An interview with Paul Barber

[Brovion]

Right here.

Can I just say that I have a season ticket from Brighton to Lewes - which I pay for and is not subsidised - but still feel that, short of implementing the most rigorous, though most dangerous, solution (i.e. checking every single ticket) the levy is the fairest way of assisting the club pay for its enormous transport management bill.

I feel some individuals pleading special cases for their circumstances need to understand that in this instance, this isn't about them, it's about the system as a whole.

...

But Im not begrudging paying for travel on top of my STH as whichever way you cut it its still a bargain. I dont even factor in the travel part.

...

This is spot on, the club are now having to cater for in excess of 25,000 a game, and it makes sense both administratively and financially to follow the path of least resistance (normally disguised as common sense). I too speak as someone who has a valid rail ticket for falmer and does not 'directly' benefit from the subsidy.

....

There speak three true Albion supporters who can see the bigger picture. And, it must be said, better supporters than I was at Withdean when I grizzled CONSTANTLY about the travel scheme!

 

[Turkey]

The subsidy is a load of nonsense and they should change the wording and just say its free travel.

Essentially, it's a cost the club have to cover for the stadium to operate. A ticket price is admission to the game and then the club spend the money they make from tickets how they wish.

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

The subsidy is a load of nonsense and they should change the wording and just say its free travel.

Essentially, it's a cost the club have to cover for the stadium to operate. A ticket price is admission to the game and then the club spend the money they make from tickets how they wish.

Then you will have people saying "well it's not free as I'm paying £60 a season for it" - look at how many are kicking up a stink on here about it already !!

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

I'd previously had it from a very good source at the club that the true cost of travel, per fan, was c£60 per season. That was not very many weeks ago, so for that figure to have jumped to £90 is very surprising.

Based on these numbers, I would expect the 2013-14 travel cost to be charged at £60 per fan. The club can then claim they are still subsidising the travel to some degree. Whether they would be or not, I have no idea.

Are the club now factoring in the additional costs of enforcement in the parking controlled zones in Coldean and Moulsecoomb on event days and the costs of transport for a home Boxing Day fixture ?

 

[jgmcdee]

80% of the Albion's income comes via match day revenues, for Manchester United it is 25%, for Manchester City it is 13%.

I'm probably in the minority but I really like that number. Shows that we can increase our revenue significantly without a massive increase in season tickets. Sponsorships are the obvious way that this can rise, and the new kit will also help.

 

[Wozza]

I'm probably in the minority but I really like that number. Shows that we can increase our revenue significantly without a massive increase in season tickets. Sponsorships are the obvious way that this can rise, and the new kit will also help.

Sponsorships? New kits? A few million here and there.

Premier League TV money? Millions every match. More than gate receipts.

It's ALL about the TV cashola.

 

[Birdie Boy]

There is a lot of shit on this thread....

I am not against the travel subsidy, infact I am all for it, even though I pay for myself and 3 kids. So, anyone moaning that they have to pay £1 per game for a subsidy they don't need, should shut the f*** up!

 

[k2bluesky]

Sounds like £60/70+ increase next season on a £430 ST, they will have to be careful and expect to lose 2-3k season ticket holders if the increase is too high. A lot of those non ST holders won't buy tickets for the less attractive fixtures either, so I expect to see 20k gates for some games, leaving 10k empty seats
The running costs are clearly too high, with 66% of turnover going on wages, honestly the number of 'players' we have is crazy, how many of the development squad ever make it to the first team or get sold for a decent sum (i.e. more than they have cost the club in wages, while playing in front of 200 at Lancing, we are just paying them to live a nice lifestyle). Gus will always buy in proven players, given the choice, I'm sure lots will disagree but football is all about finance as Barber is so often telling us and having dozens of players who earn nothing for the club is madness, squad of 22/25 max.

 

[El Presidente]

Sponsorships? New kits? A few million here and there.

Premier League TV money? Millions every match. More than gate receipts.

It's ALL about the TV cashola.

I agree, United had TV receipts of £110 million v Matchday receipts of £99 million last season. Commercial revenues were £118 million. And United were shit last season too.

