Attendances (Multiple Merged Threads)

[gingerjon]

10 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Yeah its a bit of a mish mash really - seems very much to be a Championship tv deal with League 1 and 2 thrown in. Its also clouded by the Premier League trickle down funding to the Championship through direct and parachute payments. Do you know the value of the Vanarama National League deal?

Scottish Premiership football has always struck me as a similar competition too.

No idea of the total value but remembered this from a couple of years ago which I suspect is still valid as part of it: "Home teams receive £6,000 per televised match while away teams get £2,000." (Hartlepool Mail report on the coverage of "Pools'" games).

[Scubby]

24 minutes ago, Wholly Trinity said:

Using Wakefield's figures is somewhat disingenuous as this was a period where attendance figures were important to licensing.

Probably half of that 8k weren't actually paying, and the club almost went bust again shortly after as the then owner was losing 600k per year.

Steady growth has taken place from 3.9k to 4.7k. With no significant external finance and no on-field success, it is understandable even if unsatisfactory. 

The important metric is income not attendance figures.

I don't buy into that - it is exaggeration, my whole family lives in Wakefield. Yes there were offers but that is way off the mark.

Those 4k who are no longer attending were also buying merchandise, food and drink at the stadium, programmes and engaging in social media. Now the club is building new facilities, I'm sure it would give anything to tap into that lost database of attendees.

Scrimping is a race to the bottom.

[GUBRATS]

Just now, Eddie said:

What about the pandemic made the SL clubs vote TWP out? They were paying to stay and play all their home games in England. 

The pandemic crippled Mr Argyles ' cash ' , because they were not a UK club they weren't entitled ( correctly ) to furlough payments , so financially they were stuffed 

Some short memories on here 

Now at the time I suggested they be put in a deep freeze situation until it was over , no matter how long that would have taken , but the powers needed an equal number of teams to fulfill their obligations to SKY , hence why Leigh became the sacrificial lambs 

The Toronto that was refused SL in 2021 was not the Toronto that won promotion in 2019 , the potential new owner provided no evidence he could realistically finance them to complete the season 

[Wholly Trinity]

43 minutes ago, Scubby said:

I don't buy into that - it is exaggeration, my whole family lives in Wakefield. Yes there were offers but that is way off the mark.

Those 4k who are no longer attending were also buying merchandise, food and drink at the stadium, programmes and engaging in social media. Now the club is building new facilities, I'm sure it would give anything to tap into that lost database of attendees.

Scrimping is a race to the bottom.

I don't have access to actual income figures, as I suspect you don't either, but losing 600k per year and almost entering administration for a second time in 3 years suggests it was unsustainable. 

On top of huge discounts for season tickets, there were many freebies given out. It was a gamble for instant success which didn't pay off.

Merchandising was also particularly poor at that time, lots of cheap tat, not least the Macron replica shirts.

"Scrimping" is only a race to the bottom if the business is shrinking rather than growing, however slowly. The alternative of spending money you don't have without an "investor" is a huge gamble with the future of the club (see Bradford).

Trinity have certainly been "getting away with it" for over 20 years now, but the growth of other clubs means that time is running out.

Hopefully, the new development will increase income and therefore competitiveness. Otherwise, the end is nigh.

Finishing in the top 10 for the last 6 years has been against the odds for a club with the lowest cap spend, but investment in other aspects of the club (youth, community, women, minority groups) has strengthened the infrastructure.

Diverting cash to the first team only (Salford?) and spending above income was, and is, a big short-term gamble. It is yet to be decided whether this longer-term approach will succeed, but the alternative did and would have failed.

Sub 5k attendances are unsustainable in the long term, but slow growth whilst maintaining SL status was really the only option, despite the poor optics.

P.S. I don't think the database was lost, that was from 2 regimes ago

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Wholly Trinity

[Scubby]

5 minutes ago, Wholly Trinity said:

I don't have access to actual income figures, as I suspect you don't either, but losing 600k per year and almost entering administration for a second time in 3 years suggests it was unsustainable. 

On top of huge discounts for season tickets, there were many freebies given out. It was a gamble for instant success which didn't pay off.

Merchandising was also particularly poor at that time, lots of cheap tat, not least the Macron replica shirts.

"Scrimping" is only a race to the bottom if the business is shrinking rather than growing, however slowly. The alternative of spending money you don't have without an "investor" is a huge gamble with the future of the club (see Bradford).

Trinity have certainly been "getting away with it" for over 20 years now, but the growth of other clubs means that time is running out.

Hopefully, the new development will increase income and therefore competitiveness. Otherwise, the end is nigh.

Finishing in the top 10 for the last 6 years has been against the odds for a club with the lowest cap spend, but investment in other aspects of the club (youth, community, women, minority groups) has strengthened the infrastructure.

Diverting cash to the first team only (Salford?) and spending above income was, and is, a big short-term gamble. It is yet to be decided whether this longer-term approach will succeed, but the alternative did and would have failed.

Sub 5k attendances are unsustainable in the long term, but slow growth whilst maintaining SL status was really the only option despite the poor optics.

