Wigan Athletic Season Tickets only £199

[wizadry]

Isn't it about generating more revenue ? If we reduce prices to £200 on the Kop will it increase revenues for the business ? If we have 14k seasons tickets holders paying at average of £300 now that is £4.2mill.Reducing to £200 we would have to shift 21k season tickets just to match that. Is that really going to happen ? (I know that doesn't include programme sales etc )

The Pigs upped their prices considerably for this season, attendances are well below what would be expected but I bet their revenue has increased as they haven't reversed that decision for next years tickets..

Bradford revenues will be much lower

Wigan and Huddersfield are trying to drum up support as their attendances are poor

McCabe hasn't got many things right in recent years but the pricing policy looks ok to me

The thing is though, Bart, is that Bradford and the like are paying as I see it League one prices for the standard of football or entertainment they're watching, we, imo, are overpaying for the standard of football and entertainment we are watching, which is coincidently in the same league.

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

SUFC's prices have been consistently some of the keenest in the country under McCabe's tenure. It's one thing you can't really moan about*

*unless it's a slow news day and there isn't an Adkins interview to send you apoplectic with rage

I think the phrase you're looking for is "mad with rage"

 

[alcoblade]

We go to watch United play football, not improve corporate revenue streams.

I don't give a shit about putting more money in rich business mens pockets.

The two are still directly linked, however much you don't like it.

More revenue equals better players equals more success. It's that simple, however hard United try to test that rule.

More success equals more support. There are no examples of lower tier football clubs getting enormous crowds just because they have cheap entry.

This is just the harsh reality, however harsh it is for those on the wrong side of the affordability line.

UTB

 

[wizadry]

The two are still directly linked, however much you don't like it.

More revenue equals better players equals more success. It's that simple, however hard United try to test that rule.

More success equals more support. There are no examples of lower tier football clubs getting enormous crowds just because they have cheap entry.

This is just the harsh reality, however harsh it is for those on the wrong side of the affordability line.

UTB

I must admit I'm in agreement. I'm not fussed what I pay to watch us as hopefully paying more means better players but we don't seem to work like that, we pay more money to watch but still get shit players so why don't we consider paying lower prices for our games?

 

[west_yorks_blade]

There are no examples of lower tier football clubs getting enormous crowds just because they have cheap entry.


UTB

That statement may be true, although I'm not sure why 'enormous' crowds' should be the measure.
Bradford significantly increased their support by dropping prices this season and Huddersfield certainly will next season.

 

[alcoblade]

I must admit I'm in agreement. I'm not fussed what I pay to watch us as hopefully paying more means better players but we don't seem to work like that, we pay more money to watch but still get shit players so why don't we consider paying lower prices for our games?

In agreement with who though?

We'll pay just over a tenner a match next season. If we saved £3 on that, nobody would be thankful if the football was shite. When we are shite, no price makes it worth the difference.

Our ability to generate income, and our ability to squander that income, are two completely separate inputs.
unfortunately, fans measure one output (winning), and then make false conclusions on that. It's perfectly understandable, but still wrong.

UTB

 

[wizadry]

In agreement with who though?

We'll pay just over a tenner a match next season. If we saved £3 on that, nobody would be thankful if the football was shite. When we are shite, no price makes it worth the difference.

Our ability to generate income, and our ability to squander that income, are two completely separate inputs.
unfortunately, fans measure one output (winning), and then make false conclusions on that. It's perfectly understandable, but still wrong.

UTB

So if you pay £30 for a shite game or a tenner for a shite game it doesn't make a difference? This I'm not in agreement with.

 

[alcoblade]

That statement may be true, although I'm not sure why 'enormous' crowds' should be the measure.

The measure is success.

What percentage of fans who will be "skint" next season at £288 a season ticket will still be "skint" if we were in the premiership. I'll be pessesmistic in your favour, and suggest 10 percent. Then we'd gain another 50 percent on top.

So what drives crowds? Success. It's laid out bare in the facts in front of us.

Income is the major factor in success. Again, it's just cold hard fact, though one as a club we make an outstanding effort to counter. But it still holds true overall.

UTB

 

[west_yorks_blade]

The measure is success.

