Sell-outs...

[PurpleCanary 5,573]

[quote user="grantroederdisaster"]


For the club to fulfill its potential than stadium expansion when finances allow are a neccessity! Anyone that says a club who has averaged 20,000+ League crowds since 2001 in every season apart from when the Jarold stand was being built, 24,000+ crowds since 2005 including a season in the 3rd Division when the average wasn''t far of 25,000 and is now averaging over 26,000 crowds can''t justify increasing the stadium capacity to over 30,000 is simply talking out of their backside!!!!

 I think the club could easily average 30,000+ if Carrow Road held 35,000+ and would sell out for certain games![/quote]

 

grd, I think those red figures - assuming we cement a place in the Premier League - are perhaps a touch optimistic, but not by too much. The problem is that Bowkett in particular not only seems to believe we will sell out a 35,000-seat stadium pretty much every game (which just is not going to happen in the foreseeable future) but is basing a self-financing business plan on that assumption.

 

The other point (not particularly directed at you) is about supply and demand and how you regulate it, and how it isn''t simply a question of adjusting the price. At the moment demand outstrips supply, so the argument is we increase the price until demand and supply are equalised. Then, the argument goes on, if demand ends up being less than supply we lower prices and, hey presto, demand rises again to be equal with supply.

 

For starters, that fails to take into account economic circumstances. In an era of rising inflation and rising unemployment (it is going to get worse yet) even if the club finds it can afford to hold down prices or even lower them (which is questionable) to try to attract fans back, will the fans be able to pay?

 

Secondly, by driving up prices to reduce demand, you risk losing a whole generation of fans. Literally and metaphorically a generation dies out every few seasons. What happened with the ticketing policy of affordable family football was that we kept attracting in the next generation, to replace the one lost. Actually, we did more than that; we sharply increased attendances.

 

But if  - to equalise supply and demand - you hike up prices to drive fans and potential fans away, which is what it comes to, you risk losing the next generation. Particularly as it is the young potential fans who won''t be able to afford the high prices. You won''t notice immediately, because you want to see a reduction in demand. But eventually, when demand is lower than supply, you''ll notice, and acting then on prices will be too late.

 

Bowkett says he understands this ("One of our key aims is to attract and retain younger fans.") but then eliminates the pre-adult casual ticket category. Actions speak louder than words.

[Herman 9,798]

Considering it was a sell-out how did two QPR* not only get tickets in the Barclay,but two seats together? Doesn''t seem right to me.At least we got their money i suppose.

If they weren''t then they are the most unenthusiastic City fans i have seen.

[Bill 1,788]

"Secondly, by driving up prices to reduce demand, you risk losing a whole generation of fans"

Wrong

fans are fans, irrespective of turning up

What determines whether they turn up is price (and all the many variables within) and the games worth

The paupers have seen their gates plummet to 17,000. They introduce a £10 deal and suddenly the gate goes up by 5 thousand (a found generation ?) They play us, Arsenal at home and they have a sellout.

If by magic we could turn our ground into a 40,000 seater stadium in the next week and introduce a £10 ticket for all games I have no doubt that we would fill the ground. The suport through attending games is variable, checkthe numbers at League Cup games.

City have seen their gates high through a combination of very astute marketing/pricing and recent success. It would be exceedingly foolish to believe that the people behind that would not be aware of what the median price is for next season - regarding achieving the maximum price whilst, stilll retaining a surplus demand.

A season or two of that will determine which way we go rather any concern about tatking on another huge loan.

[blahblahblah 2]

"If you are trying to rake up the old off-field/on-field spend argument i suggest you look at the myriad statements by the new board that they have been prioritising football over "peripheral activities" "

I didn''t ask you about the boards'' opinion, I asked for your opinion. Given that you were so vocal in asking for players over off-pitch spending in the past, it surprised me that you were advocating a new tier for a stand. Obviously if things can be juggled so that one could be built and we still had the money needed to keep us in the top flight, then that would be a good thing.

"We`ve even gone from being a selling club to a buying club when your side of the argument defended the previous boards asset-stripping of our football team by stating that City were a selling club and always would be..."

