RLWC Attendance-O-Meter

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

8 hours ago, Dave T said:

 

I'm very confused about the complete contradiction in these two posts just days apart. 

Is this a shared account between Jon Dutton and Mick Hogan? 

So, about this bridge? 

I’ve learned something in the last 24 hours

When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do? 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I’ve learned something in the last 24 hours

When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do? 

I'll tell you what I don't do - make smart-ass comments to people who had exactly the same view as you ("I have a bridge to sell you" ). 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

Just now, Dave T said:

I'll tell you what I don't do - make smart-ass comments to people who had exactly the same view as you ("I have a bridge to sell you" ). 

Mate, you really do take this place a little too seriously 

[Just Browny]

9 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I’ve learned something in the last 24 hours

When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do? 

Come on mate you can do better than this. Your second post was very condescending towards people who thought the same as you supposedly did two days earlier.

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Mate, you really do take this place a little too seriously 

Read it in whatever tone you like. 

 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

6 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Come on mate you can do better than this. Your second post was very condescending towards people who thought the same as you supposedly did two days earlier.

11 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Come on mate you can do better than this. Your second post was very condescending towards people who thought the same as you supposedly did two days earlier.

To be honest I found it mildly amusing, it didn’t go through 3 drafts and an editorial committee! Look, I’m not entirely sure there’s a huge need to justify that on an Internet forum full of wind-ups, the odd grumpy middle aged man and plenty of occasional nonsensical opinions but if I’ve hurt anyone’s feelings I’m very happy to apologise…  

Yesterday I worked out the likely nature of the deal cut by the organisers with the Government, based on stuff that’s been said in the last 24 hours. C’est la vie! 

[Mattrhino]

12 hours ago, Dave T said:

 

Worrying things in that article. To go from a £4m profit with cheap tickets and now be struggling to break even with hugely increased prices and £15m of costs covered is very worrying. 

I hope they are being economical with the truth and we are doing what the likes of RU do and have a fee to the world body, I. E. Guaranteed profit for them. 

It's interesting that Dutton just keeps justifying the price and saying it is right. That's fine - but if you are right, it suggests something else is wrong. Just keeping insisting you are not wrong is doing nothing to fill grounds, and demonstrates the lack of flexibility that has probably got us to where we are. 

And claiming your prices are in line with SL when you're charging £70 for seats at Saints that are £31 for a SL game is misleading. 

Not sure where the money is going. Because it sure ain't going on any entertainment or festivities on game days.

[Dave T]

Just now, Mattrhino said:

Not sure where the money is going. Because it sure ain't going on any entertainment or festivities on game days.

Yeah, it hardly looks like we are smashing the cash left, right and centre. 

Sure, there will be very substantial costs, but there have been for previous World Cup's that have made profit. 

[Just Browny]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

Yeah, it hardly looks like we are smashing the cash left, right and centre. 

Sure, there will be very substantial costs, but there have been for previous World Cup's that have made profit. 

I was crawling down the M62 alongside the Ireland team bus yesterday and it looked very standard.

[Jim from Oz]

OKAY, so back on topic: What is the latest on ticket sales for ENG v FRANCE ?

Are we going to get an actual long-promised first RLWC 2021(22) sellout?

And hopefully a good five-figure crowd for AUS v SCOTLAND too !

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Jim from Oz said:

OKAY, so back on topic: What is the latest on ticket sales for ENG v FRANCE ?

Are we going to get an actual long-promised first RLWC 2021(22) sellout?

And hopefully a good five-figure crowd for AUS v SCOTLAND too !

Eng v France has been running at less than 5k for a few weeks now. Earlier this week we got record sales for it, and we're below 3k.

Not sold out yet, fingers crossed for today. Its very slow progress on that one, and tbh I think it's possibly a case of people routing funds towards the semi and the final. 

[GeordieSaint]

13 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Eng v France has been running at less than 5k for a few weeks now. Earlier this week we got record sales for it, and we're below 3k.

Not sold out yet, fingers crossed for today. Its very slow progress on that one, and tbh I think it's possibly a case of people routing funds towards the semi and the final. 

It won’t sell out - be about 2k short of the max attendance. 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

8 minutes ago, GeordieSaint said:

It won’t sell out - be about 2k short of the max attendance. 

Yeah it’s the pricey ones left mainly 

[Toby Chopra]

50 minutes ago, Dave T said:

If this tournament doesn't provide money for international development then it is no more than.a vanity project. 

