DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 123113--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: April 16, 2024, 12:41 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: poorfour link ---
>
> ... you paying more for the same number of games, ...
>
--- End Quote ---
That sounds familiar, except the number of games has reduced.
😁
#Post#: 123114--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: T-Bone
Date: April 16, 2024, 12:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I was speaking to someone at the weekend who goes to the
occasional game at his local club (chinnor) and loves the 6
nations and rwc, but has almost no interest in the premiership /
Europe.
The 6 nations generates a lot of interest outside of the much
smaller group of fans who follow rugby throughout the season. In
much the same was as the boat race, Wimbledon, grand national,
etc.
How can you get those fans into the club game? I think you often
get much better rugby in the weekly premiership or European
games.
Perhaps a lot of those people simply have no desire to watch any
more and just like that block of games every year, with old
national rivalries, etc.
That to me is a large market to exploit, rather than going after
markets with little traditional appetite for the game
#Post#: 123115--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Quinky
Date: April 16, 2024, 1:08 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: poorfour link ---
>
> But isn't that the whole point? You are almost certainly
pretty close to a saturated market for rugby coverage. You're in
the group of active fans who watch as many matches live and on
tv as you can afford in terms of time and money. The game
probably can't squeeze that much more out of you.
>
> The potential for significant growth in the market is in
attracting fans who aren't as engaged, and women's rugby has the
potential to do that in two ways. Firstly by attracting a
different demographic altogether, and secondly by getting
existing fans into stadia on away weekends for the men's team.
>
> I do think the men's game could get more and better TV
coverage (and with hindsight I could have worded that bit more
clearly), but where BCM is right is that you can't squeeze more
men's games into the season.
>
> So there's an upper limit on broadcast revenue once all the
games are shown, and given most clubs are pretty close to
capacity (average attendance last season across the league was
83%, and that's with the likes of Bristol rattling around inside
Ashton Gate) there's not much scope for higher attendance until
they can afford to build bigger stadia.
>
> To put it another way, if you want rugby to be sustainable
without cutting salaries, your choices are between you paying
more for the same number of games, or someone else paying to
watch games you aren't particularly interested in. Which would
you prefer?
>
--- End Quote ---
I think there's the assumption that there is no more money from
TV etc, but I don't think that's entirely true. Personally, I
don't get to as many games as I'd like. Occasionally I'll watch
a live game on PRTV at a fiver a time. I have no idea how many
others do the same, but I do know that if there were
subscription based rugby channel available, I'd be very tempted
to sign up to it.
On a different note, the way to get more non-rugby fans
interested in the game is to showcase incredible rugby. At
present there's the occasional game on TV, but someone without
an interest isn't going to start paying a subscription.
Therefore, if the TV companies were to broadcast more games,
there's a better chance of increasing viewers. Spectacles like
the RWC show that there is an appetite for the game, and I can't
believe that watching a Premiership game would get less
spectators than seeing Borehamwood playing.
It would be good to see what the viewing figures were for the
Saints game at the weekend.
#Post#: 123117--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Camquin
Date: April 16, 2024, 5:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There are only five Premiership games a week.
So they can hardly show more.
They could show Championship games - but too many championship
sides play in old-fashioned clubs without TV facilities:
Ampthill, Caldy, Cambridge, Hartpury, Nottingham, London
Scottish and now Chinnor. All great places for spectators, just
not equipped for TV.
Obviously, if the TV money were more than the cost of putting in
the facilities, then those clubs could add them.
#Post#: 123126--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: April 17, 2024, 3:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Putting in a temporary tv gantry pitch side really isnt that
expensive.
Also, could we not develop an equivalent to T20's to attract a
wider audience?
Also, also, I am of the school that says let market forces reign
and even a one eyed sugar daddy will get bored with playing the
same 3 teams every week. (I note that TNT are not bothering to
cover Salarycens game this week....?
#Post#: 123130--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Quinky
Date: April 17, 2024, 4:15 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Camquin link ---
>
> There are only five Premiership games a week.
>
> So they can hardly show more.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, free-to-air rarely show any games live.
#Post#: 123136--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: April 17, 2024, 4:41 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinky link ---
>
> Well, free-to-air rarely show any games live.
>
--- End Quote ---
They don't pay enough.
#Post#: 123144--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Quinky
Date: April 17, 2024, 11:52 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Brown Bottle link ---
>
> They don't pay enough.
>
--- End Quote ---
Exactly. Which suggests they pay plenty for other (presumably)
less popular sports.
#Post#: 123146--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Brown Bottle
Date: April 17, 2024, 12:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Quinky link ---
>
> Exactly. Which suggests they pay plenty for other (presumably)
less popular sports.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not quite sure what you mean. What sport is free to air live,
other than the protected stuff?
#Post#: 123157--------------------------------------------------
Re: BMoore Harlequins great for game, but that'll not make rugby
survive financially
DIR By: Quinky
Date: April 17, 2024, 4:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Brown Bottle link ---
>
> Not quite sure what you mean. What sport is free to air live,
other than the protected stuff?
>
--- End Quote ---
"Protected"?
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 5
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page