Empty stadia and poor selections sees the Wallaby brand takes another hit

Only 14,000 people at Cbus Stadium on the Gold Coast last Saturday for the Wallabies versus Argentina match was a poor result for a home rugby international match. Conditions were wet, which will have had some effect, but it does not look good.

In Perth the week before, 26,000 attended Patersons Stadium for the Wallabies versus Springboks, when it was wet again. The Wallabies versus France in June at Etihad Stadium in Melbourne sold 27,000 tickets, meaning the stadium was half full.

The major drawcard of home international rugby is Wallabies versus All Blacks, and 68,000 attended at ANZ Stadium at Homebush in Sydney. Once again it was a wet night. The Waratahs attracted 62,000 to the same stadium for the Super Rugby Final not long before.

There is a pecking order of popularity in Wallaby Test opponents, with the Springboks the next most popular followed by France, then England, Ireland and Wales. Argentina still have a way to go to improve their status in crowd-consciousness.

There has been a lot of discussion about the attendance figures for these home Wallaby Test matches, centring on arguments about the quality of the Wallaby product itself. Is it the product? Is the entertainment value of the spectacle declining, or declining in value compared to other sporting options?

The ARU has provided the two main domestic international rugby markets, Sydney and Brisbane, two Tests each in 2014. They have had one each against France and the All Blacks.

The remaining three Tests have been spread between Perth (versus Springboks), Melbourne (versus France) and the Gold Coast (versus Argentina). The ARU is spreading these Tests away from Sydney and Brisbane for two reasons.

Firstly, to attempt to promote rugby in new markets, and secondly, to avoid overdoing it the two main markets so as to keep the interest there as high as it can there. The ARU also needs as much revenue that it can get, however, and sell-out crowds in large stadia helps a lot. Media rights are the other major element of revenue.

The failure to sell out the All Blacks Test in Sydney would definitely have been hampered by the weather to some extent. The other crowd-killer, though was the self-inflicted injury by the coach, Ewen McKenzie, when he selected Kurtley Beale at fly-half and benched the Waratahs fly-half Bernard Foley.

The Test was in Sydney and the town was buzzing after the Waratahs Super Rugby championship victory. Crowds are knowledgeable enough to know a bad decision, and the disquiet over the Beale selection at fly-half flowed over into the commercial marketplace of bums on seats.

The missing people at the ground were most likely not able to justify to themselves the price of a ticket when most would had seen Beale at fly-half before, and certainly would have seen Foley playing there for the Waratahs.

The brain explosion by the coach probably cost the Wallabies that match. A draw instead on a wet night against the All Blacks would mostly be thought to be a pretty good result, but all and sundry could see that on the night the All Blacks were there for the taking.

The momentum lost by the Wallabies on the field through that result, was multiplied manyfold by the result in Auckland, where the intensity and mental preparedness to play the All Blacks at home was not there.

The result of those two matches in commercial terms was a degradation of the Wallaby brand value. Audiences like winners, but are very acceptable of honourable and close defeats. Auckland was none of those.

The players having been forced to stay on the field at half time and sit on their plastic ‘naughty’ chairs – when obviously looking down the barrel of a big loss – was a very poor image to send to the commercial marketplace. It looked amateur, a bit narky and plainly stupid.

The Perth Test against the Springboks had wet weather to contend with, but a degraded Wallaby brand was very likely to have had a large effect. Foley was back starting at fly-half, so there was that positive to claw back some lost ground.

The Wallabies won with a gallant try at the death, with Beale, Foley, Israel Folau and Rob Horne featuring from the successful Waratahs backline line-up, along with Tevita Kuridrani fitting in like a glove in his best ever international performance.

The manner of the win, in the end, was a positive for the Wallaby brand, even though there were large swathes of less than optimal Wallaby play between the first and last tries.

Rain again on the Gold Coast for the Wallabies versus Argentina meant that this was a big Test for the current status of the value of the Wallaby brand, particularly since Argentina as opponents are well down the pecking order in popularity in Australia.

