|
Post by skemstokie on Apr 9, 2015 10:10:05 GMT
I have read the comments and sympathise with a lot of the arguments people are making in favour of faci, but I remain to be convinced. A lot of people are asking for the club to spend £millions for seats for people who may occasionally choose to turn up. Even some of the pro faci admit it might not be filled. Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. I struggle to understand how such a large majority of posters (I accept I am in the tiny minority) can just ignore economics; the viability of the club is not at stake I know, but spending money on assets that may not be properly utilised sends a bad signal, indicating the club has got money to waste. The fundamental obstacle that pro faci supporters must overcome is that Stoke has never had an average gate to support a larger ground than the present. A lot of people seem to be placing blind faith in the belief that if the seats are installed they will be filled. I know they will be filled for half a dozen "big matches" each season, but that is not sufficient argument to invest the capital. A lot of people who in the past would not have come at all may well now be interested such is the popularity of the Premier League something which is still a "new" experience for Stoke and is fantastic chance to increase our fan-base,if you deny them the chance to try there will be little chance they will buy(season ticket)
|
|
|
Post by StokieMatt on Apr 9, 2015 10:13:19 GMT
I don't really care too much about increased capacity etc. I'd just like a ground that's finished. It looks toss when compared to some Championship clubs, we've had years of Premier League income now. Just sort it. Make it look decent, not half-arsed. Made the video bit better, i agree it looks better but the tunnel corner still looks stupid in my opinion. if anyone has any ideas or improvements they want me make to the model? going put the scoreboards on later
|
|
|
Post by Paddypotter on Apr 9, 2015 10:24:20 GMT
MrCoke, I'd like the extra seats to be available every game, not more season tickets.
There's been an increase of interest in Premiership matches throughout the world, hence the increase of TV money. Most premiership clubs have larger capacity than us and some of them have increased their seats dramatically over the last few decades. If there was an increase of interest in going to the cinema and every time you and her indoors went you were turned away because it was full, would you not think they should expand it? As the proprietor would you say there's still a couple of seats to fill first, one on the end of the front row and one at the back row.
|
|
|
Post by KevinWhimper on Apr 9, 2015 10:51:14 GMT
I've heard somewhere that the club want to see an increase in season ticket sales? I personally wouldn't wait, especially when other sales strategies could be used. Lets use an example, season tickets for adults , they range from £344 - £519 (Early Bird Prices). That works out at £18 - £27 per ticket. The club have also introduced a £294 season ticket. So lets say 22,000 people buy season tickets each year, that means that about 81% of fans there on a match day have been offered a discount already to some extent. Therefore my proposal would be to use the new corner as an individual match day sales section only (No season ticket holders). Some promotion examples. 1) Groups of 4 (£100) - £25 per ticket. 2) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 25% off second ticket. 3) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 50% off kids ticket. If after the first season there was a demand for season tickets in that area, then the corner can be split into 2 sections. 1 section for new season ticket holders and another section to continue with what was put into place during the first season. So blindingly obvious it hurts. Sadly I doubt the morons in charge of this kind of thing can work that out.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Apr 9, 2015 11:29:19 GMT
are you the binman or something? dick i take it back, with such high standard diplomacy skills you're presenting he will be sure to listen. you would need do a more in depth study; Ratio of them voters who don't have season tickets and will buy one if we have a corner. How many season tickets we have sold and if there is a waiting list which will require the extra 1500 seats, if so would it recoup the cost of the new seats? how many people would be interested in safe standing if that becomes legal in the next few years, which for all you know might be the plan which they wont put out in the press till it is legal. you writing a letter to Tony Scholes going 'ive got 200 people who want a new corner we demand answers' isnt going get very far, he probably wouldn't even read it all. Its fine I will prove you wrong mate. Get the 200 votes and I promise I will speak with Tony Scholes personally to ask these questions. Hes only Managing Director of a small company it's not like im requesting an audience with Barak Obama
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Apr 9, 2015 11:45:06 GMT
I've heard somewhere that the club want to see an increase in season ticket sales? I personally wouldn't wait, especially when other sales strategies could be used. Lets use an example, season tickets for adults , they range from £344 - £519 (Early Bird Prices). That works out at £18 - £27 per ticket. The club have also introduced a £294 season ticket. So lets say 22,000 people buy season tickets each year, that means that about 81% of fans there on a match day have been offered a discount already to some extent. Therefore my proposal would be to use the new corner as an individual match day sales section only (No season ticket holders). Some promotion examples. 1) Groups of 4 (£100) - £25 per ticket. 2) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 25% off second ticket. 3) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 50% off kids ticket. If after the first season there was a demand for season tickets in that area, then the corner can be split into 2 sections. 1 section for new season ticket holders and another section to continue with what was put into place during the first season. So blindingly obvious it hurts. Sadly I doubt the morons in charge of this kind of thing can work that out. You think that the Coates family are morons?