So it was bad management that was the problem. That is different from capitalising on more fans being inside Belle Vue that year than at any point in the last 50 years.

[meast]

20 hours ago, Scubby said:

It wouldn't be just Catalans supporters who go to home games. French RL fans come from all over - there were 1000s of non Toulouse fans at the Championship Grand Final. How do you think Catalans got 12k at Toulouse v Hull KR or 32k at Barcelona - the biggest crowd ever in SL. Anyone who knows French RL will be able to tell you how passionate they are about the sport.

Toulouse core support is in its infancy. But a weekend French derby would have brought fans in from other RL hotbeds like Narbonne, St Gaudens, Limoux, Avignon. In addition you would have travelling fans from Catalans.

Thursday night puts the p#sser on all that. It was a nuts and completely short-sighted decision by SL schedulers trying to cram in 2 games in a week.

You're assuming though, if there was that much interest in the massive Catalans v Toulouse game, why didn't hundreds or thousands flock to the game in Perpignan?

Regardless of it being Thursday night, surely if it's that big a deal, people would still have attended according to your logic, so where were they??

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, meast said:

You're assuming though, if there was that much interest in the massive Catalans v Toulouse game, why didn't hundreds or thousands flock to the game in Perpignan?

Regardless of it being Thursday night, surely if it's that big a deal, people would still have attended according to your logic, so where were they??

Because it was on a bloody Thursday night! Who is travelling from Carcassonne, Narbonne, Albi etc. for an 8.30pm kick off on a work day - never mind Toulouse. Good Friday isn't even recognised as a holiday in France. 

It was scheduled on a Thursday night because SL wanted another double up weekend. It was an 8.30pm kick off because Sky wanted in on at 7.30pm. 

The same thing is happening in August - short term thinking for a nuts doubling up of fixtures.

[meast]

20 hours ago, JonNgog said:

Maybe don’t give such confident opinions on something you clearly know very little about? It’s not ‘just another game’ to them at all. Catalans supporters have travelled in their thousands to Toulouse, Montpellier and Barcelona for standard league matches. They get one ‘local’ away game in the league for the first time ever, you bet they would have travelled to it en masse on a Saturday afternoon.

Again, ifs and buts, the fact is that is that less than 9,000 attended.

Maybe thousands of Catalans dragons fans will attend the game in Toulouse, but it's guesswork.

As I said previously, I hope they fill the Ernest Wallon, but I just can't see it.

[Davo5]

3 minutes ago, meast said:

You're assuming though, if there was that much interest in the massive Catalans v Toulouse game, why didn't hundreds or thousands flock to the game in Perpignan?

Regardless of it being Thursday night, surely if it's that big a deal, people would still have attended according to your logic, so where were they??

Perhaps the 200KM distance had a bearing.

[meast]

Just now, Scubby said:

Because it was on a bloody Thursday night! Who is travelling from Carcassonne, Narbonne, Albi etc. for an 8.30pm kick off on a work day - never mind Toulouse. Good Friday isn't even recognised as a holiday in France. 

It was scheduled on a Thursday night because SL wanted another double up weekend. It was an 8.30pm kick off because Sky wanted in on at 7.30pm. 

The same thing is happening in August - short term thinking for a nuts doubling up of fixtures.

But if it's such a big deal to French Rugby league fans they would have travelled to see the game regardless, surely?

Are you saying that there's massive interest but only on a weekend?

[Wholly Trinity]

2 minutes ago, Scubby said:

So it was bad management that was the problem. That is different from capitalising on more fans being inside Belle Vue that year than at any point in the last 50 years.

Yes, bad management was to blame, but giving away gold bars to increase attendance is also bad management. 

The attendance would not have increased without this bad management. 4k before and 4k after.

There is latent support for Wakefield, but lack of success means they're not prepared to pay full price and discounts were not sustainable. 

[Scubby]

Just now, meast said:

But if it's such a big deal to French Rugby league fans they would have travelled to see the game regardless, surely?

Are you saying that there's massive interest but only on a weekend?

Yes, as with anything. That is 2022.

[meast]

1 minute ago, Davo5 said:

Perhaps the 200KM distance had a bearing.

Exactly!

That's kind of my point, why would thousands of people be crazy about a game involving teams 200km apart?

It doesn't happen anywhere else in the world, regardless of what day it's played, so why would it matter that much in a corner of SW France?

[JonM]

3 minutes ago, meast said:

But if it's such a big deal to French Rugby league fans they would have travelled to see the game regardless, surely?

Are you saying that there's massive interest but only on a weekend?

Not many people are going to take two days off work to attend a game.

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, Wholly Trinity said:

Yes, bad management was to blame, but giving away gold bars to increase attendance is also bad management. 

The attendance would not have increased without this bad management. 4k before and 4k after.

There is latent support for Wakefield, but lack of success means they're not prepared to pay full price and discounts were not sustainable. 

The bad management is having no recourse to upsell to new customers. That is what acquisition cost is in business. If the merchandise was ####, the food offerings were ####, the facilities were #### then you are on a hiding to nothing. 

