tbates
Shropshire County League
Posts: 25
|
Post by tbates on Nov 4, 2010 20:37:49 GMT 1
I assumed it was £15, regardless of when purchased. There is nothing to say here that prices differ on the day of the match Tickets brought from the ticket office at St Mary's cost £2 more for League games. The same "may" apply to this game but haven't seen anything about it so far. To the Saints fan asking what they had done wrong. Publicly coming out and accusing a club of something (to line the pockets) is one thing you have done and secondly you have belittled our club with the "bearing in mind the opposition" quote A lot of fans would have been pro Southampton and anti Shrewsbury over the ticket debacle because anything to make it cheaper is a good thing. But the comments made about our club have been less than complimentary which is why such the attitude towards Southampton Whenever ticketing is arranged for cup games, every club considers the opposition and how appealing it is their own fans. It is hardly a shocking thing to hear! Basic facts of ticketing for cup games. Everyone knows tickets for matches against "smaller" sides are less appealing and less likely to draw large crowds. Shrewsbury wanting to charge £25 does stink of wanting to force Saints and Shrewsbury fans to pay a large amount of money for a 1st round tie. I'd be questioning the actions of your chairman in the negotiations rather than our chairman bringing to light what went on. In the end the FA sided with Saints, which is telling in itself, maybe the Shrewsbury chairman was being extremely unreasonable! In any case more Saints fans will turn up with prices as they are, thus Shrewsbury will probably make more money now than they would have done at £25 a ticket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2010 20:40:08 GMT 1
In any case more Saints fans will turn up with prices as they are, thus Shrewsbury will probably make more money now than they would have done at £25 a ticket. Tickets reduced by 40% - we'd need over a 40% rise on the attendance which would have been obtained at full price to have made more money - very unlikely.
|
|
tbates
Shropshire County League
Posts: 25
|
Post by tbates on Nov 4, 2010 20:45:55 GMT 1
Tickets reduced by 40% - we'd need over a 40% rise on the attendance which would have been obtained at full price to have made more money - very unlikely. I wouldn't have gone to watch a 1st round tie for £25 and the same applies to a large number of Saints fans I know. Saints may not even put out a full strength side. At £15 I am going, as it is a reasonable price for the type of match it is, i.e. possibly a match with Southampton fringe players vs a team in the league below. So the gate I think will be much higher with the pricing it now has.
|
|
|
Post by elmundo on Nov 4, 2010 20:49:07 GMT 1
Tickets reduced by 40% - we'd need over a 40% rise on the attendance which would have been obtained at full price to have made more money - very unlikely. I wouldn't have gone to watch a 1st round tie for £25 and the same applies to a large number of Saints fans I know. Saints may not even put out a full strength side. At £15 I am going, as it is a reasonable price for the type of match it is, i.e. possibly a match with Southampton fringe players vs a team in the league below. So the gate I think will be much higher with the pricing it now has. But will we make more money based on the figures provided by Ant? I highly doubt it...
|
|
|
Post by Bordershrew on Nov 5, 2010 0:10:28 GMT 1
Will Matthew Le Tissier be playing?
|
|
|
Post by scooter on Nov 5, 2010 10:01:45 GMT 1
Will Matthew Le Tissier be playing? I want a £5 refund if he isn't
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2010 10:35:28 GMT 1
Whenever ticketing is arranged for cup games, every club considers the opposition and how appealing it is their own fans. It is hardly a shocking thing to hear! Basic facts of ticketing for cup games. Everyone knows tickets for matches against "smaller" sides are less appealing and less likely to draw large crowds. . Im not going to deny that Shrewsbury at home isnt a major attraction for your fans, although I do think some of your fans have to remember your only .one league above us What I wouldnt expect is for a professional football club to come out and belittle another club by basically saying they are an inferior club. I would not expect it from a Premiership side, let alone a club only one division higher
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Nov 5, 2010 11:50:59 GMT 1
Am I the only one whos a little disgusted by the fact that southampton made such a big fuss about the need for cheaper tickets, and hence why we've now got a reasonable £15 price - but then are likely to be charging us an extra few pounds just because people are likely to be buying them on the day??
