RLWC Attendance-O-Meter

[Tommygilf]

1 hour ago, Leonard said:

I think we need to move on from what prices were in 2013.

That is nearly a decade ago.

You can argue some pricing might be too high - but charging £15 - £20 for the top games makes no sense.

10k for the Kiwis at Headingly with some walk up in the weeks before doesn't strike me as a disaster.

You can say "move on" from x, but actually doing so is much different.

How much have tickets been to watch international RL in this country over the intervening years? I can promise you it isn't a lot. So it isn't just 2013 that it is being compared with, but the 2015 NZ tour, the 2016 Four Nations (ran by Dutton incidentally), and the 2018 NZ tour; as well as the odd mid season international game.

It is great that a good number of people are willing to spend upwards of £50 or even £70 per ticket to watch international RL. The numbers of those people however has been vastly overestimated - and that has negative consequences if stadiums are half empty and atmospheres are poor. EDIT: this is true for the people paying top dollar as well as the cheaper options. 

I also cannot believe that in a tournament where people are being charged what they are for this one, there isn't a singer for the national anthems of each team. That isn't a premium event worthy of premium ticket prices and is below expectations of any attendee, RL fanatic or otherwise.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Tommygilf

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Leonard said:

I think we need to move on from what prices were in 2013.

That is nearly a decade ago.

You can argue some pricing might be too high - but charging £15 - £20 for the top games makes no sense.

10k for the Kiwis at Headingly with some walk up in the weeks before doesn't strike me as a disaster.

I think there is wide acknowledgement that there is no need for hugely discounted prices like 2013. I'm not sure anyone ever paid full price. 

But if we have a quick look back to the Ashes that was canned two years ago, I can't find the full price list, but we were selling tickets at £20 for adults. You may feel that is too low, but it is the going starter rate for top class international rugby league in this country. And at that level we saw that we struggled to get a crowd against the Kiwis in Hull. 

It's great that they have managed to sell well for England with increased prices but games like NZ v Lebanon at Wire on a Sunday night just shouldn't have higher pricing than England v Oz in marquee grounds like Tottenham. Nobody will ever convince me that pricing is right. 

I've heading to Saints, Leigh, Wire x 2 and Wigan over the next few weeks, more than that in the area is a tough ask, and tbh I'm going to some of those on my own potentially. 

Higher pricing while expecting people to attend multiple games is a big issue and a big factor in that Kiwi crowd imo and the low one at Leeds. 

[FearTheVee]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

It's great that they have managed to sell well for England with increased prices but games like NZ v Lebanon at Wire on a Sunday night just shouldn't have higher pricing than England v Oz in marquee grounds like Tottenham. Nobody will ever convince me that pricing is right. 

I don’t disagree but I would venture those prices are wrong in both directions, it shouldn’t be £20 to watch an Ashes test match.

[GeordieSaint]

8 hours ago, Dave T said:

It's £110 for top category seats at Emirates for the semi. 

You can get lower tier corner seats for £55, or top tier seats at £30 for that game. 

This is the frustrating bit at the moment. I have seen plenty of people saying they are not going to games because prices are too high quoting the most expensive seats but completely ignore there are cheaper tickets available elsewhere in the same stadium. 

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

Top category seats at a word cup semi final in a world class stadium featuring England should be £110 - that’s not overpriced to me.

Let’s judge them at the end. Mistakes are being made but if we learn from them they will be of value.

I think this tournament will be wonderful after the group stages and the England crowds are great so far.

I think the top end is steep, but sales for England games have been decent so far, and that is for the organisers to convince people to part with. But there are plenty at £30 which is reasonable for a semi final at Emirates imo. 

They are the same price for Elland Rd's semi on the Friday night, which should be NZ v Aus. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

This is the frustrating bit at the moment. I have seen plenty of people saying they are not going to games because prices are too high quoting the most expensive seats but completely ignore there are cheaper tickets available elsewhere in the same stadium. 

They have lost the narrative. As I say, I started the thread on bargain tickets literally because the marketing has failed to mention it. 

I understand the change in strategy, away from being pricing led, but this whole "matches are selling out" and "Cat D 75% sold out" etc just isn't creating the scarcity they want. Not a single game has sold out to create a level of scarcity. 

[Dave T]

The adverts for tonight focus on telling us that Cat D seating has sold out (4 small blocks from 20).

Cat C at 75% (another 4 blocks). They don't mention the other 12 blocks, priced £55 to £70 IIRC. 

So the whole messaging is about scarcity, when the tickets are not scarce! 

Make sure people know its only £25 to see a Tonga team that have beaten GB, NZ and Oz in the last 5 years. 

[Colin James]

1 hour ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

I've noticed since the tournament started, a lot of people trying to explain how attendances have actually been inflated and they were lower than the number stated. I'm not having a go at those individuals, they're just trying to keep the tournament organisers honest but with how poor some attendances have been, if they want to inflate the official attendance given then bloody let them!

I don't know where that has come from but I know I bought my tickets at least 18 months ago before the original cancellation. It's possible there are a number of people who have paid for tickets but can no longer attend a match because their circumstances have changed or they simply can't do the re-arranged date.

