Wigan dont sell out beacause of overpriced tickets. They dont sell out because there just arent enough people to buy tickets, regardless of price.
^^but you have sold out in the past, i don't buy it. You are telling me you don't have 20,000-22,000 fans?? Or if you priced it kids for a quid they wouldn't turn up. it's not like your stadium is big at all... Anyway I don't think wigan should be in the premier league, but that's because i believe no club should be bankrolled... I for the member ownership model and salary caps/luxury tax
Yup, i am telling you that. Kids for a quid is done regularly - even when it isnt kids can get in for £5er or so. But like a lot of clubs in a similar situation the kids 7/8/9/10 year olds arent too interested in watching us when we face West Brom, Fulham etc so dont bother. Stadium is completely oversized. Should have built a little 13,000/14,000 capacity tight little ground instead. We'd have filled that - then we might not have got the "OMGZ you dont fill ur groundz" ......." u'z av no fans" that we've had for the last five years.
^^ that's why i said in my first post minimum capacity. Wigan should declare a capacity and they are not allowed to sell anymore tickets than that or as you say they should play in a smaller stadium. Also surely if they went into schools actively encouraging kids to come to games?? It seems just a wigan problem... I used to live near Gillingham and any sign of success and they'd suddenly have 30,000-40,000 hangers on, same with Millwall, who both played wigan in the early part of this decade. What Wigan had 3,000 at wembley, millwall had 50,000 lol.
We do go into schools and do all that. I'll debate with you, that fine, not that i will nessecarily agree with you, but if you want to make try to score a point dont distort the facts re - 3,000 at Wembely when you know it's blatantly not true that only 3,000 were there against Millwall. Ok it was only 12,000, or so, which isnt great, but the history books record it as 1-0 (Rodgers 90'), at the end of the day.
^^ well it's what my friends who are millwall fans told me. I didn't know the figure so i said what i was told, calm down mate. If i was wrong i apologise. what is wigan's problem then if they do everything??
That we are a small, relatively poor, town of 80,000 people surrounded by Bolton, Blackburn, Everton, Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Burnley, Preston. Football fans from Wigan travel to watch all of these teams due to long standing family ties. Having been non-league only 30 years ago plenty from Wigan, rather than wanthing to watch Northern Premier League/Lancs Combi/Cheshire League football, instead travelled to watch the teams i have listed. Loyalties continue to be passed down through generalitions and so people from Wigan still travel in numbers to watch the teams i have listed rather than watch Wigan. There just arent enough (active) football fans to go around in this area of the country.
^^ i see your point, Wigan is like Wimbledon were in London. Although after time their fanbase did start growing. I just see no growth at all in Wigan just shrinking, what would happen if you were relegated would whelan pull out and you'd drop down the divisions??
Fanbase is growing i would say. It tailed off after the first year but its on the up now i feel. Away teams - who used to sell out their allocation in the first few seasons of us being in the Premiership - are now bringing massively reduced numbers from what they once did. So the "share" of home fans among the average attendance is probably higher than it was even during the first season. As for dropping down the divisions. In a perverse way i'd quite like that. Whould it happen ? Well there are loads of factors rather than just "if Whelan left", so i dont know. The club will be debt free within the next 6 months but Whelan wont go anywhere, even when we are eventually relegated.
You see it as a when rather than an if then?? I think you have a while there are some terrible sides below you that won't go down this season and there is nothing particularly exciting looking in the championsip. You just need to keep up this good transfer policy really... that's a good thing that you'll be debt free btw!!
Of course. We will get relegated at some point within the rest of my life watching them. That is inevitable. Maybe 70% of the current Premier League teams will also get relegated in that time too.
^^You know what I meant... short-termism Anyway not necassarily look how long Southampton and Coventry lasted. Southampton only had one bad season and they were down.
Clubs would just reduce their capacity to get around it. I don't think it would work like in the NFL where there are just eight homes games a season that all matter. Most Premiership games are not on TV anyway, yet they don't all sell out. In fact I don't know if there's much of a correlation between a game being on TV and the attendance. People aren't going to fork out £40 just because the game's not on TV, they'll just listen to the radio or follow it on the Internet.
