I have a question for those complaining about the prices increase: In the last 11 years Sheikh Mansour has invested over 1 billion of his own money in MCFC, and he's still investing millions every year via Etihad, Aabar, Etilasat and Abu Dhabi Tourism.
He is also one of the few sport club owners to reinvest back all of the club's profit.
So, do you guys really think City raised the price just because "they want to explore the working class"?
Just to remember, one of City's problems with FFP is that UEFA considers the value of City's sponsors to be very high compared to other incomes. Of Europe's top clubs, City's matchday income is the lowest when compared to commercial income. Although the club is billionaire, they need fans' money to justify such high sponsorships, be more 'self-sustaining', and to balance their books.
Here is a PL comparison (2017/18):
ARSENAL
Matchday income: £99m (59k attendance; £1,668 per supporter)
Commercial income: £107m
CHELSEA
Matchday income: £74m (41k attendance; £1,792 per supporter)
Commercial: £170m
LIVERPOOL
Matchday income: £81m (53k attendance; £1,526 per supporter)
Commercial: £154m
MANCHESTER CITY
Matchday income: £57m (54k attendance; £1,059 per supporter)
Commercial: £232m
MANCHESTER UNITED
Matchday income: £110m (74k attendance; £1,467 per supporter)
Commercial: £276m
TOTTENHAM
Matchday income: £71m (67k attendance; £1,044 per supporter)
Commercial: £109m
+£1m or £2m a season seems a little but sends the message that the club is growing with the help of fans. City is fighting against a Cartel, so the club have to play their game (and hopefully win it).
I believe the season card will continue to get more expensive while FFP is a problem. When that is over, the club will probably freeze the price or even decrease it. (that's my view)