Would you pay more?

The Royal Forester
Member
Posts: 863
Joined: 25 Dec 2015 13:53

Would you pay more?

by The Royal Forester » 23 Sep 2021 14:32

The club is in money trouble but entrance fees are among the cheapest in the Championship, Would you pay more for:-
Season Ticket?
On the day entrance fee?
Make the away fans pay more?
Pay more for items from the shop?
Increase Roylas TV fee for audio and/or video?
If you would be willing to pay extra, how much, 10% 20% 50%?
anything else you would be prepared to pay extra for?

Perhaps this should have been a poll, but as I do not know how to do one, a discussion will have to do.

User avatar
Hendo
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13887
Joined: 25 Mar 2012 20:53
Location: Lambs to the cosmic slaughter

Re: Would you pay more?

by Hendo » 23 Sep 2021 15:17

I don't think any of that would make a dent with regards to FFP, unless people are suddenly willing to pay £1,000 for a ST, which I'm not FTR.

User avatar
Dirk Gently
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7290
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 13:54

Re: Would you pay more?

by Dirk Gently » 23 Sep 2021 16:23

Nope - it's just giving money to teh club to slightly reduce what they pay the players.

Any extra money from supporters should be put away into a fund to start the ball rolling when the supporters need to rescue the club (although the sums involved would be massive) or to start a phoenix club after the bankrupt entity has been wound up, Gretna-style.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16020
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: Would you pay more?

by Zip » 23 Sep 2021 17:29

Nope. Not when players are earning money I could only dream about.

User avatar
Lower West
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 4269
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 11:35
Location: Admiring Clem Morfuni at Work

Re: Would you pay more?

by Lower West » 23 Sep 2021 18:25

Given the money has gone on players wages. No. Level of remuneration is obscene for what average professional footballers do.


User avatar
Sebastian the Red
Member
Posts: 601
Joined: 20 Mar 2007 12:08

Re: Would you pay more?

by Sebastian the Red » 23 Sep 2021 20:39

I'd literally rather set fire to my wallet. There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big, there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24. Happy days.

Of course, that's a fairly slash and burn sort of approach, so in order to be internally, intellectually consistent I of course have to be willing to let Reading die first, despite my happy childhood and adolescent memories, back when I thought things like "atmosphere" and "terrace banter" were important. Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun, and the stadium land could be used for a lot of affordable housing once we knock the monstrosity down.

User avatar
Green
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 17545
Joined: 29 Jun 2012 13:28

Re: Would you pay more?

by Green » 23 Sep 2021 20:52

Sebastian the Red I'd literally rather set fire to my wallet. There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big, there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24. Happy days.

Of course, that's a fairly slash and burn sort of approach, so in order to be internally, intellectually consistent I of course have to be willing to let Reading die first, despite my happy childhood and adolescent memories, back when I thought things like "atmosphere" and "terrace banter" were important. Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun, and the stadium land could be used for a lot of affordable housing once we knock the monstrosity down.

Good post, yeh +1.

I think most people would get over the club folding pretty quickly in all honesty.

SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5647
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Would you pay more?

by SCIAG » 24 Sep 2021 11:56

Sebastian the Red I'd literally rather set fire to my wallet. There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big, there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24. Happy days.

Of course, that's a fairly slash and burn sort of approach, so in order to be internally, intellectually consistent I of course have to be willing to let Reading die first, despite my happy childhood and adolescent memories, back when I thought things like "atmosphere" and "terrace banter" were important. Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun, and the stadium land could be used for a lot of affordable housing once we knock the monstrosity down.

:roll:

Leaving aside that this would never fly with any other hobby (“there are too many overpaid actors, let’s shut down half the TV channels”), the idea of building affordable housing at the stadium is pretty worrying. Anyone who lived there would need to own a car to do anything, with all the negative environmental impacts that would go along with it. Presumably, unless your primary goal is genuinely to stop people from enjoying football, the “amateur phoenix club” would need a ground capable of holding at least 10,000 people, and it makes more sense to use the existing one rather than building a new one, with all that would entail. We need to be focusing on walkable communities. Affordable housing should be flats near the town centre or at least near major bus routes, not out-of-town projects. (That said, I’m on board with doing literally *anything* with most of the car park, which is a waste of land and only encourages driving)

I dunno, just seems pretty small minded and snobbish to deliberately want lots of people to lose one of their hobbies for no reason other than you don’t want footballers to be rich?