Every club apart from Barcelona / Real Madrid / Man City are selling clubs - even the likes of Arsenal have had to let go of Fabregas and Nasri. With that said, we have done well to hold onto those who have got us to where we are. This makes a refreshing change [:)]

[CJ 0]

I seem to remember when they were building the new South Stand they considered a two tier construction, and then probably rightly considering recent finances backed down. However they said that they would ensure that the structure was built so that they could bolt on an upper tier at some time in the future.Do not know if they did in the end but would make expansion somewhat cheaper and possible

[grantroederdisaster 0]

It always completely bemuses me that some fans think we couldn''t currently average 30,000+ when we are only just 3000 short of 30,000 virtually every sold out home game as it is, and have averaged 24,000+ every season since 2005 even in the 3rd Division. I presume after years and years of being brainwashed by the "little ole Norwich" myth its hard to change!

If our ground held 30,000 we''d have to increase the away allocation to 3000 which would be another 500 on top of what Arsenal brought last Saturday which would have increased the crowd for that game to 27,300!

We have 5000 super members, just under 22,000 season ticket holders and 2530 away spaces. This leaves just over 2500 casual tickets which at the Arsenal game were snapped up by super members before going on general sale. This means 2500 super members didn''t get tickets for the Arsenal game. 27300 + 2500 super members who missed out = just under 30,000. Then take into account members wanting to go, non members and being able to sell more season tickets and its obvious we could of easily sold 30,000+ tickets for the Arsenal game!

Yesterdays game sold out about a couple of weeks ago and Newcastle in couple of weeks sold out last week as well!

Southampton who average aout 21-22,000 in the Championship despite being top (some 3-4000 less than we did in the same Division last season whe we were never top at any stage!) got 31,000 last week for their game against Brighton. If a club that averages much less than us can get 30,000+ crowds for certain games then its almost certain we could as well and even probably get more!

If we manage to stay in the Premiership then capacity increase is a neccessity to enable the club to fulfill potential, satisfy demand and be in a better position to maintain top flight status. I''m sure if Carrow Road held 35,000, we probably wouldn''t sell out every week but in the Premiership I think 30,000+ average crowds would be likely. Just cause we wouldn''t sell out a 35,000 capacity doesn''t mean building to such a capcity would be wrong cause if it enabled us to get averages over 30,000 then thats better what we''re getting now. Anyway go back to the 1980''s and 1990''s and anyone saying we''d average 24,000 in the 2000''s would have been laughed at, including by myself. I firmly believe in build and people will come and I think its possible that in the future with a 35,000+ capacity, in the top flight we''ll be getting 30,000+ average crowds similar to how we''ve averaged 24,000+ in recent years!

Quite a few posters have gone on about the disruption caused by major redevopment at Carrow Road which is unavoidable and particularly the uprooted City stand fans. Well I''m sure many of these oldies were about when the original Main stand burnt down in October 1984 and their wern''t any spectators on that side until the start of the 1986/87 season when the current structure was completed.

I''m also sure that many older fans who''ve used the river end for many years will recall being displaced in 1979/80 when the current stand on that side was built. Likewise many of the old South stand regulars had to be displaced in 2003/04 when the current built Jarold stand was built and only became fully useable towards the end of that title campaign!

Also Barclay regulars were displaced for the last 2 games of the 2001/02 season when the grand old terrace was knocked down and for half of the next season, 2002/03, the Barclay stand had only the bottom tier in use.

So all in all if you''ve been coming to Carrow Raod for home games since at least the early 1990''s its likely at some point you''d of been effected by stand redevelopment. We all got through it OK although moving to another part of the ground may of been a bit of a bugger at the time!

If the City stand is indeed the location for major redevelopment in the future then useable capacity would go down from 26801 to about 22,700 and this doesn''t take into account any possible capacity increases in front of the Hotel or elsewhere for the matter. A reduced capcity of 22,700 is far better than the 16,000 capacity we had to endure for much of the title winning 2003/04 season.

Increasing prices to such a level that many fans stopped coming in order to kill off demand would be extremely false economy cause we''d lose a generation of young fans and lots of regulars who''ve been going for years. I''ve been going for years and used to pay at the gate for years but couldn''t afford to do that nowadays and many are in the same boat. At the moment demand far exceeds supply but still theres many potential fans who can''t afford the prices. This was proved by all the non regulars in the 13,000 crowd who went to the Carling cup game against MK Dons earlier this season. Further evidence that we have many more potential fans than we currently have!

