North Stand expansion - seating, ticketing etc

It will be interesting to see how the club price all L2 seats and other seats around the ground when NSL2 is opened and fans from all over the ground relocate to NSL2.
 
Thought I’d ask ChatGPT about season tickets concepts, this is what it pushed out. Thought provoking for the owners and fans with the new stand:

As an owner of a football club, the concept of season tickets may seem traditional, but it remains highly relevant and beneficial for business in several ways. However, it is worth evaluating its potential drawbacks and considering how it fits into modern football economics.

Benefits of Season Tickets for a Club:
  1. Guaranteed Revenue: Season tickets provide a substantial, upfront source of revenue at the start of the season. This cash flow can be essential for planning budgets, funding transfers, or covering operational costs.
  2. Loyal Fanbase: Season ticket holders tend to be the most loyal supporters. They create a consistent, engaged fanbase, helping maintain a strong matchday atmosphere, which can enhance the team's performance and attract casual fans.
  3. Sponsorship Appeal: A full stadium, guaranteed by season ticket holders, is attractive to sponsors. Packed stands make for better visuals on broadcasts, which can raise a club's profile and appeal to advertisers.
  4. Fan Loyalty and Engagement: Season tickets foster a deeper connection with fans, as they feel more involved with the club, and are often rewarded with benefits such as early access to other matches, discounts, and exclusive merchandise.
  5. Stable Pricing Model: By selling season tickets in bulk, the club can avoid the volatility of individual match ticket sales, especially for games that may not sell out. This model ensures a baseline of sold seats, regardless of opponent or team performance.
Potential Drawbacks:
  1. Missed Revenue from Dynamic Pricing: Modern clubs can maximize revenue through dynamic ticket pricing, where tickets for high-demand matches are sold at a premium. Season tickets lock fans into a fixed price, potentially causing the club to miss out on this revenue spike for marquee games.
  2. Limiting New Fans: Season tickets can create a barrier for new or occasional fans who may struggle to get access to high-demand games. As a result, clubs can lose the opportunity to grow a broader fanbase and build relationships with more casual supporters.
  3. Lower Flexibility: Modern football is embracing digital and flexible ticketing options, allowing fans to choose matches based on their schedules. Season tickets lock fans into all home games, which may not appeal to fans who prefer more flexibility or who travel for away fixtures.
  4. Resale and Scalping Issues: Season tickets can be resold in secondary markets, sometimes for profit, which can dilute the fan experience. Clubs have less control over who fills the stands, which could impact fan atmosphere.
Modernising the Concept:
  • Flexible Memberships: Some clubs are evolving from traditional season tickets to flexible membership schemes, offering packages that guarantee access to a certain number of games but give more choice on which matches to attend.
  • Subscription Models: Some clubs have introduced subscription-based models where fans pay monthly fees for access to a rotating selection of games, merchandise discounts, or streaming services. This offers more adaptability while maintaining a steady income stream for the club.
Conclusion:

While the traditional season ticket model may feel dated in the digital era, it still serves as a solid business tool for clubs by ensuring consistent revenue and fan loyalty. Modernszing this concept with more flexible, tech-driven options may help clubs adapt to the evolving expectations of fans without losing the core benefits of this time-tested model.
 
Last edited:
jrb said:
I’ve never said the club have blown it. Neither have a lot of other people posting on this thread and on the the construction thread. Is there a difference of opinion about how the club has configured the North stand, yes there is, but there’s nothing wrong with that as the fans want different things for the North stand. It’s impossible for all the fans, even the fans who post on this thread and on the construction thread to all want the same thing for the North stand.
Click to expand...
No but the post I responded to did. Have a look.
 
jrb said:
I’ve never said the club have blown it. Neither have a lot of other people posting on this thread and on the the construction thread. Is there a difference of opinion about how the club has configured the North stand, yes there is, but there’s nothing wrong with that as the fans want different things for the North stand. It’s impossible for all the fans, even the fans who post on this thread and on the construction thread to all want the same thing for the North stand.
Click to expand...

And yes all good there too, people wanting or expecting different things.

What irritates me is that a few have been fixated with this complete distrust of the club from day one, and every single day since. And continue to only seem to look at the proposals through that prism. It is odd.
 
dickie davies said:
The club will certainly increase matchday revenue and not purely because there are 6,000 extra seats in the stadium
I would suggest that maybe the "limited" rail seating is because when the stand is completed, the plan is that they're going to raise the cost of tickets in 102 - 107 in the East Stand and 123 - 128 in the CB to incredible levels (similar to that on L2) and will give all the season card holders from these blocks first dibs on relocation
Click to expand...
My OAP ticket has been hitherto funded by the,now scrapped,Winter Heating Payment.

