Toggle sidebar

GWT: English Premier League: 2/6 - 2/7/2016

Alklha

Registered User
Sep 7, 2011
16,875
2,751
Jersey Fresh said:
Not when they aren't spending, no. Not what I meant. This puts ownership in a position of having to spend now, I think. Assuming they do, you can't also complain about a corresponding price hike.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with that. I can understand frustrations when they are getting increases, less investment than other clubs and a pretty poor product on the pitch. When you see your club getting beat to transfer targets by Chinese clubs...

The problem from a lot of clubs is they take the fans for granted, and there are many fans who will sit back and accept it. It's strange how the mentality of this is very different in different countries. Germany has been brought up, and their clubs attitude to an increase like this is that it wouldn't be worth the negative impact it would have with the fan base. But then Bayern Munich season ticket prices start at around US$200.
 
Jeffrey

Jeffrey

Registered User
Feb 2, 2003
12,436
3
Montreal
Visit site
Live in the Now said:
The increase is worth only two million to FSG, but the fans are being gouged. There is hardly any defense of it, felt disgusted when I found that out.
Click to expand...
Professional football is a making money business.

The chairman could triple the price and have no fans in the stand if they wanted it's their rights.

I have read that football is nothing without fans. This is not true football is still football without fans.
 
YNWA14

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
The price hike is pennies to the owners compared to the revenue increase from the TV deal, sponsorships, merchandise, etc. The only people it affects are the fans trying to attend the game.

Maybe the players shouldn't be paid such exorbitant wages, agent fees, etc. but at the end of the day this change is a gouge of the fans and does very little for Liverpool. It has nothing to do with their spending on players.
 
YNWA14

YNWA14

Onbreekbaar
Dec 29, 2010
34,543
2,560
Jeffrey said:
Professional football is a making money business.

The chairman could triple the price and have no fans in the stand if they wanted it's their rights.

I have read that football is nothing without fans. This is not true football is still football without fans.
Click to expand...

:shakehead
 
Shrimper

Shrimper

Trick or ruddy treat
Feb 20, 2010
104,192
5,268
Essex
Jeffrey said:
Professional football is a making money business.

The chairman could triple the price and have no fans in the stand if they wanted it's their rights.

I have read that football is nothing without fans. This is not true football is still football without fans.
Click to expand...

Football without fans is nothing, it wouldn't exist as it does now.
 
Peen

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,943
25,326
Jeffrey said:
Professional football require fans.

Football is a sport and it requires a ball a field and cleats. That's it.
Click to expand...

But in this case we are talking professional football and Shrimper clearly meant this but you're trying to make a point out of nothing that we all know lmao
 
Burner Account

Burner Account

Registered User
Feb 14, 2008
37,418
1,744
Curtinho said:
It's pointless arguing. When you become a fan because a team is successful, has great history or a big name you don't have the same kind of connection to the club that the people who live there, they breath it day in and day out. It's more than just a business to them and I really am kind of starting to get why Ugmo rips into the "glory hunters" so much. They just don't get it. You can say you 'understand' but clearly when you are ragging on the fans who actually care about the club and have lived it their entire lives, and their parents lives, etc. you just don't get it.

As more and more money and modernization has begun with EPL and other leagues the fans have become more and more disconnected from the club because a lot of them are like a few of the "Liverpool fans" who have been posting in this topic. "It's a business" "supply and demand" "they can suck it up" "crappy fans deserve crappy results". Give your head a shake.
Click to expand...

They are a historic club with a waiting list a mile long for tickets. They are susceptible to price increases because the club has guaranteed butts for the seats. Just because I'm not surprised by the raise doesn't mean I'm defending it.
 
Ceremony

Ceremony

blahem
Jun 8, 2012
113,185
15,360
SeversonFan said:
Why should ownership possibly care that a bunch of paying customers left at the 77th minute, when it's all but guaranteed they will be back next week paying again?

Best way to send a message as a fan is to not give the club your money at all.

Hilarious that they blew a 2-0 lead after the walkout. :laugh:
Click to expand...

I largely agree with this. The point about tickets being paid for before the rise in prices being announced, well, they could still not go. Even if the club has the money already, have an already empty stadium for the whole match and it's still quite the stadium. I haven't seen the game though, if it was as pronounced as I heard it described as earlier then it probably had the same effect anyway.

