[Archived] The Old Gate Debate

[krislu]

For most games, the lowest adut price is £15.

Oh dear, that £2.33 must make all the difference, mustn't it!!!

394065[/snapback]

Where do I as an adult get a seat for £15?

CIS E04 Outer cat B games & Jack Walker W01 Wing cat B. But man, those seats are not a good place to be seated.

Edited March 28, 2006 by krislu

[happygilmore]

Where do I as an adult get a seat for £15?

CIS E04 Outer cat B games & Jack Walker W01 Wing cat B. But man, those seats are not a good place to be seated.

394071[/snapback]

Where it's also £24 for Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool games.

Have you actually sat in that area?

Rovers have got one of the lowest (if not THE lowest) entry level prices for a match ticket in the Premiership.

Adult Tickets from £15 for the Wigan game and it's only a £5 for the kids.

Edited March 28, 2006 by happygilmore

[krislu]

Where it's also £24 for Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool games.

Have you actually sat in that area?

394077[/snapback]

Nope, but I've been to alot of stadiums in my life, and generally sitting way out in a corner aint a good place to be seated.

[Paul]

FFS stop playing with figures and quoting an average seat cost of £12.67.

The vast majority of missing fans, those watching in the local pubs for instance, would have to pay a damn sight more than that, approaching thirty quid in many instances. They obviously feel prices are too high, I'm sure many would turn up if they could get in for £12.67.

394063[/snapback]

Either you haven't read or you haven't understood my posts. This thread is discussing a whole range of issues, one of them is income from attendances, another is the cost of attending a match. I clearly said the following:

For a single adult buying a match day ticket it is the often quoted £25-30 but for a family with STs it's very different.

The point is simple for a single matchday ticket an adult is going to pay the top whack and quite rightly so in my view. ST holders have committed to watch every game no matter how good or bad the season and get a really good deal on a per seat basis. My family is paying less than £12 per seat per game because we have committed our support to the club for an entire season. I've stumped up close to £1000 last July and I'm damned if I'm going to see some fairweather fan pay the same as me.

The people you are talking about only want to watch the best games when the team are playing well. It is only fair these fans should pay top price for the top games. Make it any different and the club will lose the ST base. Think about it.

[AggyBlue]

I've stumped up close to £1000 last July and I'm damned if I'm going to see some fairweather fan pay the same as me.

394088[/snapback]

Umm, that explains the tone of some of your posts.

[thenodrog]

"Think about it."

So often a rarity on here Paul. Too many just think of themselves.

Edited March 28, 2006 by thenodrog

[Paul]

Umm, that explains the tone of some of your posts.

394094[/snapback]

[roversmum]

Get into 'em, Paul...............

[RevidgeBlue]

The decline in attendance from 26,000 in 2002/3 has cost the club:

6,000 this season, 4,000 last season and 2,000 the season before in average gates. Rovers have averaged playing 23 home games per season so that is 276,000 x £13 not received which comes to £3,578,000 income the Rovers have not received as a result of the gates decline. However, the accounts would suggest a disproportionate drop off in higher-priced tickets pointing to a loss of closer to £5 million.

Whether it is £3.6 million or £5 million, there will be calls from supporters to spend that money which doesn't exist in the transfer market this summer.

394045[/snapback]

With all due respect I don't think you can realistically argue that any income lost during any of the last three seasons would have formed part of next season's transfer budget.

Also I can't ever recall us averaging 26000 for Cup games so the 23 game example is slightly misleading. Over a 19 game season the total loss of income over the last 3 seasons (assuming 13 quid per head) is 2,964,000 or less than 1m per season.

Hardly a piffling sum but hardly likely to have transformed our prospects in the transfer market either. Also around one third of the money Amoruso, Gresko and Matteo have been picking up for sitting around doing nothing.

[stuwilky]

Nope, but I've been to alot of stadiums in my life, and generally sitting way out in a corner aint a good place to be seated.

