Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
2026/27 Season Tickets
Comments
-
valleynick66 said:
So if I follow correctly you are being told you can only stay in your seats if you upgrade to hospitality and no suggestion if a discount to incentivise that?bobmunro said:bolloxbolder said:
I find this post really sad. A devoted , longstanding loyal supporter no longer watching his beloved club, as the club without consultation turf him out of his seat, one he has occupied for many years.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?
Nantwich Town now for my football fix now - ST about £80, sit where I like or wander around the pitch with pint in hand cheering on the mighty Dabbers, and it's a 15 minute drive from home.
I hope you feel able to share on here any reply you receive from the club to your letter.
Shame on you Charlton. A real own goal.I've got a reply. Apparently I can reserve now any currently available seats in Zone 1 Lower West (probably Blocks C and F which I don't want) and to choose from the attached image (I can't see the image). I replied including this:I’m well aware that I could choose other currently available seats in Zone 1 Lower West now - my point about waiting for the renewal deadline for existing season ticket seats to pass, is the vain hope that better alternatives become available. So, in reality my only choices are going to be seats in Zone 1 Lower West that no other current ST holders wanted! Hobson’s Choice I believe is the appropriate phrase.Finding three decent alternatives together is even more unlikely.In my original reply I inquired about next seasons hospitality plans on the off chance that I might be tempted, even though the journey I have makes arriving two hours before kick-off unrealistic if I'm honest with myself.Buy hey, good news:Because of this change, your current season tickets cannot automatically be renewed in those exact seats under the standard season ticket structure. However, you and your sons would have the option to remain in those seats by upgrading to the relevant hospitality package should that be something you would like to consider.I've instructed them not to waste any more time on me as I won't be renewing. Fuck the club, I'm done.Absolute disgrace.
Alternatively you move to other seats in Zone 1 which aren’t already ST holders and again no discount / incentive.What was the suggestion of turning up in person later in March all about then ? Just a hard sell on hospitality?1. No2. No3. Supposedly to help us choose new seats - fucking hell, I think I can do that from home without any help - I may be an old bastard but I'm still capable of selecting a green box on a screen!. So probably - Yes.3 -
ElfsborgAddick said:
@bobmunro has been priced out with others......bolloxbolder said:
I find this post really sad. A devoted , longstanding loyal supporter no longer watching his beloved club, as the club without consultation turf him out of his seat, one he has occupied for many years.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?
Nantwich Town now for my football fix now - ST about £80, sit where I like or wander around the pitch with pint in hand cheering on the mighty Dabbers, and it's a 15 minute drive from home.
I hope you feel able to share on here any reply you receive from the club to your letter.
Shame on you Charlton. A real own goal.
I'll buy the whole of the 1905 suite, leave it empty, sit in our seats and with no other prawn sandwich merchants anywhere near us.7 -
Back in the good ol' Premier League days it was £100 for the season... not sure how that would compare today. And you could usually get a table - and Crossbars was what is now the Fan's Bar. I think Crossbars now is in the West stand for more expensive hospitality.Er_Be_Ab_Pl_Wo_Wo_Ch said:
Was £50 a year, if I remember rightly.Briston_Addick said:
Crossbars was membership only a number of years ago having been free entry when it first opened.Er_Be_Ab_Pl_Wo_Wo_Ch said:Turfing out supporters is a bold move considering we're far from guaranteed to stay up.
I wonder if entry to the fans bar will be monetised within the review of memberships / new STs.
I can't remember when it changed or how much they were charging but suffice to say me, Mum and Dad decided "nah, not worth it".0 -
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?0 -
Your figures tally with mine which is basically: take £100 off current season ticket prices and aim to re-coup that loss of income by selling about an additional 3000 season tickets. I personally think that is realistic. I know of about 5 lapsed supporters that would probably sign up and a few occasional attendees who might give it a punt.Henry Irving said:
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
"Momentum" is a word that has been used in this thread a few times i.e. get a crowd in, gee up/ inspire the team to a few better results, move towards the play off positions and then is the time to increase prices. Got to speculate to accumulate!1 -
Digging?Covered End said:
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?
