Attendances

[Mattyblue]

Who’s blaming the club? It’s the EFL to blame for the ridiculous red button initiative (though presumably this deal was voted through?)

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, Paul said:

I wasn't having a go at you as I said at the end of my post. It isn't simple for a lot of people for many different reasons. The point I was making is if fans stay at home to watch on the red button by paying an extra £37 they can watch the entire season live for just £15 - that's a no brainer for me.

I'm making general not personal remarks on this. It has always been difficult for people to get to every game. I've no idea if there are more or less midweek games, I do realise more Saturday games are being shifted around. This the price the game has to pay for allowing Sky on board.

What I don't hear is fans complaining about or doing anything about Sky. The vast majority have lapped it up for decades. A few, myself included, have been against it for the same time. Sky have destroyed English football without a murmur from fans. As is usual it's kick the Rovers when the club in fact had little choice in the matter. Rovers management have been as complicit in this whole Sky deal for as long as every other club and to start hammering the current club management now is wrong.

When the second Sky deal began back in the 90s I asked John Williams face to face if the clubs would stand up to player demands this time. He told me the PL chairmen were determined not to give in to the agents and players. That went well.

Senior management at every club, in every season and the FA have failed the game and the spectators yet millions happily lap up the Sky coverage.

The horse bolted years ago. Anyone who really cares, wants to change things should first cancel Sky, tell them and the club why and stop using pubs which broadcast the games.

It won't make a jot of difference though as the game sold out for gold a long time ago.

I realise you weren't making personal remarks. I wasn't responding as though you had. I was just giving specific examples of how people I know might respond next summer. You did make sweeping generalisations about people not supporting their club though.

Agree with everything you say about SKY. I've never subscribed, partly due to cost, but also because I have a deep loathing for everything Murdoch stands for.

The 'kick the Rovers' stuff is more to do with the apparent lack of understanding of the Rovers fanbase. Some of Waggott's comments about attendances have been plain ignorant. 

[47er]

Its very simple really, clubs can either take Sky's money for live broadcasts of their games and have smaller crowds OR reject Sky's apparent wish to televise just about every game live.

They can't take Sky's money AND expect fans to turn up in large numbers.

When football loses its fans it loses its point. Waggot please note.

[Stuart]

13 minutes ago, 47er said:

Its very simple really, clubs can either take Sky's money for live broadcasts of their games and have smaller crowds OR reject Sky's apparent wish to televise just about every game live.

They can't take Sky's money AND expect fans to turn up in large numbers.

When football loses its fans it loses its point. Waggot please note.

Even worse if the clubs aren’t getting any extra money from the red button...

[AllRoverAsia]

6 hours ago, Stuart said:

Even worse if the clubs aren’t getting any extra money from the red button...

I quite like it that Sky, true to form, have rogered the EFL and clubs on this. Makes a change for that lot to experience what Joe Public has had for years.

[BlackburnEnd75]

10 hours ago, Stuart said:

Even worse if the clubs aren’t getting any extra money from the red button...

I'm pretty sure we got extra money for this. I remember reading about it last season and thinking we really needed to go straight back up. I'm almost certain we are getting more money for it.

Not on a per game basis though just as a condition of a larger TV Deal.

[tonygreenbank]

It appears that the EFL are well aware of the “slump” in midweek attendances according to the Times today.

The paper has sent figures to the EFL which show an 8.8% per game drop in gates this season compared to last seasons figure of 4.5% in midweek games without the red button facility.

The deal with Sky is worth £88m per year which will rise to £120m from 2019 to 2024 when the current deal ends.

This money is shared by all 72 EFL clubs. So we get just over a million from the deal.

The EFL Is apparently carrying out its own review of the red button effect. Officialise jargon for “ whoops we’ve made a balls up but we’re stuck with it for 6 seasons!”

[JHRover]

1 minute ago, tonygreenbank said:

It appears that the EFL are well aware of the “slump” in midweek attendances according to the Times today.

The paper has sent figures to the EFL which show an 8.8% per game drop in gates this season compared to last seasons figure of 4.5% in midweek games without the red button facility.