394078[/snapback]

Having sat in those seats many times I can safely say they have cracking views.

[Exiled in Toronto]

With all due respect I don't think you can realistically argue that any income lost during any of the last three seasons would have formed part of next season's transfer budget.

Also I can't ever recall us averaging 26000 for Cup games so the 23 game example is slightly misleading. Over a 19 game season the total loss of income over the last 3 seasons (assuming 13 quid per head) is 2,964,000 or less than 1m per season. 

Hardly a piffling sum but hardly likely to have transformed our prospects in the transfer market either. Also around one third of the money Amoruso, Gresko and Matteo have been picking up for sitting around doing nothing.

394139[/snapback]

And over the same timeframe the cumulative club turnover has been well in excess of 100,000,000 quid.

Given the extraordinarily high costs of even one bad signing, all the time and effort put into hand-wringing over attendances by our hansomely renumerated executives would have been better spent doing more adequate due diligences on the kinds of signings you mention or going on some negotiating courses.

[Boz]

I don't think it serves any purpose for aybody on this messageboard getting precious with each other, as if you post on here I'd suggest it's taken as read that you "support" BRFC.

The questions for supporters' discussion and the club's consideration are "how do you increase our gates", "where have the missing supporters gone", and "why won't they come back when we are playing well and we are realistically in our highest position in the league".

Lets face it the income from gates is less important as it's imperative to achieve premiership survival as this pays the bills.

As ST holders we can pay roughly the same for our tickets, sit in a half empty stadium and object to initiatives from the club to entice missing fans.

Hence the problem facing the club is that it would take a monumental decision to reduce ALL ticket prices with consequentially major financial risks in order to fill our ground. Otherwise you alienate the ST holders.

It would appear from the offer to freeze ST prizes by renewing in April, no such radical plans are on the cards. I hoped that they might at least move the family stand and create cheap season tickets & matchday tickets to create more atmosphere.

I'd suggest that the club are playing it safe. It's probably easier for Gordon Brown to balance his budget than BRFC!

[philipl]

1) Our executives are well paid but extremely parsimoniously paid by Premiership standards. You would probably find that their pay looks as bad at the bottom of the Premiership league table as our attendances do.

2) Revidge, just ask yourself- what is the most discretionary outlay a football club has? I doubt you will find anything as easily controlable as transfer fees. That missing seven figure number probably DIRECTLY equates to transfer fees not spent.

[RevidgeBlue]

2) Revidge, just ask yourself- what is the most discretionary outlay a football club has? I doubt you will find anything as easily controlable as transfer fees. That missing seven figure number probably DIRECTLY equates to transfer fees not spent.

394432[/snapback]

The point I was making was that lost receipts from seasons 2003/4 and 2004/5 might have a bearing on the budget for the season immediately following but not 2006/7.

As to whether there's such a direct corrolation between gate receipts and money spent on transfers, that's as usual pure supposition on your part but even assuming you are correct 1m is hardly likely to transform our fortunes in that respect one way or the other.

We are also likely to lose at least a couple of high earners off the bill and finish at least four or five places higher than budgeted for. I don't expect we'll be told that Hughes has a directly proportionate increase in spending power either.

[Exiled in Toronto]

2) Revidge, just ask yourself- what is the most discretionary outlay a football club has? I doubt you will find anything as easily controlable as transfer fees. That missing seven figure number probably DIRECTLY equates to transfer fees not spent.

394432[/snapback]

Cobblers. You yourself said on another thread that transfer fees are insignificant these days compared to the remuneration packages players get. If we spent your alleged 5 million on transfer fees, we'd pay the new superstar in washers would we?

Given the kind of hard bargaining on our side that left us with a raft of useless has-beens sat on our books, unable to be moved on because of ludicrously high salaries, at best that money over the same 3 year period would have covered a transfer fee of around a million and then the salary etc for one measly squad player. Hardly transformational.