If this loses money, then we are back to 2000 territory. 

So I've been mulling this over.

I think it IS possible for this to be the highest grossing World Cup ever in nominal cash terms, while at the same time only just about breaking even. 

The last world cup here was 9 years ago so in cash terms it's quite possible that costs are 30% - or more - higher than then. Cumulative inflation, supercharged in last year or so, more teams, more training and hotel venues, Womens and wheelchair tournament (where hopefully hotels and training camps are of the same quality as the men), a better standard of venues, many of which aren't rugby league owned-grounds. The cancellation will inevitably also have added costs.

All that could, in theory, add up to cancelling out the rise in ticket receipts in cash terms, even accounting for the government grant. 

That's where the slightly disappointing attendances really have an affect - those missing 3-4000 people in the second and third tier group games are basically where the profit disappears.

While obviously disappointing, would only breaking even render the tournament only a vanity project. Absolutely not in my mind. 

Firstly, I can't think of a single team sport with aspirations of growth and boosting it's international profile that that doesn't hold a World Cup. We'd be throwing in the towel properly if we didn't strive to put it on, even if no profit is made. I doubt the netball or hockey world cups make much, if any, money but they are still the focal points of those sports, which everyone strives to be part of. We can't give that up.         

 Secondly, even if there's not much money to distribute to the IRL, to impact on rugby league in the UK, especially with wall-to-wall TV coverage on the BBC is still going to be huge. If England get to the final, it'll probably be the biggest TV audience for RL in modern times. The boost to the game here will be huge, and hopefully with IMG steering the tiler we'll actually make something of it.

And if France 2025 had the same result - no profit but a gamechanging boost to RL's profile there - then I'd be happy with that (a profit as well of course would be even better).

[FearTheVee]

Maybe we should have some press releases celebrating this as the most expensive World Cup ever rather than the highest grossing.

Highest grossing means nothing if we don't make a profit or have done something truly different in terms of how we have invested in the tournament.

Looks like we may achieve neither.

Perhaps some truths will be told after the event has finished so as not to dampen the enthusiasm - who knows how many millions were lost to the Australians, sorry I mean one year delay.

[Dave T]

8 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

So I've been mulling this over.

I think it IS possible for this to be the highest grossing World Cup ever in nominal cash terms, while at the same time only just about breaking even. 

The last world cup here was 9 years ago so in cash terms it's quite possible that costs are 30% - or more - higher than then. Cumulative inflation, supercharged in last year or so, more teams, more training and hotel venues, Womens and wheelchair tournament (where hopefully hotels and training camps are of the same quality as the men), a better standard of venues, many of which aren't rugby league owned-grounds. The cancellation will inevitably also have added costs.

All that could, in theory, add up to cancelling out the rise in ticket receipts in cash terms, even accounting for the government grant. 

That's where the slightly disappointing attendances really have an affect - those missing 3-4000 people in the second and third tier group games are basically where the profit disappears.

While obviously disappointing, would only breaking even render the tournament only a vanity project. Absolutely not in my mind. 

Firstly, I can't think of a single team sport with aspirations of growth and boosting it's international profile that that doesn't hold a World Cup. We'd be throwing in the towel properly if we didn't strive to put it on, even if no profit is made. I doubt the netball or hockey world cups make much, if any, money but they are still the focal points of those sports, which everyone strives to be part of. We can't give that up.         

 Secondly, even if there's not much money to distribute to the IRL, to impact on rugby league in the UK, especially with wall-to-wall TV coverage on the BBC is still going to be huge. If England get to the final, it'll probably be the biggest TV audience for RL in modern times. The boost to the game here will be huge, and hopefully with IMG steering the tiler we'll actually make something of it.

And if France 2025 had the same result - no profit but a gamechanging boost to RL's profile there - then I'd be happy with that (a profit as well of course would be even better).

I can absolutely see us struggling to break even - my questioning this is more around how we have allowed ourselves to get to this stage. 

IRL have regularly stated that World Cup profits are what funds their activity. They have little else. 

Even accepting the challenging environment and delays etc. to come out of this with no funding for IRL for the next 3 years would be a disaster. That's where my point about whether a hosting fee/guarantee was required. 

I've long said I fear there is a lot of style over substance and I worry that is going to bite us here. As I say, I hope they are being economical with the truth here and future investment is ringfenced, but if not, then we really are in RLWC 2000 territory. 