No I’m challenging the assertion / suggestion that if we don’t pay more for tickets or ST then it’s a big impact on the transfer budget.I don’t think it is the major factor based on what’s been stated on allowable losses. The budget for transfers is down to the owners appetite and Sky money.A loss or gain of a few thousand ST won’t seemingly change who we shop for versus the necessary need to have a competent and competitive squad which in itself is more likely to attract floating ticket sales over the season.
I’m refuting the idea we must pay more.
To your final point (dig?) I’m clearly not worthy of an opinion as a lapsed ST holder. My historic credentials as a ST holder at Selhurst, Upton Park, VIP investor and former VG subscriber are unimportant seemingly.0 -
‘Upgrade to hospitality’ is a laugh, are they listening to themselves?
Hospitality is a downgrade on the experience in my view, why do they call it an upgrade?0 -
I'm not saying we have to pay more.valleynick66 said:
Digging?Covered End said:
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?
No I’m challenging the assertion / suggestion that if we don’t pay more for tickets or ST then it’s a big impact on the transfer budget.I don’t think it is the major factor based on what’s been stated on allowable losses. The budget for transfers is down to the owners appetite and Sky money.A loss or gain of a few thousand ST won’t seemingly change who we shop for versus the necessary need to have a competent and competitive squad which in itself is more likely to attract floating ticket sales over the season.
I’m refuting the idea we must pay more.
To your final point (dig?) I’m clearly not worthy of an opinion as a lapsed ST holder. My historic credentials as a ST holder at Selhurst, Upton Park, VIP investor and former VG subscriber are unimportant seemingly.
I'm saying getting the balance right between maximising income and maximising attendance is not as simplistic as some posters think.
The club haven't even announced the ST details or prices yet some people have already decided they've got it all wrong.2 -
valleynick66 said:
Digging?Covered End said:
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?
No I’m challenging the assertion / suggestion that if we don’t pay more for tickets or ST then it’s a big impact on the transfer budget.I don’t think it is the major factor based on what’s been stated on allowable losses. The budget for transfers is down to the owners appetite and Sky money.A loss or gain of a few thousand ST won’t seemingly change who we shop for versus the necessary need to have a competent and competitive squad which in itself is more likely to attract floating ticket sales over the season.
I’m refuting the idea we must pay more.
To your final point (dig?) I’m clearly not worthy of an opinion as a lapsed ST holder. My historic credentials as a ST holder at Selhurst, Upton Park, VIP investor and former VG subscriber are unimportant seemingly.
Ticket income and Matchday activities + Commercial = 5.883M
Total = 8.812M
Thats 66% of total revenue made via fans.Now I’m well aware TV revenue has gone from 1.9M->11M so there is an extra 9M there and prize money will go up but, the Championship is ridiculously expensive nowadays and that probably covers the wage difference via promotion and upgrades to meet the EFL standards.Were on for 13M losses this year so physically we wouldn’t be able to invest any more than we have done this summer over 3 years in order to comply with legal rules. If anyone moans about a lack of investment you’re basically arguing we should try running the club illegally. There is a lot of emphasis on us as fans to generate good income unless u have Brighton level of transfer business0 -
Of course I’m not saying run it illegally!Crispywood said:valleynick66 said:
Digging?Covered End said:
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?
No I’m challenging the assertion / suggestion that if we don’t pay more for tickets or ST then it’s a big impact on the transfer budget.I don’t think it is the major factor based on what’s been stated on allowable losses. The budget for transfers is down to the owners appetite and Sky money.A loss or gain of a few thousand ST won’t seemingly change who we shop for versus the necessary need to have a competent and competitive squad which in itself is more likely to attract floating ticket sales over the season.
I’m refuting the idea we must pay more.
