|
Post by horseman on Jan 16, 2014 10:32:13 GMT
The issue seems to me that most fans are disappointed or disgusted with our home form and performances. I am and that in the main is having an impact on the ticket price anger of the replay. Whilst the Charlton Supporters Trust are disappointed along with plenty of Oxford United fans over the decision to charge full league ticket prices, the decision from my understanding would have been made with the consultation with Charlton Football Club. Who is to say that both clubs agreed on the price to maximise the share of gate receipts to both clubs? Or did Charlton make representation and OUFC said 'No'. Did Oxford suggest lower prices but Charlton refused? It's not clear but I'd be interested to know. The rule about clubs having to agree on prices changed a couple of years ago did it not? Why would Charlton expect and be happy to see their fans charged full price at a league 4 ground when they themselves reduced their own prices. At the Valley the ball was in charltons court and they acted accordingly Now the ball is in Oxfords court and rather than think Long Term and of the Goodwill of their fans, they have kicked the ball straight over the fence end where nobody can retrieve it as the car park is empty.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Jan 16, 2014 10:36:11 GMT
Which is the better scenario reduce the prices keep your fan base happy and made to feel welcome + attract the floaters and encourage new support Or Charge full price make your fan base unhappy potentially hitting you on a long term basis+ reduce potential floaters attending and completely discourage new support One is a short sighted view the other has potential long term gain I know which I prefer. However, you're not acknowledgeing what may or may not have happened between the clubs when they discussed the replay ticket prices. Do you know that Charlton Football Club refused to Oxford's request to lower ticket prices? I don't but it is a potential scenario which may or may not have taken place.
|
|
|
Post by barryspang on Jan 16, 2014 10:41:26 GMT
I can see the clubs argument, but the goodwill argument is a fair one. I am a season ticket holder along with 2 mates and none of us are going to the replay because we are not happy to pay out that much to watch us at home at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by scotters on Jan 16, 2014 10:43:40 GMT
We put this to the club and the answer was that the club would roughly break even with a 3500 crowd at full price after only getting a 40% share of gate under cup rules and cost of putting on the game. So the cost of putting on this game is £59,500 then - am I reading this right? Meaning that assuming costs are fixed, 5,950 fans would be needed at a price of £10 - more in reality because of concessions - before any profit was made, right? This is all really interesting to me. According to my high school maths, if Oxford gets 40% of the net profits, and assuming that £59,500 cost of the game stays the same (and using the £17 and £10 mark as the average ticket price) ... Full price tickets - every fan below the 3500 mark costs OUFC £17. Every fan above the 3500 mark earns OUFC £6.80. £10 tickets - Every fan below the 5,950 mark costs OUFC £10. Every fan above the 5,950 mark earns OUFC £4. Am I way off?
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Jan 16, 2014 10:48:18 GMT
Goodwill is priceless. A happy customer tells nobody.....an unhappy one tells everybody.
As long as the bean counters are happy then all is well in the football world of money first & stuff the rest!
And they wonder why attendances are falling?
In this case a very small short term "gain" (or minimised loss) has alienated a good number of people who stump up every year for their season tickets....the very "customer" the Club DARE not lose.
Its not about the price difference.....its about the Club doing something right for the fans as an aknowledgement of what we can all see.
|
|
|
Post by mcf86 on Jan 16, 2014 10:55:28 GMT
How's it a loss, I thought Cup run money was an 'Unexpected windfall' and therefore not budgeted for? The club are working on those figures to break even with what it costs to put the game on. So yes it is a loss if the club are working on £59500 to host the game and are only going to get £42500 they have made a loss. It is much better to have a loss of £17K than a £13K loss.
The missing money will no doubt be used by the FA Cup money to help balance the books. I don't understand this bit, sorry. The cost of hosting the game is a factor whatever the gate receipts, and obviously will impact on any money made from the tie- but it seems to me (and others) that it's short termism when the Club should be looking to tempt back 'stay aways' or first time supporters. Yes, lowering the admission fee would probably mean breaking even at best for the Cup tie- but medium to long term there could be benefits.