|
|
|
Post by KevinWhimper on Apr 9, 2015 12:19:51 GMT
So blindingly obvious it hurts. Sadly I doubt the morons in charge of this kind of thing can work that out. You think that the Coates family are morons? The Coates family aren't in charge of ticket pricing/incentives. You'd think that would lie with Scholes/ticket office manager.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 9, 2015 13:34:22 GMT
I have read the comments and sympathise with a lot of the arguments people are making in favour of faci, but I remain to be convinced. A lot of people are asking for the club to spend £millions for seats for people who may occasionally choose to turn up. Even some of the pro faci admit it might not be filled. Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. I struggle to understand how such a large majority of posters (I accept I am in the tiny minority) can just ignore economics; the viability of the club is not at stake I know, but spending money on assets that may not be properly utilised sends a bad signal, indicating the club has got money to waste. The fundamental obstacle that pro faci supporters must overcome is that Stoke has never had an average gate to support a larger ground than the present. A lot of people seem to be placing blind faith in the belief that if the seats are installed they will be filled. I know they will be filled for half a dozen "big matches" each season, but that is not sufficient argument to invest the capital. A lot of people who in the past would not have come at all may well now be interested such is the popularity of the Premier League something which is still a "new" experience for Stoke and is fantastic chance to increase our fan-base,if you deny them the chance to try there will be little chance they will buy(season ticket) Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/242625/announce-filling-corner?page=5#ixzz3WomgMYqRThere is no logical reason as to why they would be empty. ![:-S](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/kdD1n42dnzYd3v59eUB_.gif) The numbers are clear as day. We sell 98% of tickets. If our capacity was 20000 we woudl sell 98% of tickets. Selling inidivudal seats is damned tricky,that is why 100% sell outs are nigh on unheard of. When The Shit had 44000 capacity they sold 98% of tickets. They now sell 98% of a 75000 (or whatever it is) stadium. Good job naysers didnt run that club. Reading used to get 6000 at Elm Park...there a tons of examples. Thre is a an optimum size capacity for our club,we don't want swathes of empty seats we are all agreed on that.Being honest I don't know what that is (probably under 40000) but it's obvious that 28000 isn't it. One small corner for peanuts (& it is peanuts),the potential risk against the potential benefits makes it an easy decision. The debate we should be having is not re the scoreboard corner but whether we should expand further,i.e. one or both of the other corners & maybe another tier elsewhere. For me I think it's probable that at least one more corner (as well as the scoreboard corner)could & should be developed however that's not a decision the club has to make straight away. Develop the scoreboard corner give it a season (or maybe two)and then worry about the rest.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 9, 2015 13:45:17 GMT
A lot of people who in the past would not have come at all may well now be interested such is the popularity of the Premier League something which is still a "new" experience for Stoke and is fantastic chance to increase our fan-base,if you deny them the chance to try there will be little chance they will buy(season ticket) Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/242625/announce-filling-corner?page=5#ixzz3WomgMYqRThere is no logical reason as to why they would be empty. ![:-S](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/kdD1n42dnzYd3v59eUB_.gif) The numbers are clear as day. We sell 98% of tickets. If our capacity was 20000 we woudl sell 98% of tickets. Selling inidivudal seats is damned tricky,that is why 100% sell outs are nigh on unheard of. When The Shit had 44000 capacity they sold 98% of tickets. They now sell 98% of a 75000 (or whatever it is) stadium. Good job naysers didnt run that club. Reading used to get 6000 at Elm Park...there a tons of examples. Thre is a an optimum size capacity for our club,we don't want swathes of empty seats we are all agreed on that.Being honest I don't know what that is (probably under 40000) but it's obvious that 28000 isn't it. One small corner for peanuts (& it is peanuts),the potential risk against the potential benefits makes it an easy decision. The debate we should be having is not re the scoreboard corner but whether we should expand further,i.e. one or both of the other corners & maybe another tier elsewhere. For me I think it's probable that at least one more corner (as well as the scoreboard corner)could & should be developed however that's not a decision the club has to make straight away. Develop the scoreboard corner give it a season (or maybe two)and then worry about the rest. I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 9, 2015 13:51:22 GMT