What percentage of fans who will be skint next season at £288 a season ticket will still be skint if we were in theme premiership. I'll be pessesmistic in your favour, and suggest 10percent. Then we'd gain another 50 percent in top.

So what drives crowds? Success. It's laid out bare in the facts in front of us.

Income the major factor in success. Again, it's just Coke hard fact, though one as a club we make an outstanding effort to counter. But it still holds true overall.

UTB

If income is the major factor in success then how do we end up 5 years in league one with our gates, compared to Bournemouth, Rotherham, I could go on and on? Do they charge a few grand per season ticket to make ups for the lack of fans?

 

[alcoblade]

So if you pay £30 for a shite game or a tenner for a shite game it doesn't make a difference? This I'm not in agreement with.

No, you're pissed off no matter what.

But if you drive up your income you drive up the quality of players you can sign and you drive up success.


And when you are successful, everyone seems to be able to afford sky high prices, hence premiership grounds being full.

UTB

 

[WhiteHawk]

Can't complain at all about our prices. My season ticket for next season is only £19 more than the first one that I got 14 years ago.

 

[alcoblade]

If income is the major factor in success then how do we end up 5 years in league one with our gates, compared to Bournemouth, Rotherham, I could go on and on? Do they charge a few grand per season ticket to make ups for the lack of fans?

You can go on and on about United, but I can go on and on about the rest of the footballing world. You surely can't be disputing this?

UTB

 

[boo radley]

So the Kop renewal price is how much this season? Had nowt through yet.

 

[west_yorks_blade]

You can go on and on about United, but I can go on and on about the rest of the footballing world. You surely can't be disputing this?

UTB

Forget United then if they are not now relevant to this discussion.
Income is not the major factor in relative success for Rotherham, or Brentford or Bournemouth. You surely can't be disputing this?

 

[Tyler Durden]

So the Kop renewal price is how much this season? Had nowt through yet.

£288 if you do it before 30th April.

 

[cooperblade]

Only in football could people be happy to pay more than twice as much as other people out of blind loyalty

Are Beats headphones twice as good as the brand that costs half the price?

Does Evian taste twice as nice as Aldi's own brand water?

In pretty much every consumer product ever, people will pay whatever they're willing to pay.

If my season ticket was £1,000 next season, I'd renew. If I could have one at the Sty for £1, I wouldn't bother.

 

[alcoblade]

Forget United then if they are not now relevant to this discussion.
Income is not the major factor in relative success for Rotherham, or Brentford or Bournemouth. You surely can't be disputing this?

Income is very difinitely a factor. All those clubs found themselves far above their long term average position as a result of extra income being pumped pumped in by benefactors.

But despite your failure to make that point, I accept there will always be examples that sit outside the norm, us being the perfect one. Overall there's a clear picture that I I don't need to paint. It's just a fact. You being pissed off that you can't afford your son's ticket next season doesn't alter any harsh reality, and United setting pricing based on these statistical fliers would be further lunacy on our part.

UTB

 

[west_yorks_blade]

Income is very difinitely a factor. All those clubs found themselves far above their long term average position as a result of extra income being pumped pumped in by benefactors.

But despite your failure to make that point, I accept there will always be examples that sit outside the norm, us being the perfect one. Overall there's a clear picture that I I don't need to paint. It's just a fact. You being pissed off that you can't afford your son's ticket next season doesn't alter any harsh reality, and United setting pricing based on these statistical fliers would be further lunacy on our part.

UTB

I appreciate that my examples are outliers, but you did make some sweeping statements, which I was responding to.

I can certainly agree that clubs with better incomes tend to be more successful, although many of the top teams now were up there before obscene money crept into the game, so maybe a chicken and egg argument. I am also not so naive as to think that Football and business are now inextricably interwoven - more is the pity.

On a different tac, and not a question directly to you - what does my additional £200 per season over a Wigan or Huddersfield supporter buy me?
Not more success, not better players, not better performances, not a better standard of opposition.
So does it just fund higher wages for players like Hammond or the lacklustre management team?

 

[wizadry]

No, you're pissed off no matter what.

But if you drive up your income you drive up the quality of players you can sign and you drive up success.


And when you are successful, everyone seems to be able to afford sky high prices, hence premiership grounds being full.

