Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It seems many clubs are becoming shy at declaring official attendances. Burnley must have 1 person counting all the the empty seats but lots of other clubs are doing the same. Norwich normally pop it up quickly, any ideas why this is happening this season? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

It seems many clubs are becoming shy at declaring official attendances. Burnley must have 1 person counting all the the empty seats but lots of other clubs are doing the same. Norwich normally pop it up quickly, any ideas why this is happening this season? 

How / where do you mean?

Attendance yesterday was 17,427 according to BBC website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

How / where do you mean?

Attendance yesterday was 17,427 according to BBC website.

 

Burnley normally take days to give it. Yesterday when l looked Brighton and Wolves were blank too on BBC website. Burnley were letting home fans in for £9 yesterday too. 

Edited by Midlands Yellow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Fans are less loyal now and tend not to sheepishly follow their club by attending every home game as there are so many alternatives.

The appetite for watching live games is readily sated on their television screens, in any case.

I believe that because City can apparently buck that trend is because Carrow Road is under-capacitated. That there was nearly a sell-out for a Carabao Cup tie, of relatively small importance in our current strife, emphasises this. Price reduction might well have been balanced out by the fact that it was a televised game in this argument.  

It seems that a spell of dire Premier League survival has finally dented the enthusiasm of those in Burnley. Perhaps they'd enthuse more if given a few seasons of yo-yoing?

I noted recently that West Ham now average gates of over 60, 000 at their much maligned London Stadium and thought at the time that that was some financial clout under their belt, over the course of the season, by comparison withy City.

It is popular today to consider that gate numbers are not important to Premier League clubs because they are dwarfed by television money. I am not sure that this is the case. All income counts.

If West Ham get 30, 000 more than Norwich at say £30 per head (including other spend) over the course of a Premier League season of nineteen home games then that amounts to an annual additional income of approx. £17, 000, 000 which sure helps the overheads.

Previously, at the Boleyn Ground, they were not privileged to that advantage by some way.

Like the OP, it seems, I have always had a fascination with attendances and wish City could accommodate bigger.

Edited by BroadstairsR
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Fans are less loyal now and tend not to sheepishly follow their club by attending every home game as there are so many alternatives.

The appetite for watching live games is readily sated on their television screens, in any case.

I believe that because City can apparently buck that trend is because Carrow Road is under-capacitated. That there was nearly a sell-out for a Carabao Cup tie, of relatively small importance in our current strife, emphasises this. Price reduction might well have been balanced out by the fact that it was a televised game in this argument.  

It seems that a spell of dire Premier League survival has finally dented the enthusiasm of those in Burnley. Perhaps they'd enthuse more if given a few seasons of yo-yoing?

I noted recently that West Ham now average gates of over 60, 000 at their much maligned London Stadium and thought at the time that that was some financial clout under their belt, over the course of the season, by comparison withy City.

It is popular today to consider that gate numbers are not important to Premier League clubs because they are dwarfed by television money. I am not sure that this is the case. All income counts.

If West Ham get 30, 000 more than Norwich at say £30 per head (including other spend) over the course of a Premier League season of nineteen home games then that amounts to an annual additional income of approx. £17, 000, 000 which sure helps the overheads.

Previously, at the Boleyn Ground, they were not privileged to that advantage by some way.

Like the OP, it seems, I have always had a fascination with attendances and wish City could accommodate bigger.

Definitely we need a bigger capacity, 35,000 would be ideal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

It seems many clubs are becoming shy at declaring official attendances. Burnley must have 1 person counting all the the empty seats but lots of other clubs are doing the same. Norwich normally pop it up quickly, any ideas why this is happening this season? 

I agree. Attendances used to be stated at every game and all match results contained them. Increasingly they are becoming harder to find. Even at Norwich the programme used to state both the attendance and the number of away fans for all of the games. Now this is nowhere to be found.

 I think clubs are finding it harder to fill stadiums, probably because people got out of the habit in the Covid era. Once again this isn’t really happening at Carrow Road, but our away attendances are down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Even on our bad days we tend to take around 23 to 24 thousand, always been proud of how good our attendences have been

Other than cup games (in which we often have amongst the highest attendance in the country) I'm not sure we've had a crowd that low since the League one season? For league games it's generally a few restricted view/single seats if there are any spare. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Mr.Carrow said:

Other than cup games (in which we often have amongst the highest attendance in the country) I'm not sure we've had a crowd that low since the League one season? For league games it's generally a few restricted view/single seats if there are any spare. 

attendences.png

Huh, you're right. It was mostly back in the old first divison days we were at below 20,000. Not been below that since 2004.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

I noted recently that West Ham now average gates of over 60, 000 at their much maligned London Stadium and thought at the time that that was some financial clout under their belt, over the course of the season, by comparison withy City.