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18985
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Would you pay more?

by Hound » 24 Sep 2021 12:36

Yep and it’s insanely hard to become a pro footballer

What do you reckon - 50% of boys growing up play football? And of those how many get to do it for a living?

And it’s incredible pressure for a young man to take on.

Obvs the top level wages of 300k a week and all that are just stupid but 5k week or so for a career that lasts 10 years and Is subject to short term contracts/injury/whims of their manager isn’t all that incredible. See chaps in my industry get 100k a year for being a slightly above average software developer that pretty much anyone could do if they put their mind to it


User avatar
Green
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 17545
Joined: 29 Jun 2012 13:28

Re: Would you pay more?

by Green » 24 Sep 2021 13:33

Hound Yep and it’s insanely hard to become a pro footballer

What do you reckon - 50% of boys growing up play football? And of those how many get to do it for a living?

And it’s incredible pressure for a young man to take on.

Obvs the top level wages of 300k a week and all that are just stupid but 5k week or so for a career that lasts 10 years and Is subject to short term contracts/injury/whims of their manager isn’t all that incredible. See chaps in my industry get 100k a year for being a slightly above average software developer that pretty much anyone could do if they put their mind to it

Slightly above average software developers aren't the benchmark. They themselves will be in the top 1% of earners nationally.

As to whether almost anyone could do it - if that were true why don't they?

User avatar
Sebastian the Red
Member
Posts: 601
Joined: 20 Mar 2007 12:08

Re: Would you pay more?

by Sebastian the Red » 24 Sep 2021 17:53

SCIAG
Sebastian the Red I'd literally rather set fire to my wallet. There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big, there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24. Happy days.

Of course, that's a fairly slash and burn sort of approach, so in order to be internally, intellectually consistent I of course have to be willing to let Reading die first, despite my happy childhood and adolescent memories, back when I thought things like "atmosphere" and "terrace banter" were important. Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun, and the stadium land could be used for a lot of affordable housing once we knock the monstrosity down.

:roll:

Leaving aside that this would never fly with any other hobby (“there are too many overpaid actors, let’s shut down half the TV channels”), the idea of building affordable housing at the stadium is pretty worrying. Anyone who lived there would need to own a car to do anything, with all the negative environmental impacts that would go along with it. Presumably, unless your primary goal is genuinely to stop people from enjoying football, the “amateur phoenix club” would need a ground capable of holding at least 10,000 people, and it makes more sense to use the existing one rather than building a new one, with all that would entail. We need to be focusing on walkable communities. Affordable housing should be flats near the town centre or at least near major bus routes, not out-of-town projects. (That said, I’m on board with doing literally *anything* with most of the car park, which is a waste of land and only encourages driving)

I dunno, just seems pretty small minded and snobbish to deliberately want lots of people to lose one of their hobbies for no reason other than you don’t want footballers to be rich?


My point is nothing to do with moral worth and everything to do with the size of the market. Clubs are losing money hand over fist and it’s not sustainable. The entire market is entirely distorted. The only thing even close to sustaining it is the childish obsession that people are encouraged to have with football clubs.

Look at other decent hobbies like theatre. No one gets tribal and violent about the Royal Court Theatre vs the National Theatre. No one gets pissed and beats up their wife because Dominic Dromgoole’s latest attempt at directing a Shakespearean tragedy was unsuccessful and didn’t win awards.

Let’s just treat football like the vaguely diverting entertainment product that it is and let it live and die in the market, with rational, dispassionate decisions made on the basis of cost vs entertainment value, etc.

Take the forced banter and exaggerated reliance upon loyalty out of the equation and, if we’re lucky, we can all find newer, better hobbies.

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 18985
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Would you pay more?

by Hound » 24 Sep 2021 19:43

Green
Hound Yep and it’s insanely hard to become a pro footballer

What do you reckon - 50% of boys growing up play football? And of those how many get to do it for a living?

And it’s incredible pressure for a young man to take on.

