 | News
Comment |
at 19:10:01
My apologies I saw one photo yesterday which looked like there was, as i expected it, but zooming in on this photo I actually realise the Amex part is in quotation marks which has the same emphasis. I just asked banner makers by text and got response "We put quotes in" which changes it from a blank statement to an emphasis of 'disappointment' at corporately naming stadium. All in the week that one of our most iconic stadiums became the Sports Direct Arena.
Oh the joys of the English language and the difficulties in wording banners. This one was way too subtle and clearly open to misinterpretation.
|
| News
Comment |
at 18:17:25
The ellipsis is not critical but the question mark is.
I was never involved in the banner's creation but understood it. Clearly many didn't
As I see it, the point made is that after all that Brighton have been through, shafted by business, years in exile and the hell hole of the Withdean and the hard work and fund-raising of so many supporters it is sad that someone sold the naming rights to the stadium to a big Corporation, it seems at odds with the community nature of the club and it's survival. Sums up all that is wrong with modern football.
The first bit was a joke and a good point and a compliment referencing Brighton's survival against the odds. the last bit is the question. Clearly such nuances are lost on many but kills points 1, 2 and 3 of the blog. Amex have naming rights because they sponsor the community scheme, not the stadium.
|
| News
Comment |
at 17:50:18
No Phil it's not quite right, look closely at the link I posted. Subtly different but makes a major difference. |
| News
Comment |
at 17:25:53
To write a blog based on such little research as to misquote the banner text (which therefore changes the entire emphasis of it's meaning) and undermines all three points you make is poor. Do us a favour and research and the then revise the blog accordingly If you still cannot see the subtlety (as many bhafc fans on twitter did when the exact text was pointed out to them) undermines your whole blog.
A shame as it was well written.
http://bbombmessageboard.runboard.com/p47896#post47901 |
| News
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 11:44:41
I welcome this move. it should have been tried earlier this season, but better late than never.
The moans from ST Holders is not that understandable really, they pay roughly £20 per game so what are they bleating about. Yes they are long-suffering but they must surely welcome any initiative that may result in a fuller ground.
Hopefully it will attract fans back to Portman Road who have been priced out of supporting the club due to high matchday prices, economic woes and it's impact and those that can and do frequent away matches rather than home games because it is often cheaper to do so for them. |
| Blog
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 11:44:41
I welcome this move. it should have been tried earlier this season, but better late than never.
The moans from ST Holders is not that understandable really, they pay roughly £20 per game so what are they bleating about. Yes they are long-suffering but they must surely welcome any initiative that may result in a fuller ground.
Hopefully it will attract fans back to Portman Road who have been priced out of supporting the club due to high matchday prices, economic woes and it's impact and those that can and do frequent away matches rather than home games because it is often cheaper to do so for them. |
| News
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 09:57:57
How to proceed? Get the view of the branches, get the ITSC Executive to consider it and not sit on it. As for the club, not really in their court as such, this is about a seed change in the way the Supporters Club is run, it is there and amongst fans that the ideas need debating.
The changes can and should happen fast, by the end of this season at the latest. |
| News
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 09:12:52
Thankyou for a really welll thought out blog.
There will be resistance to some of the proposals and from the existing Supprters Club, but I am sure support from some branches. However you seem to have a good grasp of most of the issues which strengthens your case.
You left out Home bus travel as an issue. Whilst some branches can make this pay for itself others struggle and have to raise funds to make it viable. This is one area where a regtional setup may help ease the situation. If fans felt empowered then recruitment and subsequent higher take-up of Home travel arrangements could ease the economics of home travel.
There will be resistance to replacing the branch system with a regional set-up but maybe the existing branches could be retained withing Suffolk and Essex where they make more sense, but organise better coordination and cooperation between them. Outside the immediate area regional branches already exist, but do not offer complete national coverage so the concept may need some expansion.