If we had lots and lots of empty seats on a regular basis then I''d be dead set against capacity increase cause it wouldn''t be neccessary but our regular near sell/sell out crowds over a number of seasons prove this is not the case and thinking logically and without our "little ole Norwich" specs on we have a genuine need to make Carrow Road bigger which will only be done when we can afford to do it!

As well as in Lambert we trust, I''m also firmly in the "in Mcnally and Bowkett" we trust camp!

[grantroederdisaster 0]

CJ"]I seem to remember when they were building the new South Stand they considered a two tier construction, and then probably rightly considering recent finances backed down. However they said that they would ensure that the structure was built so that they could bolt on an upper tier at some time in the future.Do not know if they did in the end but would make expansion somewhat cheaper and possible

There has been much speculation about whether the Jarold stand can extended or not. Some say it can, some say it can''t.

From what I can make out of what Board members have hinted on, I think it would be possible but very expensive. Even if foundations to take another tier wern''t dug when the stand was built its still possible to build one. Glasgow Rangers main stand was built in the late 1920''s as a 2 tier stand. In the last 15-20 years a new third tier has been added. I''m sure that when the stand was built in the 1920''s, provision for having a third tier added to it 70+ years later wasn''t included in the construction.

The City stand is the most obvious part of the ground that needs increasing as its a very small stand but that doesn''t neccessarily mean this stand will be the one to redeveloped first. If the Jarold stand can be extended with an upper tier I''d of thought this would have been a less disruptive route to increase capacity cause the current capacity wouldn''t be reduced during its construction whereas a new City stand would see capacity drop by more than 4000. Would it be possible to build a Jarold stand upper tier holding 4-6000?

What I''ve learnt over the years is that very few people know whats going on with the hierarchy at our great club even those who think they do and those who work at the club. The current board are notorious for keeping things close to their chests.

All I can indicate from what they''ve said (and remember I''m no insider just very observant!) is that they want to increase capacity to 35,000+, the City stands the obvious route, extending the Jarold maybe possible and maybe sometime in the future a big single tier Kop like Barclay maybe considered. This is not including the River end stand which looks old now with limited facilities compared to the other stands!

[Bill 1,788]

"If we manage to stay in the Premiership then capacity increase is a neccessity to enable the club to fulfill potential"

very, very slowly

If we increase the capacity by another 25% we willroughly get another 25% increase in income - minus repayment of loan on that redevelopment

If we increase the tickets by 25% we will achieve the same result .... without any risk of not making the 35,000 capacity.

As 25% may be seen as high then the club simply deducts the amount of the loan repayments (as above)plus lose of income from closing the Main Stand for some while.

That gives the same increase in revenue without the same risks and the same risk of keeping up payments were we to be relegated.

Not that difficult, is it ?

[QHcanary 0]

[quote user="City1st"]"If we manage to stay in the Premiership then capacity increase is a neccessity to enable the club to fulfill potential"

very, very slowly

If we increase the capacity by another 25% we willroughly get another 25% increase in income - minus repayment of loan on that redevelopment

If we increase the tickets by 25% we will achieve the same result .... without any risk of not making the 35,000 capacity.

As 25% may be seen as high then the club simply deducts the amount of the loan repayments (as above)plus lose of income from closing the Main Stand for some while.

That gives the same increase in revenue without the same risks and the same risk of keeping up payments were we to be relegated.

Not that difficult, is it ?[/quote]So what you''re essentially advocating is pricing even more people out of going to football matches, while showing no ambition as a football club.Ambition comes hand in hand with risk, but it''s a risk worth taking if we want to grow as a club, with the obvious caveat that we must first stabilise our position in the prem.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Like I keep saying! -

Increasing prices in order to reduce demand is false economy cause support will be lost and the club will become seperated from the community it needs to prosper!

I think most sensible thinking Norwich City home game regulars accept that if we stay up, prices will go up. We''ve just got to trust that the board don''t go too far. And anyway Bowkett has hinted that if the prices did become too much and crowds started to drop then they would likely reduce prices to restore the damage.

