Arsenal defend ticket costs

[redblood]

Arsenal have defended the cost of their match tickets after the BBC's Price of Football survey showed they had the most expensive in the Premier League.
At Thursday's AGM, chief executive Ivan Gazidis said ticket prices had gone up below the rate of inflation and wages.
"The board has never approached ticket prices glibly or lightly," he added.
But Arsenal Supporters Trust member Tim Payton said pricing promises had been broken and warned the club were "breaking the loyalty bond" with fans.
Arsenal's most expensive match-day and season tickets are £97 and £2,013, with the cheapest coming in at £27 and £1,014.
The Price of Football study reveals that Arsenal's £97 ticket is more than double the most expensive match-day ticket at seven other top-flight clubs, despite being reduced by £29 on last season.
The side's £2,013 season ticket is double the price of Manchester United's most expensive ticket and more than four times the cost of West Brom's.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/29634838

 

[silkyman]

I think it's quite ironic that the club that moaned the most about financial fairness are also the happiest to gouge as much as possible out of their fans, completely pricing a large proportion of their own, and visiting fans out of attending the games. How about some fairness to the fans?

 

[thespus]

Erm, how is that ironic? Arsenal advocated financial fair play where clubs exist within their means rather than through outside investment and buying feeder clubs in America and Australia. Arsenal, as a business, can fill a massive stadium at high prices thus internally increasing their means. It's shit for the fans, but in no way is it ironic.

 

[smat]

Yeah I started typing something along those lines. But then I stopped. Because it's Silkyman.

 

[Humongous Fungus]

£80 a game?! Come on.

 

[mnb089mnb]

£80 a game?! Come on.

It obviously depends where you live as to how much it'll cost you to attend games.

When I had a ST I couldn't get to every single game so you have to calculate it accordingly.

 

[Humongous Fungus]

Ok fair enough but still.

 

[Mustard]

I think it's quite ironic that the club that moaned the most about financial fairness are also the happiest to gouge as much as possible out of their fans, completely pricing a large proportion of their own, and visiting fans out of attending the games. How about some fairness to the fans?

I think it's ironic that a Man City fan can say that when it's the activities of his club (and others) that have driven up the cost of competing in football. Maybe the club should charge less, be shit at the football and go back to having to sell our best players to City?

If Man City weren't financed by dodgy sponsorship deals you can bet they'd be charging ridiculous prices too. For Arsenal, until recently match day revenue has outstripped corporate sponsorship as a necessity to compete at the top. It's a catch 22 for the club. To put out a good product they need to charge the fans more. If they charge the fans less, the product gets worse and nobody turns up.

 

[thespus]

I think it's ironic that a Man City fan can say that when it's the activities of his club (and others) that have driven up the cost of competing in football. Maybe the club should charge less, be shit at the football and go back to having to sell our best players to City?

If Man City weren't financed by dodgy sponsorship deals you can bet they'd be charging ridiculous prices too. For Arsenal, until recently match day revenue has outstripped corporate sponsorship as a necessity to compete at the top. It's a catch 22 for the club. To put out a good product they need to charge the fans more. If they charge the fans less, the product gets worse and nobody turns up.

There is no beating Silky in a match of logic. His ethos as a lower league supporter is too strong.

 

[Smudge]

At the end of the day, its unacceptable what all Prem clubs charge near enough considering their incomings. With the current TV deal, Cardiff earned over £60 million in prize money for finishing bottom and being on TV the least. Throw in sponsorship, corporate hospitality, merchandise, ordinary ticket sales actually make up for a very small amount of incomings for a Premier League club. But they still have to charge well over the odds and bleed every fan dry. Ive been to every one of our League matches this season, and been charged under £30 only twice, at Newcastle and Sunderland.

The Football Supporters Federation started a campaign last season asking clubs to not charge away fans more than £20. A few clubs agreed to reciprocal deals (Newcastle did for us this season). Among the info they put out for the campaign, they pointed out that with the extra money clubs received from the new TV deal last season, they could knock £35 off the price of every ticket in the ground and make the same money they did the previous year. Apart from Newcastle making that deal with us, Sunderland are the only side Ive been to this season where I paid less than the year before.

 

[FrazerLloyd]

The sad truth is that there are only two ways ticket prices will come down.

1. A rule or law comes into action that limits the cost of tickets.
2. Football fans stop going to games and paying for Sky Sports, BT Sports etc.

Sadly, I can't see either happening.