To your final point (dig?) I’m clearly not worthy of an opinion as a lapsed ST holder. My historic credentials as a ST holder at Selhurst, Upton Park, VIP investor and former VG subscriber are unimportant seemingly.Ticket income and Matchday activities + Commercial = 5.883M
Total = 8.812M
Thats 66% of total revenue made via fans.Now I’m well aware TV revenue has gone from 1.9M->11M so there is an extra 9M there and prize money will go up but, the Championship is ridiculously expensive nowadays and that probably covers the wage difference via promotion and upgrades to meet the EFL standards.We’re on for 13M losses this year so physically we wouldn’t be able to invest any more than we have done this summer over 3 years in order to comply with legal rules. If anyone moans about a lack of investment you’re basically arguing we should try running the club illegally. There is a lot of emphasis on us as fans to generate good income unless u have Brighton level of transfer business
Merely highlighting the impact on mere fans at the gate.The trend to automatically lump more on tickets is a dangerous one.I don’t see for example why our prices need be different to Millwall.Yes I like others are assuming prices will rise again.I’ll also repeat I thought the price hike immediately post Wembley was a poor decision but very indicative of the tbought process of our ownership which sees fans very differently to how I see them.If you are content to pay more then good luck to you.We simply disagree as is allowed.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
I believe it's because they have introduced a wholesome vegan menu for new customers.jose said:‘Upgrade to hospitality’ is a laugh, are they listening to themselves?
Hospitality is a downgrade on the experience in my view, why do they call it an upgrade?0 -
It is disgusting what they have done, IMO as an apology they should give all inconvenienced a heavily discounted season ticket, to the point of being a virtual freebie.bobmunro said:ElfsborgAddick said:
@bobmunro has been priced out with others......bolloxbolder said:
I find this post really sad. A devoted , longstanding loyal supporter no longer watching his beloved club, as the club without consultation turf him out of his seat, one he has occupied for many years.bobmunro said:Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?
Nantwich Town now for my football fix now - ST about £80, sit where I like or wander around the pitch with pint in hand cheering on the mighty Dabbers, and it's a 15 minute drive from home.
I hope you feel able to share on here any reply you receive from the club to your letter.
Shame on you Charlton. A real own goal.
I'll buy the whole of the 1905 suite, leave it empty, sit in our seats and with no other prawn sandwich merchants anywhere near us.2 -
I agree with my learned friend @ElfsborgAddick1
-
@ElfsborgAddick is always after a freebie.Alwaysneil said:I agree with my learned friend @ElfsborgAddick0 -
I don’t think you can attribute commercial income to fans as such - admittedly you wouldn’t get very far with no fans, but it’s the exposure sponsors are buying and some of it will be central income (not based on our crowds).Crispywood said:valleynick66 said:
Digging?Covered End said:
Perhaps you might consider looking answers up yourself instead of continually interrogating others?valleynick66 said:
Doesn’t really address my point. I’m not sure a ‘discount’ on ST prices is lost revenue drastically changes our transfer / wages budget given the fluctuation in numbers is unlikely to be a huge number/volume.Henry Irving said:
It's complicated as there so many caveats but IIRC a club can make a loss of £40.5m over three seasons and only spend 80% of it expenditure on player wages (happy to be corrected on this as it changes constantly and I can't be arsed to keep up.)valleynick66 said:
And what exactly is (as I don’t know) the percentage of income restriction you allude to?Henry Irving said:letthegoodtimesroll said:
And that is why anything that can help get promotion to the PL should be prioritised; and the cheapest and more effective route of achieving it is to try and fill the Valley for home games to give Nathan and the players as much support as possiblekillerandflash said:
To be fair, player wages are way higher in real terms than they were back in the 90s when we were building the club up.blackpool72 said:
To be perfectly honest I don't think our owners and SMT have understood our fanbase since the days of Murray, Simmons and Varney.AFKABartram said:Club have done a lot of good last couple of years and that should not be dismissed, but the one nagging gap I think is there is I never think they really understand our fanbase and the intricacies of football support.
In those days we seemed to have a much closer relationship.
