PDA

View Full Version : BBC cost of football survey - Hibs refuse to respond



Dalkeith
18-10-2012, 06:01 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

no hibs info

wearethehibs
18-10-2012, 06:08 AM
Wonder why were not on it?

Looking at that I cant believe that anyone would buy a pie from a football stadium. But 100s of people do, despite there usually being bakery's not far from most grounds.

HH81
18-10-2012, 06:08 AM
So if you want cheap football the women's super league is the answer :-).

Gatecrasher
18-10-2012, 06:13 AM
Hibs would actually come out not too bad among the other teams imo

VickMackie
18-10-2012, 07:07 AM
Wonder why were not on it?

Looking at that I cant believe that anyone would buy a pie from a football stadium. But 100s of people do, despite there usually being bakery's not far from most grounds.

Probably because there's one of these tables out every couple of months and the fact that st prices vary widely.

It does make us look petty IMO.

It's interesting to see the big clubs with the smaller stadiums in the EPL have horrendous minimum prices to try and maximise their match day income.

Beefster
18-10-2012, 07:41 AM
Very poor show by Hibs to refuse to give details.

Skanko79
18-10-2012, 07:44 AM
4 quid for a pie at kidderminster!!

The Sea-gull
18-10-2012, 07:47 AM
Don't want to have a go as there may be reasons but it is a poor show that in a survey published by the national broadcaster that the club has chosen not to respond. Looks like we are about the only ones who haven't got back to them.

I haven't appreciated the over-zealous way the media has had a go about Hibs in the last 2 or 3 years and have posted as such on here but our performance on the pitch gave them plenty ammo and our reputation as being a club that does not co-operate well with the media and external agencies doesn't do us any favours and I can maybe see why they stick the boot in when given the opportunity.

Things like this survey highlight that. It isn't a massive deal and is not the end of the world but dress it up anyway you like, it looks bad that we haven't taken part. Worse than if we had come out as having had high prices.

KeithTheHibby
18-10-2012, 07:51 AM
Hibs topped this league last year and no figures for this year, make what you want of that...

Part/Time Supporter
18-10-2012, 07:54 AM
Hibs topped this league last year and no figures for this year, make what you want of that...

IIRC, Hibs were not happy about the way the figures were presented last year. The BBC made them out to be the most expensive club in Scotland, yet took no account of relative discounts for kids, OAPs and so on. The survey only lists standard adult prices.

YehButNoBut
18-10-2012, 08:00 AM
Looks like, even more so in the present financial climate, that players are going to have to be more realistic in their wage demands as more clubs than ever are struggling to make ends meet. Players expectations of salaries still seem way above what clubs can afford to pay and until that changes clubs will struggle to make a profit and the cost to attend a football match will stay high.

Below from todays Record.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/football-players-facing-wage-cuts-1385030


SCOTS footballers face pay freezes or cuts as struggling SPL clubs strive to live within their means, according to a report.

Most top league clubs don’t expect to make any money this season.

And while bosses try to reduce their wage bills, many players and their agents are still demanding big salaries.

Accounting and business advice firm PKF said that could lead to a “widening gap” between wages here and those in England.

That in turn could threaten the future development of the game north of the Border as clubs here will struggle to attract top players.PKF’s annual football survey, Leagues Apart, showed that two-thirds of Scottish Premier League clubs don’t expect to make a profit for the 2012-13 season.

Only 17 per cent said their financial situation was “healthy” – the lowest of any of the leagues questioned.Two-thirds of SPL clubs depend on their principal shareholder to cover losses.

Six SPL teams took part in the study, along with clubs in the English Premier League, Championship and Leagues One and Two – a total of 62.

A third of SPL sides reported they would pay first team players the same as last year, while two-thirds said they would pay less.However, transfer budgets will stay the same.

Charles Barnett, head of the football industry group at PKF, said: “There is clear evidence that clubs are absorbing some of the financial lessons of the last decade and are reducing wages to turnover to ensure they operate within a manageable ratio.

“However, it is also equally clear that players and their agents may not have absorbed this lesson and are continuing to demand wages which are untenable for the majority of Scottish clubs.

“The result is likely to be a widening gap between the wages players are paid in Scotland compared with their English counterparts.

