tourists yesterday

[whp.blue]

found this skanking around the club shop the other day, we dont need this sort, bandwagon jumping!

never liked dark shorts with the home kit but she seems to carry it off

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

Selling shirts and bedcovers to gulliable, dellusional nobheads around the world is a totally different issue to letting 0.00001% of them taking genuine blues' tickets because they are richer than loyal fans.

What would your plan for financial sustainability look like?

Whatever my plan for financial sustainability would be (and it's a bit arrogant for anyone on here, without access to the exact figures to think that they know the minute knowledge of such plans), it would not include the totally financially insignificant issue - in terms of the club making an impact on it's spending - of shafting loyal fans with ticket price rises or allowing wankers with no connection to or feeling for the club to jump in front of genuine fans in the queue for tickets for big games.

You seem to be suggesting that such things lead to financial sustainability.

The only tenuous link you could make is that you might get some contacts or investment if you allow such people to take tickets. But I hardly think that anyone genuinely important would be plonked amongst the away fans.

I'm struggling to think how you are connecting the development of a worldwide fanbase (not my choice of phrase as I don't class someone on the other side of the world as a fan - maybe an interested, delusional observer but if they want to delude themselves and spend their money on City branded tat then that is their business and good for the club) and allowing a miniscule amount of people to take tickets that would otherwise be open to genuine fans of the club. Are you suggesting that these people then go back to wherever they are from (Milton Keynes, Amsterdam, Hong Kong, wherever) and are like evangelical preachers converting millions of susceptible fools to 'city fans' and allowing the club to break even?

I somehow doubt it. It is irrelevant in terms of financial sustainability, so I don't know why you connect the two.

 

[citymad]

found this skanking around the club shop the other day, we dont need this sort, bandwagon jumping!

never liked dark shorts with the home kit but she seems to carry it off

Forget yesterdays performance, lets get rid of the current players, sign some of these lovely girls in "said" kit and put this team out for next year. We'll have that 60,000 capacity stadium in no time.

 

[Bluefinn]

Yeah; all these City fans that travel from overseas to games. Absolutely scandalous!!!

;-)

Jep a japanese guy who spent 8k£ to his trip to bring his whole family to Manchester, fkin gloryhunter ? Only those who slept under the old Maineroad are truly allowed to support the club.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

Yeah; all these City fans that travel from overseas to games. Absolutely scandalous!!!

;-)

Jep a japanese guy who spent 8k£ to his trip to bring his whole family to Manchester, fkin gloryhunter ? Only those who slept under the old Maineroad are truly allowed to support the club.

If tomorrow I spend 10k travelling to Japan to watch a Kashima Antlers game, does that automatically make me a massive Kashima fan, as much as those people from the area who have grown up with them and deserving of being able to get a ticket before them?

Or does it just mean that I have somehow latched on to a team from the other side of the world and can afford to throw money at a jolly up to watch one of their matches?

 

[BrianW]

I was going to away matches, regularly, when some of our current fans were still in their mothers' wombs, or weren't even that developed. But I haven't been away for years, so if I went to one now I'd be denounced as a 'tourist'.

I have to say, I don't like the way this club is developing in some ways, with growing attitudes of exclusiveness. Perhaps in a bit it will be like one of those odd extremist churches, where anyone who steps out of line is 'shunned'.

When I first stood on the Kippax, there was no requirement to prove that your granddad used to go to Hyde Road, or that you knew Bert Trautmann's middle name. You just went. Wish it could be like that again.

 

[S04]

Selling shirts and bedcovers to gulliable, dellusional nobheads around the world is a totally different issue to letting 0.00001% of them taking genuine blues' tickets because they are richer than loyal fans.

What would your plan for financial sustainability look like?

Whatever my plan for financial sustainability would be (and it's a bit arrogant for anyone on here, without access to the exact figures to think that they know the minute knowledge of such plans), it would not include the totally financially insignificant issue - in terms of the club making an impact on it's spending - of shafting loyal fans with ticket price rises or allowing wankers with no connection to or feeling for the club to jump in front of genuine fans in the queue for tickets for big games.

You seem to be suggesting that such things lead to financial sustainability.

The only tenuous link you could make is that you might get some contacts or investment if you allow such people to take tickets. But I hardly think that anyone genuinely important would be plonked amongst the away fans.

I'm struggling to think how you are connecting the development of a worldwide fanbase (not my choice of phrase as I don't class someone on the other side of the world as a fan - maybe an interested, delusional observer but if they want to delude themselves and spend their money on City branded tat then that is their business and good for the club) and allowing a miniscule amount of people to take tickets that would otherwise be open to genuine fans of the club. Are you suggesting that these people then go back to wherever they are from (Milton Keynes, Amsterdam, Hong Kong, wherever) and are like evangelical preachers converting millions of susceptible fools to 'city fans' and allowing the club to break even?