A lot of people who in the past would not have come at all may well now be interested such is the popularity of the Premier League something which is still a "new" experience for Stoke and is fantastic chance to increase our fan-base,if you deny them the chance to try there will be little chance they will buy(season ticket) Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/242625/announce-filling-corner?page=5#ixzz3WomgMYqRThere is no logical reason as to why they would be empty. ![:-S](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/kdD1n42dnzYd3v59eUB_.gif) The numbers are clear as day. We sell 98% of tickets. If our capacity was 20000 we woudl sell 98% of tickets. Selling inidivudal seats is damned tricky,that is why 100% sell outs are nigh on unheard of. When The Shit had 44000 capacity they sold 98% of tickets. They now sell 98% of a 75000 (or whatever it is) stadium. Good job naysers didnt run that club. Reading used to get 6000 at Elm Park...there a tons of examples. Thre is a an optimum size capacity for our club,we don't want swathes of empty seats we are all agreed on that.Being honest I don't know what that is (probably under 40000) but it's obvious that 28000 isn't it. One small corner for peanuts (& it is peanuts),the potential risk against the potential benefits makes it an easy decision. The debate we should be having is not re the scoreboard corner but whether we should expand further,i.e. one or both of the other corners & maybe another tier elsewhere. For me I think it's probable that at least one more corner (as well as the scoreboard corner)could & should be developed however that's not a decision the club has to make straight away. Develop the scoreboard corner give it a season (or maybe two)and then worry about the rest.
1million percent correct.
|
|
|
Post by Paddypotter on Apr 9, 2015 13:53:43 GMT
It would add value to the stadium though, if it were to be sold.
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Apr 9, 2015 13:54:19 GMT
Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/242625/announce-filling-corner?page=5#ixzz3WomgMYqRThere is no logical reason as to why they would be empty. ![:-S](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/kdD1n42dnzYd3v59eUB_.gif) The numbers are clear as day. We sell 98% of tickets. If our capacity was 20000 we woudl sell 98% of tickets. Selling inidivudal seats is damned tricky,that is why 100% sell outs are nigh on unheard of. When The Shit had 44000 capacity they sold 98% of tickets. They now sell 98% of a 75000 (or whatever it is) stadium. Good job naysers didnt run that club. Reading used to get 6000 at Elm Park...there a tons of examples. Thre is a an optimum size capacity for our club,we don't want swathes of empty seats we are all agreed on that.Being honest I don't know what that is (probably under 40000) but it's obvious that 28000 isn't it. One small corner for peanuts (& it is peanuts),the potential risk against the potential benefits makes it an easy decision. The debate we should be having is not re the scoreboard corner but whether we should expand further,i.e. one or both of the other corners & maybe another tier elsewhere. For me I think it's probable that at least one more corner (as well as the scoreboard corner)could & should be developed however that's not a decision the club has to make straight away. Develop the scoreboard corner give it a season (or maybe two)and then worry about the rest. I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them.
why did we build a 28K stadium when we were averaging 16K?
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Apr 9, 2015 14:01:51 GMT
I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them.
why did we build a 28K stadium when we were averaging 16K?
Hit nail on the head there.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Apr 9, 2015 14:03:03 GMT
Arguing that the club has wasted £millions on players is no justification for installing rows of empty seats. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/242625/announce-filling-corner?page=5#ixzz3WomgMYqRThere is no logical reason as to why they would be empty. ![:-S](//storage.proboards.com/800541/images/kdD1n42dnzYd3v59eUB_.gif) The numbers are clear as day. We sell 98% of tickets. If our capacity was 20000 we woudl sell 98% of tickets. Selling inidivudal seats is damned tricky,that is why 100% sell outs are nigh on unheard of. When The Shit had 44000 capacity they sold 98% of tickets. They now sell 98% of a 75000 (or whatever it is) stadium. Good job naysers didnt run that club. Reading used to get 6000 at Elm Park...there a tons of examples. Thre is a an optimum size capacity for our club,we don't want swathes of empty seats we are all agreed on that.Being honest I don't know what that is (probably under 40000) but it's obvious that 28000 isn't it. One small corner for peanuts (& it is peanuts),the potential risk against the potential benefits makes it an easy decision. The debate we should be having is not re the scoreboard corner but whether we should expand further,i.e. one or both of the other corners & maybe another tier elsewhere. For me I think it's probable that at least one more corner (as well as the scoreboard corner)could & should be developed however that's not a decision the club has to make straight away. Develop the scoreboard corner give it a season (or maybe two)and then worry about the rest. I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them. It would cost around 6 million to do the scoreboard corner, which would hold 1,700 seats. That works out at £3,500 per seat which, if sold for every game, would pay for itself after 141 matches based on £25 per match. I'm swayed more towards Lord B's point of view, but clearly it's not happening soon or we would have heard something by now
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2015 14:11:31 GMT
I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them. It would cost around 6 million to do the scoreboard corner, which would hold 1,700 seats. That works out at £3,500 per seat which, if sold for every game, would pay for itself after 141 matches based on £25 per match. I'm swayed more towards Lord B's point of view, but clearly it's not happening soon or we would have heard something by now ...so nearly 7 seasons with 19 league games and 2 cups. How much would it cost for a multi storey car park and walkway?
