The fight against modern Soccer(football) 2

They can. The point was that it's not all about supply and demand. There's less demand for a crap NFL side. are their tickets cheaper?

Isn't there a team or two that doesn't sell out? Are their tickets cheaper?

Well, yes, which is why I suggested it was a problem. Increased prices drive up salaries, which in turn drives up budget requirements, which in turn drives up ticket prices.

It costs more to get into a 5th tier English game than a 2nd tier German one. The hugely smaller crowds suggest it's not demand that's forced that, nor has quality increased as a result, nor are facilities better.

You can argue increased ticket prices have seen a rise in on-field quality at the top level, but below that, what's been the gain?

Yeah, because limiting the number of designer label polo shirts you buy is just the same as giving up one of your greatest passions in life.

 

According to the NFL three percent of the games didn't sell out. Problem in the NFL is that teams can make money through television revenue without selling ticket one. So, they could play in front of empty stadiums and still make money. What would be the rational to lowering ticket prices?

Remember, (don't know if you are in marketing or business) when pricing a product you don't want to be seen as a low cost form of entertainment. why not let everyone in for free?

Kind of like Polo shirts - if they were priced the same as Arrow shirts - they might sella few more, but then they aren't seen as an exclusive label. Brand recognition goes out the window.

If people say they are going to an NFL game or an EPL game, people understand the level of competition they will see (hopefully). Their is a certain amount of status that goes with it. Same as the Ralph Lauren shirt.

I know people in the States that don't (they can't afford it) go to games. Yet, they are bigger fans than someone who have season tickets.

Why does ESPN in the states and not Ligue 1? Because of the brands (Manchester United, Chelsea, Manchester City) have been built. Teams have worked on their brand recognition. Ligue 1 teams have not.

 

So it's not supply and demand, as I said.

With sports people aren't picking and choosing which team to support. It's a completely ridiculous comparison.

People aren't drawn to the premier league because it's exclusive or expensive. A premier league ticket isn't viewed like a designer label. A Brentford fan isn't going to be tempted to go to QPR or Fulham because he'd like to be thought of as "cool".

You keep talking about marketing knowledge, but your ignorance would get you sacked here. You don't know the market at all.

The perceived status of the game has absolutely nothing to do with ticket prices. People do not go because they think it's "exclusive", nor would people be put off going if ticket prices were cheaper. After all, when clubs want to have promotions to get a bigger crowd for less appealing fixtures, the option chosen is invariably to lower prices.

That goes completely contrary to your marketing wisdom, where making games exclusive and more expensive is somehow the key to drawing more people in.

How do they feel about being priced out of going, to be replaced by richer types who are even that dedicated?

And you think high ticket prices make those teams more appealing abroad? Serie A and La Liga actually have higher ticket prices than England.

 

I disagree. In the States having season tickets to NFL, MLB , NHL, NBA is definitely a status symbol. So is the Premier League.

When you go to a play - in New York. If you go to a Broadway play - do you have to pay more? So why not let everyone for free?

I disagree, I have been to Premier League games it is a status thing.
Little bit of difference in US, not many cities have more than one NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB team. Some have a professional team with a minor league team. Trust me, the minor league team suffers.

I would bet the clubs in the Premier League and the Premier League are interested in building the brand. Just like the NFL, building the brand by playing in London. Lowering ticket prices isn't going to show a strong "brand".

My guess is that the Premier League still wants to market to the Brentford fan. That fan could become a Premier League fan. You never know. Don't tell me Brentford fans never watch the Premier League. Maybe there would be a player playing at Loftus Road or Craven Cottage that person would want to see in person. Unless Brentford makes it to the Premier League.

Fans priced out sure aren't happy. But, no organization of fans is going to change ticket prices. They understand to afford certain things - they have to work hard, get an education, good job.
Just like some people can't afford a Porsche? Or, Ralph Lauren dress shirts.

Higher ticket prices don't make them appealing. Travelling to those countries for exhibition games builds the brand. Making the game day experience good for fans. Pleasant atmosphere, good concessions - availability of merchandise. It is all about the brand. Television games which sometimes means inconvenient start times.

The unfortunate thing is being able to attend sporting events is not a god given right.

