Good post and it brings us back to the $64 million dollar question.
What do "we" actually want from the sport.

How many current fans want to see a "Super League" made up of 5 English clubs, 5 N .American clubs and 2 French clubs and what benefit will this "dream" league bring to the game of RL.
It's clear that professional RL in Canada and the US would be one hell of an achievement and should RL develop to a point where the game took hold in schools and colleges, that would be one hell of a success.
The follow on question would be, how could "we" make this happen ?

Right now, we are massaging Mr Perez ego, nothing more but there has to be a clear plan, not just a dream or wish list.

Getting back to the earlier question about some kind of international Super League.
IF N. America can be successful in creating 5 successful RL clubs, capable of competing in SL, their next move would be to have their own Super League and what happens then ?

The game in the UK would be decimated and nothing more than semi pro, with the exception of the 5 club lucky enough to make the cut but, what about the rest and where would the "big" clubs go IF the N. Americans want to do their own thing.

I think people have a slight misconception about what marketing is. It isn't, and never has been, about trying to make people like things that they don't like, or that they don't want to like. What it is about is developing a product, promoting that product, and making it easy for people to buy it.

At the moment, the sport just doesn't have a unique selling point any more. We used to claim that our USP was that we were a "family sport", when what we really meant by that was "we don't have a hooligan problem". But in 2018, how many sports have a hooligan problem? Even if you want to point to football, the sport has massively changed perceptions and cleaned up its act in that regard.

So what else do we mean by a "family sport"? That we're a "family day out?". If that's the case, do we honestly believe that places like Belle Vue, like The Jungle, like (until recently) Headingley offer what most families with leisure money to spend in 2018 consider to be a "family day out"? Does queuing in the car park at Salford scream "fun for all the family" when, literally across the road, you have a huge leisure complex full of restaurants, an aquarium, Lego Land and god knows how much else?

So what do we promote ourselves as? We can't claim to have the best talent, because we're losing much of it to other sports and leagues because we can't /won't pay them their worth. We don't have the quality of competition or that "edge of the seat thrill" to sell either - the average winning margin in Super League is higher than the Aviva Premiership, and the proportion of games won by one score or less is lower.

So there we have it. Step one of marketing - have a good product - and too many of the clubs have already failed. They're offering a product that is no better than what people can get elsewhere, they're voting for competition structures that they can't understand, and they're offering a fan / customer experience that is no better than any of the other million-and-one leisure pursuits that you can do with the family on a weekend.

I don't think it needs to be said that the clubs are crap at promotiong the product and telling people about it, and I've spoken before about clubs aren't making it easy for people to buy the product either.

As for TV, I don't think we should be seeing it as a threat. The sort of mentality you express there, whilst I understand where it comes from, makes me think of newspapers arguing that the internet will kill journalism. It doesn't, but it does require a new mindset.

Focusing on TV, or digital, or any other media is simply about getting people to engage in RL content. It doesn't really matter whether that is on the terraces on on the TV - the important point is that for that period of time, people are engaging with the sport through one medium or another. The more you can do that, the more interest you generate, and the more valuable our content becomes. You're right in that TV is more passive a medium, but it offers two big benefits - volume of audience, and it removes geographic barriers.

Look at how some US college football teams use social media to promote themselves - there's a lot that all sports (not just RL) can learn from that.

Don't mistake me.I know you have an opinion,that's fine,but it's become the same old monotonous post after post on marketing. I agreed with Sparky not you,and i have no intention of engaging with you as to why. That's all.

By denying p&r. Your denying them the opportunity to improve them selves. To give them a reason to improve.
Yes some clubs aren't ready/want SL. But to deny them the chance to improve or move forwards just seems wrong to me.

Toronto's stadium isn't all that (2 open stands along the side). And given the last 2 years you can't even play there the first 3 months of the season. But you aren't going to deny them. So why others on that bases.

Yes they should meet certain criterias. But I would focus more on the infrastructure rather than external. The financial rewards will come in SL.

Your right about trying to get a bigger pot.
But given what SL chairmen are trying to do with regards the Sky contract. And what Leneghan said about International RL. Aren't SL chairmen as guilty of not wanting to share the money? Or promote the game.
As Tommy Cruise said in that film, this franchise system will be all about the money. And what SL, the chairmen can get out of it. Nothing with promoting the sport, or moving it forwards in any way. And there's no proof that franchise's can do that. If they can great, but it seems to me that instead of incorporating it. We're relying on it.
And in my opinion this is what's damaging the game more.

Also,
If big clubs aren't relying on away support to a degree. Why have Leeds moved tonight's game and Cas to Elland Road. But not Widnes/Salford?

My posts may be monotonous to you, put at least there is some attempt at making a contribution to the discussion and to put forward ideas. Your contribution to any sort of debate seems to be to nothing more than clapping along to posts that say something that you like, and to insult those you don't. That, of course, is your prerogative, but it doesn't really make for a good discussion.

But if you don't want to engage with me that's fine. I'll keep taking to the grown-ups in here and I won't hold it against you.

