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!

You know the M1? Why not go play on it?

That just shows you know nothing, he is not on that much, he is not overrated and even if he is a "crock", it's better than being a cock like you!

Ewwen mate, he's entitled to his opinion, and even to express it robustly. If you don't agree with it, might you be better off rebutting it than resorting to insults, even if what he said did wind you up?

I think you've spent too much time on Substandard!

Either way, said organisation have no credibility and nor do they practice what they preach. Why are they trying to reinvent what the Bulls did 13 years ago based on a research base of existing fans?



That it is a different sport or country is immaterial. The essence of effectively marketing a leisure activity remains the same. The foodstalls are indeed "franchised" out for 20k per season. That is the club's choice and nor are they obliged to do so. In addition they are quite within their rights to tell said store holders to offer a variety of options and not just burgers and other such crap. They will say these "are big sellers". They would, they have the greatest margins. And you assume that those who come in early only do so to come to bars? Really? So kids under 18's from years ago went for a swift pint? The Bullmania I saw must have been at another stadium.

And do you know what, I actually went that much earlier because I loved the vibe. I aren't alone in that because a large number of my fellow fans feel the same.



Whether the band is The Who or otherwise, you miss the bullseye of my point. Since the game could have sold out 100 times over, what is the value to doing it? They also make billions of dollars because they pay massive attention to detail in the face of rivalry of NHL, NBA and god knows what else. Again, nigh on each and every sports team over there makes it a genuine day out irrespective of where they are in the league.



What I think of him is irrelevant. He did a good job in getting the club on a level footing financially. However my view is he needs to take it to the next level over and above signing Francis Meli. Flippant or not, you get my point.



I made my suggestions clear. Using the current negligible fan base as a kpi is leading with the chin. It is those people that don't attend that are the critical mass.



Look at a vast range of American sports or Super 14 teams. Using a flippant Manchester United as a beacon reason for your view is poor.



So by re-allocating some funds from a Michael Worrincy, who you have been highly critical of and investing whatever wage he is on isn't worth a punt? Yes i do think it would be a significant benefit. Bullmania was also part of an overall active plan of the club that had a central focus of smart marketing, active PR, good staff mix and offering more than one product at the stadium. Of course the hard core fans couldn't give a shiny e about the Gameday Entertainment but it was very clear that a good number did. Sure, difficult to analyse the secondary spend and the cost to revenue ratio of each customer but marketing never ever has a guarantee other than if you don't try it you will never know. The product is irrelevant. Not just my view, nor is it being sanctimonious. Simply the views of a vast array of globally successful businessman.


As for Ewwenorfolk - wind yasen in with the pish poor childish toy throwing. Not everyone on here likes what others write, but no need for the 3 year old rattle chuck.

Don't agree with most of what you wrote there, but can't be d with a war of attrition. Leave that to the 'Vark...he does attrition much better.

But out of interest, what makes you think they are using a research base of existing fans?

Personally, because I think it suits his current viewpoint that he is going to cut all Gameday activity and is using said research as his resonance. I also think he is being very smart by re-quoting the RFL if it came to a point where they pull the club up for not meeting the marketing element of the criteria. Shrewd, but not really the point.

That he thinks the RFL study has any credibility, is even more baffling. The said same governing body who have just put on another pre-match band at the CC semi, can't even sell out the Grand Final, Wembley, CC semi's or the Magic Weekend. Perhaps they should guide their research experts to tell them why they can't even do that.

Glass, houses, stones. Spring to mind.

The absolute core of my point is that team strengthening is key, of course. But by putting all the eggs in one basket is absolute suicide. Particularly factoring in that the board have taken punts on some genuinely spurious signings in recent times. The money is there, however has it's allocation been effective given other areas of the club it could have been invested in.

Investing in the fan of tomorrow is critical.

No need to write things that will obviously provoke "childish" reactions.

Did you attend the fans forum? If so, are you saying you don't believe Hood & co?

Looks like FA mode after all...sorry...



If you are not an insider, how do you know this? Serious question.



Again, if you are not an insider - and apparently did not hear his comments at the forum - how do you know this? I was not aware PH was any more a fan of the garbage that spews out of the Rot Hall job justification dept than anyone else, but maybe I have it wrong? Again, serious question.



