Thanks for clarifying that prices are to be "decided by the home team" and not necessarily "agreed with the visitors" as claimed.
The question was in relation to suggestion of football for a fiver which DOES have to be agreed with the visitors as it is below minimum suggested figure by the FA
Football for a fiver hadn't been raised at the point that CheshuntO made the comment that you responded to. Just that the club should consider lowering pricing, which as per A Pedant's post should be decided by the home team and should meet the minimum price criteria.
I hate to say you are talking nonsense.
Andy Gilson at 6:48pm
Top of the West at 6:52pm both raised it and you at 7:26 quoted them both about football for a fiver
I never posted until 8:42pm.
I think 8:42pm is 114 minutes after football for a fiver was first raised on this thread
So seems you are wrong and you haven't even got a clue what you had quoted.
The question was in relation to suggestion of football for a fiver which DOES have to be agreed with the visitors as it is below minimum suggested figure by the FA
Football for a fiver hadn't been raised at the point that CheshuntO made the comment that you responded to. Just that the club should consider lowering pricing, which as per A Pedant's post should be decided by the home team and should meet the minimum price criteria.
I hate to say you are talking nonsense.
Andy Gilson at 6:48pm
Top of the West at 6:52pm both raised it and you at 7:26 quoted them both about football for a fiver
I never posted until 8:42pm.
I think 8:42pm is 114 minutes after football for a fiver was first raised on this thread
So seems you are wrong and you haven't even got a clue what you had quoted.
I will wait your public apology
Football for a fiver hadn't been raised at the point that CheshuntO made the comment that you responded to.
The question was in relation to suggestion of football for a fiver which DOES have to be agreed with the visitors as it is below minimum suggested figure by the FA
Football for a fiver hadn't been raised at the point that CheshuntO made the comment that you responded to. Just that the club should consider lowering pricing, which as per A Pedant's post should be decided by the home team and should meet the minimum price criteria.
I hate to say you are talking nonsense.
Andy Gilson at 6:48pm
Top of the West at 6:52pm both raised it and you at 7:26 quoted them both about football for a fiver
I never posted until 8:42pm.
I think 8:42pm is 114 minutes after football for a fiver was first raised on this thread
So seems you are wrong and you haven't even got a clue what you had quoted.
I will wait your public apology
The apology is owed by you.
You replied to the third post of the thread, which was posted at 1816. When CheshuntO posted that at 1816, football for a fiver clearly hadn't been raised, so when you incorrectly replied quoting his post...
Cheshunto wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2019 6:16 pmI think the club should consider reducing pricing for this game.
Season Ticket holders will need to buy a ticket and I’m not sure that many will pay the full price to see us play a team, however good, from Four leagues below.
I may be wrong but it will be interesting to see how the club handles this match.
...you were put right by A Pedant, and then tried to claim you were talking about football for £5 when it hadn't been mentioned in CheshuntO's post.
I'm sure you're happy to be put right by A Pedant on something you were uncertain of.
Given 8:42 is after 6:48. ... Some of you need to learn to tell the time.
Football for a fiver was raised 114 minutes before I responded and even one of the clowns on here who can't tell the time had quoted the messages about football for a fiver
Ok let's make this nice and simple for you. Then why reply to someone who suggested reducing prices but wasn't claiming that tickets should be reduced to a fiver at 1816 by incorrectly saying in response to them "Prices have to be agreed with the visitors". Then when it was pointed out that your comment was wrong, you inaccurately claimed that your comments were relating to football for a fiver (which hadn't been raised in the third post that you quoted saying ""Prices have to be agreed with the visitors")?
It seems odd The FA determine the minimum price. Orient could charge £5 and get twice as many attending than for £10. Same gate money. The former would be better as more see the game and Orient sell some more pies and pints. Also given the FA have moved the game and given both clubs a bit of bunce, they should give clubs a bit more leeway as people are less likely to attend Sunday at 12.45pm as opposed to Saturday 3pm.
To go back to the original subject, I’m bloody happy that the game has been moved to Sunday as now we can attend.
