Lack of Crowds in NZ

[Bullrush]

I think Ali's Choice mentioned a while back that the crowds never recovered after Henry rested the ABs before RWC2007. People stopped going as they weren't going to watch 2nd string outfits, meanwhile discovering that sitting in the warmth with no lines for brews was better and they simply got out of the habit of going to the rugby.

The only place where the 2007 resting of ABs may be a factor is in Canterbury where there are plenty of pro-Deans/anti-Henry fans. They have such a good team though and they are as parochial as hell so I doubt it. People were choosing warm lounges and bars and short beer lines long before 2007.

Eden Park will always struggle unless it's a massive game or the Blues are dominant because it's a bitch of a place to get to and find close parking. Then there's the cold and/or rain. And then there's the ridiculous prices.

Make the tickets cheaper (and the food and drinks as well) and play in the afternoon and you'll get more people along.

I remember thinking at the time that they won the RWC hosting, that this would be NZ's last chance to host it by themselves. The tournament would just get to big for their population and economy.

Crowds have been down all year - the conference system not working for NZers?

When NZ made the bid and won the hosting rights, the NZRFU pretty much said that this would probably be the last time that we could hold the tournament alone.

It's simply too expensive.

 

[Swarley]

The only place where the 2007 resting of ABs may be a factor is in Canterbury where there are plenty of pro-Deans/anti-Henry fans. They have such a good team though and they are as parochial as hell so I doubt it. People were choosing warm lounges and bars and short beer lines long before 2007.

Eden Park will always struggle unless it's a massive game or the Blues are dominant because it's a bitch of a place to get to and find close parking. Then there's the cold and/or rain. And then there's the ridiculous prices.

Make the tickets cheaper (and the food and drinks as well) and play in the afternoon and you'll get more people along.



When NZ made the bid and won the hosting rights, the NZRFU pretty much said that this would probably be the last time that we could hold the tournament alone.

It's simply too expensive.

Excellent post

 

[Nusadan]

It's still feasible for NZ to co-host with Australia when it's our turn to host it...notwithstanding the fact that in 2003 RWC we were able to more than adequately host it on our own, but it may make more sense to allow some games in NZ to provide matches (just a few mind you!) at a different time zone for telecasting and financial reasons.

 

[Rebel rouser]

It's still feasible for NZ to co-host with Australia when it's our turn to host it...notwithstanding the fact that in 2003 RWC we were able to more than adequately host it on our own, but it may make more sense to allow some games in NZ to provide matches (just a few mind you!) at a different time zone for telecasting and financial reasons.

As far as I'm aware, there is absolutely no financial benefit to Australia to doing this. Income from world cups is by ticket sales alone. Aus has larger stadiums spread over the country than NZ so ticket revenue here would be much higher.

In addition, the outgoings are massive from many angles, but apparently a significant aspect of the cost is 'whitewashing' stadiums of all advertising. The cost of doing this is massive - think of the naming rights in Aus like AAMI stadium, Suncorp etc. So essentially, the more games you play at a stadium the better to recoup the cost of whitewashing it. Therefore sending off individual games across the ditch makes little sense.

Basically, I think the only reason we would co-host with NZ is if we were feeling sorry for them...

 

[Newb]

Basically, I think the only reason we would co-host with NZ is if we were feeling sorry for them...

JO'N doesn't possess that emotion

 

[Riptide]

Back to original subject matter, it really is surprising how poorly the top franchises are supported by home crowds in NZ. There are times it appears as if it's Scottish rugby being broadcast on TV. Is interest in attending rugby in NZ at an historical low? It's not a if games are on free to air TV either. Some of the attendance at Chiefs and Highlander games has been woeful. The Blues have the largest population catchment area and can't get 16k to a knock-out game.

I suppose Ireland is comparable in terms of population, but even there while the game ranks way behind GAA (football, hurling etc.) in terms of player participation and interest, the crowds at Munster, Ulster and Leinster matches put NZ crowds to shame.

It wouldn't surprise me if the broadcasters began to demand NZ made a bigger effort in filling their stadiums through better marketing and ticket price concessions. It looks awful on TV.

 

[qwerty51]

I thought NZ gets Super rugby on free-to-air?

 

[Riptide]

I cant imagine it is.. Isn't that why Murdoch threw so much money at Super and TriNations rugby so he could lock up broadcasting rights? I may be wrong but isn't Sky NZ the broadcaster for Super15 rugby?

 

[qwerty51]

Yes but I assume it's the same as the NRL here where Fox and 9 share the round's games and get the same slots each round. I can't imagine Union over there not being on FTA. It would be like AFL/NRL not being on FTA here. I think those Friday games are, they advertise it as Friday Night Footy.

 

[Bullrush]

I cant imagine it is.. Isn't that why Murdoch threw so much money at Super and TriNations rugby so he could lock up broadcasting rights? I may be wrong but isn't Sky NZ the broadcaster for Super15 rugby?

There is no live rugby played free-to-air in NZ. The Tests are usually delayed on channel 3 or something but not many Super rugby games are FTA at all.

 

[Riptide]

So it's even more alarming that rugby supporters would not be prepared to attend a game that can only be seen live.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Uncovered seats are a massive no-no at World Cups because people really don't like the idea of enduring rather than enjoying.

Even those who have gone the extra distance to pay for covered seats might find they have been sold a pup. When the Blues played the Highlanders a couple of weeks ago, there was no escaping the rain even for those backed up to the overhang of the bottom tier of the new South Stand.

What should be worrying World Cup officials is this: the massive drop-off in sales the Blues experienced the week after the Highlanders game. The first playoff at Eden Park in eight years and only 16,000 came to see it.

Why? There may be more than one reason but among them is the fact that so many loyal fans were soaked and chilled the previous week; given a stark reminder that Eden Park, even with $240m of investment, has the appeal of a Siberian salt mine.

World Cup organisers better pray it doesn't rain during the pool rounds.

I have often speculated about the damage done to New Zealand tourism by having their night games beamed around the rugby playing world. Driving rain and spectators rugged as if for a polar expedition are not the most entrancing images.

 

[Brumby Jack]

And when some games don't kick off til 9pm NZ time to suit European audiences, I can't imagine how fun it would be to be sitting out in the elements...

 

[RugbyInterest]

There is no live rugby played free-to-air in NZ. The Tests are usually delayed on channel 3 or something but not many Super rugby games are FTA at all.

But just about everyone in NZ has pay TV including a 24/7 rugby channel