I don't know the legality of enforcing ticket prices and I imagine that the top clubs would argue that it hurt their chances of success in Europe.

The only real hope then is action on the terraces. The problem being, we're all too bloody loyal! Football fans all moan about ticket prices. Heck, I had to pay more than £20 to watch Plymouth in League Two at the weekend! Yet when push comes to shove, we do jack shit about it.

If we as fans decided to boycott season tickets, match day tickets and TV subscriptions - basically football in it's entierity - then the prices would come down.

 

[thespus]

At the end of the day, its unacceptable what all Prem clubs charge near enough considering their incomings. With the current TV deal, Cardiff earned over £60 million in prize money for finishing bottom and being on TV the least. Throw in sponsorship, corporate hospitality, merchandise, ordinary ticket sales actually make up for a very small amount of incomings for a Premier League club. But they still have to charge well over the odds and bleed every fan dry. Ive been to every one of our League matches this season, and been charged under £30 only twice, at Newcastle and Sunderland.

The Football Supporters Federation started a campaign last season asking clubs to not charge away fans more than £20. A few clubs agreed to reciprocal deals (Newcastle did for us this season). Among the info they put out for the campaign, they pointed out that with the extra money clubs received from the new TV deal last season, they could knock £35 off the price of every ticket in the ground and make the same money they did the previous year. Apart from Newcastle making that deal with us, Sunderland are the only side Ive been to this season where I paid less than the year before.

To play devil's advocate—I certainly understand the concern of supporter re: the ticket prices, but these clubs must generate as much revenue as possible to compete with the influx of foreign owner investment. This then has a trickle down effect from clubs on the cusp such as Arsenal and Tottenham. Each position in the premier league become more expensive (wages and transfer fees) to strive for, not only the top four places.

For example—would Arsenal supporters be happier if ticket prices were slashed in half, but this meant there was no Alexis or Özil signings? There are loads clamouring for Wenger's head because we haven't won a title in a decade, but how much further from the title would we be if ticket prices were slashed in half? All of our best players (well, more than already do) would be leaving for double the wages at City and Chelsea since they can subsidize their "lost" ticket revenue via back roads of increasing "sustainability" by redistributing their owners money via different assets and effectively sponsoring their own stadium deal. It's a shit situation, but I reckon Arsenal would be in worse standing with supporters were they finishing 7th and 8th each season and Ramsey, Walcott, Alexis, etc. were playing for Man City or Chelsea. Not that it's ideal, but clubs are forced to make these difficult decisions—it's impossible to please everyone.

 

[Alf Stewart]

The sad truth is that there are only two ways ticket prices will come down.

1. A rule or law comes into action that limits the cost of tickets.
2. Football fans stop going to games and paying for Sky Sports, BT Sports etc.

Sadly, I can't see either happening.

I don't know the legality of enforcing ticket prices and I imagine that the top clubs would argue that it hurt their chances of success in Europe.

The only real hope then is action on the terraces. The problem being, we're all too bloody loyal! Football fans all moan about ticket prices. Heck, I had to pay more than £20 to watch Plymouth in League Two at the weekend! Yet when push comes to shove, we do jack shit about it.

If we as fans decided to boycott season tickets, match day tickets and TV subscriptions - basically football in it's entierity - then the prices would come down.

I used to go to every game home and away, but last season I decided I won't pay above £40 for a ticket as a point of principal. Pretty fruitless boycott if truth be told but had to draw the line somewhere so that was that, my mini protest. Villa in a couple of weeks £41, I won't be there. Not paying £41 for substandard facilities to be treated like crap by the WM police, I like Villa as a club but the away end is terrible so I'll do something else instead.....

 

[silkyman]

Oh, it's city's fault that Arsenal gouge their fans.

Now that is a new one.

 

[smat]

Nonsense!

It's City *and* Chelsea's fault.

 

[thespus]

Oh, it's city's fault that Arsenal gouge their fans.

Now that is a new one.

Silky dodges the actual reasoning used—without any sort of counterpoint—to gripe about someone else's griping.

Now that is a frequent one.

 

[Smudge]

To play devil's advocate—I certainly understand the concern of supporter re: the ticket prices, but these clubs must generate as much revenue as possible to compete with the influx of foreign owner investment. This then has a trickle down effect from clubs on the cusp such as Arsenal and Tottenham. Each position in the premier league become more expensive (wages and transfer fees) to strive for, not only the top four places.

