I was stood at the far end of the bar nearest the stage in the Liverpool shirt.

Unusually for RAB, two exceptionally poignant offerings.

I find it incredible that Hood has utilised market research from a governing body with absolutely no credibility and that consistently demonstrates it has no comprehension of marketing on any level; other than how not to do it. Said same organisation that is a graveyard for former marketing and ops staff from SL clubs who continue to ponce around with clipboards and fake smiles. The same RFL who only yesterday put some (albeit pish poor) pre-match entertainment on at the Challenge Cup semi final) and in essence going against conventional opinion in their manufactured, made up research. The same RFL who struggle to sell out any of their centrally controlled events despite their new "research bible" Poor form Mr Hood, very poor form.

Perhaps Peter could also then explain the contrary view of the NFL for instance or other sporting bodies who actually take one simplistic, effective view. They place Gameday Experience high on their list of "must do". Why? Because they want fans to come early, stay longer and have a better time; on the basis that it generates revenue through secondary spend. At this years Superbowl final, The Who took centre stage at an event that could sell out 100 times over - they didn't have to. They did it to enhance the essence of the NFL brand, and it works. You will say "but they are a multi billion dollar industry". Correct, because they generated it by being different. That's not complex Mr Hood, but well done for ignoring it.

Perhaps Peter could also explain why he is now placing a governing body who he holds in utter contempt, off camera, as some paragon of virtue and a leading light in how to successfully grow a brand?

Perhaps Peter could also explain why he is essentially saying to the likes of Richard Branson, James Caan, Duncan Bannatyne, Gerry Robinson that their view on how to market a product and grow a business is basically, wrong.

Moreover, he fails to recognise that to attract anyone to a leisure activity, particularly when on-field you are struggling, you have to give the existing occassional fan or potential new one, a reason to turn off the tv, put down their Playstation, not go shopping or go to the cinema and get out of the armchair to Odsal. You need to offer them greater bang for their buck, an additional product that you can control the output of in terms of quality and bind them to your brand. It's not rocket science. The club were the first to do it in SL and for him now to back peddle with absolutely no creditable basis for his judgement illustrates a problem at the very highest level of the club.

You have a situation now, where fans have absolutely no incentive to come earlier (where have the bands gone??) and spend money in your over priced bars or appalling dodgy food stalls. However what I will clearly predict is that because you can't quantify this secondary spend and how many fans Gameday Entertainment generates on an Excel spreadsheet, so you dismiss it. Brilliant.

The fans owe you nothing Mr Hood, it is for you to elicit response from them by doing something different. Don't wheel out "it costs money" beef. It doesn't. Sales and marketing generate money done effectively, ask any successful business. But then you wouldn't do that would you because it doesn't suit your incredibly flawed narrative. Interestingly you magically generate money for the likes of Paul Sykes, Michael Worrincy and a dire Glenn Hall. You give a 3 year contract to a 32 year old, eternally overrated crock on 200k+ a year in the form of Orford. Even the wage of the leagues worst player (Worrincy) invested in marketing would generate you more revenue than said individual. No question.

You also clearly hold the ill-conceived thought that effective sports marketing is based around on-field success. Really? Is this a path you [ireally[/i wish to go down given the evidence to the contrary of those sports organisations who invest in quality marketing and gameday despite being poor on-field? The same organisations who give the fan multiple reasons to go whether that be engaging their kids, their mates, being a place to socialise, get the odd freebie or enjoy the entertainment. You have also failed to recognise that many of the existing fans now spend their hard earned in areas around Odsal prior to kick off i.e Top House et al because you are giving them no reason to come into the stadium as early as they used to do. And most did! So well done.

I could also predict your caveat would be something based around Iestyn Harris, OSV, recession or you would pass it on to Mr Duffy (once you have surgically removed him from a dark cavity) and generate some vitriolic MP-esque stance.

So well done Mr Hood for attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of the long standing Bulls faithful, but I'm afraid they will see right through it. The only person you are fooling is yourself.

Notwithstanding the RFL survey, what do your actual staff think? Have you asked them? Strange isn't it how many former fans, coaches and players I've spoken to say "why has the Bulls vibe died?" But then maybe they haven't read the RFL survey.

As Britain's most successful entreprenuer said (and yes, miraculously he started from nothing without an RFL survey to help him):

"A business has to be involving, it has to be fun, and it has to exercise your creative instincts."

Your brand offers none of the above. And yet it used to.

Well Gurus Beard you certainly know everything dont you?

Are you Orfords agent?

I know how much the Prime Minister gets paid as well. And you know what? I'm not George Osbourne.

It must be wonderful being so clever!!!

I started doing a comprehensive reply to that long long piece. But thought better of it, since I fear GB has clearly made his mind up on the subject and so judged it unlikely he would admit any counter arguments. Also, he shows in his opening words the contempt in which he appears to hold nearly all the posters on here. Disappointing.

Unless GB knows something I don't - and that would probably mean he is a club insider - I can't find much to substantiate his arguments in that piece. Having been involved in various interesting meetings and talks with senior club personnel over the last week or two, I could point to a lot of things that seem to refute his arguments, at least in part. But I've been through it all on here already, and am not minded to do it all again. And, as I said, a club insider would likely know things we do not.

ARE you a club insider, GB? I've asked you that before and you won't say (as is your right). You DO come across very much as someone with an axe to grind though, but not necessarily with solutions. You and Maislebugs have both appeared on here at a similar time with similar issues, and central to both of your approaches seems to be a desire to see the back of the Chairman and maybe more than that. Maybe you are a potential investor who has been rebuffed? If you are neither of these, you must have some other basis for feeling justified in presenting such strong views? How are we to judge if we do not know the standpoint from which you present them, and anything that particularly qualifies you to talk with more authority than your average Joe fan?

