You're not giving something away if the customer pays for it HTH



Oh, and if there wasn't the threat of relegation, Wigan's crowds that year would not have been anywhere near that.

Not really, a top 6 finish would do more benefit then letting people have cheap entry for one season.

It's hard to get a top 6 finish without having the funds to put on a team with a high enough quality of players to do so.



What the pledge has done, is given us the funds to spend the SC, and then a top 6 finish is what will keep the fans at Odsal.

According to a number of posters on here the club see this as something that is doable for the long term with only small increases.



Of course to keep interest up they need to back it up with on the pitch success but this is going to get people through the gates in the first place which is half the challenge. I would be more concerned if they didn't take any action to try to get people into the games.

You know what I mean.





And that's exactly why promotion and relegation should be reinstated IMO.

as a fan of hull kr and considering the significant losses you post every year ( see your accounts are late in yet again

) you'd be better served worrying what your own club is doing in trying to sort out your own finances which are in a far worse state than ours. Should hudgell walk away your dead in the water. Bradford on the other hand are managed sustainably without the need for a sugar daddy (not that we'd turn one away

).

With regards to Wigan in 2006, Noble only arrived in Round 11 (which he won) when Wigan were stuck firmly to the bottom of the pile, he then went on to lose his next six games - so that 'good feeling' went pretty quick. Only when Fielden came along on the 18th June did Wigan's performances pick up - at this point Wigan had only won two league games out of sixteen (and with only twelve games left).

Yet Wigans home attendances were:



Fri 17 Feb Leeds Rhinos Home Lost 16-24 17,281

Fri 24 Feb Huddersfield Giants Home Won 36-20 11,623

Fri 10 Mar Warrington Wolves Home Lost 12-24 16,640

Mon 17 Apr Harlequins Home Lost 18-30 12,329

Fri 5 May Castleford Tigers Home Lost 24-30 12,484

Sat 27 May St Helens Home Lost 14-28 18,358



Average 14,786

No concerns at all, wouldn't be trying to sign Mason if we were in the shat.

yeah good luck with that. be quite funny seeing look on your faces when RFL uphold any ban NRL choose to impose. and thats just on assumption that he gets a visa in first place

Werent Huddersfield shot down a couple of years ago for doing a cheap ST deal??

or is it a case of its a bloody brilliant idea if any other club does it ? just wondering why Bradford, who have had plenty of success and fans recently, are being commended for doing this but my club were giving an abundance of grief for trying to get our fan base up ?

Its not an unreasonable point. Not at all.



I think one big difference is that you have a wealthy owner and Bulls do not. Maybe another big difference is that you were trying to improve a fan base that was historically far too low, whereas Bulls were trying to arrest and significantly reverse a scary plummeting fanbase from a much higher recent historic level.



But maybe the key difference was that in your case the Owner was making cheap tickets available IIRC unconditionally? In Bulls case, the pricing would only be applicable if enough people actually pledged up front to buy a season ticket.



In your case, it was a generous gesture from the chairman to try and encourage an increase in your too-low core fanbase. Slated by some, but as I said at the time a sound strategy where you have a rich owner willing and able to bankroll it - and fund the playing staff needed to dramatically improve the on-field performances. Lowish-risk, very sound incremental strategy entirely appropriate to the circumstances.



In our case, the club bet its future on a challenge to the fans and lapsed fans and armchair fans to show and prove they still wanted a SL club in Bradford. This after the disaster of Harrisgate, the previous administration squandering the Odsal settlement and the fruits of our "glory" years - together with a lack of a rich owner - having contributed to worsening and finally disastrous performances on the park. Very high risk emergency strategy to stop the looming plane crash, entirely appropriate to the circumstances.



Neither strategy would have been appropriate to or would have worked in the other's situation.



And, in the event, the Bulls fans and Bradford rose to the challenge, and we pulled off something quite amazing - the implications of which will likely have far-reaching consequences. You'd feel a lot better joining, working for, sponsoring, investing in a club whose fans had just given it such a resounding endorsement than one whose crowds were plummeting and seemed set to continue to do so at least until things improved dramatically on the park - which with crowds now so low they likely never would.



That anyway is my take on the differences - you posed a very valid question, so I've made an attempt at a reasoned answer.

Wasn't that more to do with the level of anticipation built up around the amazing news that Huddersfield's chairman was to announce at half time during a televised game? Didn't rumours abound about some sort of wonder signing or other and when it all boilded down to it the news was an offer for season tickets.



I seem to recall the Sky commentary team at the time were a bit underwhelmed at the revelation.