The crowd was poor. It was worse than would have been expected. McKenzie had his players on the ‘naughty’ chairs at half time on the ground, again, which would have, once again, degraded the brand through the idiocy being presented.

As a television spectacle, it always looks most exciting when the ground is full. The atmosphere becomes electric and that feeling bleeds through the screens into the armchairs of the viewers. It becomes a sporting spectacle.

The ARU, in the lesser markets particularly, needs to pay a lot of attention to this element in the development and maintenance of Brand Wallaby.

There are four reasons for poor crowds. Firstly, it is the popularity of the opposition and the public’s estimation of the likely quality of the match in terms of its rating as a “sporting spectacle”.

Secondly, it is the current status of the value of Wallabies. Thirdly, it is the value-for-money perception determined by the potential match crowd. Obviously, bad weather has an effect too, but if matches are highly valued by the public they sell out before match-day, which is good for the revenue, but the weather-affected crowd size does still detract from the “sporting spectacle”.

And fourthly, it is the relative size of the potential crowd attending market, which relates to the city of the venue. Gold Coast would be ranked behind Perth and Melbourne of the three Tests played outside Sydney and Brisbane in 2014.

Argentina is lower in audience popularity than the Springboks and France. Those are two reasons to expect a lesser crowd-size for the Gold Coast Test.

The ARU would have known that beforehand, and really does need to redress the negatives proactively, rather than just letting it all unfold. Ticket pricing is always an issue, and free tickets for children will get at least one adult paying to bring them, so the crowd numbers could be greatly increased with no loss of revenue.

Ground merchandise, refreshments and hospitality, etc, is a further spinoff for both the venue and ARU. The increased crowd looks much better on TV, and helps to increase the value of the Wallaby brand.

Certainly, if ticket sales are poor, then freebies for rugby juniors and schools, radio give-aways, whatever else marketing ploys that could be effective, need to be thrown at the problem to get a crowd of a decent size at the ground. If it looks better on TV, there has to be an eventual spinoff to an increase in revenue for the TV rights to the games.

Ticket pricing differentials is an issue in the major markets as well, with the SFS and Homebush in Sydney, and is probably the same at other grounds in other cities as well. I’ve noticed the difference between the lowest priced ticket and the second-lowest is way too large.

That second-lowest rung is always way too high, in my opinion, while the lowest rung could just possibly be edged up a tad.

So, to build the Wallaby brand, the performances on the field must be of a quality that impresses the potential market, the stadia need to full, the TV ratings high. Bill Pulver, as CEO of the ARU, needs to stop McKenzie overtly damaging the brand.

The selection of Beale failed, which was no surprise, so Auckland should have had that issue corrected. The chairs on the ground at half time, has just got to be banned by Pulver. He needs to get tough with McKenzie and put in place some more meaningful KPIs if they are not there already, to force McKenzie down the track of positive man-management.

The coach really does need help here. The ARU really does need to have a much greater flexibility and fast-twitch reactivity to likely match-day crowd size, because the flow-on benefit or cost to Brand Wallaby doesn’t appear to be recognised. I think it is crucial.

The Waratah brand, by comparison, had a reasonable start, given 2013 outcomes in crowd sizes, but then slipped down to looking pretty marginal. The players performance on the field started to improve week by week, until the on-field product became reliably attractive, winning rugby.

The crowds knew what to expect, they were liking what they were seeing, and the good attendance at ANZ Stadium at Homebush for the Super Rugby Final was the end result. It worked like that for the Reds in 2011, as well, and they have enjoyed that benefit in the following years.

Winning is a big thing. The style of the winning is a big thing. The quality of the opposition is a big thing – beating New Zealand teams is always at the top in public perception of quality of performance. The match-day atmosphere is a big thing.

Brand Wallaby can do what Brand Reds and Brand Waratah have done. The Reds are the gold standard here. ARU Marketing needs a big review/overhaul. This must coincide with Bill Pulver exercising the necessary measures to get his coach up to speed so he doesn’t damage the Wallabies, but in fact moves it progressively forward.

I still hope and trust Ewen McKenzie can do it. I think an Australian coach is an imperative, so the ARU needs to throw everything at helping him to succeed.