The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well, as you spectacularly failed to comprehend what my point was, it can't really be used to further your argument of another point elsewhere. My point, which was put across in what I had thought was plain English, was that fans of Tottenham, West Ham, Spurs, Arsenal, etc, would come to St Mary's when they were playing us here, if they lived closer to us here than they do to those clubs. Many fans of those clubs in this area are plastics, many of whom have never even seen their team play at their home ground. There is scope for some of them to come here to see their team play, that was the point I was making. It might well be the case that having seen their teams play here on successive years, that they change their allegiances. I know of several anecdotal instances where that has happened, particularly with the younger fans. I did ask the question to clarify it earlier, Wes; thanks for the stroppy response though. So you do think we would swell the attendances of our home game by letting in more away fans then. tell me, would this be from an extended away section or would they just sit in with the home fans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 (edited) Well, as you spectacularly failed to comprehend what my point was, it can't really be used to further your argument of another point elsewhere. My point, which was put across in what I had thought was plain English, was that fans of Tottenham, West Ham, Spurs, Arsenal, etc, would come to St Mary's when they were playing us here, if they lived closer to us here than they do to those clubs. Many fans of those clubs in this area are plastics, many of whom have never even seen their team play at their home ground. There is scope for some of them to come here to see their team play, that was the point I was making. It might well be the case that having seen their teams play here on successive years, that they change their allegiances. I know of several anecdotal instances where that has happened, particularly with the younger fans. All this talk about fans in North Hampshire being closer to West London teams is also spurious to an extent, as it is not just a case of proximity, but more ease of access. For example, it is probably far easier to drive down the M3 from Aldershot/Farnham/Fleet/Farnborough, than it is to get to most London Clubs. But apart from those who might go to Reading, there is nothing else available along the South Coast apart from the Skates, Brighton and Bournemouth, all in the lower divisions. The scope for increased support if we do well, is mostly towards the coastline, where the major population areas are concentrated, rather than northwards, where Reading and the London Clubs begin to have more influence. So we're back to relying on away fans in the home end to fill our stadium then. Genius! You also posed the question that would away fans of these clubs follow their team up north or come here of they just wanted to see a game of football? It was in plain English so I'm most surprised you failed to grasp it. Edited 12 October, 2012 by Turkish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well apparently, we're a small team anyway. I find that comment quite funny coming from the chairman of a current SFL Div 3 team. “There will be a European league because big teams can’t keep subsidisng small teams like Southampton for the next 10 years because they will go stale. “Arsenal don’t want to play Southampton or Swansea, but ask them if they want to play Celtic or Rangers. It’s what the fans want to see. “Fans across the world want to see Manchester United play Southampton or Swansea, they want to see them play Rangers and Celtic" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 (edited) Very reasonable and sensible projections. Clearly ticket price also a factor, but at roughly current prices, these numbers seem about right to me. The question then for debate is whether a business case can be built on these additional attendances. i.e. would a 40k stadium be worthwhile if filled 3-5 times a year when the really big clubs come to town? And a few mid-30s attendances thrown in for good measure. Some say yes, others say no - i'm personally in the "maybe" camp. I don't think it can be ruled out, but i simply don't think we have the information we would need in order to determine whether the business case would fly or not. We need to remember it's more than just ticket price x attendance = revenue. There's a whole load of knock on impacts from getting more people through the turnstiles - food & drink, merchandise, corporate, advertising etc - and these all have an influence. I bet Cortese knows exactly what the average spend per fan, per visit to SMS is today, and what premier league average is, and has a plan to improve it. What is likely is that any stadium expansion won't purely be for the purposes of getting more bums on seats - though that is obviously a big factor. It will also include the opportunity to develop additional revenue streams and more corporate and commercial facilities (to make better use of the place on non-match days). Incidentally, to that end, a lot has been done recently around the club's branding and image. The silver crest on black background is everywhere now; associations with ultra-luxury brands like sun-seeker; even the flight attendant style uniforms in the shop, and for the programme sellers. Cortese is definitely looking to position the club/brand as upmarket and fashionable... i.e. (in his own words) boutique. Any development of the stadium would be in line with these values and with the intention of attracting high spenders (corporate or otherwise). For me, you've hit the nail right on the head there. My opinion as I've said is that we'll pretty much always get up to 40K against the top 4, 5 maybe even 6 clubs (Man U, Man C, Tottenham, Arsenal, Liverpool will always be a big draw, and maybe Chelsea). The question then becomes what will we / could we get against the rest, and as you say, does that make a 40K / 45K / 50K stadium viable. Which is why I think the club will be closely monitoring attendances over the next 2 or 3 seasons to see if they can take a rough stab at that answer. If they comfortably think we could sell 35K+ for at least half the games and more then it becomes a viable opportunity. If it looks like we'll get close to full for those games but average around 33K, 34K for the rest then it becomes