Not exactly my point - I think that our current need for the derby rivalry in Super League in terms of a) financial requirements, b) the motivation factor and c) publicising the club and the game in Hull and beyond, is much lower than it was prior to when they were last in Super League. We are growing our attendances, as highlighted earlier in the thread, as a result of improved performances, success in the cup and a much better league positions (and consistency) along with a very good marketing and community engagement department. Financially, the improved attendances plus prize money from the cup (and going far in the Super 8s) has nullified the extra income from the derby. And also, being the (much) bigger and more successful of the two teams in the city, we stand up without needing the derby to assist with the promotion of the club.

Rovers, I'd argue, have much more to gain from the derby than we would, and their involvement in Super League and the return of 2/3 derby games would prove this. They are a club with a lower financial income than us, so need the increase in gate receipts more than we do. We've seen on a number of occasions across recent years how they enjoy the rivalry and use it to whip the team and fans up, and aim to build momentum. And as the lesser side in the city, as has been the case with inter-city derbies across sport, the smaller of the two clubs usually benefits from being in the same league as their larger rivals, through increased appeal from fans and neutrals wanting to savour the atmosphere of a same-city rivalry.

This article helps to sum it up quite well: haas.berkeley.edu/faculty/papers/stawrivalry.pdf -

I'm not saying that we wouldn't benefit from the derby returning; only that, for Rovers, their need for the derby far outweighs ours, both as a club and as a fanbase.

Not exactly my point - I think that our current need for the derby rivalry in Super League in terms of a) financial requirements, b) the motivation factor and c) publicising the club and the game in Hull and beyond, is much lower than it was prior to when they were last in Super League. We are growing our attendances, as highlighted earlier in the thread, as a result of improved performances, success in the cup and a much better league positions (and consistency) along with a very good marketing and community engagement department. Financially, the improved attendances plus prize money from the cup (and going far in the Super 8s) has nullified the extra income from the derby. And also, being the (much) bigger and more successful of the two teams in the city, we stand up without needing the derby to assist with the promotion of the club.

Rovers, I'd argue, have much more to gain from the derby than we would, and their involvement in Super League and the return of 2/3 derby games would prove this. They are a club with a lower financial income than us, so need the increase in gate receipts more than we do. We've seen on a number of occasions across recent years how they enjoy the rivalry and use it to whip the team and fans up, and aim to build momentum. And as the lesser side in the city, as has been the case with inter-city derbies across sport, the smaller of the two clubs usually benefits from being in the same league as their larger rivals, through increased appeal from fans and neutrals wanting to savour the atmosphere of a same-city rivalry.

This article helps to sum it up quite well: haas.berkeley.edu/faculty/papers/stawrivalry.pdf -

I'm not saying that we wouldn't benefit from the derby returning; only that, for Rovers, their need for the derby far outweighs ours, both as a club and as a fanbase.

I put some very basic sums together a few weeks ago on the Rovers board following a claim by a Rovers fan that we're missing out on a bumper pay day by not having them in SL. When pointing out that the last Derby didn't attract a great deal of fans, the free juniors/% of away ticket deals, our awful deal with the SMC, no takings from food/drink outlets - the actual incremental profit from Rovers home game compared to the Leigh home game is around £70k.

Away fans are a bonus of course, but it's not particularly lucrative for us as a club. That's why our games are on a Friday night and not a Sunday afternoon.

Maybe it's a coincidence that our best years in SL have been when Rovers haven't been in SL with us. 2005-06, 2016-17? Ultimately, a prolonged period as Hull's only SL club would give us the pick of the bulk of corporates, sponsors, new fans, media attention, youngsters (if we had our own academy, but that's another story).

For us fans it certainly makes the season more interesting having them in SL, even if the derby was over-played, and they certainly bring more to SL than a few other current SL clubs.

I put some very basic sums together a few weeks ago on the Rovers board following a claim by a Rovers fan that we're missing out on a bumper pay day by not having them in SL. When pointing out that the last Derby didn't attract a great deal of fans, the free juniors/% of away ticket deals, our awful deal with the SMC, no takings from food/drink outlets - the actual incremental profit from Rovers home game compared to the Leigh home game is around £70k.

Away fans are a bonus of course, but it's not particularly lucrative for us as a club. That's why our games are on a Friday night and not a Sunday afternoon.

Maybe it's a coincidence that our best years in SL have been when Rovers haven't been in SL with us. 2005-06, 2016-17? Ultimately, a prolonged period as Hull's only SL club would give us the pick of the bulk of corporates, sponsors, new fans, media attention, youngsters (if we had our own academy, but that's another story).

For us fans it certainly makes the season more interesting having them in SL, even if the derby was over-played, and they certainly bring more to SL than a few other current SL clubs.