Ricoh Arena bosses overcharge again (1 Viewer)

duffer

Well-Known Member
I suppose in fairness there's a difference in costs between hosting a match with a handful of specatators, and hosting one where perhaps they're expecting a lot more. If they're not expecting a lot of spectators, then why couldn't they use the Bedworth Oval as an alternative (where they used to play), rather than going to Walsall?

Is it an issue because it's a night game with floodlights needed, etc?

I don't know in truth. From where I stand, I don't mind ACL covering their costs, but this does look excessive.

Saying that, when HR allowed itself to be hired out for some games at the end of the very last season the cost was about £2,400* per game. Did get to drink in the players' bar though, iirc. :)

*Edit: Actually, more like £3k perhaps - £100 per player, 15 or 16 per team, two teams, 60 minutes. Maybe ACL are undercharging here. (kidding) ;)
 
Last edited:

Nick

Administrator
I suppose in fairness there's a difference in costs between hosting a match with a handful of specatators, and hosting one where perhaps they're expecting a lot more.

Serious question, what things will be different depending on attendance?
 

ricohroar

Well-Known Member
£5000 too much for a state of the art, World Class venue.... they'd only need 500 people watching paying £10 each to cover that? If they can't generate that interest then maybe the memorial park is better suited? Go ask how much it is to play their match at Wembley in comparison....
 

sky blue john

Well-Known Member
Because you can't. You made the effort to respond otherwise.

I will help you lets start with turnstile operatives. Lets say their wages would be £20 per match.

Sixfields for 1500 - 4 x £20 = £80 per match.
Ricoh for 13,000 - 16 x £20 = £320 per match.
Wembley for 80'000 - 32 x £20 = £640 per match.

Does this help Fernando ?????
 

Nick

Administrator
I will help you lets start with turnstile operatives. Lets say their wages would be £20 per match.

Sixfields for 1500 - 4 x £20 = £80 per match.
Ricoh for 13,000 - 16 x £20 = £320 per match.
Wembley for 80'000 - 32 x £20 = £640 per match.

Does this help Fernando ?????

Genuine Question, are these hired by the club or ACL?

If ACL then I can think of:

Cleaners
Turnstyle People
A couple more managers (just to oversee shit is ok) I guess for more people
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
I will help you lets start with turnstile operatives. Lets say their wages would be £20 per match.

Sixfields for 1500 - 4 x £20 = £80 per match.
Ricoh for 13,000 - 16 x £20 = £320 per match.
Wembley for 80'000 - 32 x £20 = £640 per match.

Does this help Fernando ?????

Well done John. Any other examples? That's just £560 difference between Sixfields and Wembley. The club are being robbed.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
Aren't stewards paid for by the club?

Which staff would increase for ACL based on attendance (I am not doubting some will, but who)

I don't know for CCFC, were they paid direct by the club? For the ladies team I doubt they've got paid-for stewards for example.

Is this about the costs for the ladies game, or the overall costs of running ACL when CCFC were there?
 

Nick

Administrator
I don't know for CCFC, were they paid direct by the club? For the ladies team I doubt they've got paid-for stewards for example.

Is this about the costs for the ladies game, or the overall costs of running ACL when CCFC were there?

CCFC were paid for by the club, but you are right they would need staff for tickets etc.

If I remember though, when I went to a cup final there years ago a lot were volunteers from in and around the clubs in the final (i think)
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I will help you lets start with turnstile operatives. Lets say their wages would be £20 per match.

Sixfields for 1500 - 4 x £20 = £80 per match.
Ricoh for 13,000 - 16 x £20 = £320 per match.
Wembley for 80'000 - 32 x £20 = £640 per match.

Does this help Fernando ?????

The stewards are paid for by the club direct. Also the Ricoh was automated whereas Sixfields is manual.

Either way its a desperate and irrelevant example.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
CCFC were paid for by the club, but you are right they would need staff for tickets etc.