The deal with Sky is worth £88m per year which will rise to £120m from 2019 to 2024 when the current deal ends.

This money is shared by all 72 EFL clubs. So we get just over a million from the deal.

The EFL Is apparently carrying out its own review of the red button effect. Officialise jargon for “ whoops we’ve made a balls up but we’re stuck with it for 6 seasons!”

The EFL continues to stick to the claim that the Checkatrade Trophy project has been a success. Everyone knows it has been a disaster for the competition and crowds yet they still claim it has worked.

They're on a different wavelength. For them success is all about how much cash comes in from sponsors and media. Nothing else matters.

[tomphil]

Top and bottom is they aren't bothered we've been saying for years on here that you'll end up with games in virtually empty stadiums kicking off at 10 am Sat morn just to fill in a slot. If the broadcasters can get good advertising revenue they'll pay the clubs to do as they are told.

Ever decreasing circles but the suits, players and agents are getting better off by the year and so it will continue.

The soul of the game was sold long long ago but of course you'll get a sky gen fan popping up saying I think it's great, I love football so will happily watch Bolton v Reading over my cornflakes and I won't notice the bigger picture until it affects my team or me personally !

[RoverCanada]

Just looking at this purely from a Rovers' revenue point of view, if we are getting £1.2m extra a year out of the deal (£88m/72), rising to £1.7m...

I count 8 Rovers home games outside of 3pm on Saturdays. 10 if you include holiday games.

Suppose we usually average home attendances of 15,000 for 3pm Saturdays (optimistic I know, but let's suppose high away travel like the Leeds game). 9,000 of which are season ticket holders, 6,000 walk-up/away travel. Assume £24/ticket (excluding discounts, but let's say concessions make up the difference...). So, £144,000 revenue per game from walk-up/away ticket sales. If such midweek/non-3pm games had an attendance drop of 4.5% last year, then that revenue drops to £137,500 per game. Or, £1.1M over 8 games, £1.38M over 10 games.

If midweek attendances are now down 8.8% for midweek games due to Sky red button, the walk-up/away ticket revenue from those games is down to £131,328 per game. Or, £1.05M over 8 games, £1.31M over 10 games.

So that's £50,000/£70,000 (maybe a bit higher if you add concession losses from slightly less season ticketholders showing up) of lost revenue attributable to Sky red button versus £1.2M of additional revenue.

So, looking purely from a revenue perspective, and if those 4.5% vs 8.8% figures are correct, it looks like no-brainer, no? Happy to be corrected on any of the above as it's a very quick-n-dirty calculation done out of curiosity 

Edited October 17, 2018 by RoverCanada

[Mattyblue]

The EFL spokesman in The Times says 

‘Upon introducing both the red button and steaming services at the start of the season, the potential impact on attendances was highlighted and was always going to be assessed as part of a wider review, which will include all fixtures up the end of October regardless of when they were played. Only after this process has been completed can we start to understand any effect on live attendances’

So once this review and assessment has been completed and they realise crowds have fallen in midweek by twice the amount of last season, then what? What can this ‘review’ alter considering the deal is signed?

[blueboy3333]

7 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

The EFL spokesman in The Times says 

‘Upon introducing both the red button and steaming services at the start of the season, the potential impact on attendances was highlighted and was always going to be assessed as part of a wider review, which will include all fixtures up the end of October regardless of when they were played. Only after this process has been completed can we start to understand any effect on live attendances’

So once this review and assessment has been completed and they realise crowds have fallen in midweek by twice the amount of last season, then what? What can this ‘review’ alter considering the deal is signed?

Waggott said similar:-

"It’s right across the board. I don’t want to get in to politics, but iFollow, Sky red button, all these other things that are available at the press of a button will impact, especially on midweek games. You have the blocked out hours but it will have an impact. It’s in discussion as to what the red button consists of within the Sky package. We get central distribution money from the Premier League so we do benefit, but Sky is such a huge income for everyone in football. It’s under debate"

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16977667.rovers-chief-executive-discusses-ewood-park-crowds/?ref=mac

If the TV deal is for 6 years (?) there's nothing they can do. 