It is popular today to consider that gate numbers are not important to Premier League clubs because they are dwarfed by television money. I am not sure that this is the case. All income counts.

If West Ham get 30, 000 more than Norwich at say £30 per head (including other spend) over the course of a Premier League season of nineteen home games then that amounts to an annual additional income of approx. £17, 000, 000 which sure helps the overheads.

West Ham fill their (awful) ground due to low-cost pricing (£99 for an U16 ST), and in 2018/19 their income per seat was only around  £20.

Increasing the Carrow Road capacity by 7,000 would cost around £40-50m and would take well over a decade to begin paying for itself.

It might be nice to have a bigger CR but the cost (and disruption) do not justify the risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

attendences.png

Huh, you're right. It was mostly back in the old first divison days we were at below 20,000. Not been below that since 2004.

The good old days at Carrow Road in the 80s/90s! 15,000 was a decent turn out some seasons. When we finished 3rd some were well below that figure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Burnley normally take days to give it. Yesterday when l looked Brighton and Wolves were blank too on BBC website. Burnley were letting home fans in for £9 yesterday too. 

Only in groups of 10.  Buy 10 tickets for £90, though strangely, it was barely publicised.  Our new owners have some strange ideas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Commonsense said:

I agree. Attendances used to be stated at every game and all match results contained them. Increasingly they are becoming harder to find. Even at Norwich the programme used to state both the attendance and the number of away fans for all of the games. Now this is nowhere to be found.

 I think clubs are finding it harder to fill stadiums, probably because people got out of the habit in the Covid era. Once again this isn’t really happening at Carrow Road, but our away attendances are down.

Burnley have been reluctant to give gates all season.  It's speculation and rumour, but the story goes that season ticket sales dropped from 14k to 11.5k over the coronavirus break.

Part of that is natural wastage.  I've heard it said that 10% of season ticket holders are lost each year, as a rough guide; and there wouldn't be any replacements coming in while the grounds were shut.  Part of it is coronavirus fears.  Older people, or people who have vulnerable older people in their home, may be reluctant to sit in a large crowd for a couple of hours breathing the same air as their neighbour.  I am myself - I'm watching Accy Stanley this year (good game yesterday!) and Colne in non-league.  And as an aside, some clubs (ie. Burnley) made a complete shambles of season ticket renewals.  

There will be elements of this at all clubs.  One of the side effects of filling the ground with season ticket holders is that there is no longer a huge reserve of part-time supporters to fill the gaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

West Ham fill their (awful) ground due to low-cost pricing (£99 for an U16 ST), and in 2018/19 their income per seat was only around  £20.

Increasing the Carrow Road capacity by 7,000 would cost around £40-50m and would take well over a decade to begin paying for itself.

It might be nice to have a bigger CR but the cost (and disruption) do not justify the risk.

Where do you get the £40/50m figure from? That’s just nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Burnley have been reluctant to give gates all season.  It's speculation and rumour, but the story goes that season ticket sales dropped from 14k to 11.5k over the coronavirus break.

Part of that is natural wastage.  I've heard it said that 10% of season ticket holders are lost each year, as a rough guide; and there wouldn't be any replacements coming in while the grounds were shut.  Part of it is coronavirus fears.  Older people, or people who have vulnerable older people in their home, may be reluctant to sit in a large crowd for a couple of hours breathing the same air as their neighbour.  I am myself - I'm watching Accy Stanley this year (good game yesterday!) and Colne in non-league.  And as an aside, some clubs (ie. Burnley) made a complete shambles of season ticket renewals.  

There will be elements of this at all clubs.  One of the side effects of filling the ground with season ticket holders is that there is no longer a huge reserve of part-time supporters to fill the gaps.

Is the style of play under Dyche a contributing factor too? Effective as it is long term it can’t be good for anyone’s mental or physical health when viewing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Is the style of play under Dyche a contributing factor too? Effective as it is long term it can’t be good for anyone’s mental or physical health when viewing. 

To some extent.  When we aren't winning, we get complainers who say the style of play is rubbish.  I think it's overrated, myself.  Playing our style when it's going well is entertaining enough, because after all it does involve getting the ball into the business end of the field.  When a side is playing bady, passing it round the back and getting nowhere near the goal isn't any more entertaining than launching it long and getting nowhere near the goal.  (We do pass it about as well.  Sometimes.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Where do you get the £40/50m figure from? That’s just nonsense. 

 

So how much do you think it will cost?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

 

So how much do you think it will cost?

 

 

The South stand was around £8/10m? Obviously to rebuild the main stand is more complicated but definitely nowhere near your figure. Leicester built the King Power for less than what your guessing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

attendences.png

Huh, you're right. It was mostly back in the old first divison days we were at below 20,000. Not been below that since 2004.