I somehow doubt it. It is irrelevant in terms of financial sustainability, so I don't know why you connect the two.

Well, for every City-shirt sold in the UK there are two sold outside UK. That is a scale of importance surely..Those that buy those shirts might want tickets, and they will get them eventually.
We can´t afford to alienate them for the same reasons as the rags, Liverpool, Barca and others cater to them. They spend big while local fans spend as little as possible.

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

What would your plan for financial sustainability look like?

Whatever my plan for financial sustainability would be (and it's a bit arrogant for anyone on here, without access to the exact figures to think that they know the minute knowledge of such plans), it would not include the totally financially insignificant issue - in terms of the club making an impact on it's spending - of shafting loyal fans with ticket price rises or allowing wankers with no connection to or feeling for the club to jump in front of genuine fans in the queue for tickets for big games.

You seem to be suggesting that such things lead to financial sustainability.

The only tenuous link you could make is that you might get some contacts or investment if you allow such people to take tickets. But I hardly think that anyone genuinely important would be plonked amongst the away fans.

I'm struggling to think how you are connecting the development of a worldwide fanbase (not my choice of phrase as I don't class someone on the other side of the world as a fan - maybe an interested, delusional observer but if they want to delude themselves and spend their money on City branded tat then that is their business and good for the club) and allowing a miniscule amount of people to take tickets that would otherwise be open to genuine fans of the club. Are you suggesting that these people then go back to wherever they are from (Milton Keynes, Amsterdam, Hong Kong, wherever) and are like evangelical preachers converting millions of susceptible fools to 'city fans' and allowing the club to break even?

I somehow doubt it. It is irrelevant in terms of financial sustainability, so I don't know why you connect the two.

Well, for every City-shirt sold in the UK there are two sold outside UK. That is a scale of importance surely..Those that buy those shirts might want tickets, and they will get them eventually.
We can´t afford to alienate them for the same reasons as the rags, Liverpool, Barca and others cater to them. They spend big while local fans spend as little as possible.

The percentage of shirt buyers outside of the UK who want tickets for the likes of Arsenal and United away is so small that it is not even worth discussing. 99.9999999% of them will never go to a City match and they will still buy the shirts. So why shaft the proper fans over it and deny them tickets to big games, just to satisfy the sad desires of those rich enough to be able to travel to watch a far away team they have latched on to.

Anyway, there is plenty of room for such people at home games and I personally haven't got an issue over a small percentage of tourists turning up there. There is room for that.

Remind me how much money such tourists are spending at the City shop on a day trip to the Emirates?

It's bollocks, there is such a small amount of tickets for such fixtures that to give priority to day trippers (only those who can afford to pay a big wedge mind) is a joke and it shafts actual fans. At home games, well, there is room for it to happen.

None of it has a huge impact of the club's bottom line though as the foreign markets that they (and other clubs) are cynically targeting consist overwhelmingly of numpties buying tat branded with the badge of a club they've never get anywhere near.

 

[stimo]

absolutely dead after that journey, might go by train next time!

 

[Skashion]

Whatever my plan for financial sustainability would be (and it's a bit arrogant for anyone on here, without access to the exact figures to think that they know the minute knowledge of such plans), it would not include the totally financially insignificant issue - in terms of the club making an impact on it's spending - of shafting loyal fans with ticket price rises or allowing wankers with no connection to or feeling for the club to jump in front of genuine fans in the queue for tickets for big games.

You seem to be suggesting that such things lead to financial sustainability.

The only tenuous link you could make is that you might get some contacts or investment if you allow such people to take tickets. But I hardly think that anyone genuinely important would be plonked amongst the away fans.

I'm struggling to think how you are connecting the development of a worldwide fanbase (not my choice of phrase as I don't class someone on the other side of the world as a fan - maybe an interested, delusional observer but if they want to delude themselves and spend their money on City branded tat then that is their business and good for the club) and allowing a miniscule amount of people to take tickets that would otherwise be open to genuine fans of the club. Are you suggesting that these people then go back to wherever they are from (Milton Keynes, Amsterdam, Hong Kong, wherever) and are like evangelical preachers converting millions of susceptible fools to 'city fans' and allowing the club to break even?

I somehow doubt it. It is irrelevant in terms of financial sustainability, so I don't know why you connect the two.

I'm not just talking about away day tourism, which I've already said is totally insignificant to me and which affects one game a season as far as I'm concerned. I'm talking generally about whether our club caters to corporates at home games and whether it would be a positive thing for our club's financial sustainability. There's a huge gap in our match day income and that of the rags and Arsenal and a large bulk of that is in corporate hospitality in which said clubs earn millions in the £30m+ range whereas we make around £7m.