 

 

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, RoverCanada said:

Just looking at this purely from a Rovers' revenue point of view, if we are getting £1.2m extra a year out of the deal (£88m/72), rising to £1.7m...

I count 8 Rovers home games outside of 3pm on Saturdays. 10 if you include holiday games.

Suppose we usually average home attendances of 15,000 for 3pm Saturdays (optimistic I know, but let's suppose high away travel like the Leeds game). 9,000 of which are season ticket holders, 6,000 walk-up/away travel. Assume £24/ticket (excluding discounts, but let's say concessions make up the difference...). So, £144,000 revenue per game from walk-up/away ticket sales. If such midweek/non-3pm games had an attendance drop of 4.5% last year, then that revenue drops to £137,500 per game. Or, £1.1M over 8 games, £1.38M over 10 games.

If midweek attendances are now down 8.8% for midweek games due to Sky red button, the walk-up/away ticket revenue from those games is down to £131,328 per game. Or, £1.05M over 8 games, £1.31M over 10 games.

So that's £50,000/£70,000 (maybe a bit higher if you add concession losses from slightly less season ticketholders showing up) of lost revenue attributable to Sky red button versus £1.2M of additional revenue.

So, looking purely from a revenue perspective, and if those 4.5% vs 8.8% figures are correct, it looks like no-brainer, no? Happy to be corrected on any of the above as it's a very quick-n-dirty calculation done out of curiosity 

Good post, but Rich Sharpe has just said on his live Q&A that there is no extra recompense for the red-button from SKY. Where are you getting £1.2m from? 

[perthblue02]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

If the TV deal is for 6 years (?) there's nothing they can do. 

 

Its the Football League, cut from the same cloth as the FA,  so they will probably fine clubs for showing empty seats as La Liga did/do

[tonygreenbank]

1 hour ago, RoverCanada said:

Just looking at this purely from a Rovers' revenue point of view, if we are getting £1.2m extra a year out of the deal (£88m/72), rising to £1.7m...

I count 8 Rovers home games outside of 3pm on Saturdays. 10 if you include holiday games.

Suppose we usually average home attendances of 15,000 for 3pm Saturdays (optimistic I know, but let's suppose high away travel like the Leeds game). 9,000 of which are season ticket holders, 6,000 walk-up/away travel. Assume £24/ticket (excluding discounts, but let's say concessions make up the difference...). So, £144,000 revenue per game from walk-up/away ticket sales. If such midweek/non-3pm games had an attendance drop of 4.5% last year, then that revenue drops to £137,500 per game. Or, £1.1M over 8 games, £1.38M over 10 games.

If midweek attendances are now down 8.8% for midweek games due to Sky red button, the walk-up/away ticket revenue from those games is down to £131,328 per game. Or, £1.05M over 8 games, £1.31M over 10 games.

So that's £50,000/£70,000 (maybe a bit higher if you add concession losses from slightly less season ticketholders showing up) of lost revenue attributable to Sky red button versus £1.2M of additional revenue.

So, looking purely from a revenue perspective, and if those 4.5% vs 8.8% figures are correct, it looks like no-brainer, no? Happy to be corrected on any of the above as it's a very quick-n-dirty calculation done out of curiosity 

I understand your argument and your figures appear compelling as I’m sure they did to the Chairmen of all 72 EFL clubs but over the next few seasons the figure of 9,000 season ticket holders and 6,000 walk ons will surely diminish when people realise that the games can be watched on Red Button and other streaming services so the losses will be greater.

As a Championship club now Rovers do have other income streams as a result of Sky deals such as £2.3m of TV money and £4.6m from the Premier League which Steve Waggott alluded to plus £100,000 for every home game screened live (£120,000 on a Sunday). Also Rovers receive £10,000 as an away fixture screened live.

I suppose those sums will help soothe the brows of some of the Championship Chairmen into accepting the reality of the red button but it could easily lead to the “Croatia” effect where EFL football is played before ever diminishing crowds.

[tonygreenbank]

11 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Good post, but Rich Sharpe has just said on his live Q&A that there is no extra recompense for the red-button from SKY. Where are you getting £1.2m from? 