If I remember though, when I went to a cup final there years ago a lot were volunteers from in and around the clubs in the final (i think)

Yep, not disputing that mate. I just wonder if the BCFA said something like you've got be ready for 5,000 or something. If they didn't then why can't they play at Bedworth, which would surely suit both teams better, and as you say could be stewarded by a handful at most (which is what CCLFC used to do when I watched them there).

It does seem odd. I'd agree that £5000 sounds excessive, but maybe there's more to it.
 

Nick

Administrator
The stewards are paid for by the club direct. Also the Ricoh was automated whereas Sixfields is manual.

Either way its a desperate and irrelevant example.

They did have the people stood around checking though, and cash ones. I always thought these were classed as stewards though.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
Brilliant. Peanuts, a lot higher and a lot higher still. When I win the lottery (though admittedly I don't do it) then I want you to be my accountant.

"John, how much money have I got left?"
"A lot."
"Great, here's a pay rise."

In the real world please people !!
Match day costs -
Sixfields for 1500 people = peanuts
Ricoh for 13,000 people = A lot higher than sixfields.
Wembley for 80,0000 people = A lot higher than the Ricoh.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Point proven really I don't feel the need to embarras you further !!

Do you think the matchday costs would stay the same regardless of the rent deal?
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
They did have the people stood around checking though, and cash ones. I always thought these were classed as stewards though.

All politics aside, the automated turnstiles were a bit of a farce weren't they. They always had to have someone stood either inside or next to them it seemed, I can't see how it saved very much money, personally.
 

torchomatic

Well-Known Member
I always found it annoying that I had to queue (sometimes) to get in. Queue to get money loaded on my season ticket and then queue again only to be told "we don't do hotdogs here mate".

All politics aside, the automated turnstiles were a bit of a farce weren't they. They always had to have someone stood either inside or next to them it seemed, I can't see how it saved very much money, personally.
 

Nick

Administrator
All politics aside, the automated turnstiles were a bit of a farce weren't they. They always had to have someone stood either inside or next to them it seemed, I can't see how it saved very much money, personally.

I think it was more for time to get people in quicker. Compare it to sixfields where they have people on there and they have to do things manually, if it was a huge attendance it would take forever.
 

Noggin

New Member

because sixfields cost about 6mill to build, the ricoh about 100 mill and wembley 800 mill. The larger better featured stadia have higher costs (including mortgages and loans) and provide more capacity, better facilities an all round better environment so they cost more to rent. But you know this of course, you and this forum as a whole (won't be long till it's GMK MK2) are getting more and more ridiculous by the day.

personally though I'd prefer to see the Ricoh do the best they can to provide a lower cost to the Coventry City ladies, but if they want to price themselves out of this business it's their loss.
 

Nick

Administrator
I always found it annoying that I had to queue (sometimes) to get in. Queue to get money loaded on my season ticket and then queue again only to be told "we don't do hotdogs here mate".

Yeah, it was even worse when the cashless queue was 90% people who wanted to pay by cash so most time was spent them arguing.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
The stewards are paid for by the club direct. Also the Ricoh was automated whereas Sixfields is manual

For all we know the stewards were paid for by CCFC as it was a permanent deal with 25ish games per season.

For a one off or occasional game isn't it more likely that staff are provided rather than the hirer having to provide their own staff.

We don't know and that of course is the big problem with commenting on this. Unless we know the cost to ACL it's hard to make a judgement on the price they are asking. If it's costing them £4.5K to stage the game a charge of £5K seems reasonable. If it's costing them £500 to stage the game the charge is way over the top.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
because sixfields cost about 6mill to build, the ricoh about 100 mill and wembley 800 mill. The larger better featured stadia have higher costs (including mortgages and loans) and provide more capacity, better facilities an all round better environment so they cost more to rent. But you know this of course, you and this forum as a whole (won't be long till it's GMK MK2) are getting more and more ridiculous by the day.

personally though I'd prefer to see the Ricoh do the best they can to provide a lower cost to the Coventry City ladies, but if they want to price themselves out of this business it's their loss.

