Attendances

[Stuart]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

outstanding Stuart. give yourself a pant on the back. 

not everyone is the same Stuart but you just keep throwing the insults out which I haven't done. I will repeat again no insults throw out by me. 

You really need to stop this. At no point have I insulted you.

And in the first instance you inserted yourself into a discussion that didn’t involve you.

[Hasta]

5 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

The Swansea game was on BBC Wales Tv

Either club are as big as Newcastle are they. 

So now people won't return for Premier League clubs. Only big premier league clubs. Ok ?

I took 8 people with me to the Newcastle game. Only 1 is a regular attendee. 1 had never been to Ewood before. They didn't go because it was Newcastle.

My brother is mid-40s. He's seen many big games and big teams at Ewood. He doesn't go much anymore. The only game he's been too this year is Newcastle.

Certainly, it helps that we weren't playing Northampton. However had it been £20 against Newcastle there would have been just 2 or 3 going in our group.

Would any of my group go again for a tenner for a future league game? Possibly.

Would they pay £100 for 6 games? Not a chance.

Bolton is a 3pm kickoff on Easter Monday. A chance of 16000 home fans there at a tenner.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Hasta

[chaddyrovers]

2 minutes ago, Hasta said:

So now people won't return for Premier League clubs. Only big premier league clubs. Ok ?

I took 8 people with me to the Newcastle game. Only 1 is a regular attendee. 1 had never been to Ewood before. They didn't go because it was Newcastle.

My brother is mid-40s. He's seen many big games and big teams at Ewood. He doesn't go much anymore. The only game he's been too this year is Newcastle.

Certainly, it helps that we weren't playing Northampton. However had it been £20 against Newcastle there would have been just 2 or 3 going in our group.

Would any of my group go again for a tenner for a future league game? Possibly.

Would they pay £100 for 6 games? Not a chance.

Bolton is a 3pm kickoff on Easter Monday. A chance of 16000 home fans there at a tenner.

why wouldn't they pay 100 pounds for 6 games? its 16 pounds per game. how cheap do they want it

Yes Bolton game should be decent crowd but fans have to get behind the club and they cant have it they own way all the time. 

[Hasta]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

why wouldn't they pay 100 pounds for 6 games? its 16 pounds per game. how cheap do they want it

Yes Bolton game should be decent crowd but fans have to get behind the club and they cant have it they own way all the time. 

How much money left their wallet for the Newcastle game? How much money would leave their wallet for this 6 game offer?

They would rather pay £10 than £100.

Simple as that.

They also don't regularly attend Ewood so don't want to book in 6 games as they may have other things to do on some of those dates.

You can criticise their level of support and dedication all you want, but the discussion we are (or we were) having here is how to encourage them back. Slagging them off won't do that.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Hasta

[blueboy3333]

8 minutes ago, Hasta said:

So now people won't return for Premier League clubs. Only big premier league clubs. Ok ?

I took 8 people with me to the Newcastle game. Only 1 is a regular attendee. 1 had never been to Ewood before. They didn't go because it was Newcastle.

My brother is mid-40s. He's seen many big games and big teams at Ewood. He doesn't go much anymore. The only game he's been too this year is Newcastle.

Certainly, it helps that we weren't playing Northampton. However had it been £20 against Newcastle there would have been just 2 or 3 going in our group.

Would any of my group go again for a tenner for a future league game? Possibly.

Would they pay £100 for 6 games? Not a chance.

Bolton is a 3pm kickoff on Easter Monday. A chance of 16000 home fans there at a tenner.

All good points but I think you may be wasting your time. He's now gone back to 'how cheap do they want it'? 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Hasta said:

They would rather pay £10 than £100.

Simple as that.

He may need it simpler. 

[Stuart]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

why wouldn't they pay 100 pounds for 6 games? its 16 pounds per game. how cheap do they want it

Yes Bolton game should be decent crowd but fans have to get behind the club and they cant have it they own way all the time. 

Astonishing way to view it. It’s no wonder you are disappointed.

