monies derived from it is cuter. 

The other sensible idea I wished we had done is a Fans Bond scheme.

Did I hear a squeak in the dark corner asking how clubs play for ground improvements?

Well one way are Bonds. Here in Shock City it funded FC United's ground and the Manchester Ship Canal.

Other ways for any budding business students on here. 

Government loans/grants.

Local government loans/grants.

Third sector grants/loans ie Sports England.

Supporter donations.

Club Development Fund

Community Shares

Crowdfunding

Loan stock scheme

Match day pennies in a tub

Increasing your already huge club debt by taking out even more debt Ian.

Private equity.

whip round on the coach home 

Blah, blah. It will be built. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ray Cashmere said:

Again. Have you bothered to read any of the now extensive detail on the Moor Lane thread before asking these questions?

You, and any other poster, have every right to think whatever you wish with regards to Salford. I have no interest in changing that. All I do ask is that you stop telling Salford fans and the people of Salford what they do or don't think and what they can or can't do without even pretending to engage in the substance of any of it.

It's a forum at the end of the day so you can do as you like but I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds it tedious.

I'm not sure where this has happened. You seem to make a big deal about asking Salford fans what they think, but you haven't asked them either. You might know a good representation of the sort of fan who is willing to attend a forum, but this isn't the same as the likely 10,000 or so people who will attend as a Salford supporter across a season.

In my opinion, you are far too defensive with any comment that is made around Salford, regardless of the intention or the substance. I have read the Moor Lane thread in its entirety, and whilst I accept that Salford may have no real alternative, I still think it will mean the end of them as a SL club. As a fan of a Championship club, this isn't necessarily the end of the world. One of the main reasons, and the main thing I have been pushing against in this thread is the idea that you can transfer 4,000 in a 12,000 stadium into 4,000 in a 5,000 stadium. In that thread you even go as far as saying 5,000 sellouts will look better than 4,000 in the AJ.

Examples of clubs downsizing in this way are actually few and far between, but I have demonstrated two concrete examples in RL where the exact same reasoning was used to justify moving an event to a smaller stadium. In both examples, they not only saw a significantly reduced crowd but didn't even sellout the smaller venue.

If Salford moved to Moor Lane, got 5,000 every week and then expanded it to 8,000 soon after then they would certainly have an argument considering other SL clubs' facilities. However, I suspect it would really mean a half-full Moor Lane that in turn would be even less appealing than the AJ is currently. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Will Salford own Moor Lane?

As stated in the Moor Lane thread, if Salford proceed with Moor Lane it will be a minimum 15 year lease with full control over naming rights and sponsorship and full control of all matchday revenues (unless anything has materially changed from the last fans’ forum). 
 

Commercially, that is as good as owning the freehold (if you want to argue that it isn’t I refer you to my posts on the Moor Lane thread). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Maximus Decimus said:

I'm not sure where this has happened. You seem to make a big deal about asking Salford fans what they think, but you haven't asked them either. You might know a good representation of the sort of fan who is willing to attend a forum, but this isn't the same as the likely 10,000 or so people who will attend as a Salford supporter across a season.

In my opinion, you are far too defensive with any comment that is made around Salford, regardless of the intention or the substance. I have read the Moor Lane thread in its entirety, and whilst I accept that Salford may have no real alternative, I still think it will mean the end of them as a SL club. As a fan of a Championship club, this isn't necessarily the end of the world. One of the main reasons, and the main thing I have been pushing against in this thread is the idea that you can transfer 4,000 in a 12,000 stadium into 4,000 in a 5,000 stadium. In that thread you even go as far as saying 5,000 sellouts will look better than 4,000 in the AJ.

Examples of clubs downsizing in this way are actually few and far between, but I have demonstrated two concrete examples in RL where the exact same reasoning was used to justify moving an event to a smaller stadium. In both examples, they not only saw a significantly reduced crowd but didn't even sellout the smaller venue.

If Salford moved to Moor Lane, got 5,000 every week and then expanded it to 8,000 soon after then they would certainly have an argument considering other SL clubs' facilities. However, I suspect it would really mean a half-full Moor Lane that in turn would be even less appealing than the AJ is currently. 

 

‘Likely’?! Please submit your business plan to Paul King as I’m sure he’d love to know how to get 10,000 fans ‘likely’ attending Salford games. 
 

If you want a good-faith discussion on the viability of our various stadium options then please direct this to the Moor Lane thread so as not to pollute the attendances thread further. 
 

However, your obsession with capacity and complete ignorance of geography does not suggest you understand the crux of the discussion amongst Salford fans re AJ Bell/Moor Lane. 
 

I’ll leave it at that 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ray Cashmere said:

‘Likely’?! Please submit your business plan to Paul King as I’m sure he’d love to know how to get 10,000 fans ‘likely’ attending Salford games. 
 

If you want a good-faith discussion on the viability of our various stadium options then please direct this to the Moor Lane thread so as not to pollute the attendances thread further. 
 

However, your obsession with capacity and complete ignorance of geography does not suggest you understand the crux of the discussion amongst Salford fans re AJ Bell/Moor Lane. 
 

I’ll leave it at that 

I think he's suggesting that approx 10,000 different people will attend the AJ as a home fan over a season , not an unreasonable estimate IMO 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

I think he's suggesting that approx 10,000 different people will attend the AJ as a home fan over a season , not an unreasonable estimate IMO 

It might or might not be an unreasonable estimate but what it is is a figure plucked out of thin air 

Edited by Ray Cashmere
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ray Cashmere said:

It might or might not be an unreasonable estimate but what it is is a figure plucked out of thin air 

I don't disagree , what would be your guess Ray ? 

What sort of numbers did you take to the GF and Wembley ? 

Edited by GUBRATS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

I don't disagree , what would be your guess Ray ? 

What sort of numbers did you take to the GF and Wembley ? 

My guess wouldn’t be worth the paper it’s written on and I go every week!

Well we took 0 to Wembley thanks to COVID but the Grand Final had anywhere between 12,000 and 20,000 ‘Salfordians’ (ie supporting Salford due to more than disliking/loathing St Helens) as a rough estimate. 
 

Now I’d love to know the data on all those people in order to encourage them to come every week but I can guarantee you they don’t see the AJ Bell as an attractive stadium experience and don’t live on the largely derelict land around Barton with the sub-standard transport infrastructure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ray Cashmere said:

My guess wouldn’t be worth the paper it’s written on and I go every week!

Well we took 0 to Wembley thanks to COVID but the Grand Final had anywhere between 12,000 and 20,000 ‘Salfordians’ (ie supporting Salford due to more than disliking/loathing St Helens) as a rough estimate. 
 

Now I’d love to know the data on all those people in order to encourage them to come every week but I can guarantee you they don’t see the AJ Bell as an attractive stadium experience and don’t live on the largely derelict land around Barton with the sub-standard transport infrastructure. 

Sorry mate I'd genuinely forgotten about the Covid final , it is a difficult one , hope the right decision is made in the end 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.