Attendance thread

[phiggins]

16 hours ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

There's no getting away from the fact that our sport is currently in the perfect storm combination of:

1. The RFL still can't market their way out of a paper bag, and it's too late to fix that for 2023's final, and...
2. The cost-of-living crisis is a real thing, so discretionary spend luxuries like this are getting cut (amongst the rugby league traditional audience perhaps more than any other)

Yep, the RFL's marketing appears to be to hope that existing fans of clubs will go to Wembley in big numbers, as neutrals, as was tradition. Trouble with that is, along with the cost of living point you make, there is also Catalans away (Or Toulouse for Championship fans) and Magic weekend (summer bash) that means something would have to give for most fans.

Add to that the fact that the Challenge cup final is no longer "the" cup final, with the Grand Final now the end of season showpiece event, it means new people need to be found.

Most of the ads I've seen have focussed on "look, you can watch three games", which I'm not sure is the selling point the RFL seem to think it is. I think more interest would've been gained in London if they'd done separate marketing campaigns for the men's and women's finals, bigging up each game in their own right. While the 1895 cup would really be only targeting the fans of the clubs involved.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

16 hours ago, Dave T said:

That is certainly true, but it is clear that there has been a marked drop. The atmosphere has quietened a fair bit too. 

I have a feeling the atmosphere will be up this year......KR and Leigh have many years of pent up anticipation to vent! 

Easier for neutrals to pick a side this year too as Leigh and KR are less likely to have built up any resentment ....e.g. I can't see any neutrals ever supporting Saints after what Wellens has been up to this last few weeks 

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

47 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Most of the ads I've seen have focussed on "look, you can watch three games", which I'm not sure is the selling point the RFL seem to think it is. I think more interest would've been gained in London if they'd done separate marketing campaigns for the men's and women's finals, bigging up each game in their own right. While the 1895 cup would really be only targeting the fans of the clubs involved.

I agree with this. The idea that watching 3 games is somehow an attractive prospect for a new customer is a nonsense. The value in those additional games is as a reward for the players involved, and the fans of their teams. Nothing more.

The 'product' we have to sell is the Challenge Cup Final, a prestige annual event in one of Britain's leading spectator sports, where two of the best teams with some of the world's best players compete for a prize with real meaning and over a century of heritage in this country's sporting landscape. That's what you sell. 2 hours of that. Six or seven hours of rugby is not a positive concept to people unsure yet if they even want 2 hours of the elite version. 

This stuff isn't hard to research, if you're professional. 

[The Masked Poster]

3 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I agree with this. The idea that watching 3 games is somehow an attractive prospect for a new customer is a nonsense. The value in those additional games is as a reward for the players involved, and the fans of their teams. Nothing more.

The 'product' we have to sell is the Challenge Cup Final, a prestige annual event in one of Britain's leading spectator sports, where two of the best teams with some of the world's best players compete for a prize with real meaning and over a century of heritage in this country's sporting landscape. That's what you sell. 2 hours of that. Six or seven hours of rugby is not a positive concept to people unsure yet if they even want 2 hours of the elite version. 

This stuff isn't hard to research, if you're professional. 

Correct. 

As we can read, even seasoned RL fans are not going to watch all 3 games, so why they think it's a selling point I aren't sure. 

Even the Squid Games was less of an endurance test. 

[JonM]

15 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't think it's a coincidence that 70k is the target that the RFL have for finals, and how many seats they have open. 

Do you think I should be worried that I was emailed 3 tickets by TicketMaster on 17th July - and 3 different tickets on 24th July? Shades of the world cup ticketing debacle?

[Eddie]

5 minutes ago, JonM said:

Do you think I should be worried that I was emailed 3 tickets by TicketMaster on 17th July - and 3 different tickets on 24th July? Shades of the world cup ticketing debacle?

As in you ordered six together yet received them in two lots of three a week apart???

[JonM]

Just now, Eddie said:

As in you ordered six together yet received them in two lots of three a week apart???

Good point - should have made clear that it's 3 tickets - bought last November.

[Eddie]

5 minutes ago, JonM said:

Good point - should have made clear that it's 3 tickets - bought last November.

Are they the same three seats or different ones? If different at least they can boost the official attendance figure. 

[The Masked Poster]

3 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Are they the same three seats or different ones? If different at least they can boost the official attendance figure. 

Or get people to keep moving around to give a better impression. 

[gingerjon]

19 minutes ago, JonM said:

Do you think I should be worried that I was emailed 3 tickets by TicketMaster on 17th July - and 3 different tickets on 24th July? Shades of the world cup ticketing debacle?

Joking aside, isn’t that *exactly* what the key problem was with the World Cup ticketing?

[Dave T]

24 minutes ago, Hull Kingston Bronco said:

I agree with this. The idea that watching 3 games is somehow an attractive prospect for a new customer is a nonsense. The value in those additional games is as a reward for the players involved, and the fans of their teams. Nothing more.

The 'product' we have to sell is the Challenge Cup Final, a prestige annual event in one of Britain's leading spectator sports, where two of the best teams with some of the world's best players compete for a prize with real meaning and over a century of heritage in this country's sporting landscape. That's what you sell. 2 hours of that. Six or seven hours of rugby is not a positive concept to people unsure yet if they even want 2 hours of the elite version. 

This stuff isn't hard to research, if you're professional. 

I may not have seen the ads you refer to, but tbh, the RFL seem to have forgotten about the AB Sundecks Final - the online ads I see all refer to the Mens and Womens Challenge Cup Finals - which, putting aside the principle of double headers, is the right thing to do. It's weird to include a different cup with a different sponsor as part of the 'product'.