[blue phil]

1) Our executives are well paid but extremely parsimoniously paid by Premiership standards. You would probably find that their pay looks as bad at the bottom of the Premiership league table as our attendances do.

394432[/snapback]

Maybe the two are related . They should be .

[cletus]

Having sat in those seats many times I can safely say they have cracking views.

394147[/snapback]

I too have often bought the cheaper tickets, & all i do is move to a better seat just after kick-off......as there are plenty of them

[philipl]

Sparky's rallying call!

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

I can only conclude from Sparky's renewed call for more support that the Rovers board are disappointed with the lack of responce to date from the Blackburn public to on field matters.

How an earth we can draw a crowd of 20,700 against WBA in October and then see it fall by some 2,000 for a home game against Boro in our present league position leaves me baffled and frustrated.

[Ozz]

I can only conclude from Sparky's renewed call for more support that the Rovers board are disappointed with the lack of responce to date from the Blackburn public to on field matters.

How an earth we can draw a crowd of 20,700 against WBA in October and then see it fall by some 2,000 for a home game against Boro in our present league position leaves me baffled and frustrated.

395672[/snapback]

They were are still outside!!!

[JAL]

To me do the Rovers people really sell themselves well enough ? What would Alan Sugar think of their abilities to promote the club and entice supporters, I'm sure he'd have plenty to say.

Continually just keep putting out promo's, to me, looks like, its an outsider trying to promote Rovers without actually having any hands on local knowledge of local feeling.

This to me is a massive problem, locals see it as someone earning big bucks to get some more money out of them through some sort blind loyalty to the team as qouted by waggy. Mark Hughes and his team have re invented the Rovers first team now the business side has to be reinvented.

The whole selling team at Rovers from the ticket office upwards should be dis mantled and reorganised with a new team formed along with re investment in their facilities.

Ticket office staff the front of Rovers to the public how good are they, to me they seem polite and friendly but their knowledge of whats going on and making effective decisions at times seems very poor.

On a positive note though, how good was the publicity brought by Jack Straw and the US secretary of state on their visit to Ewood Park, you couldnt put a value on that as Condeleeza Rices Rovers shirt was beamed around the world.

[mhead]

The lower gates(65% of total space v the Premier average) eventually has more of an effect on the motivation of the manager more than us supporters.

The discussion I had in the chippy on Thursday evening included:

-it was boring under souness

-I have Sky and that costs a lot

-I am very busy

Only me and the assistant in the chip-shop went....its always been the Blackburn way. If it isn't raining it soon will be.

We need to be the Regional team - like Lyon.That's why we need to act as the Regional Team...Transport,bundling matches,Neutral section,cheaper Bleachers section,Hotel,weekly non-football events,Motorway fast route and other facilities.Its about economic development as much as football development.

[greggyk]

I can only conclude from Sparky's renewed call for more support that the Rovers board are disappointed with the lack of responce to date from the Blackburn public to on field matters.

How an earth we can draw a crowd of 20,700 against WBA in October and then see it fall by some 2,000 for a home game against Boro in our present league position leaves me baffled and frustrated.

395672[/snapback]

because West Brom brought 2,000 more fans!?

btw- instead of ranting on about it here where most of the people on here go most weeks(if they live around Blackburn of course). Why not do something constructive, i mean have you been going onto the streets of Blackburn asking why they dont come?? I mean, your rants on here are clearly not working, infact they are actually making things worse (If you look at the gate sizes).

Edited April 2, 2006 by greggyk

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Even if there were 2,000 more boing boing Baggies greggyk does that not go to perfectly highlight the lack of increased interest on our fans behalf!!

''your rants on here are clearly not working, infact they are actually making things worse (If you look at the gate sizes).''

Edited April 2, 2006 by SIMON GARNERS 194

[Manchester Blue]

You can laugh SG194 but he has a point. Your constant rants against our crowds are clearly having no impact so why continue. We'd all like to see Ewood full every week but it's not going to happen and slagging people of isn't going to help.