much more doubful whether its worth the money. However, for your last paragraph about attracting more big-spenders. Well, that's one area where the club is currently failing, somewhat spectacularly. Corporate boxes not a third full, corporate suites a naff and overpriced experience. If that's where the funding streams are going to come from then that side of the business needs a bloody great overhaul, because at the moment it simply isn't working. Edited 12 October, 2012 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajjuk Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 (edited) There are records actually. The Dell capacity in our glory years of the early 80s was 24k and our averge crowd was about 18-20k So what did the Dell have to do with it. why are we going to tap into these tens of thousands of fans with nothig else to do when their team is away on saturday now when we've never done it at anytime in our history? Well we found another 10k fans from somewhere by getting worse, how did we do that?. Also see my point about Liverpool, they were European and English champions in the early 80's, they played an excellent attractive football and had some of the biggest names around. Yet the current underperforming Liverpool team plays in front of much bigger crowds than their 80's counterparts. Liverpool fans are paying paying proportionally a lot more money to watch the game than they did in the 1980's and getting a worse football team in return. Clearly football attendances in the 1980s and the state of football has little relevance to now, and little relevance to this discussion. I'll freely admit I was wrong about the dell affecting attendances, I have no idea why we wouldn't sell out back then, there must be a lot of other factors at play, but obviously in the 30 years since we have increased our regular fan base by over a 3rd by being constant relegation strugglers, winning nothing and dropping down the leagues. So I don;t see how it's too much of a stretch to suggest we could find another 10k fans with a bit of success. Simply there is no real relevance between attendances in the early 1980's and now. Our own attendances prove that point entirely as does the Liverpool example I provided. You clearly chose to ignore that because it completely destroyed your point. I also don't understand your point about away fans, think you are talking to someone else there. I was talking about the potential of finding new fans, people choose football clubs to support for various reasons, but clearly a lot choose teams because they are good, hence the mass load of Chelsea, Man Utd and Liverpool fans that are dotted around this area who will never watch their team live. Maybe if we got a bit better some of those fans might switch or the younger ones might choose Saints in the first place and maybe might end up going to St Marys to actually watch the team they support. Currently they have a choice between supporting their local not so good team or their not so local but good team. If Saints got better we could be both. There is certainly a lot of people living near Southampton who are football fans and there is a limited number of options for them. Edited 12 October, 2012 by tajjuk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 I did ask the question to clarify it earlier, Wes; thanks for the stroppy response though. So you do think we would swell the attendances of our home game by letting in more away fans then. tell me, would this be from an extended away section or would they just sit in with the home fans? Yes, you asked for me to clarify my point, but then before I responded, used it regardless to make another point further in the debate and then you wonder why I found it exasperating. Regarding what you asked above though, as things stand with the current capacity, there is only so much space available for away fans and I understand that there is an obligation to allow a certain percentage of the capacity to be set aside for away fans. Once that allocation is filled, then naturally any other fans of the away team have only the option of taking home seats, if they can get them. They then run the risk of ejection if they identify themselves as away fans in the home section. By and large, it is only the glory teams and the local rival derbies which will produce the demand for tickets that will sell out the stadium currently. But there are several clubs who are glory clubs, or those close enough, or who historically have good away support to fill the away end for many fixtures. Whether the home parts of the ground are filled depends on several factors, such as whether the opponents are a big enough pull, whether the match is televised, on a weekend, whether the Corporate areas are sold out, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint86 Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well we found another 10k fans from somewhere by getting worse, how did we do that?. Also see my point about Liverpool, they were European and English champions in the early 80's, they played an excellent attractive football and had some of the biggest names around. Yet the current underperforming Liverpool team plays in front of much bigger crowds than their 80's counterparts. Liverpool fans are paying paying proportionally a lot more money to watch the game than they did in the 1980's and getting a worse football team in return. Clearly football attendances in the 1980s and the state of football has little relevance to now, and little relevance to this discussion. I'll freely admit I was wrong about the dell affecting attendances, I have no idea why we wouldn't sell out back then, there must be a lot of other factors at play, but obviously in the 30 years since we have increased our regular fan base by over a 3rd by being constant relegation strugglers, winning nothing and dropping down the leagues. So I don;t see how it's too much of a stretch to suggest we could find another 10k fans with a bit of success. Simply there is no real relevance between attendances in the early 1980's and now. Our own attendances prove that point entirely as does the Liverpool example I provided. You clearly chose to ignore that because it completely destroyed your point. I also don't understand your point about away fans, think you are talking to someone else there. I was talking about the potential of finding new fans, people choose football clubs to support for various reasons, but clearly a lot choose teams because they are good, hence the mass load of Chelsea, Man Utd and Liverpool fans that are dotted around this area who will never watch their team live. Maybe if we got a bit better some of those fans might switch or the younger ones might choose Saints in the first place and maybe might end up going to St Marys to actually watch the team they support. Currently they have a choice between supporting their local not so good team or their not so local but good team. If Saints got better we could be both. There is certainly a lot of people living near Southampton who are football fans and there is a limited number of options for them. Love it, turkish getting facepalmed! Quality! