|
Post by Boomer on May 20, 2014 17:26:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Saint on May 20, 2014 17:35:12 GMT
I just hope our's don't increase!
|
|
|
Post by minty on May 20, 2014 20:07:36 GMT
Good for Hemel. Their attendances, like ours have gone up last season and it's good to reward the fans with a price freeze. It's important to keep any floating fans onboard which helps build momentum gathered over last season. I hope we follow Hemel's example!!
|
|
|
Post by Saint on May 20, 2014 21:58:41 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2014 22:17:42 GMT
I've got a bad feeling about next season's prices. Don't know why, hope I'm wrong!
|
|
|
Post by Canary Saint on May 20, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
Had a quick flick round other Conference sides web sites and admissions vary between £10 & £12. Concessions general start at 60 rather 65.
If the Club do put up prices, one has got to start to thinking that they are taking the p1ss (or that is the cost of the dream).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 8:06:39 GMT
I'd hope that £12 for admission is enough for consolidation (and play-offs with a bit of luck) in the Conference South. A bit of refining of the first team squad, the money from last season's cup runs helping (if it hasn't been used already), hopefully deeming a price rise unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by cheshuntsaint on May 21, 2014 8:29:19 GMT
I for one couldn't care less about Hemel's admission prices
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 8:42:49 GMT
neither could i.
sure chelmsford charge 14£
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 8:46:20 GMT
bath 13£
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on May 21, 2014 11:57:25 GMT
Some interesting views and comments. Having quickly flicked through the Conference South sites, here is a resumé of their admission prices, which are for 2014/15 unless stated otherwise in bold.
£14 Dartford
£13 Boreham Wood, Chelmsford, Gosport, Havant (2013/14)
£12 Basingstoke, Bath City, Bishop's Stortford, Bromley (2013/14), Concord Rangers(2013/14), Eastbourne Borough, Farnborough, Lowestoft, St. Albans City (2013/14), Staines (2013/14), Sutton Utd (2013/14), Wealdstone, Weston-super-mare
£10 Ebbsfleet (2013/14), Hemel Hempstead, Maidenhead Utd (2013/14), Whitehawk (2013/14).
As minty rightly says, a tremendous momentum has built up over the latter half of last season, with various initiatives and this impetus must not be lost. Prior to the St. Neots game in mid January our average gate was 404. The average gate for the final 11 home games was 626, which is real progess, whichever way you look at it. Keeping prices sensible will not only maintain this progress but actively encourage even more people into the fold.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on May 21, 2014 12:13:52 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2014 14:58:45 GMT
Indeed, and yet 12£ at ours
|
|
|
Post by EFMTFTV on May 21, 2014 16:50:15 GMT
I heard a rumour that we wanted to raise ours to £15, that would be a massive piss take IMO I would accept a £1 rise for the higher standard we are playing but I agree it should be kept at £12
|
|
|
Post by Saint on May 21, 2014 17:07:18 GMT
£15 would do a lot of damage.
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on May 21, 2014 17:28:37 GMT
They should definately keep the prices the same at least for the first season back up into the connie south, I don't think the club would manage to keep as many fans as they did last time they put them up especially if we don't get off to a real flying start.
|
|
|
Post by notsorecentconvert on May 21, 2014 19:14:10 GMT
I find it hard to believe a rumour of £15. Not even football club directors would be that daft.
It would be ludicrous and, as a relatively new fan, it would put me off attending as frequently.
I already maintain a reasonably pricey season ticket at a league club, despite only making it to about half the league games.
Although cost isn't necessarily a major factor it is nevertheless a consideration. I don't mind hopping in the car knowing I can get a ticket, a bite to eat, a pint and sometimes a programme for £20.
I would say bumping the price up by 25% in one go would turn away a good couple of hundred people. Perhaps not immediately but after one or two dodgy results the crowds would dive.
I think £13 would be okay but perhaps the club should be more creative with their ticketing. Last season I took advantage of the two games for £20 offer they did a couple of times but it was almost an inside secret finding out about it. There was a mention in the programme but even the fella on the gate wasn't 100% certain.
|
|
|
Post by bob666 on May 21, 2014 21:46:45 GMT
Given that St Albans is relatively affluent I think key issue is perception of value rather than simple affordability. It not that large number of fans who simply could afford £15 but rather than many people would regard this as unreasonable. For me I do not think £14 for Conference South is any worse value than £12 for Calor league, and having the highest (I think) prices in the Calor league did not obviously effect attendance- although the counterfactual is unknowable . But if club do charge £14 I only be happy with this if I was also reassured that the management would have top 10 playing budget. If we plan on being the joint most expensive we have to be good. I would not be happy paying £14 to watch a relegation scrap. £14 to watch a palpably better side fair enough.