Obvs the top level wages of 300k a week and all that are just stupid but 5k week or so for a career that lasts 10 years and Is subject to short term contracts/injury/whims of their manager isn’t all that incredible. See chaps in my industry get 100k a year for being a slightly above average software developer that pretty much anyone could do if they put their mind to it

Slightly above average software developers aren't the benchmark. They themselves will be in the top 1% of earners nationally.

As to whether almost anyone could do it - if that were true why don't they?


Because until recently it was pretty niche, male dominated and seen as something for nerds only to do. And we don't expect top pro footballers to be anywhere benchmark do we? Considering thats pretty much the job half the population would dream of doing

Elm Park Kid
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1150
Joined: 05 Feb 2013 10:45

Re: Would you pay more?

by Elm Park Kid » 24 Sep 2021 20:24

No.

Clearly the clubs pricing over the last decade has been excellent and we couldn't grumble if they did increase things a bit. But we shouldn't do anything to encourage higher ticket prices overall. If we put up prices that puts pressure on everyone else to do the same.

Instead, we should be encourage limitations of the prices that other clubs charge. The club doesn't fundamentally need more money. It needs to exist in a league where other clubs are spending less.


SCIAG
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5647
Joined: 17 Jun 2008 17:43
Location: Liburd for England

Re: Would you pay more?

by SCIAG » 24 Sep 2021 21:18

Sebastian the Red
SCIAG
Sebastian the Red I'd literally rather set fire to my wallet. There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big, there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24. Happy days.

Of course, that's a fairly slash and burn sort of approach, so in order to be internally, intellectually consistent I of course have to be willing to let Reading die first, despite my happy childhood and adolescent memories, back when I thought things like "atmosphere" and "terrace banter" were important. Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun, and the stadium land could be used for a lot of affordable housing once we knock the monstrosity down.

:roll:

Leaving aside that this would never fly with any other hobby (“there are too many overpaid actors, let’s shut down half the TV channels”), the idea of building affordable housing at the stadium is pretty worrying. Anyone who lived there would need to own a car to do anything, with all the negative environmental impacts that would go along with it. Presumably, unless your primary goal is genuinely to stop people from enjoying football, the “amateur phoenix club” would need a ground capable of holding at least 10,000 people, and it makes more sense to use the existing one rather than building a new one, with all that would entail. We need to be focusing on walkable communities. Affordable housing should be flats near the town centre or at least near major bus routes, not out-of-town projects. (That said, I’m on board with doing literally *anything* with most of the car park, which is a waste of land and only encourages driving)

I dunno, just seems pretty small minded and snobbish to deliberately want lots of people to lose one of their hobbies for no reason other than you don’t want footballers to be rich?


My point is nothing to do with moral worth and everything to do with the size of the market. Clubs are losing money hand over fist and it’s not sustainable. The entire market is entirely distorted. The only thing even close to sustaining it is the childish obsession that people are encouraged to have with football clubs.

Look at other decent hobbies like theatre. No one gets tribal and violent about the Royal Court Theatre vs the National Theatre. No one gets pissed and beats up their wife because Dominic Dromgoole’s latest attempt at directing a Shakespearean tragedy was unsuccessful and didn’t win awards.

Let’s just treat football like the vaguely diverting entertainment product that it is and let it live and die in the market, with rational, dispassionate decisions made on the basis of cost vs entertainment value, etc.

Take the forced banter and exaggerated reliance upon loyalty out of the equation and, if we’re lucky, we can all find newer, better hobbies.

Not sure if I’m being trolled - you say it’s not a moral question then proceed to make several moral arguments?

League One and Two clubs are pretty sustainable, losses in the low millions (with some breaking even) that can easily be underwritten by wealthy patrons. Covid apart, of course.

Championship clubs require patrons with deep pockets indeed, particularly if that club is us. There’s a lot of incentive to live outside your means to try and secure promotion, where most clubs make a profit. There is a risk that the owner gets bored. That’s what FFP is supposed to mitigate against - it encourages clubs to live within their current means.

Nameless
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7508
Joined: 23 Aug 2013 12:25

Re: Would you pay more?

by Nameless » 25 Sep 2021 08:40

Current FFP allows clubs to overspend every year by in excess of £13 million. Anyone know how that figure was arrived at and why clubs are not required to break even if the intention is they should live within their means ?
I believe German clubs are not allowed to run a deficit ?

