|
Post by saddletramp on Feb 7, 2017 5:15:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by oxfordyankee on Feb 7, 2017 6:12:26 GMT
Is anyone holding a gun to people's heads to force them into the restaurant? No. If the customers don't feel its value for money, they'll vote with their feet.
|
|
|
Post by SteMerritt on Feb 7, 2017 8:54:18 GMT
Is anyone holding a gun to people's heads to force them into the restaurant? No. If the customers don't feel its value for money, they'll vote with their feet. As Saddletramp was alluding to, you could quite easily have done this with match tickets for a few games this season and then there would have been uproar. Having said that, I don't have a problem with it.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 8:58:01 GMT
I do, means more of a que at the bloody bar
|
|
|
Post by oxfordyankee on Feb 7, 2017 11:12:41 GMT
Is anyone holding a gun to people's heads to force them into the restaurant? No. If the customers don't feel its value for money, they'll vote with their feet. As Saddletramp was alluding to, you could quite easily have done this with match tickets for a few games this season and then there would have been uproar. Having said that, I don't have a problem with it. But they didn't.
|
|
|
Post by SteMerritt on Feb 7, 2017 11:25:54 GMT
Yeah I know but clubs in the past have raised prices for big games (Aldershot a famous example from our past)
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Feb 7, 2017 12:32:26 GMT
The restaurant is a tricky area for the club. Damned if they do damned if they don't. It adds to the overall experience that is so crucial to bringing some folk to the ground and the club were hurt when they had to abandon the season ticket restaurant offer. This was entirely down to the loss making price of the tickets caused by the high price paid to Stadco (£25 - £30 a head) With a cover price of £79 the club can at least cover the meal and the cost of a seat in the SSU and still show a small profit. I have spoken to two previous restaurant season ticket holders who are not interested at that price but going by the numbers who used the restaurant at the Newcastle game there are sufficient numbers who are and maybe more now the price has come down. This is just the sort of thing that new ownership of the stadium would be able to look at and start attracting more money to the club.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 12:34:32 GMT
Isn't £79 what it was last season though ?
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Feb 7, 2017 13:08:24 GMT
Isn't £79 what it was last season though ? Can't remember the exact price but pretty sure it was less if bought as a season ticket. Working it out, if you buy a ticket for the lounges then it's £39.00. Add on £30.00 for the cost of the meal (as charged by Stadco) makes £69.00 - club adds a tenner and thus £79.00. Tried having a look for the old prices but no longer available.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 13:12:26 GMT
Isn't £79 what it was last season though ? Can't remember the exact price but pretty sure it was less if bought as a season ticket. Working it out, if you buy a ticket for the lounges then it's £39.00. Add on £30.00 for the cost of the meal (as charged by Stadco) makes £69.00 - club adds a tenner and thus £79.00. Tried having a look for the old prices but no longer available. Yeah your right mobile.oufc.co.uk/news/article/matchday-restaurant-oxford-united-2576586.aspx
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Feb 7, 2017 13:18:26 GMT
The restaurant is a tricky area for the club. Damned if they do damned if they don't. It adds to the overall experience that is so crucial to bringing some folk to the ground and the club were hurt when they had to abandon the season ticket restaurant offer. This was entirely down to the loss making price of the tickets caused by the high price paid to Stadco (£25 - £30 a head) With a cover price of £79 the club can at least cover the meal and the cost of a seat in the SSU and still show a small profit. I have spoken to two previous restaurant season ticket holders who are not interested at that price but going by the numbers who used the restaurant at the Newcastle game there are sufficient numbers who are and maybe more now the price has come down. This is just the sort of thing that new ownership of the stadium would be able to look at and start attracting more money to the club. Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand.
|
|
|
Post by manorlounger on Feb 7, 2017 14:06:17 GMT
The restaurant is a tricky area for the club. Damned if they do damned if they don't. It adds to the overall experience that is so crucial to bringing some folk to the ground and the club were hurt when they had to abandon the season ticket restaurant offer. This was entirely down to the loss making price of the tickets caused by the high price paid to Stadco (£25 - £30 a head) With a cover price of £79 the club can at least cover the meal and the cost of a seat in the SSU and still show a small profit. I have spoken to two previous restaurant season ticket holders who are not interested at that price but going by the numbers who used the restaurant at the Newcastle game there are sufficient numbers who are and maybe more now the price has come down. This is just the sort of thing that new ownership of the stadium would be able to look at and start attracting more money to the club. Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand. Firstly, hat off to OUFCYellow for finding the original prices, these clearly are well below what is being charged today. Adult prices start from £55 per game, or just £35 to existing season ticket holders looking to upgrade for the day. Season packages are available for £975 for adults. Concession prices are available.