For example—would Arsenal supporters be happier if ticket prices were slashed in half, but this meant there was no Alexis or Özil signings? There are loads clamouring for Wenger's head because we haven't won a title in a decade, but how much further from the title would we be if ticket prices were slashed in half? All of our best players (well, more than already do) would be leaving for double the wages at City and Chelsea since they can subsidize their "lost" ticket revenue via back roads of increasing "sustainability" by redistributing their owners money via different assets and effectively sponsoring their own stadium deal. It's a shit situation, but I reckon Arsenal would be in worse standing with supporters were they finishing 7th and 8th each season and Ramsey, Walcott, Alexis, etc. were playing for Man City or Chelsea. Not that it's ideal, but clubs are forced to make these difficult decisions—it's impossible to please everyone.

I take your point, and its one Ive heard a few people make. The thing is, it only highlights how out of control wages are, ad that clubs can use what is basically emotional blackmail to convince supporters they HAVE to pay this big money. 'If we dont charge you £60+ for tickets, we'll never ever play in the Champions League or win anything ever again and we will be relegated to the Conference within 5 years because we cant possibly compete with Cheltenham Town, never mind Chelsea, if we're not ripping you off!' Dont get me wrong and think Im just picking on Arsenal, all clubs are guilty of it. And then cite supply and demand, or ambition as justifying factors. Clubs in other countries do well enough with nothing like our TV money and without charging the stupid prices we do. I went to two European aways earlier this season watching Everton, I paid £16 at one, and £15 at the other. I visited another who charge only 15 Euros in the whole lower end behind one goal because they want to encourage a group of their fans to congregate together and create an atmosphere. We pay well over the odds and arent even allowed to stand up!

Its a bit like how they tell you you're helping your club by buying merchandise from the club direct, when they charge £10-£15 more for kits in some cases for example. Everton now have an exclusivity deal with Kitbag than you can only buy Everton merchandise through the club or Kitbag. Bear in mind our kits now cost £50, and a further £15 for shirt printing, and yet before said exclusivity deal, you could buy a shirt and get it printed for £45 all in at JJB or Sports Direct, you can see why a lot of fans were going elsewhere. Now we dont have a choice.

 

[Avatar]

If the choice is between high ticket prices and the likes of the sheikhs or even worse, Putin's dirty lieutenants, i'll take the ticket prices. The atmosphere does suffer a bit, but our traveling support is fantastic for that. If I still lived in London I would still be a S/T holder, despite the prices. It's worth the money, fantastic football to watch. Would I rather have cheaper tickets? Yes. Do I and my friends/family complain that the are high? Yes. But do I understand why they are high? Yes.

 

[CFC91]

Surely the latest revenue figures yet again prove that ticket prices do not need to be that high. Would love a price cap or atleast an attempt to replicate the German model.

 

[thespus]

I am a huge admirer of the German model. It is the best run sport league in the world, in my opinion. But to further my earlier points about the reasons for clubs needing to increase internal revenues to compete—how many Bundesliga teams are owned by foreign billionaires who find creative ways to pump hundreds of millions of their own money into their club's revenue streams?

If there were not inflated transfer fees and wages which *coincidentally* coincided with the arrival of billionaires who view their football club as you or I view our FIFA ultimate team, would ticket prices be lower? It is romanticist, but not pragamatic, to point to the German ticket prices and say "I'll have those, please!" That is, unless there is a way to lower the price to be competitive in the Premier League. That's the core problem from which the supporters see the trickle down effects.

 

[Smudge]

I am a huge admirer of the German model. It is the best run sport league in the world, in my opinion. But to further my earlier points about the reasons for clubs needing to increase internal revenues to compete—how many Bundesliga teams are owned by foreign billionaires who find creative ways to pump hundreds of millions of their own money into their club's revenue streams?

If there were not inflated transfer fees and wages which *coincidentally* coincided with the arrival of billionaires who view their football club as you or I view our FIFA ultimate team, would ticket prices be lower? It is romanticist, but not pragamatic, to point to the German ticket prices and say "I'll have those, please!" That is, unless there is a way to lower the price to be competitive in the Premier League. That's the core problem from which the supporters see the trickle down effects.

Thats the point though, we dont seem to have many owners in this country, who despite raking it in from more sources than most other European clubs, are still so uncreative that raising prices is the only way they can think of to raise more money. And as pointed out, even at the lower Premier League clubs, ticket revenue is actually a very small percentage of their overall income. Take the figures that came out yesterday for example. We apparently made £121 million last season. Take away the £85 million TV and prize money, and the roughly £32 million we took in from player sales, and you are left with about £14 million, about 16% of our income last season we basically made ourselves off the pitch.

