Where's the proof that they won't get increased attendances? Both Super League clubs that have moved into new grounds have had massive increases so why won't Salford?

Proof?There is no proof Jonny,it's just an opinion,a realistic one that I also share.It's going to be almost insurmountable for Salford to pull a 10000 average in such a soccer hot bed.I think gates will increase at first due to the novelty factor,maybe around 7000 ish, but will probably level off back to the 4500/5000 mark.Just because Hull and Warrington have attracted extra thousands it doesn't automatically follow for every club in a new stadium.

When you are starting at such a low base level it would need a very dramatic incease for them to be respectable. HAs anyone increased 125%?

Warrington are a bad comparison to use as an example of new stadia attracting bigger crowds. For a start, the location of the stadium is a key factor being slap bang in the middle of the town centre and very easily accessed.

Secondly, and most importantly, Warrington's move to the HJ coincided with a major new investor in the club who has invested significantly in the team. There is nothing, not even the best marketing campaign in the world, that attracts fans like a successful team on the pitch.

Salford will have a new stadium but are they going to make the same kind of investment into the actual team and the club's other infrastructure ? Or is it a case of hoping, the "build it and they will come" mentality ? If you've still got a below average team you'll still get below average attendances regardless of where you play.

Huddersfield can't be far off. Averaged 3392 (less than Salford) in 2000 to 8192 this year.

Wilderspool was in the town centre too. I agree that a winning team draws crowds, but Warrington moved into the HJ in 2003 and didn't win anything until 2009 (also the year in which they had their worst average attendances at the HJ)

Hull have had a below average team for a few years now yet have good crowds at the KC.

i hate it when people say "look at warrington new stadium, new crowds" or, "it coincided with them getting a rich backer"

point one, our average was up in 2003 due to a lot of fans coming back to say goodbye to wilderspool, and we had a reasonable season after nearly going tits up and relegted in 2002.

But the main reason for the crowd increase/increase in interest in the town is that we'd been doing a load of community work in the schools and stuff for about 3 years prior, we won SL community club for nearly 4/5 years running at one point.

That built up interest, that got the kids interested and more importantly it got parents involved as well. That wouldn't have just happened with a stadium on its own.

The thing with moran is a bit of a misnomer, he was already on the board from 1999 in a minor advisory role and it was only during the 2004 season he became majority shareholder in the club, once it looked and was confirmed that the club would be self sufficient via the stadium, previously at wilderspool we were ing money, and didn't have any banqueting facilities, cept for about 80 people.

Now we've got 11 exec boxes (2 new in the off season) all sold out and the east stand dining facility which holds 450 on a mtachday.

moran didn't splash the cash really until the johns signing (arguably not even then)

Anyone remember who the signings were that we made going into the HJ?

mike forshaw
Danny lima
Chris Leikvoll
John Wilshere.

hardly headline signings to get the pulse racing and punters buying ticlets.

What was the question again? oh yeah, just dropping a stadium in, aint gonna work


oh and wilderspool was a nightmare to get to, having to cross bridge foot/spaghetti junction. Plus the HJ is slap bang on the door step of about 70% of our season ticket holders

Hang on, you start off by saying it's horsecrap but then immediately admit to doing exactly the same, choosing Widnes over Liverpool when they clash.



As true as it is for "true" supporters of football teams.



But they do stop going to Liverpool games? Let's face it, the Cup tie was no doubt a contributing factor in the low attendance and that isn't horsecrap because you've demonstrated quite clearly that fans of both games will, and do, choose one game over the other when they clash.

which does not bode well for the 'building a new stadium will suddenly see them flocking in' theory either.
a new stadium will make absolutely no difference to 'most salford fans being football fans first' they wont suddenly choose salford over United or City just because the seats are new and shiney.
and electric warrior, you are of course correct. the inverse of my point is also true. im not disputing that.
merely getting at the flimsy nature of salfords claims to be able to 'tap into the Manchester market' Which has been their saving grace for some time now.

lol like id be taking your advice

every club moving to a new ground bar leigh has had a massive increase in gates

salford will be the same no doubt about it

hudds have more than doubled crowds since moving from fartown to Galpharm

Wire and hull fc close to double with room to grow more

salford are currently around 5000 now in a dump and a team devoid if real success

10,000 over 5 - 10 years EASY

yeah wilkinson has the funds to build them up so thanks for raising that red herring

we have doubled our crowds in the last 5 years more or less, our last season at fartown was around 1700 IIRC,up until 2006 we were still struggling to pull in 4,000 regulars,we still i think should be hitting 10k average but we have done pretty well recently to get up around the 7/8k mark
a quick question for salford fans,what do you think the crowd would have been if the manc derby hadn't been played at the same time?

Salford average 4,500 - 5,000

deduct the bizzare K/O time on a sat , when Salford traditionally play Friday eve or Sunday afternoons
game was on SKY , non season ticket/ concession fans can see it at home/ pub / streamed..
last two weeks poor performances & off field ' issues' .

manc footie derby would be a fouth contributory factor but would have had an impact not just to the people who went but to the TV coverage.

I knew people who didn't go for all the above reasons. money's tight and Salfords performances are far too erratic to enable new fans to gather momentum.

I'd imagine around the 4,500 mark which if I'm honest is absolutely shocking in the 3rd year of our license. I think it's fair to say that there is a lot of work needed to be done to increase our fan base. The club have all but admitted that they have given up trying to attract fans to the Willows as its a non-starter.

I don't think its unrealistic to expect our crowds to rise in a new stadium. It's a sad fact that The Willows is in a run down part of Salford, I've lived in Weaste (and been robbed more times than i care to remember!) and it's a simple fact that the casual's are put off by it's location. The new stadium will hopefully find us picking up more of the floating fan base than our current location.

Contrary to what die hard Rugby League fans will tell you, i really do think facilites plays a big part in the causal/floating fans decision on whether to attend a game or not. Us die hards would watch our team in the local park it makes no difference to us. If your new to the sport where would you rather watch the game, in Weaste with an old run down stadium or a nice shiny new stadium near the Trafford Centre?

The club has submitted, as part of our licence aplication, a report from a leading UK marketing research company which advises that in the 1st year of the stadium we can realistically expect an average attendance of 8,500. Whilst i personally think thats overly optimistic given where were at now I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest around a 7,000 avearge in our 1st season in the stadium. That will give us something to work with and if we can have a bit of success on the field as well then I'm hoping we have a real chance to be a success in Super League.