Such a setup could then be used for away travel. Branches can and do run away travel at prices set to cover costs. If branches shared such arrangements where feasible these would enable the clever idea of yours of running away travel from hubs.
Such interbranch cooperatoon and regional setup would also foster better social activities and cement such interraction. A more unified structure would doubtless result and make a central committee with elected members truly viable.
We would therefore need better tools for communication and cooperation, the internet is ideal for this, however there is some resistance to it's use by older branch members may make this difficult, but demonstartion and training can overcome this. The technology exists to make it work and make it easy to set up, I would be more than happy to provide a Contemt Management based website for the purpose with branch and regional sections, facebook and twitter feeds and more or less anything else identified by members.
Ultimately a Supporters Club mirroring the setup of similar organisations in Germany would be the ideal with the target of match day meeting points and campaigns to improve home match day atmosphere and experience would enable better feedback between supporters and the club help special interent groups like the disabled branch and hopefully foster a new spirit of unity amongst fans.
Let the debate begin. |
| News
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 16:57:43
Can't we just have Gareth McAuley back, or have him cloned.
To play two left sided defenders in the centre of defence last night was a recipe for disaster and so it proved.
Our twenty minutes of dominance was due to the introduction of Martin and JET, the latter looking superb and just the ticket whislt the former was far more effective on his right side.
There are two worries here though: 1) where an earth do we get a McAuley replacement (I would actually look at the lower leagues for a cheap right sided centre back with experience rather than upwards for a player not good enough to make a Prem squad and therefore either young or possibly past it) and 2) I am getting worried about Jewells tactical nouse, his press comments afterwards were to me so off the mark (in complete contrast to Roy Keane who was always so spot on) seem to suggest he cannot see the obvious mistakes he is making.
This was what made me feel so negative (and anyone that knows me would be shocked to hear that).
Mind you, I had the last laugh, a summer of unemployment has left me with no Season Ticket. My new work may leave me with no time for football since evenings and weekends may be set aside for client liaision and work, at least for the next quarter. So as I left, I jokingly pitied my fellow fans who would have to witness what I now fear may be a poor few months, whilst I can pick and choose my games based on work requirements. (I was of course only half serious) |
| News
Comment | Experimental Price Cut for Middlesbrough Clash
at 13:14:26
A well written blog and I agree with the majority of your blog. Liz's statement seems to have annoyed and alienated an awful lot of fans. If the booing was aimed at the player (and most fans I have spoken to think it was in fact aimed at the ref) then she may have a point that does not confine itself merely to a dozen or so fans in their early teens or even earlier. But the appallingly badly worded statement and the 'message' pinned to the walls of the Lower North on Saturday (which went further than the EADT article) seem to have actually united fans in one sense. The moaners and the singers on Saturday were in agreement that it was misdirected, patronising and from a largely self-appointed voice of the Supporters.
This is where your blog hits the nail on the head, like me you have an insight into how ITSC works (or rather doesn't) and how Liz got to be Chair. She may get complaints requiring action but should have the common sense to target the fans in question rather than manage to annoy the vast majority. If he probable idol David Cameron can hug a hoodie perhaps Liz can chat to some teenaged kids.
Thankfully it may have also united some disparate sections of supporters who previously held diverse views of what supporting your team meant. They now seem to share a loathing of the statement and the veiled threats it contains.
W |
| News
Comment | Supporters\' Club: Grow Up or Stay Away
at 09:29:32
Thanks to NottsTractor for pointing out that Section 6 is against racist and homophobic chanting.
The aim of S6 was to improve the atmosphere, we have received no support from the Supporters Club in this aim, we still try our best but some of the comments on here reveal partly why we have yet to achieve success.
Too many fans are happy to pour scorn and ridicule on our efforts, this of course neatly sidesteps the issue that they do zero themselves to improve the atmosphere, indeed one suspects they are why the sound of moaning is louder than the singing in many parts of the ground. If they can suggest an alternative then fine, but they cannot or will not.
