Yes; a cost to the travel companies, not the club. Are you really suggesting that the club are deliberately reducing their own revenue to make things easier for the travel companies?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Matchday travel subsidy?
- Thread starter 1066familyman
- Start date
Yes; a cost to the travel companies, not the club. Are you really suggesting that the club are deliberately reducing their own revenue to make things easier for the travel companies?
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,448
I live in the immediate catchment area and like many others pay a private firm £5 to take me to and from the ground, why? because the P&R bus does not have the flexibility it could have i.e. a simple stop in Woodingdean. I am sure same occurs for other locations.
sussex_guy2k2
Well-known member
- Jun 6, 2014
- 3,747
You've hit the nail on the head. I come with North West Seagulls who, I believe, aren't profit making and the increase has been minimal this year (although it's likely to be larger next year). This still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth because it shows a certain contempt for fans who live outside of a certain area but who love and support the club and regularly make long journeys to get to games. What's most frustrating is that the club could easily offer supporters who don't use the subsidy a lower ST price to counteract this, but they obviously can't be bothered, or don't want, to sort this out.
I remember thinking that the first time I read those comments, especially as someone who has noted in the past that I usually walk and am still charged the subsidy (and I don't say that to complain, I accept that's part of the agreement of having the stadium there). The universities have both been there long before the stadium, there was always infrastructure to get there. Trying to claiming walking routes fall under the subsidy is quite a stretch.
HAILSHAM SEAGULL
Well-known member
- Nov 9, 2009
- 10,347
But that is the problem. They cant determine who uses the travel subsidy or not, the users of the trains and buses are not counted or listed.
Its all or nothing.
I would imagine the club have agreed a set figure to pay to the train and bus operators, regardless of the numbers.
AlastairWatts
Active member
I too am an exile, living in Buckinghamshire, but I can't follow your argument. I get the train, tube and train to or via Hayards Heath, where the travel concession area starts. So I get a discount on the travel although I don't live in the concession area but do have an East stand season ticket. It's a nice perk, and makes a small difference to the cost. The point surely is that if people who live in the concession area don't take advantage of the concession then that's their choice - if they choose some other means of travel then they have to pay for it themselves. A little like buying a first clas or standard ticket on the railway - it's one or the other....
To determine the payment, there will have been an estimate of train/bus numbers, however crude.
Possibly. But the reason for removing the subsidy was because there was a supposed double subsidy. Whilst it is the case Seagulls Travel is a separate company and offering a supposed premium service this was not the reason given for the club withdrawing funding.
Hampster Gull
New member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,462
In my experience in business you have to compromise to get deals and certainly if you want long term partnerships, which seems to be the Bloom and Barber way.
For home fans I think some are perhaps being a little naive to think the club isn’t charging market rate for the ticket price regardless of travel subsidy. The away fans, a small percentage of seats, is more complicated due to external regulation and planning requirements so yes, I expect that the club have looked at this in the round. They may lose a bit here but overall they win.
Anyway, will leave you to it, I’m good with my season ticket price, regardless of whether there is a “subsidy” or not, which I don’t use anyway.
I’m not saying anything.
The Board said, in effect, that the cost of subsidising Seagulls Travel and supporters clubs coaches was the best part of £1m.
Beach Hut
Brighton Bhuna Boy
If they are subsidising these other companies presumably that is tax deductible
.... and at the same time save the club the best part of £1m in costs, they’ve been open about that.
Due to colossal tax losses brought forward of £124m (from all the years Bloom and others subsidised the club’s trading), the club won’t be paying negligible corporation tax for many years to come.
The club’s annual tax bill wouldn't therefore be affected by higher, lower or nil subsidies to travel providers.
All I can think is Seagulls Travel must have been creaming in the profits if they charged £12 from Polegate and still had a share of £1m amounting to £52632 per game!
HAILSHAM SEAGULL
Well-known member
- Nov 9, 2009
- 10,347
This is it exactly.
I live 3 miles from Polegate, where I could travel to the Amex and back with my season ticket. To get to Polegate would cost me £8 from Hailsham and £10 from Polegate to Hailsham coming home.
I use Seagull Travel, 2 mins walk from my local pub, door to door and it costs me £12-68 per match with my Seagull Travel season ticket.
I dont have the hassle of waiting for Southern Rail to turn up on time, stand on the bridge getting soaked, or get hoe at 11-45 after a evening kick off, in fact I get off the coach in timme to have a late beer in my local.
So I dont utalise my travel subsidy, my choice.
Ernest
Stupid IDIOT
We will only find out next Saturday if the travel is more chaotic thanks to more people requiring the trains and normal buses against using Seagull Travel, hopefully the coach park will now be less crowded
Cheshire
Member
This is now the third thread either devoted to this subject or as in the Fans Forum thread one of the topics discussed, and seems to be the cause of mainly confusion.
First PB said the saving from taking the travel subsidy off Seagull Travel was a 6 figure sum, so probably some way off the million being quoted.
Secondly, most are baffled by the second subsidy situation, it seems to me that he is referring to the free door to door parking enjoyed by ST travelers. So to add a subsidy for travel and provide free parking, is seen as the double subsidy. Others travelling door to door by car or taxi have to pay for their parking or private hire cost with no subsidy, which maybe their choice but PB says is unfair if ST, another private hire company, receive two subsidies. Therefore ST had their travel subsidy withdrawn for the first time this season, but still receive the privilege of free parking next to the ground.
First PB said the saving from taking the travel subsidy off Seagull Travel was a 6 figure sum, so probably some way off the million being quoted.
Secondly, most are baffled by the second subsidy situation, it seems to me that he is referring to the free door to door parking enjoyed by ST travelers. So to add a subsidy for travel and provide free parking, is seen as the double subsidy. Others travelling door to door by car or taxi have to pay for their parking or private hire cost with no subsidy, which maybe their choice but PB says is unfair if ST, another private hire company, receive two subsidies. Therefore ST had their travel subsidy withdrawn for the first time this season, but still receive the privilege of free parking next to the ground.
HAILSHAM SEAGULL
Well-known member
- Nov 9, 2009
- 10,347
In my humble opinion, The Second Travel Subsidy is the fact that the club subsidise every single fan with a season ticket if they use the train, the bus or park and ride.
They also paid a Second subsidy to Seagull Travel, which has now been removed, so that is a personal choice because the other subsidy is still available to them.
They also paid a Second subsidy to Seagull Travel, which has now been removed, so that is a personal choice because the other subsidy is still available to them.
I am sorry that is not possible and if you can show me proof this statement came from club I will write them. My figures may not be accurate but assume ST take 4000 supporters and supporters club coaches 500. If club is saying this is costing them £1m this is crap. Over £200 per person you are joking.
If the £1m is what they pay out overall including train/buses thats not bad after collecting £1.5m from add ons to tickets. Do think we need some accurate figures from club because until they do I see it as just another income raiser. Sorry but income gone from £25 to £150m in 3 years there can be no justification for any supporter cost increases
The ground is in the sticks and should make it easier not harder for all supporters to get to. I feel strongly about this because heard last week elderly relatives from Hangleton say as they cannot afford the increase they are going to get bus into Hove and then get I think no 26.. Madness and feel I cant see this happen so a few of us will chip in to get there ST tickets.