They can and will “have it their own way”. This isn’t a dictatorship it’s a commercial enterprise.

If people don’t think the price is right then they won’t buy a ticket, it’s that simple.

We do not have 20,000 die hards, we have about 8,000 (currently). The rest are people who are sensitive to value for money - I.e. standard of football v enjoyment v price.

The use of “they” though - even unintentionally - is very telling. An ‘us’ and ‘them’ mentality.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Stuart

[Hasta]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

He may need it simpler. 

£10 < £100

[Husky]

3 hours ago, JeffRover said:

The offer would have legs if the season wasn’t just ended yesterday. Difficult to sell a 6 match dead rubber ticket (albeit with 3 local derbies thrown in).

Exactly that.  That kind of offer can only really work if a club shows some footballing ambition - of which we haven't seen any from Rovers.

The only other way it works (to a lesser degree) is if you're in a relegation scrap.

I'd be amazed if many (or any) took up the offer. Hardcore fans either already have an ST or are the 'only go to away games' crowd.

Floating fans won't be interested in a dead rubber commitment. Especially when you add the fact that the weather will be getting slightly better, 2 more hours of daylight and the fact that Shock! Horror! Many people do have other things to occupy them other than football.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Husky

[JBiz]

1 hour ago, Hasta said:

No one is justifying the non-atendees. Just explaining one of the main reasons why they don't go and explaining why the 6-game deal won't work.

Do you think that this deal will significantly increase attendances?

There's a reason we got one of our biggest home cup attendances of the last 8 years for a midweek game against Newcastle despite it being in TV, and it wasn't due to success.

 

If you’ve read my posts, you’ll know that I don’t think any ticket deal is going to bring in the numbers without success on the pitch.

The price is being used by many here as a reason why some won’t attend. I just don’t agree with that idea, I think some suggestions are frankly ridiculous(for example halving the cost of the ST).

Referencing the premier league “fortress Ewood” strategy ignores the attractiveness of fixtures compared to this level, and it also ignores the FACT (not opinion) that turnover or sponsorship money through the league made our ticket money negligible.

Its also pre-FFP, and whilst many people have had their say, I don’t recall anyone even mentioning those rules, and how a bigger turnover from tickets would allow the owners to invest more without sanction.

I also get the same irony @magicalmortensleftpeg talks about - a correlation between demanding the club spend more (After the most investment the team has had in years) and demanding it lowers prices “to suit all fans”

Im not sure those views can go hand in hand with a straight face. If you want dirt cheap tickets then you surely understand the clubs turnover drops - along with wages/fees. 

As one famous moaner says, the tickets aren’t directly paying for wages/fees, but the more costs they cover, the more playing budget. 

 

 

 

 

[roversfan99]

4 hours ago, Biz said:

Sorry but I can’t do any further into your post without pointing out that the first sentence is utter garbage.

This thread is hilarious, I’ve never seen so many people try to justify the non-attendance  position.

You talk as if it’s putting off fans - as MagicalM said, the same fans are complaining that we aren’t investing more money on the team.

Genuinely, what is a game worth these days? Rather than avoid the question and go into some anti Chaddy rant, you tell me what you think the average game should cost.

You've taken the quote out of context somewhat, the last part of it was the key bit.

As far as I am concerned, there will be little scope to boost crowds during 6 games at the end of the season in which there will almost certainly be nothing to play for, by charging close to season ticket prices per game for 6 games in a mini season ticket. I am not saying that the price is too high per se, per game it works out pretty reasonably for such a deal, but youve commented before on success being a key variable in attendances, and having nothing to play for is a prime example of something that may take something off the gates.

That is not me having a go at the price of these mini season tickets. I am saying that it is a lot of money to suddenly shell out for someone who clearly doesnt see Rovers as their number 1 priority at the moment, for whatever reason, for a clutch of games with no real significance to them.