On ticketing I agree with recent convert. One, last year our season tickets offered a relatively poor discount compared to other clubs. Two, years ago I worked in the Northwest and Gateshead done a flexi 15 ticket which allowed buy admission to 15 league games in advance, at a discount. Its great for regulars who for whatever reason cannot quite guarantee attendance at every game. could we do something like this.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on May 22, 2014 0:02:52 GMT
Given that St Albans is relatively affluent I think key issue is perception of value rather than simple affordability. It not that large number of fans who simply could afford £15 but rather than many people would regard this as unreasonable. For me I do not think £14 for Conference South is any worse value than £12 for Calor league, and having the highest (I think) prices in the league did obviously effect attendance- although the counterfactual is unknowable . But if club do charge £14 I only be happy to with if I was also reassured that the management would have top 10 playing budget. If we plan on being the joint most expensive we have to be good. I would not be happy paying £14 to watch a relegation scrap. £14 to watch a palpably better side fair enough..................... Bob, not everyone in St. Albans is a banker/city trader and whatever any of the politicians may blithely choose to say, we are nowhere near being out of recession, to which I'm sure your average Joe would testify. I suspect that the vast majority of Saints supporters would find £14 (16.6% increase) more than unreasonable, regardless of the level of the playing budget. We should also not forget the 20% hike midway through the 2012/13 season.
|
|
|
Post by notsorecentconvert on May 22, 2014 7:47:22 GMT
Good points, Bob and Boomer... It is about perception of value for me, I guess. I think £12 for last season was just about fair enough (although the two friends I brought along a few times did remark that it seemed just a bit too much).
An increase of £1 would probably be fair enough. £2 would be pushing it. Any more would significantly jeopardise the good work the club has done attracting more fans over the past six months.
I don't think many people attending would know, or particularly care, whether £12 was the most expensive price in the Southern League Premier. They don't care that Arlesey or Banbury are only a tenner. But they will notice if the St Albans price jumps from the £12 they are used to paying to £14.
Let's be frank here, we go to watch Saints. There are not really any teams in the Conference South that are a huge draw compared to the Southern League Premier. On the face of it Bishop's Stortford and Whitehawk may as well be Banbury and Arlesey. Obviously the playing budget may need to be bigger and so the club needs money, in which case they need to be more creative about attracting sponsorship from local businesses.
I look at the club my friend supports, Wealdstone, and the way they have worked really hard to engage with fans and businesses to grow from almost nothing. Their matchday programme just won the Ryman League's best of the year award. They have loads of great sounding social events. My friend has, in the past, sponsored a player's kit and they got invited to a sponsors' dinner at the end of the season and got a shirt signed by that player.
Wealdstone need to be creative to attract money because they are not even playing in their home town. I must admit I don't sense the same energy and dynamism in terms of commercial opportunities at Clarence Park. Having said that, there's a fine line between attracting funding and offering creative opportunities to individuals and businesses to get involved without turning every matchday into a tedious invitation for the same people to empty their wallets further.
Anyway, that's all rather off topic. In terms of ticket prices, I hope the board are sensible and medium-term about it. I like bob666's idea of a 'season' ticket that entitles entry to, say, half the home league games of the purchaser's choice and is eligible for the whole season. That would definitely appeal to someone like me because various other commitments make it difficult to commit to every game. Admittedly, it might mean people pick and choose, particularly if the season doesn't get off to a good start, but it's cash up front for the club.
|
|
|
Post by Saint on May 22, 2014 12:29:04 GMT
Why, in reality, do our prices have to go up, when teams like Hemel, newly promoted as champions, having played good football last season, decide to keep their prices exactly, the same? Rising it upwards from £12 in our first season back at this level would not be good.
We have no idea how we're going to perform in this division with the current squad, and if thing's aren't going too well, but the entrance fee is £13 or 14, people are going to stop coming. The club aren't going to cut the prices mid-way through the season if we're doing badly.
I could understand an increase by a pound or two if it was our second or third season at this level, as by that point we would be established, and could try and push on for a play-off place.
But right now, putting prices up even further will not be a good idea, and £12 for this level is, I think, acceptable. Go beyond that, and you could risk damaging the 'casual' support.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2014 14:09:23 GMT
£1 extra to sit?
|
|
|
Post by EFMTFTV on May 22, 2014 14:20:55 GMT
That would be better Gaz The club made a big point about the seating now being free when the price was increased mid-season by 20% If you look around most people still stand so these people paid an extra £2 and sitters a extra £1
|
|
|
Post by COYS on May 22, 2014 14:58:23 GMT
I was thinking that. As a 'sitter' myself I was pleased to hear they were taking the charge off seating when they raised the price mid-season. I wouldn't feel too hard-done-by if they decided to add the pound back on for next season if it meant keeping general prices frozen. That way the club gets a little extra in its pocket but people still come through the gate. Having said that, I won't be able to make too many games next season so someone who will might have a different view on things!
|
|
|
Post by citycentresaint on May 22, 2014 22:30:52 GMT
Should stick at £12.
Spurs were offering Europa tickets for £20.