And I have to say: if you WERE at the forum (were you?) were you that miserable guy near the end of the forum? Reading that post, you sure sound like him

So you did not attend, and you are really no better qualified than any of the rest of us to make statements on here? If so, that's fine, and nothing whatsoever that anyone should presume to say is wrong in that. Just helps in considering what weight to attach to what you have to say, that's all.

I, along with others, have taken quite a bit of time of late (and in my case, over a number of years) to engage with club personnel and try and do something to make a bit of a difference. That maybe gives me an insight that someone who has not done that, and if not otherwise involved in any other capacity with the club, may not have the advantage of. I've also had many years in business, with a financial and commercial remit, so would hope to have picked up a bit of experience and nous along the way. You'd hope that this would allow me to form a more objective view than might otherwise be the case, although clearly you have already decided otherwise.

Have you had any engagement with the club, to help you in forming your (clearly strong) views? Again, only asking so I can better consider what you have to say, so I can be sure in my mind you are indeed very different to another who posts similar strongly-expressed views on here but whose posts sadly lack any authority.

Incidentally, there are actually a lot of fans who have already said they are ready willing and able to help with painting (to pick up on your specific point). Well before PH said that - indeed, he may well have said it only because it had already been mentioned. Word of mouth and a few words on internet forums got that far. It's not rocket science.

Have you met the Marketing Director? He has not been with the club long, is apparently working full time (unpaid - he is a dedicated fan who is now in the fortunate position of being able to give something back to the club and so offered his services) - and is working on a lot of ideas, some quite imminent. I guess had you been at the forum you would have heard PH explain all that. Would you be happy with someone who tried to change everything immediately he arrived? I would not. Again, it's not rocket science!

I'ts probable you don't realise it GB, but you previous post seems to come across as personal, a little like Barack Obama's constant mantra of "British Petroleum", every time you mention the board. Heaven knows, the board has made mistakes. Who hasn't? We're all human and suffer the same fallibilities, even people like Richard Branson, who you put up as someone to be admired, who, IIRC has made a few quite calamitous decisions, and been very close to insolvency more than once in the early days of his long and illustrious business career. It's not always plain sailing, and sometimes you need things, things over which you have no control, to fall into place for you, but serendipity, just like to hindsight can't be bought.

You say the board has failed to deliver, but they have arrested the decline in the financial position of the club and turned a massive year on year debt into a (just about) break even figure, and, in doing so, turned a club that was spiralling into oblivion, into one which has a solid base on which to build. For this, at least, even the most, curmudgeonly fan ought to be grateful.

On field performance isn't what it was during that aberration between 1996 and 2005, but when you've exhausted all your accounts, it is always going to be a bit more difficult. It is, I think, very much a period of transition, and clearly some are going to be more forgiving than others, but even the unforgiving ones might like to ponder just who would take over if the chairman handed in his resignation and left. I don't think Peter Hood was ever a person who coveted being chairman of the club, he was (again IIRC) a businessman who sponsored the club (and was a fan), who was co-opted onto the board and took on the role of chairman when the previous bloke left. He was (again IIRC) on a short list of one, and right now the only ones waiting in the wings are the people from the same short list who didn't get the job.

Personally, I'm prepared to cut him some slack, I'm certainly not going to get into bed over one RFL 'fact' sheet about pre-match entertainment, much as I actually agree with your take on that sheet and also feel the club have got it wrong. The reasons for that aren't 'rocket science', but then rocket science isn't really rocket science is it, just basic Newtonian principles with a variable mass.........

On to your next point about attracting people. What do you suggest the club do? You claim they are back peddling but if you actually checked with people what time they normally get up to Odsal for games you'd see that most people don't come in time for pre-match entertainment. Which says to me and it seems the club as well "Why pay for something that no-one is bothered about?" The only games I've seen people in the ground early for tend to be, IMO, the bigger games which tend to attract the larger crowds so people are getting in early so they can get their usual spot on the terracing. What I've seen with my own eyes is that for games against perceived lower opposition, Wakefield, Castleford etc that the majority of the crowd seen to come into the ground about 30-45 minutes prior to kick off. And tbh, I don't really recall it ever being that different.

Next point

Would you like to provide evidence of the clubs who do this? Perhaps name the clubs involved? The fact is, without a successful on field team, all the bells and whistles of the off field stuff make no difference to actual crowds. What do you think attracts people to Old Trafford to watch Manchester Utd? A face painting tent and bouncy castle for the kids or the fact they've been one of the most successful football clubs in the world for the past 20 years? Personally I think it's the latter.

You also want us to reduce our already paper thin playing squad to accommodate additional funds towards marketing. Do you honestly think that would be of benefit? What a lot of people over look when they go back to the start of SL is the fact that we had lots of razzle-dazzle of the field and drummed up a lot of interest in, what had been to that point, a fairly marginalized and ignored sporting team within the city. But IMO what speared Bullmania onwards was the fact we were winning and winning well. 3rd in the first SL followed by a rampaging 2nd season that saw us lose only 2 games. I doubt very much that the huge crowds and buzz about the club would have been generated by the performances we've had from the Bulls in recent seasons.

I think Bulliac's and Roofaldo's posts easily win out over mine for diplomacy and logical analysis respectively - mine was more a reactionary shot from the hip - so its without hesitation that I add: "what they said". Well-argued and explained, guys, did a much better job than I did!