What's the ratio of City to Utd in Manchester now?

[Wigan_Citizen]

There are definitely a lot more City shirts seen in Wigan nowadays. I think it was Gary James who said the general rule of thumb in Manchester is West and North = Red and East and South = Blue.

 

[BlueAnorak]

There are definitely a lot more City shirts seen in Wigan nowadays. I think it was Gary James who said the general rule of thumb in Manchester is West and North = Red and East and South = Blue.

Exclude Bury from the red bit.

 

[levets]

You can look closer to home.

Warrington/Wigan/Bolton/Oldham/Bury/Rochdale. - rags everywhere. City fans still
Make up a very small minority in Warrington. It’s growing but rags and red scousers rule the roost.

Blues a plenty in Oldham. Always has been. And as for Chadderton, easily more blues

 

[supersonicblue]

Growing up in Carlisle only 2 blues at school and both our dads are city fans and mancs. Mostly dippers and rags here.

 

[billfromthehill]

Back in 2002, MMU did a survey of City and Utd's season ticket fan-base and found:

• Manchester City had 16,481 season ticket-holders, 40% of whom lived in Manchester.
• Utd had 27,667 seasin ticket-holders, 29% of whom lived in Manchester.

• The result being that City fans were much more likely to be Mancs, but that Manchester in 2001, had marginally more Man Utd fans: 7,808 : 6,678.

This survey was done at possibly the zenith of Man Utd's strength, they had just won the Treble, and City had just been relegated again under Joe Royle, and we had a stadium that had been reduced in size to 34,000.

City were shortly to move to the Etihad, and then of course experience the takeover.

Where are we now? In reality, fans are stubborn so and sos. It takes a generation to change habits, but surely the last two decades of a new stadium and unprecedented success for City have had an effect?

If the two clubs did that survey now, I think they'd find a lot more City than Utd in Manchester. Anecdotally, I see a lot more City than Utd colours in Manchester, and when I say a lot more, I mean it's actually rare to see Utd fans out and about in Manchester now.

Amongst match-going fans I reckon it must be 3:1 City. Overall, higher.

There are social media surveys and digital trends etc which show Utd as No.1 but City increasing dramatically. I watched the highlights of games on tour, and I noticed they were well attended e.g. 60k against Yokohama.

How long before those dinosaurs in Fleet St realise that the world has changed? Perhaps the problem is that they are staffed by Man Utd fans who grew up in another era.

This comment was motivated by the title of a new City book: "A treble without applause." Could a title ever be more apt?

Really

 

[trumpton]

Growing up in Carlisle only 2 blues at school and both our dads are city fans and mancs. Mostly dippers and rags here.

Either you or your father aren't called Colin by any chance?

 

[Cobwebcat]

Didnt we used to have bigger floodlights than them too?

 

[gkmcfc]

It’s a generational thing for sure. You won’t see the difference for a few years but the under 15 age group is more even than its been in my lifetime.

 

[Shaelumstash]

United have more fans than us in Manchester, it's as simple as that. It just appears we have more blues at the moment because we are winning trophies and wearing City colours with pride. United fans are keeping a low profile, it's as though they feel embarrassed to be in our shadow.

Good, the sniffling rag ****s.

It's not as simple as that actually.

They might have more armchair "fans", but City have more season ticket holders in Manchester, and I can prove it.

This study looked at where season ticket holders in Manchester lived. The study was done in 2002, when United had just won the treble and City had just played in the 3rd division. https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/12506/1/seasonticketreport - brown1.pdf

The study found that United had 7,808 season ticket holders in "M" postcodes and City had 6,678. But when you look at a map of Greater Manchester, it's pretty clear that considering "M" postcodes as Manchester is a ridiculous way to conduct a study.

"M" postcodes include Manchester, and the Greater Manchester districts of Trafford and Salford (United strongholds) and doesn't include Greater Manchester districts of Tameside and Stockport (City strongholds), so it's no wonder United are listed as having more season ticket holders in the study. There is no data available for Tameside and Stockport, so it's impossible to do an accurate study of Greater Manchester.

But it is possible to do an accurate study of Manchester. Instead of just including the "M" postcodes, it's possible to actually just include the postcodes in Manchester. City had 2827 season ticket holders and United had 2158.

If you analyse each postcode individually to see whether there's more City or United, it's a sea of blue.

City had 14 out of the 19 Manchester postcodes with more season ticket holders. United only had 5 postcodes in Manchester with more season tickets. And two of those (M3 and M16) are actually half in Manchester and half in Salford, so you could argue they only had 3 out of 19.

When the study was conducted, United had a capacity of 67k and City had a capacity of 35k. Theirs is now 75k and ours 55k, so assuming the increase in attendance is reflected in a similar increase in Manchester based season ticket holders:
United - 11% increase
City - 37% increase

United 2158 + 11% = 2395
City 2827 + 37% = 3873

In 2002 their attendances were almost double ours, and we STILL had more season tickets in Manchester than them. Now our capacity is only 30% fewer than theirs, we'll have far more season ticket holders in Manchester than them, without any question.

 

[Mr Blue Moon]

My preferred ratio of City to the rags is 6:1