I wonder, will this extra cost of £2 or £3 for phone orders, be passed on to Shrewsbury or will Southampton be keeping it all?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2010 12:10:14 GMT 1
And for all that look where it has got you, less than 24 places above poor little Shrewsbury, not a very good return on the investment so far. I'm still wondering why you though Shrewsbury were better off financially? I think slackbadders thinking is as follows. Shrewsbury, 1, own our ground outright with an asset value of 15 million plus 2, if you check the last accounts the club had near 2 million working capital. 3, from the accounts, the clubs financial structure and income streams are set up to maintain our current financial status. If the chairman of Shrewsbury left for any sudden reason we know our club is secure, but should the benefactor of Southampton leave or even (heaven forbid) die can you be sure Southampton would be financially secure - iam not so sure
|
|
dinno
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 150
|
Post by dinno on Nov 5, 2010 12:14:50 GMT 1
And for all that look where it has got you, less than 24 places above poor little Shrewsbury, not a very good return on the investment so far. I'm still wondering why you though Shrewsbury were better off financially? I think slackbadders thinking is as follows. Shrewsbury, 1, own our ground outright with an asset value of 15 million plus 2, if you check the last accounts the club had near 2 million working capital. 3, from the accounts, the clubs financial structure and income streams are set up to maintain our current financial status. If the chairman of Shrewsbury left for any sudden reason we know our club is secure, but should the benefactor of Southampton leave or even (heaven forbid) die can you be sure Southampton would be financially secure - iam not so sure Mr. Liebherr did die only a couple of months back.
|
|
|
Post by albionshrew on Nov 5, 2010 12:27:25 GMT 1
Soton normally charge £2 extra for sales on the day, as we do, but I can't see anything to say if they are doing that for the FA cup What is the justification for charging more on the day for the same 'product' compared to in advance? If it costs more on-line or by telephone anyway it's all a bit of a joke claiming that the cost is just £15.00 - unless you live in Southampton and reasonably close to the ground so you can walk/cycle there to buy a ticket in advance without accruing transport costs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2010 12:32:36 GMT 1
Soton normally charge £2 extra for sales on the day, as we do, but I can't see anything to say if they are doing that for the FA cup What is the justification for charging more on the day for the same 'product' compared to in advance? If it costs more on-line or by telephone anyway it's all a bit of a joke claiming that the cost is just £15.00 - unless you live in Southampton and reasonably close to the ground so you can walk/cycle there without accruing transport costs. To be fair we cant criticise on that score we obviously do it ourselves. Personally Ive never been in favour of advance ticket prices and then matchday ticket prices, as you said its for the same product. Ill probably be proven wrong but I wonder whether you are actually any better off getting in advance, because of the cost of either travelling to the stadium to pick up in person or the cost of being on the phone to book, and then any booking/credit card charges. Why fans of L1 & L2 (plus a good proportion of the Championship) fans cant just walk up and pay on the turnstile, knowing that they are being charged the same is beyond me
|
|
mlt
Shropshire County League
Posts: 12
|
Post by mlt on Nov 5, 2010 13:22:11 GMT 1
The idea behind charging £2 more on the day was to encourage fans to buy tickets in advance, avoiding long queues on the day, which sometimes meant that fans missed the start of the game.
Before this season, there was no internet sales fee so it was easy to avoid paying the extra £2.
This season, Signor Cortese brought in a £3 fee for internet sales, so the only way to pay the basic ticket price is to buy the ticket at the ground (or possibly at other ticket points in Southampton).
If you don't live or work in Southampton, the answer might seem to be to buy your ticket before another home game. However, the club decided that they would only sell tickets for the Dagenham game before the game on Tuesday. They did sell tickets for the Shrewsbury game after the Dagenham game, but that was not an option for people with trains or ferries to catch.
Cortese's aim is to maximise income (which is why he opposed £25 tickets). My adult season ticket on the halfway line, which was not an early bird offer, as we don't do them any more, costs £17 per game (with no booking fee), so even with the basic ticket price reduced to £15 plus booking fee it costs more for a Cup game than for a League game, for a seat with a worse view, as only two stands will be used and the good seats in the main stand that is being used are all corporate hospitality.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Nov 5, 2010 13:38:15 GMT 1
This season, Signor Cortese brought in a £3 fee for internet sales, so the only way to pay the basic ticket price is to buy the ticket at the ground (or possibly at other ticket points in Southampton). And this is the chap who had a pop at Town for trying to line our pockets is it? The cheek of it... Crazy days when folk can get away with this type of thing. I thought for the most part getting fans to buy on the internet would be more helpful to the clubs, less cost to the club? No need for two parties, just the one that can sort themselves out...you should get the ticket cheaper buying from the web!!
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Nov 5, 2010 15:01:02 GMT 1
Internet ticket sales are abused generally - by football clubs, by music promoters etc. It's a cheaper and more efficient way of selling tickets so there's no justification for a premium to be added. How do internet retailers manage to undercut high street stores without charging customers for the convenience?