There is no part of the ground where adult and teenage singers can congregate, stand and sing. No longer can the teenagers sneak in and join in the singing in Section 6 of the SBRS Lower. So any influence is confined to away games.
The issue of bridging between the family sections and the adult only SBRS Lower is still an issue. How are these kids meant to learn how to behave at football, where do they congregate at Home games near older fans who can drown out the fashanu song.
The Press is full of stories of lack of correct peer pressure, role models and leadership contrbuting to the riots, but surely the same lack of respect displayed by this group is symptomatic of the same issues but in terms of football support.
In the seventies terracing meant that as you got older you moved backwards through the stand. Seating killed this concept and there is nothing to replace it.
The club offers no solution but to back the inneffectual Supporters Club when they complain of youngsters acting badly. Perhaps rather than threats the club should actually look at how these fans can be positively influenced by older singers (and by older I don't mean me but fans in their twenties upwards) and find a solution that aims to bridge that gap.
|
| News
Comment | Supporters\' Club: Grow Up or Stay Away
at 23:52:03
I agree with almost all your post, aside from the Justin Fashanu song, which I find offensive and am one of the loud ones who drown it out when it starts to be sung.
The rest of the post is spot on though, football supporters are a broad church. Not everyone is there for the same reasons and frustration amongst some supporters does manifest itself in different ways.
But the worst aspect of Elizabeth's statement is using the term 'so called fans'. If these are 'so called fans' then arguably so are the likes of Elizabeth. Some hardcore fans heap disdain on non-singing replica shirt wearing fans as 'so called fans' as well. These fans who you refer to, misguided in some ways they may be, are as much fans as she is, and in some eyes more so. Well done for alienating not just this set of fans but others as well, the Glazers could not have done better. Maybe you want us all to sit and clap politely.
If that becomes the norm at Ipswich Wither the last remnants of passion. |
| News
Comment | Crawford Can\'t Understand Why Town Let Norris Go
at 12:17:25
All the animosity towards Norris is based on the "We won't be held to ransom" comment and everyone seems to have the impression he wanted more wages. But it was stated at Christmas time that Norris had been offered two years and wanted three but this 'fact' passed everyone by.
The club have made another cock-up, if they had offered him an optional third year he probably would have accepted, but they didn't. I wonder why the club have no intention of committing to players wages beyond the 2012/13 season except for players with obvious selling potential. It's does not dispel notions of lack of ambition nor does it dispel the "olympic" theory that seems to gain creedence with every failure to sign a player.
Meanwhile we have to replace one of the best players we have signed for a decade (I agree wholeheartedly with Crawford on this), we will not get a player as good.
|
| News
Comment | Crawford Can\'t Understand Why Town Let Norris Go
at 18:04:07
My response was rushed and I have been away for a day or so, but it does seem that there are complexities in assessing whether demand for football matchday tickets is elastic or inelastic.
To assess this in any detail we have to create a model that takes all the various factors into account that affect demand for tickets for a given match.
Clearly there seem to be at least three posters that have some understanding of economic modelling. So I have been looking to see if there is any research and specific modelling of this market that will help us in this case determine if the assumption of the degree of market elasticity can be determined.
My initial research suggests there is, so I will try and get access to JANET (via a friend and get access to relevant articles. Just reading a selection suggests this is a live debate and the assumption of inealasticity is under question. But this will take me time. Clearly the model is beyond our ability to create, it would be an excellent dissertation subject for a student of economics or Political Economy (Oh to be 20 again, actually double that as I am currently under the effects of a night out clubbing in Camden!!!) But I will try and see if I can make headway. |
| News
Comment | Crawford Can\'t Understand Why Town Let Norris Go
at 00:18:21
This whole article, clearly written in response to mine makes a number of assumptions that I feel are unproven and which undermines it's whole tenet. It is cleverly written because only those with a good understanding of economics.