It would be very unambitious and limited to not go for ground capacity increases when the clubs had many seasons now of near sell out/sell outs, and we sell a higher % of our useable capacity than nearly every club in the Country (probably the world I''d suspect!).

Major ground redevelopment will only occur when finances allow and I doubt we''d get to 35,000 straight away!

Yet again 1st Canary I''m trying to talk sense, your talking in riddles and seem so dead set against capacity increasing at Carrow Road when all the evidence suggests its justifiable!

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Blah, where exactly am i advocating anything? My opinion is that i trust the board`s judgement to increase capacity when appropriate, and that they have already proven that they understand that the team on the pitch must be the priority at all times.

Your last sentence is simply untrue. Most of the top 30 or so English clubs are net buyers of football players- something i always said we could be if the club was run in the right way and your side of the argument always said we couldn`t be. Who was right? Do you anticipate us selling any of our best players in January? Have we sold any since the new board took over?

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Purple, i assume you accept that the big 6-8 Prem games would comfortably sell out 35k? Everyone i know with any interest in football wants a ticket for those games. As the board would not want to look silly by having thousands of empty seats for the smaller games i am sure we will see a more forgiving pricing structure, ticket offers, an extended family area or even the reversal of some of the pricing changes you have a bugbear about. In short, if the catchment area is there (ours is huge) there are ways and means of putting bums on seats. At the moment the club don`t even have to try.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Just to add my twopenneth - totally agree with your last two posts grantroederdisaster.

I missed the agm this year but attended the fans forum a couple of weeks before and thought both McNally and Bowkett spoke well about this. I have total confidence in their research and if all goes to plan the ground capacity will be increased and quite rightly so.

I can remember the City Stand being built and when I first saw it I couldn''t believe how small it was. When you think what a classic looking stand it replaced - quite remarkable. The sooner that is transformed into a ''normal'' looking stand the better. Interestingly a few years ago I was told the plans were for the Jarrold stand to be the main stand as and when the City Stand was rebuilt. Of course this may well not be the case now.

[PurpleCanary 5,573]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Purple, i assume you accept that the big 6-8 Prem games would comfortably sell out 35k? Everyone i know with any interest in football wants a ticket for those games. As the board would not want to look silly by having thousands of empty seats for the smaller games i am sure we will see a more forgiving pricing structure, ticket offers, an extended family area or even the reversal of some of the pricing changes you have a bugbear about. In short, if the catchment area is there (ours is huge) there are ways and means of putting bums on seats. At the moment the club don`t even have to try.[/quote]

 

Mr.Carrow, this is not an exact science but on the assumption of::

 

1. Economic conditions continuing/getting worse, with rising inflation and unemployment.

 

2. Advantageous demographic and other factors (population increase/A11 dualling).

 

3. A pricing policy that continues to attract in the next generation (the possible scrapping of which is my main worry, as you have seen).

 

4. A mid-table Premer league position, as opposed to a dream scenario of top finishes and European nights.

 

Then I would expect - very roughly - around 30,000 for the normal kind of game -  ie untelevised at 3pm on a Saturday against most teams in the division. As to the "big" games, we can argue about how many of those there are and  - of course - most of them won''t be untelevised at 3pm on a Saturday, but televised at 1pm on a Sunday or 8pm on a Monday. Even so I would expect crowds close to 35,000 for a few.


But to achieve that we need 32,000 Norwich fans. At the moment, even if you factor the season ticket waiting list (around 1,500 I think) we seem to have around 26,000 trying to get in. From 26,000 to 32,000 is quite a jump. I am not sceptical about the need for a bigger ground, but about the club''s business-plan assumption that we will fill it week in, week out. That I don''t buy. And I don''t, for reasons I have explained, trust Bowkett and McNally to get the crucial pricing policy right.

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Purple, i agree with most of that until the final paragraph which i think is self-evidently wrong. We took well over 30,000 fans to Wembley and Cardiff, at the time of Cardiff we had 45,000 people on the clubs data-base (not sure they`ve still got one tbh, but i`d expect it to be significantly higher now if they have).

Even Doncaster stated that there was demand for 35k per game in the last Prem.season and that the club had 70k enquiries for tickets for the Chelsea cup game. I know plenty of Norwich fans who can`t be bothered to become a member but who still go to occasional games.

