One home ground

[TigerTownSFS]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


TBF 15k at Bankwest is pretty good. I'm surprised SFS averaged 19k.

Yeah but 15K average was only 4 games. Wait until the novelty wears off. I don't think the crowds will stay at that level. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

Totally agree.

 

[cochise]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

Stadium Australia stands out more.

 

[tony soprano]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.

 

[mike]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.

And how does sacking Madge get us more in the Campbelltown area exactly?

 

[TigerTownSFS]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

Stadium Australia stands out more.

I’d accept stadium Australia if we played the vast majority of our games there. Despite the fact that the viewing is poor, that it would only ever be max 25% full and atmosphere not great. I just think if you are going towards a centralised mega stadium we would be better off doing SFS given it is designed for rugby league not AFL/cricket/track and field/rugby league

 

[tony soprano]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.


And how does sacking Madge get us more in the Campbelltown area exactly?

Not sure but noticed it’s been a narrative of our issues.

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

Stadium Australia stands out more.

I’d accept stadium Australia if we played the vast majority of our games there. Despite the fact that the viewing is poor, that it would only ever be max 25% full and atmosphere not great. I just think if you are going towards a centralised mega stadium we would be better off doing SFS given it is designed for rugby league not AFL/cricket/track and field/rugby league

[/QUOTE]

 

[mike]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.


And how does sacking Madge get us more in the Campbelltown area exactly?

Not sure but noticed it’s been a narrative of our issues.

Really? I haven't noticed that to be honest. But then I can be quite thick at times, so who knows.

 

[hobbo1]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

Stadium Australia stands out more.

I’d accept stadium Australia if we played the vast majority of our games there. Despite the fact that the viewing is poor, that it would only ever be max 25% full and atmosphere not great. I just think if you are going towards a centralised mega stadium we would be better off doing SFS given it is designed for rugby league not AFL/cricket/track and field/rugby league

@cochise has ditched bankwest..
It’s a start ?

 

[member850]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.


And how does sacking Madge get us more in the Campbelltown area exactly?

Not sure but noticed it’s been a narrative of our issues.


Really? I haven't noticed that to be honest. But then I can be quite thick at times, so who knows.

I know I’ve got memory like a sieve, but I haven’t notice it as well........if my memory
serves me right

 

[Geo]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.

Good Theory apart from the fact there is no Campbelltown side on the board..

 

[innsaneink]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

We had a winning team then

 

[mike]

I think the chances of Liverpool happening are increasing at the moment. If it happens I believe we will be there.


If Liverpool is only 20K (which is what is currently proposed) it will doom the club to be a second tire club, forever. Whilst the Cowboys have a 25K stadium , Eels a 30K stadium, Storm 30K stadium, Roosters 45K stadium, Broncos 52K stadium, with the Rabbits and the Bulldogs sharing an 86K stadium.

It would be the dumbest decision the club could ever make. It would choke any future growth and severely restrict membership access to games.

I don't believe the club will commit to it at 20k, this is currently being discussed behind the scenes. It will likely take a commitment from the Bulldogs and Tigers but they would be pushing for at least 5k more.


5K more is still not good enough. Small thinking.

We draw more than 25k once a year, anywhere above 30k is too big for our purposes.

That's what we do now. Are you happy with that? I want us to draw 45K every week. That's what we should be aiming for, not what we do now.

So you expect us to almost triple our average? Its just not realistic.

Of course it is over 25 years. Stop thinking about how it is now and look to the future. If you are not planning to triple or quadruple membership then you are ensuring the Wests Tigers remain a small club.

Rubbish mate, there are no Sydney clubs anywhere near that average.

**The actually best way to grow membership is to make tickets harder to come** by, not easier. You create demand for tickets and that drives membership.

Half full stadiums do not make a much attend event.


What utter nonsense you speak sometimes.

Mate that is not nonsense, scarcity of tickets creates a reason for casuals to become a member.


That is absurd. If that is the thinking of the club they have seriously lost the plot big time. That is actually chocking demand. You create membership by having a fantastic experience. The more the merrier. Can you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that's not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

I do take you point on that but you are not providing a fantastic experience in a stadium that is 1/3 full for the majority of games. 45k is too big, I would want 30k.

You have a stadium like the new SFS will be, where you close off part of it, the upper areas, when not required. It wont look empty. It will be the best place to watch Rugby League. It will also be big enough when needed and as attendance grows.

Except the closed off area was canned to save money.


You still do it. The upper areas may be empty but the lower areas will be packed and provide a great experience and close to the action. It won't be like Stadium Australia where you start off further away from the action.

Yeah can't agree mate, I think the averages also show that people are not willing to travel to the SFS. I would prefer ANZ over the SFS and I hate that stadium.

What is our average at the other grounds over the last 20 years, I think someone posted that a long time ago. 18k average at SFS must be up there with best of all our grounds.

Only to end 2019, didn't include 2020 for obvious reasons.


SFS really stands out of the places we have played more than half a dozen games. That was also at a time when the club didn’t market memberships as hard. Imagine if we committed to the SFS for a decade and played all but 2 home games there. You would market to people to buy their memberships and maintain their seats for the next decade with the chance to attend a game at the same place every other week. Would be very compelling in my view.

We had a winning team then

That seals it then. SFS to get that winning team feeling again. 🙂

 

[cochise]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.

There is no Campbelltown side of the board

 

[tony soprano]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.

Good Theory apart from the fact there is no Campbelltown side on the board..

I stand corrected

 

[tony soprano]

Safe to say the Campbelltown side of the board are pushing for Madge to sacked to get us more in that area.


And how does sacking Madge get us more in the Campbelltown area exactly?

Not sure but noticed it’s been a narrative of our issues.


Really? I haven't noticed that to be honest. But then I can be quite thick at times, so who knows.

Buzz brought it up today just wondering who’s pushing this agenda

 

[jirskyr]

an you think of any other business where restricting product access actually increases sales? I am sure there will be some examples but that’s not the normal business model. You have capacity that meets and grows demand, not restrict it.

There are very many models of that type, especially where you are trying to market exclusivity, like for "luxury" goods. For example Rolex control supply to boost demand (and do it very well), and DeBeers are the well-known diamond monopoly. You don't see Louis Vuitton punching out 500 million Chinese-made handbags every year, even though they easily could.

You could definitely create demand through scarcity and FOMO, like they have achieved with many European football teams, but obviously you create the risk of creating an artificial ceiling that you can't easily overcome. For example if your institutionalised home ground is 20K, but you may actually be able to sell 40K member tickets, then you have done yourselves a disservice in the long-term. It cost Tottenham a billion pounds to upgrade the old White Hart Lane from 36K seats to the new 62K top-end stadium.

 

[Rugba]

ANZ or the new SFS both are close to our COE in concord and neither have a damn opposition leagues club right next door
wake up wests tigers !

If the club was smart it would set up a satellite mini club at Homebush (not Haymarket) to be home club for Tigers when we are playing (if we make that our home ground) but also market to every other game played at Homebush (afl, league etc)

I don’t think that is viable
The nrl team does not have the funds to build it and shouldn’t focus on building a leagues club that will take away resources from the side

Joint venture majority owned by west’s Ashfield and they have no need to build a new club , the Balmain tigers if they ever have a leagues club only makes sense on the land they own and if they ever build a leagues club doesn’t make sense to build one in an area for max 10 game day business opportunity .