Huddersfield fans complaining about the away ticket prices and boycotting

[oaklandrdblade]

>The Westfield Corner is nice. Its where I go
best seats in the building.. plus you don't get incinerated in the sun and drowned in the rain.. the viewing angle is near perfect.. just don't tell anyone.. i may be back next season.. the 'gerrit dahn't pitch' mob are doing my head in already on the kop

You can transfer up there by paying the difference between a kop ticket and the corner price, it's what I usually do as My 9 year old can see so much better.

 

[Revolution]

I can see a case for one league game being a category "A" game this season: the Wednesday game. No other opposition deserves this ranking. We are in League One, for crying out loud.

 

[raul]

There begins the race to the bottom, with the fans being the losers.

UTB

The penny (plus booking fee) drops. However, until fans stop sniping across the divides about "we're ripping you off because you rip us off" and turn all their guns on the clubs, it'll just continue.

Works in Germany after all.

 

[axel smeets]

United are completely and utterley wrong on this one, especially the extra 10% on top ffs. Again though, just check out Huddersfield's match day pricing for CAT A games. The lowest adult price is £23, the highest £28 so again it is not like there is a massive disparity between the two clubs' pricing structure. I mean, £26 to sit on the Kop? Do Huddersfield fans not realise that we will be charged somewhere in the same region as they are paying to come to the Lane?

The only difference is that this match is being played first, therefore they are up in arms about it first. We no doubt will be pissed off when we get our allocation in February and we are paying £25+. Like someone said earlier, it is the race to the bottom and BOTH sets of supporters are the losers. Yeovil have the got the prices right, £16 is what all third tier fans should be paying.

 

[Linz]

The penny (plus booking fee) drops. However, until fans stop sniping across the divides about "we're ripping you off because you rip us off" and turn all their guns on the clubs, it'll just continue.

The issue is, when clubs get so much income from ticket sales, no club is going to want to do the honourable thing and reduce their prices without all the others doing so, because they'd be leaving themselves in a poorer position to their competitors.

Along with wage caps across the leagues to limit outgoings, I'd impose ticket price restrictions so that ticket income was proportional to your capacity (the bigger your ground, the less you can charge for tickets) and on a sliding scale throughout the leagues. So no one in the Championship paid more than the Premiership etc.

It'd be a pain in the arse to work out and take more of a mathematical genius than I of a Friday morning... but it would level the playing field.

But I'm not in charge, so what I think is pretty irrelevant.

 

[Revolution]

The issue is, when clubs get so much income from ticket sales, no club is going to want to do the honourable thing and reduce their prices without all the others doing so, because they'd be leaving themselves in a poorer position to their competitors.

Some clubs have had a go. Bradford and Hartlepool have both tried this, and in Bradford's case cheap season tickets have proved very popular to the extent that net income remains the same. Hartlepool's scheme is embryonic.

About 20 years ago a then Division 4 Cardiff tried a pay-as-they-play system where ground admission was linked to their league position. It was only a couple of quid if they were in the bottom half, and went up on a sliding scale. they got promoted and attendance improved dramatically. That would have less of an effect now given the vast increase in season ticket sales at most clubs, but it's innovation that should be considered.

Look at it this way: at every United home game this season bar one, the likelihood is that there will be at least 10,000 unused seats. Personally, I think it's folly not to consider ways to fill them.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

Thats a very well considered and sensible idea Linz. Just a shame it will never happen.

I would vote you for FIFA presidency with those sorts of policies.

 

[raul]

I'm not a million miles away, because with salary caps now it should be possible to work out some sort of linkage. A maximum price should be set per League to reflect the standard of the fare on offer. If clubs wish to offer, full time or otherwise, under this then they are free to do so.

 

[Linz]

I'm not a million miles away, because with salary caps now it should be possible to work out some sort of linkage.

Are the salary caps becoming compulsory? Because at the moment, they're more of an opt-in guideline.

 

[Revolution]

I'd impose ticket price restrictions so that ticket income was proportional to your capacity (the bigger your ground, the less you can charge for tickets) and on a sliding scale throughout the leagues.

This would be difficult to work given the capacity variance: for example, look at the difference between the size of Old Trafford and Loftus Road, or The Sty and Chesterfield's new ground, to give jsut 2 examples.

I'm with you all the way on salary caps, though.

 

[Linz]

This would be difficult to work given the capacity variance: for example, look at the difference between the size of Old Trafford and Loftus Road, or The Sty and Chesterfield's new ground, to give jsut 2 examples.

I know... but the problem is that even if we make all the prices the same, Manchester United can potentially multiply that ticket income by 76k while QPR can only multiply it by a maximum of 18k. While the salary cap is based on income, the winners and the losers will remain pretty much the same. Those with the biggest grounds can afford to pay the best wages to the best players.

It's hard to balance out fairness with competitiveness.

 

[raul]

Are the salary caps becoming compulsory? Because at the moment, they're more of an opt-in guideline.

I'd like to think that the Football League will eventually see it as a necessity. How many of their member clubs have gone into ADministration over the past few years?

Also, outside of the FL thus far I'll grant you an increasing number of "Entrepreneurs" coming in and "saving clubs", only to then encourage over-spending, deciding they want their loans back when the clubs can't pay,making off with the grounds in lieu, "redeveloping" them then disapearing over the hill with the proceeds. Protect and Survive.

 

[Rustyblade]

I'm not a million miles away, because with salary caps now it should be possible to work out some sort of linkage. A maximum price should be set per League to reflect the standard of the fare on offer. If clubs wish to offer, full time or otherwise, under this then they are free to do so.

And we saw how that worked out with the university fees. All charged the max.