We like copying off each other too. One big side raises prices or does a bit of redevelopment, and then every other club can use them as proof of why they have to do the same thing. Ironically when I started going away games, United and Liverpool were two of the cheaper away days in the Prem, like most of the north west and north east clubs, because we are from poorer areas and so it reflected the fanbase. Both have increased their prices by more than any other regular Prem club in that time, which maybe reflects where their priorities lie now. Who gives a toss if we price out the locals? Plenty of foreigners and day trippers waiting to take their place.

 

[Destruction]

If people are stupid enough to pay it, clubs will charge it.

And as a group (football fans) we are too thick to do anything en masse. So they will continue to rise.

Carry on.

 

[thespus]

Thats the point though, we dont seem to have many owners in this country, who despite raking it in from more sources than most other European clubs, are still so uncreative that raising prices is the only way they can think of to raise more money. And as pointed out, even at the lower Premier League clubs, ticket revenue is actually a very small percentage of their overall income. Take the figures that came out yesterday for example. We apparently made £121 million last season. Take away the £85 million TV and prize money, and the roughly £32 million we took in from player sales, and you are left with about £14 million, about 16% of our income last season we basically made ourselves off the pitch.

We like copying off each other too. One big side raises prices or does a bit of redevelopment, and then every other club can use them as proof of why they have to do the same thing. Ironically when I started going away games, United and Liverpool were two of the cheaper away days in the Prem, like most of the north west and north east clubs, because we are from poorer areas and so it reflected the fanbase. Both have increased their prices by more than any other regular Prem club in that time, which maybe reflects where their priorities lie now. Who gives a toss if we price out the locals? Plenty of foreigners and day trippers waiting to take their place.

£14 million is massive for Everton. I don't have the figures, but I'd be surprised if many teams had profits which exceeded £5 million. We may not care about profits, but we do care about the quality of the football team on display and we would hate to see a Portsmouth situation. Clubs like Arsenal and Liverpool are being goaded by supporters to have high net spends in order to compete with Manchester City and Chelsea, and it trickles down (see your copying/"monkey see, monkey do" point). The rapid, inorganic inflation of transfer fees and wages is 100% a catalyst to the rise in ticket prices. If Everton lowered ticket costs 25%, and they only took in £10.5 million, where does the other £3.5 million come from? What creative solutions are there apart from selling your assets and cutting the wage bill which will make the club a less attractive option for quality players? It's a lose-lose situation for the club. If you can keep your best players, and still fill your stadium, basic economics dictates that's what you do. I see so many people say, "look at the German ticket prices! Why the fuck can't we have those?" and it is not comparable until there is a massive structural change in English football.

I am not saying it's isn't shit for supporters—everyone can see that. I am saying as long as we allow this model of sugar-daddy ownership, ticket prices will continue to inflate at a higher rate than they were previous to the turn of the century. Raise the costs of competing, and everything else will increase with it. Blue-collar types being priced out of football is a tragic consequence, a branch stemming from the tree rooted in deeper issues.

 

[Smudge]

Interesting thing Ive just seen online, especially interesting in what I said earlier about us having an exclusivity deal with Kitbag...According to Everton themselves, we made £8.4 million from sponsorship, advertising and merchandise in 2014. Were we not bound by this stupid exclusivity deal on our merchandising, as well as the one we have for all the catering at Goodison, we would have made an extra £7 million. So basically nearly doubled what we made.

Thats what I kind of meant earlier. Clubs are so utterly shortsighted when it comes to money. No originality or thinking, just quick fixes.

 

[BlueBee]

Arsenal are charging £90 for Monaco at home in the Champions league.....Liverpool fans paid £40 less to stand in the Kop vs Real Madrid.

You'd have to be off your bloody rocker to pay £90 for that game.

 

[Whitechapel]

Funny, I just bought one for £42.42.

Block 42.

 

[BlueBee]

I'm going by what a match going Gooner said on twitter....my bad.

 

[Whitechapel]

The cost for me will go up, travel is £24. Hot dog £2.40.

 

[Smudge]

Wont the £90 be top price? I know that compared to the prices at a lot of clubs, Arsenal do have some fairly reasonably priced ones. Its usually around £35 in the away end for us for example.

 

[AFCB_Mark]

£35 for an away ticket reasonably priced? Jesus. Hope it comes with a free pie and a pint, or a pinot grigio and caviar for Arsenal?