It was the playoff season in 01-02 where attendances really started to improve. And since then, we've been close to selling out every  home league games. Very impressive, really. 03/04 would have been higher, but for the South Stand re-construction. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my "guessing"

Liverpool's new Main Stand (added 8,500 seats) cost £ 110m and their Anfield Road Stand expansion (add 7,000) seats is being projected at £ 80m.

Both these are of the Up-and-Over build that would be best for City.

Yes, a full rebuild would be cheaper but then what do you do with the 4,000 displaced ST holders?

I don't think that twenty year-old building costs are very relevant.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

attendences.png

Huh, you're right. It was mostly back in the old first divison days we were at below 20,000. Not been below that since 2004.

88/89 average attendance was under 17,000. The ground started to be filled a season or two before the South stand was built and after. In the 80s and part of the 90s it was easy to just turn up and pay at the turnstiles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

88/89 average attendance was under 17,000. The ground started to be filled a season or two before the South stand was built and after. In the 80s and part of the 90s it was easy to just turn up and pay at the turnstiles. 

Do you mean 98/99?

I think my old man first got us season tickets in the 1995 season when we were relegated because the club went nuts with kids season tickets. They were selling them for under £20 when purchased with an adult one. In the block I sit in in the River End I could run up and down my row and it was easily less than half full. But like you say, two years before the South Stand was built in the 01/02 season we had that run to the playoffs and it opened the city's eyes to the football club and suddenly everyone wanted a ticket. The table says the average attendance across 01/02 was 18,629, but I bet if you looked at the average attendance between August and January it'd be down at 14 or 15k and then February to the end of the season was pretty much all sold out pushing 21,000. And to be honest since then, there has barely been a home game that hasn't been close to a sell-out, even in our miserable relegation seasons or our sojourn into League One.

Edited by canarydan23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Do you mean 98/99?

I think my old man first got us season tickets in the 1995 season when we were relegated because the club went nuts with kids season tickets. They were selling them for under £20 when purchased with an adult one. In the block I sit in in the River End I could run up and down my row and it was easily less than half full. But like you say, two years before the South Stand was built in the 01/02 season we had that run to the playoffs and it opened the city's eyes to the football club and suddenly everyone wanted a ticket. The table says the average attendance across 01/02 was 18,629, but I bet if you looked at the average attendance between August and January it'd be down at 14 or 15k and then February to the end of the season was pretty much all sold out pushing 21,000. And to be honest since then, there has barely been a home game that hasn't been close to a sell-out, even in our miserable relegation seasons or our sojourn into League One.

94/95 saw average attendances under 19,000  and we were relegated. 95/96 in what now is the Championship under 15,000. 

Edited by Midlands Yellow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it depends how clubs count the figures. Norwich used to count them as 'tickets sold' rather than how many people actually turned up - not sure if that has changed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They used to show a percentage on the scoreboard when giving the attendance. 

Not sure if that was percentage of capacity, or percentage of people who turned up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AJ said:

I guess it depends how clubs count the figures. Norwich used to count them as 'tickets sold' rather than how many people actually turned up - not sure if that has changed

City have chopped & changed.

Chase used to declare tickets sold

Then the club changed to Bums on Seats

Then the club gave a tickets sold number but with a % of bums figure *

Now we are back (along with everyone else, I think) to the tickets sold figure

 

* In 06/07 the midweek match v gold scum had a declared gate of 23,311 but only 85% in attendance. That means fewer than 20k turned up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

West Ham fill their (awful) ground due to low-cost pricing (£99 for an U16 ST), and in 2018/19 their income per seat was only around  £20.

Increasing the Carrow Road capacity by 7,000 would cost around £40-50m and would take well over a decade to begin paying for itself.

It might be nice to have a bigger CR but the cost (and disruption) do not justify the risk.

No. If you borrow to build something and the income from that is more than the cost of the loan then, obviously, you are making money. I think in the current climate our caution on this front is looking wise, however we clearly more seats if we can swing it in the next few years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/10/2021 at 10:44, Greavsy said:

How / where do you mean?

Attendance yesterday was 17,427 according to BBC website.

 

Listened in to Clarets TV commentary which was free unlike Canaries TV when out of area. The attendance was announced during the broadcast alongside the away attendance so no idea why some other sources fail to report it other than perhaps if clubs are not using a consistent approach to calculating the figure it becomes meaningless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mr.Carrow said:

No. If you borrow to build something and the income from that is more than the cost of the loan then, obviously, you are making money. I think in the current climate our caution on this front is looking wise, however we clearly more seats if we can swing it in the next few years. 

7,000 seats at Carrow Road would yield perhaps £3.5 million per year. So the borrowing rate needs to be less than 7% or so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...