Without knowing the specifics of the proportions of Liverpool's price rise or how their prices compare to other teams in the league, I think anybody criticising regular paying supporters for demonstrating against a perceived unfairness being transferred to them doesn't really appreciate any of the realities of the situation at play. For whatever monster the Premier League has created when it invented football in 1992, its members are still historic entities to which people have generations of community representation to attach to as symbols. In seeing prices for a Liverpool game reaching £77 the consideration isn't given to the globalisation and merchandisation of the game itself and the club and the players/infrastructure which go towards that, it's that something that's been so integral to (part of) a city's identity for so long is being warped and effectively taken from them. To raise ticket prices when you're going to have extra seats installed also seems to me to be especially cynical. The problem is though, the way top level sport is going the reality is that statements like "football without the fans is nothing" will ring increasingly hollow at this sort of level. PL teams could quite easily play an entire season without having any fans in the stadium at all and barely take a hit financially. Fans have never been less integral to a football club's financial wellbeing than they are now.

Still though, I'd like to see a comparison of league prices and see how Liverpool compare to other teams.

Also, I hope Klopp's okay.

Also, at least they're not likely to erect an FC United of Mersey any time soon.

Also, this: http://allardyceplz.ytmnd.com

Also, imagine being beaten by Robert Huth. Minter.
 
Burner Account

Burner Account

Registered User
Feb 14, 2008
37,418
1,744
Ceremony said:
I largely agree with this. The point about tickets being paid for before the rise in prices being announced, well, they could still not go. Even if the club has the money already, have an already empty stadium for the whole match and it's still quite the stadium. I haven't seen the game though, if it was as pronounced as I heard it described as earlier then it probably had the same effect anyway.

Without knowing the specifics of the proportions of Liverpool's price rise or how their prices compare to other teams in the league, I think anybody criticising regular paying supporters for demonstrating against a perceived unfairness being transferred to them doesn't really appreciate any of the realities of the situation at play. For whatever monster the Premier League has created when it invented football in 1992, its members are still historic entities to which people have generations of community representation to attach to as symbols. In seeing prices for a Liverpool game reaching £77 the consideration isn't given to the globalisation and merchandisation of the game itself and the club and the players/infrastructure which go towards that, it's that something that's been so integral to (part of) a city's identity for so long is being warped and effectively taken from them. To raise ticket prices when you're going to have extra seats installed also seems to me to be especially cynical. The problem is though, the way top level sport is going the reality is that statements like "football without the fans is nothing" will ring increasingly hollow at this sort of level. PL teams could quite easily play an entire season without having any fans in the stadium at all and barely take a hit financially. Fans have never been less integral to a football club's financial wellbeing than they are now.

Still though, I'd like to see a comparison of league prices and see how Liverpool compare to other teams.

Also, I hope Klopp's okay.

Also, at least they're not likely to erect an FC United of Mersey any time soon.

Also, this: http://allardyceplz.ytmnd.com

Also, imagine being beaten by Robert Huth. Minter.
Click to expand...

I'd seen a ranking of Premier League season ticket prices on this board, maybe a year or two ago. Arsenal were the most expensive, and Manchester City were the least, believe it or not.
 
Live in the Now

Live in the Now

Registered User
Dec 17, 2005
53,098
7,544
LA
Mignolet on the Adam Johnson goal. Once again a complete joke. If this guy is our starting keeper for five more years it'll mean all ambition from the club had gone and we got relegated. Can't believe this is our starting keeper, says it all about the state of the playing squad.
 
Ceremony

Ceremony

blahem
Jun 8, 2012
113,185
15,360
How much did Otamendi cost again? :laugh:

I'm enjoying all the empty seats for 1st vs 2nd too
 
Burner Account

Burner Account

Registered User
Feb 14, 2008
37,418
1,744
Live in the Now said:
Mignolet has now cost Liverpool an approximate 15 points this season. [Squawka]
Click to expand...

thumb_15022_default_news_size_5.jpeg
 
Peen

Peen

Rejoicing in a Benning-free world
Oct 6, 2013
29,943
25,326
I thought it was. Usually I don't agree with handballs when the strike comes from so close but that was going on target, seemingly towards an open goal.

Think you have to call it.
 
Jussi

Jussi

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
91,402
11,083
Mojo Dojo Casa House
McPeen said:
I thought it was. Usually I don't agree with handballs when the strike comes from so close but that was going on target, seemingly towards an open goal.

Think you have to call it.
Click to expand...

It hit Blind's left hand, which was in front of his chest. It didn't hit his right hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
-->