I do think that the club is limited in what initiatives it can that run between now and May simply down to our league position. Again, kudos to the club for trying something for the Boro game, but personally I would suggest not choosing a TV game, but more importantly, to not attach strings such as "bring a friend," that causes logistical problems, if I wanted to bring an extra friend for example I would have to move seats, presumably that is the case for a lot of fans and things like that may put people off. You dont want such a promotion to be in any way restrictive. Both the 6 game ticket and the Boro bring a friend policy deserve credit for the club trying something, I acknowledge that but am also being constructively critical of why I feel these policies may be limited in their effectiveness. Maybe do a one off game, tickets for a fiver (obviously things like that arent feasible over a 6 game period) to get fans back into the ground for a game, but otherwise I suppose we are limited until next season.

Season tickets are the key, this season I suggest failure to hit season ticket sales targets this season meant that they perhaps set the prices slightly too high. I was always of the opinion at that point that they should have froze the prices (or even a modest decrease), with a mindset of getting the numbers up, get the regular fanbase up with the momentum of a promotion, get people into the habit, that way you can introduce incremental rises going forward which if done with enough strategy, will mean that not only have attendances gone up on a regular basis to improve the atmosphere etc, but also you can increase revenue if you play the long game.

For me, like @chaddyrovers (and perhaps the club based on their half season ticket marketing campaign coupled with relentless calls from manager/players for crowds to go up) you have totally the wrong attitude towards those not attending, hence why we will never agree on the issue. No one should have to "justify" themselves for not attending, indeed the floating fans probably wouldnt even claim to be as committed as you or I. Every team has a section of fans who will go barring exceptional circumstances, even if they stuck £50 extra, £100 extra onto the price, I would get a season ticket next season, its my primary hobby and I would find the money.  I suspect that a decent proportion of the current attendances would do likewise. You can either look down your nose at them and see them as inferior or hope they come back and boost attendances.

I felt that the half season ticket push was telling in that saying "they are committed, are you?" is a passive aggressive marketing campaign that wont work on the type of fans that it was aimed at, floating fans. If you questioned the commitment of a diehard season ticket holder, that might push the right buttons, alas with those whose attendance is not of ultimate priority to them, stuff like that will just be water off a ducks back.

And fans were only complaining because Mowbray said he had money but chose not to spend it. Or in the case of Brereton, spent foolishly and in the wrong area!

[Hasta]

7 minutes ago, Biz said:

If you’ve read my posts, you’ll know that I don’t think any ticket deal is going to bring in the numbers without success on the pitch.

 The price is being used by many here as a reason why some won’t attend. I just don’t agree with that idea.

How can you say you don't agree that many people don't attend because of price. Obviosly some don't go for that reason. We just don't know how many.

Read my post above about the Newcastle game and the number of people I took.  They went because I made an event out of it and it was a tenner.

 

 

[blueboy3333]

8 minutes ago, Biz said:

I also get the same irony @magicalmortensleftpeg talks about - a correlation between demanding the club spend more (After the most investment the team has had in years) and demanding it lowers prices “to suit all fans”

Straw man Number 48 of the day. Nobody has demanded the club spend more. They questioned why £7m had been spent on a sub and not the areas of the pitch (the defence) which need attention. Also, there is no correlation between attendances and the money Venky's are willing to spend, as BB proved. Try again. 

[JBiz]

37 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

You've taken the quote out of context somewhat, the last part of it was the key bit.

As far as I am concerned, there will be little scope to boost crowds during 6 games at the end of the season in which there will almost certainly be nothing to play for, by charging close to season ticket prices per game for 6 games in a mini season ticket. I am not saying that the price is too high per se, per game it works out pretty reasonably for such a deal, but youve commented before on success being a key variable in attendances, and having nothing to play for is a prime example of something that may take something off the gates.

That is not me having a go at the price of these mini season tickets. I am saying that it is a lot of money to suddenly shell out for someone who clearly doesnt see Rovers as their number 1 priority at the moment, for whatever reason, for a clutch of games with no real significance to them.

