skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
You prepare yourself business model based on success. We've seen last season that 20k is barely big enough for CCFC in league one with a hint of success. We've seen the same even in cup games.
You don't prepare a business model just around that though do you.
20,000 would be fine - if games are occasionally sold out even better.
You have to factor in that was our first season at the Ricoh, and a lot of those large crowds were due the curiosity/new stadium factor. I'd hazard a guess that the average away attendances were significantly larger than the subsequent seasons as away fans 'ticked off' a first visit to a new stadium. That season ead anomaly full stop, the previous season our average was around 15k.What you fail to say is how many were just under 25k...
20 August 2005
Queens Park Rangers H 3-0 23,000
29 August 2005
Southampton H 1-1 23,000
10 September 2005
Reading H 1-1 22,074
24 September 2005
Hull City H 0-2 21,161
15 October 2005
Crystal Palace H 1-4 24,438
29 October 2005
Luton Town H 1-0 22,228
26 November 2005
Norwich City H 2-2 20,433
21 January 2006
Derby County H 6-1 20,267
4 February 2006
Brighton & Hove Albion H 2-0 20,541
15 February 2006
Sheffield Wednesday H 2-1 20,021
11 March 2006
Sheffield United H 2-0 23,506
1 April 2006
Preston North End H 0-1 21,023
30 April 2006
Cardiff City H 3-1 22,536
I deliberately haven't placed in here those over 25k... and just to let you know I've also left out 3-4 that were over 19k
This whole discussion is a bit silly really but to say we needed a 25,000 stadium would mean if we were still at that old ground we used to have surrounded by houses and no parking would be a sign of our total lack of ambition.
Ok
You have to factor in that was our first season at the Ricoh, and a lot of those large crowds were due the curiosity/new stadium factor. I'd hazard a guess that the average away attendances were significantly larger than the subsequent seasons as away fans 'ticked off' a first visit to a new stadium. That season ead anomaly full stop, the previous season our average was around 15k.
20k would be aquate for our needs, if we had a decent run it would for encourage people to commit longer term and would make getting and having a ticket special.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
think it's also fair to say, and like much of this thread it's hypothetical, but if new owners prepared to build a stadium came to our rescue they wouldn't be doing it with the intention of bobbing about the lower leagues.You have to factor in that was our first season at the Ricoh, and a lot of those large crowds were due the curiosity/new stadium factor. I'd hazard a guess that the average away attendances were significantly larger than the subsequent seasons as away fans 'ticked off' a first visit to a new stadium. That season ead anomaly full stop, the previous season our average was around 15k.
20k would be aquate for our needs, if we had a decent run it would for encourage people to commit longer term and would make getting and having a ticket special.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
There is one up the road for one off big matches.Which is why I say we need at least 25k Capacity Stadium!
You prepare yourself business model based on success. We've seen last season that 20k is barely big enough for CCFC in league one with a hint of success. We've seen the same even in cup games.
Your argument is based on emotion not economic reality.
The number of times we've needed a ground of that size on the last 40 years shows its not necessary.
Swansea have a business model for success - we in a 32,000 stadium have a model of failure.
Swansea have a business model for success - we in a 32,000 stadium have a model of failure.
I mentioned the very same thing a few weeks back, but no one responded at all. The lot is completely vacant and has to be bigger than the Butts location.There is an alternative site, or could be, the recently vacated car compound that used to be Lex on the corner of Foleshill Road and Old Church Road, plenty big enough for a Highfield Road type cloned stadium. A stones throw from the Ricoh so parking will be little difference to what we have now.
And access would be much better.I mentioned the very same thing a few weeks back, but no one responded at all. The lot is completely vacant and has to be bigger than the Butts location.
So we're talking jumpers for goal posts, a tin shed for a stand and a caravan for the changing rooms/exhibition halls/concert venue.And access would be much better.
But SISU would have to pay for the land as well as build costs. So a non starter if the Butts thing is a bluff. And a non starter if they want a stadium as cheaply as possible.
Do you really believe that it would be as luxurious as you say?So we're talking jumpers for goal posts, a tin shed for a stand and a caravan for the changing rooms/exhibition halls/concert venue.
Refreshments will be sold by a bloke on a tricycle offering cones and wafers.
It doesn't matter what size ground we play in. We would still have a model of failure. We are run by SISU.
