I did say in part its bo**ocks! That said if we accept other contributing factors its still not going to substantially change the overall revenue and change the landscape to the extent that gate receipts and associated match day revenue would ever become say more than 20% of overall revenues for the club, that's 3 times more than present. A significant impact yes, but overall the greatest revenue whilst in The Premier League will ALWAYS be the TV income. I would imagine within the UK and based on current revenues only 4 clubs may be the exception to this, and invariably that's those that qualify for the Champions League and progress within that competition season after season, and enjoy worldwide brand recognition. Aim high by all means but that 'game changing' position for City is many years away at best.
It is a double edged sword. If we become successful we get loads of plastics. If we get loads of plastics it will be harder to get tickets and go to Cup finals etc. It would be interesting to know how many of the Arsenal fans actually came from North London.
It's surprising how big a difference the matchday revenue can actually make, it's obviously dwarfed by the TV money, but it's still significant money. Ours is about £5.5m, which is the lowest in the league, the previous low was £5m at Wigan, but obviously they got relegated. To put things into perspective, the matchday revenue at Newcastle is £28m, even Norwich managed £12m and that's just matchday revenue, commercial revenue is on top of that and we come bottom of that list to. Details for all clubs 2012-13... http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/may/01/premier-league-club-accounts-debt-wages
As I've said before though, one point against Everton on the last day would have earned us £2.5m, is a huge increase in costs for fans justified when it is in relative terms a small contribution to overall funds?
You guys talking about plastics crease me up. I was probably with you when we had 3k crowds, I been going since 1954. However we need new people to discover us and join, we'ed look a bit bloody foolish when United come to the KC and only 3,000 of us turned up. Drop the kids plastic statement, we need these people like it or not.
Oh i think that SB will come up trumps(no wind jokes please) once again with 2 quality loans in august. Those 3 would certainly send out a clear message to all the PL clubs from 8th place down in the PL. Oh i think that he will be doing so. Trust in Bruce. LibDems had no chance just like the rest. Hull is a Labour safe seat at the moment. The sheep have voted.
Are you going to make up the short fall ? On your theory we may as well open the gates as and let any f**ker in for nowt. Why do Arsenal, Manchester Utd, Man City, Villa, Everton, Liverpool, and virtually anyone else in the Premier League bar Burnley, Swansea and Palace, have stadiums that can get well over 40,000 in then if it doesn't make any difference to the overall revenue, thus proving your in theory, in part, is arse wipe.
If you believe we can fill a 40k capacity stadium week in and week out you are deluded; we can't fill a 25k capacity stadium week and week out!
Got no problem with any of that, fact remains TV Money will for the foreseeable future (assuming we stay in The Prem) always represent by a BIG MARGIN City's main source of revenue. Reducing our dependency on TV revenue makes sound commercial sense but its not going to be a game changer short term
Top post on here for months. The amount of up their own arse comments about worthiness of other supporters to support our club gets on my nerves. The amount of times I've seen people complain about other supporters, who turn up every week, don't cause any trouble, pay their money and thoroughly enjoy themselves is ridiculous and incredibly narrow minded. Complaints include people using flasks, using blankets, wearing up-to-date replica shirts, people who go to the football with their dads, people who wear onesies, 'Weststanders' and many more. These are the same guys that say they know there are lots of other ways to earn the club money than change the name - all of which surely involves getting new people and building a fan base (like a few sensible posters have also pointed out on this post). To chastise these people who bring their money to OUR club is nonsensical. New supporters shouldn't be seen as 'plastics' but welcomed to our club and may be they'll get further involved, the more that they feel part of our club. Success brings these people, along with other things, get over it... we need them to become more successful. They may bring their own kids, who become more fanatical about the club and hence, we build! I realise this is my second rant on the issue but it was just nice to see someone who seems to be able to see past the snobbery and look to the bigger picture.
There is no snobbery. If you were an owner, or a regular client of an upmarket bar, you would not like that bar to be suddenly plagued by chavs and scallywags who are aggresive, lacking respect and tolerance and downright rude. This is much the same with regards flask wielders, shirters, onesie wearers etc. they are a blight on the club and an embarrasment carefully picked out by tv cameras in attempt to heap shame on our club and mould public perception to hate us as a club of fake plastic fans who do not deserve to be in the greatest league in the world. New supporters will always be welcomed but they should wear suitable football attire such as a Stone Island coat over a Fred Perry t-shirt and Levi jeans.
But we have filled it plenty of times. Even in the bottom division. I didn't say we needed a 40k stadium, although I have been part of a 40,000 plus crowd in Hull for a Hull City game against 3rd division opposition, proving the punters are out there. On your theory we will never know if we can get more then 25,000 for a league game because it will never be put to the test. Still think small, stay small eh?
I have also been at City games when we have far exceeded what we get at present, but that's in the past; we don't get anywhere near 40k now. Unfortunately in general terms the cost of attending games by comparison say to the 'Boothferry Park days' is far greater. Its generally accepted that the game is moving away from the average 'man on the street' due to the cost of attending. If City can validate that it would be cost effective to build a 40k capacity stadium I for one would be delighted; we must be achieving something fantastic on the pitch. I think a case could be put together now to expand to around the c30k capacity. Its not about thinking small and staying small, its about getting a reasonable financial return on any investment to expand the stadium capacity without which it wouldn't make any sense at all!
most football clubs in the pretty distant past could fill 30k plus stadiums , then as gates fell in the 80s along with the new Health ,Safety and public order designs to stadia meant clubs no longer able to fill large areas of a ground would reduce capacity in the areas it wasn't needed . without checking but i suspect , if a club wasnt a big club in the mid 80s (support wise) you will find the stadium will be small today. (>30k)
Your point is very valid. Most clubs in the Premier League just fall short of capacity. We get crowds of 24,000 because we have a capacity of 26,000. If we had a 40,000 seater we would, imo, get 38-39,000. We have proved many times, in the past, even in lower divisions, that we can get crowds of 40,000 if the entertainment is right. As you say, think small, stay small.
