[Football] Matchday travel subsidy?

[Goldstone1976]

It would be difficult to segment ticket holders in the way you propose. For travel companies to get their revenue from away fans rather than the club they would need to check all ticket holders. That would drive significant costs to them. They would challenge the club I suspect if we took that turn.

Yes; a cost to the travel companies, not the club. Are you really suggesting that the club are deliberately reducing their own revenue to make things easier for the travel companies?

 

[Wardy's twin]

I live in the immediate catchment area and like many others pay a private firm £5 to take me to and from the ground, why? because the P&R bus does not have the flexibility it could have i.e. a simple stop in Woodingdean. I am sure same occurs for other locations.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I wasn't at, and haven't heard, the Fans' Forum but I'm struggling to understand the "double subsidy" thing, even with your explanation.

If someone is travelling with Seagull Travel then they are not "using" the subsidy on train travel, public bus nor park 'n' ride. If, say, 2,000 people travel by private-operated bus to games (and the number must be pretty steady game-by-game), then the subsidy for 2,000 fans should NOT be provided to Southern Rail, Brighton Buses et al.

From my experience of the various transport methods to get to the Amex, Seagull Travel are probably the only one who could provide accurate data as to the number of fans that have used their services for any given game.

Seagull Travel may be privately-owned and, as such, looking to turn a profit, but they seem to made a significant effort to provide a comprehensive network of routes serving much of Sussex and a little bit beyond. In the early Amex seasons, when I lived in Somerset, I would marvel at the small groups of fans standing in far-flung parts of West Sussex and Hampshire waiting for their Seagull Travel bus as I drove back for an evening fixture.

It seems that the increase in their price necessitated by the removal of the subsidy has reduced demand - something any GCSE economics student could tell you would happen. I just hope that if Seagull Travel have to restructure routes etc to work around this shift, it doesn't leave some fans stranded and unable to get to games any longer.

I would sometimes used Seagull Travel for the games I'd take my 9-y-o to as it made getting home significantly more painless, particularly in cold/wet weather when the queues for the train would be a massive pain in the arse. Having just checked ST, this will now cost me over £30 for one-off games. I simply can't see me paying this, which may well mean he comes to fewer games from now on.

You've hit the nail on the head. I come with North West Seagulls who, I believe, aren't profit making and the increase has been minimal this year (although it's likely to be larger next year). This still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth because it shows a certain contempt for fans who live outside of a certain area but who love and support the club and regularly make long journeys to get to games. What's most frustrating is that the club could easily offer supporters who don't use the subsidy a lower ST price to counteract this, but they obviously can't be bothered, or don't want, to sort this out.

 

[Acker79]

The more I think about it, the more conflating of travel zone and infrastructure seems a little disingenuous. We need some infrastructure, like the footpaths he mentions. How else can we get to the ground? I’m not aware of any other business making a point of subsidising basic access.

I remember thinking that the first time I read those comments, especially as someone who has noted in the past that I usually walk and am still charged the subsidy (and I don't say that to complain, I accept that's part of the agreement of having the stadium there). The universities have both been there long before the stadium, there was always infrastructure to get there. Trying to claiming walking routes fall under the subsidy is quite a stretch.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

You've hit the nail on the head. I come with North West Seagulls who, I believe, aren't profit making and the increase has been minimal this year (although it's likely to be larger next year). This still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth because it shows a certain contempt for fans who live outside of a certain area but who love and support the club and regularly make long journeys to get to games. What's most frustrating is that the club could easily offer supporters who don't use the subsidy a lower ST price to counteract this, but they obviously can't be bothered, or don't want, to sort this out.

But that is the problem. They cant determine who uses the travel subsidy or not, the users of the trains and buses are not counted or listed.
Its all or nothing.
I would imagine the club have agreed a set figure to pay to the train and bus operators, regardless of the numbers.

 

[AlastairWatts]

You've hit the nail on the head. I come with North West Seagulls who, I believe, aren't profit making and the increase has been minimal this year (although it's likely to be larger next year). This still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth because it shows a certain contempt for fans who live outside of a certain area but who love and support the club and regularly make long journeys to get to games. What's most frustrating is that the club could easily offer supporters who don't use the subsidy a lower ST price to counteract this, but they obviously can't be bothered, or don't want, to sort this out.

I too am an exile, living in Buckinghamshire, but I can't follow your argument. I get the train, tube and train to or via Hayards Heath, where the travel concession area starts. So I get a discount on the travel although I don't live in the concession area but do have an East stand season ticket. It's a nice perk, and makes a small difference to the cost. The point surely is that if people who live in the concession area don't take advantage of the concession then that's their choice - if they choose some other means of travel then they have to pay for it themselves. A little like buying a first clas or standard ticket on the railway - it's one or the other....

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

But that is the problem. They cant determine who uses the travel subsidy or not, the users of the trains and buses are not counted or listed.
Its all or nothing.
I would imagine the club have agreed a set figure to pay to the train and bus operators, regardless of the numbers.

To determine the payment, there will have been an estimate of train/bus numbers, however crude.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I too am an exile, living in Buckinghamshire, but I can't follow your argument. I get the train, tube and train to or via Hayards Heath, where the travel concession area starts. So I get a discount on the travel although I don't live in the concession area but do have an East stand season ticket. It's a nice perk, and makes a small difference to the cost. The point surely is that if people who live in the concession area don't take advantage of the concession then that's their choice - if they choose some other means of travel then they have to pay for it themselves. A little like buying a first clas or standard ticket on the railway - it's one or the other....

Possibly. But the reason for removing the subsidy was because there was a supposed double subsidy. Whilst it is the case Seagulls Travel is a separate company and offering a supposed premium service this was not the reason given for the club withdrawing funding.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Yes; a cost to the travel companies, not the club. Are you really suggesting that the club are deliberately reducing their own revenue to make things easier for the travel companies?