What! These are MATCH DAY costs. How on earth do mortgaged loans stadium quality gave anything to do with a fixed charged?

You accuse me of being ridiculous. Jesus.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Do you think the matchday costs would stay the same regardless of the rent deal?

Would depend on what you were including as matchday costs. If you were comparing 2 deals where the matchday costs were covering the same items, and all those costs were fixed rate rather than variable according to attendance then yes you would expect matchday costs to stay the same.

Of course the person setting the charge may decide to increase the cost based on affordability. If you have one company wishing to rent who are expecting attendances of under 10K on an average £5 ticket price you may chose a price point which gives you a lower markup than a company who are expecting attendances of 30K or more on a average £50 ticket price.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Would depend on what you were including as matchday costs. If you were comparing 2 deals where the matchday costs were covering the same items, and all those costs were fixed rate rather than variable according to attendance then yes you would expect matchday costs to stay the same.

Of course the person setting the charge may decide to increase the cost based on affordability. If you have one company wishing to rent who are expecting attendances of under 10K on an average £5 ticket price you may chose a price point which gives you a lower markup than a company who are expecting attendances of 30K or more on a average £50 ticket price.

In talking about the offers to CCFC. The £400,000 rent deal, the £150,000 and the free rent deal. Would matchday costs be the same?

By the way I think (not sure) one of the under 21 games was a lot less than £5,000
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
In talking about the offers to CCFC. The £400,000 rent deal, the £150,000 and the free rent deal. Would matchday costs be the same?

Are they the same or should they be the same? If they are all fixed costs and both offers cover exactly the same things as matchday costs then you could reasonably expect them to be the same.

I'm sure ACL could make an affordability argument, if ticket prices suddenly shot up they could argue it is fair for them to increase their margin.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Are they the same or should they be the same? If they are all fixed costs and both offers cover exactly the same things as matchday costs then you could reasonably expect them to be the same.

I'm sure ACL could make an affordability argument, if ticket prices suddenly shot up they could argue it is fair for them to increase their margin.

The offers are different. There was Q and A somewhere that broke the costs down. My view is the deal has never really differed and that matchday costs and rent combined have been the same. The £400,000 offer according to the trust had costs included the others didn't.

There has never been a definition of what these costs cover either. Police are paid by the club and stewards also. When you factor in these charges the costs are escalating to again high levels.
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
The offers are different. There was Q and A somewhere that broke the costs down. My view is the deal has never really differed and that matchday costs and rent combined have been the same. The £400,000 offer according to the trust had costs included the others didn't.

My understanding was the £400K figure was first mentioned by Fisher in one of his CWR appearances as an acceptable / average rent. When it was offered it was £400K + matchday costs at which point he said that wasn't really £400K as it needed to be that level inclusive of matchday which led to £150K being offered which is £400K when you add in the matchday costs.

If SISU are still interested in a rental deal then in my opinion what they need to do is state what they are prepared to pay and what they expect that to cover. If they do that and the average fan thinks what they are saying is reasonable it will move pressure to ACL to offer that deal. Similarly if ACL do then offer that deal it will put pressure of SISU to accept it.
 

duffer

Well-Known Member
I always found it annoying that I had to queue (sometimes) to get in. Queue to get money loaded on my season ticket and then queue again only to be told "we don't do hotdogs here mate".

Absolutely, that used to drive me nuts. The whole system seemed to be designed to extract as little money as possible from people, whilst simultaneously causing them the most aggravation. I liked to call it the Ricoh Order Prevention System. I would have spent a lot more on food and beer at the ground had I been able to. Especially beer. ;)

In fairness, though you probably won't believe me, the only thing that made me happy about the system being so crap was the knowledge that at least it wasn't costing the club money, just ACL.
 

Wyken Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Yeah, it was even worse when the cashless queue was 90% people who wanted to pay by cash so most time was spent them arguing.

I remmeber one season I had a cashless card, queued up to pay with it and they said 'sorry we only accept cash here'.

Make your f**king mind up!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top