And can you remind everyone what gates we were getting when SISU took over?
I don't suppose you will. The truth hurts too much when everyone can see that you are wrong.
OK make excuses for what the gates were when SISU took over
Hardly. It's based on if you have a 20k stadium you'll find a natural place for a 20k stadium. It's wether you determine that natural place a success or not. My guess it's more likely to equal mediocre league one with an odd good cup run. That's going to turn people of not on.
Of course a smaller stadium doesn't mean a bigger income.The stadium impact was a major factor - as was the fact tickets never peaked at more than £12 per person when the break even figure was £23. That's the rub isn't it - a smaller stadium doesn't always mean greater income.
Why would a 20k stadium equal mediocrity Tony?
Of course a smaller stadium doesn't mean a bigger income.
So what was the average gates when SISU took over?
And also....we had such a high break even amount because of the wages that were being paid to the players. We were paying too much for mediocre players. It had nothing to do with the size of the stadium....although it would have had something to do with it if the stadium would have been as small as you would say is big enough.
So you are saying that we should have slashed wages and survived on £12 a head tickets just so we could say we had big crowds - even though in reality we were not selling them at full price?
You say a smaller stadium doesn't mean a bigger income. OK answer this then - in the first season at the Ricoh did we earn more match day revenue than Swansea City with a 20,000 stadium?
Are you trying to change history again?So you are saying that we should have slashed wages and survived on £12 a head tickets just so we could say we had big crowds - even though in reality we were not selling them at full price?
You say a smaller stadium doesn't mean a bigger income. OK answer this then - in the first season at the Ricoh did we earn more match day revenue than Swansea City with a 20,000 stadium?
We're in league one. Ticket revenue is king. Why restrict your biggest revenue earner? Are we going to pay for running costs and service the development debt because we have more of the profit from the pie sales?
Are you trying to change history again?
We got into financial difficulties by paying players too much. That is a well known fact. So are you saying that we should have continued to pay the players more than we could afford?
And yes I am saying that a smaller stadium doesn't mean a bigger income. If I am wrong and you are right for once why don't we just move into the Butts without extending it?
Arsenal play in the same division as Swansea. So the price they are able to charge will be closer than a Prem side and Division 3 side. So which club earns the most? Arsenal with the bigger ground?Well answer the question then. Swansea 20,000 stadium against our average in the first years the the Ricoh - who earned the most?
We weren't paying players more than the average in the league of clubs with crowds similar to us - so you now admit the business model meant we should have slashed wages and acted like a club the size of Peterborough as we had to slash prices to fill the ground?
Are you and Tony Economic graduates?
We weren't paying players more than the average in the league of clubs with crowds similar to us - so you now admit the business model meant we should have slashed wages and acted like a club the size of Peterborough as we had to slash prices to fill the ground
Arsenal play in the same division as Swansea. So the price they are able to charge will be closer than a Prem side and Division 3 side. So which club earns the most? Arsenal with the bigger ground?
How did we get 60m in debt?
Oh yes we paid the players too much.
So it is OK for you to choose a team doing better than us and that have a stadium that isn't big enough but I can't compare them with a team doing even better with a ground that still isn't big enough?With respect Arsenal fill the stadium - we do not. So again I ask Swansea - 20,000 us higher which was the best revenue
Please answer rather than divert
Actually don't - Swansea with a 12,000 less capcity earnt more
But you said in a post above that you adopt a natural place for success
I would say that a natutal place for success would have been the ground we previously owned with a 10,000 less capacity than this one.
So you actually think we are better off now as the stadium is bigger?
Wow
Are you now saying that SISU should be spending money that isn't coming in through the turnstiles?So you actually believe in the Sisu model of self sufficiency
Interesting - are you Tim Fisher as that is exactly what he would say
When does he ever read what someone posts and not twist the words to suit his agenda?I suggest you try reading my post again because that is nothing like what I said.
With respect Arsenal fill the stadium - we do not. So again I ask Swansea - 20,000 us higher which was the best revenue
Please answer rather than divert
Actually don't - Swansea with a 12,000 less capcity earnt more
Because Swansea want to have a lower income by having a bigger stadium.With respect Arsenal are in the premier league we aren't. If everything was hunky dory at Swansea with a 22k stadium why are they looking to increase capacity considerably? Is it because the smaller capacity stadium model works for a successful team?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?