[Archived] Killing Us!

[Jan]

Eh??? Forget what we already have in season ticket sales. That’s already in the bank.

It’s the extra that are being attracted that is the problem – but just to show you what I mean il show you below.

Firstly 20,000 @ 17.50 = £350,000 – not 320k

18,000 @ £28 (a rough ave of price for sunday) = £504,000

But what im saying is - @ £17.50, rather than £28 you are going to get a hell of a lot more fans in the ground.

If the price for an adult ticket was only £17.50 then without a doubt we could have got at least 25,000 on for that game – because for starters City would of sold there full 8000 tickets. So @ 25,000 it would be worth £437,500. So to start we are a total of £66,500 down – but there is an extra 6,597 at the game - spending money on pies, hotdogs, beer, programmes and club merchandise. You then also have a better atmosphere and a better feeling around the ground when there are more bums on seats.

And that should hopefully help more fans want to come back to Ewood Park.

So you're saying that the price for the "walk-on" fan should be cheaper than that for those who regularly contribute to the club (ie the season ticket holder)?

Forget it- I'd ask for my money back if that were the case. the lowest price that should be sold is at least 20% higher than the season ticket equivalent- otherwise the season ticket numbers will fall next year disasterously.

Edited September 19, 2006 by Jan

[den]

How can you be sure that city would have sold 8000 tickets? I've said a couple of times recently that they have lost 5000 fans of their own. That's not down to price alone.

Rovers reducing prices at this moment in time, is only going to lose the club more money. There isn't an answer for Rovers alone. The only time prices will come down, is when Man Utd can't sell out O.T.

[blue phil]

On things for certain , Den - keeping prices as high as they are now is going to lose us a couple of thousand supporters year in year out until we get to the stage where people stop going because the atmosphere is no longer there . You want to know what our REAL hardcore following is ? I'd estimate it at about 4,000 - what it was back in the 70's .

This policy of screwing the away fans and screwing our own fans with unrealistic prices is failing badly . This year City brought 3,000 - next year they'll bring probably a 1000 less . So will other teams . Great policy JW - keep it up ...but don't moan when no-one wants to play in an empty stadium . Or watch .

[den]

It's finding the answer that's the problem, BP.

The screwing of away fans is a calculated gamble though, isn't it. The gamble being that it needn't cost any rovers fan one penny. The small number of walk on rovers fans on the BBE can always go in another part of the ground.

Ticket prices are definately way too high - the club DO know that. They can't reduce prices unilaterally. Nor can they force/persuade any of the other big clubs to do the same. When Man U can't fill OT, then something will happen, not until then.

Like I said there's no obvious answer.

ps, I don't think rovers ever sank to an average of 4000, but what's the real hardcore support of most other clubs in the old third division?

[yorkblues]

i went to ewood in the late 80s for a league game v oxford i think and we had less than 5,000 and we was in the top 6 ,the sat before we lost to brentford in the facup at home

[den]

i went to ewood in the late 80s for a league game v oxford i think and we had less than 5,000 and we was in the top 6 ,the sat before we lost to brentford in the facup at home

1988/89 season: Feb 21 h Oxford U.......W 3-1 hendry,og,diamond Att. 5,724

Average gate that season: 9,380

[jim mk2]

ps, I don't think rovers ever sank to an average of 4000, but what's the real hardcore support of most other clubs in the old third division?

At the last home match of the 1982-83 season (I think) Rovers played Chelsea (!!!) in front of about 3,500.

Chelsea fans stormed the Blackburn End and I seriously thought that day professional football as a spectator sport was finished.

[blue phil]

The point remains that we can go thousands down on what we have now - and at the present rate we'll find out what the real hardcore is quite soon

But Mr Williams is doing his best - that's a good thing I suppose

Chelsea fans stormed the Blackburn End and I seriously thought that day professional football as a spectator sport was finished.

Nice to know you were getting things wrong even back then ..

[den]

At the last home match of the 1982-83 season (I think) Rovers played Chelsea (!!!) in front of about 3,500.

Chelsea fans stormed the Blackburn End and I seriously thought that day professional football as a spectator sport was finished.

I'm talking average gates here.

80/81 Average Gate; 11,684

81/82 Average Gate; 8,353

82/83 Average Gate; 7,069

83/84 Average Gate: 7,613

84/85 Average Gate; 9,647

85/86 Average Gate; 5,826

86/87 Average gate; 7,277

87/88 Average Gate; 9,956

88/89 Average Gate; 9,380

89/90 Average Gate: 9,611

Jim, you must be talking about the 81/82 season where this was the result from the last home gate of the season:

May 15 h Chelsea.........D 1-1 garner. gate: 5,833

The point remains that we can go thousands down on what we have now - and at the present rate we'll find out what the real hardcore is quite soon

But Mr Williams is doing his best - that's a good thing I suppose

Nice to know you were getting things wrong even back then ..