User avatar
tmesis
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1761
Joined: 16 Aug 2013 20:26

Re: Would you pay more?

by tmesis » 26 Sep 2021 00:03

Sebastian the Red There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big,

I've always found this idea to be utter nonsense.

If we culled 99% of the pyramid, that remaining 1% would still overspend by the same degree that they do now.

there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24.

And we'd still have exactly the same problems.

Footballers are only overpaid because that's what clubs choose to pay them. If championship clubs paid what they could actually afford, the average salary in the championship would be considerably lower, because those premier league rejects wouldn't be picking between half a dozen clubs offering £20k a week. They'd be choosing between those same clubs offering £10k a week.

Basically, clubs are choosing to spend virtually their entire turnover (and often more) on salaries. You could double the income in the championship, and within a few years the average wage bill would have doubled too.

This mess has nothing to do with the number of clubs, or the salaries players ask for. It has everything to do with owners gambling on success, and overspending to gain a competitive advantage. It been like that since the maximum wage was scrapped. Clubs were always getting in a mess in the 70s and 80s, for example, when salaries were far lower. It's just that the sort of businessmen able to buy clubs and wipe out those debts were far more common then.


Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun

The phoenix clubs that do well usually have a semi-decent ground to move into. We would have Scours Lane, which is dreadful, or we'd have to go somewhere like Thatcham and groundshare. It probably wouldn't be a happy time.

User avatar
Chairman Mao
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4447
Joined: 21 Apr 2021 22:19

Re: Would you pay more?

by Chairman Mao » 07 Oct 2021 14:01

Leaving aside that this would never fly with any other hobby (“there are too many overpaid actors, let’s shut down half the TV channels”)


Nor would - we are doubling the prices at cinemas, because the film studios arent making enough money any more

User avatar
linkenholtroyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1408
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 16:18
Location: anywhere but where you want me

Re: Would you pay more?

by linkenholtroyal » 08 Oct 2021 10:57

tmesis
Sebastian the Red There are too many football clubs, the pyramid is too big,

I've always found this idea to be utter nonsense.

If we culled 99% of the pyramid, that remaining 1% would still overspend by the same degree that they do now.

there are too many professional footballers on insane, undeserved wages. If we even let half of the 92 clubs collapse we'll still have nearly 50 clubs, league of 22, league of 24.

And we'd still have exactly the same problems.

Footballers are only overpaid because that's what clubs choose to pay them. If championship clubs paid what they could actually afford, the average salary in the championship would be considerably lower, because those premier league rejects wouldn't be picking between half a dozen clubs offering £20k a week. They'd be choosing between those same clubs offering £10k a week.

Basically, clubs are choosing to spend virtually their entire turnover (and often more) on salaries. You could double the income in the championship, and within a few years the average wage bill would have doubled too.

This mess has nothing to do with the number of clubs, or the salaries players ask for. It has everything to do with owners gambling on success, and overspending to gain a competitive advantage. It been like that since the maximum wage was scrapped. Clubs were always getting in a mess in the 70s and 80s, for example, when salaries were far lower. It's just that the sort of businessmen able to buy clubs and wipe out those debts were far more common then.


Shame to see the club fold, but I'm sure the amateur phoenix club will be a lot of fun

The phoenix clubs that do well usually have a semi-decent ground to move into. We would have Scours Lane, which is dreadful, or we'd have to go somewhere like Thatcham and groundshare. It probably wouldn't be a happy time.

If this was the case I would probably switch elegancies fully to Hungerford Town I have already been to a few games and they seem to be running the club well. (If Reading did not exist)

muirinho
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1915
Joined: 20 Jan 2016 12:10

Re: Would you pay more?

by muirinho » 08 Oct 2021 19:40

linkenholtroyal If this was the case I would probably switch elegancies fully to Hungerford Town I have already been to a few games and they seem to be running the club well. (If Reading did not exist)


Presume this is an auto-correct error, but quite taken by the idea that we are all elegancies

User avatar
Jagermesiter1871
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3297
Joined: 25 Jul 2010 01:59

Re: Would you pay more?

by Jagermesiter1871 » 08 Oct 2021 22:22

How many affordable homes do you think we could fit on the Dome site? Maybe trial that and if it goes well we sell off the West Stand for homes and go from there. Obviously fold the club first though.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

It is currently 20 Oct 2021 18:47