 

[8ace]

It's a 7 minute journey from Lewes to Falmer, 9 minutes from Brighton to Falmer. And you're saying that different rules should apply?

Yes. The longer journey is also £1.20 cheaper.
They can check tickets at Lewes but no chance at Brighton.
It's not my fault you live in Plumpton or wherever.

 

[Blackadder]

The subsidy is a load of nonsense and they should change the wording and just say its free travel.

Essentially, it's a cost the club have to cover for the stadium to operate. A ticket price is admission to the game and then the club spend the money they make from tickets how they wish.

That's what I was saying in my earlier post. The cost has gone up by x%, do you wish to pay it?

Maybe there is too much info given out. Less info=less grizzling?

 

[severnside gull]

I am so glad that the little bit of common sense that occassionally sees the light of day on here is inevitably engulfed in a tidal wave of self interest and utter nonsense. It goes some way to restoring my belief that the professionals who are paid to run my football club may indeed know what they are doing. Aftter all - if they were as incompetent as some would have it - they would be in accord with the majority and we would still be playing to 7000 crowds

 

[The Large One]

That's what I was saying in my earlier post. The cost has gone up by x%, do you wish to pay it?

Maybe there is too much info given out. Less info=less grizzling?

Not around here.

Less info=people filling in their own blanks, and coming up with their own truths.

 

[Blackadder]

Not around here.

Less info=people filling in their own blanks, and coming up with their own truths.

It's just that whatever comes out of the club, some people back it, some slag it off.

Another example is the away season ticket. I think it's quite innovative. I don't do enough aways to justify it myself but think it's a good idea for those that go to all aways. A post went up yesterday and most people slagged it off. what's the catch? I only go to 15 - 18 games so why would I want it? If you don't want it, don't have it.

Nature of the beast of NSC I suppose. Broad Church etc.

 

[Wozza]

I agree, United had TV receipts of £110 million v Matchday receipts of £99 million last season. Commercial revenues were £118 million. And United were shit last season too.

And much higher TV revenue from next season...

 

[Turkey]

Then you will have people saying "well it's not free as I'm paying £60 a season for it" - look at how many are kicking up a stink on here about it already !!

The subsidy covers 1/3 of the cost of the travel scheme yeah? So the other 2/3 have to be paid for. It's paid for by money the club make. Should we start saying there is a transport subsidy on every Pie, Pint and Shirt sold?

(Not directed at you, I know you're talking about other people )

 

[Mellotron]

Sponsorships? New kits? A few million here and there.

Premier League TV money? Millions every match. More than gate receipts.

It's ALL about the TV cashola.

Another reason that being a side with a strong identity of playing attractive football in a ruddy lovely stadium could actually be lucrative. Who shall we show? Reading vs Stoke, or Brighton vs Swansea?

 

[JCL666]

Specifically JCL666 , but it can apply to anyone who fulfills the criteria

What are you on about? I don't live in Shoreham....

 

[Gazwag]

I would not mind paying more for the travel but its only valid a few hours before and after the game where I think it should cover all day!

Why should the club pay for your travel outside of the Amex consourse opening times

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Sounds like £60/70+ increase next season on a £430 ST, they will have to be careful and expect to lose 2-3k season ticket holders if the increase is too high. A lot of those non ST holders won't buy tickets for the less attractive fixtures either, so I expect to see 20k gates for some games, leaving 10k empty seats
The running costs are clearly too high, with 66% of turnover going on wages, honestly the number of 'players' we have is crazy, how many of the development squad ever make it to the first team or get sold for a decent sum (i.e. more than they have cost the club in wages, while playing in front of 200 at Lancing, we are just paying them to live a nice lifestyle). Gus will always buy in proven players, given the choice, I'm sure lots will disagree but football is all about finance as Barber is so often telling us and having dozens of players who earn nothing for the club is madness, squad of 22/25 max.

One of the things that came out of the court case in the last fortnight was the wages of the players in the development squad, which was £250 per week. That's hardly breaking the bank, is it?