Just trying to point out that rovers never dropped to 4000 average. Course we can drop even further than where we are now, but again, it's pretty much out of the clubs hands.

Unless someone knows the answer to the question "how can BRFC reduce prices and compete in the Premier league"?

[blue phil]

That may well be an impossible question to answer but the policies being followed now are only serving to speed up the process of alienating potential and existing supporters . We are fortunate in having a trust fund . If that has to be used solely to "subsidise" more imaginitive measures in getting punters through the gates then so be it . I'd rather go downhill and have kids for a quid every week against every club than suffer the slow death we're going through at present .

[speeeeeeedie]

I've just skimmed the message board and decided to put this here. We have 3 threads dedicated to what is bad about the national game; bungs, high ticket prices, and illegal TV. How strange is football? The game has been full of dodgy characters for years, and always will be. Clubs now want to make as much money as possible rather than breaking even to field a team. TV is always in it for TV too.

I am beginning to seriously wonder why so many people continue to pay silly money to watch this sport, get mad when folk don't go, and travel vast distances to support a gang of overpaid thickos. I should have no room to talk as I contribute to the mess by subscribing to a channel that costs extra every month. It's getting to the point where I really do not want to bankroll a soulless idiot's latest flashy suit. But what else can I do? I've been football mad since I was a kid. Any ideas? Grass roots is great, I do my bit, but I still like watching top class football.

[Exiled in Toronto]

This policy of screwing the away fans and screwing our own fans with unrealistic prices is failing badly . This year City brought 3,000 - next year they'll bring probably a 1000 less . So will other teams . Great policy JW - keep it up ...but don't moan when no-one wants to play in an empty stadium . Or watch .

The policy is indeed failing, and it is also badly flawed. We make peanuts from visiting fans when set against the money from league placing, TV appearances and corporate, all of which could well suffer much more as the stadium becomes increasingly empty. If the crowd is worth a goal, we're going to be 1-0 down at the start; TV doesn't want to show empty stadiums; and the corporate crowd will soon need amplifiers on their external noise dial, if they are still interested in bringing their clients to a morgue.

By attempting to cash in on the supposed price inelasticity of visiting fans, the entire income stream is being risked.

And please don't give me the 'if you can think of something better, e-mail JW' He gets paid a fortune for thinking himself.

[den]

The policy is indeed failing, and it is also badly flawed. We make peanuts from visiting fans when set against the money from league placing, TV appearances and corporate, all of which could well suffer much more as the stadium becomes increasingly empty. If the crowd is worth a goal, we're going to be 1-0 down at the start; TV doesn't want to show empty stadiums; and the corporate crowd will soon need amplifiers on their external noise dial, if they are still interested in bringing their clients to a morgue.

By attempting to cash in on the supposed price inelasticity of visiting fans, the entire income stream is being risked.

And please don't give me the 'if you can think of something better, e-mail JW' He gets paid a fortune for thinking himself.

So you have no ideas on how to increase gates then?

[thenodrog]

So you have no ideas on how to increase gates then?

I have Den!

[Exiled in Toronto]

So you have no ideas on how to increase gates then?

Everyone on here seems to assume that the only measure of success for increasing attendances is the direct gate revenue. I was trying to point out that, since gate revenue is a lowly third in our sources of income, that perhaps the club should view Ewood attendances in a broader perspective, and that other sources of income might be indirectly linked to the attendance level. If every seat for every game was a tenner and we sold out every week, the gate revenue would be 5.7 million - no change to what it is now. But on average I would argue that we would win more games thus finishing higher, be on telly more, and sell more of those embarrassingly empty executive boxes, and be much better off overall.

I have often read on here that 'lower prices don't work', but we don't know that. We only know that random and infrequently applied lower prices for the most unatttractive fixtures don't seem to work. But is that a surprise? Football watching is a habit that needs to be built. A tenner to watch Fulham amidst a sea of 35 quids to watch Everton and Man City makes no sense at all as a pricing strategy when the ground is 40% empty.

But anyway, it doesn't matter if I have any ideas or not. It is clear that JW doesn't have good any ideas either. At least me not having any ideas doesn't cost the club 250k a year in salary.

[den]

I have Den!

LU?