I think what Rich Sharpe is referring to is that Sky do not provide any extra funding to clubs playing at home midweek to compensate for a drop in attendance.

Each EFL club gets £1.2m per season to allow the Red Button facility whether you are Leeds, Luton or Lincoln.

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, RoverCanada said:

Just looking at this purely from a Rovers' revenue point of view, if we are getting £1.2m extra a year out of the deal (£88m/72), rising to £1.7m...

I count 8 Rovers home games outside of 3pm on Saturdays. 10 if you include holiday games.

Suppose we usually average home attendances of 15,000 for 3pm Saturdays (optimistic I know, but let's suppose high away travel like the Leeds game). 9,000 of which are season ticket holders, 6,000 walk-up/away travel. Assume £24/ticket (excluding discounts, but let's say concessions make up the difference...). So, £144,000 revenue per game from walk-up/away ticket sales. If such midweek/non-3pm games had an attendance drop of 4.5% last year, then that revenue drops to £137,500 per game. Or, £1.1M over 8 games, £1.38M over 10 games.

If midweek attendances are now down 8.8% for midweek games due to Sky red button, the walk-up/away ticket revenue from those games is down to £131,328 per game. Or, £1.05M over 8 games, £1.31M over 10 games.

So that's £50,000/£70,000 (maybe a bit higher if you add concession losses from slightly less season ticketholders showing up) of lost revenue attributable to Sky red button versus £1.2M of additional revenue.

So, looking purely from a revenue perspective, and if those 4.5% vs 8.8% figures are correct, it looks like no-brainer, no? Happy to be corrected on any of the above as it's a very quick-n-dirty calculation done out of curiosity 

Interesting breakdown and I know you are posting it as purely from a revenue perspective BUT that's exactly how the suits pushing buttons, touching screens and crunching numbers look at it.

What you have on here is the flip side of the coin i'e the hardcore fans way of looking at it saying why should I pay up front every season just to be jerked around at someones whim and why I should I choose a Tues night game in pishing rain in November paying best part of 30 quid when I can press a button and watch it ?

If anything highlights how media is now the life blood of the game and not the fans I think that post is it.

[arbitro]

9 minutes ago, tonygreenbank said:

I think what Rich Sharpe is referring to is that Sky do not provide any extra funding to clubs playing at home midweek to compensate for a drop in attendance.

Each EFL club gets £1.2m per season to allow the Red Button facility whether you are Leeds, Luton or Lincoln.

Is the red button facility available for League One and League Two clubs or just Championship clubs?

[blueboy3333]

11 minutes ago, tonygreenbank said:

I think what Rich Sharpe is referring to is that Sky do not provide any extra funding to clubs playing at home midweek to compensate for a drop in attendance.

Each EFL club gets £1.2m per season to allow the Red Button facility whether you are Leeds, Luton or Lincoln.

"It's (red button/ifollow) certainly a hot topic, and I'm yet to learn of any recompense for clubs from Sky Sports, other than the annual TV money they receive"

That's what he said^.

Have you got a link to the £1.2m extra. I can't find one.

[tonygreenbank]

8 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

"It's (red button/ifollow) certainly a hot topic, and I'm yet to learn of any recompense for clubs from Sky Sports, other than the annual TV money they receive"

That's what he said^.

Have you got a link to the £1.2m extra. I can't find one.

The link was in today’s Times in an article on falling attendances at midweek games. It stated that £88m was agreed between Sky and the EFL to show the midweek Championship games either live or on the red button and my search has found that highlights of Leagues 1 and 2 are shown after the final whistle.

Each EFL club will get £1.2m up to 2019 and then £1.7m up to 2024. 

Sharpe’s quote does mention no recompense other than the annual Sky deal so its £1.2m for now and sorry if your attendances suffer but we’re not compensating you!

[RoverCanada]

Cheers, guys. Yes, definitely wanted to stress I was looking at it purely from a revenue perspective! I was curious about the 4.5% vs 8.8% drop tonygreenbank quotes from the Times. While a notable drop, my first thought was that's pretty small fry from a revenue perspective.

