RLWC Attendance-O-Meter

[RL Tragic]

Just now, Damien said:

Not in your initial post that I quoted, you only mentioned the Gnoll game when I questioned your selectiveness. There were numerous crowds beneath the lowest you cited, 9 out of 28 games in fact. 2013 wasn't the picture you tried to 

[RL Tragic]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

Not in your initial post that I quoted, you only mentioned the Gnoll game when I questioned your selectiveness. There were numerous crowds beneath the lowest you cited, 9 out of 28 games in fact. 2013 wasn't the picture you tried to paint.

Not trying to paint a picture. It’s quite clear that attendance wise the 2013 edition was a relative success. I don’t need to fudge any data to show that it’s out there . Fingers crossed things swing back in this version , I assure you I want to be completely wrong and at the end of the tournament look a real ###### and be shown that the organisers knew what they were doing all along , nothing would make me happier ( Bar England winning of course) 

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Damien said:

Not in your initial post that I quoted, you only mentioned the Gnoll game when I questioned your selectiveness. There were numerous crowds beneath the lowest you cited, 9 out of 28 games in fact. 2013 wasn't the picture you tried to paint.

One of the things that they did well in 2013 in the main was used appropriately sized grounds. Because as you say, a lot of the actual numbers were relatively modest (hence the targets for this tournament were to deliver huge growth on crowd numbers). 

Rochdale, Workington, Leigh, Halifax, Wrexham were good, lively events, but modest numbers. 

They didn't stage games like Jamaica and Ireland at grounds as large as Headingley for example.

[RayCee]

As summary of attendances after the first round:

Eng - Sam	43,200	Round 1
Aus – Fij	13,666
Sco – Ita	6,206	Tot
Ire – Jam	6,320	85,015
NZ – Leb	5,435
Fra – Gre	4,000	Avg
C Is– Wal	6,188	12,145

If any can be improved on, please let me know. 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

One of the things that they did well in 2013 in the main was used appropriately sized grounds. Because as you say, a lot of the actual numbers were relatively modest (hence the targets for this tournament were to deliver huge growth on crowd numbers). 

Rochdale, Workington, Leigh, Halifax, Wrexham were good, lively events, but modest numbers. 

They didn't stage games like Jamaica and Ireland at grounds as large as Headingley for example.

To be honest some of the venues this year are a square peg in a round hole. I've said before but grounds like York were ideal for some of the smaller fixtures. It's like we went for as few hosts as possible with no regard for what the crowds will be.

I don't really get the crowd targets around this World Cup. The whole strategy seems to be around maximising revenue rather than crowds. That's fine in itself but x amount of profit has bever been a public target. Its been crowds. However with high ticket prices and lack of effort in terms of match day entertainment they've sabotaged their own target.

I'm quite comfortable with the organisers aiming to make as much money as possible. I'm behind some of the things they are doing with regards charging a premium for England and marquee games. They absolutely seem to be maximising revenue there and England are still getting good crowds. However I certainly think they could have made much more effort and relaxed prices somewhat for the lesser group games to get fans in and create a carnival atmosphere. Its the whole one size fits all and charging more but doing nothing to justify that which I dont agree with. I also don't think they are actually maximising revenue with what they are doing with these games.

[Mr Frisky]

10 minutes ago, RayCee said:

As summary of attendances after the first round:

Eng - Sam	43,200	Round 1
Aus – Fij	13,666
Sco – Ita	6,206	Tot
Ire – Jam	6,320	85,015
NZ – Leb	5,435
Fra – Gre	4,000	Avg
C Is– Wal	6,188	12,145

If any can be improved on, please let me know. 

Tonga v PNG?? 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Damien said:

To be honest some of the venues this year are a square peg in a round hole. I've said before but grounds like York were ideal for some of the smaller fixtures. It's like we went for as few hosts as possible with no regard for what the crowds will be.

I don't really get the crowd targets around this World Cup. The whole strategy seems to be around maximising revenue rather than crowds. That's fine in itself but x amount of profit has bever been a public target. Its been crowds. However with high ticket prices and lack of effort in terms of match day entertainment they've sabotaged their own target.

I'm quite comfortable with the organisers aiming to make as much money as possible. I'm behind some of the things they are doing with regards charging a premium for England and marquee games. They absolutely seem to be maximising revenue there and England are still getting good crowds. However I certainly think they could have made much more effort and relaxed prices somewhat for the lesser group games to get fans in and create a carnival atmosphere. Its the whole one size fits all and charging more but doing nothing to justify that which I dont agree with. I also don't think they are actually maximising revenue with what they are doing with these games.

