OT ticket price hikes for rest of season

Pogue Mahone

Closet Gooner.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
138,576
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
MUST Statement

Club put up remaining Members match tickets to £66 per game for remainder of season

Tonight the club informed the Fans Forum of changes to certain ticket policies that will take effect immediately. The Club has indicated that it will post the details of these changes online but the headline is that, with immediate effect, all Members tickets for the remainder of this season will increase to £66 each, and that this price will apply for kids and over-65s as well as adults.

This means that for an adult member to take their kid to a game in the remainder of this season will cost £132. Well over double the minimum price they could pay to do it today. And this change is happening overnight, immediately.

The Club claims that 97% of this season's tickets are already sold, so that this will only affect a small number of people, but we believe this stat is misleading, as we will explain below.

The Club has provided zero consultation on the matter, neither with the Forum nor the Fan Advisory Board nor MUST. We were simply informed of the decision that there will be price rises affecting certain fans that are “urgently needed” to address profitability and sustainability concerns.

Suffice it to say, that the idea that the fans must pay their “fair share” for the Club’s excesses and/or mismanagement—and above all, the Glazers lack of investment over two decades—is offensive.

We fans have done everything we have been asked. We have cheered the players on even in the face of substandard performance. We have gone to matches and abided by the new usage rules for tickets. We have taken on a price increase this year. This is in addition to the hundreds, even thousands loyal fans pay to follow United home and away.

There is a risk that this is only the opening salvo of what will surely be massive pressure to implement a significant price rise for next season. Once they have got used to charging £132 for a parent and child to come to OT, will they really go back to the old pricing levels for next season?

We are absolutely in favour of running a sustainable business, but football clubs are hardly ordinary consumer businesses. Ours is clearly in “rebuilding mode.” Moreover, it is not like we have options to take our custom elsewhere: we are not going to “choose another provider” like one might pick a telecoms company.

If the club has a need for short term capital they should issue new shares, as they did when INEOS first arrived, and bring in funding from existing or new shareholders.

We have objected to this action in the strongest possible terms, both for the action itself and the complete lack of consultation, which is a step backward based on the process we had agreed with the Club before INEOS’ arrival.

Over the coming days MUST will be seeking urgent discussions with the Club to get them to listen to fans' concern at this policy. United fans have sucked up a lot. We will not be silent on this and we need to be prepared to resist any attempts to further drive up ticket prices.

Many thanks for your continued support

--
M.U.S.T.
Click to expand...

Being discussed in ticket thread but merits its own thread. To me this seems like a disgraceful decision. Also insanely short sighted. The average age of local match-going fans is going up and up. How does the next generation get hooked if their parents have to play adult prices for them to attend?!

Is there any precedent at any other club?
 
Someone's got to pay for Ten Hags sacking. The club leadership and fans both played their part in the mess, so it's only right they both pay for it
 
As they say in the statement, the club (Glazers) should sell more shares to generate funds, they already increased ticket prices.
MUST and other fan groups should be pressuring them on doing that.
 
Is there any confirmation this is actually a policy and not a website issue?
 
Btw, weren't INEOS the popular choice of ownership? This whole thing is going rather well.
 
The club want to build a "Wembly of the North", looks like they are starting with pricing to reflect that.

The cost after these rises is ridiculous but we already no football and all involved our out of touch. As was mentioned in the MUST statement, they should have issued new shares but it clear the Glazer's want to keep their cake. I must also look at INEOS who in my opinion have been terrible to the staff and fanbase since coming on board.
 
Skills said:
Someone's got to pay for Ten Hags sacking. The club leadership and fans both played their part in the mess, so it's only right they both pay for it
Click to expand...
On a site with a lot of awful posters, you still manage to consistently stand out.
 
Skills said:
Btw, weren't INEOS the popular choice of ownership? This whole thing is going rather well.
Click to expand...

I don't think they were to popular choice overall, perhaps with ST holders.

Either way, they aren't treating fans or staff with respect.
 
lilcurt said:
The club want to build a "Wembly of the North", looks like they are starting with pricing to reflect that.

The cost after these rises is ridiculous but we already no football and all involved our out of touch. As was mentioned in the MUST statement, they should have issued new shares but it clear the Glazer's want to keep their cake. I must also look at INEOS who in my opinion have been terrible to the staff and fanbase since coming on board.
Click to expand...

That's not just down to the Glazers. Both INEOS and Glazers would have to agree to dilute their shareholding to issue new shares.
 
LlKjCvH_d.webp


Absolutely wild. The money gained is never going to be worth the negative PR. Someone new has completely shit the bed.
 


Amazingly the £66 in this is not referenced in the video, but whoever made the graphic for tonight’s video probably went to the official website and inadvertently stumbled upon the change when they saw the minimum ticket price on the slider filter!
 
Last edited:
Skills said:
That's not just down to the Glazers. Both INEOS and Glazers would have to agree to dilute their shareholding to issue new shares.
Click to expand...
True, I made an assumption that the Glazers would be most against that, or INEOS would agree to buy additional Glazer shares but the money goes to the club. It's criminal how much they have pocketed off the back of neglect.
 
lilcurt said:
True, I made an assumption that the Glazers would be most against that, or INEOS would agree to buy additional Glazer shares but the money goes to the club. It's criminal how much they have pocketed off the back of neglect.
Click to expand...

How much of their own money have INEOS given to the club so far?
 
Cut costs, increase revenue, boost value of their investment. It was all INEOS and Ratcliffe were ever interested in.
 
