[cite]Posted By: Airman Brown[/cite]It costs £3.5k minimum to open all the north stand. There is very little saving in opening some bits and not others, because the escape routes take in the closed areas.
We've looked at it again this morning because we'd like to do it, but it doesn't stack up.
So 350 adults through the gates to cover the costs? Do you not think we'd get that many sitting there?
It's not as if people are going to stop sitting elsewhere as the other areas will be open regardless thus not affecting existing costs.
[cite]Posted By: killer kish[/cite]Why would anyone consider the people sitting in the North Stand week in and week out after the recent comments on here about North Stand riff raff!Cant believe we all support the same club with the comments of late on another thread!
Butch, dont take the riff raff comments so seriously. they are mainly in jest.
But for me, it's the feel to the ground that bothers me lots, the Jimmy Seed will be banged out, the east and west dilute the noise, and will have the north stand empty.
[cite]Posted By: Airman Brown[/cite]It costs £3.5k minimum to open all the north stand. There is very little saving in opening some bits and not others, because the escape routes take in the closed areas.
We've looked at it again this morning because we'd like to do it, but it doesn't stack up.
So 350 adults through the gates to cover the costs? Do you not think we'd get that many sitting there?
It's not as if people are going to stop sitting elsewhere as the other areas will be open regardless thus not affecting existing costs.
Maybe I'm missing something here.
surely the point is assuming those 350 come regardless then opening the North Stand for them does cost us £3.5k.
[cite]Posted By: Airman Brown[/cite]It costs £3.5k minimum to open all the north stand. There is very little saving in opening some bits and not others, because the escape routes take in the closed areas.
We've looked at it again this morning because we'd like to do it, but it doesn't stack up.
But there is more to this stacking up than plain costs isn't there? How do you factor in possible revenue and goodwill loss if this closed N. stand policy alienates a significant number of supporters so that they just don't turn up? Plus the chiff chaff do create the atmosphere and I believe that the atmosphere can make a significant difference to a close game. It was so dead on Tuesday, surely there has to be some viable alternative?
[cite]Posted By: charltonaddickedmatt[/cite]Do luton even have a fan base of 3k ?
just over 3k there last night, including however many Corby took, but I believe they have had some 7k attendances this season. However, a Saturday day out to a big club in the smoke ......
but we have already started selling tickets for the west lower and east before luton was even confirmed to be playing us. i'll be expecting more then 3,000 turning up so where else is the left overs going to sit, its the quads or the covered end... i believe it was a really stupid thing to do.
[cite]Posted By: JimboCAFC[/cite]but we have already started selling tickets for the west lower and east before luton was even confirmed to be playing us. i'll be expecting more then 3,000 turning up so where else is the left overs going to sit, its the quads or the covered end... i believe it was a really stupid thing to do.
The East and West Lower hold around 9k between so well over double the number of home fans there on Tuesday.
I'm presuming the £3.5k relates to the whole of the North (Upper, Lower, North East, North West).
If you opened just the lower then saved from that would be stewarding, lighting, kiosk staff, turnstile operators from the other areas of the North. All that would remain would be the access point issue which would need to be stewarded (additional 4-6 stewards ?)
So the increased cost in opening just the lower would be somewhere between £1-£2k ?
Am i reading that right ? Please tell me if i'm wrong Airman.
Against that £2k outlay, you have to marry it up against the potential increased issue of having to further steward a few hundred fans who will no doubt sit in the blocks nearest to what is likely to be a 'lively' away following and participate in goading tennis, and changing the routine environment of those that already sit in those stands and those that normally sit in the north.
As you can see on here for example, you get a real difference (generalising i know) between those who sit on the sides and those who sit behind the goal, and i'm pretty sure both camps would find it preferable for it to remain that way.
Out of interest, what is the prelimary home crowd exectations for this fixture ?
Corby didn't want more than the Jimmy Seed Stand, hence we could sell the east in either eventuality.
We fully accept that this is more than a financial argument, which is why we've looked at it again. But at the other extreme you can't say that finance shouldn't come into it.
The east and lower west gives us roughly 10,000 home seats. Opening the east is half the price of opening the north. Some people would be unhappy either way. There's no dispute that there was a lack of atmosphere against Barnet, but given the total crowd opening the north stand would have made very little difference.
There will be, I suggest, a significantly bigger home crowd against Luton and that will make a difference of itself. But it isn't ideal and we're not pretending it is.