 

Sure it is. There is nothing really different about sports teams compared to any other brand. There is a certan supply of tickets, and a certain demand for those tickets. The rest is just emotionalism on your part.

If the demand for the NFL's product went down, then the value of that product would decrease. The fact that the NFL can sell nearly 100% of its tickets and that, in many places, there are long waiting list for season tickets (the waiting list for Green Bay season tickets is over 20 years!) is what makes its product so valuable (that, and the large TV audiences the league attracts). As a result of its popularity, the NFL is able to charge ridiculously high ticket prices.

If a team in Europe is charging too much for its tickets, then the fans will stay home. If they don't sell enough tickets, teams need to drop the price of tickets. But, unless there are some laws preventing them from doing so, a team will charge whatever it thinks the market can bear. And there's nothing wrong with that.

 

People don't go to sports events here "to be seen" or to look cool.

While it may be possible that going to a major league sports game in the USA gives someone a certain kudos akin to wearing designer gear or going to a fancy club, here it's nothing like that.

So what's the justification for ridiculously high prices where stadiums aren't sold out, or even close to being sold out?

I've said before, a few cases apart (hello Arsenal), I don't think clubs are on the whole trying to squeeze fans. It's just that a lack of cost control has sent ticket prices and wages upwards for years. They are charging what they feel they need to put a decent team on the field. Unfortunately, if you are in a league where clubs are overspending and upping the ticket price to try and lessen their losses, it really leaves you with no choice but to do the same if you want to compete.

 

When a club like Manchester United, Chelsea, or Liverpool talk about a tour of Asia, or the United States. They talk about the reason for the tour is to build the BRAND. The reason that tv rights to a league like Ligue 1 aren't worth much in the US. Is because the fact that none of the clubs have toured the US and don't have a footprint.

The NFL is the most popular league in the US. It has supplanted baseball as the national game. Sure, if no one went to see the games maybe television wouldn't pay enormous sums ( depending of course where they were in relation to if the contract were set to expire).
The problem for your argument is that the NFL is no where near that problem.

 

I was at White Hart Lane in August and was seven rows off the pitch. There were definitely people there that were more interested in being seen.

Well, I guess you could let everyone in for free! As I have said before there should be a strategy when pricing a product. You just can't let everyone in for ten pounds.

Why the hate on Arsenal? Because they are owned by an American business man.

 

I always like to see competing fans helping each other. However, it doesn't mean ticket prices are going down 40 euros, start times will not be changed etc. Plus, as I said - when fans in the Premier League start affecting change - then you will have my attention.

 

In what way?

Indeed there should, and fans will always complain about ticket prices.

There comes a point where expensive becomes too expensive though.

Oh yeah, it must be anti-American sentiment. What other reason could there be?

Arsenal did come out in the summer and say they felt thre was room to squeeze more money out of fans, and consquently announced ticket prices up to £96 for the 2011/12 season.

Ipswich also acted pretty badly in their decision to house away fans in one of the most expensive parts of the ground, so they could charge them more.


To be fair a lot of clubs do offer deals. I renewed my season ticket for just £375. That's a £246 saving on the walk-up price for each game (9 free games), or a £154 saving on advance bookings (6.5 free games).

In fact my season ticket, valid at the same price if we go up to the premier league, works out £5 cheaper than a season ticket at Aldershot in League Two.

 

I assume European soccer stadiums, at least the more high-end ones, have features like luxury boxes and premium seats? If going to a sporting event was purely about the on-field action, then companies and rich individuals would not be shelling out tons of money for such high-end seats. And luxury boxes and the expensive seat portions of the stadium are disproportionately profitable for the team, so it's not surprising that there has been a gradual shift in emphasis away from things like standing terraces (which aren't great revenue generators).

Yeah, for the rest of us going to the game isn't really an opportunity to network and do business, but a lot of that goes on in the more expensive portions of the stadium.

If I was giving the clubs the benefit of the doubt, I would say that they have done a market analysis and figured out that the ticket prices they charge will bring in maximum revenue. If dropping the average ticket price is not expected to bring in enough new ticket buyers to result in an increase in revenues, then you might as well leave ticket prices relatively high.

Of course, having read some articles on just how amaterishly run most soccer teams are, I'm more likely to agree with your analysis. The lack of such things as salary caps and revenue sharing has made it incredibly difficult for smaller clubs to compete with larger ones, and has pushed many clubs to the economic brink.