I do think that the club is limited in what initiatives it can that run between now and May simply down to our league position. Again, kudos to the club for trying something for the Boro game, but personally I would suggest not choosing a TV game, but more importantly, to not attach strings such as "bring a friend," that causes logistical problems, if I wanted to bring an extra friend for example I would have to move seats, presumably that is the case for a lot of fans and things like that may put people off. You dont want such a promotion to be in any way restrictive. Both the 6 game ticket and the Boro bring a friend policy deserve credit for the club trying something, I acknowledge that but am also being constructively critical of why I feel these policies may be limited in their effectiveness. Maybe do a one off game, tickets for a fiver (obviously things like that arent feasible over a 6 game period) to get fans back into the ground for a game, but otherwise I suppose we are limited until next season.

Season tickets are the key, this season I suggest failure to hit season ticket sales targets this season meant that they perhaps set the prices slightly too high. I was always of the opinion at that point that they should have froze the prices (or even a modest decrease), with a mindset of getting the numbers up, get the regular fanbase up with the momentum of a promotion, get people into the habit, that way you can introduce incremental rises going forward which if done with enough strategy, will mean that not only have attendances gone up on a regular basis to improve the atmosphere etc, but also you can increase revenue if you play the long game.

For me, like @chaddyrovers (and perhaps the club based on their half season ticket marketing campaign coupled with relentless calls from manager/players for crowds to go up) you have totally the wrong attitude towards those not attending, hence why we will never agree on the issue. No one should have to "justify" themselves for not attending, indeed the floating fans probably wouldnt even claim to be as committed as you or I. Every team has a section of fans who will go barring exceptional circumstances, even if they stuck £50 extra, £100 extra onto the price, I would get a season ticket next season, its my primary hobby and I would find the money.  I suspect that a decent proportion of the current attendances would do likewise. You can either look down your nose at them and see them as inferior or hope they come back and boost attendances.

I felt that the half season ticket push was telling in that saying "they are committed, are you?" is a passive aggressive marketing campaign that wont work on the type of fans that it was aimed at, floating fans. If you questioned the commitment of a diehard season ticket holder, that might push the right buttons, alas with those whose attendance is not of ultimate priority to them, stuff like that will just be water off a ducks back.

And fans were only complaining because Mowbray said he had money but chose not to spend it. Or in the case of Brereton, spent foolishly and in the wrong area!

Dearie me..99 quid for 6 games is not expensive.

Complaining that the "bring a friend" offer is on tv and it means you might have to move seat, scraping the barrel.

Season tickets are key - so why the rush to criticise any attempt to get more people into the habit of regularly attending?

I think you are talking absolute bobbins about a perceived attitude toward people not attending. My priority is the club in this case, more fans, more money - better atmosphere. You know that non-attendees are directly hurting the prospects of the team - but you'd sooner justify this position by complaining about the clubs offers. 

To see a marketing strategy as "passive aggressive" is the icing on the cake really, I mean surely anybody who wants the club to move forward knows that commitment from fans, players, the manager and owners is key. Its a buzzword to inspire some level ownership - you might have a different subjective opinion on the impact that strategy might have - but to see it as insulting is an absolute joke.

32 minutes ago, Hasta said:

How can you say you don't agree that many people don't attend because of price. Obviosly some don't go for that reason. We just don't know how many.

Read my post above about the Newcastle game and the number of people I took.  They went because I made an event out of it and it was a tenner.

 

 

The reason people don't attend is individual, but the groups over the years change with the wind. One minute its NAPM, the next its too expensive.

Who are Newcastle by the way, and what do you think (bar price) may have inspired more people to attend that game? Level of opposition perhaps? Run of form up to it? Performance at St James?

28 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Straw man Number 48 of the day. Nobody has demanded the club spend more. They questioned why £7m had been spent on a sub and not the areas of the pitch (the defence) which need attention. Also, there is no correlation between attendances and the money Venky's are willing to spend, as BB proved. Try again. 

Nobody has demanded the club spend more? Forget straw men, that is just a blatant lie. If you remember correctly, its only 10 days since the "lack of ambition" was disected on the transfer thread.

 

[blueboy3333]

23 minutes ago, Biz said:

Dearie me..99 quid for 6 games is not expensive.