 

[S64 Blade]

The only real way ticket prices can be effectively reduced is by fans voicing their dismay by terms of boycott. But with football being an addictive hobby for most, that ain't going to happen.

 

[Bladesman]

The issue is, when clubs get so much income from ticket sales, no club is going to want to do the honourable thing and reduce their prices without all the others doing so, because they'd be leaving themselves in a poorer position to their competitors.

Some clubs have had a go. Bradford and Hartlepool have both tried this, and in Bradford's case cheap season tickets have proved very popular to the extent that net income remains the same. Hartlepool's scheme is embryonic.

About 20 years ago a then Division 4 Cardiff tried a pay-as-they-play system where ground admission was linked to their league position. It was only a couple of quid if they were in the bottom half, and went up on a sliding scale. they got promoted and attendance improved dramatically. That would have less of an effect now given the vast increase in season ticket sales at most clubs, but it's innovation that should be considered.

Look at it this way: at every United home game this season bar one, the likelihood is that there will be at least 10,000 unused seats. Personally, I think it's folly not to consider ways to fill them.

Exactly but SUFC are complacent and aslong as we atleast get 15,000 in the ground it seems they are not massively bothered about filling the rest of the ground. Just it makes the ground developments look a complete waste of time especially when we know that it is possible to fill BDTBL.

 

[Darren]

I know... but the problem is that even if we make all the prices the same, Manchester United can potentially multiply that ticket income by 76k while QPR can only multiply it by a maximum of 18k. While the salary cap is based on income, the winners and the losers will remain pretty much the same. Those with the biggest grounds can afford to pay the best wages to the best players.

It's hard to balance out fairness with competitiveness.

In the good old days gate money was shared out equally (so QPR would get half of Man Utd's 76K receipts and Man Utd would get half of QPR's 18K receipts). This was something of a redistibutive mechanism and meant that teams like Burnley, Ipswich, Derby and Forest could win the league.

That system was abolished in 1982ish and it may not be conicidence that, since then, only clubs from the big cities of Manchester, London, Liverpool and Leeds have won the league (with the sole exception of Jack Walker/Blackburn in 1995).

 

[beechblade]

The only real way ticket prices can be effectively reduced is by fans voicing their dismay by terms of boycott. But with football being an addictive hobby for most, that ain't going to happen.

Or players lowering their wages (i.e wage caps brought in. For everyone and not just based around club incomes.) After all that's probably the main factor why most clubs like ourselves can't lower ticket prices drastically.

 

[S64 Blade]

Most clubs are in a mess financially, even considering a reduction in players wages. So I seriously doubt they'd be willing to do the fans a favour by lowering match prices.

Even if that was not the case, one would assume most owners would rather have higher revenue and potential profit, they are business men after all.

 

[davidpinder]

So Huddersfield are moaning about paying £28.50 to watch a game down the road against a side that we in the championship last season? They have just released prices for the Wycombe game a team who were in league 2 last season and its £22 a ticket. That is just £6.50 less i know what i'd do.

 

[Bert]

South Stand prices at The Lane

v. Huddersfield £31
v. Bury £15


Which idiot at The Lane dreamt that up?

 

[SwissBlade]

South Stand prices at The Lane

v. Huddersfield £31
v. Bury £15


Which idiot at The Lane dreamt that up?

Kop Season Ticket cost per game £13

 

[Bladeforlife]

The Huddersfield saga (in terms of prices)

No complaint from them about hartlepool game, but creating a huge fuss over this one.
Price of a ticket £28.50 our game £25 Hartlepool game
Train fare £7.45 our game £31.75 Hartlepool game
Plus i would imagine petrol costs would be a lot more to Hartlepool compared to Sheffield.
Added to the fact they are complaining about £28.50 if they did get promoted they would have most likely faced more expensive away tickets!
Price of a ticket and train fare to Hartlepool: £56.75
Price of a ticket and train fare to Sheffield: £39.95
Also take a look at some of there season ticket prices, over £500 some of them!
Thanks for reading,
I will be coming over from huddersfield for this one why cant they???

 

[cooperblade]

Every club has plenty of fans who like to shout loudly that they aren't attending matches because of the ticket prices. In some cases it's genuine and in others it's just an excuse not to go.

Thinking of some of the followings that Huddersfield have brought to BDTBL, I'd say that this is a nice little bandwagon for their non-travelling fans to jump on and that they will bring similar numbers to this game as they do to other midweek aways.

 

[Linz]

According to their Twitter feed, they've sold 350 tickets for the game.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Any idea of how that works out comparatively to their other away days?

 

[Quiff Boy]

they usually bring a decent crowd to the lane don't they?

 

[stannyblade]

they took 5000 to swillsborough last year Night match as well, I work with a Huddersfield fan who says that they are upset that united have exercised their rite to up the price.

I personally believe that no ticket in league 1 should be more than £20

 

[Rodders]

You know what? Fair play to them if they are boycotting. More people should make a stand about the prices of football in this country, rather than shrugging their shoulders and going "well down the road they're charging the same so that's the way it is".
A seat in the South Stand for the Hudders game is £31 - a total disgrace for Division 3 football, regardless of how many other offers are put on for other matches such as tomorrow's.

 

[Finance Blade]

I say let them have there boycott. It wont be helping there team's cause. This season our travelling support has been fantastic and helps motivate our team.

If they dont want to support their team. All the better for us. BDTBL will be rocking with our supporters drowning out their minority.

Bring it on!!

 

[stannyblade]

My mate said the same. It wont help them with 300 fans rather than 3000. Lets hope it just helps us to 3 more points in our drive towards the League 1 title