[Dave T]

We just need some 'wins' and quick. Starting tonight. 

In the UK, memories of the RLWC are packed grounds in the main, great nights in Workington, Halifax, Bristol, Rochdale, Warrington, Saints, Leeds, Wigan, France- plus great events at Cardiff, Old Trafford and Wembley. The image was very positive. We've been told for weeks that ticket sales are great and exceed 2013, so people are going to these events expecting them to be at least what we had in 2013.

When they get there and they are a damp squib, it is damaging. 

Affluent people saying pricing is right while stadiums are almost empty are not helping anything. 

I'm now going to Leigh tomorrow our of a sense of duty, having to substantially change plans, I thought we'd moved on from that. 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Colin James said:

I don't know where that has come from but I know I bought my tickets at least 18 months ago before the original cancellation. It's possible there are a number of people who have paid for tickets but can no longer attend a match because their circumstances have changed or they simply can't do the re-arranged date.

I think there'll be an element of that. I've bought plenty of gig tickets in the past and ended up wasting them on the night. At Newcastle for Scotland the other day there were some empty seats ins old out blocks, but to be fair, they were handfuls, which suggest some plans falling through. 

I don't think we need to over analyse the crowd numbers in this context, we know travel plans are all over the place, utility bills have shot up, and even covid is ona huge upward trend. Sometimes sales will not equal bums on seats, but it'll be modest. 

[RP London]

13 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

Absolutely agree that we need an international calendar that is fixed long term and people know what is coming well in advance and regularly.

We really shouldn't be following union like that though - the top six European nations in the rankings are currently England, France, Serbia, Malta, Greece and Ireland. Why would we run a competition that has lower ranked nations just because they are the same countries that play in a union competition?

We aren't a long established/well developed sport in countries like Scotland in the same way as union, so there is much more scope for other countries to develop quickly and pass them in the rankings - as has happened since world cup qualification.

And why follow the union calendar? why not any other sport instead?

and lets remember they stared with 4, introduced France when they were good enough (kicked them out for being too physical, then re admitted when they were looking at League a little too lovingly) and only became 6 in 2000. 

England, France, Greece and Ireland would be interesting England may walk away with it for the first few years but we would just have to live with that. Keep working on Serbia, Wales, maybe Lebanon (though understand the security issues) to try and get them up to speed too. There are many ways to skin a cat too in terms of how you run it but we have to play more regular European fixtures.. I still think England v France mid season, without the NRL players, would be a good competitive match 

[GeordieSaint]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The adverts for tonight focus on telling us that Cat D seating has sold out (4 small blocks from 20).

Cat C at 75% (another 4 blocks). They don't mention the other 12 blocks, priced £55 to £70 IIRC. 

So the whole messaging is about scarcity, when the tickets are not scarce! 

Make sure people know its only £25 to see a Tonga team that have beaten GB, NZ and Oz in the last 5 years. 

The issue at Saints tonight is there are simply too many expensive tickets. 12 of the 20 seating blocks are £55 or more. That’s a good 5,000 seats that will have barely anyone in. St Helens is probably the second most deprived location hosting games this tournament and they are charging those prices on mass.

Absolutely mental strategy. They absolutely could amend some prices to cheaper categories. They already have done at some grounds. 

[Dave T]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The adverts for tonight focus on telling us that Cat D seating has sold out (4 small blocks from 20).

Cat C at 75% (another 4 blocks). They don't mention the other 12 blocks, priced £55 to £70 IIRC. 

So the whole messaging is about scarcity, when the tickets are not scarce! 

Make sure people know its only £25 to see a Tonga team that have beaten GB, NZ and Oz in the last 5 years. 

Thinking about this more - they should be trading on the war dances of teams like Tonga. 

[Dave T]

Just now, GeordieSaint said:

The issue at Saints tonight is there are simply too many expensive tickets. 12 of the 20 seating blocks are £55 or more. That’s a good 5,000 seats that will have barely anyone in. St Helens is probably the second most deprived location hosting games this tournament and they are charging those prices on mass.

Absolutely mental strategy. They absolutely could amend some prices to cheaper categories. They already have done at some grounds. 

With over 8k at £25 though I'm remaining hopeful of a 5 figure crowd. 

But I expect to be disappointed again. 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, GeordieSaint said:

 

Absolutely mental strategy. They absolutely could amend some prices to cheaper categories. They already have done at some grounds. 

The only place I've seen reduced prices was at St James the other day. 

I paid £30 for brilliant seats that were originally £70.

[rlno1]

How many have been sold for England v Greece in Sheffield?

[Gomersall]

9 minutes ago, RP London said:

and lets remember they stared with 4, introduced France when they were good enough (kicked them out for being too physical, then re admitted when they were looking at League a little too lovingly) and only became 6 in 2000. 