Pubs across the region are showing every home game and are packed with people cheering on City. We have way, way more than 32,000 fans Purple and that`s even before you factor in nuetrals and supporters of other clubs who would just like to see some Prem.football and who can`t get a look in at the moment. I`ve lost count of the number of people who`ve asked me how they can get tickets for games- of course, they can`t.

I haven`t actually seen anywhere that the board are basing their business plan on filling it week-in, week-out? I may have missed it but i`d be grateful if you could point me to a quote.

[PurpleCanary 5,573]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Purple, i agree with most of that until the final paragraph which i think is self-evidently wrong. We took well over 30,000 fans to Wembley and Cardiff, at the time of Cardiff we had 45,000 people on the clubs data-base (not sure they`ve still got one tbh, but i`d expect it to be significantly higher now if they have). Even Doncaster stated that there was demand for 35k per game in the last Prem.season and that the club had 70k enquiries for tickets for the Chelsea cup game. I know plenty of Norwich fans who can`t be bothered to become a member but who still go to occasional games. Pubs across the region are showing every home game and are packed with people cheering on City. We have way, way more than 32,000 fans Purple and that`s even before you factor in nuetrals and supporters of other clubs who would just like to see some Prem.football and who can`t get a look in at the moment. I`ve lost count of the number of people who`ve asked me how they can get tickets for games- of course, they can`t. I haven`t actually seen anywhere that the board are basing their business plan on filling it week-in, week-out? I may have missed it but i`d be grateful if you could point me to a quote.[/quote]

 

Mr.Carrow, sorry, in a rush now, but quickly there is a difference between fans who follow and fans who turn up week in week out. An extreme example, but how many Paulton Rovers fans emerged from the woodwork when they drew us in the Cup?! More seriously, you yourself talk about fans who want to see the odd game, or who follow on TV. My doubt is that enough of those would translate into attendees, week in, week out fans.

 

As to the business plan, Bowkett and McNally have both said they have drawn up a break-even business plan based on a 35,000-seat stadium. Pretty much by definition that must mean they expect to fill or almost fill it every time, since one can hardly draw up a plan based on not filling it. And they have both said they believe there are that many fans out there. There is this from a few weeks ago:

Mr McNally said the 35,000 figure would “produce a self-sustainable Premier League football club”, but the current capacity of 27,000 would not.

He added: “We’re absolutely convinced that there’s a market for this, but we need some certainty about Premier League football."

...and there is a previous quote on the same lines. As it happens I don''t think it matters if they''re wrong about that, because I believe the next expansion (if and when we can afford it) probably has to go to 35,000, to cater for the big games. But there will then be many games with many empty seats. I do''t actually think you and I are in great diasgreement on the fundamentals of this issue. I think it is that I am a bit more pessimistic (realistic?) about our potential to get in extra fans.

[Bill 1,788]

"So what you''re essentially advocating is pricing even more people out of going to football matches "

Ye gods, your stupidity knows no bounds. I am not advocating anything, merely pointing out the basics of supply and demand. Or ''cross price elasticity'' as the technically minded would have. something that appears to be finally taking root in your rather f mind, at last, as with -

" Bowkett has hinted that if the prices did become too much and crowds started to drop then they would likely reduce prices to restore the damage."

Exactly. You match demand to price.That is why there are different catagory games, different prices relating to age, when you buy your ticket etc. Something with casual tickets thaht can be done on a weekly, daily or even hourly basis. Something that cannot be done with a high repayment loan.

"while showing no ambition as a football club"

Not that old idiots bleat. If ''hambition'' is getting as far up the league etc as possible based on generating income then the figures quoted in other posts demonstrate that the income can simply be generated by moving the price rather than lumbering the club with a highly risky debt. It is not pricing people out of the game otherwise the ground would not be full. Demand falls, so will ticket prices, as they have done before (kids for a quid etc). Demand goes up so does ticket prices, as they did this summer for casual tickets.

Unfortunately in the world you appear to exist in Mr Roeder chap this sort of theing doesn''t happen. Holidays, flights, hotels, trains and other sporting events don''t control/manipulate demand through price adjustment. Shops don''t have sales, employers don''t pay an ''overtime'' rate and the local swimming baths don''t offer OAP swims in the off peak times. Whereas in reality that IS what happens.