“This will have worrying ramifications for the development of Scottish football as it is unlikely SPL teams will attract top players in the same way as clubs in England which will, in turn, widen the gap between wages in Scotland and England.”

SPL clubs’ income fell across the board in the 2011-12 season.

The biggest concern for the coming season was a drop in TV cash, followed by falling attendances at games due to the poor state of the economy. A third of SPL clubs believe the state of the economy will cause all sources of revenue to be down in 2012-13, apart from corporate entertainment.

And Rangers dropping down to the Third Division may have made things worse.

Barnett said: “It is likely that the financial concerns of many SPL teams will be heightened with the loss of Rangers from the league.

“It is likely that some clubs will now be predicting an even greater fall in revenue and further worries about whether they can manage the gap between expenditure and income which the departure of Rangers has undoubtedly precipitated.

“The problem is that many SPL clubs were facing a difficult year anyway but the changed circumstances of the league mean those difficulties may have become exacerbated.

“Nobody can deny these are worrying times for Scottish football. But there may be something more positive which arises.

“For example, this season Rangers are substantially increasing revenues among Third Division teams.”

Mikey
18-10-2012, 08:04 AM
I caught the very start of the phone in on Radio 5 while in the car and the phrase "fleecing the fans" was used in pretty much the first sentence.

Surely the fans are only being fleeced if the owner is trousering the money? The reason prices are high at any club is to put players on the park.

Until Sky stop pumping millions into England, and players salaries drop, then fans in Scotland (in particular) will pay over the odds for what they're seeing.

500miles
18-10-2012, 08:09 AM
You can have cheaper football, as long as you're willing to allow the standard on show to drop further. That's the bottom line, because there's no much lining of pockets to be done in the SPL as things are anyway.

500miles
18-10-2012, 08:10 AM
So if you want cheap football the women's super league is the answer :-).

And if I want cheap vodka, ill drink tattie peelings and antifreeze!

Biffa Bacon
18-10-2012, 08:12 AM
IIRC, Hibs were not happy about the way the figures were presented last year. The BBC made them out to be the most expensive club in Scotland, yet took no account of relative discounts for kids, OAPs and so on. The survey only lists standard adult prices.

The survey can't cover every discounted deal offered by every club (or it would be too complicated). For a 'standard adult' (which a large number of the fans will be) Hibs are one of the most expensive in the SPL.

Viva_Palmeiras
18-10-2012, 08:18 AM
I caught the very start of the phone in on Radio 5 while in the car and the phrase "fleecing the fans" was used in pretty much the first sentence.

Surely the fans are only being fleeced if the owner is trousering the money? The reason prices are high at any club is to put players on the park.

Until Sky stop pumping millions into England, and players salaries drop, then fans in Scotland (in particular) will pay over the odds for what they're seeing.

Sky is in effect the king maker in the UK (England prosper whilst Scotland withers on the vine) and it's also got it's grubby hands on Brazilan football - anyone fancy paying a subscription and the ppv for the Classico games?

Out of interest did any of the studies determine where the money goes? Players, agents and lawyers are the real winners

Mikey
18-10-2012, 08:20 AM
That Radio 5 programme has been on for 20 minutes and finally someone has made the link to players wages. The Man City fan who seems to want to go back to the age of 11 quid season tickets would do well to listen.

How many 11 quid season tickets would it take to pay Vincent Kompany's wages?

jonty
18-10-2012, 08:22 AM
If its just standard adult prices, then the BBC could have gathered the ST prices at the start of the season, monitored the clubs website prices and over the course of the season so far, popped into a game to gather prices on food and drink. All of the information is in the public domain.

It used to be called market research. Now it appears to have been rebranded as lazy journalism.

basehibby
18-10-2012, 08:22 AM
OBSCENE! Especially in the EPL - where they get ridiculous amounts of cash thrown at them by the TV companies and STILL seek to suck the cash out of their loyal supporters with vastly over inflated prices for everything possible. It disgusts me that rather than making an effort to bring value for money to their fan bases, all of these clubs choose instead to chuck a few million more at the already over-bloated wallets of their spoiled rotten "stars" . Football supporters - treated like **** by the authorities and taken for mugs at every turn by the clubs we follow - what did we do to deserve this?!?

portyfelly
18-10-2012, 08:23 AM
I caught the very start of the phone in on Radio 5 while in the car and the phrase "fleecing the fans" was used in pretty much the first sentence.