£25 - £28 as cost price for a three course meal is quite steep and whilst correctly stated it may have been a decent meal with service, the club were making a loss on selling the package as a season ticket set up. The club were paying rent for the location and a service charge for heating and lighting. There was no profit from sales of alcohol or other drinks and the half time tea/coffee was also charged to the club at a high price. Add on the program and the seat in the SSU adjacent to the directors and this would certainly show as a loss. Charging £79.00 as a one off price is going to allow a moderate return, no more. I did not set out to attack Firoka in any way at all, didn't even mention them. If I were to offer criticism then it would be towards the club for making such a naive decision with regards to the original pricing. The package now is moving in the right direction. Something I would like to see taken further under new ownership.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 14:37:32 GMT
Looks like you also only get 2 courses not 3 now. And no parking space included. For £24 more
|
|
|
Post by oxfordyankee on Feb 7, 2017 14:47:00 GMT
Oufcyellows, I don't think there has ever been a bigger change in a posters stance. I always read your posts as overly protective of the club, yet in recent times you NEVER let a chance go by to dig at it.
What happened?
|
|
|
Post by headingtonbarfly on Feb 7, 2017 14:49:14 GMT
I used the restaurant for majority of the games last season on a ad-hoc basis but bear in mind the prices quoted at £55 was plus VAT so total sum was £66 per game, and prices were raised for certain games like the Hartlepool game which was co-opted with the milk cup 30th anniversary dinner (this was around £80 if i remember rightly). Also i know a parking space was advertised for the restaurant games i attended around 18-20 and i never was offered a parking space and when raised was told Box guests got a spot along with associate directors.
From what i can cee the prices have been raised by £13 a head, i imagine that Stadco want more of a cut considering we have now gone up a league and how popular it was (1st game 4 tables and final game of season around 20 tables) but if this is not the case then this can only mean more profit for the club?
What i dont agree with is it dropping down to 2no courses for more money.
|
|
|
Post by shabby on Feb 7, 2017 14:50:01 GMT
Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand. Firstly, hat off to OUFCYellow for finding the original prices, these clearly are well below what is being charged today. Adult prices start from £55 per game, or just £35 to existing season ticket holders looking to upgrade for the day. Season packages are available for £975 for adults. Concession prices are available.
£25 - £28 as cost price for a three course meal is quite steep and whilst correctly stated it may have been a decent meal with service, the club were making a loss on selling the package as a season ticket set up. The club were paying rent for the location and a service charge for heating and lighting. There was no profit from sales of alcohol or other drinks and the half time tea/coffee was also charged to the club at a high price. Add on the program and the seat in the SSU adjacent to the directors and this would certainly show as a loss. Charging £79.00 as a one off price is going to allow a moderate return, no more. I did not set out to attack Firoka in any way at all, didn't even mention them. If I were to offer criticism then it would be towards the club for making such a naive decision with regards to the original pricing. The package now is moving in the right direction. Something I would like to see taken further under new ownership.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 14:54:46 GMT
Oufcyellows, I don't think there has ever been a bigger change in a posters stance. I always read your posts as overly protective of the club, yet in recent times you NEVER let a chance go by to dig at it. What happened? Uhh unless I missed something , I haven't attacked the club on this at all. People were asking what the price difference was, I found a link and pointed out the difference. I think it's great the club have reopened it, it was packed last season. The only negative if u want me to go down that route is like brahmabull says this could have been sorted out at the start of the season. They knew what stadco were charging, they had never had a share of profits so unlikely it would ever of been agreed. Just a simple the restaurant will continue this season but we have had to increase prices to make it worth doing.
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Feb 7, 2017 16:44:54 GMT
Manourlounger it's not you I refer about the attacking of the stadium company. I understand why you thought I was, apologises! x. You are absolutely right about the club being naive in pricing and I am all for them, making a profit. The commercial team should be looking to profit from the bigger ticket items that might help the club.
This constant strategic warfare against StadCo/Firoz, being stoked in some quarters, is utterly pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by eighteen93 on Feb 7, 2017 18:44:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 18:46:25 GMT
That's outrageous , they get padded bloody seats
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Feb 7, 2017 18:50:25 GMT
Oufcyellows, I don't think there has ever been a bigger change in a posters stance. I always read your posts as overly protective of the club, yet in recent times you NEVER let a chance go by to dig at it. What happened? Covert S***don fan. Sunday's result has sent him over the edge and the mask has slipped.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Feb 7, 2017 18:51:14 GMT
Oufcyellows, I don't think there has ever been a bigger change in a posters stance. I always read your posts as overly protective of the club, yet in recent times you NEVER let a chance go by to dig at it. What happened? Covert S***don fan. Sunday's result has sent him over the edge and the mask has slipped. Take that back or I will slap u silly
|
|
|
Post by MJB on Feb 7, 2017 19:32:35 GMT
Covert S***don fan. Sunday's result has sent him over the edge and the mask has slipped. Take that back or I will slap u silly Your username is too on the nose to be a genuine fan. We all know your positivity bus is red and it suspiciously travels the same route as the 66 service.