To summarise, when our matchday revenue is probably only around £5m, and our overall revenue is probably around £17-18m this year, a ~10% or so boost in our revenue is hard to turn down relative to seeing a 5-10% drop in attendance for 8-10 games a year, particularly as a relatively poorer club in this division.

45 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Good post, but Rich Sharpe has just said on his live Q&A that there is no extra recompense for the red-button from SKY. Where are you getting £1.2m from? 

I was using tonygreenbank's numbers from above. Perhaps it's part of the recent increase in central distribution payments rather than a specific revenue item? I'm not familiar with the deal at all, so I used those numbers by trust.

37 minutes ago, tonygreenbank said:

I understand your argument and your figures appear compelling as I’m sure they did to the Chairmen of all 72 EFL clubs but over the next few seasons the figure of 9,000 season ticket holders and 6,000 walk ons will surely diminish when people realise that the games can be watched on Red Button and other streaming services so the losses will be greater.

As a Championship club now Rovers do have other income streams as a result of Sky deals such as £2.3m of TV money and £4.6m from the Premier League which Steve Waggott alluded to plus £100,000 for every home game screened live (£120,000 on a Sunday). Also Rovers receive £10,000 as an away fixture screened live.

I suppose those sums will help soothe the brows of some of the Championship Chairmen into accepting the reality of the red button but it could easily lead to the “Croatia” effect where EFL football is played before ever diminishing crowds.

Yes, going forward it could certainly get worse. Although from my numbers, the attendance would have to get a lot worse for it not to make sense relative to the extra £1.7m in coming years. Again, only looking at revenue... Something to worry about if midweek attendances start regularly falling to, say, 7-8,000, even if the finances still make sense on paper, compared to drawing 13,000 instead of 14,000 today.

14 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Interesting breakdown and I know you are posting it as purely from a revenue perspective BUT that's exactly how the suits pushing buttons, touching screens and crunching numbers look at it.

What you have on here is the flip side of the coin i'e the hardcore fans way of looking at it saying why should I pay up front every season just to be jerked around at someones whim and why I should I choose a Tues night game in pishing rain in November paying best part of 30 quid when I can press a button and watch it ?

If anything highlights how media is now the life blood of the game and not the fans I think that post is it.

Yep, always fair points. It's particularly the case for Premier League clubs where 70-80% of their revenue comes from broadcast revenue now (or even the parachute-payment receiving clubs now too). I suppose some are terrified at the prospect of relegation and losing that broadcast cash cow some day, but anything that makes it harder for attending fans or that reduces the crowd atmosphere for the sake of an extra £1-2m is ridiculous.

(Having said that, we currently do not have that comfort, so I have some sympathy for our management's own efforts to raise revenue...)

[blueboy3333]

Just now, tonygreenbank said:

The link was in today’s Times in an article on falling attendances at midweek games. It stated that £88m was agreed between Sky and the EFL to show the midweek Championship games either live or on the red button and my search has found that highlights of Leagues 1 and 2 are shown after the final whistle.

Each EFL club will get £1.2m up to 2019 and then £1.7m up to 2024. 

Sharpe’s quote does mention no recompense other than the annual Sky deal so its £1.2m for now and sorry if your attendances suffer but we’re not compensating you!

Thanks. Sharpe wasn't clear. Clubs can't expect to be compensated twice. They've got the £88m and were surely aware of the pitfalls. 

[BlackburnEnd75]

17 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Thanks. Sharpe wasn't clear. Clubs can't expect to be compensated twice. They've got the £88m and were surely aware of the pitfalls. 

People seem to be forgetting this.

[JHRover]

Sharpe is mistaken if he's saying clubs haven't been compensated for the red button. It may not come in the form of a specific payment but will come with the League's agreement through an increased payment to all clubs.

As I said the other day - why on earth would any club consent to the red button introduction if they weren't to be well compensated for it?

[Stuart]

If the red button is here to stay then the clubs’ response is simple.

DO make attending games an affordable, enjoyable experience. It will win hands down. Get people hooked and into the habit.

DO NOT lick your wounds and put up ticket prices for the dwindling faithful. You will kill the experience and lose more fans. And the experience is the only selling point over TV.