Finally before try to claim some ''holier than thou'' attitude regarding ''hambition'' and a defense of the poor put upon fan, bear in mind that we would all like to see a few of Barcelona''s finest turning out for City - but we don''t accuse those who point out the financially impracticalities of that wish of .......... ''pricing even more people out of'' watching top players.

And yes I''m sure that every genuine City fan would love to see 35 - 40,000 fans at Carrow Road. Would love to see the hideous hotel removed and there to be another level on top of the Main Stand - but not all of us have the luxury of only being accountable to our own blinkered vision.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="CJ"]I seem to remember when they were building the new South Stand they considered a two tier construction, and then probably rightly considering recent finances backed down. However they said that they would ensure that the structure was built so that they could bolt on an upper tier at some time in the future.Do not know if they did in the end but would make expansion somewhat cheaper and possible[/quote]

I thought it was built so that they could add another 4,000 seats later.

27,300 + 5,600 increase as a result of a new GW. stand --> 32,900

Add another 4,000 to the Jarrold stand at a later date and that would take us to 36,900 and thus past the 35,000 seat target.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="Bury Yellow"]

We have a big big problem re parking, which will reduce with the sale of the car park. [/quote]

They have already sold the piece of land between the test bed and the river to Broadland Housing Association. Furthermore they have also sold a building (presumably the test bed - the long building) and a piece of land to some LSE related company.

So I wonder if the club still owns the large triangle shaped piece of car park directly behind the Jarrold stand? Enough for the users of the executive boxes and sponsors etc.?

May be the extra 5,600 that may attend with a new GW. stand will park in the city and walk to the ground, come by train, by bus or walk?

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="City1st"]The high demand is partly through having almost League 1 prices for Premier League football. The logical answer is to reduce demand by price. [/quote]

I wonder what the occupants of the Barclay or Snakepit will think if their season tickets increase by £100 next season?

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="City1st"]"If we manage to stay in the Premiership then capacity increase is a neccessity to enable the club to fulfill potential"

very, very slowly

If we increase the capacity by another 25% we willroughly get another 25% increase in income - minus repayment of loan on that redevelopment

If we increase the tickets by 25% we will achieve the same result .... without any risk of not making the 35,000 capacity.

As 25% may be seen as high then the club simply deducts the amount of the loan repayments (as above)plus lose of income from closing the Main Stand for some while.

That gives the same increase in revenue without the same risks and the same risk of keeping up payments were we to be relegated.

Not that difficult, is it ?[/quote]

May be the club has plans to increase prices and capacity?

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Purple, i have to admit i dread the thought of expansion followed by relegation and thousands of disheartening empty seats. But i am certainly alot more positive than you over our potential crowds in the Prem and as i stated before even the old board quoted the 35k figure for demand in the top league. I actually think we would sell 35k easily for the top 6 games as simply everyone wants to see those teams in the flesh no matter who they support. The smaller teams will be more of a challenge but as stated it`s then up to the board to entice people in with cheaper pricing/ticket offers etc.

Something has convinced both boards that 35k is realistic in the Prem and given a population of over 1 million in Norfolk and North Suffolk with little competition from other high-profile leisure activities, the crowds of recent years, and the fact that we`re currently selling out easily when people can watch the game for nothing in the pub, i can understand why. It`s a big step and it`s a real shame we can`t do it in two or three stages, but i do feel that available evidence points to it being the logical next step as long as the team continue its upward curve.

I would also add that the idea in itself is an inspiring one and just adds to the general impression of a driven and ambitious club which is going places- which all helps to keep ambitious people at the club and attract others.