UTB

We are going round in circles here but I'm in general agreement.

We know more revenue should mean better players but it doesn't work like that for us.

My point is that surely in anyone's book, that if a team who is in the same division i.e. Bradford is paying way less than us to watch a game but is above us in the league then surely we are over paying? If people can't see this fact then i can't go any further on the subject.

 

[alcoblade]

I appreciate that my examples are outliers, but you did make some sweeping statements, which I was responding to.

I can certainly agree that clubs with better incomes tend to be more successful, although many of the top teams now were up there before obscene money crept into the game, so maybe a chicken and egg argument. I am also not so naive as to think that Football and business are now inextricably interwoven - more is the pity.

On a different tac, and not a question directly to you - what does my additional £200 per season over a Wigan or Huddersfield supporter buy me?
Not more success, not better players, not better performances, not a better standard of opposition.
So does it just fund higher wages for players like Hammond or the lacklustre management team?

I can't defend the mess United make if things. But as I've said, that's another story.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

We are going round in circles here but I'm in general agreement.

We know more revenue should mean better players but it doesn't work like that for us.

My point is that surely in anyone's book, that if a team who is in the same division i.e. Bradford is paying way less than us to watch a game but is above us in the league then surely we are over paying? If people can't see this fact then i can't go any further on the subject.

But you pull out Bradford and state that as some sort of deal clincher. What about all time others that we are cheaper than? There are far more of them, as we are factually one of the cheapest.

However hard anyone spins this, the facts are categorically on my side. The only circle is being travelled is by those who don't want to accept he facts.

UTB

 

[Ben_1982]

Probably cuz they're desperate for fans . We ain't

 

[west_yorks_blade]

So a poor fan base should be rewarded and a larger, loyal fan base should be squeezed for more money.

 

[wizadry]

But you pull out Bradford and state that as some sort of deal clincher. What about all time others that we are cheaper than? There are far more of them, as we are factually one of the cheapest.

However hard anyone spins this, the facts are categorically on my side. The only circle is being travelled is by those who don't want to accept he facts.

UTB

I'm not going to start getting the ST prices out for clubs above us that will no doubt be paying less than us to watch a game in general. As much as I personally couldn't give a fuck what we pay for League bastard one we are over paying to watch the shit we have. And it's not just our club, other clubs coming to the lane have also been shite, the standard we pay for is hugely over priced and to prove this, Whitehawk has said we only paid a small difference to what he paid years ago. He should do, we're in League One ffs, the standard of football has to make a difference as in any industry.

 

[Large Mendonca]

What have Wigan, Huddersfield and Bradford all got in common that we haven't ?

Clue: the ball is oval shaped

 

[wizadry]

So a poor fan base should be rewarded and a larger, loyal fan base should be squeezed for more money.

If people can't see we're over paying to watch this standard of football then McCabe must be doing a good job somewhere? You can't fucking make this shit up. The same people will be slagging him off when we don't bring any cunt in due to a measly 10% reduction in ST prices. I know, it's laughable ain't it!

 

[west_yorks_blade]

What have Wigan, Huddersfield and Bradford all got in common that we haven't ?

Clue: the ball is oval shaped

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago:

So a poor fan base should be rewarded and a larger, loyal fan base should be squeezed for more money.

 

[wizadry]

What have Wigan, Huddersfield and Bradford all got in common that we haven't ?

Clue: the ball is oval shaped

They're all of a smaller stature with smaller towns and cities, have less income coming in from crowds but are still above us in the league ladder, Is that it?

 

[Large Mendonca]

They are all Rugby towns and could be competing with their respective local Rugby teams for bums on seats. That's how I read it anyway - I could be wrong.....

 

[alcoblade]

If people can't see we're over paying to watch this standard of football then McCabe must be doing a good job somewhere? You can't fucking make this shit up. The same people will be slagging him off when we don't bring any cunt in due to a measly 10% reduction in ST prices. I know, it's laughable ain't it!

I won't be slagging McCabe off for lack of investment, it's difficult do that when despite some people's myopia (), he's made us one if the cheapest teams to watch in the division we're in.

I'll be slagging him off ( as I have for a decade) for squandering any investment on more shite.

UTB