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Jan 16, 2014 10:58:13 GMT
We put this to the club and the answer was that the club would roughly break even with a 3500 crowd at full price after only getting a 40% share of gate under cup rules and cost of putting on the game. So the cost of putting on this game is £59,500 then - am I reading this right? Meaning that assuming costs are fixed, 5,950 fans would be needed at a price of £10 - more in reality because of concessions - before any profit was made, right? This is all really interesting to me. According to my high school maths, if Oxford gets 40% of the net profits, and assuming that £59,500 cost of the game stays the same (and using the £17 and £10 mark as the average ticket price) ... Full price tickets - every fan below the 3500 mark costs OUFC £17. Every fan above the 3500 mark earns OUFC £6.80. £10 tickets - Every fan below the 5,950 mark costs OUFC £10. Every fan above the 5,950 mark earns OUFC £4. Am I way off? You also have to cost in TVP in this match as well. Reduced prices will encourage more away fans to attend, this match is not all about the home fans attending. How many would we have took to their place at full price.
|
|
|
Post by stevegilbert on Jan 16, 2014 12:28:57 GMT
The club are working on those figures to break even with what it costs to put the game on. So yes it is a loss if the club are working on £59500 to host the game and are only going to get £42500 they have made a loss. It is much better to have a loss of £17K than a £13K loss.
The missing money will no doubt be used by the FA Cup money to help balance the books. I don't understand this bit, sorry. The cost of hosting the game is a factor whatever the gate receipts, and obviously will impact on any money made from the tie- but it seems to me (and others) that it's short termism when the Club should be looking to tempt back 'stay aways' or first time supporters. Yes, lowering the admission fee would probably mean breaking even at best for the Cup tie- but medium to long term there could be benefits. I meant £30K loss instead of £13K! Bad typo there! I don't think a FA Cup replay against a struggling Championship side will bring back stay away fans long term. I have doubts we will win this game as the pitch will mean Charlton can actually play their passing football. Losing wont make fans want to come back in a hurry. You are better off doing a deal for a game like Accy at home.
|
|
|
Post by tonyw on Jan 16, 2014 12:44:52 GMT
Quick random question.
At £17 a ticket, I think none of us would be surprised if we get a crowd of less than 3500. If we believe what the club told Mark, that will therefore mean that we lose money on the game.
Do we then share that loss with Charlton and the FA according to their rules? After all, the net gate receipts will be negative.
|
|
|
Post by stevegilbert on Jan 16, 2014 13:01:32 GMT
It depends if the club are working 3500 fans to break even after Charlton have taken their cut.
Lots of possibilities as to why the club think 3500 will be the break even mark.
It is save to say they don't expect to make a profit by having the replay.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Jan 16, 2014 13:17:19 GMT
Its only £17 if bought in advance (plus booking fee).
IF I decided to drive down "on the day" its £19.50 at a bare minimum.
A little bit of incentive would encourage "wavering" supporters to make the effort...... as it is the Club have stuck up two fingers to them.
Maybe Oxvox or the other supporters groups should be finding out how the cost of nearly £60k is broken down..... thats a hell of a lot of money to open the gates, turn the lights on and chuck in a few minimum wage staff!!
|
|
|
Post by southstandyellow on Jan 16, 2014 13:45:23 GMT
I too find it hard to believe it costs 60 bags of sand to stage a game!
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on Jan 16, 2014 14:07:44 GMT
It depends if the club are working 3500 fans to break even after Charlton have taken their cut. Lots of possibilities as to why the club think 3500 will be the break even mark. It is save to say they don't expect to make a profit by having the replay. One of us is confused Steve. I thought any cut is taken AFTER break even (ie a cut on profits).
|
|
|
Post by iambungle on Jan 16, 2014 14:15:51 GMT
I too find it hard to believe it costs 60 bags of sand to stage a game! I'd say it cost Charlton at least that looking at the state of their pitch!
|
|
|
Post by oufcrealist on Jan 16, 2014 14:18:34 GMT
I don't understand this bit, sorry. The cost of hosting the game is a factor whatever the gate receipts, and obviously will impact on any money made from the tie- but it seems to me (and others) that it's short termism when the Club should be looking to tempt back 'stay aways' or first time supporters. Yes, lowering the admission fee would probably mean breaking even at best for the Cup tie- but medium to long term there could be benefits. I meant £30K loss instead of £13K! Bad typo there! I don't think a FA Cup replay against a struggling Championship side will bring back stay away fans long term. I have doubts we will win this game as the pitch will mean Charlton can actually play their passing football. Losing wont make fans want to come back in a hurry. You are better off doing a deal for a game like Accy at home.Do you honestly think more people would pay £10 to watch Accy than £10 to watch Charlton? In any event I just can't see it! IMO, the main reasons people are staying away at the moment is the form, tactics and the manager. There is just as much chance of disappointment being at home to Accy than anyone at the moment!! A missed opportunity by the club.
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Jan 16, 2014 14:30:06 GMT
£59,500 to put a match on?!?!?!
That's astonishing. We pay over £500,000 per year rent to play at the shithole, so what does the other £59 grand cover? If that's the cost of staging every game, then we would be paying out just shy of £2million per season before wages! Something doesn't add up here. Our lease allows us to play a certain number of cup games a season, and we've only played two home cup games so far, so it can't be that kassam is charging us extra for this game.
