They are not screwing anyone over. It's the value of the ticket, there's no manipulation here. The stadium has a 75k capacity, there are 659 million fans. That's why ticket prices are high.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
They are not screwing anyone over. It's the value of the ticket, there's no manipulation here. The stadium has a 75k capacity, there are 659 million fans. That's why ticket prices are high.
I see the "London tax" is still in full effect. Chelsea, Spurs and Arsenal are making out like bandits at their fans expense. No wonder Wenger finally cracked and went on a spending spree. 6 years without trophies, when their punters are coughing up that kind of cash, is inexcusable.
Wigan tickets now cost two potatoes and a mushroom.Always puzzles me this ticket price question....MU fans moaning they pay more than some other clubs when they have the privilege of watching the cream of world football in one of the best stadiums.
Try being a Leeds fan in div 2...STH paying £711 to sit in the East Stand Lower...go upstairs and it's £752! A parent and his child are paying £750 a season!
MUFC can't win can they...the fans want the best players etc but moan when they have to pay for it. Take a look at the list below to see who's paying more and maybe you'll realise you're pretty lucky really.
Wigan tickets +2%
City +9%
NUFC +5%
Everton +3%
Scumderland +5%
Norwich +11%
WHU +16.6%
Spurs +4-6%
Swansea +10.4%
MUFC Prices frozen
WBA are the only club to cut prices.
City have to put theirs up now they have to work within FFP and can fill a ground for more than just United.
West Ham have just been promoted so irrelevant.
Swansea and Norwich are having to match a Premier League wage bill now they've stayed up.
What were their prices to begin with?
Besides, how does all this affect me? I don't want a season ticket for elsewhere - the demand for other tickets doesn't concern me. The price of nappies no longer concerns me now my kids are older. As I've said, season ticket prices have been kept the same because they can't sell them. They struggled to sell them last year and are doing so again. They've put match tickets up as an incentive to get people buying season tickets, so if you don't buy a season ticket, the prices have gone up anyway by about 4%
in all honestly, did you realistically think for a milisecond that ticket prices or season ticket prices would drop??
Ticket prices would go up no matter who owned the club. So using that as one of the main issues with the Glazers is wrong.
Yes they should be criticised if they said they would not raise them. Because it was a lie. But inevitable all the same.
And of course you compare to other clubs. The same with every product or service. I know I do when buying just about anything so I know if what I am paying is fair or not.
If we were the only club raising prices and were the highest in the league everyone would have a right to be furious.
Yes they should be criticised if they said they would not raise them. Because it was a lie. But inevitable all the same.
And of course you compare to other clubs. The same with every product or service. I know I do when buying just about anything so I know if what I am paying is fair or not.
If we were the only club raising prices and were the highest in the league everyone would have a right to be furious.
I will buy at least one share. And if Glazers demand me to sell it after they have made their money, I'll refuse to sell it. Motherfeckers.
Id like to see the price of tickets of the 'big' clubs in comparison
How much do u pay per trade? Buying one share would be financially asinine.
Always puzzles me this ticket price question....MU fans moaning they pay more than some other clubs when they have the privilege of watching the cream of world football in one of the best stadiums.
Try being a Leeds fan in div 2...STH paying £711 to sit in the East Stand Lower...go upstairs and it's £752! A parent and his child are paying £750 a season!
MUFC can't win can they...the fans want the best players etc but moan when they have to pay for it. Take a look at the list below to see who's paying more and maybe you'll realise you're pretty lucky really.
Wigan tickets +2%
City +9%
NUFC +5%
Everton +3%
Scumderland +5%
Norwich +11%
WHU +16.6%
Spurs +4-6%
Swansea +10.4%
MUFC Prices frozen
WBA are the only club to cut prices.
I think the problem is fans paying top dollar for tickets, merchandise and whatever else and the club not reinvesting that money into the players and/or facilities but using it to pay off debt, and or line their own pockets.
But that's an argument for another day.
4.99 Dollars on Etrade (or 7.99) I think. I think I got an offer of first 40 trades on Free. I'm at 20 or something by now. It's just a token purchase though, I'm not going to make any money out of it.
I think a few years ago MU were charging too little and that's partly the reason for the hike when the new owners came in and saw what they were offereing compared to other clubs was worth more.
Some fans have and always will be priced out of watching their club....just like some people can afford other things while others can't. It's life!
At Wigan you could have a potatoe playing for you....at MU you have the best in the world.
You can't just look at MU ticketing policies like you are doing and it's not just MU that are increasing match day ticket prices....MU fans pay between and £30 - £52 a game. Are you really saying that's too much?!
My point in listing other clubs increases is to show that MU are not the only club in the country raising prices.
fair enough. i'm looking for a facebook-like plunge off the IPO and perhaps buy 500-1000 usd worth.
I'm not having a go at anyone, but I find it a bit strange that non match goers can have a go at match goers for moaning about rise in price tickets. After all, they're the one whose pockets are getting burned.
Duh, don't twist what I said. Look at the way they've treated fans since the takeover - massive ticket price increases, extra increases on CL knockout tickets, the automatic cup scheme (including forcing people to buy early round Carling Cup games but making them miss out on the Barcelona semi final in 08), the manipulation of the loyalty pot rules after the OFT forced them to scrap the automatic cup scheme.