England, France, Greece and Ireland would be interesting England may walk away with it for the first few years but we would just have to live with that. Keep working on Serbia, Wales, maybe Lebanon (though understand the security issues) to try and get them up to speed too. There are many ways to skin a cat too in terms of how you run it but we have to play more regular European fixtures.. I still think England v France mid season, without the NRL players, would be a good competitive match 

Serbia are just treading water. They focus too much on one/two clubs being the top dog IMO. Only RSB v PB is a competitive game, the rest are usually pastings which nobody gains anything from. 

[Toby Chopra]

3 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

The issue at Saints tonight is there are simply too many expensive tickets. 12 of the 20 seating blocks are £55 or more. That’s a good 5,000 seats that will have barely anyone in. St Helens is probably the second most deprived location hosting games this tournament and they are charging those prices on mass.

Absolutely mental strategy. They absolutely could amend some prices to cheaper categories. They already have done at some grounds. 

This is also where the scheduling has an effect too - they might have had more success at these prices if the game was at the weekend, and people were willing to travel from a much wider area.

I so, so wanted to see this game, it's arguably the most attractive of the group stage, but coming up from the south on a weeknight means days off work. 

For comparison - I have a ticket for Tonga/Cooks at Boro, because I can make a weekend of it. 

I note that the Women's union WC currently being played in NZ is playing all its games at the weekend. It's a fine balance - you potentially lose narrative and sustained attention, but get bigger crowds. 

[RP London]

8 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

Serbia are just treading water. They focus too much on one/two clubs being the top dog IMO. Only RSB v PB is a competitive game, the rest are usually pastings which nobody gains anything from. 

Hence I wouldnt have them in right now but work on them as there is potential. If they are getting people playing then they have something to work on (better than Scotland, for example). I think to start with any of the teams there will be a reliance on heritage to get them to any sort of standard for regular games of note or world cup qualification but with a regular domestic tournament then it gives those in country something to work with. There also needs to be some funding.. 

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

This is also where the scheduling has an effect too - they might have had more success at these prices if the game was at the weekend, and people were willing to travel from a much wider area.

I so, so wanted to see this game, it's arguably the most attractive of the group stage, but coming up from the south on a weeknight means days off work. 

For comparison - I have a ticket for Tonga/Cooks at Boro, because I can make a weekend of it. 

I note that the Women's union WC currently being played in NZ is playing all its games at the weekend. It's a fine balance - you potentially lose narrative and sustained attention, but get bigger crowds. 

There's also a potential balance then to have midweek games in larger population centres to compensate somewhat.

[Gomersall]

12 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

This is also where the scheduling has an effect too - they might have had more success at these prices if the game was at the weekend, and people were willing to travel from a much wider area.

I so, so wanted to see this game, it's arguably the most attractive of the group stage, but coming up from the south on a weeknight means days off work. 

For comparison - I have a ticket for Tonga/Cooks at Boro, because I can make a weekend of it. 

I note that the Women's union WC currently being played in NZ is playing all its games at the weekend. It's a fine balance - you potentially lose narrative and sustained attention, but get bigger crowds. 

Didn’t they only play on weekends in the 2017 RLWC too? 

[Gomersall]

5 minutes ago, RP London said:

Hence I wouldnt have them in right now but work on them as there is potential. If they are getting people playing then they have something to work on (better than Scotland, for example). I think to start with any of the teams there will be a reliance on heritage to get them to any sort of standard for regular games of note or world cup qualification but with a regular domestic tournament then it gives those in country something to work with. There also needs to be some funding.. 

Do you think it would be better to focus on selected countries to hasten their development rather than spreading the available investment too thinly across too many nations?

[The Hallucinating Goose]

38 minutes ago, Colin James said:

I don't know where that has come from but I know I bought my tickets at least 18 months ago before the original cancellation. It's possible there are a number of people who have paid for tickets but can no longer attend a match because their circumstances have changed or they simply can't do the re-arranged date.

I don't mean people are literally accusing the organisers of inflating match attendances, I'm just referring to people saying certain attendances looked smaller than the official attendance given. I'm just saying even if a stadium is empty but they say there is 20,000 in there then I'm happy to go with it because in the end its these official figures that will go down in the record books. 

[RP London]

Just now, Gomersall said:

Do you think it would be better to focus on selected countries to hasten their development rather than spreading the available investment too thinly across too many nations?

Yes. 

Its like anything you can spend the money across loads hoping some will stick but what if none of it does? you may get loads of "ok" nations but what about having 1 more that can really challenge, then thats 3 (lets say England and France are the 2 at the moment only).. then you have a triangular tournament. That 3rd one can spark the interest of others, funding can then be driven into the most likely of those to succeed bringing it to the top table, maybe there would be enough being generated from those 4 to then spread to 2 countries getting investment etc.. 

(bearing in mind you dont just abandon everyone else, you still need to keep them going with funding, you just heavily fund one instead of giving everyone the full split).

[The Rocket]

2 minutes ago, Gomersall said:

Do you think it would be better to focus on selected countries to hasten their development rather than spreading the available investment too thinly across too many nations?

Definitely, throw the lot at France if you ask me, that`s where there is already a `rugby ` culture and plenty of room for a more attractive alternative. Greater prospect of immediate returns to your own League as well.