Either someone has got their wires crossed, or the club are not telling the truth...............
|
|
|
Post by rickspangle on Jan 16, 2014 15:43:43 GMT
It doesn't seem that long ago that clubs would be putting prices up for a game like this. It's the FA CUP 3RD ROUND ffs, not the zenith data systems reserve team challenge trophy qualifiers.
I don't know whether this thread tells us more about how far the status of the FA Cup has fallen, or how depressed our fan base has become.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2014 16:04:19 GMT
I don't know whether this thread tells us more about how far the status of the FA Cup has fallen, or how depressed our fan base has become. Good debating point! The FA Cup doesn't have the same cache that it had 20 years ago (or possibly longer). The final at Wembley was always the last competitive match of the season. It felt like a special day. Now there are Premier League games for a couple of weeks afterwards. It's not a showcase anymore that attracts the interest of every football fan, and I think that has infected people's attitude to the earlier rounds too.
|
|
|
Post by horse on Jan 16, 2014 16:21:03 GMT
Its only £17 if bought in advance (plus booking fee). IF I decided to drive down "on the day" its £19.50 at a bare minimum. A little bit of incentive would encourage "wavering" supporters to make the effort...... as it is the Club have stuck up two fingers to them. Maybe Oxvox or the other supporters groups should be finding out how the cost of nearly £60k is broken down..... thats a hell of a lot of money to open the gates, turn the lights on and chuck in a few minimum wage staff!! It's not £17 a ticket for everyone though as this is for the East Stand. My normal seat in the SSL is £19 (£21.50 on the day).
|
|
|
Post by notaswindonfan on Jan 16, 2014 16:41:30 GMT
How about giving a voucher for every Oxford fan who buys a ticket for a discount against say 10% for club shop or 12th man bar drinks, or even for the next round.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Jan 16, 2014 16:54:42 GMT
£59,500 to put a match on?!?!?! That's astonishing. We pay over £500,000 per year rent to play at the shithole, so what does the other £59 grand cover? If that's the cost of staging every game, then we would be paying out just shy of £2million per season before wages! Something doesn't add up here. Our lease allows us to play a certain number of cup games a season, and we've only played two home cup games so far, so it can't be that kassam is charging us extra for this game. Either someone has got their wires crossed, or the club are not telling the truth............... Having read back I might have crossed the wires! Sorry. I think they need to TAKE £60k to "not make a loss" after paying Charlton their share, the FA, wages, "rent" for an extra game etc.... Either way its fairly obvious that the Club as a whole don`t really give a shit about the paying punters so somebody can have my seat.
|
|
|
Post by Colin B on Jan 16, 2014 18:16:41 GMT
£59,500 to put a match on?!?!?! That's astonishing. We pay over £500,000 per year rent to play at the shithole, so what does the other £59 grand cover? If that's the cost of staging every game, then we would be paying out just shy of £2million per season before wages! Something doesn't add up here. Our lease allows us to play a certain number of cup games a season, and we've only played two home cup games so far, so it can't be that kassam is charging us extra for this game. Either someone has got their wires crossed, or the club are not telling the truth............... Having read back I might have crossed the wires! Sorry. I think they need to TAKE £60k to "not make a loss" after paying Charlton their share, the FA, wages, "rent" for an extra game etc.... Either way its fairly obvious that the Club as a whole don`t really give a shit about the paying punters so somebody can have my seat. It doesn't make any difference. Charlton's share only comes out of any PROFIT, so therefore the £59,500 would be the cost of staging the game, or the "take". I agree with your last sentence though!!!
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jan 16, 2014 18:24:44 GMT
Would people rather a cheap ticket, or a new player, or a new manager?
Isn't that what juggling the finances comes down to?
|
|
|
Post by whathesaid on Jan 16, 2014 19:14:46 GMT
My opinion, for what it's worth is that the club COULD have agreed a quick 'early bird' discount for fans (home and away) to pay £12-15, but full price on the day?
Anyway, what's also knackered this tie a bit, aside from the 'quality' of oppo is the fourth round draw, and who awaits the winner of our tie.
If the winner was going to face a 'big' PL club in the fourth round (particularly away due to the potential for restricted ticket allocations) how many would have turned up for the old ticket stub factor, plus the chance that our players would have even more drive to win as they knew they could have their moment (and possibly be televised)?
|
|
|
Post by behindthegoal on Jan 16, 2014 20:14:29 GMT
I live 15 min walk away ,i'm not going £12. then i would go
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Jan 16, 2014 20:21:43 GMT
An interesting one with the ticket stubs. Currently I think the priority is season ticket holders > half season ticket holders > members (is this still going?)> general sale.
