'Use TV billions to cut ticket prices'

[Gwylan]

... so the fans are now able to watch virtually all of the top 100 footballers in the world, and therefore should pay more for this upgrade in quality.

Don't know why you think that. Of the23 players on the FIFA shortlist for player of the year, just five play in the PL (and none of the top three do). The PL is good at playing lots of money for useful players, not so good at attracting exceptional ones

 

[Pavilionaire]

Today's Daily Mirror:

•Liverpool will have to pay a club record £37m to sign Roma star Miralem Pjanic - the man they want to replace Steven Gerrard. They will also have to offer the Bosnia midfielder more than £160,000 a week in wages.

I can't see ticket prices getting cheaper at Anfield anytime soon.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Most PL clubs have 95% attendances, why would they want to cut ticket prices

http://www.soccerstats.com/attendance.asp?league=england

look at the punters attending, a lot of tourists and prawn sandwich, it's a joke now end of, Arsenal in the cup was the proof in the pudding
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Today's Daily Mirror:

•Liverpool will have to pay a club record £37m to sign Roma star Miralem Pjanic - the man they want to replace Steven Gerrard. They will also have to offer the Bosnia midfielder more than £160,000 a week in wages.

I can't see ticket prices getting cheaper at Anfield anytime soon.

sickening stats that make me want to puke
regards
DR

 

[Spadge]

Why when money comes into the game must the gate prices be reduced?

Its a bit like the housing market, where there is demand there is supply, at the right price!

Instead of reducing gate prices how about every premier league club being forced to supply 1000 tickets to every home game to local schools. Not only does this allow the clubs to grown there own local fan base but it would also encourage kids to play football and be like there hero's. It works, how many kids are seen in the parks nowadays wearing Albion shirts since the move to the Amex.

If 20 of them kids then went and played for youth teams grassroots football has a base to grow.

Just a suggestion, thoughts??

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

look at the punters attending, a lot of tourists and prawn sandwich, it's a joke now end of, Arsenal in the cup was the proof in the pudding
regards
DR

Exactly, the Premier League is sold on its unique atmosphere which is being degraded by the fact only rich old codgers or Asian day trippers can go, it needs to be made cheaper for a broader spectrum of society to attend not just the elite otherwise this 'unique atmosphere' will vanish (if you don't consider it has already).

The easiest way of doing this would be to make a ruling that away tickets can cost a maximum of £20.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Exactly, the Premier League is sold on its unique atmosphere which is being degraded by the fact only rich old codgers or Asian day trippers can go, it needs to be made cheaper for a broader spectrum of society to attend not just the elite otherwise this 'unique atmosphere' will vanish (if you don't consider it has already).

The easiest way of doing this would be to make a ruling that away tickets can cost a maximum of £20.

total'y agree , the game has become Pidgeon holed , don't see how the £20 away ticket price is going to help if they're still going to have high prices for home fans.
regards
DR

 

[Gwylan]

If 20 of them kids then went and played for youth teams grassroots football has a base to grow.

But what if Brighton got into the PL? There aren't enough teams around for the kids who want to play, there's little point in attracting more.

Now, if the PL teams were obliged to contribute to supplying some more pitches then we could be getting somewhere (although, again, I'm not sure where there'd be situated here)

 

[BigGully]

There's no question Liverpool are desperate to keep Sterling, and they would have loved have got him to sign and extended contract before the new Prem deal had been done. Now he has them over a barrel. They have deeper pockets - he knows it and so do they. Therefore, what changes is the deal from Sterling's position.

But Sterling is the first of Liverpool's stars to be dealing 'post-megadeal. The likes of Jordan Henderson will see the Sterling deal, see Gerrard is off the wage bill imminently and will also be looking for a massive deal, then Sturridge and so it will go on. Therefore, all of this talk of "grass roots", "infrastructure" etc is total bollocks.

Aahhhh I see, yep I agree, Sterling rightly wants to demand his market worth, again seems reasonable to me, the other players too will see this, ultimately they can afford it or not.

My point is that I am sure PL clubs support charities and local initiatives and national ones, not sure they then have a obligation to then give away their money to other things.

 

[BigGully]

Today's Daily Mirror:

•Liverpool will have to pay a club record £37m to sign Roma star Miralem Pjanic - the man they want to replace Steven Gerrard. They will also have to offer the Bosnia midfielder more than £160,000 a week in wages.

I can't see ticket prices getting cheaper at Anfield anytime soon.

But Liverpool do not have to do anything, they are not forced to buy anyone or anything, however if they want to buy this player then they will need to compete with other clubs wishing to secure his services at about that rate.

They dont need to reduce ticket prices, they are selling out most weeks at their current rate, I totally agree that the figures are mind boggling but clubs are big boys as are their supporters so either buy your season ticket or dont, either subscribe to Sky or dont, but with the multi billion pound deal the answer seems to be that most are.

 

[Pavilionaire]

You wonder how much big clubs like Man Utd actually spend on community and local initiatives? I expect it will be a drop in the ocean compared with the £750 million spent on paying interest, bank charges and debt repayment since the Glazers took over the club through a leveraged deal almost 10 years ago.

 

[Pavilionaire]

But Liverpool do not have to do anything, they are not forced to buy anyone or anything, however if they want to buy this player then they will need to compete with other clubs wishing to secure his services at about that rate.

They dont need to reduce ticket prices, they are selling out most weeks at their current rate, I totally agree that the figures are mind boggling but clubs are big boys as are their supporters so either buy your season ticket or dont, either subscribe to Sky or dont, but with the multi billion pound deal the answer seems to be that most are.