Everyone on here seems to assume that the only measure of success for increasing attendances is the direct gate revenue. I was trying to point out that, since gate revenue is a lowly third in our sources of income, that perhaps the club should view Ewood attendances in a broader perspective, and that other sources of income might be indirectly linked to the attendance level. If every seat for every game was a tenner and we sold out every week, the gate revenue would be 5.7 million - no change to what it is now. But on average I would argue that we would win more games thus finishing higher, be on telly more, and sell more of those embarrassingly empty executive boxes, and be much better off overall.

I have often read on here that 'lower prices don't work', but we don't know that. We only know that random and infrequently applied lower prices for the most unatttractive fixtures don't seem to work. But is that a surprise? Football watching is a habit that needs to be built. A tenner to watch Fulham amidst a sea of 35 quids to watch Everton and Man City makes no sense at all as a pricing strategy when the ground is 40% empty.

But anyway, it doesn't matter if I have any ideas or not. It is clear that JW doesn't have good any ideas either. At least me not having any ideas doesn't cost the club 250k a year in salary.

Apologies for a rather flippant reply from me, EIT.

On your points - For you to be able to push your points further, you would IMO, have to persuade the people at Ewood that more people attending = more points. It possibly does, but can you give a solid case that reducing prices to a tenner, would result in full houses? I suggest that even if you gave tickets away, you wouldn't fill it. Or to be more serious, a tenner a ticket wouldn't fill Ewood regularly. Maybe against Man U it would, but not against Fulham.

[krislu]

If every seat for every game was a tenner and we sold out every week

I dont think we would, even at £10.

Where I live in Bergen our local team is top of the league with only about half a dusin game left. There are roughly around 250k people living here, around 17 000 turnes up on match day. We are now building a new stadium which holds 20 000, but I do not think we will fill that week in week out.

Also, the average cost of a ticket is something around £10 I would imagine. Add to that the high income levels in Norway, this aint much money.

There aint 250 000 people living in Blackburn, and income levels are not as high, so at £10 a game I have no believe in us filling Ewood Park on a regular basis.

Edited September 20, 2006 by krislu

[Exiled in Toronto]

BA probably said the same about the price of airline seats before Ryanair and Easyjet found new markets through radical pricing strategies.

Continuing on the current course will kill us faster than we can imagine. Ewood will reach a tipping point where no-one - fans, corporate sponsors, TV cameras and good players - will want to come because its a graveyard.

The risk with radical reductions in ticket pricing is small in comparison. Even if we lost half our gate income, that's less than 10% of current turnover, something a competent CEO should be able to weather....

Edited September 20, 2006 by Exiled in Toronto

[thenodrog]

Question

Do the Prem have any control over our prices? I cannot imagine that they would be happy with us de-valuing their product so drastically.

[Scotty]

I have Den!

An idea that you haven't got a clue how to implement, whether it's even possible to implement, or whether it will work or not (imo it wouldn't). Still, having the idea is all that counts apparently so good effort.

[blue phil]

Well even Theno's idea doesn't deserve a silly point scoring post like that , Scotty ...

Back on topic . I seem to remember someone on this forum coming up with the novel idea that we should price our games similar to the way Easyjet and Ryanair price their tickets , ie . the further ahead you buy your ticket the cheaper it is . Porbably a million and one reasons why it wouldn't work but worth mentioning ...

[Bing]

The local market is saturated, there are simply too many clubs near us. We have to look beyond the town and the M65.

The two most extreme, and probably most unpopular, options are firstly the 'Lancashire United' option. Secondly, the 'MK Dons' route of upping sticks and moving 30 miles up the road to Lancaster. Both non-starters until our gates slide into 4 figures.

The happy medium is marketing ourselves as the Premiership representative for the North Lancashire/Cumbria area. It's a potential goldmine to our club. I'm sure JW has recognised this and taken some action - the token gesture of reserve games at Morecambe would suggest so - but I'd wager that it simply hasn't been done agressively or intensively enough.

Someone made the point earlier and its absolutely true. How JW isn't hanging on for his job for dear life is a mystery. There's no evidence of any imagination or creativity in his attempts to get people back through the gates.

[Scotty]

Well even Theno's idea doesn't deserve a silly point scoring post like that , Scotty ...

Unlike your post it wasn't point scoring at all. Theno continually posts that he has the answer to our attendance problems - I continually ask him to explain how his idea will work - he never does. As long as he keeps bringing up the "Lancashire United" idea I'll keep asking him to expand on his theory.

If that's ok with you obviously.

[Oakland]

just wondering....how many people lives in blackburn??

[Florida Rover]

105,085

per THIS page

ranks 53rd