Does anyone think that Ferran will take this into account ??
 
jrb said:
With or without 1894, NSL2 will generate an atmosphere. All it needs is a proper and organised singing section.
Click to expand...

Agree, it is nowhere near as bad as it has been made out to be.

The singing should come. If not, some shoutong will, in reaction to what goes on on the pitch. 9.5k blues in one tier, another 3k below them. You'll see them, you'll hear them, singers or not. Imo.

For 75 minutes anyway, then they'll all fuck off ;)
 
Manchester33 said:
You’re looking at it too simplistically. What 1894 have said is that they don’t plan to move with the current proposals.


You’re trying to make the point that the club is giving us this perfect opportunity, but the reality is that it’s not perfect. They’re lumping hospitality sections in the key areas of the stand. They’re only putting 3k rail seats in stretched across the back and down the sides. They aren’t committing to a pricing policy. They aren’t adding new affordable season cards.

Atmosphere is not important to them.

It could easily be the perfect opportunity handed to us on a plate. But the priority is match day revenue (which is fair - but it’s not going to move me from SSL1).
Click to expand...

Was reading that and thinking, see now there is a reasonable take. Not one I fully agree with, but reasonable, and I get it.

Then it got to your 'atmosphere is not important to them line', and it all fell apart. Because the club have repeatedly said it is, based designs and the build around that, and continue to say it. Lying bastards, right!

You having an opinion of what you want to see in the stand is all great. Might even be right. You deciding the group won't move, all good too. Both hardly up for debate.

But the minute you throw that bit of innuendo conjecture in, it muddies your own point, and invites this type of reaction from me, and others btw. And becomes you vs the club.

How do you not see the optics of that, including in 1894's statements? I annoyed a few by saying it earlier, but I also genuinely can't understand that you guys can't consider that point openly.

To me you and the club have different takes on what makes an atmospheric end. That's all. But both want the same. On top of that, the club are balancing fanbase variety, financial sustainability, and longevity of the stand with that.
 
Last edited:
pride in battle said:
Yes but its a cash cow, like ours will be, you don't spend 300 million and give tickets away for £20, there has to be a compromise which is lost on a lot of people on here who want cheap tickets, oh and throw in a couple of free pints cos were loaded...
Click to expand...
Stop fucking exaggerating. Not a single poster has demanded £20 tickets and free beer. All anyone is saying is that if a load of singers are to move over to the rail seating part of the new stand then it has to be priced reasonably to entice them over. As @jrb stated, his season ticket in SS1 is now nearly £800. No-one’s asking for £300 season tickets but it has to be priced attractively if they want to maximise atmosphere.
 
Manchester33 said:
You’re looking at it too simplistically. What 1894 have said is that they don’t plan to move with the current proposals.


You’re trying to make the point that the club is giving us this perfect opportunity, but the reality is that it’s not perfect. They’re lumping hospitality sections in the key areas of the stand. They’re only putting 3k rail seats in stretched across the back and down the sides. They aren’t committing to a pricing policy. They aren’t adding new affordable season cards.

Atmosphere is not important to them.

It could easily be the perfect opportunity handed to us on a plate. But the priority is match day revenue (which is fair - but it’s not going to move me from SSL1).
Click to expand...
You have 3000 seats to start with, how many are in 1894 ? Sorry mate but its just excuses, youve been handed a HOME end on a plate which you wanted but now its 'Not Right' ?
 
pride in battle said:
You have 3000 seats to start with, how many are in 1894 ? Sorry mate but its just excuses, youve been handed a HOME end on a plate which you wanted but now its 'Not Right' ?
Click to expand...
If 1894 decide they don't want it then others will move into the 3000 seats which may become 4000 or more. It's entirely up to those in 1894 but they need to be carefull they don't cut off their noses to spite because they could end up regretting their deciision because of some unreasonable red lines and become sidelined.
 
pride in battle said:
The elephant in the room is that 1894 don't want to move there...the chance to have a proper home end and it appears they have spat their dummy out...why ?
Click to expand...

When you're a group that's solely focussed on improving the atmosphere, you will inevitably have strong opinions on how this stand should look. The starting point would be for the majority of the stand to be safe standing, second to that would be attractive pricing for people to relocate and there would also be a list of things you wouldn't want to see, which would include hospitality areas. I think the fact the club sought to engage with 1894 and saw them as pivotal to unlocking this new home end meant they went in with full confidence, and that's slowly been eroded as proposals have been announced.