The funny thing is, MLS here in the US is the epitome of "modern soccer" in terms of things like salary caps and revenue sharing. Other leagues in the world would be smart to adopt such features, but I doubt it would be possible in most places. If you were starting up a brand new league today in Europe, with all new clubs, you would be much more likely to follow the MLS model (franchise system, no promotion or relegation, salary caps and revenue sharing) than you would the model of something like the EPL. Of course, I understand that in most European leagues there are some large clubs and a bunch of smaller clubs. A team like Man U is never going to agree to share their revenues with Blackburn.

 

You could tell for some (not the majority) that it was more of a social event.

Who decides when too expensive is expensive? Don't fans. Which is my argument. Fans choose not to afford, or realize they can't afford to go to games any longer.

I would love to see the link where Arsenal came out and publicly said they could squeeze more from the fans. I have a hard time believing they are that stupid.

In terms of Ipswich - again, competing fans will decide if they can, or want to afford to go to the game.

Teams in the States usually give season ticket holders a break as they should.

 

There haven't been many places where terraces have been replaced with boxes. Spurs is an obvious exception, but WHL was rare for having the main terrace area on a side rather than at an end.

In many places in Europe, the terrace ends are an integral part of the spectacle of the game. The atmosphere from them is what makes going to sports different from going to the theatre. The Germans especially have got that part right, recognising that the terraces and the atmosphere in the ground is just as much part of the experience as the match itself.

Standing areas can actually generate more money than seats. You can fit 50% more fans into the same space, so if you put standing ticket prices above 66% of what seats would be, you'd actually make more.

They also provide a good "entry level" ticket for younger fans or those on lower incomes. And a lot of people prefer to stand.

One of the things they do badly here is the price ranges. In Germany seats might well range from 20 euro to 60 euro in the same stadium. In England you are more likely to see a narrow £35-£50 difference across the stadium. My own club offers a mere £3 difference between the cheapesrt seats and the most expensive.

There are difficulties that MLS doesn't have.

Stepping away from football for a second, England's second most popular sport (by attendance average) is Rugby Union.

It has a salary cap. Not all clubs can afford to pay the full cap level, so it's good in that is keeps the league competitive. The downsides are that the game also has high ticket prices. Depending on the game, a club like Bath, playing at the beautiful but restricted Recgreation Ground, can charge from £27 to £46 to get in, and still sell out.

Other clubs, still trying to build a fan base, have the difficult job of keeping prices low enough to entice casual fans to give the game a try, while also being able to keep touch with the clubs that can charge the high prices as they sell out.

The salary cap helps, but the £4.5 million level in England is way below the £7 million cap level in France, seriously hindering the clubs at Heineken Cup Level (the rugby champions league)

 

I think Schapes' point was that the NFL has tons of revenues, and tickets sales are just a relatively small part of that. Of course the NFL would never play to empty stadiums. Every sports team in the world wants to make as much money as possible off of ticket sales.

A team that has problems selling tickets is in trouble. I doubt we disagree on that point.

So, if people are willing to keep buying tickets, those tickets are not too expensive for them. A ticket is not "too expensive" for you if you're willing to pay for it.

What's your argument going to be to the club?

You: "Tickets are too expensive"

Club: "Ticket sales are fine, and you renewed your season tickets. If you really can't afford the tickets, you shouldn't buy them."

You: "I'm going to keep buying the tickets, but I still want a price reduction."

Club: "Why would we charge you less for tickets if there's no danger that you'll stop buying tickets?"

 

If the club believes it's a smart business move to lower ticker prices, that's their decision.

On the other hand, if you're proposing some sort of law or government subsidy to make your hobby more affordable, there's that sense of entitlement we've been talking about.

 

The only problem is the NFL isn't playing to empty stadiums. Maybe three teams out of 32 are having trouble selling tickets. Only three percent of the games weren't sold out. But that doesn't necassarily mean no one attended, or, even poor attendance. It just means no matter how many show up, teams still make money. So there is not a reason to lower ticket prices.

You talk about reasonable pricing. Who decides what is reasonable? If it is government intervention, then you are looking for a handout.

If the marketplace decides, then I am ok with that.

 

So this group of fans have changed things at which clubs?