The last time I remember ticket stubs was I think Exeter in the league to go to arsenal in the 4th round. So many fans left early (day trippers we call them now), that I queued after final whistle but gave up as the queue was so long.
|
|
|
Post by essexyellows on Jan 17, 2014 7:38:08 GMT
Would people rather a cheap ticket, or a new player, or a new manager? Isn't that what juggling the finances comes down to? I would rather the Club (my Club.....owners,chairman,managers & players are all very transient)....... just for once looked after the supporters with a gesture of goodwill. "We would like to thank our loyal supporters by announcing pre-purchased tickets for the FA Cup replay against Charlton are £10" Incentivise, promote & reach out a bit. Instead we`ll get similar for Accrington on a wet Tuesday night......metaphorically speaking.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on Jan 17, 2014 8:30:28 GMT
There are also a lot of wannabe 92-club memnbers in Charlton who have never been to the Kassam. They will be coming. And as we need the money - let's screw the b**tards while we can. Well done OUFC Bit short sighted. We're not only screwing the (probably) few hundred Charlton fans who will attend, we're also screwing our own fans. None of them need to tick off the Kassam from the 92 list, so I'm guessing lots will not come at full price. I'm hoping someone in the OUFC Commercial Department has done a sensible financial an*lysis and honestly believes enough people will come, whatever the price. We'll see. 92 club?if you want join the 92 club,surely,if you have visited the Manor you have visited Oxford ? Im currently,on 99,been to Luton,Kiddy,Grimsby,Boston,Hereford,Southport,Wrexham,Cambridge,Chester,Aldershot and Darlington,all for football league games. Never been to Burton,MK Dons,Crawley and Yeovil. If its the 92 GROUNDS club,ive never heard of it. Ive been to 110,3 Bristol rovers,2 Oxford,Reading,Bolton,Chester,Arsenal,Millwall.Huddersfield,Wigan and Wimbledon(if that counts). Yet to visit the new grounds at Chesterfield(will remedy that this season)Southampton,Leicester,Sunderland,Shrewsbury,Boro,Walsall,Hull,Rotherham,Colchester and Stoke So of the current football league grounds,ive been to 77. Oh,ive also been to about 25 non league "dives" with Oxford.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2014 8:43:53 GMT
Bit short sighted. We're not only screwing the (probably) few hundred Charlton fans who will attend, we're also screwing our own fans. None of them need to tick off the Kassam from the 92 list, so I'm guessing lots will not come at full price. I'm hoping someone in the OUFC Commercial Department has done a sensible financial an*lysis and honestly believes enough people will come, whatever the price. We'll see. 92 club?if you want join the 92 club,surely,if you have visited the Manor you have visited Oxford ? Im currently,on 99,been to Luton,Kiddy,Grimsby,Boston,Hereford,Southport,Wrexham,Cambridge,Chester,Aldershot and Darlington,all for football league games. Never been to Burton,MK Dons,Crawley and Yeovil. If its the 92 GROUNDS club,ive never heard of it. Ive been to 110,3 Bristol rovers,2 Oxford,Reading,Bolton,Chester,Arsenal,Millwall.Huddersfield,Wigan and Wimbledon(if that counts). Yet to visit the new grounds at Chesterfield(will remedy that this season)Southampton,Leicester,Sunderland,Shrewsbury,Boro,Walsall,Hull,Rotherham,Colchester and Stoke So of the current football league grounds,ive been to 77. Oh,ive also been to about 25 non league "dives" with Oxford. Good for you. I dare say a lot of football fans simply like to "collect" new grounds and aren't particularly bothered about joining a formal club to do so, whatever that club might be called.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on Jan 17, 2014 8:50:18 GMT
Can we be clear about this. My understanding is : "(e) In replayed matches in the Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Rounds of the Competition Proper involving Clubs outside the FA Premier League or The Football League, the net gate receipts of each match shall be divided as follows: 47.5% to Clubs outside The FA Premier League or The Football League. 37.5% to FA Premier League or Football League Clubs. 10% to the Pool (save where both Clubs are outside The FA Premier League or The Football League). 5% to The Association. "So the 40% share has nothing to do with break-even since the rules refer to net gate receipts. The costs are paid before OUFC takes it's share - which is some distance from what your sentence above implies. Don't understand ? If clubs in the premier league and football league,get 37.5% of the net profits,(both teams are) 10% to the pool 5% to the association, 37.5% + 37.5% + 10% + 5% = 90%, Who gets the other 10% ?
|
|