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 9, 2015 14:21:48 GMT
I understand what you are saying but that doesn't necessarily amount to a business case though does it? Even if I accept that the extra 2,800 seats may be full 50% of the time I still can't arrive at anything akin to a payback inside about 15 years based on a project priced at £4 million (and no doubt rising) or whatever it is. I did the back of a fag packet mathematics s on here a few months ago on one of the other threads on this topic and I can't be arsed to do it again. I can't imagine were it Bet365 they would entertain any major investment that had a payback longer than about 5 years and this one is closer to 15 years EVEN if you accept that we will remain in the Prem for 15 years. If we don't then all bets are off. Not saying I wouldn't like to see it done only that the Board would look at it as a vanity project more than anything else. Payback won't happen on any terms that would typically be acceptable to them. It would cost around 6 million to do the scoreboard corner, which would hold 1,700 seats. That works out at £3,500 per seat which, if sold for every game, would pay for itself after 141 matches based on £25 per match. I'm swayed more towards Lord B's point of view, but clearly it's not happening soon or we would have heard something by now 7 years payback then at 20 home games a season if I accept that calculation. That alone would have the accountants muttering in to their tea cups. But I can see 4 huge problems with that calculation: 1Anyone preparing the business case today would work with an assumption that the new seats would be full no more than 50% of the time so that makes 282 matches or 14 years. 2)My guess is that today our average seat price is closer to £15 than £25 actually paid. Remember 80% of fans are paying season ticket price averages per seat, and say about 30% of fans enjoy some kind of concession or other, old, young, schools etc. So with that one third reduction on £25 you can make that 427 matches or 21 years. 3)New seats are not free to maintain, service, sell, clean, steward etc. which further darkens the calculation, so lets call it 500 games or 25 years. 4)Finally anyone preparing a business plan would need to factor in the risk of us dropping out of the Prem ahead of payback. Don't know how you would do that but you can bet someone has. I'd love us to do it but at the same time I can see why it would not head an investment priority list based on the finances alone.
|
|
|
Post by ashleyscfc on Apr 9, 2015 14:27:15 GMT
I don't really care too much about increased capacity etc. I'd just like a ground that's finished. It looks toss when compared to some Championship clubs, we've had years of Premier League income now. Just sort it. Make it look decent, not half-arsed. Made the video bit better, i agree it looks better but the tunnel corner still looks stupid in my opinion. if anyone has any ideas or improvements they want me make to the model? going put the scoreboards on later Yea could you move the john smiths stand round to the boothen? And see if the top tier of the John Smiths will move around the away end and then see if a studio will fit above the tunnel? That should do it imo?
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Apr 9, 2015 14:29:18 GMT
It would cost around 6 million to do the scoreboard corner, which would hold 1,700 seats. That works out at £3,500 per seat which, if sold for every game, would pay for itself after 141 matches based on £25 per match. I'm swayed more towards Lord B's point of view, but clearly it's not happening soon or we would have heard something by now 7 years payback then at 20 home games a season if I accept that calculation. That alone would have the accountants muttering in to their tea cups. But I can see 4 huge problems with that calculation: 1Anyone preparing the business case today would work with an assumption that the new seats would be full no more than 50% of the time so that makes 282 matches or 14 years. 2)My guess is that today our average seat price is closer to £15 than £25 actually paid. Remember 80% of fans are paying season ticket price averages per seat, and say about 30% of fans enjoy some kind of concession or other, old, young, schools etc. So with that one third reduction on £25 you can make that 427 matches or 21 years. 3)New seats are not free to maintain, service, sell, clean, steward etc. which further darkens the calculation, so lets call it 500 games or 25 years. 4)Finally anyone preparing a business plan would need to factor in the risk of us dropping out of the Prem ahead of payback. Don't know how you would do that but you can bet someone has. I'd love us to do it but at the same time I can see why it would not head an investment priority list based on the finances alone. You make some good points Gods, and clearly your view is shared by the powers that be at the club. It begs the question though, why did we apply for planning permission in the first place??