Complaining that the "bring a friend" offer is on tv and it means you might have to move seat, scraping the barrel.

Season tickets are key - so why the rush to criticise any attempt to get more people into the habit of regularly attending?

I think you are talking absolute bobbins about a perceived attitude toward people not attending. My priority is the club in this case, more fans, more money - better atmosphere. You know that non-attendees are directly hurting the prospects of the team - but you'd sooner justify this position by complaining about the clubs offers. 

To see a marketing strategy as "passive aggressive" is the icing on the cake really, I mean surely anybody who wants the club to move forward knows that commitment from fans, players, the manager and owners is key. Its a buzzword to inspire some level ownership - you might have a different subjective opinion on the impact that strategy might have - but to see it as insulting is an absolute joke.

The reason people don't attend is individual, but the groups over the years change with the wind. One minute its NAPM, the next its too expensive.

Who are Newcastle by the way, and what do you think (bar price) may have inspired more people to attend that game? Level of opposition perhaps? Run of form up to it? Performance at St James?

Nobody has demanded the club spend more? Forget straw men, that is just a blatant lie. If you remember correctly, its only 10 days since the "lack of ambition" was disected on the transfer thread.

 

And theres still no correlation between attendances and transfer spend. That's a blatant falsehood or we wouldn't be spending £7m on a sub. Hopefully you'll be able to accept that at some point and base your arguments in some version of reality. 

[Hasta]

36 minutes ago, Biz said:

The reason people don't attend is individual, but the groups over the years change with the wind. One minute its NAPM, the next its too expensive.

Who are Newcastle by the way, and what do you think (bar price) may have inspired more people to attend that game? Level of opposition perhaps? Run of form up to it? Performance at St James?

Do I think that winning 3 in 12 games was the reason 12000 home fans bought tickets for Newcastle? Nope.

Do I think we had a large number of home fans go to that game because we played well in the original tie? Not a chance.

Do I think Newcastle as a club contributed to a significant increase in home fans for an FA cup game than we were used to?  Kind of but not because they were a premier league side.  I think people wanted to see a game with  a much fuller darwen end and a good atmosphere, as opposed to seeing 'Newcastle's Premier league starts.' Certainly a couple of the people I went we were looking forward to what they thought would be a more lively atmosphere. However, regardless of what they were hoping for, they wouldnt have gone at £20.

Again, it goes back to if you are going to do a deal on a single game, do a good one.

I'd love the 6 game deal to boost crowds but, as many many people say, the people who will commit to regularly to going to Ewood are probably signed up on one of the two season ticket deals. People who do other things at the weekends and attend infrequently aren't going to be encouraged to spend £100 and tie up 6 dates for up to 10 weeks in the future. 

Edited February 10, 2019 by Hasta

[JBiz]

12 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

And theres still no correlation between attendances and transfer spend. That's a blatant falsehood or we wouldn't be spending £7m on a sub. Hopefully you'll be able to accept that at some point and base your arguments in some version of reality. 

Turnover directly impacts outlay on wages and transfer fees. If you cannot accept or see any validity in this notion - why are you constantly referring to the "obscene" fee for Brereton as an issue? 

 

8 minutes ago, Hasta said:

Do I think that winning 3 in 12 games was the reason 12000 home fans bought tickets for Newcastle? Nope.

Do I think we had a large number of home fans go to that game because we played well in the original tie? Not a chance.

Do I think Newcastle as a club contributed to a significant increase in home fans for an FA cup game than we were used to?  Kind of but not because they were a premier league side.  I think people wanted to see a game with  a much fuller darwen end and a good atmosphere, as opposed to seeing 'Newcastle's Premier league starts.' Certainly a couple of the people I went we were looking forward to what they thought would be a more lively atmosphere. However regardless of what they were hoping for they wouldnt have gone at £20.

Again, it goes back to if you are going to do a deal on a single game, do a good one.

I'd love the 6 game deal to boost crowds but, as many many people say, the people who will commit to regularly to going to Ewood are probably signed up on one of the two season ticket deals. People who do other things at the weekends and attend infrequently aren't going to be encouraged to spend £100 and tie up 6 dates for up to 10 weeks in the future. 