I think the fact that the club engaged on this quite late in the day, when plans were advanced and the application was due to be submitted led to a lack of trust that the engagement with fans was meaningful. This latest statement from the Club doesn't go far enough in their opinion, and I expect due to the process so far, they don't expect things to improve.

As I said, I think in spite of the fact it's not 100% what 1894 want right now, it ticks the boxes in a lot of ways. Firstly, it provides a huge number of seats in a single tier which is ideal for creating an atmosphere. Secondly, it is providing safe standing areas albeit initially not as many as desired. But the current issues with atmosphere are unlikely to be addressed. You could move the away fans and create a more vocal area in the SS. SSL3 being the ideal place to increase the atmosphere around the ground. But it requires thousands of people to move around the stadium and it's just unrealistic at this stage.

Work with what you've got and then push for more. If we can get singers in the 3,000 safe standing seats under the roof the atmosphere increases because of the acoustics. It's then inevitable that people want to move in to that stand to join in as time goes on. It's also inevitable that those wanting a more peaceful experience move elsewhere. The club are looking to get younger fans in the stand too, and they're the future and will probably want to stand and sing rather than sit in silence, especially with a section making noise behind them.

What I'd like 1894 to do is think about the mindset of non-singers. Would they want to sit in a stand behind the goal knowing they've got 3,000 likely raucous people stood up chanting all game? If I was someone who liked to sit and watch and only join in the occasional song I wouldn't fancy that personally. If they continue to work with the club or push it with members, they could say to City we have 6,000 who want to stand in the new NS can you accommodate that rather than 3,000? Or could you look to do it in the future? Could you also work with us on ticketing/relocation information so we can discuss with our members and wider fan base too.
 
blueparrot said:
If 1894 decide they don't want it then others will move into the 3000 seats which may become 4000 or more. It's entirely up to those in 1894 but they need to be carefull they don't cut off their noses to spite because they could end up regretting their deciision because of some unreasonable red lines and become sidelined.
Click to expand...
I actually agree with this. SSL1 is shite. The view is shite and the acoustics are shite. It really does stink of biting of their noses. The new stand will clearly be miles better for both thoughs things. If the prices are at least matched with SS1, then there's no excuse in my opinion.
 
I'm not really here said:
I actually agree with this. SSL1 is shite. The view is shite and the acoustics are shite. It really does stink of biting of their noses. The new stand will clearly be miles better for both thoughs things. If the prices are at least matched with SS1, then there's no excuse in my opinion.
Click to expand...
When we surveyed our members the majority said they preferred being closer to the pitch and in level 1.

That contrasts with the plans for rail seats to be positioned right at the back of NSL2.

I personally don’t care. I wouldn’t be put off moving to the back of NSL2 and I believe the further back in a stand you are, the better you can control the atmosphere.

What we will inevitably end up with (no matter what 1894 says or does) is some singers at the back of NSL2 and some in SSL1.

That could work brilliantly as long as the club leans more into marketing the North Stand as an atmospheric home end (which I do not feel is strongly pushed in the update they sent out).
 
What will be very interesting when the time arrives is the criteria for relocating to the new stand. People may want to go there for a whole host of reasons, and as always their reason will be more valid than others. I await this with baited breath and I'm pretty sure they'll be some tasty debate on here.
 
Gone for a Burton said:
My OAP ticket has been hitherto funded by the,now scrapped,Winter Heating Payment.

Does anyone think that Ferran will take this into account ??
Click to expand...
It's a worry for us FOCs, for sure..

Mind, when my Big Sister qualified for her first ever Winter Fuel Allowance, she put it towards buying an Armani jacket.. to be fair though, it is fleece lined, so it keeps her warm as toast when sitting on the sofa of an evening watching the latest episode of some 'Scandi-Noir' detective thriller or other.. doesn't have to have the gas boiler on as a result..
 
supercity88 said:
When you're a group that's solely focussed on improving the atmosphere, you will inevitably have strong opinions on how this stand should look. The starting point would be for the majority of the stand to be safe standing, second to that would be attractive pricing for people to relocate and there would also be a list of things you wouldn't want to see, which would include hospitality areas. I think the fact the club sought to engage with 1894 and saw them as pivotal to unlocking this new home end meant they went in with full confidence, and that's slowly been eroded as proposals have been announced.

I think the fact that the club engaged on this quite late in the day, when plans were advanced and the application was due to be submitted led to a lack of trust that the engagement with fans was meaningful. This latest statement from the Club doesn't go far enough in their opinion, and I expect due to the process so far, they don't expect things to improve.