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Apr 9, 2015 14:35:22 GMT
7 years payback then at 20 home games a season if I accept that calculation. That alone would have the accountants muttering in to their tea cups. But I can see 4 huge problems with that calculation: 1Anyone preparing the business case today would work with an assumption that the new seats would be full no more than 50% of the time so that makes 282 matches or 14 years. 2)My guess is that today our average seat price is closer to £15 than £25 actually paid. Remember 80% of fans are paying season ticket price averages per seat, and say about 30% of fans enjoy some kind of concession or other, old, young, schools etc. So with that one third reduction on £25 you can make that 427 matches or 21 years. 3)New seats are not free to maintain, service, sell, clean, steward etc. which further darkens the calculation, so lets call it 500 games or 25 years. 4)Finally anyone preparing a business plan would need to factor in the risk of us dropping out of the Prem ahead of payback. Don't know how you would do that but you can bet someone has. I'd love us to do it but at the same time I can see why it would not head an investment priority list based on the finances alone. You make some good points Gods, and clearly your view is shared by the powers that be at the club. It begs the question though, why did we apply for planning permission in the first place?? It does! Except I do think that we are very seriously considering it DESPITE the fact that the business case would not pass any of the usual hurdles based on my total guess work as to how they do these kind of things! By the way it wasn't really "my view" just my guess at what goes on in the back ground based upon what I have seen of finance people working on ROI for business cases. For the record I'd love to see it done. It occurs to me that the one thing I neglected to mention in my fag packet calculation is that it would be an investment in the ground which would raise it's 'sell on' value, by how much who knows, but clearly that too would be a factor in favour.
|
|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Apr 9, 2015 14:41:16 GMT
Has the wind that rips through ever caused any damage to the facility?
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Apr 9, 2015 14:48:04 GMT
Has the wind that rips through ever caused any damage to the facility? Well it has done for one of our most expensive signings, who apparently can't play in it.
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Apr 9, 2015 14:55:11 GMT
It would cost around 6 million to do the scoreboard corner, which would hold 1,700 seats. That works out at £3,500 per seat which, if sold for every game, would pay for itself after 141 matches based on £25 per match. I'm swayed more towards Lord B's point of view, but clearly it's not happening soon or we would have heard something by now 7 years payback then at 20 home games a season if I accept that calculation. That alone would have the accountants muttering in to their tea cups. But I can see 4 huge problems with that calculation: 1Anyone preparing the business case today would work with an assumption that the new seats would be full no more than 50% of the time so that makes 282 matches or 14 years. 2)My guess is that today our average seat price is closer to £15 than £25 actually paid. Remember 80% of fans are paying season ticket price averages per seat, and say about 30% of fans enjoy some kind of concession or other, old, young, schools etc. So with that one third reduction on £25 you can make that 427 matches or 21 years. 3)New seats are not free to maintain, service, sell, clean, steward etc. which further darkens the calculation, so lets call it 500 games or 25 years. 4)Finally anyone preparing a business plan would need to factor in the risk of us dropping out of the Prem ahead of payback. Don't know how you would do that but you can bet someone has. I'd love us to do it but at the same time I can see why it would not head an investment priority list based on the finances alone. Point 2.If you sell as one match only not season ticket the revenue raised would be matchday price which is higher?(less any any concessions) but you are bringing people in who at the moment are excluded.