TMDaines said:
LlKjCvH_d.webp


Absolutely wild. The money gained is never going to be worth the negative PR. Someone new has completely shit the bed.
Click to expand...
That's the thing. If, as the club claims, 97% have been sold already anyway and thus it will only affect very few fans wanting to buy a ticket, the financial benefit is negligible, while the damage in terms of fan relations is substantial.
 
Very approximate estimation but say this is an average rise of £15 a ticket - 3% of 72k tickets is 2160 tickets per game remaining. 13 home Premier League games left making an extra 15*2160 is £32k increase in revenue per game, totalling £416k.

Is this seriously worth the dreadful PR for little more than a week's wages for Marcus Rashford?

Incredible.
 
FortunaUtd said:
That's the thing. If, as the club claims, 97% have been sold already anyway and thus it will only affect very few fans wanting to buy a ticket, the financial benefit is negligible, while the damage in terms of fan relations is substantial.
Click to expand...

It's just setting the flag down for next seasons price hike.

I said it earlier, but I actually don't think they'll mind missing out on top 4 this season if it acts as the catalyst to raise ticket prices for the long term.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/erik-ten-hag-2024-25-sacked.484291/post-32445206

I think the one benefit of keeping him and missing out on top 4, would be that it's quite easy for INEOS to raise ticket prices next season and make the fans pay for their choice they made this summer.

Season ticket prices have been untouchable for most of the last decade, with a marginal 5% increase last summer. We'll need to make up for the lost revenue next season, especially if there's any CL clauses in our sponsor contracts. That'll be good for the clubs financial health long term, if the ticket prices are restored back in-line with inflation during the 11 year freeze.
Click to expand...
 
Devil_forever said:
What's the current price for reference?
Click to expand...
£45 - £58 - Adult
£20 - Child

I have taken my kids to 5 games this season, and I can categorically say that from now on, we will not be attending anymore games at £132

This is an own goal by the club, because kids are the future generations of fans, the lifeblood. INEOS want to build a new stadium and find an extra 25 thousand fans to fill it twice a week. Well, this is certainly not the way to go about it.

Shame on them.
 
Wheato said:
£45 - £58 - Adult
£20 - Child

I have taken my kids to 5 games this season, and I can categorically say that from now on, we will not be attending anymore games at £132

This is an own goal by the club, because kids are the future generations of fans, the lifeblood. INEOS want to build a new stadium and find an extra 25 thousand fans to fill it twice a week. Well, this is certainly not the way to go about it.

Shame on them.
Click to expand...

Yes, those are member prices.

ST holder seats are as little as £33. This allows the club to re-sell tickets back from ST holders who cannot attend at DOUBLE the face value.

Legalised club touting.
 
FortunaUtd said:
That's the thing. If, as the club claims, 97% have been sold already anyway and thus it will only affect very few fans wanting to buy a ticket, the financial benefit is negligible, while the damage in terms of fan relations is substantial.
Click to expand...

Makes no sense but obviously it's just laying the groundwork for future pricing.

You'd have to be an absolute idiot to sign off on this PR nightmare given the state of the club this season.
 
This is a fecking shocker from the club.

Disgusting.
 
You lot wanted INEOS and the Glazers and so that's what we've got. It's pointless moaning about it now I'm afraid.

How were people not seeing this coning with all the other penny scrounging since the ownership change? It's bizarre it's taken this long.

Don't expect your season ticket to stay in the same price region either if Sir Jim calculates the club can make more money selling less for a higher price
 
noodlehair said:
You lot wanted INEOS and the Glazers and so that's what we've got. It's pointless moaning about it now I'm afraid.

How were people not seeing this coning with all the other penny scrounging since the ownership change? It's bizarre it's taken this long.

Don't expect your season ticket to stay in the same price region either if Sir Jim calculates the club can make more money selling less for a higher price
Click to expand...

:lol: what a horrendous attitude.

Ok mate I'll just pack it all in.
 
noodlehair said:
You lot wanted INEOS and the Glazers and so that's what we've got. It's pointless moaning about it now I'm afraid.

How were people not seeing this coning with all the other penny scrounging since the ownership change? It's bizarre it's taken this long.

Don't expect your season ticket to stay in the same price region either if Sir Jim calculates the club can make more money selling less for a higher price
Click to expand...

Can comments like these just feck off.
 
Utd heap said:
Yes, those are member prices.

ST holder seats are as little as £33. This allows the club to re-sell tickets back from ST holders who cannot attend at DOUBLE the face value.

Legalised club touting.
Click to expand...
Season Ticket holders don't have to give their seats back to the club, they can forward them onto other club members. There are 330,000 members, so you would not have to look hard to find some. Plenty on here as well.

When I was a ST holder, I used to have a group who I would message if I couldn't go. I only gave tickets back to the club once in 3 seasons. And that was a last minute thing.
 
Utd heap said:
Because we didn't want to be run by a nation state proxy we shouldn't be infuriated by INEOS pricing regulars out?
Click to expand...

Maybe people shouldn't have leant so heavily into INEOS as if it was one or the other? Or maybe should have educated themselves on Jim Radcmiffe rather than be "infuriated" by something as ridiculously predictable as this.

That's even if most of this "nation state lroxy" stuff wasn't just virtue signalling. Which in qbout 90% of cases it was.
 
FrankDrebin said:
Can comments like these just feck off.
Click to expand...

Sorry but the fact anyone is surprised by this with Radcliffe is genuinely dumbfounding to me.

Did any of you bother to give yourselves even the slightest clue who he was or how he operates?

I also find it annoying but more because people act surprised by it now when it's too late after actively supporting the changes that have led to it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.