Assumption one which underlies the whole statistical analysis of ticket pricing is that demand for tickets is relatively inelastic. This may indeed be true for SOME supporters but cannot be assumed for all supporters. I specifically argue that season ticket holders should be excluded from the argument. We can make the safe assumption that for the majority of Season ticket holders will get a season ticket even if it causes them financial hardship or precisely because it does not. This argument is all about those fans who used to have Season Tickets or have for many seasons just bought match tickets.
The experiments of offering £10 tickets for additional tickets purchased by Season Ticket holders is actually a difficult example to judge the elasiticity of demand by. On the face of it it seemed to work and would therefore suggest that demand for tickets is elastic rather than inelastic. (for those without a degree in Economics price elasticity is the measure of which demand for a product increases or decreases depending upon the price of the product,for a price elastic product if you increase the price demand falls whilst for a price inelastic product it stays roughly the same whilst if you decrease the price demand will increase if demand is price elastic or again stay roughly the same if it is price inelastic).
So allowing tickets at £10 increased demand. Oh that it was that simple, for price elasticity to be measured effectively demands an almost perfect market where every customer has a) the cheaper price available to them and b) They have perfect information. Neither was in fact true so the market was seriously impaired and therefore imperfect.
As an examples to clarify the above, the offer was only open to Season ticket holders and was not available on the day. This meant that it was not available to any supporter who was not able to obtain tickets through a season ticket holder. At the Palace game, I spoke to four fans who stood behind me who paid full price on the day, they were unaware and had not taken advantage of the offer because they did not know it existed. You may be wondering why, well they were from London (and we have a large section of fans who live in London) and knew no Season Ticket holders. They had been to many away matches this season but this was part of a small handful of home games. What put them off from home games was mainly price but also the lack of atmosphere. This is clear proof that the information and the market was imperfect.
Economic modelling is not, and never has been an exact science, indeed there is a body of work that suggests that if the price falls too low it has a negative demand on price. So it cannot be assumed that demand price is elastic or inelastic since the evidence is contradictory. Indeed if it was inelastic then the offer would have failed and/or demand for the next normal Saturday match would have held up. Sadly we will never know as we had the Derby debacle as the next game. So we cannot use the Palace game as any guide to elasticity of price demand. I may do some analysis of the previous offer game and the following game. But all in all the whole notion of assuming the elasticity of demand is way too complex to make assumptions. That is unless you have research that proves or disproves whether price is a major determining factor in whether supporters will buy match tickets.
The second odd assumption is that the issue is accross the board and affects fans in every price band, this is clearly also an unsubstantiable assumption. The concession prices paid by for example youths in those areas of the ground that allow it have not been considered too high based on my own evidence (evidence based on my experience in Section 6) for example the fact that younger fans will happily afford a ticket in the SBRS Upper then sneak into the Lower tier shows that the pricing in the concession bands is not an issue. The issue is almost exclusively around adult ticket pricing throughout the stadium. Dropping this assumption thus negates all the assumptions of average ticket price. It is not scientific to base a theory on unsubstantiated and false assumptions (it is what blew the Monetarist theory of Hayek and Friedman out of the water btw) It is for this reason that I concern myself only with the marginal returns of adult ticket prices to do otherwise also requires 'finger in the air' assumptions of the proportions of tickets in each price band and concession level.
Neither the poster nor myself are privy to exact ticket sales information, broken down into price bands, Thus the figures quoted are as innaccurate as any other analysis without this information. This, despite all the figures given sadly renders the figures as mere guesses. Aware of this I avoided this and concerned myself merely with adult tickets and the lowest price bands, I did average ticket prices myself based on a spread of adult ticket prices between the cheapest and more expensive parts of the ground. I went no further since to do so is impossible without exact and accurate information (which neither the poster or I have).