Pretty much agree with all of that Damien. 

[Niels]

I read an article in the Guardian about German soccer grounds being 90% full. This is due to many tickets being available for £7.50, even at Bayern Munich. 

For a lot of people, £7.50 may seem low, but I think we need to consider that at the moment, lots of families have no spare money and are frightened about bills. 

The point I want to make is that I think if we want full grounds then we have to go lower with the prices for all tickets. If not then we can't complain about attendances. 

It may be possible to have both during a boom period but at the moment I don't think it is.

 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Niels

[Yakstorm]

1 hour ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

Can't say I'm exactly excited for Aus v the Scots and it does clash with one of Mrs. Goose's programmes so I might end up just watching that. Do we have any idea what kind of crowd we're expecting in Coventry? 

RLWC officials have said the following :

“We are continuing to work closely with the Stadium, as well Coventry City Council and associated partners to ensure that ticket holders receive the full Rugby League World Cup matchday experience with a large crowd expected to attend.”

I guess large is a subjective term.  Looking at ticket availabilities, assuming the bays that were previously on sale (and now aren't) are sold out, the Cat Ds have been selling pretty strongly and there's been some movement in C & B.

[Jim from Oz]

12 hours ago, Jim from Oz said:

 

TOTAL after DAY 3: 78,646 

PNG v Tonga: 10,409 

TOTAL after DAY 4: 89,055  (12,722 per match)
 

TARGETS:

2000 RLWC: 263,921

(8,514 per match)

 

2017 RLWC: 382,080

(13,646 per match)

 

2013 RLWC: 458,483

(16,374 per match)

 

2022 WOMEN’S EURO: 574,865

(18,544 per match)

 

ORIGINAL TARGET: 750,000

TOTAL after DAY 4: 89,055  (12,722 per match)

Wales  v Cook Islands : 6188

TOTAL after week 1: 95,243 (11,905 per match)
 

TARGETS:

2000 RLWC: 263,921

(8,514 per match)

 

2017 RLWC: 382,080

(13,646 per match)

 

2013 RLWC: 458,483

(16,374 per match)

 

2022 WOMEN’S EURO: 574,865

(18,544 per match)

 

ORIGINAL TARGET: 750,000

[StandOffHalf]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

To be honest some of the venues this year are a square peg in a round hole. I've said before but grounds like York were ideal for some of the smaller fixtures. It's like we went for as few hosts as possible with no regard for what the crowds will be.

I don't really get the crowd targets around this World Cup. The whole strategy seems to be around maximising revenue rather than crowds. That's fine in itself but x amount of profit has bever been a public target. Its been crowds. However with high ticket prices and lack of effort in terms of match day entertainment they've sabotaged their own target.

I'm quite comfortable with the organisers aiming to make as much money as possible. I'm behind some of the things they are doing with regards charging a premium for England and marquee games. They absolutely seem to be maximising revenue there and England are still getting good crowds. However I certainly think they could have made much more effort and relaxed prices somewhat for the lesser group games to get fans in and create a carnival atmosphere. Its the whole one size fits all and charging more but doing nothing to justify that which I dont agree with. I also don't think they are actually maximising revenue with what they are doing with these games.

Nicely put, Damien.

[Jim from Oz]

edit

Edited October 19, 2022 by Jim from Oz

[Jim from Oz]

6 minutes ago, Jim from Oz said:

 

TOTAL after DAY 4: 89,055  (12,722 per match)

Wales  v Cook Islands : 6188

TOTAL after week 1: 95,243 (11,905 per match)
 

TARGETS:

2000 RLWC: 263,921

(8,514 per match)

 

2017 RLWC: 382,080

(13,646 per match)

 

2013 RLWC: 458,483

(16,374 per match)

 

2022 WOMEN’S EURO: 574,865

(18,544 per match)

 

ORIGINAL TARGET: 750,000

So the TOTAL after week 1 is 95,243 … as a guesstimate I'd say week 2 and 3 would be the same, so we are looking at roughly 285,000, then making more guesstimates/optimistic predictions, maybe about 60,000 for the 1/4s, 90,000 for the semis and 75,000 for the final.

So as a rough optimistic guesstimate that's 510,000 in total for the (men's tournament).

