• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand

Jordinho said:
Match day income is actually not that insignificant.

The numbers for last season are due any day now I think, but the latest Deloitte money league have us at over 300 million for last season. For 2015/16 the total revenue was £210 million and £40 million of that was matchday income. For Arsenal the numbers were £350 million and £100 million. If revenue really has risen as high as 300 million then matchday is no more than 10-15% of that, but with the prices we're asking now we're looking at more than £100 million, which is not far off what we get in tv money. Arsenal get more tv money than us as well, but that's because their media facilities are better. We're way behind the other top six commercially, but that gap can only be bridged through years of sustained success.
Click to expand...

How have Liverpool increased their commercial revenue

They haven’t been a success for about 10 years or more

It’s all about branding

Kane for us is a HUGE part of that now as he is a flag ship name

I asked on holiday for a spurs shirt for my daughter.... don’t have them

Ask for a Kane shirt and here you go... England ones admittedly

One guy joked he had never heard of spurs... so I had to remind him we battered his beloved Madrid
 
The Trust should represent fans who can't afford or are stretched by pricing. Absolutely.

Levy should generate more profit where reasonable, that is his job. Who else but the Trust will push back and highlight things that affect loyal fans? I'd say a minority are happy to spend more of their hard earned on increased pricing, whereas a majority are not happy with shelling out more but will accept it. The Trust need to put down a marker so the club know they can't walk over fans, so we shouldn't undermine them. They don't get paid for what they do, do they?

While its Levy's job to be frugal and prudent, there are times when he needs to spend. Its knowing when that is key. I think this summer, we would benefit from a statement signing if Poch wants ones. Obviously spending what is needed for Kane and others to stay, and not squeezing punters too much are all things Levy is aware of.
 
Last edited:
Bedfordspurs said:
How have Liverpool increased their commercial revenue

They haven’t been a success for about 10 years or more
It’s all about branding
Kane for us is a HUGE part of that now as he is a flag ship name
I asked on holiday for a spurs shirt for my daughter.... don’t have them
Ask for a Kane shirt and here you go... England ones admittedly
One guy joked he had never heard of spurs... so I had to remind him we battered his beloved Madrid
Click to expand...

Mate, to answer your question

- Pool has a sustained period of success that got them global fans certainly more recently than us.
- Pool, United, Scum & Chelsea all benefitted from years of free brand advertising via the Sky 4 and the CL scenario
- Additionally our sponsors in recent times, simply haven't had global marketing reach, Nike is actually much better now, you can actually buy kit in US as example.

And this is the challenge that people just aren't seeing

- Levy has had to play catch up, not just on income, but facilities, stadium, brand recognition, global reach and even media coverage (at the start of this season every pundit put Pool as a potential title challenger, but not Spurs, completely ignoring previous 2 years)

I'm not saying the club should feel free to fudge everyone over, and you can ask for concessions (add cup games, discounts specific to season holders for more than x number of years, etc.) but to expect that ticket prices were not going to go up is just naïve..

And to respond to a previous poster, it is a big deal to get a chairman meeting in a privately held enterprise. The club is doing a bit more than humoring the Trust, it doesn't mean they will follow the Trust's advice, it means they listened ..
 
Raziel said:
Mate, to answer your question

- Pool has a sustained period of success that got them global fans certainly more recently than us.
- Pool, United, Scum & Chelsea all benefitted from years of free brand advertising via the Sky 4 and the CL scenario
- Additionally our sponsors in recent times, simply haven't had global marketing reach, Nike is actually much better now, you can actually buy kit in US as example.

And this is the challenge that people just aren't seeing

- Levy has had to play catch up, not just on income, but facilities, stadium, brand recognition, global reach and even media coverage (at the start of this season every pundit put Pool as a potential title challenger, but not Spurs, completely ignoring previous 2 years)

I'm not saying the club should feel free to fudge everyone over, and you can ask for concessions (add cup games, discounts specific to season holders for more than x number of years, etc.) but to expect that ticket prices were not going to go up is just naïve..

And to respond to a previous poster, it is a big deal to get a chairman meeting in a privately held enterprise. The club is doing a bit more than humoring the Trust, it doesn't mean they will follow the Trust's advice, it means they listened ..
Click to expand...