I suggest quite rightly that this issue should be seriously studied by the club, further that they could if market research indicates my theory is substantiated, experimented with using the three categories of ticket prices. Use Category C for the test, if it has no effect on sales then revert to category B at the rates they would normally use. It does boil down to elasticity of demand and whether it is, as I suggest elastic or as this post suggests inelastic. Only by asking and maybe testing the market will the answer be discovered
The writer of this post has a BSc in Applied Economics. |
| Blog
Comment | [Blog] Reducing Ticket Prices Is An Expensive Business
at 00:18:21
This whole article, clearly written in response to mine makes a number of assumptions that I feel are unproven and which undermines it's whole tenet. It is cleverly written because only those with a good understanding of economics.
Assumption one which underlies the whole statistical analysis of ticket pricing is that demand for tickets is relatively inelastic. This may indeed be true for SOME supporters but cannot be assumed for all supporters. I specifically argue that season ticket holders should be excluded from the argument. We can make the safe assumption that for the majority of Season ticket holders will get a season ticket even if it causes them financial hardship or precisely because it does not. This argument is all about those fans who used to have Season Tickets or have for many seasons just bought match tickets.
The experiments of offering £10 tickets for additional tickets purchased by Season Ticket holders is actually a difficult example to judge the elasiticity of demand by. On the face of it it seemed to work and would therefore suggest that demand for tickets is elastic rather than inelastic. (for those without a degree in Economics price elasticity is the measure of which demand for a product increases or decreases depending upon the price of the product,for a price elastic product if you increase the price demand falls whilst for a price inelastic product it stays roughly the same whilst if you decrease the price demand will increase if demand is price elastic or again stay roughly the same if it is price inelastic).
So allowing tickets at £10 increased demand. Oh that it was that simple, for price elasticity to be measured effectively demands an almost perfect market where every customer has a) the cheaper price available to them and b) They have perfect information. Neither was in fact true so the market was seriously impaired and therefore imperfect.
As an examples to clarify the above, the offer was only open to Season ticket holders and was not available on the day. This meant that it was not available to any supporter who was not able to obtain tickets through a season ticket holder. At the Palace game, I spoke to four fans who stood behind me who paid full price on the day, they were unaware and had not taken advantage of the offer because they did not know it existed. You may be wondering why, well they were from London (and we have a large section of fans who live in London) and knew no Season Ticket holders. They had been to many away matches this season but this was part of a small handful of home games. What put them off from home games was mainly price but also the lack of atmosphere. This is clear proof that the information and the market was imperfect.
Economic modelling is not, and never has been an exact science, indeed there is a body of work that suggests that if the price falls too low it has a negative demand on price. So it cannot be assumed that demand price is elastic or inelastic since the evidence is contradictory. Indeed if it was inelastic then the offer would have failed and/or demand for the next normal Saturday match would have held up. Sadly we will never know as we had the Derby debacle as the next game. So we cannot use the Palace game as any guide to elasticity of price demand. I may do some analysis of the previous offer game and the following game. But all in all the whole notion of assuming the elasticity of demand is way too complex to make assumptions. That is unless you have research that proves or disproves whether price is a major determining factor in whether supporters will buy match tickets.
The second odd assumption is that the issue is accross the board and affects fans in every price band, this is clearly also an unsubstantiable assumption. The concession prices paid by for example youths in those areas of the ground that allow it have not been considered too high based on my own evidence (evidence based on my experience in Section 6) for example the fact that younger fans will happily afford a ticket in the SBRS Upper then sneak into the Lower tier shows that the pricing in the concession bands is not an issue. The issue is almost exclusively around adult ticket pricing throughout the stadium. Dropping this assumption thus negates all the assumptions of average ticket price. It is not scientific to base a theory on unsubstantiated and false assumptions (it is what blew the Monetarist theory of Hayek and Friedman out of the water btw) It is for this reason that I concern myself only with the marginal returns of adult ticket prices to do otherwise also requires 'finger in the air' assumptions of the proportions of tickets in each price band and concession level.