Maybe a more realistic/pessimistic figure would be somewhere between 450,000 (the 2013 target) and 500,000.

The 2022 Women's Euro target of 574,865 looks unobtainable, unless women's and wheelchair matches are added on.

[pahars]

My main concern with this tournament is that we at the moment assume Old Trafford will be full for the final and we’ll get good semi final numbers because of 2013. 200k in knockouts minimum. 
 

If you look at the differences between 2008 and 2017 in Aus, it isn’t a like for like because of the first tournament’s  super pool,  but the fact that the 2017 final was 10,000 down on 2008 was mainly blamed by our Aussie cousins on what they referred to as ‘price gouging’. 

[RayCee]

1 hour ago, RayCee said:

As summary of attendances after the first round:

Eng - Sam	43,200	Round 1
Aus – Fij	13,666
Sco – Ita	6,206	Tot
Ire – Jam	6,320	85,015
NZ – Leb	5,435
Fra – Gre	4,000	Avg
C Is– Wal	6,188	12,145

If any can be improved on, please let me know. 

 

1 hour ago, Mr Frisky said:

Tonga v PNG?? 

Thanks Mr Frisky. I don't know how I missed that. Trying to do too many things. 

Eng - Sam	43,200	Round 1
Aus – Fij	13,666
Sco – Ita	6,206	Tot
Ire – Jam	6,320	95,424
NZ – Leb	5,435
Fra – Gre	4,000	Avg
Ton-PNG	10,409	11,928
C Is– Wal	6,188

[Tex Evans Thigh]

2 hours ago, Jim from Oz said:

So the TOTAL after week 1 is 95,243 … as a guesstimate I'd say week 2 and 3 would be the same, so we are looking at roughly 285,000, then making more guesstimates/optimistic predictions, maybe about 60,000 for the 1/4s, 90,000 for the semis and 75,000 for the final.

So as a rough optimistic guesstimate that's 510,000 in total for the (men's tournament).

Maybe a more realistic/pessimistic figure would be somewhere between 450,000 (the 2013 target) and 500,000.

The 2022 Women's Euro target of 574,865 looks unobtainable, unless women's and wheelchair matches are added on.

Not sure we'll see a 12k average for the next two rounds given that England crowds will be a fair bit smaller than the first round. Can see the average being below 10k for the next two rounds. You could also argue that the 4 top seeds have already played their biggest/most challenging group game.

[JohnM]

8 hours ago, RL Tragic said:

I think the attendances so far versus the , we have already beaten 2013s attendances rhetoric the organisers told us . Points to attendances being disappointing . Take away the opening game and have a look at the average, then tell me you are happy with that .

No. I'm challenging the statement that there is broad agreement. There isn't. Most fans just want to watch the games by any means. A few on here have expressed  genuine concerns. A different few on here are permanently unhappy with all aspects of our game ( the seat counters, ref bashing RFL haters etc) 

The vast majority of people who follow the forum don't post their opinions, and the thousands, tens of thousands and probably the hundreds of thousands who are following the world cup in other ways are more entertained by the on field action than the off field sniping.

[RL Tragic]

27 minutes ago, JohnM said:

No. I'm challenging the statement that there is broad agreement. There isn't. Most fans just want to watch the games by any means. A few on here have expressed  genuine concerns. A different few on here are permanently unhappy with all aspects of our game ( the seat counters, ref bashing RFL haters etc) 

The vast majority of people who follow the forum don't post their opinions, and the thousands, tens of thousands and probably the hundreds of thousands who are following the world cup in other ways are more entertained by the on field action than the off field sniping.

Ok I will change the statement and say , it’s broadly clear based on data versus 1/ expectations that we the public were given by the organisers 2/ Investment versus previous competitions 3/ previous competitions .That the attendances have been either disappointing or below expectations. 
 

can I just say I don’t fall in to the permanently unhappy category. The games Is for me by a country mile the best in the world . I am always though ready to put its leadership to task when they perform badly for the players and fans . With the product we have this sport should be way way bigger . 
 

From my perspective and what’s been fed back to me from RL friends , RU friends general new watchers of the game , to a man is …. Great game looked empty though . 
 

[Dave T]

Rd 2 will be interesting from an attendance angle. 

The quality of Rugby has been really good imo. Less formulaic and a bit more interesting than we see in club RL. Hopefully people will like what they have seen and be tempted to give it a go. 

