Doesn't matter hoy many we sell, the Club will announce initial ssles of 7 to 8 thousand just like every year.
I actually don't think this **** season will cause that many to stay away, more than usual however, but I think it being on Sky half the time is the problem.
Yes we do mate. No idea how much though. It was all in the news a bit ago but can't really remember. Issue is, if it's not a big number for the club, it not only removes money from club via tickets, food, drink etc, but also local takeaways, fish shops, sarnie shops, pubs etc.
I find this interesting - it suggests that there is a level of independence to the development of an approach to ticketing and pricing. I'd always assumed this would be board-led, or at least defined by the CFO. I absolutely agree that offering something to negate the sky silliness would be a smart move.
Gone for the 5,000 to 6,000 option but I feel like it could well be closer to the 5 than 6. Clearly matters on the pitch are frustrating a lot and that will have a big impact of course but I feel like the Sky deal with regular moving of fixtures will impact more. Combine them both and I think it’ll be a bit of a drop. Hopefully I’m wrong though and we can sell well, like we have done in recent years.
As I’ve said before, on here, I’m not willing to travel for so many midweek games or weekend ones with stupid kick off times. It’s just become too much even though I used to travel much greater distances than 50 miles each way. Based on this season’s interference in our fixture list there’s no reason to think next season will be any better so it’s a no from me. I’ve always liked the feeling of belonging to the club that having my own seat offers but that’s finished now. Nothing to do with poor home form or poor atmosphere in the ground. A ST is just not worth it for me - sorry BFC but you can add me to the growing list of absentees.
I fear more season ticket holders will be lost due to sky's takeover of the fixtures, dodgy sticks n'all. than what is happening on the field or at the club. And it could run into hundreds, maybe low Thousands. 2k for example would mean approx 650k less income from season tickets alone. (At an average of £400 per season ticket in lost revenue minus vat.) Then there is the other revenue lost through income from other outlets in the club.
Thing is mate, Sky and the clubs, when agreeing the most recent deal, will have known full well the knock on affect of stay-at-home-fans. And they'd have agreed compensation packages to reflect that. My issue is that clubs want the best of both worlds; they want the compo money, but they don't want to lose income from lost fans. The club (all clubs in same boat) will moan at us when announcing 1500 less STs sold, but they'll conveniently forget that they are supposedly compensated for that fact. Hence my feeling is that when sat round the negotiating table; clubs only considered lost matchday tickets. If they'd have thought outside the box they should have factored in lost ST tickets too.
Never seen official figures but heard it said that clubs in L1 and L2 get only a small percentage of the Sky deal. Vast majority of the money goes to Championship clubs. It’s the clubs in the bottom two tiers that will be hurt the most. Should never have agreed the deal for me.
Teams in the Championship have their sights on the Premier League. I've felt for some time that a Premier League Division 2 is not far in to the future.
Absolutely this ........ The PL will be reduced to 16, maybe even 14 teams (to let them focus on their European comps and anything that might stave of a SuperLeague). And PL2 will consist of the 2 or 4 disgarded clubs, plus the perennial yo-yo clubs like Burnley, Leeds, Watford, Sheff U etc. There'll be a reduced parachute implication too. Only one team will be relegated from PL1 and one promoted from PL2. Likewise from the 'Championship' (what a misnomer!!) it will be the same. One up. All the above maintains the same (ish) pool of clubs. Whilst we compete in L1 (another misnomer - 4th tier) with an average chance of making a push to the Champ (3rd tier) and a nigh-on impossible change of getting to PL1 or even PL2
Even if all 23 home games were guaranteed to kick off at 3 pm on a Saturday, to many around £400 would still be an heck of a lot of money for watching a third division club with half a decade of season on season decline in league positions.
I’d be genuinely interested to know why people have selected the over 7000 option. Not a prayer unless some ambition is shown.
Personally, I believe many will renew because they support the club and would miss not going to the games and everything else that encompasses their matchday. I don’t reach the depths of almost depression and feel the need to create and fuel negativity when things aren’t going well like presently. Yes, I get disappointed/hacked off/ frustrated but to me it’s all part and parcel of being a fan. Yes, the ST take up will take a hit next season, how much of that is down to fans being ‘disgruntled’ with the club, or The Sky TV deal, and even ‘dodgy sticks’ or just that people simply no longer can afford it, is all debatable but not fact
If it was just about the football, even though we've been crap, I wouldn't either. A new season brings new hope and against their better judgement many who have been thoroughly miserable this year would still renew. If we used our better judgement we'd never go to watch 22 blokes kick a ball around some grass in the first place. Fortunately for the football industry we don't use our judgement very well. But when a lot of games have been moved to Saturday lunchtime or Friday night and you can't go (even if you didn't really want to)... I worry that will have a big impact. Particularly when accompanied by poor football. And I don't just think it will be us. I've a feeling the current Sky deal could be a pivotal moment for lower league football. But I could be completely wrong.
How many employees we got on minimum wage and how many are full time? I realise minimum wage is way more than what most of our first team deserve but I think they're on a lot more than that. Do you think the increase in minimum wage is more costly than say the wages of Rodrigues and Lewis, signings that were entirely superfluous? I don't.