We need to be realistic and build on the good feeling around the club.
|
|
|
Post by davymac55 on May 23, 2014 7:37:29 GMT
Any price increase would be unacceptable especially in the light of other clubs maintain theirs having also been promoted. Any increase in income needs to come through an increase in crowds and 'paying' customers and the increased revenue that would bring in bar and other takings. The increase in our crowds last season was due to some good marketing ploys such as kids free and reduction for parents/ carers. That can still be used but obviously there is not a direct proportional increase in gate receipts -we need to look at getting as many season tickets sold ASAP and others have commented on the relative value. I believe, and I stand to be corrected, that missing two home games made the season ticket a 'loss'. Talk of £15 is madness and I hope this is not in order to make a hike to £13 seem reasonable as it would not be. £10 at Hemel and £13 at The park would see a 30% diff in prices and an absolute non-starter. Getting as many fans in the park as possible is what it is about. Not putting the financial pressure on those who have supported and stood by the club no matter what. and Finally, with few exceptions, the older concession rate is 60 at most clubs but not ours.
|
|
yellowalf
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 301
|
Post by yellowalf on May 23, 2014 15:25:41 GMT
Any increase in income needs to come through an increase in crowds and 'paying' customers and the increased revenue that would bring in bar and other takings. I agree entirely. Unfortunately the cost of running a football clubs doesn't increase on a par with inflation so it would be no surprise if players were asking for increased money to sign. We want a squad good enough to perform well next season at the higher level so it does seem unwise to expect that costs stay the same. However, to back up davymac's point by taking the 626 that Boomer notes was the average crowd for the final 11 games, adding £1 to the cost of admission will obviously bring in an additional £626 per game from that average. Alternatively, another 52 fans @ £12 would bring in £624 and gives the potential for more from the Saints Bar/golden goal/raffle/programmes/etc. We've got a good number of fans coming to games at the moment so it seems to me to be a more sensible option to increase the money they spend as part of the Clarence Park Experience (TM) than charge them more for getting into the ground in the first place and potentially reduce the average. I didn't bat an eye when admission went up to £12, I simply bought fewer golden goal and raffle tickets and occasionally forewent a programme. My match-day expenditure stayed the same and therefore the money the club made from me stayed the same. Paradoxically, had the admission stayed the same but something else had been made more attractive for me to buy I would have spent more money per game. We are strange creatures when it comes to spending our disposable income: the cost of football is fairly inelastic but the sense of injustice felt by football fans at being taken advantage of is very keen. I hope Tom Norman is thinking imaginatively about how to raise revenue this coming season. As many have said already, increasing the cost of admission is not the way to go about it.
|
|
pirate
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 295
|
Post by pirate on May 23, 2014 15:46:59 GMT
Any increase in income needs to come through an increase in crowds and 'paying' customers and the increased revenue that would bring in bar and other takings. I agree entirely. Unfortunately the cost of running a football clubs doesn't increase on a par with inflation so it would be no surprise if players were asking for increased money to sign. We want a squad good enough to perform well next season at the higher level so it does seem unwise to expect that costs stay the same. However, to back up davymac's point by taking the 626 that Boomer notes was the average crowd for the final 11 games, adding £1 to the cost of admission will obviously bring in an additional £626 per game from that average. Alternatively, another 52 fans @ £12 would bring in £624 and gives the potential for more from the Saints Bar/golden goal/raffle/programmes/etc. We've got a good number of fans coming to games at the moment so it seems to me to be a more sensible option to increase the money they spend as part of the Clarence Park Experience (TM) than charge them more for getting into the ground in the first place and potentially reduce the average. I didn't bat an eye when admission went up to £12, I simply bought fewer golden goal and raffle tickets and occasionally forewent a programme. My match-day expenditure stayed the same and therefore the money the club made from me stayed the same. Paradoxically, had the admission stayed the same but something else had been made more attractive for me to buy I would have spent more money per game. We are strange creatures when it comes to spending our disposable income: the cost of football is fairly inelastic but the sense of injustice felt by football fans at being taken advantage of is very keen. I hope Tom Norman is thinking imaginatively about how to raise revenue this coming season. As many have said already, increasing the cost of admission is not the way to go about it. What a great post. Absolutely.
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on May 23, 2014 17:03:20 GMT
As i said before i think it would be better to keep the prices the same at least for the first season back, keep players on the same wages (seems we have a good squad that want to play for the club and not the money) and then add in a bonus for top half/play-offs/promotion and reward them for the better we do and at the same time it should increase crowds the better the team do thus bringing in more money.
|
|
|
Post by ex-saintswebbo on May 23, 2014 19:20:54 GMT
The problem with St Albans City is that it makes zero money other than that taken on match day (excluding sponsorship etc.)
It's all well and good Hemel keeping their prices the same - they can! I would guess they make more on functions a month than City get in sponsorship all season.
I fear that the owners will do what they have to do....like it or not... I also fear that it may blow up in everyones faces long term.....
|
|