MarkInTheStands said:
The More Money we get, the More Fans will be able to see us play football.
No, you've got it entirely the wrong way around.
The more fans we get, the more atmosphere at our home games, the more buzz there is around town, the more fans we get, the more atmosphere ...etc etc... the more corporate interest, the more flogging of Parraphernalia, the more money we get.
You (and by 'you' I'm not aiming this at you Mark, but the general 'you') can talk all you like about alternative money-making schemes, but it all starts with getting fans to the games. The best way to do that is to make them feel like they are a part of something, that the club is a community that they belong to. Then the bandwagon lightens and the stayers increase. And we've had quite a big bandwagon of late, wouldn't you agree?
Once you increase your base the $$ follow, because sponsors and corporates want to associate themselves. That's why the NRL went through its 'become a member' drive last year - it saw how AFL teams do it, and the Victory (Melbournites in general are much more into their clubs and memberships as opposed to just rocking up), and wanted to follow suit. But it didn't work. Why not? Because you can't just say "oh, please become a member". You've got to give something to get something. And our club has been all take when it comes to the fans.
I repeat:
this club has stood by and done
absolutely nothing to increase the fanbase. With the growth in areas like Kellyville etc on the outskirts of Parra, you'd have thought that our fanbase would be increasing. But it's not. It has treated us like f**king sh*t for years, and now we're all paying the penalty.
Natalie's Daddy said:
It is human behaviour to identify a risk and not invest in it. People become very worried when businesses are reporting losses or less than predicted gains.
Everyone can see how well the Football Club or Leagues club is going. It's no big secret.
It's not - as the Colonel said - that I (and others, but I won't speak for anyone but me on this obviously devisive issue) can't see the forest for the trees. It doesn't take a genius to realise that it's about money! The issue is that I'm not happy that it has come to this, and the way it was done.
It's not like the attraction for sponsors etc is going to be any less if they say "The Parramatta Stadium games are costing us money, Telstra is offering us a significant financial windfall which we see as productive for our future" and then - if they so desire - even a political shot at the councils about the amount of investment into upgrades for Parra Stadium. They tried to pay the political game and pretend it was about the fans, and they failed. Miserably. Again.
But really, when it boils down to it, I question the entire direction Rugby League is taking. With Phil Gould blabbering on about "keeping our players in the game", I'd like to ask "How?" We simply cannot, and - here's the thing -
will never be able to compete with Union, AFL, cricket, even soccer in the future. It just won't happen. We should be selling this game as a boutique sport. To do that we should be playing it at boutique grounds.
I can see the forest for the trees alright, and it's overgrown with the weeds of other codes. We need to find a nice little hut and shelter down where we can watch our own backyard and fight off invasion. If we try and fight them out in the open we will lose. Think about it - this decision might help Parra for a few years, but what is going to happen in 10, 20, 50, 100, when there is minimal community feel to the league and soccer and AFL are swamping us? In business you either compete with the big boys or you find your niche. League - and our club - can't work out which one it wants to do.
You know the funny thing - it doesn't mean squat if people don't attend Telstra. We'll be making cash just from being there. So it's not as if boycotting it is hurting the club's new money-making ideals anyway.