As I said, I think in spite of the fact it's not 100% what 1894 want right now, it ticks the boxes in a lot of ways. Firstly, it provides a huge number of seats in a single tier which is ideal for creating an atmosphere. Secondly, it is providing safe standing areas albeit initially not as many as desired. But the current issues with atmosphere are unlikely to be addressed. You could move the away fans and create a more vocal area in the SS. SSL3 being the ideal place to increase the atmosphere around the ground. But it requires thousands of people to move around the stadium and it's just unrealistic at this stage.

Work with what you've got and then push for more. If we can get singers in the 3,000 safe standing seats under the roof the atmosphere increases because of the acoustics. It's then inevitable that people want to move in to that stand to join in as time goes on. It's also inevitable that those wanting a more peaceful experience move elsewhere. The club are looking to get younger fans in the stand too, and they're the future and will probably want to stand and sing rather than sit in silence, especially with a section making noise behind them.

What I'd like 1894 to do is think about the mindset of non-singers. Would they want to sit in a stand behind the goal knowing they've got 3,000 likely raucous people stood up chanting all game? If I was someone who liked to sit and watch and only join in the occasional song I wouldn't fancy that personally. If they continue to work with the club or push it with members, they could say to City we have 6,000 who want to stand in the new NS can you accommodate that rather than 3,000? Or could you look to do it in the future? Could you also work with us on ticketing/relocation information so we can discuss with our members and wider fan base too.
Click to expand...
Relocating City fans from ESLI upto SS2/3 is actually minimum disruption and has advantages.

Better views.
Better acoustics.
Above, but close to, away fans.
At their preferred end for access/egress.

No disruption for away fans who have no 'permanence'.

Segregation, security, logistics, coach park, H&S are maintained.

Finally, safely will be improved by no more missiles launched from above on to City fans.

This proposal is entirely achievable at very low cost, and I hope the club will engage with the authorities to achieve it for the start of season 2025/26.

Two acoustical atmosphere stands must be better than one particularly if it means away fans are relocated to the worst acoustic location in thestadium....

.....win,win,win !!
 
Coatigan said:
Was reading that and thinking, see now there is a reasonable take. Not one I fully agree with, but reasonable, and I get it.

Then it got to your 'atmosphere is not important to them line', and it all fell apart. Because the club have repeatedly said it is, based designs and the build around that, and continue to say it. Lying bastards, right!

You having an opinion of what you want to see in the stand is all great. Might even be right. You deciding the group won't move, all good too. Both hardly up for debate.

But the minute you throw that bit of innuendo conjecture in, it muddies your own point, and invites this type of reaction from me, and others btw. And becomes you vs the club.

How do you not see the optics of that, including in 1894's statements? I annoyed a few by saying it earlier, but I also genuinely can't understand that you guys can't consider that point openly.

To me you and the club have different takes on what makes an atmospheric end. That's all. But both want the same. On top of that, the club are balancing fanbase variety, financial sustainability, and longevity of the stand with that.
Click to expand...
It’s one of those things where we’ll have to agree to disagree.

I’ve sat in three meetings with the club and (although I can’t say too much) the impression I got in those meetings was that atmosphere is a secondary (if that) priority to revenue. I cannot give you specifics, I’m sure the proof will be in the pudding.

My major concern with the update the club has released was the lack of confidence. They are putting in 3k rail seats and saying they can add more if we fill those. That’s not confident. It makes the decision risky for fans (because they might swap their amazing seat they’ve been in for a decade, for one right at the back of NSL2, and NSL2 might end up being shite). Less will move and the opportunity will be missed.

The alternative was to come out and say half (or more) of NSL2 will be rail seating. No hospitality (which could be put on north side of CBL2 and ESL2 so revenue isn’t missed). Rename the North Stand to the new Kippax or something else that fans would want to be part of.

They haven’t done that. Their current plans is too much of a mixed bag. Trying to please too many people (18-25s, Families, prayer rooms, hospitality, existing NS seasoncard holders) which is contrary to ‘an atmospheric home end’.

Hopefully you can see my thought process and I would stress that this was a view that was shared by many CityMatters reps who were present in the meetings and who aren’t half as bothered about atmosphere as me.

I would also stress that ‘atmosphere’ was by far the most important issue for City fans in all of the surveys I saw.

Finally, my personal view is that I really want NSL2 to work. It’s such a no brainer. I’m probably the biggest advocate for it within 1894’s leadership. We have to get this right! The ball is firmly in the clubs court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top