[cite]Posted By: adamtheaddick[/cite]Im not going unless the north is open,hated tues night.
It reminds me a bit of pub with a saloon bar and a games room.
It is your local, 'your' pub which you have been going to for 30 years. You sit or stand all the time at the same spot in the Saloon bar comfortable with the surroundings and the people around you.
You find out one Friday the Saloon is closed and its only the Games room open that night, with its pool tables and jukebox.
So what do you do ?
A lot of people would think 'nah, can't be bothered. I'll stay in this week'.
no im saying it is rather stupid as with have already started selling tickets for the game before it was confirmed that we had Luton, if they sell out the Jimmy Seed, we have to give them more seats, its 15% for the FA Cup right, where else are we gonna seat them other then the Quads and the North. the club have'nt thought this out.
[cite]Posted By: JimboCAFC[/cite]no im saying it is rather stupid as with have already started selling tickets for the game before it was confirmed that we had Luton, if they sell out the Jimmy Seed, we have to give them more seats, its 15% for the FA Cup right, where else are we gonna seat them other then the Quads and the North. the club have'nt thought this out.
It's already been stated they're not getting more on safety grounds and previous "record"
Whilst I appreciate that there is a cost attached to opening the stand did we not just gain £18,000 after beating Barnet? I am assuming we did not budget for receiving that money.
I accept that a lot of that may have been swallowed up by the cost of staging the game on Tuesday, although presumably the few thounsand who did turn up covered some of that.
Linked with the risk of some deciding not to go to the Luton game given lack of atmosphere/having to associate with the riff-raff from the north in the Barnet game is the cost of opening the stand really that much of a risk? Especially if it leads to an improved atmosphere, a bigger crowd and potentially a victory that will bank another unbudgeted £24k
[cite]Posted By: JimboCAFC[/cite]no im saying it is rather stupid as with have already started selling tickets for the game before it was confirmed that we had Luton, if they sell out the Jimmy Seed, we have to give them more seats, its 15% for the FA Cup right, where else are we gonna seat them other then the Quads and the North. the club have'nt thought this out.
It's already been stated they're not getting more on safety grounds and previous "record"
Only got to see what happended when they lost in the play offs against York to see what Luton are capable of!
Does make it surprising the police will not give them any more than 3K but there are no restrictions in place on tickets in home areas. Not really fussed from a personal point of view but does seem a bit odd.
As much as it not good having the Covered End open you can see why the club need to make calls like this. We need to be careful with the funds we have, that said I agree it could end up costing more if people stay away or steward costs go up in other areas as a result.
[cite]Posted By: Airman Brown[/cite]AFKA, we've asked the question about the lower north and the answer came back the difference isn't significant.
Sorry AB, i'm trying not to come across as repetitive i swear !
I don't understand if you strip out say 7 turnstile operators, however many stewards that would be needed for the north upper, north west, north east, the lighting and electricity from those areas, 12 kiosk staff, that it can't make that much of a difference if the only residual need is the access points to be stewarded. What else could make up the costs ?
Its not so much a case for me of 'atmosphere' because i still don't think it will be great whatever, its more a case of people, in all stands, having familiarity with their environment and the people around them. I would have thought the goodwill of that would have been worth £2k off a £100k income, even if it wasn't completely recouped.
Is my point making sense, or am i being a bit tunnel vision with this ?
It seems there are a few covered end faithful convinced they won't show up unless the north is open. I was tempted to stay away on Tues due to the thought of being away from the north. For me the feeling will be the same for the Luton game and i may be tempted to stay away.
The club could make a loss on the decision to close the north as apposed to making a loss for opening it.
Also with no atmosphere we could well lose the game and miss out on a decent tie next round which would again cause the club a loss financially.
Well, if the North Stand is not open then I almost certainly won't bother going as I hate sitting in the East or West Stands. So that will be another 3 non-attendees to factor in. The whole thing seems ridiculous to me as surely we should expect a crowd of 12,000+ for a Saturday FA Cup game. So why wouldn't you treat it the same as any other match day?
Comments
It's not as if people are going to stop sitting elsewhere as the other areas will be open regardless thus not affecting existing costs.
Maybe I'm missing something here.
Butch, dont take the riff raff comments so seriously. they are mainly in jest.
But for me, it's the feel to the ground that bothers me lots, the Jimmy Seed will be banged out, the east and west dilute the noise, and will have the north stand empty.
surely the point is assuming those 350 come regardless then opening the North Stand for them does cost us £3.5k.
