Featherstone - Boom or Bust by the looks of it

[Man of Kent]

Just now, Michael Bates said:

Some replies add value to a discussion. This isn't one of them.

Rather limits their potential, no?

[Michael Bates]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Rather limits their potential, no?

I don't think there's a rule that says only people from Featherstone can attend Featherstone matches. There's the wider area and yes that brings competition with Wakefield and Castleford, another big red cross for the anti-Featherstone brigade I know. There are a lot of people in the Wakefield and 5 towns area, so writing Featherstone off because it's population is about 15,000 is just a cheap cop out.

[Monkeymagic22]

16 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

It sounds like Newcastle ruined the game then not the ref.

To be fair Newcastle employed tactics which they considered to be the best, to compete with us. They worked to some extent extent, and put a good effort in. I can see Newcastle give teams a few problems, if they play with that level of effort. 

[Harry Stottle]

2 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Rather limits their potential, no?

Talking demographics and attendances gets frowned upon on these pages MoK, especially when it is in the other direction and criticising the natives of the towns and cities with massive populations who can hardly muster 1% of the populas to attend.

[Fevrover]

11 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Shocked that a pit village near Pontefract has small crowds.

 EX pit town which as competed and beaten all the BIG teams in our History, not bad for a population of 15,000. 

Edited February 27 by Fevrover

[The Blues Ox]

Like people have said winning games by huge margins just makes for really poor value for money after you have seen 1 or 2. Fev have probably had the easiest start to the season out of most teams and having already disposed comfortably of what could be one of their nearest rivals it would be no surprise to see people pick and choose their games before the important play off games. Having a go at people for looking after their money when money is so tight is probably not the way to go.

Looking at the bigger picture though if I were a Fev fan what MC says there may be a slight worry in that it comes across that if they make SL he may be still looking to lower the amount of money that he puts in obviously with the Sky money to come but it would be a struggle for any promoted team to go up and rely on funding alone.

[Fevrover]

6 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

Like people have said winning games by huge margins just makes for really poor value for money after you have seen 1 or 2. Fev have probably had the easiest start to the season out of most teams and having already disposed comfortably of what could be one of their nearest rivals it would be no surprise to see people pick and choose their games before the important play off games. Having a go at people for looking after their money when money is so tight is probably not the way to go.

Looking at the bigger picture though if I were a Fev fan what MC says there may be a slight worry in that it comes across that if they make SL he may be still looking to lower the amount of money that he puts in obviously with the Sky money to come but it would be a struggle for any promoted team to go up and rely on funding alone.

Fans DO pick their games it's only the diehards who go come what may and its been said on here numerous times Fev have many income streams. 

[Monkeymagic22]

I’d have thought that once things settle down, we might also be able to reduce costs by sending some players out on loan. Although we do have a few injuries at the moment. As mentioned previously Fev have got many income streams, with some businesses based at the ground and only this week we rented out the car park to a fun fair. Also the club owns substantial areas of land, which eventually it is hoped could be utilised for housing. 

[Niels]

8 minutes ago, Fevrover said:

Fans DO pick their games it's only the diehards who go come what may and its been said on here numerous times Fev have many income streams. 

It's interesting about attendances.

When I first supported Batley they hardly ever won and that was part of the attraction. Supporting a side that needed my encouragement.

I always think of Featherstone as a small team so I like them to do well. As opposed to the big city teams. 

I think for our sides we appreciate winning more as we know there are years of struggle also.

[binosh]

1 hour ago, Just Browny said:

Entitled ranting on Facebook is right out of the Degsy playbook. I suppose he has seen Leigh Leopards in Super League (Fev Fundercats?) and fancies a bit of that action.

Yet again the mighty Leopards are brought into a thread for apparent reason. Always in your minds.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 hour ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

Exactly. Hull KR used to lose all the pre-match drinkers to a combination of The Crown pub and a 5-a-side centre next door, now with Craven Streat people eat and drink before the game at the club. You have to give people a good reason to spend money with you, the fans would probably prefer to all-else-being-equal but won't if it's not up to scratch. 

The food tricks at Broncos yesterday were great....the beer is pricier than the pubs though....

[redjonn]

1 hour ago, Michael Bates said:

True, the issue is how does the club make each fixture attractive when a lot are considered foregone conclusions (rightly or wrongly). Does the club take a tiered approach to pricing for certain fixtures? I'm sure that would give people a lot of ammunition to moan on here, why is my club Cat B, Cat C, etc.?

 

The club shot itself in the foot in my opinion by agreeing to reverse the Newcastle fixture, making it 4 home games in a row. I'm not sure why we did it, it had no benefit to us to do so and probably had an effect on the attendance of the match.

On the cat B, C comment.   Saints do that with hospitality.

I guess just another way of doing promotions.  Could have done short 4 game ticket with pricing to attract I guess. 

 

[Michael Bates]

3 minutes ago, redjonn said:

On the cat B, C comment.   Saints do that with hospitality.

I guess just another way of doing promotions.  Could have done short 4 game ticket with pricing to attract I guess. 

 

It sounds like a plan but one that can't really be implemented mid season and especially with the Newcastle fixture being a late(ish) reversal of fixture. How do you not annoy people that have bought a full price season ticket by then deciding you can have 4 games for £40 for example. You'll just turn people off buying season tickets for the next season.

[Just Browny]

27 minutes ago, binosh said:

Yet again the mighty Leopards are brought into a thread for apparent reason. Always in your minds.