You talk as though Liverpool have a choice. They've lost Suarez and slipped from 2nd to 7th in the table as a result. Gerrard is retiring. If the lose the services of Sterling they can forget about Champions League for a good while yet. And if they're not in the Champions League then they'll struggle to bring in players who can get them back there because that sort of quality is already in the Champions League.

 

[BigGully]

You talk as though Liverpool have a choice. They've lost Suarez and slipped from 2nd to 7th in the table as a result. Gerrard is retiring. If the lose the services of Sterling they can forget about Champions League for a good while yet. And if they're not in the Champions League then they'll struggle to bring in players who can get them back there because that sort of quality is already in the Champions League.

Ok then you think they dont have a choice, so now we know why they cannot fund grassroots football or reduce ticket prices, the conclusion seems to be that they need this money to compete at the very highest level, its not EXTRA that they should be giving away.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

You seem to be saying just increase taxes for those successful companies a windfall tax perhaps, I am sure that Sky and the PL would perhaps find a different outcome than make a deal that then the government takes a lionshare for keeping the streetlights bright ??

Personally as long as they continue to pay their correct and appropriate tax and employ the many 1000's of people that pay their appropriate tax, with many associated businesses benefiting that then pay their appropriate tax and contribute to local many initiatives then they seem to be doing their fairshare.

Except we all know that it won't be the 1,000's of employees getting the pay rises and paying additional tax, it will be a very select few group of players and agents whose 'social usefulness' (to quote an old term levelled at bankers) is questionable.

How does a club getting more from the PL increase their concession sales - there is a finite number of seats in a ground, a finite number of pies, beer and shirts that can be sold. There is no obvious reason why a PL club should or would want to employ more staff or raise the wages of the ones that are already employed on a matchday basis, and whose wages will almost certainly remain completely unaltered by all of this.

To say otherwise is both naive and delusionary.

Anyway forget streetlights, we were talking about who should help the grass roots of the game. If it needs help then the FA should be taking a levy of this money, it is their responsibility, NOT Central or Local Government.

 

[studio150]

Don't know why you think that. Of the23 players on the FIFA shortlist for player of the year, just five play in the PL (and none of the top three do). The PL is good at playing lots of money for useful players, not so good at attracting exceptional ones

On the basis that PL clubs will be able to upwards of £250k a week, which will attract such players.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

You talk as though Liverpool have a choice. They've lost Suarez and slipped from 2nd to 7th in the table as a result. Gerrard is retiring. If the lose the services of Sterling they can forget about Champions League for a good while yet. And if they're not in the Champions League then they'll struggle to bring in players who can get them back there because that sort of quality is already in the Champions League.

Exactly, the reasons Liverpool need to sign good players are exactly the same as Brighton do, to stave off a slump in form and potential relegation (all things being relative of course). Otherwise they follow Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Portsmouth, et al who all thought they'd be 'too big to go down'. It happened to Man City who went down to League 1, so it can happen to anyone ( I'm going for Villa to be the next 'fall guys' ).

 

[BigGully]

Except we all know that it won't be the 1,000's of employees getting the pay rises and paying additional tax, it will be a very select few group of players and agents whose 'social usefulness' (to quote an old term levelled at bankers) is questionable.

How does a club getting more from the PL increase their concession sales - there is a finite number of seats in a ground, a finite number of pies, beer and shirts that can be sold. There is no obvious reason why a PL club should or would want to employ more staff or raise the wages of the ones that are already employed on a matchday basis, and whose wages will almost certainly remain completely unaltered by all of this.

To say otherwise is both naive and delusionary.

Anyway forget streetlights, we were talking about who should help the grass roots of the game. If it needs help then the FA should be taking a levy of this money, it is their responsibility, NOT Central or Local Government.

I agree that's its a lot of money, but its a deal between two organisation where each feel they have secured a deal in their best interests, I just find it strange that everyone seems to feel obliged to a slice of it, I can kind of see the grassroots football stuff at least there is some link, but most are probably investing in loads of local initiatives anyway grassroots included.

Although it seems a colossal sum, it shouldn't follow that they have some moral obligation to give it away otherwise you wouldn't get investment in the first place, what would be the point.

 

[Gwylan]

On the basis that PL clubs will be able to upwards of £250k a week, which will attract such players.

Maybe. But it's already the richest league in Europe and can't attract the players. When you're talking giddying amounts of money I'm not sure that someone who won't come to England for £200k a week, will come for £250k. These players are already dazzlingly wealthy and may prefer living in Barcelona to Newcastle or Liverpool.

There probably will be more players coming over but I bet there won't be a mass exodus

 

[Pavilionaire]

The Prem deal for 2016-19 is £5.136 billion for 2016-2019 so c. £1.7 billion per season for each of the 3 seasons. The Bundesliga clubs are getting just over a quarter of that now. The Italian deal signed last year is less than half of the new Prem deal.

The top clubs around Europe are sh1tting themselves now because they cannot compete financially. German football fears it will have to pay higher ticket prices and higher TV prices. Bayern Munich fans unveiled a banner "This ain't no Premier League - No to the English model", ironically before their side swept aside Hamburg 8-0.

 

[BadFish]

But your just asking for money from the PL to subsidise central or local government funding for new facilties, where is the win for the PL teams.

I am happy to fleece PL money as much as the next person but unless it represents some goodwill or other then why would they give away their money.

Surely a healthy football pyramid is better for everyone. Sorry I am not thinking like a premier league chairman am i?