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

 

And if France 2025 had the same result - no profit but a gamechanging boost to RL's profile there - then I'd be happy with that (a profit as well of course would be even better).

To just pick up on this point, I disagree. It's really important that these tournaments fund the world game. Let's be honest, we don't do much development anyway, if IRL are skint then these world cups are a waste of time anyway. 

IRL have always been open that these are the funding vehicles, we can't accept break even being a good result. 

I made the point on the WC29 thread that we may have to do things differently in future, and if what we are hearing is true, then I don't see an RLWC sustainable anywhere. 

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I can absolutely see us struggling to break even - my questioning this is more around how we have allowed ourselves to get to this stage. 

IRL have regularly stated that World Cup profits are what funds their activity. They have little else. 

Even accepting the challenging environment and delays etc. to come out of this with no funding for IRL for the next 3 years would be a disaster. That's where my point about whether a hosting fee/guarantee was required. 

I've long said I fear there is a lot of style over substance and I worry that is going to bite us here. As I say, I hope they are being economical with the truth here and future investment is ringfenced, but if not, then we really are in RLWC 2000 territory. 

Yes - the disaster scenario will be an IRL with zero effective income to cover any activity for the next three years.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

Yes - the disaster scenario will be an IRL with zero effective income to cover any activity for the next three years.

The thing giving me hope is that I do seem to recall in 2017 the Aussies had to guarantee money to IRL. Now IIRC there was some controversies as they failed to deliver their guaranteed number, but that at least suggests they have the concept of guaranteed return for the IRL in their head. 

 

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

Just a thought, maybe Dutton is saying the tournament is struggling to break even because he is incapable of admitting that they have botched some of the ticket prices and that is his way of defending them

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Cumbrian Fanatic said:

Just a thought, maybe Dutton is saying the tournament is struggling to break even because he is incapable of admitting that they have botched some of the ticket prices and that is his way of defending them

Yes - honestly, we have no way of knowing.

It wasn't even clear just how bad 2000 had been financially until some time after.

[Just Browny]

6 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Yes - honestly, we have no way of knowing.

It wasn't even clear just how bad 2000 had been financially until some time after.

They claimed a £1m profit for quite a while as I recall.

[Toby Chopra]

10 minutes ago, Dave T said:

To just pick up on this point, I disagree. It's really important that these tournaments fund the world game. Let's be honest, we don't do much development anyway, if IRL are skint then these world cups are a waste of time anyway. 

IRL have always been open that these are the funding vehicles, we can't accept break even being a good result. 

I made the point on the WC29 thread that we may have to do things differently in future, and if what we are hearing is true, then I don't see an RLWC sustainable anywhere. 

I agree with almost all of your criticisms of the tournament organisation Dave, and the lack of development funds going forward would be a big black mark for any world cup, this one or France 25. I'm certainly not saying it's a good result.

But I just can't agree that putting it on would then be a waste of time. If the reality of rugby league as a sport is that we can only just about manage to afford to put on a world cup (in reality 3 world cups) then so be it. What's the alternative? Not putting it on? Where does that get us? 

This tournament is still a fabulous thing to watch and enjoy, and for those players and coaches and other staff involved, will be a highlight of their careers, especially the non-professional participants. By all means, let's do it better, and by golly we certainly can. But let's not give up on it as an aim in itself.  

[Derwent]

I think one of the issues here is that the government funding may be milestone based. I recall reading an interview with Dutton where he said the £15m funding pledge was based on selling 750,000 seats. So we may not get £15m - there might be some kind of pro-rata based on actual ticket volumes.

Then we have the issue that the tournament was costed about 4 years ago and there have been massive increases in prices since then. Logistics costs will have increased to a multiple of what they planned for pre-covid.

Additionally there may well have been a lot of costs associated with the cancellation. We may have had to pay for some stadiums twice - don't forget there was technically no legislative reason why the tournament couldn't have been staged last year. The decision to postpone was made by the sport, it was not something they were being forced into by government regulations, it wasn't a a force majeure. Therefore it would not surprise me if we had to pay for the stadiums that had been booked last year and then pay again for them this year. We broke the contracts, there will have been some financial penalty as a consequence.

[The Masked Poster]

15 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

They claimed a £1m profit for quite a while as I recall.

They did indeed. Or thereabouts anyway