This working at a football club lark is fine except when your own team’s fixtures clash on almost every bloody game
ValJac wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:29 pm
To go back to the original subject, I’m bloody happy that the game has been moved to Sunday as now we can attend.
This working at a football club lark is fine except when your own team’s fixtures clash on almost every bloody game
Opposite for me. as it is Remembrance Sunday. When did Orient last play a home game on a Sunday?
ValJac wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 3:29 pm
To go back to the original subject, I’m bloody happy that the game has been moved to Sunday as now we can attend.
This working at a football club lark is fine except when your own team’s fixtures clash on almost every bloody game
Opposite for me. as it is Remembrance Sunday. When did Orient last play a home game on a Sunday?
RientO wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:50 pm
It seems odd The FA determine the minimum price. Orient could charge £5 and get twice as many attending than for £10. Same gate money. The former would be better as more see the game and Orient sell some more pies and pints. Also given the FA have moved the game and given both clubs a bit of bunce, they should give clubs a bit more leeway as people are less likely to attend Sunday at 12.45pm as opposed to Saturday 3pm.
If half ticket price does resultin double gate (it never does). Then club still get same income, but have far higher expenses as need to employ far more stewards etc. Thus reducing net gate receipts to be shared
This sort of argument is often put forward but it's an economic nonsense.
RientO wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:50 pm
It seems odd The FA determine the minimum price. Orient could charge £5 and get twice as many attending than for £10. Same gate money. The former would be better as more see the game and Orient sell some more pies and pints. Also given the FA have moved the game and given both clubs a bit of bunce, they should give clubs a bit more leeway as people are less likely to attend Sunday at 12.45pm as opposed to Saturday 3pm.
If half ticket price does resultin double gate (it never does). Then club still get same income, but have far higher expenses as need to employ far more stewards etc. Thus reducing net gate receipts to be shared
This sort of argument is often put forward but it's an economic nonsense.
RientO wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 2:50 pm
It seems odd The FA determine the minimum price. Orient could charge £5 and get twice as many attending than for £10. Same gate money. The former would be better as more see the game and Orient sell some more pies and pints. Also given the FA have moved the game and given both clubs a bit of bunce, they should give clubs a bit more leeway as people are less likely to attend Sunday at 12.45pm as opposed to Saturday 3pm.
If half ticket price does resultin double gate (it never does). Then club still get same income, but have far higher expenses as need to employ far more stewards etc. Thus reducing net gate receipts to be shared
This sort of argument is often put forward but it's an economic nonsense.
Same gate income.
Only IF halving price leads to doubling the gate...in reality it doesn't
Same gate income is irrelevant as it's the NET proceeds that are shared. Double the crowd will require far more stewards etc so net proceeds to be shared are far less.
If half ticket price does resultin double gate (it never does). Then club still get same income, but have far higher expenses as need to employ far more stewards etc. Thus reducing net gate receipts to be shared
This sort of argument is often put forward but it's an economic nonsense.
Same gate income.
Only IF halving price leads to doubling the gate...in reality it doesn't
Same gate income is irrelevant as it's the NET proceeds that are shared. Double the crowd will require far more stewards etc so net proceeds to be shared are far less.
Orient sell around 3,000 tickets outside season ticket holders when it is football for a fiver.
Orient sell less than 1,000 outside season ticket holders when it is football for twenty quid. (A lot of complimentary tickets included)
So there is some evidence that the gate could be doubled or bettered with £5 tickets.
As there will be no season tickets sold for the FA Cup game, I would suspect that the gate would be more than doubled with cheap tickets and the amount spent on pies, pints and popcorn would be more than stewarding costs. Indeed most games have fixed costs that are the same if 2,000 or 8,000 attend.
Last edited by RientO on Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Red_Army wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:55 pm
I reckon you'd increase the number of away fans with much cheaper tickets.
Good point. Maldon will bring half the town if the price is right and create an atmosphere.
I can’t imagine the BBC want a half empty stadium with zero atmosphere and I hope Both clubs can agree to a reasonable ticket price. I’m not suggesting “ Football for a Fiver” but maybe £10 per adult and kids for a £1...........If you charge more people will just watch it on TV and the crowd will be much less.