One of the points that jars with me is the little detail here. The ad refers to Men's and Women's final, and there is some nice consistency across logos etc. but whilst the Women's logo says "Women's Challenge Cup Final", the men's version just says "Challenge Cup Final". It's a minor point, but I think it speaks volumes.

[Eddie]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I may not have seen the ads you refer to, but tbh, the RFL seem to have forgotten about the AB Sundecks Final - the online ads I see all refer to the Mens and Womens Challenge Cup Finals - which, putting aside the principle of double headers, is the right thing to do. It's weird to include a different cup with a different sponsor as part of the 'product'.

One of the points that jars with me is the little detail here. The ad refers to Men's and Women's final, and there is some nice consistency across logos etc. but whilst the Women's logo says "Women's Challenge Cup Final", the men's version just says "Challenge Cup Final". It's a minor point, but I think it speaks volumes.

Aren’t they the names of the competitions though? I don’t think the challenge cup has been renamed the men’s challenge cup? 

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Eddie said:

Aren’t they the names of the competitions though? I don’t think the challenge cup has been renamed the men’s challenge cup? 

Well that is sort of the point. But in the ad, they refer to them as the Men's and Women's Challenge Cup Finals.

[gingerjon]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well that is sort of the point. But in the ad, they refer to them as the Men's and Women's Challenge Cup Finals.

Just had the Men’s Ashes and Women’s Ashes in cricket. Consistentl referred to as such by partner broadcasters and host grounds even when fans quite often shortened one and not the other.

Details matter. Especially if you’re trying to reach new people through using the women’s game.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Just had the Men’s Ashes and Women’s Ashes in cricket. Consistentl referred to as such by partner broadcasters and host grounds even when fans quite often shortened one and not the other.

Details matter. Especially if you’re trying to reach new people through using the women’s game.

It's an area the RLWC did well in. They used umbrella branding, and IIRC did differentiate in their comms etc. But we have done it half-assed in the CC. 

[Dave T]

3 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

Honestly, I think this angle is overplayed. This is not to say many people aren’t finding things a struggle financially, they are, but it doesn’t seem to affect most other sports at their big games. We rely on too small a fan base, that’s more the problem than anything else. 

I think one of the challenges is that every sports' market is different. 

Our market will behave very different to Rugby Union's market, and different again to Cricket's market.

In reality, we have played for many years in the less affluent market space and have failed to diversify which leaves us more vulnerable to this impact.

[The Masked Poster]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think one of the challenges is that every sports' market is different. 

Our market will behave very different to Rugby Union's market, and different again to Cricket's market.

In reality, we have played for many years in the less affluent market space and have failed to diversify which leaves us more vulnerable to this impact.

Couldn't agree more. I don't think we can just look at cricket or RU and try to replicate whatever they do (although lessons possibly could be learned) we should have spread the support base wider.

Even if it meant attracting "not proper fans" to the big games, something that RL fans have sneered at and dismissed as unnecessary and we should focus on the real areas. Well, we did and surprise, that well won't last forever.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

1 hour ago, JonM said:

Do you think I should be worried that I was emailed 3 tickets by TicketMaster on 17th July - and 3 different tickets on 24th July? Shades of the world cup ticketing debacle?

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

49 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think one of the challenges is that every sports' market is different. 

Our market will behave very different to Rugby Union's market, and different again to Cricket's market.

In reality, we have played for many years in the less affluent market space and have failed to diversify which leaves us more vulnerable to this impact.

Spot on. In the world I'm lucky enough to live in there's not a cost of living crisis to any way the same extent as an "average earner", whatever that is. Sure, energy bills went up a bit and if you were unfortunate enough to have a fixed rate mortgage need refinancing now rather in 3 years time etc etc, but anyone with assets and savings (that are now earning more interest) is doing fine. The restaurants of Oxford where I live, and London where I work, all seem to be doing a roaring trade. So I think it very much depends who your audience is, and unfortunately rugby league's is the segment of Britain's population genuinely doing it really tough.

Rugby union and the Premier League? I'm sure its much less bad, or least its OK for a greater proportion of their fan base than it is for ours.  

[Josef K]

6 hours ago, The Masked Poster said:

Honestly, I think this angle is overplayed. This is not to say many people aren’t finding things a struggle financially, they are, but it doesn’t seem to affect most other sports at their big games. We rely on too small a fan base, that’s more the problem than anything else. 

You’re right TMP and until that changes and we can attract more people to watch the sport, then the game will have to keep relying on the same cash strapped supporters. 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

6 hours ago, JonM said:

Do you think I should be worried that I was emailed 3 tickets by TicketMaster on 17th July - and 3 different tickets on 24th July? Shades of the world cup ticketing debacle?

So you've got 6 tickets for the price of 3??

[JonM]

Just now, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

So you've got 6 tickets for the price of 3??

Well, I'm assuming that the first 3 are no longer valid and have been replaced by the second 3, although there's nothing saying that.

I'd say I'd already got 3 for the price of 1, considering these are in Club Wembley and were £25 each due to the RFL's sell 'em cheap policy.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

The RFL have just released 3 new middle tier blocks to Rovers in the southwest corner. These had previously not been on sale on the RFL site, people had assumed sold, and yet are totally empty. I’d imagine that means that almost all middle tier blocks in the south end are empty as things stand (it’s not like Leigh are going to need extra) which means pre-sales before the team allocations are far, far worse than everyone thought.

Heads should roll if that’s true. 

[Josef K]

11,464 at Wigan which was a good effort. I don’t know how many HKR fans went but if they’d have had any sense they would’ve stayed at home. 

[Josef K]

6,452 at Cas which was a decent gate considering how they have gone into free fall.