Man of Kent Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 9 minutes ago, Leonard said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/63656512 Not sure if already posted. Plenty to pick the bones out of. In summary: in terms of making money, RLWC21 is a fail. In terms of getting eyeballs on RL through TV, a success. On balance, the greater good in the long run is eyeballs. Internationals are the gateway drug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 minute ago, Man of Kent said: In summary: in terms of making money, RLWC21 is a fail. In terms of getting eyeballs on RL through TV, a success. On balance, the greater good in the long run is eyeballs. Internationals are the gateway drug. For sure its not all bad - but the stuff about people wanting refunds and not rebooking is just odd. Other customers are available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 That interview with Dutton is frankly shameful. "Reach over revenue", you must be joking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said: That interview with Dutton is frankly shameful. "Reach over revenue", you must be joking. They turned down £10k from Premier Sports for the sacrifice of eyeballs. If they gave the BBC 30m viewers for free and didn't get a fee - I don't know what to say. Edited November 17, 2022 by Leonard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said: That interview with Dutton is frankly shameful. "Reach over revenue", you must be joking. It's all so contradictory yet again. If it was reach over revenue then ticket prices would have been far cheaper and we'd have been doing everything we could to get everyone through the gates. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrispmartha Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 minute ago, Leonard said: They turned down £10k from Premier Sports for the sacrifice of eyeballs. If they gave the BBC 30m viewers for free and didn't get a fee - I don't know what to say. To be fair the BBC coverage has been amazing, id happily turn down £10k from premier sports to have it on the BBC the tv partnership is one thing they have got correct 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Leonard said: They turned down £10k from Premier Sports for the sacrifice of eyeballs. If they gave the BBC 30m viewers for free and didn't get a fee - I don't know what to say. Its poor isn't it. The BBC production has been much better than Premier would have been, but if they were the only two parties... Edited November 17, 2022 by Tommygilf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 hour ago, redjonn said: Let's not forget that insuffient people are interested no matter if all the things said on here are done. Maybe a few more maybe if we have very low prices, but not many more. There is no evidence for that. We were staging games in towns and wider areas that attract a lot more fans than these games did. In 2013 we got bigger crowds than usual at most grounds. To drive the numbers substantially, we didn't need to have huge increases per game. We needed the likes of Wire, Saints and Leigh to become 10k games minimum, or stage those games elsewhere that would do so. There is no evidence in the slightest that we pretty much maxed out our crowds. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 30 minutes ago, Leonard said: Having been to 5 games and having watched a ton on TV - who are the 15 commercial partners? Cazoo Specsavers? Then I have no idea. Interestingly it seems to have a similar portfolio to the Grand Slam of darts on at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 5 minutes ago, Tommygilf said: Its poor isn't it. The BBC production has been much better than Premier would have been, but if they were the only two parties... Just because its on BBC - I don't see why BBC cannot pay a fee. People don't provide them other programming for free - although I get the BBC incurs costs as well and is not provided with a ready made product. Not talking a huge fee - but something would make a difference to the bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 6 minutes ago, Damien said: It's all so contradictory yet again. If it was reach over revenue then ticket prices would have been far cheaper and we'd have been doing everything we could to get everyone through the gates. Reach over Revenue would have seen reduced ticket prices and a much broader spread of games. The mens tournament was the opposite. It was Revenue (from mostly the same base supplemented by travelling/casual support such as in Leeds for Ireland games and Newcastle) over reach. My dad and I were discussing but for the Wheelchair and Womens, the Mens tournament seems to have never really got going for us. I'm pretty sure as a family we've watched more of those two tournaments than the mens frankly too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said: Interestingly it seems to have a similar portfolio to the Grand Slam of darts on at the moment. had to google it https://www.rlwc2021.com/get-involved/sponsorship Absolutely no idea other than Cazoo Maybe Selco - but only because of the Broncos link and I have a memory of seeing something and thinking that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 minute ago, Leonard said: Just because its on BBC - I don't see why BBC cannot pay a fee. People don't provide them other programming for free - although I get the BBC incurs costs as well and is not provided with a ready made product. Not talking a huge fee - but something would make a difference to the bottom line. It certainly shouldn't be for free, but there has been massive value in their coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 34 minutes ago, Leonard said: Having been to 5 games and having watched a ton on TV - who are the 15 commercial partners? Cazoo Specsavers? Then I have no idea. That Pepsi Max deal seemed a great one! Does he just make stuff up? I'm going to choose my words carefully here so as not to offend, but the 2013 RLWC official report highlights a 2.8m peak for the Wembley semi and he is now trying to claim a record for 2.5m. He was an organiser of the 2013 WC. He just isn't into the detail. Is he? