Living the dream?

Why? You're confusing your opinion with fact without anything to back it up. Good luck trying to engorge the regulars though?

Why don't PNE impose the surcharge then? Are the issues you raise specific only to Rovers?

Stop moaning. The club's on the up. All I ever read on here is moaning.

What has that got to do with a surcharge imposed 2 hours before the game? Are you saying that Rovers deliberately increase prices to deter potential last-minute attenders?

So there you go, you only comment on what you see as 'negative' posts and ignore the 'positives'. Like I said, you're the problem. You're no different to JAL, but from the opposite end of the spectrum.

And 'people' on here know we are in a better position than in years. There's a Charlie Mulgrew thread with lots of 'positive' comments after he signed his new contract. Have you or Biz posted in there or do you not like good news? See, it's easy to do this pointing the finger thing. So, back to the debate. It's about attendances and what the club are doing, or rather not doing, to attract fans back to the club. Just for reference, I'm a ST holder who hates sitting in a more than half empty stadium every other week whilst at the same time the club are putting up prices and imposing silly surcharges. That isn't 'moaning'. If you think it is then you're the problem, not the 'people' trying to discuss it.

Can you provide a reason the club add a surcharge? 'Airline seats' have them is not a reason. Cinemas don't put the price up two hours before the films start as far as I'm aware and theatres often do the opposite. I'm not even going to consider why you think the rip-off merchants who operate car parks are in any way relevant to a football club, but you may well have just been hoisted by your own petard. Also, using the Leeds game, with 35% of the crowd being from Leeds, as a indicator of how well our crowds are holding up and that people are just 'moaners' is frankly bizarre. The debate is how to get more people in the ground. If you think a surcharge is conducive to that then fair enough. I think it's pointless and counter-productive. PNE don't do it, and they are of similar status and demographic to us with similar crowds, so why do we? It's an interesting debate, however I'm yet to hear a justification for the surcharge either from the club or from those on here that defend it. Maybe @chaddyrovers can explain Waggott's reasoning for the surcharge. Chaddy keeps stating Waggott has provided one and that we should all move on. I'm yet to see a link to it. Rather than just call people 'moaners' perhaps you could engage with some of the above points?

He spelt Duff wrong.

A class act with a great attitude. Richly deserved new contract. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/17226437.mulgrew-excited-by-rovers-potential-after-signing-new-deal/?ref=mac

So, as far as I can see, the Surchargers have yet to offer an explanation as to why an extra £3 goes on the price of a ticket in the two hours preceding a game, or even a quote from Waggott by way of explanation. The Attendance Tax, as most right thinking people must surely agree, is an affront to common decency. It also makes no business sense. We need to crowdfund a Business for Beginners course for Waggott.

Why so precious these days?

Thatcher's Britain.

That isn't what the discussion is about at all. The discussion is why the club are imposing a surcharge on people just because they may not be able or want to commit to a ticket before midday/1pm on a Saturday. Nobody knows how many people it is putting off going. It is the message it sends that is important. That message is 'BRFC would rather cut down on admin costs than get more people in the ground'. It is counter-intuitive to the spiel Waggott comes out with about 'building a club'.

So? When a couple of youngsters are wondering what to spend their money on do they think 'Mmm, how will this affect the local economy'? No, they don't. They get about 90 mins entertainment whether they go to Rovers or Vue. At Vue it's a lot cheaper. And warmer … and just as immersive as the 1st half against every team we've played at Ewood this season … and we've only had 3 happy endings! But we'll still be there next match... The point you're missing is that it's not us Rovers need to attract back. We have ST's, we are diehards (with a vengeance). We are already there on matchdays. It's the families/couples who choose between the cinema etc and a football ground for their Saturday/Sunday/Tuesday entertainment who Rovers need to entice to the citadel of football. They won't do that by putting prices up and imposing a ridiculous surcharge which appears to have no justification. BTW, do you have an explanation for a surcharge that seems to have arbitrarily imposed, and that other local clubs in the same division don't charge?

Still cheaper than going to Rovers and at least you get a happy ending* *and sometimes two if you're on the back row with a 'friend'.

I've lived and worked amongst them a lot longer and they hate Rovers with a passion. Envy can do terrible things to a person.

Or a successful one, presumably

It's actually 5 pounds people are 'complaining' about …. but again that's not the point

In a half empty stadium (and that's being generous) ticket prices should be going down as we approach kick-off, not up. It happens in most other entertainment industries that way. Football clubs are unique in the way they treat their customer base. Anyway, it's the principle as much as anything, and also the fact it doesn't happen at other local clubs in the same division. 'Rip-off' is the right term for it.

They want to sign him for their Academies. It doesn't follow that the teams in the league below will put him straight in the 1st team squad at 17yo. The likes of Rooney are few and far between. He was a raging bull at 17.

The same Notts County who wanted Bowyer in the summer? Good shout https://www.nottinghampost.com/sport/football/football-news/gary-bowyer-harry-kewell-leading-1939558

Tongue in cheek. Chaddy called my opinion on the Sheff U game 'disgraceful'.

https://www.teamtalk.com/news/exclusive-man-utd-liverpool-leading-big-six-in-battle-for-blackburn-forward

@chaddyrovers is the one that has repeatedly said Waggott has answered the question and given reasons for the surcharge. Chaddy has yet to provide a link. I can't remember Waggott addressing it either.