Take it from someone who lived not more than 30 yrds from Griffin Park Brentford that you wouldn't have known the Broncos were there apart from a bit of match-day congestion. Once we got hold of the then marketing man (Rabbits warren's son Chris) and arranged for the club to get us some flyers printed, we got a bunch of volunteers to door drop the area......Griffin Park is the only ground the London Broncos left with more fans than they arrived with.
Marketing isn't always about an instant return, but it is key and the fact that the owner of the club refuses to spend any money on "his hobby" is 100% te reason why the club now plays in a lower tier and at a wedding venue! London had 5,000 at one stage......that's more than one or 2 heartland clubs managed in SL.....
Londoners will attend RL if you invite them.........but the debate about who's job it is to send the invites has set back the sport decades in the national psyche.

Moving games to Elland Road comes at significant cost to the Rhinos. Firstly, there is the cost of hiring the venue, and there is the loss of ancillary revenue from concession rents and wet sales.

The decision to move to Elland Road isn't about "away fans", but about what the club can sell to the people of Leeds. In the coming months the club is going to have a lot more premium seats and corporate areas to sell at Headingley, and the Elland Road game was the start of that sales push.

In the last two weeks I have driven past a digital billboard every day with Danny McGuire and Stevie Ward on it. The selling point for last night was all about the return of a local hero. The selling point for the Castleford game is a local derby, and a Grand Final grudge match. We don't have that 'story' for games against Widnes.

The club feels that it can sell those stories well enough to be able to take the gamble of taking on the costs that Elland Road comes with. It has nothing to do with away fans. (Judging by how much of the South Stand was open last night, you're looking at a generous estimate of around 2k Hull fans last night).

That if true is why the super league need hull kr for its fans

The Hull KR following last night was no more remarkable than most other clubs that Leeds will play this season. Hull KR have their merits as a Super League club, but there is no "need" for any club on the basis of how many of their fans will travel to an away game.

Last season the turnstyles at Headingley clicked just short of 250,000 times (249,671 to be precise). If Leeds were to repeat that figure again, 2,000 Hull KR fans would represent less than 1% of those tickets sold.

As I said earlier, selling lattes to students is probably more important to the club than selling tickets to away fans.

Having been at the game last night, I would say while it was hard to gauge how many there was around me, that you are roughly correct. Which considering that it was a thurs night, with the game on TV and dIre weather. Isn't bad. Add in the extras (ie drink,food,programmes etc). Would have meant if it had been at Headingley Leeds would have made a tidy profit.

Like I've said. Your right it shouldn't be all about away support.
But having away support there makes the whole experience of going to a game better.
You wouldn't have wouldn't have wanted that game to be Catalans for example were on TV all there would have been was an end of empty seats. Which hardly promotes the sport to a casual guy who turns on it on to have a look and thinks, well if people who supposedly love the sport can't be bothered going why should I? (The game was poor enough to put them off ).

This whole topic seems to have been changed from looking at the pro's and Cons into anfocusing on 1 aspect. In my opinion while the away support thing is one aspect. There are more important cons, like if Toronto continue to not be able to play at home for the first 3 months how's that benefit SL. What happens to the French Elite division if 2 sides are in SL. Why are not looking at this country to promote the sport first. Would the American sides if successful leave to start there own league. And what happens to SL if they do. Why aren't we willing to incorporate them into an existing structure, rather than just rely on them and change everything for them.

And why are SL chairmen not looking to improve the sport and funding into the sport. But on a pure money grab.

I think that you are being a little disingenuous to the away support there.
KR alone, may represent less than 1% but, you have another 12 "home" fixtures and certainly, the likes of Cas, Wakefield and maybe Saints, would bring decent numbers to Leeds.
IF KR was an average away attendance, then suddenly your 1% becomes 13% and lets remember that those away fans, especially form KR, like a few pints.#
Your comparison with students buying latte's is laughable.
They may buy 1 between 4 of them and their coffee consumption will be a hell of a lot less than than the average alcohol consumption of visiting (and home) fans, who may also have burger & chips etc + programmes.
Greanted, the students will turn up more than 13 times a year but, I'm sure that you get my point.

What? Four people sharing one coffee?

There's a reason why there are coffee shops popping up everywhere in town and city centres, around colleges and univesities - they're high margin products and you can shift a lot of them very quickly and very cheaply.

I don't know what a coffee costs in the Carnegie Cafe but if one student buys just two a week at £2.50 each in a 36 week term (a pretty conservative effort given how packed the Costas and Starbucks' near Leeds Uni seems to be), that one student is worth about £180 in turnover to the club.

I know some away fans can sup, but I doubt they stick £180 behind the bar.

The names may live on but IF RL did take off in NA/the northern hemisphere I very much doubt those clubs would be playing in the same towns as they are now. None of them would be attractive to the big money players who would be NA TV channels and advertisers.

The other thing that everyone is forgetting is that the game of RL is not suited to American TV (sports) viewers, who have the attention span of a gnat - a 60 minute American Football game typically takes more than 3 hrs to play, with, in the 2013 season, the ball being in play for an astounding average of 11mins(!!!) and a 48 min basketball game taking typically 2-2.5hrs.

I get your point though remain unconvinced. Out of interest, what income do Wakey generate on the 350-odd days of the year when RL's not being played? All this community stadium b******s isn't being pursued solely for the service it may provide to the good folk of Wakefield, it's being pursued for what the community will spend there on non-match days if/when it gets built. I dare say they'll even sell coffee

That said, I have little faith in the north American venture.