Pool haven’t been a sky big side in the relatively modern era as they haven’t competed for anything domestically

But they do have a huge following I agree though Particularly in Asia and Scandinavia all off the back of the 70s and 80s
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Pool haven’t been a sky big side in the relatively modern era as they haven’t competed for anything domestically

But they do have a huge following I agree though Particularly in Asia and Scandinavia all off the back of the 70s and 80s
Click to expand...

This and CL participation as part of the Sky 4, pre City and us becoming competitive.
 
So fudging many southern Liverpool fans especially in Essex. Their parents supported Liverpool apparently. They’re some of the worst ones as loads of them haven’t even been to Liverpool.

Actually, can we get this back onto our wonderful stadium and not mention those thieves again in the thread?
 
Can someone explain this ‘roof lift’ to me? Like why does it take so long, how is it supposed to look once it’s on? I can’t make head nor tail of it.
 
Libero said:
Quite a lot of grumbles over the process from what I remember with window times, the phasing and pricing, someone will always have a gripe but also not allowing certain supporters an amnesty from Wembley, the pricing structure, no cup games included etc. They again didn't listen to concerns raised by the trust which individual supporters raised and then the general wider issues like the pricing.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the club put a foot wrong with Wembley..... The phases were spot on I think (as they have been for the new stadium). They couldn’t offer an amnesty IMO (and neither should they have). The pricing structure was good. Cup games were always going to be pretty much impossible due to the stadium capacity restrictions (and were then significantly discounted anyway). If the trust were raising concerns over Wembley then IMO all they did was weaken their position with the club.
 
parklane1 said:
The trust is ...run by those who want to feel/sound important, most fans who i have come across over the years regard them as wanabees full of hot air.
Click to expand...
Listen to the fighting rooster podcast with the Trust members, Kat and Martin, and see whether you feel that is true or not
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Can someone explain this ‘roof lift’ to me? Like why does it take so long, how is it supposed to look once it’s on? I can’t make head nor tail of it.
Click to expand...

The lift is complete. The roof structure itself is far from complete obviously, but it's at the full height now. There is now a tensioning process/period of what I've heard is about 4 weeks (not sure if this can be sped up or anything) which ensures the cables can support the weight they need to, and after that the structure will start to have things like the lights, roofing, sky bridge and sky walk installed etc. But for a while it will still be the bare structure you see now, at the height it is.
 
parklane1 said:
Agree with both of the above.

The trust is and always been a waste of time, run by those who want to feel/sound important, most fans who i have come across over the years regard them as wanabees full of hot air.
Click to expand...
If they acted and sounded at all professional in their press work then people might start to listen to them a little.

Obviously they'd also have to get past the preposterous belief that the club owes them something but one step at a time.
 
Kandi1977 said:
What is all the talk about concessions? What does it mean or what's in it? And is it different from previous years?
Click to expand...

Concessionary pricing is reduced pricing for certain categories. Previously Juniors (U18) and OAPs.
Differences :
- A new concession category for Young Adults (18-23 I think).
- Junior Concession prices used to be at a 60%% discount but will now be at 50% (not sure about OAPs. The Young Adult will be lesser reduction).
- At WHL concessions were only available in the Paxton and Park Lane. In the new stadium they are available across all stands but not for the higher priced tickets (and not in the safe standing area for juniors).
 
Kandi1977 said:
What is all the talk about concessions? What does it mean or what's in it? And is it different from previous years?
Click to expand...

Glenda's Legs said:
Concessionary pricing is reduced pricing for certain categories. Previously Juniors (U18) and OAPs.
Differences :
- A new concession category for Young Adults (18-23 I think).
- Junior Concession prices used to be at a 60%% discount but will now be at 50% (not sure about OAPs. The Young Adult will be lesser reduction).
- At WHL concessions were only available in the Paxton and Park Lane. In the new stadium they are available across all stands but not for the higher priced tickets (and not in the safe standing area for juniors).
Click to expand...

slightly related, there were seats at the old build with restricted views, these had a discount too, there are no restricted views at the rebuild
 
scaramanga said:
If they acted and sounded at all professional in their press work then people might start to listen to them a little.

