So it is your contention that all 83,000 at wembley got in for free is it?

I know of at least 2 people who paid 30 quid each....the higher priced tickets were 50 notes....I doubt the "event" lost them money and if it did, not a lot, but I think it did help them secure an 8 milion pound international sponsor.
As for your attempt to hijack the salford thread....I never said we should use sarris tactics....I did say that the irony of a broncos fan trying to belitttle what sarries had achieved was not lost on me......pay attention and seriously, let's keep the sarries debate in one thread if you're that interested in it.....

It is my contention that none of those 80,000 eventers generated repeat custom.

Hell, that's not a contention it's a fact backed up by some of those stats you're so fond of quoting.

Cowgirl is closer to the truth that GF with regard to Sarries.

I know quite a few football fans who went to Sarries at Wembley as it was a geat day out, but none have gone to home games. Just like our big day out in 99!

Sarries for some unknown reason just haven't connected well with their local area and I hope for them they do well in Barnet, although they do play bloody boring rugby unlike Quins.

I have some news for you both....nobody has said that the wembley event attracted "new" repeat fans to sarries....what has been said is that the 83k made headlines, attracted media, generated interest and did what an "event" does.....got exposure that lasted a couple of days before and a day afterwards.......oh, it also boosted their seasons average from 7k to 20k.

For some reason, the renting of wembley to attract a crowd of 80k+ as well as generating media interest and raising the seasons averages is a bad thing in the opinion of some....

All I have said is that by comparrison, with double headers and literally thousands of free tickets the London SL club has achieved an average of about 3,200....and absolutely no national or local media interest. I say that that is a terribel state of affairs....

Do you think that any resident of Barnet will be unaware that Sarries have moved in come February? The residents of Twickenham don't know the London Broncos exist...because they've never been told......I suspect sarries will spend a lot of money "inviting" locals and local businesses to their new ground......I am sure "cowgirl" find fault in that too


I repeat, I am not saying that London Broncos should copy sarries....we couldn't even fill wembley for a CC Final...I just can't understand how anyone, especially a fan of a club that is as poorly run and supported as ours, can take the stance that Sarries have done something wrong.....

I wasn't passing moral judgement but I do think Saracens are a failing business.

& I've backed that up with evidence.

Are they failing as badly as Broncos?

It would be hard to argue that they are but on the other hand I could imagine the furore on here if Gus & Co spent 250 grand to rustle up 4 extra fans.

So where did anyone say we were playing? Or have I wandered into another marketing thread?

Will someone lock this BS or send it to the other sports section.

Yeah, I suppose you're right.

GF may quote a lot of stats but he sure doesn't seem able to interpret them.

You didn't provide any evidence to back up your moral judgement that they are running a ponzi scheme.

Yet to see this evidence? I've seen your opinion quite a lot here, but no links to facts or stats....

I mean to say, you "think" that they spent 250k on wembley...and, er, nope, that's it.
You have patently ignored the facts surrounding the 83,000 attendance not being designed to attract new regulars to games, the same way that you repeatedly go on about the supposedly thousands of free tickets, but with no substantiated figures and every time you post, you reatedly claim to have backed up your standpoint with facts...which you haven't.

As for my being able to interpret stats.........post some and we'll see shall we?

You really are a card GF. I produced evidence that the Wembley stunt generated no new customers and you claim that isn't the point of marketing. So if that's the case can you please explain what is and by extension your neverending supply of superfluous stats?

If the problem is location, that we are in union heartlands, then the least worst option is to move to Stratford. There's a desire for post Olympic legacy, which suggests some good deals on land or stadiums, west Londoners could get there via Waterloo and the Jubilee line, and the only competition is West Ham, Orient and Dagenham & Redbridge.

The Stoop is ideal for me, but I could still see myself going to Stratford. Barnet, MK, Gillingham not so.

If we can rent a stadium cheaply, then I don't see the need to own it. Companies rent office space, it's not such a big deal.

However, priority No 1 should be having a team that can qualify for the playoffs. Little point spending on marketing if the team is going to bet beaten. Thousands turned up to see the first Quins RL game against St Helens. We lost 56-nil I think, and those thousands never came back.

Digital marketing via Facebook etc means you can measure your results more closely than sticking an advert in a newspaper or on a billboard.

Little point marketing full stop apparently ...

Nope....what I said was sarries knew how to draw a crowd. I said this in response to your assertion on page 5 of this thread...remember?

Quote: Cowgirl Nostalgist "Funny thing is Saffercens market like crazy, & even win things, but they still can't draw a crowd.'"

The wembley event was an event designed to generate media interest and attract sponsorship/sponsorship interest...I have never said it was designed to attract fans to games at VR.....you have "opined" this, but like the rest of your posts, there is little in the way of factor stats to back up your opinion. By the way, I believe it's fair to refer to 83,000+ as a crowd.

Furthermore, you cast doubt on my ability ro comprehend stats, when in fact, I have posted the only accurate ones here and have backed them up with factual assessment that Sarries have averaged over 17k per game over the last 3 seasons.....you reckon their being run like a Ponzi scheme...again, your opinion with no fact.

What we do know about the fezzed wonders is that they will have a nice shiny new stadium in 7 months time, as well as an 8 million pound sponsorship deal over 6 years......in the context of this thread....I would say that puts them in a much better position than the London Broncos RL club.....which in reality, is all I said in the first place.

Unless you think being 100% reliant on 1 man for survival, having a shirt sponsor for only 7 of 54 games and not being able to confirm to your long suffering fans exactly where the team will be playing in 2013 is better than sarries position?