|
|
|
Post by yellowoptimist on Feb 7, 2017 20:45:24 GMT
The restaurant is a tricky area for the club. Damned if they do damned if they don't. It adds to the overall experience that is so crucial to bringing some folk to the ground and the club were hurt when they had to abandon the season ticket restaurant offer. This was entirely down to the loss making price of the tickets caused by the high price paid to Stadco (£25 - £30 a head) With a cover price of £79 the club can at least cover the meal and the cost of a seat in the SSU and still show a small profit. I have spoken to two previous restaurant season ticket holders who are not interested at that price but going by the numbers who used the restaurant at the Newcastle game there are sufficient numbers who are and maybe more now the price has come down. This is just the sort of thing that new ownership of the stadium would be able to look at and start attracting more money to the club. Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand. He didn't approve the 4th stand! Don't understand what the hell the point of that statement is.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Feb 7, 2017 20:53:22 GMT
Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand. He didn't approve the 4th stand! Don't understand what the hell the point of that statement is. Well the point is Oxvox say he (Kassam) did , as they asked if he'd permit a fourth stand for the Newcastle game. But once this "offer" was sent to the club and followed up I guess between OUFC and Stadco, it apparently wasn't viable. Which seems to me like two statements that can both be true, but open to spin.
|
|
|
Post by yellowoptimist on Feb 7, 2017 22:29:38 GMT
He didn't approve the 4th stand! Don't understand what the hell the point of that statement is. Well the point is Oxvox say he (Kassam) did , as they asked if he'd permit a fourth stand for the Newcastle game. But once this "offer" was sent to the club and followed up I guess between OUFC and Stadco, it apparently wasn't viable. Which seems to me like two statements that can both be true, but open to spin. Exactly so why the original poster portray it as though the club was lying?
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Feb 8, 2017 4:43:53 GMT
Not sure if it is a tricky situation. Firstly, it's excellent it has been re-implemented for supporters. It's a shame that the club decided to shelve it during their 'dispute' with the landlord. Having realised they wanted to cash in for Newcastle, they had to agree to implement it for the rest of the season - quite a reasonable request from the Stadium Company for being mucked about with it I'd say. What I will disagree with, is this loss-making argument. The club are quoted a set-price from Firoka of between £25-£28 per head. The club then set the price and take the sale proceeds. And what do you get for the fixed cost of £25, a decent three-course meal, waiter service - someone has to pay them as well, a warm environment. Not unreasonable unless someone wants to use it to attack Fiorka for whatever reason. That's the reality. I'll be accused of siding with Kassam's company, just putting a counter-argument to this absurd constant attack on the stadium company and renewed witch-hunt being peddled. Next we'll be told that FK didn't give approval for a 4th Stand. He didn't approve the 4th stand! Don't understand what the hell the point of that statement is. Did we ever find out if OGB would allow us to have it for the rest of the season or was it just for the Newcastle game?
|
|
|
Post by Si Bradbury on Feb 8, 2017 8:52:14 GMT
Well the point is Oxvox say he (Kassam) did , as they asked if he'd permit a fourth stand for the Newcastle game. But once this "offer" was sent to the club and followed up I guess between OUFC and Stadco, it apparently wasn't viable. Which seems to me like two statements that can both be true, but open to spin. Exactly so why the original poster portray it as though the club was lying? It's all very simple. OxVox spoke to Kassam - I know, I was party to those conversations, got approval for one-game and relayed it back to two of the clubs board members. The article below - www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15054994.Oxford_United__Fourth_stand_for_Newcastle_clash_was__not_viable_/"But a statement from supporters’ trust OxVox to members on Thursday night, which also revealed they held met with Mr Kassam and the City Council last week to progress their discussions over a deal to buy the stadium and make it community-owned, claimed United had been given the green light to install extra seating for today’s match. The club confirmed that was the case, but said it was not an option for a one-off game – especially an FA Cup clash where 45 per cent of the gate receipts go to the visiting team, and another ten per cent to the Football Association" The stand, I believe, would have stayed up. The club may have then decided to enter into talks with the Stadium Company about a deal - that's none of OxVox's business.
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Feb 8, 2017 14:17:43 GMT
If you already have a ticket in the SSU do they deduct this from the cost, and if so, what will the cost be?
|
|
|
Post by Junior on Feb 8, 2017 16:51:40 GMT
Exactly so why the original poster portray it as though the club was lying? It's all very simple. OxVox spoke to Kassam - I know, I was party to those conversations, got approval for one-game and relayed it back to two of the clubs board members. The article below - www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15054994.Oxford_United__Fourth_stand_for_Newcastle_clash_was__not_viable_/"But a statement from supporters’ trust OxVox to members on Thursday night, which also revealed they held met with Mr Kassam and the City Council last week to progress their discussions over a deal to buy the stadium and make it community-owned, claimed United had been given the green light to install extra seating for today’s match. The club confirmed that was the case, but said it was not an option for a one-off game – especially an FA Cup clash where 45 per cent of the gate receipts go to the visiting team, and another ten per cent to the Football Association" The stand, I believe, would have stayed up. The club may have then decided to enter into talks with the Stadium Company about a deal - that's none of OxVox's business. One game having that stand up in which Eales has already said that would mean the club making a loss. Can hardly blame Eales for turning the offer down. Can I ask you what makes you believe that the stand would have been able to stay up when OGB has refused previously?
|
|