[PurpleCanary 5,573]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Purple, i have to admit i dread the thought of expansion followed by relegation and thousands of disheartening empty seats. But i am certainly alot more positive than you over our potential crowds in the Prem and as i stated before even the old board quoted the 35k figure for demand in the top league. I actually think we would sell 35k easily for the top 6 games as simply everyone wants to see those teams in the flesh no matter who they support. The smaller teams will be more of a challenge but as stated it`s then up to the board to entice people in with cheaper pricing/ticket offers etc. Something has convinced both boards that 35k is realistic in the Prem and given a population of over 1 million in Norfolk and North Suffolk with little competition from other high-profile leisure activities, the crowds of recent years, and the fact that we`re currently selling out easily when people can watch the game for nothing in the pub, i can understand why. It`s a big step and it`s a real shame we can`t do it in two or three stages, but i do feel that available evidence points to it being the logical next step as long as the team continue its upward curve. I would also add that the idea in itself is an inspiring one and just adds to the general impression of a driven and ambitious club which is going places- which all helps to keep ambitious people at the club and attract others.[/quote]

 

Mr.Carrow, you have identified the main problem, which is that it doesn''t make any sense to do this in stages. There has to be a once and for all leap of faith. You - and the board - have a bit more faith than me. Which is fine. You (and presumably the board) read the facts one way. I read them a touch more pessimistically. But as I have already said, I think that - on this issue at least - we are not in serious disagreement. It is more a question of degree. And I am not even going to point out the irony of you quoting Neil Doncaster to back up your case...

 

[QHcanary 0]

[quote user="City1st"]some tripe from business for dummies[/quote]

Look mate, I dont need a lesson in supply and demand. 5 year olds understand the stuff you''re trotting out.

You can warn us all of the dangers of expanding the ground all you like. We all know the risk. But why shouldn''t we want more for The club? The board do and so do the majority of fans. If you''re happy for the club to stagnate and fall further behind the larger clubs then by all means keep kicking and stamping your feet.

if you''d also be happy to pay even more inflated prices then lucky old you that you can afford it. I dare say I could afford it too. However, there are plenty of "put upon" fans who couldn''t, and why shouldn''t that viewpoint be represented here. A lot of those fans are the ones who continued to attend games when we weren''t sure we''d get out of league 1, and now you want the club to say "thanks, but no thanks".

If you''re not advocating the approach you''re so aggressively putting across, then I have to ask why you''d bother posting it at all? And if you''re not, then how do we build a premier league club capable of operating on a financially stable footing? If you''ve got master plan all to yourself then be a love and share with us all. I''m sure the powers that be at Carrow Rd would love to hear what they''re doing wrong.

More than anything your vitriolic rhetoric marks you out as exactly the type of "fan" that any normal person avoids like the plague. A joy sponge, sucking the life out of people who enjoy watching their team and want to see the team and the club improve, get bigger and succeed.

Come to think of it you''re probably that tool who sits behind me.

[Harry 0]

As I''ve said on here before on the Questions for the Club section of the now defunct message board of the Clubs site someone asked about the Jarrold Stand, the reply that came back from the club was that there had been 2 options for the foundations when the stand was built:

1) Deep foundations that would allow a second tier straight on top.

2) Shallower (but cheaper) foundations that wouldn''t take a second tier

The board at the time went for the second cheaper option.

I''m not saying it would be impossible to add an upper tier, it''s just not as easy (or cheap) as some people think.

To the poster who asked about people in the Snakepit and Barclay paying an extra £100 for season tickets next season, personally I would struggle but yes I would pay it, it works out to roughly an extra £5.50 per game.

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Fair do`s Purple. I am fully aware of the irony, but given that Doncaster was basically chief dampener of expectations, telling us how many clubs we couldn`t compete with and how we mustn`t do a Gretna, i actually think that lends his very occassional positive comments on our club much more weight. Why on earth would he make it up?

[nutty nigel 7,555]

Mr. Carrow, were you not just as positive about the previous board in their first few years running the club. Aren''t you just a teeny bit worried about the future? Watling, South and Chase all suffered relegations from the top division. It wasn''t just Munby and Doncaster. It''s difficult to make the step up after many years below. The odds are well against us.

 

 

[blahblahblah 2]

Thanks nutty for making the point I was trying to make.  10 million spent on another 8,000 seats would be blamed as the pre-cursor for a relegation should one occur.  Although I would be able to get a seat more easily :).In an ideal world, a new tier would be built, Lambert would still be here and would be able to keep his squad together, and stay in the division.  We''ve had a fairytale ride so far under his reign, long may it continue, but what if it doesn''t ?

[T 190]

Mr. C in capex u-turn shocker. I knew he''d get there in the end.

[Mr.Carrow 378]

Spurs game sold out already.....