Why so few tickets sold V Charlton?

[Bozza]

Had a discussion on here about 2/3 years ago and the figures were worked out between crowd averages and the complete fee the club pay per season to the railways.
It was just over a 2 million loss then
Could be different now,but would be interested to find out again

In the first season they had the travel vouchers that paid a percentage of the travel cost.
From those two numbers one could guess the total cost of travel to the club.

Sorry, I know all that.

What I mean is that each ticket contains a theoretical travel element - previously it was explicitly stated and this has to be subtracted from whatever the club pay out for the transport system. If the 'inclusive free travel' was scrapped, people would be expecting tickets to be cheaper.

All of which is why I said "net cost" and I don't believe it's £2m.

 

[Bozza]

Follow-up: the travel component used to be £50 per season ticket when priced separately - http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10561904.Bus_service_to_cost_Albion_an_extra___75/?ref=rss

 

[8ace]

They can't. It was a condition of the planning permission.

I think the condition was a "sustainable transport strategy", which actually means making sure everyone doesn't drive their car there.
Maybe that could be achieved without the current level of subsidy? Or maybe not.

 

[LlcoolJ]

I remember paying £26 (well, £52 cos me and Mrs coolJ went) to watch us lose at Forest in League 1 about ten years ago.

Although I completely disagree with the idea of £42 tickets at the Amex, if you looked at it purely on the standard of facilities, quality of entertainment and all round experience then (in comparison) it would probably be about right. Not even taking into account inflation.

I realise some people are priced out and unfortunately that's always going to be the way these days. But I also think that we should appreciate that we've got one of the best match day experiences in the country with the stadium and the way things are run.

I go to more away games than home and it makes me appreciate the Amex more the few times I get to go. And it's never seemed too expensive.

Sheffield Wednesday charging more to go to their dump of a ground is a good example. Leeds too.

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

Trouble is, they may be the best facilities and compare well with other clubs but we're talking disposable income here.

I think the season ticket is great value and my DD is under £50pm, which I never see so don't miss it, but I'd be gutted if I had to pay £30 or £40 for a match and sometimes there are 2 or 3 in a month and it is pre-Xmas.

 

[LlcoolJ]

Yes, I completely get that. As I said, they're will always be people priced out and this is the same at every club. Was just trying to apply a bit of perspective.

As others have said it's a fine balance that the club has to work out before people start abandoning their season ticket for paying by the game.

The Category thing should be scrapped though, it's nonsense.

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

I think the condition was a "sustainable transport strategy", which actually means making sure everyone doesn't drive their car there.
Maybe that could be achieved without the current level of subsidy? Or maybe not.

The travel subsidy was deemed necessary at the time of the original application. There was lots of unknowns at that time. Now there have been a number of years to assess the travel habits of fans, and as an example of something that has changed we have the matchday controlled parking zone around the ground, this matter could be revisited. As per my previous post the club could apply to remove the requirement, and if this was refused at a local level they would have a right of appeal to get a second opinion.

At the moment, fans who live further away and travel in by public transport get a significant subsidy on their day out, those who live nearer get a lesser subsidy, and those who do most to address the travel demands of the club- i.e. those who walk or cycle to games, are actually punished financially as they pay towards the subsidy of other fans journeys.

If the subsidy was removed it might actually encourage more local fans to walk / cycle as they would be saving money, at the moment they pay for travel whether they use it or not.


On the subject of categorising matches in the championship, it looks like EVERYONE, other than those inside the club, agree that it is a RIDICULOUS idea. I suppose the club like it because it helps them justify the OTT prices being charged for Cat A games. Hopefully next season we will be in the Prem so calling a game Cat A or anything else will actually make some sense, albeit I'm sure matchday ticket prices will be put up significantly.

 

[LlcoolJ]

With the amount clubs in the PL now receive from tv rights is there actually any excuse for increasing ticket prices when promoted?

It used to make sense but with match day income now dwarfed by tv income for the majority of clubs you could argue that there's no reason, other than just "because they can".