Acquiring those customers again is a hard slog. They will have a whole shiny stand of seats to sell and corporate boxes. I hope this is the start of something for Wakefield but it is so frustrating as the city has huge potential and there are so many pockets of affluence there that Trinity should be converting but never have because of perception.

[Davo5]

3 minutes ago, meast said:

Exactly!

That's kind of my point, why would thousands of people be crazy about a game involving teams 200km apart?

It doesn't happen anywhere else in the world, regardless of what day it's played, so why would it matter that much in a corner of SW France?

Erm,first ever French derby in Superleague maybe.

Pretty sure the Cowboys/Broncos games do.

[meast]

6 minutes ago, JonM said:

Not many people are going to take two days off work to attend a game.

Not even if it was the biggest thing to happen to French RL and the region's sporting landscape?

[Tommygilf]

If Leeds were playing in the World Club challenge final on a Thursday night in Carlisle, I, a committed diehard tragic would struggle to get there frankly without a day off either Thursday or Friday or both.

2 days for 1 league game that was also on TV?

There's so much potential to build on here, everything practical and fair should be in place to make it as successful as possible, not the opposite.

[Dave T]

We are seeing some stunning hypocrisy here. 

We give Catalans a pass for a low crowd on a Thursday for a match that is geographically the same as Hull v Wire. We won't do that for Wakefield.

We say that they had no away fans because it is a Thursday. Yet the arguments over and over are that Northern England clubs are backwards in relying on away fans.

Catalans' crowd versus Toulouse was poor. They got 2.5k more versus Hull KR for the LLS game last year (on a Thursday)

We don't need to overstate everything. There i every indication that we can get good crowds in Toulouse, there is every indication that a Toulouse v Catalans match could be a big draw - but we don't need to go overboard with it and then move the goalposts when it doesn't happen. People in Toulouse are like anywhere else, they won't be enjoying their season and will vote with their feet.

Its similar to all the claims about how a French TV deal would come on the back of two French teams.

A strong Toulouse could be very good for SL IMO, but we don't need to put undue pressure on them with unrealistic expectations. On the other hand, we should be doing everything we can to support them being a success. Over to IMG I suppose.

Edited June 8, 2022 by Dave T

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Because it was on a bloody thursday night. Not regardless, people have work. Imagine having a once in a generation opportunity, almost willfully tanking it then blaming the teams involved. 

Its a modest capacity - they got 2.5k more last year on Thursday versus Hull KR.

Surely they would expect that for this once in a generation game?

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, Dave T said:

We are seeing some stunning hypocrisy here. 

We give Catalans a pass for a low crowd on a Thursday for a match that is geographically the same as Hull v Wire. We won't do that for Wakefield.

We say that they had no away fans because it is a Thursday. Yet the arguments over and over are that Northern England clubs are backwards in relying on away fans.

Catalans' crowd versus Toulouse was poor. They got 2.5k more versus Hull KR for the LLS game last year (on a Thursday)

We don't need to overstate everything. There i every indication that we can get good crowds in Toulouse, there is every indication that a Toulouse v Catalans match could be a big draw - but we don't need to go overboard with it and then move the goalposts when it doesn't happen. People in Toulouse are like anywhere else, they won't be enjoying their season and will vote with their feet.

Its similar to all the claims about how a French TV deal would come on the back of two French teams.

A strong Toulouse could be very good for SL IMO, but we don't need to put undue pressure on them with unrealistic expectations. On the other hand, we should be doing everything we can to support them being a success. Over to IMG I suppose.

We have a hundred plus year old tradition in the UK of the sport. France is still a tier 2 RL nation sadly, and should be given every help by the English game to grow to tier 1; because it benefits us too.

[Dave T]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

We have a hundred plus year old tradition in the UK of the sport. France is still a tier 2 RL nation sadly, and should be given every help by the English game to grow to tier 1; because it benefits us too.

OK. But that doesn't relate to my post.

Thursday nights are either an issue or they aren't. Away fans are either a benefit or they aren't.

I agree with the principle, I think we need a strong, clear plan for France integration into the UK structures, not this random invite that we currently hand out. The French federation should be stakeholders in the UK structure imho.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, ShropshireBull said:

Wakefield have been in the league for twenty years without seasons of covid restrictions, financial rigging against their team . On the TV point, would you sign a long term tv deal with no guarantee that the two teams you are paying for won´t be in the league at the end of the season? You wouldn´t. 

Ice Cream in November stuff from the Super League clubs and RFL. This is the administrators fault, pure and simple. 

I mean, this is just excuses. Something that backward northerners aren't allowed to use.

The Catalans crowd versus Toulouse was poor. 

[Omott91]

80,500 @ Origin 1.

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Tell you what, when Toulouse have 20 years in SL and all that cash without having to cover the hundreds of thousands of pounds travel and don´t have the state restricting their attendances on the eve of their opening game come back to me. Administrators who make the product as ###### as possible and then blame the club is simply astounding. 

FWIW, I hope that if (as seems likely) Wakefield stay up, that redev transforms them into the 6-6.5 k with good commercial income club and legtimate playoff contender they should be but once again with Toulouse and this stupid 2 10´s idea, RL never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. 

That's great, but nowt to do with my post.