3 games in 12, or 3 games in 3? 

Newcastle looked for the taking and the performance away will have definitely encouraged more fans to attend.

The premier league pull, combined with those other elements AND the cost will have brought more fans - however I don't think 12000 would've paid £10 if you have 0 wins in 12 running up to it, or if the game wasn't premier league opposition. 

What will encourage people to take up those 6 games? or say the last 3?

A chance of promotion, a run of good form and something to play for. This is the main issue. Hence why I don't agree with those highlighting the price as a key contributor to putting fans off.

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by Biz

[roversfan99]

38 minutes ago, Biz said:

Dearie me..99 quid for 6 games is not expensive.

Complaining that the "bring a friend" offer is on tv and it means you might have to move seat, scraping the barrel.

Season tickets are key - so why the rush to criticise any attempt to get more people into the habit of regularly attending?

I think you are talking absolute bobbins about a perceived attitude toward people not attending. My priority is the club in this case, more fans, more money - better atmosphere. You know that non-attendees are directly hurting the prospects of the team - but you'd sooner justify this position by complaining about the clubs offers. 

To see a marketing strategy as "passive aggressive" is the icing on the cake really, I mean surely anybody who wants the club to move forward knows that commitment from fans, players, the manager and owners is key. Its a buzzword to inspire some level ownership - you might have a different subjective opinion on the impact that strategy might have - but to see it as insulting is an absolute joke.

The reason people don't attend is individual, but the groups over the years change with the wind. One minute its NAPM, the next its too expensive.

Who are Newcastle by the way, and what do you think (bar price) may have inspired more people to attend that game? Level of opposition perhaps? Run of form up to it? Performance at St James?

Nobody has demanded the club spend more? Forget straw men, that is just a blatant lie. If you remember correctly, its only 10 days since the "lack of ambition" was disected on the transfer thread.

 

Your defensive nature of the clubs pricing policies has seemingly caused you to see every word that I have uttered as stinging criticism.

I acknowledged that both offers deserve some credit because the club is trying to get some fans into the club. Something youve ignored. I just think that the uptake may be minimal as the club could be somewhat hamstrung by the teams league position. (And that is not having a go at where we are!) £100 is a lot of money for the vast majority of fans who hasnt budgeted for it, who wasnt otherwise going to attend so clearly isnt desperate to attend, whether you like it or not. Especially for 6 games that dont have the competitive edge of a promotion/play off push or a relegation battle. By that, I am not at all slagging off the pricing by the club for the price per game etc. Im saying to justify spending the sum of £100 promptly and unexpectedly on something you can clearly do without, is a lot.

With the Boro game, or whatever game they selected, I would have recommended a simple tickets for a fiver or for a tenner policy, no strings attached, no terms and conditions, that would for me be much more likely to swell the attendance. Fair play to the club, bring a friend is better than nothing, it was just constructive criticism/advice.

You mention protestors, I suspect some of them have got out of the habit of going now rather than continuing to stay away under protest, its no longer a priority for them to attend. Difference is, I see it as a reason, you see it as an excuse. My attitude is to wonder what the club can do to get them back, yours is to lambast them for not attending in the first place. I hope the club doesnt see the situation like you do with such bitterness and pin the blame onto those who dont go. Whatever the reason. However flimsy it may be perceived, no one is obliged to attend. Hopefully the club is of the opinion, unlike yourself, that those not attending for whatever reason would be welcomed back with open arms and encouraged to do so, not seen with the attitude that if you dont come now, you dont deserve to come at all.

I dont understand your bitterness towards those not attending. Those who care the most that not attending may be to the detriment of the team already attend. Id love to be able to empathise as to why you hold so much resentment to people who quite simply dont see Blackburn Rovers as their number one priority. This is the same for every team, they have the hard core fans, then those that arent as interested, arent as passionate, arent as financially stable, whatever, that require additional coaxing to get through the turnstiles.

