Value for money

[cityrebel]

8 hours ago, Skidder1 said:

Am I right in recalling that if you sat in the grandstand at Exeter - other than in the front row - you couldn't see the start line or home straight?

You had to stand up to see.

[Halifaxtiger]

17 hours ago, mikebv said:

A truly ludicrous race to the bottom isn't it?

Promoters demanding riders have the best kit to win competitions that by the way they run them have absolutely zero worth..

Meaning. Riders spending fortunes on gaining the best kit they can find and paying for expensive tuning, just to remain at the same level as their rivals because they are all doing exactly the same thing..

Meaning. Promoters paying out unaffordable and unsustainable levels to riders to pay for the best kit and tuning they demand of them...

Meaning. Fans having to pay admission costs far in excess of what the Sports standing actually is, and far in excess of what actual entertainment value is put on offer to them..

Meaning. A reduction year on year of fans due to the higher admission costs needed to fund the racing..

All to compete in, try to win, and watch competitions that Mickey Mouse would be embarrassed to have organised...

If you tried to put together this as a business or operating model to launch a new venture you would be laughed at out loud by any potential investors wouldn't you? 

Yet this is the model British Speedway uses year in year out...

Amazing really...

I don't think speedway's competitions are Mickey Mouse at all but otherwise you are pretty much spot on.

The other thing is that in those days speedway was very much a part time occupation for the overwhelming majority of riders even during the season -  Mick Bell (a three time British League championship winner and decent second string/reserve in the 1970's) once said that for him it was 'a good paying hobby'. 

Nowadays, it seems to me that - NL riders excepted - they regard it as a full time job (which is why we have the blight of uncontrolled doubling up) and require payment to that level. Costs have definitely risen, but so have expectations.

That simply has to change.

 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Halifaxtiger

[Piotr Pyszny]

On 7/21/2019 at 10:46 AM, Skidder1 said:

Am I right in recalling that if you sat in the grandstand at Exeter - other than in the front row - you couldn't see the start line or home straight?

That's certainly my recollection of watching speedway at the County Ground, while working in Exeter (1997-98). The grandstand was the last vantage point you'd pick. Did the OP refer to a "thrilling" evening? Wow. Can' recall too many of those at Exeter. It was mostly follow-the-leader, everybody-strung-out-after-one-lap stuff on a gaters' track where passing was virtually impossible (as poor Joe Screen discovered during Pete Jeffrey's testimonial meeting). Most of the opposition riders seemed beaten before they started. I remember one National League/Division Two stalwart telling me: "Exeter? That's not speedway."

Edited July 23, 2019 by Piotr Pyszny

[Midland Red]

2 hours ago, Piotr Pyszny said:

That's certainly my recollection of watching speedway at the County Ground, while working in Exeter (1997-98). The grandstand was the last vantage point you'd pick. Did the OP refer to a "thrilling" evening? Wow. Can' recall too many of those at Exeter. It was mostly follow-the-leader, everybody-strung-out-after-one-lap stuff on a gaters' track where passing was virtually impossible (as poor Joe Screen discovered during Pete Jeffrey's testimonial meeting). Most of the opposition riders seemed beaten before they started. I remember one National League/Division Two stalwart telling me: "Exeter? That's not speedway."

I was talking of 1970 and it certainly was thrilling seeing the racers around the County Ground

Times had obviously changed by 1997/98

[woofers]

On 7/21/2019 at 10:31 AM, auntie doris said:

The recent Kings Lynn matches at Swindon was 18 quid entry attracting a 1000 or so for both meetings. In 2017 over 3000 turned up for a fiver.

So does that mean the recent meetings took in £18,000 and in 2017 £15,000.....? If so,which would you rather bank ?

[ShyTalk]

On the subject of value for money, it should be noted that years ago, with the old second halves,you would get mores races per meeting.

[djr]

On ‎7‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 6:03 PM, woofers said:

So does that mean the recent meetings took in £18,000 and in 2017 £15,000.....? If so,which would you rather bank ?

Gate money isn't everything though,    if   3000 people buy a burger/cup of tea / programme etc.  you might well end up with more money to bank   than if 1000 people did the same.

Also how many of the 1000 people paying £18  would pick and choose meetings due to the price, but would attend more at £5 admission ?