A £3 charge is outrageous. It's a ridiculous hypocrisy for clubs to make paying on the turnstile obsolete but then make fans stand in queues to buy tickets at other times when the internet provides a quicker, cheaper and more convenient alternative.
All part of the crappy RyanAir way of doing business these days - throw in words like "flexible" and "choice" to disguise the fact that you're overcharging by other means.
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Nov 5, 2010 15:04:52 GMT 1
As I didn't know whether we would get charged an extra £2 for buying on the day - it's not clear on either club's website - i've bought mine and my friends tickets from the Shrewsbury ticket office for the standard £15 each. While £17 isn't too much, it is an extra £2 each that could instead go towards the petrol.
Lady selling them reckoned we'd sold around 400
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Nov 5, 2010 15:07:23 GMT 1
Whenever ticketing is arranged for cup games, every club considers the opposition and how appealing it is their own fans. It is hardly a shocking thing to hear! Basic facts of ticketing for cup games. Everyone knows tickets for matches against "smaller" sides are less appealing and less likely to draw large crowds. Shrewsbury wanting to charge £25 does stink of wanting to force Saints and Shrewsbury fans to pay a large amount of money for a 1st round tie. I'd be questioning the actions of your chairman in the negotiations rather than our chairman bringing to light what went on. In the end the FA sided with Saints, which is telling in itself, maybe the Shrewsbury chairman was being extremely unreasonable! In any case more Saints fans will turn up with prices as they are, thus Shrewsbury will probably make more money now than they would have done at £25 a ticket. 1. Don't be publicly disrespectful to your opposition. If you are, don't be surprised when others treat you in the same way. 2. The FA didn't "side with Saints" - it produced a sensible compromise. 3. If you should progress to a lucrative away tie in future rounds, I look forward to hearing your delightful chairman encourage, say, Man Utd to charge a tenner for admission. Be hypocritical not to, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
Post by saintlamb on Nov 5, 2010 18:43:20 GMT 1
I find the "Lining their pockets" sleight quite amusing really - I haven't checked the figures but I wouldn't be surprised to discover that we are better off financially than Southampton. Shrewsbury are well off for Div2 side, but Southampton are in another league financially. With the fortunes of the Liebherrs behind them are quoted as the 3rd richest side in the country, only behind Man City and Chelsea,. Even Spurs with thier rich owners are behind them.
|
|
|
Post by saintlamb on Nov 5, 2010 18:51:43 GMT 1
I think slackbadders thinking is as follows. Shrewsbury, 1, own our ground outright with an asset value of 15 million plus 2, if you check the last accounts the club had near 2 million working capital. 3, from the accounts, the clubs financial structure and income streams are set up to maintain our current financial status. If the chairman of Shrewsbury left for any sudden reason we know our club is secure, but should the benefactor of Southampton leave or even (heaven forbid) die can you be sure Southampton would be financially secure - iam not so sure Mr. Liebherr did die only a couple of months back. and left a vast fortune to the club... so don't worry about Southampton FA have them down as the 3rd richest in the country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2010 18:57:23 GMT 1
Fair play, sounds like a few exciting years in store for you.
However what I think a few of the posters have been getting at is we are a fairly stable football club with a decent turnover, decent assets and no debt so if the current chairman were to leave the club then it wouldnt be the end of the world
However with your recent expenditure Id imagine if your chairman/owners were to leave then it might cause you a few problems. And of course that could see a repeat of administration
|
|
|
Post by saintlamb on Nov 5, 2010 19:17:41 GMT 1
Fair play, sounds like a few exciting years in store for you. However what I think a few of the posters have been getting at is we are a fairly stable football club with a decent turnover, decent assets and no debt so if the current chairman were to leave the club then it wouldnt be the end of the world However with your recent expenditure Id imagine if your chairman/owners were to leave then it might cause you a few problems. And of course that could see a repeat of administration We have no debt, no mortgage, a new stadium, vast up to date training facilities, other property as well. On top of that although we have spent £6m on players last season, the club is operating on on very handsome profit. Average gates of 20,000 plus ensure this. The Liehbeers would not just walkout, WHY WOULD THEY? They would want a return on their investment, and would sell the club on. A club with all those advantages would not remain unsold for long. However none of that will be necessary, the owner has left the club enough working capital to get to the Premier League and beyond that. I can't believe you haven't kept up to date with what's happening in the game over the last two years This may help you catch up with what has been happening.. www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1197540/Swiss-billionaires-roll-save-League-One-Southampton.htmlwww.thisishampshire.net/sport/8434784.Saints_fifth_on_football_rich_list/
|
|
|
Post by Amsterdammer on Nov 5, 2010 19:31:25 GMT 1
Cortese's aim is to maximise income (which is why he opposed £25 tickets). That's what's confused me in this episode. "Maximising income" is exactly what Town tried to do by keeping the ticket price high. So in effect the spat was a business disagreement based on which would bring in the most money, high price tickets or low price tickets. Not some crusade by Soton to help the common man save a few quid.
