: Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:47 pm  

Leaguefan wrote:

It's a fair enough comment, but the games is now "EYES ON THE BOX" and very little to do with "bums on seats".

It's a mute question anyway.....

If proof be seen look at cricket coverage on Sky and see how many are at some games, if there actually is anybody, yet they carry on with the coverage.

Talking shite still Leaguefan? Yes, thought so. If i ever get stranded on a desert island with you, remind me to kill you instantly before i go insane and start thinking you actually talk sense.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:01 pm  

Glenn Morangie wrote:

I wouldn't care if there was a 'free day' as it would indicate potential market. You could have free days and get contact details for example.

Does it though?

Yes, "free" days are a great way of expanding your database but in the end, if you can't convert those freebies into sales, then it isn't exactly a "market" per se. It's just a group of people who are only interesting in your product when they don't have to pay for it.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:02 pm  

I would like to see clubs getting consistantly higher attendances year on year rather than just one 'big' attendance each year. Take Huddersfield for example - they cut the season ticket prices and there attendances so far this year have been alot higher. Surely this has attracted some new fans that will remain there next year. Whether there attendances drop is yet to be seen.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:58 pm  

bramleyrhino wrote:

Does it though?

Yes, "free" days are a great way of expanding your database but in the end, if you can't convert those freebies into sales, then it isn't exactly a "market" per se. It's just a group of people who are only interesting in your product when they don't have to pay for it.

A lot of it is about increasing awareness. Yeah, people can watch rugby on the TV but going down to the game is where people can see the spectacle, feel the atmosphere and generally get an attachment to the experience. Some may not like it but some may love it and by a pass or come to other games, which would ultimately boost the overall average.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:04 pm  

Loyal Leeds Fan wrote:

I would like to see clubs getting consistantly higher attendances year on year rather than just one 'big' attendance each year. Take Huddersfield for example - they cut the season ticket prices and there attendances so far this year have been alot higher. Surely this has attracted some new fans that will remain there next year. Whether there attendances drop is yet to be seen.

But that was on the back of one of them "free days". That big crowd could have contributed to making them all aware of the Giants and of the ticket deal.
I aren't advocating just having a free day, either. Just maybe a big marketing push, or good promotional deals for the most attractive fixture to get it full if they struggle to fill it.

I would also much rather see clubs getting consistantly higher crowds also, don't get me wrong. It is definitely more important. But is selling out the ground once a year any less important than having an average of 40% capacity?

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:11 pm  

Glenn Morangie wrote:

I don't I think increase is far better. Otherwise you could go from 16k to 14k to 12k and still pass that criteria, just ask Bradford...

I also think this is a very good point. Crowd increase should perhaps also be included. You could maybe say the same about turnover. I don't think it should be a one or the other thing.

They've reached the target (10k, £4m), they should be rewarded for that. But maybe they should also get rewarded for progress (1k increase, £500k increase per year). Stops clubs getting stale then.

Good points made all round though.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:12 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

But that was on the back of one of them "free days". That big crowd could have contributed to making them all aware of the Giants and of the ticket deal.
I aren't advocating just having a free day, either. Just maybe a big marketing push, or good promotional deals for the most attractive fixture to get it full if they struggle to fill it.

I would also much rather see clubs getting consistantly higher crowds also, don't get me wrong. It is definitely more important. But is selling out the ground once a year any less important than having an average of 40% capacity?

But if having a 'free day' works then why not do it? I would definately like to see clubs selling all their tickets for at least one game per year but for me I would much rather like to see attendances increasing year on year.

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:17 pm  

Loyal Leeds Fan wrote:

But if having a 'free day' works then why not do it? I would definately like to see clubs selling all their tickets for at least one game per year but for me I would much rather like to see attendances increasing year on year.

Doesn't have to be a one or the other thing though, does it?
And won't selling the ground out contribute to increasing attendances year on year?

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:17 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

I also think this is a very good point. Crowd increase should perhaps also be included. You could maybe say the same about turnover. I don't think it should be a one or the other thing.

But to be fair there are likely to be a range of criteria.

Que: Bitter Widnes and Leigh fans saying the criteria do not matter...

: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:26 pm  

Glenn Morangie wrote:

But to be fair there are likely to be a range of criteria.

Que: Bitter Widnes and Leigh fans saying the criteria do not matter...

Not that I'm sure whether the criteria we were shown is the criteria used, but it seems that the criteria replies to more of a "now" thing rather than showing increase, etc.

I think a lot of the criteria (if that is the criteria we were shown) seems to miss out a lot of good things that clubs could be doing and allow for a lot of bad things.