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well apparently, we're a small team anyway. I find that comment quite funny coming from the chairman of a current SFL Div 3 team. “There will be a European league because big teams can’t keep subsidisng small teams like Southampton for the next 10 years because they will go stale. “Arsenal don’t want to play Southampton or Swansea, but ask them if they want to play Celtic or Rangers. It’s what the fans want to see. “Fans across the world want to see Manchester United play Southampton or Swansea, they want to see them play Rangers and Celtic" Link here for anyone who cares to comment on the article.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2216624/Rangers-join-European-super-league-says-Charles-Green.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Yes, you asked for me to clarify my point, but then before I responded, used it regardless to make another point further in the debate and then you wonder why I found it exasperating. Regarding what you asked above though, as things stand with the current capacity, there is only so much space available for away fans and I understand that there is an obligation to allow a certain percentage of the capacity to be set aside for away fans. Once that allocation is filled, then naturally any other fans of the away team have only the option of taking home seats, if they can get them. They then run the risk of ejection if they identify themselves as away fans in the home section. By and large, it is only the glory teams and the local rival derbies which will produce the demand for tickets that will sell out the stadium currently. But there are several clubs who are glory clubs, or those close enough, or who historically have good away support to fill the away end for many fixtures. Whether the home parts of the ground are filled depends on several factors, such as whether the opponents are a big enough pull, whether the match is televised, on a weekend, whether the Corporate areas are sold out, etc. Sorry, perhaps I'm being daft here, but I'm not sure what your response was. Once the away end gets to 3,000 seats there is no obligation to provide any more to the opposing side (and it would arguably in fact be slightly self-defeating to do so). Spurs, West Ham and the sides you've mentioned always sell that out. So, given your original point, can you clarify that there's a significant extra number of these fans that we should look to accommodate at St. Mary's? And by extension of that suggestion (and being as the away end is full) we should look to accommodate them in the home sections? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Link here for anyone who cares to comment on the article.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2216624/Rangers-join-European-super-league-says-Charles-Green.html Bit of a desperate article on many levels. Look at the attendances for European games, they are all massively down compared to League matches, until the very last knock out stages. The big clubs may soon angle to make more money out of the tv deals, but I doubt they could really give a stuff about playing Celtic or Rangers year in, year out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajjuk Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Link here for anyone who cares to comment on the article.... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2216624/Rangers-join-European-super-league-says-Charles-Green.html lol, what a mong that man is - "'How can Manchester United's revenues be £320million and Aston Villa, who are completely useless, get £250?" A bit harsh on Villa there I'm pretty sure they would comfortably beat both Rangers and Celtic, plus they have a pretty big fan base despite not doing that well recently. It's funny because I commented on the FM forums in response to a post by a Celtic fan who was moaning that Football Manager gives Southampton a higher reputation rating than Celtic. I pointed out to him that just because Celtic get 60k doesn't mean any decent players want to play there. We signed Gaston Ramirez one of the most hotly rated youngsters in European football and they signed Newcastle's third choice keeper. About sums it up. 'There will be a European league because big teams can't keep subsidising small teams like Southampton for the next 10 years because they will go stale,' he said. 'Arsenal don't want to play Southampton or Swansea, but ask them if they want to play Celtic or Rangers. It's what the fans want to see. How are we being 'subsidised' by Big teams, also I'm pretty sure Arsenal welcome the 3pts they get off us every time! But yeh he's probably right though I'm sure Arsenal fans would be quite happy to play Rangers seeing as they would beat them about 20-0. Is it me or is the reason that games between Barcelona and Man Utd are special because of the fact they don't play each other every year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well apparently, we're a small team anyway. I find that comment quite funny coming from the chairman of a current SFL Div 3 team. “There will be a European league because big teams can’t keep subsidisng small teams like Southampton for the next 10 years because they will go stale. “Arsenal don’t want to play Southampton or Swansea, but ask them if they want to play Celtic or Rangers. It’s what the fans want to see. “Fans across the world want to see Manchester United play Southampton or Swansea, they want to see them play Rangers and Celtic" This from the guy whose grasp of football and strategy is so acute he managed to arrange things so that i) his club was bankrupted ii) all his players became free agents iii) they got relegated two divisions. I wouldn't put too much store by his comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Sorry, perhaps I'm being daft here, but I'm not sure what your response was. Once the away end gets to 3,000 seats there is no obligation to provide any more to the opposing side (and it would arguably in fact be slightly self-defeating to do so). Spurs, West Ham and the sides you've mentioned always sell that out. So, given your original point, can you clarify that there's a significant extra number of these fans that we should look to accommodate at St. Mary's? And by extension of that suggestion (and being as the away end is full) we should look to accommodate them in the home sections? No, unless the stadium is expanded so that the proportionate allocation of away fans' seats rises accordingly, I don't think that we should allocate more seats to away fans in home areas. Is that clear enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 No, unless the stadium is expanded so that the proportionate allocation of away fans' seats rises accordingly, I don't think that we should allocate more seats to away fans in home areas. Is that clear enough? Wes, I think you're getting confused. The away allocation won't rise at all; the regulation is 10% of total capacity or 3,000 seats, whichever is smaller. We could have an 80,000 seater stadium and would only have to provide 3,000 away seats. Unless you're suggesting that we increase the away allocation just to fill a bigger stadium? Which, as I said earlier, is not a good idea and a self-defeating principle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Wes, I think you're getting confused. The away allocation won't rise at all; the regulation is 10% of total capacity or 3,000 seats, whichever is smaller. We could have an 80,000 seater stadium and would only have to provide 3,000 away seats. Unless you're suggesting that we increase the away allocation just to fill a bigger stadium? Which, as I said earlier, is not a good idea and a self-defeating principle. Not really, it's worth flogging more seats to away fans if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Not really, it's worth flogging more seats to away fans if you can. If you need to fill seats that you can't sell in a ground you already own, there is an argument for it. Although I'd suggest it gives the away side a much bigger advantage and shouldn't be entertained myself. Do you think it should be a valid reason used for potentially expanding a ground though? i very much don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Wes, I think you're getting confused. The away allocation won't rise at all; the regulation is 10% of total capacity or 3,000 seats, whichever is smaller. We could have an 80,000 seater stadium and would only have to provide 3,000 away seats. Unless you're suggesting that we increase the away allocation just to fill a bigger stadium? Which, as I said earlier, is not a good idea and a self-defeating principle. I think that again you have not understood my point. I stated that the away allocation should only be expanded as a proportion of the stadium's increased capacity. So that if the stadium capacity was 80,000, I'd have no qualms personally if the away support increased to 8,000. I've no problem with away support being 10% of capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 If you need to fill seats that you can't sell in a ground you already own, there is an argument for it. Although I'd suggest it gives the away side a much bigger advantage and shouldn't be entertained myself. Do you think it should be a valid reason used for potentially expanding a ground though? i very much don't. I don't see how having 4,000 away fans in a 40,000 stadium can be a "much bigger advantage" than having 3,000 in a 30,000 seater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 I think that again you have not understood my point. I stated that the away allocation should only be expanded as a proportion of the stadium's increased capacity. So that if the stadium capacity was 80,000, I'd have no qualms personally if the away support increased to 8,000. I've no problem with away support being 10% of capacity. Christ, you're uppity today aren't you? Did you miss the part where I asked you if that's what you meant or not? It was the part where I said "unless you're suggesting that we increase the away allocation just to fill a bigger stadium". Which, incidentally I think is a lousy idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 I don't see how having 4,000 away fans in a 40,000 stadium can be a "much bigger advantage" than having 3,000 in a 30,000 seater. If you can't then that's fine, and we'll disagree. But there's probably a good reason why many clubs who can't sell out their stadiums don't give a higher allocation out of choice. Otherwise you could get loads of clubs knocking on an extra 5,000 or so seats just to fill them up with away fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 If you can't then that's fine, and we'll disagree. But there's probably a good reason why many clubs who can't sell out their stadiums don't give a higher allocation out of choice. Otherwise you could get loads of clubs knocking on an extra 5,000 or so seats just to fill them up with away fans. I've been to plenty of away games where the away support is over 10%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Christ, you're uppity today aren't you? Did you miss the part where I asked you if that's what you meant or not? It was the part where I said "unless you're suggesting that we increase the away allocation just to fill a bigger stadium". Which, incidentally I think is a lousy idea. Are you being deliberately obtuse today? I already answered that question. If we increased the away allocation to fill an enlarged stadium, it would only be a bad idea if the proportion of seats allocated to rival fans increased. Of course you wouldn't increase the capacity by say 5000 and have most of those seats filled with away fans, as the balance of support would be altered significantly to our detriment. But I see no problem in increasing the capacity by 5000 and allowing an extra 500 to go to away fans. Do you? If we could fill the extra capacity entirely with our fans beyond the 3000 we have to allocate, then obviously that would be the thing to do, unless we were able to charge significantly higher prices to the away fans than we could get from our home fans. Even then, I wouldn't want them to have over 10% of the capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 I've been to plenty of away games where the away support is over 10%. Good for you. How many of those games were against sides in the PL top ten? It's not IMO a business principle that I believe we should (or will) aspire to. It's a measure taken by clubs who have paid a lot for a number of seats and, try what they may, they simply cannot shift them. Sides like Wigan, Bolton, previously Blackburn. They are hardly business models we should be looking to emulate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Are you being deliberately obtuse today? I already answered that question. If we increased the away allocation to fill an enlarged stadium, it would only be a bad idea if the proportion of seats allocated to rival fans increased. Of course you wouldn't increase the capacity by say 5000 and have most of those seats filled with away fans, as the balance of support would be altered significantly to our detriment. But I see no problem in increasing the capacity by 5000 and allowing an extra 500 to go to away fans. Do you? If we could fill the extra capacity entirely with our fans beyond the 3000 we have to allocate, then obviously that would be the thing to do, unless we were able to charge significantly higher prices to the away fans than we could get from our home fans. Even then, I wouldn't want them to have over 10% of the capacity. No, I was trying to have a conversation with someone who only seems to want to throw out insults. As a consequence after this I shan't engage with you any further, you've clearly got a bee in your bonnet about something and I care not what it is. The last thing I'l say on the matter; the proportion argument does nothing for me. It's not a league rule (rightly so IMO); none of the other top sides do it; and it gives away sides an increased advantage. To answer your question; yes, I do see a problem of increasing the capacity by 5,000 and having to let in 500 away fans to fill it. I'd much rather we just built an extra 4,500 seats and filled them entirely with home fans. Feel free to chuck another insult back as I'll leave you to it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 This from the guy whose grasp of football and strategy is so acute he managed to arrange things so that i) his club was bankrupted ii) all his players became free agents iii) they got relegated two divisions. I wouldn't put too much store by his comments. He is right though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Good for you. How many of those games were against sides in the PL top ten? It's not IMO a business principle that I believe we should (or will) aspire to. It's a measure taken by clubs who have paid a lot for a number of seats and, try what they may, they simply cannot shift them. Sides like Wigan, Bolton, previously Blackburn. They are hardly business models we should be looking to emulate. It is worth factoring in ways of maximising revenue, and increasing the away allocation should the need arise is a way of maximising revenue, as countless clubs have proved. Fulham even have a neutrals section I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 He is right though Im sure thats what he wants. Its what Rangers and Celtic have wanted for years and its been talked about for 20 to my knowledge. He is also probably right that that is what should happen. Doesnt mean it will though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 He is right though Right about what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 It is worth factoring in ways of maximising revenue, and increasing the away allocation should the need arise is a way of maximising revenue, as countless clubs have proved. Fulham even have a neutrals section I believe. As I said, it's not something the typical top ten clubs do, and IMO not something we should strive to do either. Much better to work out how many seats we need to cater for increased home attendance and leave it at that. Otherwise where do you stop? The likes of Tottenham, Man United, Arsenal etc would likely fill an away allocation of 10,000 or more if it was offered to them. For the likes of Fulham at Craven Cottage, who already have sh*t loads of empty seats, its perhaps worth their while filling them one way or the other. For us, building a whole load of extra seats and then needing additional away fans just to fill them makes no business logic to me. At all. but then, if that what floats your boat and you think its a good idea, good luck to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 No, I was trying to have a conversation with someone who only seems to want to throw out insults. As a consequence after this I shan't engage with you any further, you've clearly got a bee in your bonnet about something and I care not what it is. The last thing I'l say on the matter; the proportion argument does nothing for me. It's not a league rule (rightly so IMO); none of the other top sides do it; and it gives away sides an increased advantage. To answer your question; yes, I do see a problem of increasing the capacity by 5,000 and having to let in 500 away fans to fill it. I'd much rather we just built an extra 4,500 seats and filled them entirely with home fans. Feel free to chuck another insult back as I'll leave you to it now. To begin with, my original post was in response to Malmacian, taking issue with his comment about the catchment area. Whereas you continued with a long discussion with tajjuk about the catchment area, you somehow chose to go off on a tangent with me about the allocation of tickets to away fans visiting St Mary's, not something that I was particularly interested in, but seemingly you wished to discuss with me. Then I chided you for quoting me in a reply to somebody else's post, when I had not responded to your question to clear up a misapprehension you had about what I said. And now you claim that I have thrown insults at you. You have called me stroppy and uppity, whereas I have called you obtuse and might have been a bit terse in my responses. Insults? Where? Are you really that thin-skinned? Or is asking that question deemed to be an insult? Regarding the increased capacity, I have even stated quite clearly that if we could fill the capacity with our own fans beyond the 3000, that would obviously be the thing to do. But if we added an extra 5000 seats and had say 500 that we couldn't sell, would you prefer them to be empty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 