The first person to mention Leigh in this thread was @Harry Stottle, who bizarrely has liked your post.

[Harry Stottle]

5 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

The first person to mention Leigh in this thread was @Harry Stottle, who bizarrely has liked your post.

Yes I did but it was very relevant to the conversation and the OP showing the comments from the Fev Chairman post game, which in contrast was far different to your juvenile attempt at what you think is humour.

Especially coming from a guy who is confused about where he lives is it London or West Yorkshire?

Edited February 27 by Harry Stottle

[David Shepherd]

14 hours ago, The Daddy said:

Seems like they're rolling the dice this season with the squad they have.

According to the chairman, matchday revenue and walk up from locals isn't matching investment into the squad.

 

Don't be getting excited.  It shouldn't come as a shock to anyone to learn that a low crowd of around 2500 won't cover the wage bill.  It's not like it's the only revenue stream.

MC quite rightly gets a bit pee'd off when crowds don't turn up, or when a sizeable number come in just before kick off and leave straight away to save 50p on a pint.

[David Shepherd]

2 hours ago, Just Browny said:

It sounds like Newcastle ruined the game then not the ref.

Yeah. Ref could and should have been harsher on it. Made for pretty grim viewing most of the afternoon.

Newcastle weren't terrible and if they'd played Rugby instead, they might have had more success.

[David Shepherd]

2 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Rather limits their potential, no?

Not really. Plenty of chimney pots in the surrounding postcodes.  Fev's supporter base has never been confined to the town itself. Worth remembering that it's only a 5 minute drive from around another 50,000 population.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

1 hour ago, The Blues Ox said:

Like people have said winning games by huge margins just makes for really poor value for money after you have seen 1 or 2. Fev have probably had the easiest start to the season out of most teams and having already disposed comfortably of what could be one of their nearest rivals it would be no surprise to see people pick and choose their games before the important play off games. Having a go at people for looking after their money when money is so tight is probably not the way to go.

Looking at the bigger picture though if I were a Fev fan what MC says there may be a slight worry in that it comes across that if they make SL he may be still looking to lower the amount of money that he puts in obviously with the Sky money to come but it would be a struggle for any promoted team to go up and rely on funding alone.

MC hasn't put money in for a number of years now and the last published accounts show him to have been paid back just over 11% of his previous 'investment' in the Club during the year they covered. I think some are misinterpreting him saying he might not be willing to put in his time and effort to find extra revenue (sponsorship etc) rather than his own money which isn't that surprising as, as TPH pointed out, he isn't getting any younger and their are other (likely more important) demands appearing on his time.

 

[The Blues Ox]

28 minutes ago, David Shepherd said:

Yeah. Ref could and should have been harsher on it. Made for pretty grim viewing most of the afternoon.

Newcastle weren't terrible and if they'd played Rugby instead, they might have had more success.

They wouldn't. If they tried to play rugby they would have got destroyed, the tactics they used seem pretty clear and a way to stop Fev getting on a roll.

[The Blues Ox]

3 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

MC hasn't put money in for a number of years now and the last published accounts show him to have been paid back just over 11% of his previous 'investment' in the Club during the year they covered. I think some are misinterpreting him saying he might not be willing to put in his time and effort to find extra revenue (sponsorship etc) rather than his own money which isn't that surprising as, as TPH pointed out, he isn't getting any younger and their are other (likely more important) demands appearing on his time.

 

I could be wrong its just that he used the words money/subsidise in the sort of context that it were he personally that was putting money in.

[Monkeymagic22]

5 minutes ago, The Blues Ox said:

They wouldn't. If they tried to play rugby they would have got destroyed, the tactics they used seem pretty clear and a way to stop Fev getting on a roll.

Totally agree, it was an awful match, but clearly Newcastle had to play that way. Sounds like good coaching to me.

[binosh]

1 hour ago, Just Browny said:

The first person to mention Leigh in this thread was @Harry Stottle, who bizarrely has liked your post.

Harry’s comment was relevant to the thread not just another snide comment about the club and owner with no reason other than malice.

[Derwent]

13 minutes ago, Monkeymagic22 said:

Totally agree, it was an awful match, but clearly Newcastle had to play that way. Sounds like good coaching to me.

It’s how Thorman had Town playing last year. Awful to watch and reaped no rewards other than keeping the margin of loss down.

[The Grinder]

58 minutes ago, David Shepherd said:

Don't be getting excited.  It shouldn't come as a shock to anyone to learn that a low crowd of around 2500 won't cover the wage bill.  It's not like it's the only revenue stream.

MC quite rightly gets a bit pee'd off when crowds don't turn up, or when a sizeable number come in just before kick off and leave straight away to save 50p on a pint.

If it was just 50p difference then I think a lot more people would drink more at the club. Though drinking elsewhere because of the beer prices will reduce the clubs secondary income stream on match days, I very much doubt it it will affect the attendance figures since people can choose just not to drink at the club. And let's face it how many people are able to fit in those pubs 350 maybe 450 out of all the people going to the games?

Personally I think changing a 3pm fixture to a 4pm fixture to accommodate a football fixture on TV and having 4 home fixtures in a row because you swap fixtures with another club will have had a bigger determent to the attendances than the price of beer.

The bigger question is how we get more of the surrounding population to attend games. For example what advertising have the people of Ackworth, Fitzwilliam, Sharlston, Crofton, Pontefact, Knottingley, Hemsworth and further afield seen to tell them that there was a game on At Featherstone v Newcastle yesterday or that there is a game there against the previously all conquering Bradford Bulls?