At £18 how many people with a family would go on there own,  but would take the family with them if it was £5 admission ?

its not easy getting the right balance on admission prices

[Ovalman]

3000 buying progs, merchandise, parking, etc., much better atmosphere it were. 12 quid is about right.

Edited July 24, 2019 by auntie doris

[Halifaxtiger]

18 hours ago, djr said:

Gate money isn't everything though,    if   3000 people buy a burger/cup of tea / programme etc.  you might well end up with more money to bank   than if 1000 people did the same.

Also how many of the 1000 people paying £18  would pick and choose meetings due to the price, but would attend more at £5 admission ?

At £18 how many people with a family would go on there own,  but would take the family with them if it was £5 admission ?

its not easy getting the right balance on admission prices

The problem with cost reduction is it is a huge financial gamble. You are relying on substantial additional numbers turning up and there's absolutely no guarantee that they will. In addition, they also have to like what they see enough to come back again and again and again.............

I have never seen an advocate of price reductions who is so confident that it will work that they will put their own money up to back it, and its very easy to gamble with another persons bank account.

I can recall a post some years ago referring to Belle Vue dropping the price to £10 and getting a much increased attendance. They did the same the next week and the crowd figure dropped. By the third week they were back to usual crowd numbers and over the three weeks they lost money when compared to charging full price.  

The Lakeside free meeting held a few years ago (when thousands turned up) shows that there could well be a market for speedway, but I understand why no promoter is willing to cut prices in the hope of attracting it.

Edited July 25, 2019 by Halifaxtiger

[Fortythirtyeight]

On 25 July 2019 at 12:51 PM, Halifaxtiger said:

The problem with cost reduction is it is a huge financial gamble. You are relying on substantial additional numbers turning up and there's absolutely no guarantee that they will. In addition, they also have to like what they see enough to come back again and again and again.............

I have never seen an advocate of price reductions who is so confident that it will work that they will put their own money up to back it, and its very easy to gamble with another persons bank account.

I can recall a post some years ago referring to Belle Vue dropping the price to £10 and getting a much increased attendance. They did the same the next week and the crowd figure dropped. By the third week they were back to usual crowd numbers and over the three weeks they lost money when compared to charging full price.  

The Lakeside free meeting held a few years ago (when thousands turned up) shows that there could well be a market for speedway, but I understand why no promoter is willing to cut prices in the hope of attracting it.

Sheffield ran a ' free entry' meeting and over 2 thousand turned up, the very next meeting back to normal 6-700 level. 

Big ' free ' crowd does not mean more income in anything especially if the club does not run the food franchise ( as many don't)  .

 

[steve roberts]

3 hours ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

Sheffield ran a ' free entry' meeting and over 2 thousand turned up, the very next meeting back to normal 6-700 level. 

Big ' free ' crowd does not mean more income in anything especially if the club does not run the food franchise ( as many don't)  .

 

I recall that the Oxford promotion received nothing from the bar takings during its last years of operation.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, steve roberts said:

I recall that the Oxford promotion received nothing from the bar takings during its last years of operation.

Why should Oxford have cash from bar takings? They were only tenants for speedway racing. The  stadium would have employed their own bar staff and sold items that they had initially paid for. It was the same as I recall at Wimbledon. Usual business practice as I see it TBH.

[steve roberts]

5 minutes ago, gustix said:

Why should Oxford have cash from bar takings? They were only tenants for speedway racing. The  stadium would have employed their own bar staff and sold items that they had initially paid for. It was the same as I recall at Wimbledon. Usual business practice as I see it TBH.

When Cowley was promoted and owned by Northern Sports the bar and catering takings were all part of the deal (as well as the sponsorship from local brewery 'Halls') but all this was lost when the promotion operated under different landlords when Northern Sports went into receivership.

Edited July 26, 2019 by steve roberts

[BWitcher]

On 7/25/2019 at 12:51 PM, Halifaxtiger said:

 

I have never seen an advocate of price reductions who is so confident that it will work that they will put their own money up to back it, and its very easy to gamble with another persons bank account.

 

I can guarantee you have in almost every business going... just speedway seems to think every normal rule that applies is different for it.

[Halifaxtiger]

8 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

I can guarantee you have in almost every business going... just speedway seems to think every normal rule that applies is different for it.

Perhaps I should have been a little more specific and said that I have never seen an advocate of speedway entry price reductions who is so confident that they will work that they will put up their own money to back it.