As I said, it's not something the typical top ten clubs do, and IMO not something we should strive to do either. Much better to work out how many seats we need to cater for increased home attendance and leave it at that. Otherwise where do you stop? The likes of Tottenham, Man United, Arsenal etc would likely fill an away allocation of 10,000 or more if it was offered to them. For the likes of Fulham at Craven Cottage, who already have sh*t loads of empty seats, its perhaps worth their while filling them one way or the other. For us, building a whole load of extra seats and then needing additional away fans just to fill them makes no business logic to me. At all. but then, if that what floats your boat and you think its a good idea, good luck to you. It's only you banging on about building seats especially for away fans. You obviously build a stadium to suit you own support but increasing /decreasing the away allocation is a factor to take into account depending on demand. It's not rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tajjuk Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 To begin with, my original post was in response to Malmacian, taking issue with his comment about the catchment area. Whereas you continued with a long discussion with tajjuk about the catchment area, you somehow chose to go off on a tangent with me about the allocation of tickets to away fans visiting St Mary's, not something that I was particularly interested in, but seemingly you wished to discuss with me. Then I chided you for quoting me in a reply to somebody else's post, when I had not responded to your question to clear up a misapprehension you had about what I said. And now you claim that I have thrown insults at you. You have called me stroppy and uppity, whereas I have called you obtuse and might have been a bit terse in my responses. Insults? Where? Are you really that thin-skinned? Or is asking that question deemed to be an insult? Regarding the increased capacity, I have even stated quite clearly that if we could fill the capacity with our own fans beyond the 3000, that would obviously be the thing to do. But if we added an extra 5000 seats and had say 500 that we couldn't sell, would you prefer them to be empty? Yeh he's not bothered responding to me since he said that my argument about our catchment area wasn't viable since we weren't able to fill our stadium when we were doing really well in the early 80's, despite ignoring the fact we have gained over 30% more fans since that period whilst the club's on field performances have not got close to the 83/84 season. Turkish even chirped in with the exact same point and ignored the obvious. He will cherry pick your posts for stuff he can take issue with whilst ignoring the things that make his points less valid, he's done a similar thing to you whilst trying to distract from the fact he hasn't really said anything new for 5 or 6 posts by making out your attacking him personally. I've noticed he does it a lot in other posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well we found another 10k fans from somewhere by getting worse, how did we do that?. Also see my point about Liverpool, they were European and English champions in the early 80's, they played an excellent attractive football and had some of the biggest names around. Yet the current underperforming Liverpool team plays in front of much bigger crowds than their 80's counterparts. Liverpool fans are paying paying proportionally a lot more money to watch the game than they did in the 1980's and getting a worse football team in return. Clearly football attendances in the 1980s and the state of football has little relevance to now, and little relevance to this discussion. I'll freely admit I was wrong about the dell affecting attendances, I have no idea why we wouldn't sell out back then, there must be a lot of other factors at play, but obviously in the 30 years since we have increased our regular fan base by over a 3rd by being constant relegation strugglers, winning nothing and dropping down the leagues. So I don;t see how it's too much of a stretch to suggest we could find another 10k fans with a bit of success. Simply there is no real relevance between attendances in the early 1980's and now. Our own attendances prove that point entirely as does the Liverpool example I provided. You clearly chose to ignore that because it completely destroyed your point. I also don't understand your point about away fans, think you are talking to someone else there. I was talking about the potential of finding new fans, people choose football clubs to support for various reasons, but clearly a lot choose teams because they are good, hence the mass load of Chelsea, Man Utd and Liverpool fans that are dotted around this area who will never watch their team live. Maybe if we got a bit better some of those fans might switch or the younger ones might choose Saints in the first place and maybe might end up going to St Marys to actually watch the team they support. Currently they have a choice between supporting their local not so good team or their not so local but good team. If Saints got better we could be both. There is certainly a lot of people living near Southampton who are football fans and there is a limited number of options for them. Im not going to give you a history lesson in why crowds are bigger now than they were in the 80's, if you cant see the reasons why then you really should never comment on football attendances again. So how do you propose we attact new fans. I take it "being good" is one of them, which to reach the levels of the other clubs you mention such as Chelsea and Man United is going to cost hundreds of millions of pounds in transfer fees. How else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Love it, turkish getting facepalmed! Quality! Sorry, where? He said there were no statistics available of crowds when we were in our peak in the early 80's i showed him there are. How is this the faceplaming you love so much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Yeh he's not bothered responding to me since he said that my argument about our catchment area wasn't viable since we weren't able to fill our stadium when we were doing really well in the early 80's, despite ignoring the fact we have gained over 30% more fans since that period whilst the club's on field performances have not got close to the 83/84 season. Turkish