Neither the poster nor myself are privy to exact ticket sales information, broken down into price bands, Thus the figures quoted are as innaccurate as any other analysis without this information. This, despite all the figures given sadly renders the figures as mere guesses. Aware of this I avoided this and concerned myself merely with adult tickets and the lowest price bands, I did average ticket prices myself based on a spread of adult ticket prices between the cheapest and more expensive parts of the ground. I went no further since to do so is impossible without exact and accurate information (which neither the poster or I have).
I suggest quite rightly that this issue should be seriously studied by the club, further that they could if market research indicates my theory is substantiated, experimented with using the three categories of ticket prices. Use Category C for the test, if it has no effect on sales then revert to category B at the rates they would normally use. It does boil down to elasticity of demand and whether it is, as I suggest elastic or as this post suggests inelastic. Only by asking and maybe testing the market will the answer be discovered
The writer of this post has a BSc in Applied Economics. |
| News
Comment | [Blog] Reducing Ticket Prices Is An Expensive Business
at 18:36:54
So if two accountants (even ones not yearning for the excitement of lion-taming or entrepreneurship) agree that this argument makes sense, there must be a good accounting basis for it.
It does need wider debate though, if as was stated there is now no marketing input into ITFC how are the club to judge if this notion is indeed viable.
Perhaps Phil can do a poll. Just as a start, just to see if it actually has enough support. Of course in this instance the views of Season Ticket holders is actually of less importance than those of the occassional or used to be season ticket holder, but if they too can reflect the views of their mates who are in this position their vote would still be valid. |
| News
Comment | [Blog] Reducing Ticket Prices Is An Expensive Business
at 23:03:15
I was merely pointing out that even as recently as the turn of the last decade the majority of fans, certainly in the North would sing, join in and get behind the team from the off. So what has changed: Perhaps the often used "I'll sing if the players deserve it" sums up the problem and the difference between latter day and modern supporters.
Give me 200 fans together not with that latter mindset and we could have a real atmosphere again. |
| News
Comment | [Blog] Reducing Ticket Prices Is An Expensive Business
at 21:20:19
Ultras is only considered confrontational because of the media, ignore the media and look at the facts Ultras is a blanket term used by supporters groups throughout the world. Some are right wing and these are often violent and racist, many more have been positive forces for their clubs and communities, several clubs would not exist without the extremely positive activities of their club's Ultras. Almost all Ultras groups improve the atmosphere at matches, irrespective of political viewpoint.
Remind yourself that bad news sells and good news is ignored, the non-reactionary media are not interested in a story about how an Ultras group has done good. It does not sell papers or make for good TV. An exception is here http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/video/2011/mar/16/st-pauli-socialist-football-h
Just because our feeble minded media have stereotyped 'Ultras" as dangerous hooligans is no reason to believe the stereotype.
A good example is the Green Brigade, they shun all sectarianism and sectarian chants, this has I gather almost eradicated such songs from the Celtic repertoire it is Rangers who perpetuate this ludicrously outdated confrontation between Loyalist/Protestant and Catholic/Republican factions. (The anti poppy banners were not anti-british but anti-war the Daly Mail being quite thick missed the point entirely) They have also lifted the atmosphere at Celtic matches to new heights. There are only 200 members of the green brigade.
It is only when you investigate the wide range of Ultras groups worldwide that you realise the breadth and scope of Ultras groups and how they are so poorly represented in a british media driven by sensationism and stereotyping |
| News
Comment | [Blog] Reducing Ticket Prices Is An Expensive Business
at 16:45:34
It would not have been a few dozen we were planning close on 1000 (which is section 6 to the second exit) which would have looked good.
In my opinion the problem is that the vast majority of fans now come to matches, wear a shirt and clap along as opposed to singing all game or as often as possible as it was when football matches had a decent atmosphere. The corporate nature of football encourages this of course. |
| | CaughtInTheBrambles
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 0 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 0 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.