Are you talking about home or away? Anyway,I would appreciate a link to where you're getting this info so that I can see where we stand. Thanks.
Wolves did sell out. A couple had pretty embarrasing followings, Wigan and Stoke were the 2 worst I can remember. Another thing about Loftus Road is the lack of appeal to away supporters, not only is Craven Cottage appealing to tourists but also to away fans, who often would much rather visit the river side and have a nice day out than go to some grotty away end submerged in the white city estate. Each to their own I guess.
Part of the reason we're over building is they want a stadium with a roof. Doing that means that expanding would cost about as much as building a new stadium, so they're building it too big IMO, for current demand. I think their reasoning is that they want to make sure the space is available to cope with the seating demands that they want to give the club, as they continue to invest and (hopefully) bring in success. I think that most reasonable supporters would agree that we're the smallest club in the borough currently, all be it we have more loyal followers than Fulham. But as was mentioned earlier, there's a lot of people in the Home Counties that can come and watch a game, and we'll look to convert a good proportion of them over time - as most clubs have done.
Billionth,if it wasn't for the fact you never lie I would start to think you're talking ****e and made the whole 5th best % up.
I think this is the link what Bill was referring to CPofL http://www.talksport.co.uk/magazine...gues-biggest-away-attendances-revealed-172653
Really? I don't think it can be because nowhere on that link does it show QPR as having the "fifth best % of our allocation filled." What that link shows is the number of fans at your away games but it does not differentiate if they are home or away supporters. In fact the reason why QPR,Swansea and WBA are at the 'top' of that list is most likely because you take fewer away fans and the excess tickets are sold to the home support. Also most clubs at the 'top' of that list are teams that are in the lower category pricing thus making the games more attractive to the home support. Also the teams at the 'top' of that list are the one's shown least on tv so to see those games people have to actually go. That list actually shows the exact opposite of what you're trying to prove ffs. Still thanks for the link it did at least show one fact we can't deny. QPR are the worst supported team in the Prem,even worse than Wigan. Billion,is that the link you meant or is there another that actual shows what you claim?
That table at the bottom is based on average home attendances. Considering we had the smallest ground in the league, we never had a chance of finishing higher.
Thank god for that because if you'd claimed you had a bigger away support than ManU I really would have thought you were a moron.
The attendance was 75505 (source: BBC Sport). According to wiki, OT holds 75811, so we definitely sold at least 2700
OK,once again, if you don't take up all your allowance then the tickets are sold to home fans. That is a fact at Chelsea,ManU,Liverpool,Arsenal and all the big clubs. It might not happen at QPR because you struggle to sell your tickets anyway but at BIG clubs all seats are sold that are available.
It's not a theory. At SB we offer away teams 2 options. 1500 or 3000 seats. Which ever they choose they have to pay for every ticket regardless of if they sell it so if they sold 2100 they still have to pay for 3000. Because of that many teams coming to Chelsea choose 1500 and the rest are sold to home fans. Same at many clubs. That is how it works. Honestly,you're starting top look a bit silly now.
I understand that, theory was the wrong word. By your explanation, if Man Utd offer the same away allocation as you do, then we can't have taken 1800 and for the game to still have been a sell out.
Best I can find out,ManU offer away tickets in increments of 100 not 1500 like us. So there is your answer.