Obviously they'd also have to get past the preposterous belief that the club owes them something but one step at a time.
Click to expand...

this has always been my main issue with them
 
Finney Is Back said:
I don’t think the club put a foot wrong with Wembley..... The phases were spot on I think (as they have been for the new stadium). They couldn’t offer an amnesty IMO (and neither should they have). The pricing structure was good. Cup games were always going to be pretty much impossible due to the stadium capacity restrictions (and were then significantly discounted anyway). If the trust were raising concerns over Wembley then IMO all they did was weaken their position with the club.
Click to expand...

I think we will agree to disagree then. Pricing they could have got better given the sheer size of the stadium, they were going to make money anyway. It was a season of disruption for everyone and despite Wembley being a public transport destination it is still a pain for most to get to and from with ease because of the sheer numbers of people. That is also why in certain circumstances why they should have used common sense and given amnesties to people in specific situations but to my knowledge that never happened.

Not including some cup games was obviously a pre cursor to their plans for this season and imo it is wrong. The cup games against the likes of Newport, Barnsley and Rochdale have to be discounted but the pricing then of A standard cup games could have been better given the price of the STs for people who had to pick seats after large swathes had taken seats at reasonable prices. £75 Madrid, Juventus and £60 Dortmund. Its irrelevant whether I can or did pay that to a degree, my point is that it doesn't need to be that expensive. You can make that £10/£15 less expensive and you are still making a bucket load.

Your final statement doesn't make sense to me at all. If they raised concerns it is because their members raised concerns with them so therefore they acted in the interests of their members, not really sure how that weakens their position and the club will have known that the discussion points were as a result of the trust consulting its paying membership.
 
Libero said:
I think we will agree to disagree then. Pricing they could have got better given the sheer size of the stadium, they were going to make money anyway. It was a season of disruption for everyone and despite Wembley being a public transport destination it is still a pain for most to get to and from with ease because of the sheer numbers of people. That is also why in certain circumstances why they should have used common sense and given amnesties to people in specific situations but to my knowledge that never happened.

Not including some cup games was obviously a pre cursor to their plans for this season and imo it is wrong. The cup games against the likes of Newport, Barnsley and Rochdale have to be discounted but the pricing then of A standard cup games could have been better given the price of the STs for people who had to pick seats after large swathes had taken seats at reasonable prices. £75 Madrid, Juventus and £60 Dortmund. Its irrelevant whether I can or did pay that to a degree, my point is that it doesn't need to be that expensive. You can make that £10/£15 less expensive and you are still making a bucket load.

Your final statement doesn't make sense to me at all. If they raised concerns it is because their members raised concerns with them so therefore they acted in the interests of their members, not really sure how that weakens their position and the club will have known that the discussion points were as a result of the trust consulting its paying membership.
Click to expand...
Considering the moaning that has taken place this year regarding price increases, can you imagine what would've happened had they reduced prices at Wembley this season at Wembley? The club have to maximise revenue to be able to maximise investment in the team. Personally I thought the Wembley tickets have been decent value for money overall. I got an ST in club Wembley seat for the same price as my East Upper ST. That was fantastic value IMO, better than i expected.

Regarding an amnesty. I think this has to be either a complete amnesty or none at all. Otherwise it is impossible to draw the line. Getting to Wembley isn't THAT hard for anyone and I agree with the club's stance on not allowing amnesties.

IMO it is better to offer cheap Cup games that to give them away free and have a bunch of ST holders simply not attend. As I said before there were also the stadium capacity restrictions that you have conveniently ignored.

As an ST holder at Wembley you had a pick in the first 40,000 for a stadium with a capacity of over 80,000. There was never a situation where one of the 40,000 ST holders was going to be forced into having to purchase an expensive ticket due to the cheaper ones already being sold.

As you say. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree here. I just feel that my stance is based on realism while the Trust's stance is based on fairy tales. I think the club have got the pricing wrong by about 10% in the New stadium, but spot on at Wembley. By moaning about Wembley I think the Trust have weakened their argument for the new stadium as it now seems as though tgey would moan at anything other than a price reduction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back