As I said, the £500m going out of the club is irrelevant in the long run if we're undergoing a transitional period off the pitch to leave us in a much stronger position in several years' time. Wenger has been hamstrung by comparison to Fergie because of the Ashburton Grove development and the financial crisis affecting its projected success.
Why would I give a toss about the price of 2-seater sports cars if I'm after a people carrier? Still a vehicle but not the type I want.
Why? To see that we're the same as Chelsea, Spurs or Arsenal or slightly less is irrelevant given London weightings.
Of course you care that tickets have gone up. But would you accept that they would have gone up no matter who was in charge?
I believe that our ticket prices are reasonable when compared to other PL clubs, if I didn't think that then I wouldnt buy them!
Ticket prices have always gone up, they went up significantly under the PLC and Edwards as well - it is true that the Glazers pushed them up when they first arrived but now the price has barely changed for about 3/4 years so the average rise is no more than it used to be.
The big negative for us is the ACS, I think only Arsenal have a similar policy.
why are you avoiding a simple question?
Did you honestly think ticket prices would drop?
Only idiots and the transfer muppets see it that way. A lot have been invested in players, very good ones too in fact and didnt we announce that we built some kind of medical science or health stuff buildingat Carrington last season or so?
They probably think the world is unfair too because they're not born rich. The world is against them. Boohoo
bloody hell, who'd live in London eh?
Was interested to see the comparison in teams around the same area; United-City-Liverpool. Interesting to see that last season it was more expensive to watch Liverpool than City.
Those prices for United don't seem unreasonable, though there should be some kind of loyalty scheme/discounted price for long standing season ticket holders
Was interested to see the comparison in teams around the same area; United-City-Liverpool. Interesting to see that last season it was more expensive to watch Liverpool than City.
Those prices for United don't seem unreasonable, though there should be some kind of loyalty scheme/discounted price for long standing season ticket holders
You just keep buying into the pro-Glazer bullshit then.
Bottom line, the club can no longer compete for the really top players, despite that fact that its one of the most valuable and commecially astute Sporting "companies" on the planet, and generating huge profits. The reason being in many people's eyes a precariously dangerous amount of debt leveraged against the club.
Now the owners are trying to rake in some cash to go directly into their own pockets. They're at United for one reason only - to make a huge profit, and they're prepared to gamble on the clubs long term security in order to do so. They're speculaters, like most business men and the bottom line for them is profit. Simple as that.
That's not true.
We continue to be able to compete for the really top players, provided we don't get into a bidding war with a club that's bank-rolled by an oligarch/oil rich state. We also struggle to sign players who have their head turned by some of the glamour clubs on the continent. This is nothing new. It's an improvement from losing out on players like Gascoigne and Shearer to other clubs in the same league though.
This would have been the case irrespective of whether or not we had the current level of debt. United was being run as a profitable business before the Glazers took over, that wouldn't have stopped just because a few other clubs in Europe came into the sort of wealth that means they no longer need to care about the bottom line.
The way that people wilfully ignore the seismic effect that sugar daddies have had on the game in general is just one of many examples where people distort reality to fit their agenda. No doubt someone will interpret me pointing this out as being a "Glazer apologist" or somesuch but - just like this whole topic of debate - the reality is a bit more complicated than than. I wish the Glazers hadn't taken us over and I wish the club didn't have to deal with all this debt. IMO none of this provides as big a challenge to our future success as the whole sugar daddy phenomena, which has nothing to do with our current owners and is waaaaaaaay more damaging to our chance of ongoing success than whatever potential cash flow challenges these debt repayments might cause.
Yes it is true that the Glazers are only here for profit, that much is obvious. However, I don't agree that there has been any gamble on the long term security of the club - we easily manage to service our debts and the annual interest bill is now falling.
Surely you can see that the best way for them to make a profit is for the club to be successful and to do that they have to invest in players so we can challenge for trophies - our wage bill is one of the highest in the world and I believe we already have a strong squad plus still expect at least 1 more player to be signed.
Don't be absurd. It was a stupid question that didn't deserve an answer.
Of course I didn't expect them to drop. Nor did I expect the increases that saw a £28 ticket in 2005 going for £49 only four years later.
We can argue all day long about ticket prices being resonable. They may very well be. How ever one thing we have to put up with, that other teams don't. Is the Automatic Cup Scheme.
Could add upto £500 on a season ticket.
Could add upto £500 on a season ticket.
Why is it a stupid question?
If you didnt expect it to drop why are you so pissed off? Lets look at your answer. You're pissed because tickets no longer cost the same as they did six years ago. How many adult tickets do you see in any of those clubs going for £28? The cheapest ticket is Wigan at £30
agreed, stupid scheme.
And the sooner you understand and accept that the better...it IS a business!
They are in it for the money...just like any other business owner and do you really think any other owner would not run it on borrowed money? Do you really want another rich oil billionaire wanting a new toy.