Speedway is indeed different : while I am certain that some who believe in price reductions in business will back them  - we see it often enough after all - that simply does not apply to those who have an identical view regarding speedway entry prices.  

The simple truth is that a cut in prices is a massive financial gamble, and its one that those who support it are only prepared to take if it risks others money, not their own. 

The day that someone who believes in price reduction puts up their own capital to ensure against potential losses is the day I will take their argument seriously. 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, steve roberts said:

When Cowley was promoted and owned by Northern Sports the bar and catering takings were all part of the deal (as well as the sponsorship from local brewery 'Halls') but all this was lost when the promotion operated under different landlords when Northern Sports went into receivership.

What an incredible -IMO stupid - act by Northern Sports. Almost too hard to comprehend. That means they also paid for all the stock that was sold. And on the basis mentioned paid the bar staff as well?

[BWitcher]

2 hours ago, Halifaxtiger said:

Perhaps I should have been a little more specific and said that I have never seen an advocate of speedway entry price reductions who is so confident that they will work that they will put up their own money to back it.

Speedway is indeed different : while I am certain that some who believe in price reductions in business will back them  - we see it often enough after all - that simply does not apply to those who have an identical view regarding speedway entry prices.  

The simple truth is that a cut in prices is a massive financial gamble, and its one that those who support it are only prepared to take if it risks others money, not their own. 

The day that someone who believes in price reduction puts up their own capital to ensure against potential losses is the day I will take their argument seriously. 

 

Speedway is not different, it just keeps telling itself it is, ignoring successful business tactics employed by all manners of businesses (including entertainment) and wonders why it continues to struggle.

Your comments are indicative of why the sport is in the mess it is in the UK. 

Anyone with the slightest semblance of business knowledge would tell you that continually cutting the quality, whilst increasing the price will result in only one thing... and so it has come to pass.

[Halifaxtiger]

6 hours ago, BWitcher said:

Speedway is not different, it just keeps telling itself it is, ignoring successful business tactics employed by all manners of businesses (including entertainment) and wonders why it continues to struggle.

Your comments are indicative of why the sport is in the mess it is in the UK. 

Anyone with the slightest semblance of business knowledge would tell you that continually cutting the quality, whilst increasing the price will result in only one thing... and so it has come to pass.

To my knowledge, cutting prices has been tried. As I have indicated earlier, Belle Vue did it and it failed. Under John Anderson, Berwick tried it. They didn't continue, so presumably it didn't work there either.

If its a 'successful business tactic' why is that no-one can be found to put the money up to guarantee any loss just in case cutting prices doesn't work ? 

After all, according to you - and others - you can't lose. 

Care to put your money up to prove you are right ? Thought not 

Belle Vue costs £18 to go in. Cutting the cost to £15 - which according to at least one poster isn't enough - would require an increase in gates of 20%.Cutting it to £12 - one figure mentioned - would require an increase of 50%. 

Is that realistic, especially in the short term ? 

Your comments are indicative of why some promoters regard the BSF as a haven for 'keyboard commandos' who  have all the ideas but won't risk a penny themselves. In this case, they're right.

You are right when you say that cutting quality and increasing price can be disastrous. Decreasing the price and increasing the quality can be equally so.

 

Edited July 27, 2019 by Halifaxtiger

[waytogo28]

cityrebel said this on another thread " The British public don't want to go to speedway anymore. Cheaper admission would only be a short term fix. Once all of us old fogies have died off, its days as a professional sport will be over."

And I believe that is correct. It is not an attractive leisure activity worth spending your money on - increasingly this century it is either invisible to the general public or uncool. When newbies do get there they find out that only 2 or 3 minutes out of two hours plus, is exciting enough to merit the word and that "races" are very rarely that. NSS excepted. Reduced prices might attract some fallen by the wayside diehards but it is as cityrebel says not at the heart of the problem,

[steve roberts]

10 hours ago, gustix said:

What an incredible -IMO stupid - act by Northern Sports. Almost too hard to comprehend. That means they also paid for all the stock that was sold. And on the basis mentioned paid the bar staff as well?

Surely no different than any other business venture whereby the whole operation is owned by a single company running and managing every aspect of its business as was the case with Northern Sports? Unfortunately it was their Garden Centre empire that collapsed which caused the eventual sale of Cowley Stadium...the speedway side of the business was ticking along quite nicely before the pay restraint caused issues.

Edited July 27, 2019 by steve roberts