bluetonium
Well-Known Member
To me, this is one of the biggest reasons we need an independent regulator. Football has a deep historic cultural connection to our history in the UK, and there is a need for protection and support that should be evident. Yet as it flies in the face of profits, and given the wider status of premier league football in particular, it's a clash point.
There was a window with my two kids where they were interested. We went to see city ladies, a couple of mens home games, then it got too expensive and frankly, too difficult to actually get a ticket. Even acquaintances want more for a ticket when they couldn't go, because why shouldn't they. So the family link I had, my dad taking me to Maine Road, the Bovril, the time together, the family atmosphere win or lose, sticking with something through loyalty... the chain is broken.
I can't really get them interested again now in city, half a chance with the youngest and she'll come and watch games on telly if I'm there at home, but the eldest no chance, the window has gone. Not really asking for cheap deals, not asking for unfair treatment because I have a greater Manchester postcode. Just recognition of what it means to be a local fan, and the opportunity to be able to take myself and my family to games at a fair price. If one of them grows up and meets a united fan, a chelsea fan, someone who isn't at all interested in football, that's for sure a potential customer lost for City and maybe one gained for a rival.
I'm sure it's a similar story across many fans and clubs, and it does stick in my throat a little when the club praises itself for something they're proud of in the local community, knowing they also cut their own fanbase off for higher profits.
Working class folk aren't the target audience anymore unfortunately, especially when you consider that some of the American owners entering the game also own handegg teams where they can get hundreds of dollars per ticket, and given the roots of football and even our own club, out of a church wellbeing initiative to promote community and exercise, it's really quite sad to see.
Protecting a minimum amount of tickets at lower prices, for younger folks and for local postcodes may be worth a review. But the only way that is going to come about is through influence wider than the clubs and leagues themselves.
When you think that we play in competitions that require us to have a certain number of academy trained players, placing emphasis on the importance of locality, it's odd that there's no provision for that same protection of the locality for fans themselves.
Although football is a business nowadays, it does stand slightly apart in that a percentage of those consumers are captive, maybe even dependant. We don't switch around from one entertainment provider to another in general (at least not in the UK, or to a much lesser degree) and you could make a case that we're more closely resembling addicts than customers.
I personally know people who feel they can't walk away, can't stop following city, and have to show that through being a season ticket holder. They've done it for years and if it means they have to take out a loan to do it, they do it. Especially my generation who may have younger kids they want to introduce to the game and city, as well as an older generation who not only influenced them to come every week but also, to be frank, have limited time left together with us.
City could score a huge moral victory by being the first to take such steps in the premier league. It astounds me that we can't look at it from a different point of view - the amount of money I and others have put in over the decades must still dwarf that of the currently more attractive, more affluent targets. But you can't guarantee the latter, whereas I think for many of us we're here to stay. Relegate us on the 115, we'd still be there. Finish outside the champions league spots, yep I'm still city through and through and I'll pay what I can to show that and be part of it. Now that crowd is never, ever going to take a year out from supporting city if we don't perform or if someone else does better, if a star player leaves. Never. And they know it, using it whichever way suits.
There was a window with my two kids where they were interested. We went to see city ladies, a couple of mens home games, then it got too expensive and frankly, too difficult to actually get a ticket. Even acquaintances want more for a ticket when they couldn't go, because why shouldn't they. So the family link I had, my dad taking me to Maine Road, the Bovril, the time together, the family atmosphere win or lose, sticking with something through loyalty... the chain is broken.
I can't really get them interested again now in city, half a chance with the youngest and she'll come and watch games on telly if I'm there at home, but the eldest no chance, the window has gone. Not really asking for cheap deals, not asking for unfair treatment because I have a greater Manchester postcode. Just recognition of what it means to be a local fan, and the opportunity to be able to take myself and my family to games at a fair price. If one of them grows up and meets a united fan, a chelsea fan, someone who isn't at all interested in football, that's for sure a potential customer lost for City and maybe one gained for a rival.
I'm sure it's a similar story across many fans and clubs, and it does stick in my throat a little when the club praises itself for something they're proud of in the local community, knowing they also cut their own fanbase off for higher profits.
Working class folk aren't the target audience anymore unfortunately, especially when you consider that some of the American owners entering the game also own handegg teams where they can get hundreds of dollars per ticket, and given the roots of football and even our own club, out of a church wellbeing initiative to promote community and exercise, it's really quite sad to see.
Protecting a minimum amount of tickets at lower prices, for younger folks and for local postcodes may be worth a review. But the only way that is going to come about is through influence wider than the clubs and leagues themselves.
When you think that we play in competitions that require us to have a certain number of academy trained players, placing emphasis on the importance of locality, it's odd that there's no provision for that same protection of the locality for fans themselves.
Although football is a business nowadays, it does stand slightly apart in that a percentage of those consumers are captive, maybe even dependant. We don't switch around from one entertainment provider to another in general (at least not in the UK, or to a much lesser degree) and you could make a case that we're more closely resembling addicts than customers.
I personally know people who feel they can't walk away, can't stop following city, and have to show that through being a season ticket holder. They've done it for years and if it means they have to take out a loan to do it, they do it. Especially my generation who may have younger kids they want to introduce to the game and city, as well as an older generation who not only influenced them to come every week but also, to be frank, have limited time left together with us.
City could score a huge moral victory by being the first to take such steps in the premier league. It astounds me that we can't look at it from a different point of view - the amount of money I and others have put in over the decades must still dwarf that of the currently more attractive, more affluent targets. But you can't guarantee the latter, whereas I think for many of us we're here to stay. Relegate us on the 115, we'd still be there. Finish outside the champions league spots, yep I'm still city through and through and I'll pay what I can to show that and be part of it. Now that crowd is never, ever going to take a year out from supporting city if we don't perform or if someone else does better, if a star player leaves. Never. And they know it, using it whichever way suits.
Last edited:
