You have a point. I'm not enjoying the cold element of sitting in the stands. Bring on the sun...

The quota rules are changing whereas you need a certain number of locally produced players-I believe it is going to be 11 soon. There is one reason why.

I suspect there is a suspicion we pay more for an Aussie than a Brit and with our poor crowds make a simple, possibly wrong assumption, Aussies will bust the club and move on?

Have we had good value from Robinson, Williamson, Dorn, Hill, over the last couple of years?

The club contributes to the national team? I think there is pride in the club seeing LMS and Clubby in the England squad.

Just a few thoughts -I stress thoughts!

Bu99er...I have to say I agree with you. I take a great del of pride in LMS and Clubby being current internationals and I am all for reducing the number of overseas players at the club, but I still believe that we need a couple more "names" to get a few more bums on seats......don't have to be Aussies.....just good players.

I agree about needing a couple of quality 'names' however, because those players can move clubs without moving home 'Up North', our only real option is Aussies or Kolpak as London or Up north is much the same to them.

Yer I understand all of the quote rules etc but people seem to be delighted with having English players but it doesn't bother me whatosever where they come from. Good point about the national team, I hadn't thought of that. I think if Hill played in our side now, we would be class. The other 3 have been overpaid donkeys.

Karl T is the best VFM overseas player we have at the moment IMO....
Dorn isn't the player he was at Griffin Park...and he wasn't that good then, but was running off some very good individuals.

, if you dont have enough interest to get people down to pay to see what is on offer , then just get them down by hook or by crook , but make sure you then do all you can to make it enjoyable despite what happens on the pitch as that is beyond your control

And then most importantly get their details , the cost of contacting people via e mail and text is virtually nothing , up to the 60's it was all done via local newspapers and basic posters , from the 70/80's local radio and teletext became the easiest mode of communication with your fan base

At Leigh for many years you knew if there was a home match on if the flag was flying at Hilton park

Get them down , entertain them , then offer discounted tickets to future matches

It isn't hard , but it does require some funds , but more impotantly the desire and will to do it

You will not grow your fan base by managing to get 100 people to sample your product , at most you will get 5 % to come back

Get 3,000 to sample it and that 5 % will rise to 10 % if there is a better atmosphere

You need to take a giant stride , not little steps

...or strides like The Giants have over the last 3 seasons,,,,,,free/subbed tickets, massive media campaigns (proper local media campaigns, not fri99in oyster cards and unwatched virals) and a constant collection of data on people in the stadium......
Result? Bradford gate 2010 (cold feb) up nearly 2k on 2009 (warm August)......rocket surgery it aint!

According to Sky Sports, they are down 1000 from 2009:

Huddersfield vs Bradford 2010
Engage Super League
5th Feb 2010 KO 20:00 Ground: The Galpharm Stadium Att: 9,774
Huddersfield vs Bradford 2009
Engage Super League
6th Jul 2008 KO 15:00 Ground: The Galpharm Stadium Att: 10,786

And this after their most successful SL season.

2 years


Always hard to try to compare like for like though, Feb 2010 Friday night vs July 6th 2008 Sunday afternoon, and Bulls away support may well have drifted off since 08 given their performances. I think overall the stats do show that the Giants have improved their gates over the past 2 seasons.

gate last year was 7,982 on August 16th......


either way

Huddersfield
2000-seasons average of 3,391
2009-seasons average of 8,235 (regular season only)

Harlequins
2000-seasons average of 3,430
2009-seasons average of 3,436

Whilst statistics can be manipulated to suit most arguements, Huddersfield have added 4,844 fans to their average gates in 10 years (including 1 year of relegation).......whilst London Broncos/Quins RL have added 6.......

I fully expect the usual "stop being so negative" bollox to follow, but a very little in the way of FACT to shoot me down


Salford and ourselves are in the mix for the chop based on crowds, Salford/cas/wakey on grounds and all the while, Widnes are ticking boxes.....something has to give and from a business perspective.....we are the weakest link. Only the "SKY" issue is saving us at the moment IMO.

Cobblers - the RFL won't cut off the development being done down here

So that makes it Ok to have crap crowds ?

...so what you are syaing is that if DH were to cut us loose, the RFL would prop us up financially? Would the other SL chairmen or boards be happy with that?
For as long as I have followed the club, the unsubstantiated rumour regarding us being the b'strd child of Lewis and Murdoch has been going around, but if we don't either start to fend for ourselves financially (ie...not DH bunging in pots of cash) or find a Russian Billionaire with early stage dementia then the club isn't viable as a Business. 1 double header to boost the average gate by 1k isn't going to fool many and it will do bu99er all to change the clubs financial position.
What is needed is a clear plan to make the people in Twickenham aware we exist, then an offer that is too good for them to refuse and then shed loads of work to make sure they come back......not 5,000 oyster cards, a viral campaign and a game against the best team in the world that nobody bothered to market (because we DESERVE better crowds).
I have always admired and praised the community and development teams work at the club....but now it is time to turn their attention to what makes the club a financial success......and unless we produce 5 LMS's Clones a year and flog them for £1,000,000 each then crowds are where the cash will come from.