Its a simple unwilingness in my opinion to empathise with anyone who isnt as dedicated as you clearly are to attend.

[Mattyblue]

Amazing that there’s been such a row over the wholly uncontroversial view that we certainly should do offers like half and quarter season tickets for those that can commit to multiple matches.

But also throw in an odd one off ticket offer for those that can’t commit to a run of games.

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by Mattyblue

[Hasta]

8 minutes ago, Biz said:

 

3 games in 12, or 3 games in 3? 

Newcastle looked for the taking and the performance away will have definitely encouraged more fans to attend.

The premier league pull, combined with those other elements AND the cost will have brought more fans - however I don't think 12000 would've paid £10 if you have 0 wins in 12 running up to it, or if the game wasn't premier league opposition. 

What will encourage people to take up those 6 games? or say the last 3?

A chance of promotion, a run of good form and something to play for. This is the main issue. Hence why I don't agree with those highlighting the price as a key contributor to putting fans off.

 

 

But it wasn't 3 in 3, and most people didn't see the away performance. 

You talk about form being a factor, but are then arguing that people attended because it was 3 wins in 12 but wouldn't have if it was 0 wins in 12.   3 wins in 12 is hardly stirring form!

Therefore that just leaves the opposition and I've covered that above.

As for encouraging people to attend the last 6, we will struggle now as interest will wane even more oncd we have nothing to push for.  However a well publicised £10 a ticket, £1 for kids will get a big crowd on for Bolton on Easter Monday.

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by Hasta

[blueboy3333]

8 minutes ago, Biz said:

Turnover directly impacts outlay on wages and transfer fees. If you cannot accept or see any validity in this notion - why are you constantly referring to the "obscene" fee for Brereton as an issue? 

Clearly not at Rovers as the owners are pumping in £m's a year just to keep the club running. Our gate receipts for the season wouldnt buy BB's left bollock.

[Hasta]

6 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Amazing that there’s been such a row over the wholly uncontroversial view that we certainly should do offers like half and quarter season tickets for those that can commit to multiple matches.

But also throw in an odd one off ticket offer for those that can’t commit to a run of games.

 

I think an I ssue is that Waggot has said price promos do not work, but we never seem to get one that you believe will work. Whilst there might be a handful of people who will be able to take this new offer up, I imagine not one person on either side of this argument will say they expect a significant take up.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Hasta

[Mattyblue]

This Big 6 deal could have worked reasonably well, but unfortunately timed just as our play off surge has ended. C'est la vie. However, as we see with half season tickets, they only ever sell in their hundreds, those willing to sign up for every game in a package usually do so in the summer.

Boro is a bad choice for the one off game. Live on Sky with strings attached.

Bolton on Easter Monday or the last game of the season, no strings attached, would have been a much better idea. With thousands of extra fans trapping.

Edited February 10, 2019 by Mattyblue

[Stuart]

18 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Amazing that there’s been such a row over the wholly uncontroversial view that we certainly should do offers like half and quarter season tickets for those that can commit to multiple matches.

But also throw in an odd one off ticket offer for those that can’t commit to a run of games.

I think we need a bit more imagination than that though. Having 18,000 twice a season through a £10 offer would be good but it doesn’t really get numbers back consistently.

It appears to have garnered zero discussion but I quite like the idea of beefing up the 1875 club to offer access to cheaper tickets. If the club was to put up a scheme it would need to have some value in its own right but low cost to Rovers. Free or early access to certain events or away tickets, merchandise discount. Might be controversial but I’d also stop the “club cash” scheme for season ticket holders.

Add in £10 tickets for a limited number number of games, e.g. 10, (subject to availability) and it gives people flexibility, in theory guarantees extra ticket sales. Would it impact ST sales? Possibly, but they just need to get the numbers right to make it match the total revenue of today.

The beauty of such a scheme is that you could continue to charge away fans (and normal walk ons) the normal price.

I’m buying my ST for convenience and certainty of mine and my family’s fixed fortnightly seats.

[chaddyrovers]

is floating fan a thing now?