Do you really want to be like City with a squad full of top price players that in the main don't justify their price tag? Ferguson rarely splashes the cash and certainly hasn't paid over the odds like City and Chelsea have...he's better than that and develops players into greats.
As I've said before, even in light of the Chelsea/Man City effect in football United seemingly have a different transfer strategy in recent years.
The simple fact is that the club seem much less willing to spend even the sums they were a decade ago, and areas of the side have been neglected in the hope that we could limp along. Top players may bei going for large sums but is it much more than United were preapred to pay in the past? Given the amounts being thrown about a decade ago things haven't changed all that much.
It may be the case that the City/Chelsea situation privides the club with enormous challenegs going forward - but it doesn't take away the fact that any efforts made to mitigate that damage clearly has to be effected by the enormous millstone of debt around the club.
Currently, with the greatest manager football has ever seeen we remain competative, and it seems that right now, the club can service its debt. This may not always be the case, and with such huge debt the club is always on a precipice and reliant on factors outside its control for continued financial stability. And that's what I don't like.
Yes. Not only the transfer fees, the wages too. The inflationary effect of sugar daddies means that all the top clubs are treading new ground when it comes to being able to afford the best players around. As explained in this article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/31/deloitte-premier-league-survey-wages
Re your last para, I agree.
I'm not naive, I accept that its a consequence of United being forthcoming in the business world and the club profiting ono the pitch. Doesn't mean I have to like what the owners are doing with the club.
If a large company goes under, nobody but employees give a shit. If United go bang it takes away a large part of my life, and millions of others, and leaves a seismic hole in football.
And Fergie has spent plenty of money in the transfer makret in the past. Sums still right up there at the top of the tree, self funded yes, but large nonetheless, and not much less than City and Chelsea have paid for top stars. Only in recent years has their been "no value in the market". People may disagree but I don't consider that a coincidence.
I noticed MUFC are not alone in using the ACS....is your scheme the same as other clubs?
I must say it does seem unfair to be forced to buy tickets for home European and FA Cup games you don't want.
I must say it does seem unfair to be forced to buy tickets for home European and FA Cup games you don't want.
An Arsenal fan told me that they are (or were when he said it) only billed for the home CL matches and had a choice on the KO cups.
Obviously ours has changed now (thanks to the MUST-instigated OFT review) but they have changed the loyalty pot configuration to take into account the cup scheme.
So you'd be fine with the rocketing prices at a time when money's tighter than it ever has been?
Our ticket prices have barely changed for about 4 years now - I know you gave up your ticket due to price increases, but IIRC you were sat in the one of the most expensive areas of the ground - you did have the option of moving to a less expensive area and paying the same as you were before, which is exactly what I did in fact.
Off course i'd be pissed when it goes up, just like im pissed when the price of electric, gas etc goes up
however, if it goes up to be in line with the market its in, then its a case of shrugging your shoulders and getting on with it. As Marching says, its like any item in life, its up to you to decide whether you can afford it or not
I'm very pleased for you. I chose not to go to a different area of the ground with a worse view and unknown costs of the cup scheme. Had their been no ACS, my decision may have been different. I may have found somewhere with a slight increase but having sat in most parts of the stadium I can see why some are so much cheaper than others.
The last four years are irrelevant - it skews it because they'd rocketed already and the season ticket waiting list had disintegrated; couple that with the global financial crisis and they knew they couldn't increase them further. Bolton and others were actually reducing their tickets at a time when we were meant to be grateful the Glazers weren't stiffing us again.
I think we agreed to disagree at the time - I assume we'll do the same again.
I'm very pleased for you. I chose not to go to a different area of the ground with a worse view and unknown costs of the cup scheme. Had their been no ACS, my decision may have been different. I may have found somewhere with a slight increase but having sat in most parts of the stadium I can see why some are so much cheaper than others.
The last four years are irrelevant - it skews it because they'd rocketed already and the season ticket waiting list had disintegrated; couple that with the global financial crisis and they knew they couldn't increase them further. Bolton and others were actually reducing their tickets at a time when we were meant to be grateful the Glazers weren't stiffing us again.
I think we agreed to disagree at the time - I assume we'll do the same again.
It's a few years back, so my memory is hazy but weren't the really aggressive price hikes in the first year after the takeover all signed off and agreed before the Glazers had a controlling stake?
I don't think anyone outside of Mr Gill and the Glazers could tell you that.
The season ticket price rises were confirmed in a match programme at the back end of the season - I think it was the game against Newcastle where Wayne score that goal. Which means it could be either. The unknown factor is how much influence the Glazers had on ticket prices during that takeover process - pure speculation on anyone's behalf to suggest they had none or plenty.
Perhaps. But wages have been heading this way in football for a long time, and the trend is unlikely to be bucked - seems the average wage has increased year on year even down the leagues - how much of that you can pin on the rich owners I'm not sure - it started a long time ago and clubs were paying well over the odds to average players before Roman or the Sheikh got involved. Leeds are the rpime example - overstretching themselves to keep pace with United at the time.
It seems people want to bring up the City and Chelsea situation in every argument, but to me, in this case it ignores the issues, and skews the debate. Regardless of how rich other clubs are, it doesn't change the position united find themselves in currently.
- Status