|
|
|
Post by jaytee on Nov 5, 2010 19:43:14 GMT 1
Could somebody inform me of the coach prices and leaving times please? Just thinking of going at the moment and can't find it anywhere. Cheers. For you, and anyone else thinking of going by coach : - Away Travel Club - 01952 604742 Official Supporters - 01691 652126 Both are excellent. Take your pick. I only have one fare and pick-up times, but I'm sure you'll get the information when you ring.
|
|
tbates
Shropshire County League
Posts: 25
|
Post by tbates on Nov 5, 2010 20:52:54 GMT 1
And for all that look where it has got you, less than 24 places above poor little Shrewsbury, not a very good return on the investment so far. I'm still wondering why you though Shrewsbury were better off financially? I think slackbadders thinking is as follows. Shrewsbury, 1, own our ground outright with an asset value of 15 million plus 2, if you check the last accounts the club had near 2 million working capital. 3, from the accounts, the clubs financial structure and income streams are set up to maintain our current financial status. If the chairman of Shrewsbury left for any sudden reason we know our club is secure, but should the benefactor of Southampton leave or even (heaven forbid) die can you be sure Southampton would be financially secure - iam not so sure You really haven't been keeping up with things. Billionaire Markus Liebherr died in August 2010. His estate is continuing to fund the club in order to fulfill his wishes. - Saints are completely debt free - have a modern 32,000 seater stadium - have an average attendance of over 20,000 in League One - when in the Premier League they averaged over 30,000 in every season at St Mary's (only 11 clubs in the country currently do that in 2010/11) - plans to increase the capacity of St Mary's or relocate to a bigger stadium - have planning permission for an extensive multi million training ground development in the New Forest - own Jackson's Farm - a huge piece of land outside the city worth alot of money - spent circa £5m on transfers in the last 12 months All of the above makes them an extremely attractive investment proposition when the day comes that the Liebherr's sell up. More than likely will just be sold onto another extremely rich owner.
|
|
|
Post by Slackbladder on Nov 5, 2010 22:57:51 GMT 1
tbates - thanks for putting me straight on all that. I really didn't realise how seriously rich the clubs holding company is. My second post was misguided and based on the knowledge that 18 months ago Saints were in disarray as the parent company was in administration.
The point I was trying to make was that Shrewsbury are a well run club financially, who have never been in administration and there is no neccessity to" line our pockets." That sleight was difficult to take from a club who have the recent experience of financial difficulties against a club who have always tried to cut their cloth accordingly. I would expect a little more professionalism.
A point on all the things you mention in your last post - how much of that would still be sustainable without the backing of Mr Liebherr and his estate?
I have nothing against Southampton but sometimes clubs have to remember where they are now and why they are there rather than where they have been before making ill advised comments.
Enjoy the game tomorrow and good luck for the rest of the season.
|
|
tbates
Shropshire County League
Posts: 25
|
Post by tbates on Nov 6, 2010 0:47:13 GMT 1
The point I was trying to make was that Shrewsbury are a well run club financially, who have never been in administration and there is no neccessity to" line our pockets." That sleight was difficult to take from a club who have the recent experience of financial difficulties against a club who have always tried to cut their cloth accordingly. The actions of Rupert Lowe cannot be used against Liebherr/Cortese. The club is now being run by diferent people to those that took them into administration. S A point on all the things you mention in your last post - how much of that would still be sustainable without the backing of Mr Liebherr and his estate? The club no longer has the burden of mortgage repayments on St Mary's. It is debt free now. Even without Liebherr the fanbase and average gates of over 20k in the 3rd tier make it sustainable. They just wouldn't have the extras of the new training ground, possible railway station, capacity increase to St Mary's and as much spent on players. I have nothing against Southampton but sometimes clubs have to remember where they are now and why they are there rather than where they have been before making ill advised comments. Again...the actions of those running the club when it went into admin should not be used against the new owners.
|
|