I was merely replying to the fact that you seem stressed out that we won't get a licence next time because of poor crowds it is 1 tick in a box

Obviously we need better crowds, more money and less reliance on DH.

What ticks do we have, apart from a nice ground (or maybe that doesn't count since it isn't ours) and a development program that is still a few years off proving to be successful?

No other Superleague club within an X miles radius is one point we gain over just about everyone else except Catalans and possibly Crusaders, which counterbalances the point just about everyone else gains over us regarding the crowds. Regardless of whether or not our place in Superleague is fireproof due to the "London" factor it would be nice to think we can start making a real impact instead of just being makeweights. Average league position was another of the criteria, and one on which we stand at a disadvantage against many of our rivals.

Facilities
1 Point here, as long as the initial 3 year agreement has been extended and isn't just a rolling "arrangement" every year until RU get tired of us. 1 Point

Attendances
2 Points lost here. No way near the 10k average and no way near the 40% capacity mark either.........and neither look to be achievable in the near future. 0 Point

Finances
2 Points available here. Solvency is a toughy....are we solvent or are we just extremely lucky to have DH? As for a £4,000,000 turnover....not a cats chance in hell. 1 Point

Player strength
Another 2 points here. 1 for being competitive and another for development. Competitive? 9th, 9th and 10th are our last 3 finishes and let's face it, do we look like we will be anywhere near the 6th we need to get this to the average 8th....so no point there. Development.....yep, 1 Point.
Salary cap
1 Point for not breaching the cap. This is pretty much a given as we couldn't afford to break the cap if we wanted to. 1 Point
Geographical expansion
1 Point again.....thanks to the RFL rules and nothing the club have done. 1 Point

So there we have it. 5 Points if we are considered solvent.
We keep our 1 point for development, 1 for not breaching the cap, 1 for our Hosts Ground, 1 point for David Hughes' money and our 1 point for being an expansion club....but we have not become more competiive, added to (actually we lost fans in 2009) our gate and the 40% criteria has gone up due to the South Redevelopment.

I thought the idea of the licences was to enable clubs to become stronger by removing the threat of relegation? From what I can see, the club have cemeted the development point and er.......hum....er......that's it!

To those who still say we are bolted on for a licence.....I am a fan of Quins RL, but if I can put the above summary together, then believe me, so can the RFL and we have as many enemies there as we have fans.

Great post GF. Hopefully people will start to see the light at some point.

What light is that? There is nothing we as fans can do other than keep turning up.

It wouldn't make any difference if they stopped going all together. The Club would continue to blindly spend money on the 1 point for development and ignore the 4 points available for crowds and solvency.......



That's right....2 points for 40% average gate and 10k averages = a better chance of being Solvent and turning over £4,000,000.
14,816 x 13 @ £10 each = 1.9 million....a few beers a few jerseys and Bingo...£4,000,000 and 4 points + the line of Kids wanting to play the game would grow as well.......

.

One of the most effective ways of increasing attendances (without throwing tickets about like confetti) are the "bring a mate" offers - for instance I brought a mate of mine to Wakey back in 2001 - 9 years, 9 season tickets, 9 shirts and about 100'00 beers later he's still coming, replete now with his wife and kids (kids are now mad keen Trinity fans.)

Obviously I realise that this probably a perfect example, but for the sake of making your mates tickets a fiver or something for one game, at the very worst the club is £5 richer and in this instance £1000's.

The same here. They guy that brought me to my first game has to remain nameless for fear of retribution from some on here

that would already attend but pay at the gate , the most important thing that any club needs to do if they are trying to increase their support base with offers is to educate and inform the existing fans what and why they are doing

A few years back at Hilton Park I witnessed stewards watching while so called loyal fans were getting in on the cheap with student cards and then passing these student cards back out through metal gates for their ' mates ' to use again and again

That is the problem with bring a mate type incentives , not saying you shouldn't do them , but they like all idea's have their drawbacks

Look at British Ice Hockey. the leagues are almost entirely full of Canadians.
If our league/team is full of second rate aussies (which most imports are) it gives the impression that the game is weak, this is particularly the case with London/Quins Cats or Celts and why would people want to pay good money to watch second class sport.
Developling your own players also gives the club an identity (which is why it was a shame to lose Sykes/Moran/Steele (I know two are "second class aussies" but you can have a few sprinkled in the side without diminishing the idea that its an imported game (look at the failings of American Football/Baseball/Ice Hockey/Basketball over here.
Players who can identify with the club and whom the fans can identify with are the most important thing rather than nationality and this is more easily achieved through academy players - look at how we've taken to LMS Clubb Sharpe Jamie O in their first seasons rather than the young brits we've signed. You can look at other sports too for this. The popularity of Gerrard, Terry at Liverpool Chelsea, or long term players like Cesc and Rooney at Arsenal and Man U.

Crowds
Crowds legitimise us in the wider publics eye rather than the curio we are now. If we have a big enough crowd to survive and do well then overall numbers are not essential but point to the game of RL being in a healthy state.
They make for better atmosphere which make games more enjoyable, which brings with it bigger crowds.

Would I mind if we won something infront of three people with a team full of aussies. Not at first but I would also know that the future of the game down here was not on sure ground.