Just my opinion but it will be interesting to see how the club play this.
Red_Army wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:55 pm
I reckon you'd increase the number of away fans with much cheaper tickets.
Maximum number of away fans would be around 1,500 which is probably more than have ever been to see Maldon. if I lived near Maldon and the tickets were a fiver and I knew someone was going i would be more likely to go than if they cost £20.
Orient probably got more fans at FA trophy because tickets were available at £25 than if they cost £50.. in fact, many paid £12.50 or less. (Kids £1 and Seniors £5)
Last edited by RientO on Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Red_Army wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:55 pm
I reckon you'd increase the number of away fans with much cheaper tickets.
Good point. Maldon will bring half the town if the price is right and create an atmosphere.
I can’t imagine the BBC want a half empty stadium with zero atmosphere and I hope Both clubs can agree to a reasonable ticket price. I’m not suggesting “ Football for a Fiver” but maybe £10 per adult and kids for a £1...........If you charge more people will just watch it on TV and the crowd will be much less.
Just my opinion but it will be interesting to see how the club play this.
Can only watch it on TV abroad, though I suspect a stream could be found without too much trouble.
Red_Army wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 6:55 pm
I reckon you'd increase the number of away fans with much cheaper tickets.
I’m not suggesting “ Football for a Fiver” but maybe £10 per adult and kids for a £1...........
I would suggest football for a fiver, get 7,000 in and make a big day of it.
FA Trophy for £10, Gateshead attendance was 3,700 and Telford 3,600.
£5 is a sweet spot. Orient v Walsall 6,950
Yeah I wouldn’t be against “ Football for a Fiver” and maximise the crowd, although this would mean “ Football for a Fiver “ for two consecutive weeks so it may depend on how deep Kent’s and Nigel’s pockets are ( Scunthorpe on 16th Nov is £5 )
We are also at home on 23rd Nov v. Forest Green and three consecutive home games may be too much for some fans.
I also thought that the FA Cup game was on BBC and so shown in the UK, maybe I’m wrong.
Cheshunto wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 7:16 pm
I’m not suggesting “ Football for a Fiver” but maybe £10 per adult and kids for a £1...........
I would suggest football for a fiver, get 7,000 in and make a big day of it.
FA Trophy for £10, Gateshead attendance was 3,700 and Telford 3,600.
£5 is a sweet spot. Orient v Walsall 6,950
Yeah I wouldn’t be against “ Football for a Fiver” and maximise the crowd, although this would mean “ Football for a Fiver “ for two consecutive weeks so it may depend on how deep Kent’s and Nigel’s pockets are ( Scunthorpe on 16th Nov is £5 )
We are also at home on 23rd Nov v. Forest Green and three consecutive home games may be too much for some fans.
I also thought that the FA Cup game was on BBC and so shown in the UK, maybe I’m wrong.
Three home games in a row, even more reason. FA Cup tie is a bonus and they have already got £12500 more because it is on TV.
I remember seeing Os v Scunthorpe in FA Cup in front of 2,500. It was crap. Get 7,000 in, sell them pies, pints, popcorn and Onuts. Advertise it locally and get people in.
If half ticket price does resultin double gate (it never does). Then club still get same income, but have far higher expenses as need to employ far more stewards etc. Thus reducing net gate receipts to be shared
This sort of argument is often put forward but it's an economic nonsense.
Same gate income.
Only IF halving price leads to doubling the gate...in reality it doesn't
Same gate income is irrelevant as it's the NET proceeds that are shared. Double the crowd will require far more stewards etc so net proceeds to be shared are far less.
You appear to have missed the point being made again.
You only mention gate income. Other income streams would be increased by having twice the amount of people in.
RedO wrote: ↑Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:05 pm
You only mention gate income. Other income streams would be increased by having twice the amount of people in.
And more. Get 7,000 people in, more than usual are not season ticket holders as it is a Cup game. Some will come to to next £5 game, some come to £20 games in the future. Some might buy season tickets. Some will buy food, drink and souvenirs. Kerching.
( Scunthorpe on 16th Nov is £5 )