In the Championship, the wages and budgets are ludicrous now, requiring deep pockets from the owners.
Sparrows Lane. Phone rings
Nathan Jones: Morning
Gavin Carter: Hi Nathan, it's good news and bad news
Nathan Jones: Hi Mr Chairman, hit me with it, my faith makes me strong
GC: Good news is we've sold more season tickets
NJ: Great, can't beat a packed out Valley, whats the bad news?
GC: well, we cut prices to sell more season tickets, we sold 3000 more but got less income overall so your transfer budget has been cut
NJ: but our megarich owners will make up the difference, right?
GC: they'd love to but financial fair play rules limite what they can put in as a percentage of income.
NJ: can't you flog more hospitality?
GC: we tried but when we expanded the hospitality seating area we upset a few existing ST holders, one bloke said he was going back to supporting Stoke
NJ: Agh, don't mention Stoke to me. So how can we be the best versions of ourselves with no budget?
GC: we're sure Ahadme and Tanto will do the business for us and there are some really promising kids in the U18s, Nathan? Are you still there Nathan?I’m trying to see what scale of adjustment less ticket sale income in absolute terms is.
Essentially, the more money a club generates from tickets, sponsorship, retail, hospitality and player sales the better their player budget can be.
If our income is £6.5m then we can spend £20m a season on average over three seasons on the playing budget ie a £13.5 loss per years which is covered by the owners.
"Our" (ie the owners) losses this season will be £11 to £13m according to the last directors brief although not all of that will have been spent on players.
If you put prices up you might lose sales and so reduce income.
If you bring prices down you might increase sales but reduce income as you've given your 12.5k existing ST a discount before you even start. 12,500 x £100 rebate is 1,250,000. That means you need to sell another 3,125 £400 just to generate the same income.
If you keep prices the same you might fall further behind other clubs who already have bigger budgets.
There is no easy fix to solve this problem.However pricing with your supporters budget in mind is the main factor in at least maintaining numbers.Did you buy a S/T?
No I’m challenging the assertion / suggestion that if we don’t pay more for tickets or ST then it’s a big impact on the transfer budget.I don’t think it is the major factor based on what’s been stated on allowable losses. The budget for transfers is down to the owners appetite and Sky money.A loss or gain of a few thousand ST won’t seemingly change who we shop for versus the necessary need to have a competent and competitive squad which in itself is more likely to attract floating ticket sales over the season.
I’m refuting the idea we must pay more.
To your final point (dig?) I’m clearly not worthy of an opinion as a lapsed ST holder. My historic credentials as a ST holder at Selhurst, Upton Park, VIP investor and former VG subscriber are unimportant seemingly.Ticket income and Matchday activities + Commercial = 5.883M
Total = 8.812M
Thats 66% of total revenue made via fans.Now I’m well aware TV revenue has gone from 1.9M->11M so there is an extra 9M there and prize money will go up but, the Championship is ridiculously expensive nowadays and that probably covers the wage difference via promotion and upgrades to meet the EFL standards.Were on for 13M losses this year so physically we wouldn’t be able to invest any more than we have done this summer over 3 years in order to comply with legal rules. If anyone moans about a lack of investment you’re basically arguing we should try running the club illegally. There is a lot of emphasis on us as fans to generate good income unless u have Brighton level of transfer businessI’ll reserve judgement on 26/27 pricing until I see it, but having designed the club’s pricing structure for 15-20 years my view is that match tickets are already too expensive, are unlikely to be maximising revenue and are absurdly overcomplicated.
One simple suggestion would be to stop setting multiple obscure price points that generate sod all revenue. Just look at those price grids.
Given the small number of “cheap” seats available it is bonkers to set the starting point for most seats at £35 at gold games, rising before kick-off.
I wouldn’t reduce prices in the upper Covered End because the demand is clearly there already.The objective is always to maximise ticket revenue and always was, ancillary revenue is zilch by comparison, but as certain evening games have shown this season you cannot price people in if they find it inconvenient or unattractive to attend. That will apply to season tickets too.0