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

With the amount clubs in the PL now receive from tv rights is there actually any excuse for increasing ticket prices when promoted?

It used to make sense but with match day income now dwarfed by tv income for the majority of clubs you could argue that there's no reason, other than just "because they can".

And that is why they will.

A question- who is getting the best deal vs the worst deal at the Amex? I don't know the figures but say for example someone with a season ticket getting a train from the edge of the travel zone might be paying £22 per match less a £7 saving on travel so £15 per game, compared to someone who buys a matchday ticket and walks to the Amex who pays £42 per game..

 

[Return of the Rev]

With the amount clubs in the PL now receive from tv rights is there actually any excuse for increasing ticket prices when promoted?

It used to make sense but with match day income now dwarfed by tv income for the majority of clubs you could argue that there's no reason, other than just "because they can".

Would be great if s/t price remained the same for existing ticket holders and lump on a few quid for the glory hunters!(if we are promoted)

 

[Hastings gull]

And that is why they will.

A question- who is getting the best deal vs the worst deal at the Amex? I don't know the figures but say for example someone with a season ticket getting a train from the edge of the travel zone might be paying £22 per match less a £7 saving on travel so £15 per game, compared to someone who buys a matchday ticket and walks to the Amex who pays £42 per game..

I do see the point that it probably is unfair, but to make this sort of comparison, surely your should compare like for like, and not two different price scenarios. Whilst you are correct in that someone who walks effectively pays for others' subsidies, in practice this rarely happens (though you might argue, that this is not the point, granted). I should know, as when I come by car, I park at Mithras House and walk for 40 minutes; on average there are about 2 or 3 still walking by the time of the railway bridge. Given that so very few walk, it is reasonable to say that virtually everyone who uses public transport gains - I don't know what the normal fare would be from the Race Hill/MillRoad/Mithras House return would be, but it must be £4.00 on average.
I have asked before what other expenses the club might have, that others typically do not have, which would reasonably explain why watching the Albion costs more than most - presumably the Club pays for the public/university car parks and then the stewarding must also be paid for. I think there are 3 at Mithras House who do a wonderful job playing on their phones . .Bridge Car Park seems to have even more, all standing by the entrance.

 

[chucky1973]

Any update on how many tickets sold?

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

I do see the point that it probably is unfair, but to make this sort of comparison, surely your should compare like for like, and not two different price scenarios. Whilst you are correct in that someone who walks effectively pays for others' subsidies, in practice this rarely happens (though you might argue, that this is not the point, granted). I should know, as when I come by car, I park at Mithras House and walk for 40 minutes; on average there are about 2 or 3 still walking by the time of the railway bridge. Given that so very few walk, it is reasonable to say that virtually everyone who uses public transport gains - I don't know what the normal fare would be from the Race Hill/MillRoad/Mithras House return would be, but it must be £4.00 on average.
I have asked before what other expenses the club might have, that others typically do not have, which would reasonably explain why watching the Albion costs more than most - presumably the Club pays for the public/university car parks and then the stewarding must also be paid for. I think there are 3 at Mithras House who do a wonderful job playing on their phones . .Bridge Car Park seems to have even more, all standing by the entrance.

Why do you park at Mithras and then walk? The bus is free, or rather, paid for with the subsidy.

 

[Superphil]

Compared to Birmingham.

There are 100's, possibly 1500+ more seats available that at the same time last week yet Charlton have received a bigger allocation.

After our great performance last week, being 2 points clear, a big away following I thought we would be looking at another high crowd of the season, but availability suggests anything but.

 

[Hastings gull]

Why do you park at Mithras and then walk? The bus is free, or rather, paid for with the subsidy.

Of course. If it is raining, then I get the bus -just prefer the exercise, no other reason.

 

[Return of the Rev]

Of course. If it is raining, then I get the bus -just prefer the exercise, no other reason.

That's a good enough reason! The Lewes road can be stunning this time of year.