In my experience in business you have to compromise to get deals and certainly if you want long term partnerships, which seems to be the Bloom and Barber way.

For home fans I think some are perhaps being a little naive to think the club isn’t charging market rate for the ticket price regardless of travel subsidy. The away fans, a small percentage of seats, is more complicated due to external regulation and planning requirements so yes, I expect that the club have looked at this in the round. They may lose a bit here but overall they win.

Anyway, will leave you to it, I’m good with my season ticket price, regardless of whether there is a “subsidy” or not, which I don’t use anyway.

 

[e77]

I think getting too and from the stadium in the last few seasons has been as good as you could expect it to be. Moving people off buses to other forms of transport might upset the balance.

 

[Weststander]

With £50 pa added to average gate is £1.5m. pa. Are you saying club pay out £1m on top of this. I think remember first year at Amex when club desperate to get people there, ST was free. When I have used ST many were elderly and wouldnt think capable of using PR or trains etc. It is small minded of club but sums up Premier football where you can do what you like..
Interesting because of little interest Seagull/Travel buses are FREE from Amex to Crawley for womens games.

I’m not saying anything.

The Board said, in effect, that the cost of subsidising Seagulls Travel and supporters clubs coaches was the best part of £1m.

 

[Beach Hut]

I’m not saying anything.

The Board said, in effect, that the cost of subsidising Seagulls Travel and supporters clubs coaches was the best part of £1m.

If they are subsidising these other companies presumably that is tax deductible

 

[Weststander]

Possibly. But the reason for removing the subsidy was because there was a supposed double subsidy. Whilst it is the case Seagulls Travel is a separate company and offering a supposed premium service this was not the reason given for the club withdrawing funding.

.... and at the same time save the club the best part of £1m in costs, they’ve been open about that.

 

[Weststander]

If they are subsidising these other companies presumably that is tax deductible

Due to colossal tax losses brought forward of £124m (from all the years Bloom and others subsidised the club’s trading), the club won’t be paying negligible corporation tax for many years to come.

The club’s annual tax bill wouldn't therefore be affected by higher, lower or nil subsidies to travel providers.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

.... and at the same time save the club the best part of £1m in costs, they’ve been open about that.

All I can think is Seagulls Travel must have been creaming in the profits if they charged £12 from Polegate and still had a share of £1m amounting to £52632 per game!

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

I too am an exile, living in Buckinghamshire, but I can't follow your argument. I get the train, tube and train to or via Hayards Heath, where the travel concession area starts. So I get a discount on the travel although I don't live in the concession area but do have an East stand season ticket. It's a nice perk, and makes a small difference to the cost. The point surely is that if people who live in the concession area don't take advantage of the concession then that's their choice - if they choose some other means of travel then they have to pay for it themselves. A little like buying a first clas or standard ticket on the railway - it's one or the other....

This is it exactly.
I live 3 miles from Polegate, where I could travel to the Amex and back with my season ticket. To get to Polegate would cost me £8 from Hailsham and £10 from Polegate to Hailsham coming home.
I use Seagull Travel, 2 mins walk from my local pub, door to door and it costs me £12-68 per match with my Seagull Travel season ticket.
I dont have the hassle of waiting for Southern Rail to turn up on time, stand on the bridge getting soaked, or get hoe at 11-45 after a evening kick off, in fact I get off the coach in timme to have a late beer in my local.
So I dont utalise my travel subsidy, my choice.

 

[Ernest]

We will only find out next Saturday if the travel is more chaotic thanks to more people requiring the trains and normal buses against using Seagull Travel, hopefully the coach park will now be less crowded

 

[Cheshire]

This is now the third thread either devoted to this subject or as in the Fans Forum thread one of the topics discussed, and seems to be the cause of mainly confusion.

First PB said the saving from taking the travel subsidy off Seagull Travel was a 6 figure sum, so probably some way off the million being quoted.

Secondly, most are baffled by the second subsidy situation, it seems to me that he is referring to the free door to door parking enjoyed by ST travelers. So to add a subsidy for travel and provide free parking, is seen as the double subsidy. Others travelling door to door by car or taxi have to pay for their parking or private hire cost with no subsidy, which maybe their choice but PB says is unfair if ST, another private hire company, receive two subsidies. Therefore ST had their travel subsidy withdrawn for the first time this season, but still receive the privilege of free parking next to the ground.

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

In my humble opinion, The Second Travel Subsidy is the fact that the club subsidise every single fan with a season ticket if they use the train, the bus or park and ride.
They also paid a Second subsidy to Seagull Travel, which has now been removed, so that is a personal choice because the other subsidy is still available to them.

 

[amexer]

I’m not saying anything.

The Board said, in effect, that the cost of subsidising Seagulls Travel and supporters clubs coaches was the best part of £1m.

I am sorry that is not possible and if you can show me proof this statement came from club I will write them. My figures may not be accurate but assume ST take 4000 supporters and supporters club coaches 500. If club is saying this is costing them £1m this is crap. Over £200 per person you are joking.
If the £1m is what they pay out overall including train/buses thats not bad after collecting £1.5m from add ons to tickets. Do think we need some accurate figures from club because until they do I see it as just another income raiser. Sorry but income gone from £25 to £150m in 3 years there can be no justification for any supporter cost increases
The ground is in the sticks and should make it easier not harder for all supporters to get to. I feel strongly about this because heard last week elderly relatives from Hangleton say as they cannot afford the increase they are going to get bus into Hove and then get I think no 26.. Madness and feel I cant see this happen so a few of us will chip in to get there ST tickets.