even chirped in with the exact same point and ignored the obvious. He will cherry pick your posts for stuff he can take issue with whilst ignoring the things that make his points less valid, he's done a similar thing to you whilst trying to distract from the fact he hasn't really said anything new for 5 or 6 posts by making out your attacking him personally. I've noticed he does it a lot in other posts. Sorry for not responding immediately to you, but alas I've been to the gym. In future I'll remember to put my social schedule to one side to provide answers to random faceless people online. My point to you about the Dell was to highlight that "success" in whatever guide is no immediate guarantee of filling a stadium; even one much smaller as we had at the Dell. Success in those guises (top 2, Europe) wasn't enough on its own when we were in the 80s and had a team filled with the European footballer of the year. And neither was a massive catchment area. If you can be arsed to read the other drivel I've written at the top of this page, you'll see exactly where I stand on how many future fans we might expect to see; so your statement that I've "ignored the 30% more fans" is obviously complete nonsense. As for your last paragraph, ok then! As for Wes, if he looks in my previous response to him I've already answered his direct question and given reasons why, so there's really no need to repeat it, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 (edited) It's only you banging on about building seats especially for away fans. You obviously build a stadium to suit you own support but increasing /decreasing the away allocation is a factor to take into account depending on demand. It's not rocket science. Dear me. It clearly isn't "just me" talking about it; otherwise why is Wes suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? Even you yourself said "I don't see how having 4,000 away fans in a 40,000 stadium can be a "much bigger advantage" than having 3,000 in a 30,000 seater." How is that not considering building more seats for away fans? I don't mind having a conversation or even being proved wrong (as I often am), but come on now. Edited 12 October, 2012 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Dear me. It clearly isn't "just me" talking about it; otherwise why is Wes suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? Even you yourself said "I don't see how having 4,000 away fans in a 40,000 stadium can be a "much bigger advantage" than having 3,000 in a 30,000 seater." How is that not considering building more seats for away fans? I don't mind having a conversation or even being proved wrong (as I often am), but come on now. For some reason that must only be known to yourself, I try to explain my position in as simple terms as I can possibly muster, but as tajjuk observes, you twist it around. I am NOT suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium. I have already said that I am happy with 10% away fans. That is 3000 in a 30,000 seater stadium, 4000 in a 40,000 seater. Although there would be an extra 1000 away fans under such a scenario, the proportion of away fans would remain constant, wouldn't it? And just in case it is also not clear, if that extra 10,000 seats could be filled by our own supporters, that would be great, but if not, then I would be happy with 1000 (10%) of the seats being sold to away supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 For some reason that must only be known to yourself, I try to explain my position in as simple terms as I can possibly muster, but as tajjuk observes, you twist it around. I am NOT suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium. I have already said that I am happy with 10% away fans. That is 3000 in a 30,000 seater stadium, 4000 in a 40,000 seater. Although there would be an extra 1000 away fans under such a scenario, the proportion of away fans would remain constant, wouldn't it? And just in case it is also not clear, if that extra 10,000 seats could be filled by our own supporters, that would be great, but if not, then I would be happy with 1000 (10%) of the seats being sold to away supporters. How am I twisting it? I don't think we should cater for more away fans than we have to. Pretty much no other club inside the top ten does that. And we currently have around 10% simply because we have a 32K stadium. I wouldn't want us to give any more away. So I'm not twisting anything; if we need a bigger stadium we should build one but keep the away allocation at 3,000. Find out how many extra home fans we need and build for that. It's quite simple; I think your 10% proportion is entirely unnecessary. This is hard work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Dear me. It clearly isn't "just me" talking about it; otherwise why is Wes suggesting increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? Even you yourself said "I don't see how having 4,000 away fans in a 40,000 stadium can be a "much bigger advantage" than having 3,000 in a 30,000 seater." How is that not considering building more seats for away fans? I don't mind having a conversation or even being proved wrong (as I often am), but come on now. You build a stadium you think is suitable for demand, if it turns out there is not sufficient demand from the home supporters there is an option to increase the away section. How is that hard to understand? It's not a hard concept to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 How am I twisting it? I don't think we should cater for more away fans than we have to. Pretty much no other club inside the top ten does that. And we currently have around 10% simply because we have a 32K stadium. I wouldn't want us to give any more away. So I'm not twisting anything; if we need a bigger stadium we should build one but keep the away allocation at 3,000. Find out how many extra home fans we need and build for that. It's quite simple; I think your 10% proportion is entirely unnecessary. This is hard work. Proportion is irrelevent after 30k isn't it? So why on gods earth should we be expanding the ground specifically to cater for four or more thousand away fans? Why? Typical nonsense from the "visionaries" again. Just nuts. Oh well, he'll be tw atting on about Nottingham Forest being crippled by the existance of Notts County again soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 You build a stadium you think is suitable for demand, if it turns out there is not sufficient demand from the home supporters there is an option to increase the away section. How is that hard to understand? It's not a hard concept to grasp. Do you fail to understand that I disagree with this concept? Do you really? I disagree with it. I think the away supporters should be capped at 3,000. Whatever our size stadium is. I think we should build to the demand of the home fans only, and get that right. I do not think we should fill potential shortfalls with extra away fans. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Proportion is irrelevent after 30k isn't it? So why on gods earth should we be expanding the ground specifically to cater for four or more thousand away fans? Why? Typical nonsense from the "visionaries" again. Just nuts. Oh well, he'll be tw atting on about Nottingham Forest being crippled by the existance of Notts County again soon. Yes. League rules state 10% or 3,000 away seats, whichever is the lowest. Any proportion argument would be entirely voluntary; we'd be under no obligation to do so in a bigger stadium and quite frankly, as I've explained, I think it would very unwise to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Do you fail to understand that I disagree with this concept? Do you really? I disagree with it. I think the away supporters should be capped at 3,000. Whatever our size stadium is. I think we should build to the demand of the home fans only, and get that right. I do not think we should fill potential shortfalls with extra away fans. It's not a hard concept to grasp. just out of curiosity...with the following clubs...be interesting to see what the cap is far away fans for league games..not what they normally do..but officially.. Man u Arsenal Newcastle Liverpool Villa Spurs Sunderland Chelsea Man city Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 How am I twisting it? I don't think we should cater for more away fans than we have to. Pretty much no other club inside the top ten does that. And we currently have around 10% simply because we have a 32K stadium. I wouldn't want us to give any more away. So I'm not twisting anything; if we need a bigger stadium we should build one but keep the away allocation at 3,000. Find out how many extra home fans we need and build for that. It's quite simple; I think your 10% proportion is entirely unnecessary. This is hard work. So did I suggest increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? No, I did not. So to suggest that I did, is twisting my words. It would be lovely if we could add 10,000 seats and sell them all to our fans. But if we couldn't, why should we forego the chance to make money from rival fans filling at the most 10% of that extra capacity and generating around £665,000 extra revenue, plus additional takings in the concourse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 (edited) So did I suggest increasing the proportion of away fans in a bigger stadium? No, I did not. So to suggest that I did, is twisting my words. It would be lovely if we could add 10,000 seats and sell them all to our fans. But if we couldn't, why should we forego the chance to make money from rival fans filling at the most 10% of that extra capacity and generating around £665,000 extra revenue, plus additional takings in the concourse? Wes, please just take it that I think giving any extra seats to away fans than we have to would be a mistake. It wouldn't be a good idea. I disagree with that notion. Just to be clear. There are many reasons why I don't think we should; as there are for many/all of the clubs that TDD has listed above. If you feel its a good idea, then good for you. I feel the opposite. Leave it there, shall we? And your plan means giving away more tickets than we need to. Its a proportion of capacity but its unnecessary; we don't have to do it, so I don't think we should either. That's not twisting your words; it really isn't. Edited 12 October, 2012 by The Kraken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Do you fail to understand that I disagree with this concept? Do you really? I disagree with it. I think the away supporters should be capped at 3,000. Whatever our size stadium is. I think we should build to the demand of the home fans only, and get that right. I do not think we should fill potential shortfalls with extra away fans. It's not a hard concept to grasp. God you are thick. You really think "fill potential shortfalls with extra away fans" is the same as building a purpose built massive away end. ****ing hell, are you 12 years old? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 God you are thick. You really think "fill potential shortfalls with extra away fans" is the same as building a purpose built massive away end. ****ing hell, are you 12 years old? Ha ha, I'm the thick one?!!!! You can't even understand what I clearly wrote. Just f*ck off pal, if that's all you've got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Proportion is irrelevent after 30k isn't it? So why on gods earth should we be expanding the ground specifically to cater for four or more thousand away fans? Why? Typical nonsense from the "visionaries" again. Just nuts. Oh well, he'll be tw atting on about Nottingham Forest being crippled by the existance of Notts County again soon. Who said anything about four or more thousand additional away fans? Typical CB Fry exageration. And you ask why allow additional away fans. Simple really. Additional revenue. Get it? And who said anything about Nottingham Forest being crippled by the existence of Notts County? That adjective is entirely yours. Exaggeration again, hyperbole, pompous, supercilious claptrap. But if one of those two clubs did not exist, then the other would pick up a lot of their fans, would they not? So each club in close proximity to another affects the other's attendances. Or is that concept too alien for you to understand it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 That's not twisting your words; it really isn't. Well, stop misquoting me and we'll leave it there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 12 October, 2012 Share Posted 12 October, 2012 Well, stop misquoting me and we'll leave it there. If I misquoted you I aplologise. I didn't mean to, and to be honest I didn't think I did. But I do very much disagree with the notion of giving away any more tickets than we absolutely have to, under any circumstances. There we go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now