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 Just now, Leonard said: had to google it https://www.rlwc2021.com/get-involved/sponsorship Absolutely no idea other than Cazoo Maybe Selco - but only because of the Broncos link and I have a memory of seeing something and thinking that. Selco are at the darts too, along with Cazoo is what I noticed the similarity from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 minute ago, Dave T said: That Pepsi Max deal seemed a great one! Does he just make stuff up? I'm going to choose my words carefully here so as not to offend, but the 2013 RLWC official report highlights a 2.8m peak for the Wembley semi and he is now trying to claim a record for 2.5m. He was an organiser of the 2013 WC. He just isn't into the detail. Is he? He could probably run a pretty standard successful Football world cup or euros, for a tournament as much work (and with as small a team) as you find in RL, he has yet again been found wanting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 2 minutes ago, Dave T said: That Pepsi Max deal seemed a great one! Does he just make stuff up? I'm going to choose my words carefully here so as not to offend, but the 2013 RLWC official report highlights a 2.8m peak for the Wembley semi and he is now trying to claim a record for 2.5m. He was an organiser of the 2013 WC. He just isn't into the detail. Is he? Polishing a ###### and rolling it in glitter springs to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob565 Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 Oh dear, what a jumbled mess of messaging. Not sure it hangs together at all. No one attended, no one watched it on tv and no one cared. Full credit to the Wheelchair and Womens game but a world cup has just taken place for the men and it’s made next to no impact. number of those sponsors will have done the professional legal, financial, consulting work for the World Cup and been paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 Just now, Jacob565 said: Oh dear, what a jumbled mess of messaging. Not sure it hangs together at all. No one attended, no one watched it on tv and no one cared. Full credit to the Wheelchair and Womens game but a world cup has just taken place for the men and it’s made next to no impact. number of those sponsors will have done the professional legal, financial, consulting work for the World Cup and been paid for it. A bit harsh. Plenty watched on TV and plenty cared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacob565 Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 26,000 in Bristol tonight watching Bristol bears play the springboks B team. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Chopra Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 17 minutes ago, Damien said: It's all so contradictory yet again. If it was reach over revenue then ticket prices would have been far cheaper and we'd have been doing everything we could to get everyone through the gates. To be fair, the reach over revenue bit does seem to be specifically talking about the TV deal, which he then says has to be balanced by ticket revenue. But there are weird bits. If the article accurately reflects what he said, he seems to be saying that running multiple tournaments alongside each other impacted ticket sales, which is nonsense. And he says the business model could be significantly improved, yet the tournament was also resounding success? That doesn't work. Spinning to the end really, which just isn't necessary, but there we are. There were positives from this tournament, but also huge lessons that really do need to be learned. I just hope the RFL isn't left with a bill to pay, that's what it all boils down to for me now, and that still isn't clear from this interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 1 minute ago, Jacob565 said: 26,000 in Bristol tonight watching Bristol bears play the springboks B team. I don't disagree - but i don't see the relevance. More will watch the World Cup opener than Bristol Bears. So I don't think picking a more popular sport as a comparator works as a measure. Plenty have watched the RL WC on TV and in person and cared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Chopra Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 5 minutes ago, Leonard said: A bit harsh. Plenty watched on TV and plenty cared. When you break the TV figures doen though, it's mostly the same people who always watch RL watching multiple games, these aggregate figures are always very misleading, whichever sport tries it. And it was mostly the same people who cared - perhaps with a small addition of some newbies who were attracted to the wheelchair and women's. But it didn't cut through beyond that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 6 minutes ago, Jacob565 said: 26,000 in Bristol tonight watching Bristol bears play the springboks B team. So what? There is a cross code forum for this. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 17, 2022 Share Posted November 17, 2022 2 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said: To be fair, the reach over revenue bit does seem to be specifically talking about the TV deal, which he then says has to be balanced by ticket revenue. But there are weird bits. If the article accurately reflects what he said, he seems to be saying that running multiple tournaments alongside each other impacted ticket sales, which is nonsense. And he says the business model could be significantly improved, yet the tournament was also resounding success? That doesn't work. Spinning to the end really, which just isn't necessary, but there we are. There were positives from this tournament, but also huge lessons that really do need to be learned. I just hope the RFL isn't left with a bill to pay, that's what it all boils down to for me now, and that still isn't clear from this interview. The fact the deal is not to just pay the IRL any profit and to ignore a guaranteed fee is an odd one to me. I can see that making sense in a competitive bid environment, for example bidding for tests or one dayers (there are about 8 grounds for potentially for 5/6 tests), but with a limited option of really one country each cycle (GB and then Australia - accepting France now in the mix) - it just seems a method to potentially screw the holder who in our case can't afford it and the NRL had to cover a shortfall last time. Seems a very unnecessary process. That or the IRL writes off any shortfall and really all they get is the profit anyway - so why not just do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now