And again. What was the one basket all the eggs were put in? Was it the first team? Are you arguing that less should have been spent on the first team, in an attempt to divert more money to some marketing effort? If so, what would those new fans have thought had they watched in previous seasons the meltdown we saw in this? And if so, just HOW would you have justified that to the fans? Do you think any of the fans would have listened to you? Or believed you? Once again, serious question.

But again...you say the money is there. How do you know that? Are you saying the club have been lying to us? And again...



Indeed it is. But the fan is the customer. Following your logic, should a retailer invest in a shiny new experience of a store when inside it has little on sale that anyone wants? Should a car manufacturer launch a shiny new model that is all whistles and bells outside, but under the bonnet its badly underpowered and likely to break down through lack of investment and insufficient spare capacity? Folk might visit the store once or buy a few of then cars to start with, but if they find nothing in the store they like or realise they have been sold a pup with the car, they won't be back. And they'll tell their mates. Surely that is what you risk with what you seem to be saying?

Now, if you WERE a club insider, especially in this field, and if you felt that even low-cost marketing activities with (what you believed had) great potential for punching well above their weight had been ruled out, then one could understand you being wound up on this subject. If you WERE, then of course you would be better placed than anyone else on here to assess the situation. The trouble is, in the absence of you saying you are people have to assume you are not - do they not? And, in that case, they are bound to question why you feel able to speak with such authority on the subject? Not being funny, just saying it how (it seems to me) it is?

I don't think you answered my question about how you know they are only using a research base of existing fans? Do you know this, or are you assuming it to be so? Serious question again, since the implication of using data from only current fans is obvious.

Why is using Man Utd poor? They're one of the biggest sporting teams in the world in any sport. They are very much something any sporting team should aspire to be like.

I know you say that Game Day entertainment is important to you, but do you actually have any figures to support what you say about it being important to other fans? Because it seems that just by a quick show of hands on here that the majority don't care about it. But maybe that's something you could do for the club? The club have said their open to fans offering their service, so why don't you arrange and distribute a little questionnaire to Bradford fans regarding what they want from match days. If you feel so strongly about it, get involved.

I don't know what happend to my earlier post on this thread re marketing, but those of us who went to BISA meetings when Duffy attended might remember the reasons why the Club had reduced the match day experience! I can't be d to go over it again except to say GB hasn't got much of a clue about what is going on or he has a hidden agenda which is what I suspect! The fact he can spell and put together sentences doesn't mean he isn't trolling!

So because you don't concur with my post it's trolling? Perhaps I should similarly castigate you for trolling because you continue to regurgitate and believe whatever eminates from Mr Duffys keyboard or mouth?

Drag yaself back to the shore Jonah.

Agreed, based on success/trophies won. However their brand goes far deeper than that, similarly with Newcastle United, Leeds United, Wolves, Celtic, Rangers, Sunderland, Man City (previously) etc etc. Some of it purely tribal, some community driven and some of it down to other elements. All of which are difficult to split the DNA on. Fact is, they all offer more than pure winning or losing as part of what they communicate with existing fans and potential new fans.



A straw poll of fans who are Bulls through and through would as I've pointed out, be a farcial exercise. It is the missing fan as well as the thousands of others that don't come or haven't ever been who are the relevant market to target.

I don't drink nor do I buy some of the merchandise in the shop, or the matchday programme but that doesn't mean the club should get rid of it based on my viewpoint voiced on a committed fan site.

My final thought really is that it is an existentialist topic. Some won't give a hoot about Gameday or marketing, other will see it's value and that it is incredibly difficult to give some spreadsheet projection or retrospective offering of it's value. What is clear is a look to any brand, in any industry in any given place, is that effective marketing in whichever format it takes will be a critical factor in their success. That's good enough for me.

So you're saying effective marketing is important but decrying Peter Hood and the Bulls for using the market research commissioned by the RFL?

I think I've made my stance more than transparent on that one.

As has rightly been pointed out, it simply seems odd to hold up some piece of research by a governing body, that few people at the club actually respect in any way as has been eluded to by others, as any kind of kpi in making a decision either way.

What I do know, is attendances need to change for the better and the more bricks that are put onto the wall over and above team building, works for me.