You are missing my point. You can't take away what you've already given to fans. Bill Wirtz took away tv games, that the fans had since the beginning of tv. Fans revolted by not going to games. Bill Wirtz dies, Rocky Wirtz takes over puts them on tv again fans repay by selling out all the home games. That's 40+ games. The Blackhawks have no problem selling out their home games, but it's about principle. When fans see something they don't agree with they are going to take a stand. If this would happen, I think you would see the premier league popularity diminish. And absolutely fans go to games, because they see the atmosphere on tv and say I want to be a part of that. As a result of Bill Wirtz taking games off tv the Chicago Wolves AHL franchise popularity increased and their games were put on local tv and the Chicago Wolves attendance increased. You may see clubs that can sell every match out get even more popular than they already are and those smaller clubs become less popular and who already are at a financial disadvantage face an even bigger one. In theory, the idea is good, but in practice it is not. The consumer would not stand for it. Also what would happen for International Markets. Would a Tottenham v. Manchester City be blacked out in Germany or Brazil since they didn't sell the game out in Manchester. Doesn't really seem fair when the Premier League is clearly a global brand and is selling itself as such. Why punish your international fans because you were 5K short of a sellout in England. Are you expecting your fans from around the world to come to the game and spend an even more outrageous amount of money for travel expenses than ticket prices. On a side note Chicago attendance wise is the best in the U.S. In basketball the Bulls they've been in the top 3 in attendance since the early 90's, even when the team was winning 10 games a year. In football, the Bears have never had a problem selling out games. In baseball both teams the Cubs and White Sox surpass the 3 million yearly attendance every year and the Cubs fill the stadium in middle of the week, middle of the day games against mediocre teams, the Blackhawks were number one in attendance this year, also the Chicago Fire averages around 15-16K in a 20K stadium in a stadium that is 20 minutes from the city and in a market where there there is a lot of other things going on. I don't think a game should be taken off tv just because a few tickets weren't sold. What about walkups. If those tickets are sold last minute, in some cases tickets are sold just after the game starts. Do you start the game not on tv and then interrupt the program with the game because it became a sell out?
That's why i said that there should be a minimum capacity. Based on how many years you've been in the top flight over the last few decades. The theory being clubs who've been in the top flight longer have bigger fan bases and thus should have bigger stadiums. I don't want it to work like the NFL, by all accounts it doesn't really work... owners still get TV money regardless of whether their game is shown (apparently). Why do people not read what you say. I never said there was correlation and i never said fans should fork out £40, read what i say for crying out loud!! I said that if a team doesn't sell out, they lose the equivilent TV revenue. AKA there are 19 prem games a season If 5.3% of TV revenue is allocated per game, if you don't sell out one game you lose 5.3% of revenue. TV revenue makes up over 1/3 of total revenue in the premier league, therefore clubs would find any means necessary to sell out, and fans would have the power to force ticket prices down. Also so that man united don't just say who cares if Wigan don't sell out, we'll still make the revenue, if the round isn't sold out, all TV games of that round are blacked out. Meaning all clubs are responsible for each other as Manchester United lose exposure. The aim is to drive down prices and subsequently fill stadiums.
1. Paragraphs?? 2. You make a lot of assumptions about English football based on american football 3. You missed my points, it is/was two points, 1. is that clubs must sell out and 2. The consequences of which are that they lose a percentage of TV revenue and/or the whole TV round is blacked out. What has that got to do with the premier league?? That's america where TV dictates sport... In England we don't like Armchair fans, that is fans who watch games on television and don't go to games, hence why between 3 and 5 on a saturday no games are allowed to be broadcast, different mentalities. Your argument is completely different to what i am saying. 1. I am talking about teams who can't sell out, but charge extortionate prices. Teams that aren't on telly regularly. You are talking about a team that is always on telly that can sell out. Completely different. 2. There is a difference between an owner doing it, and it being league rules. Under what i am saying fans would turn up as they would directly influence how much a team earns by not turning up and subsequently survival. Fans in the premier league want cheaper tickets, and more fan friendly environments. Match going and Television has no real correlation. The point is clubs want to be on television for exposure and financial reasons. If fans know they can effect this then they can force down prices by not turning up, because clubs to get the TV revenue would need the fans. This isn't America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You couldn't be more wrong. Why would a club become less popular, you have a weird perception of Football fandom. Smaller clubs play in smaller stadiums, bigger clubs play in bigger stadiums. Smaller clubs have less stadium to fill so it's easier for them to get a sell out. Especially if you had rules governing minimum capacity based on perceived size. 1. Football fans are not consumers!!!! 2. You're using an american example on Europe where fan culture and the relationship with television is far different. Well considering you wrote tottenham v Man city, the game would be in London not manchester. But yes, the game is about fans at stadiums first, and television viewers second. If they can't fill their stadium then they have no right in showing it on television. The fact is no one wouldn't sell out. That's the point. Most clubs only don't sell out because they are over pricing their product. Which is live football. What has around the world fans got to do with it?? I have no respect for someone in Singapore that supports an English club over a singapore club. The majority of English clubs have enough English fans to fill their stadiums, that is a fact and they don't because prices are too high at many and chance of being anything better than mid table is disgracefully low. Good for them, 1 city franchises are different to community football clubs! Great, none of that has anything to do with the Premier league or EUROPEAN football. In England especially the premier league it is very difficult to buy tickets on the day. But once again 3-4 games out of 10 are on television per week, so what's your point. It is quite clear you don't read a word of what i say, and are basing all your arguments on the american mentality. One where the link between Television and sport is long and historic. There is a different mentality here, and until you understand that you won't understand the point.