But there is more to this stacking up than plain costs isn't there? How do you factor in possible revenue and goodwill loss if this closed N. stand policy alienates a significant number of supporters so that they just don't turn up? Plus the chiff chaff do create the atmosphere and I believe that the atmosphere can make a significant difference to a close game. It was so dead on Tuesday, surely there has to be some viable alternative?
just over 3k there last night, including however many Corby took, but I believe they have had some 7k attendances this season. However, a Saturday day out to a big club in the smoke ......
as Airman said even if you open the lower there is access to the upper that has to be stewarded etc so no-one can gain access.
The East and West Lower hold around 9k between so well over double the number of home fans there on Tuesday.
If you opened just the lower then saved from that would be stewarding, lighting, kiosk staff, turnstile operators from the other areas of the North. All that would remain would be the access point issue which would need to be stewarded (additional 4-6 stewards ?)
So the increased cost in opening just the lower would be somewhere between £1-£2k ?
Am i reading that right ? Please tell me if i'm wrong Airman.
Against that £2k outlay, you have to marry it up against the potential increased issue of having to further steward a few hundred fans who will no doubt sit in the blocks nearest to what is likely to be a 'lively' away following and participate in goading tennis, and changing the routine environment of those that already sit in those stands and those that normally sit in the north.
As you can see on here for example, you get a real difference (generalising i know) between those who sit on the sides and those who sit behind the goal, and i'm pretty sure both camps would find it preferable for it to remain that way.
Out of interest, what is the prelimary home crowd exectations for this fixture ?
We fully accept that this is more than a financial argument, which is why we've looked at it again. But at the other extreme you can't say that finance shouldn't come into it.
The east and lower west gives us roughly 10,000 home seats. Opening the east is half the price of opening the north. Some people would be unhappy either way. There's no dispute that there was a lack of atmosphere against Barnet, but given the total crowd opening the north stand would have made very little difference.
There will be, I suggest, a significantly bigger home crowd against Luton and that will make a difference of itself. But it isn't ideal and we're not pretending it is.
It reminds me a bit of pub with a saloon bar and a games room.
It is your local, 'your' pub which you have been going to for 30 years. You sit or stand all the time at the same spot in the Saloon bar comfortable with the surroundings and the people around you.
You find out one Friday the Saloon is closed and its only the Games room open that night, with its pool tables and jukebox.
So what do you do ?
A lot of people would think 'nah, can't be bothered. I'll stay in this week'.
We do not have to give them more tickets, because the police will not allow it. We cannot do it. Doesn't matter what the rules say.
I accept that a lot of that may have been swallowed up by the cost of staging the game on Tuesday, although presumably the few thounsand who did turn up covered some of that.
Linked with the risk of some deciding not to go to the Luton game given lack of atmosphere/having to associate with the riff-raff from the north in the Barnet game is the cost of opening the stand really that much of a risk? Especially if it leads to an improved atmosphere, a bigger crowd and potentially a victory that will bank another unbudgeted £24k
Only got to see what happended when they lost in the play offs against York to see what Luton are capable of!
Does make it surprising the police will not give them any more than 3K but there are no restrictions in place on tickets in home areas. Not really fussed from a personal point of view but does seem a bit odd.
As much as it not good having the Covered End open you can see why the club need to make calls like this. We need to be careful with the funds we have, that said I agree it could end up costing more if people stay away or steward costs go up in other areas as a result.
Sorry AB, i'm trying not to come across as repetitive i swear !
I don't understand if you strip out say 7 turnstile operators, however many stewards that would be needed for the north upper, north west, north east, the lighting and electricity from those areas, 12 kiosk staff, that it can't make that much of a difference if the only residual need is the access points to be stewarded. What else could make up the costs ?
Its not so much a case for me of 'atmosphere' because i still don't think it will be great whatever, its more a case of people, in all stands, having familiarity with their environment and the people around them. I would have thought the goodwill of that would have been worth £2k off a £100k income, even if it wasn't completely recouped.
Is my point making sense, or am i being a bit tunnel vision with this ?
I was tempted to stay away on Tues due to the thought of being away from the north.
For me the feeling will be the same for the Luton game and i may be tempted to stay away.
The club could make a loss on the decision to close the north as apposed to making a loss for opening it.
Also with no atmosphere we could well lose the game and miss out on a decent tie next round which would again cause the club a loss financially.