On the flip side, there are challenges around the factbthat the next two weeks see repeat grounds in use. Leigh, Saints, Wire and Leeds will be used again, and all of them have delivered below par, with Wire being by far the worst. Newcastle and Doncaster have a repeat, but theirs was probably in line with expectations.

I'm hopeful that Wire will be better, PNG are resident in town and make their debut at the HJ, and it should be good versus CI. 

Possibly the concern is that 6k appears to be the standard crowd, outside of Eng, Aus and Tonga. I don't think we can rely on Aus this weekend, Tonga may be tougher, England's will be good. It would be good if those 6k crowds could become 8 to 9k crowds to give the averages a nudge for the round. 

[Dave T]

7 hours ago, Jim from Oz said:

So the TOTAL after week 1 is 95,243 … as a guesstimate I'd say week 2 and 3 would be the same, so we are looking at roughly 285,000, then making more guesstimates/optimistic predictions, maybe about 60,000 for the 1/4s, 90,000 for the semis and 75,000 for the final.

So as a rough optimistic guesstimate that's 510,000 in total for the (men's tournament).

Maybe a more realistic/pessimistic figure would be somewhere between 450,000 (the 2013 target) and 500,000.

The 2022 Women's Euro target of 574,865 looks unobtainable, unless women's and wheelchair matches are added on.

I agree we are looking at 450 to 500k, it's hard to see how we will exceed that. 

In 2013 we had 458k over 26 events (17.6k per event). 

If we get 480k (my prediction) over the 31 mens events this year, we will average 15.5k.

We then start to boost that to over the 500k with the women's games, although these are double headers and a couple of major games packaged with the mens games, so won't add anything there. 

But imho, there is a very real possibility of not beating the 2013 number, despite having more games. I hope I'm wrong and Rd 2 sees huge uplifts. 

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree we are looking at 450 to 500k, it's hard to see how we will exceed that. 

In 2013 we had 458k over 26 events (17.6k per event). 

If we get 480k (my prediction) over the 31 mens events this year, we will average 15.5k.

We then start to boost that to over the 500k with the women's games, although these are double headers and a couple of major games packaged with the mens games, so won't add anything there. 

But imho, there is a very real possibility of not beating the 2013 number, despite having more games. I hope I'm wrong and Rd 2 sees huge uplifts. 

Whilst a lower men's event would be disappointing - the considerable uplift in profits and ability to grow the international game with it would be fine for me.

That and hopefully establishing higher prices for Eng games moving forward.

[Chrispmartha]

45 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I agree we are looking at 450 to 500k, it's hard to see how we will exceed that. 

In 2013 we had 458k over 26 events (17.6k per event). 

If we get 480k (my prediction) over the 31 mens events this year, we will average 15.5k.

We then start to boost that to over the 500k with the women's games, although these are double headers and a couple of major games packaged with the mens games, so won't add anything there. 

But imho, there is a very real possibility of not beating the 2013 number, despite having more games. I hope I'm wrong and Rd 2 sees huge uplifts. 

I get this is the attendance thread so focus is on that, but the other metrics, financial and IMO more importantly eyes actually on the game will surpass the 2013 WC.

Having every game on the BBC is huge, and it will affect attendances, maybe not hugely but it will have an effect.

 

Edited to add, whilst I do think they have some pricing structures and stadiums incorrect I am glad that we are now seeing high prices for England games, we have undersold those games for years and it will take time to get supporters out of the habit of getting cheap tickets for our national side.

Edited October 20, 2022 by Chrispmartha

[Northern Eel]

Will the double header games be double counted?

[gingerjon]

I've just checked.

The 2013 World Cup was successful enough to deliver £3.7m to International Rugby League (as it is now called).

That's a figure we should keep an eye on in the longer term.

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Leonard said:

Whilst a lower men's event would be disappointing - the considerable uplift in profits and ability to grow the international game with it would be fine for me.

That and hopefully establishing higher prices for Eng games moving forward.

 

5 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

I get this is the attendance thread so focus is on that, but the other metrics, financial and IMO more importantly eyes actually on the game will surpass the 2013 WC.

Having every game on the BBC is huge, and it will affect attendances, maybe not hugely but it will have an effect.

 

Whilst this is right, this has always been known. And was the case when we talked about 750k targets. 

Making a substantial profit is something we can absolutely be proud of, but it doesn;t have to be one or the other.