^^ what type of post is that?? I just feel some clubs aren't doing enough to get fans into grounds, and are pricing a lot of their fans out!
ffs you cant make it the responsiblity of Manchester United, Arsenal etc etc that some tin-pot clubs in the north of England arent selling out. It's like getting Microsoft to help Apple along. ...... They're both too busy trying to cream as much money from Asia and the US as they can. The whole idea smacks of a Blatter/Platini mash-up.
Football is a family we should all be responsible for each other! And you see nothing wrong with that?? Platini has some good ideas and makes good points. Blatter knows what's wrong but his ideas are not that great, he also has a tendency to put his foot in his mouth. Until we realise there is a lot fundamentally wrong with the premier league we will never move forward. If you like the premier league the way it is, a closed shop based on who can borrow and extort the most money then fine, i don't!! Why post that?? I am not looking for a reaction i was looking for reasoned debate about an idea i thought of, but hey i shouldn't have even expected that this is the bloody internet afterall!
But this "idea" of yours would clearly make it even more of a closed shop ? What happens if a club wants to expand their ground ? Do they have to run it by all the big clubs who sell out every week to make sure they are ok with that ? What if they add 5,000 in one go then subsequently only sell out 1,000 ? Or do the clubs add a dozen seats here and there as they need. Adding 1000 seats for next season might cost £1m, but adding 5000, for a couple of years down the line might cost only £4m, thus saving the club money in the long run. But then if they only need 1000 more for the next season they will be left with 4000 empties every week meaning that no PL game would be shown anywhere in the world for the next 5 years. What would happen to the surplus TV revenue ? Then when the TV contract was up for renewal who would then buy a worthless product ?
Not at all, i don't know how you work that out. Like i said i am for rules like Luxury tax, protection of youth, club trained quotas and public ownership. This is an idea to make sure grounds are full. The idea is two ideas which i lumped together, like i said. The TV black out idea was really the secondary idea but it has taken prominence. No there would be rules for minimum capacity based upon top flight experience, so the longer you are in the top flight, the bigger your ground has to be. Based on a rolling 20 or 25 years. If you have only spent 1-3 seasons you can have a ground any size and you don't have to fill it. After 4 seasons minimum 25,000, after 10 seasons minimum 30,000, so on and so forth. That's a rough example of what i am getting at. See above See above again Either redistribute it down the leagues, to grass routes football or give it to charity Why would it be a worthless product?
Ideasman, Don't take the easy way out and just shout American mentality, you don't get it. When not only me, but many Europeans disagree with your idea. I get you don't want ticket prices to be gouged. But wouldn't a better solution be a ticket price regulating committee. You fail to see that tv revenue is a huge part of the sport. If you don't think a football fan is a consumer you are naive. You consume the product. From the apparel you buy, to the tickets, etc. That's how clubs view their fans. On American mentality, it seems to be doing just fine for Manchester United and Liverpool seem to be doing fine. Having no problem putting matches on tv and selling out. The close minded mentality of your points is clearly evident. Its a selfish mentality. Spread the growth of the game. That's what makes it so great. I guarantee you will watch matches on tv that will not be sold out. Maybe you should hold yourself to the same standard you want to hold these clubs. With your idea, what happens for national team matches. Say Germany is playing Nigeria in the World Cup. It's a group stage match and they are 1,000 short of a sellout. Do you not show a World Cup match all over the World? With your you have plenty of English fans to support English clubs. That is true, what about English soldiers abroad who can't see their club play on tv. Lets crap on them too. And if that's your theory when the Premier League stops raiding players from other countries then you can shut out the rest of the world from showing Premier League matches. When the league is completely English owned you can do this too. But I have a feeling the smart people want them game to grow and there is no proof that attendances grow when matches aren't being shown on tv.
Because Sky etc wouldnt know what they were getting for their £600m+ contract. Are they buying the rights to show 100 games a year, or will they only get to show 3 or 4 because Wigan, Blackburn and Bolton are dictating to them that they can onyl show that many because for the rest of the time they only have sold 90% of their ground out then nobody anywhere should be able to view the Premier League product. I really did think that last point was basic common sense.
Increasing minimum attendance with years spent in the top division is stupid, a promoted club's crowds generally peak in the first season when Premiership football is still a fresh novelty, and go down when they realise they're just going to be fighting relegation every season and being dicked by the top teams. A minimum attendance just sounds like a backdoor franchise system where only the biggest markets are allowed in.