|
|
|
Post by thebet365 on Apr 9, 2015 15:50:23 GMT
7 years payback then at 20 home games a season if I accept that calculation. That alone would have the accountants muttering in to their tea cups. But I can see 4 huge problems with that calculation: 1Anyone preparing the business case today would work with an assumption that the new seats would be full no more than 50% of the time so that makes 282 matches or 14 years. 2)My guess is that today our average seat price is closer to £15 than £25 actually paid. Remember 80% of fans are paying season ticket price averages per seat, and say about 30% of fans enjoy some kind of concession or other, old, young, schools etc. So with that one third reduction on £25 you can make that 427 matches or 21 years. 3)New seats are not free to maintain, service, sell, clean, steward etc. which further darkens the calculation, so lets call it 500 games or 25 years. 4)Finally anyone preparing a business plan would need to factor in the risk of us dropping out of the Prem ahead of payback. Don't know how you would do that but you can bet someone has. I'd love us to do it but at the same time I can see why it would not head an investment priority list based on the finances alone. Point 2.If you sell as one match only not season ticket the revenue raised would be matchday price which is higher?(less any any concessions) but you are bringing people in who at the moment are excluded. Not to mention, new stand, new sponsor. There's not an awful lot of short term gain from doing the corner, but with the money knocking around in football these days it wouldn't hurt em to improve the ground and facilities. The longer it's left the higher the costs to do the job if they were to eventually decide to do it.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Apr 9, 2015 17:06:28 GMT
I've heard somewhere that the club want to see an increase in season ticket sales? I personally wouldn't wait, especially when other sales strategies could be used. Lets use an example, season tickets for adults , they range from £344 - £519 (Early Bird Prices). That works out at £18 - £27 per ticket. The club have also introduced a £294 season ticket. So lets say 22,000 people buy season tickets each year, that means that about 81% of fans there on a match day have been offered a discount already to some extent. Therefore my proposal would be to use the new corner as an individual match day sales section only (No season ticket holders). Some promotion examples. 1) Groups of 4 (£100) - £25 per ticket. 2) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 25% off second ticket. 3) Buy 1 Adult Ticket get 50% off kids ticket. If after the first season there was a demand for season tickets in that area, then the corner can be split into 2 sections. 1 section for new season ticket holders and another section to continue with what was put into place during the first season. So blindingly obvious it hurts. Sadly I doubt the morons in charge of this kind of thing can work that out. To be fair our tickets are already among the cheapest in the league and good value. We need a bigger fanbase.
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Apr 9, 2015 17:15:26 GMT
Some simple figures for someone to rip to shreds : -
Assume a cost of £6m for 1800 seats.
Assume BET365 can get a reasonable rate of finance say 6%
Yearly interest 360k, or £200 per seat, just over a tenner per game per seat.
Or rip the fans off for the A****+ games and give 'em away to anybody for a £1 for the other games.
AND SPEND ANY PROFIT BUYING A TANNOY SYSTEM THAT WORKS!!!!
|
|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Apr 9, 2015 17:18:26 GMT
So blindingly obvious it hurts. Sadly I doubt the morons in charge of this kind of thing can work that out. To be fair our tickets are already among the cheapest in the league and good value. We need a bigger fanbase. But with an ability to attend and sit together. I don't mind the cost of a matchday ticket as I think it should be higher than those who buy ST's
|
|
|
Post by miggo on Apr 9, 2015 17:29:03 GMT
The club will fill in the bloody corners when they are good and ready, an infinite amount of threads on here won't change that.
Put it to bed already.
Sent from my C6603 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Apr 9, 2015 17:45:50 GMT
Couple of people have mentioned increased sale value. Um who do they have in mind as buyers? The Vale, Crewe maybe?
|
|
|
Post by surreystokie on Apr 9, 2015 17:49:12 GMT
I've already posted, earlier in this thread, that the overriding financial arguments, largely negative, on here, will be outdated this time next year, if we stay in the PL.
Because of our less than creditable financial intake, due to poorish sponsorships (relatively speaking) and cheap ticketing, we will then be unable to spend our hugely increased monies, due to FFP (financial fair play) but will have spare cash for capital expenditure, which is what building - in our case a new corner stand - is. Therefore there will be NO financial reason for not going ahead.
What other reason can be offered for not improving our embarrassingly poor stadium, aesthetically? I want a stadium of which we can be proud in keeping with the other aspects so much improved, like a highly respected manager and better players.
After next season, we can have both.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2015 19:27:55 GMT
Some very intelligent insight on the more recent posts
and having read carefully the most recent couple of pages - the argument to my eyes remains compelling as ever
and the clubs position remains out of step with what should really be happening in this case.
as I said before - Ive seen plenty of examples in industry where, company directors, chairmen and chief executives, simply fail to act at the right time
- preferring to 'wait and see'.
in this case it remains pretty plain, there is a failure to act in timely fashion, no matter how you choose to crunch the numbers
it is the most credible conclusion to draw.
It frustrates and saddens me greatly, given the great strides made so far and, given the circumstances presently surrounding our club -
that the ownership and management continue to procrastinate on this relatively small but nevertheless important issue.
I will keep raising this issue - try to keep it in focus because it is another step in our evolution that needs to be taken - and is now well overdue to my mind.
|
|