Surely the fans are only being fleeced if the owner is trousering the money? The reason prices are high at any club is to put players on the park.

Until Sky stop pumping millions into England, and players salaries drop, then fans in Scotland (in particular) will pay over the odds for what they're seeing.

I do not know if this is a solution it just seems reasonable to me.

Currently season tickets across the country range from around 300 - 600 and average 23 per game. The result is the attendances we currently have.
I think that we should consider reducing gate prices.

If a season ticket at Easter road was say... 200 to 250 and games were priced at 20 I reckon we could maximise our support. The increased numbers would generate the same if not more income than current pricing does.
This would have knock on effects
1. Better atmosphere
2. More add on sales in the ground. pies etc
3. More sales at the shop

Is this too simple a solution?

Part/Time Supporter
18-10-2012, 08:23 AM
The survey can't cover every discounted deal offered by every club (or it would be too complicated). For a 'standard adult' (which a large number of the fans will be) Hibs are one of the most expensive in the SPL.

And for the discounted pricing they're one of the least expensive. Hence why the club were unhappy that this survey was cherry picking one statistic and trying to create a cheap headline out of it.

Mikey
18-10-2012, 08:28 AM
I do not know if this is a solution it just seems reasonable to me.

Currently season tickets across the country range from around 300 - 600 and average 23 per game. The result is the attendances we currently have.
I think that we should consider reducing gate prices.

If a season ticket at Easter road was say... 200 to 250 and games were priced at 20 I reckon we could maximise our support. The increased numbers would generate the same if not more income than current pricing does.
This would have knock on effects
1. Better atmosphere
2. More add on sales in the ground. pies etc
3. More sales at the shop

Is this too simple a solution?

Here's a wee job for you. Away and find another club that's done the same and it's worked for them.

See ye later :greengrin

Remember Motherwell did this and ended up in administration, and I'm sure there are other examples. What would happen to Hibs if they tried that and their income halved?

Pretty Boy
18-10-2012, 08:30 AM
I do not know if this is a solution it just seems reasonable to me.

Currently season tickets across the country range from around 300 - 600 and average 23 per game. The result is the attendances we currently have.
I think that we should consider reducing gate prices.

If a season ticket at Easter road was say... 200 to 250 and games were priced at 20 I reckon we could maximise our support. The increased numbers would generate the same if not more income than current pricing does.
This would have knock on effects
1. Better atmosphere
2. More add on sales in the ground. pies etc
3. More sales at the shop

Is this too simple a solution?

Has it ever been proven that lower prices equals more fans?

I just don't see that a £4 reduction on walk up prices would have hundreds or thousands flocking back to ER.

I'm all for creative pricing to attract fans back, perhaps a family ticket or top up card, but imo the slash the prices argument is unproven and a bit simplistic.

portyfelly
18-10-2012, 08:33 AM
Here's a wee job for you. Away and find another club that's done the same and it's worked for them.

See ye later :greengrin

Remember Motherwell did this and ended up in administration, and I'm sure there are other examples. What would happen to Hibs if they tried that and their income halved?

In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb

Mikey
18-10-2012, 08:37 AM
In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb

That's nice for them. If they charged their fans more, and could afford better players, they might not be 9 points off the top of the table :wink:

jonty
18-10-2012, 08:42 AM
In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb


Its certinly something that fans would like to see, but I guess that tampering with a 'well proven/traditional' formula during a recession isn't the kind of risk that clubs are willing to take.

If Hibs were to offer a £25 ticket for local rail (or bus) fare and entry to a game, it may encourage more fans.
A huge logistical hurdle for hibs though - having to link up with scotrail, lothian buses, stagecoach etc
On the other hand, some fans just dont have the time or funds.

Pretty Boy
18-10-2012, 08:43 AM
In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb

Germany also has a population of 80+ million. Lot more potential fans to cram in at the cheap prices.

Scotland is already punching above It's weight with the percentage of the population who attends football matches.

Part/Time Supporter
18-10-2012, 08:48 AM
In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb

There are more people in the metropolitan area surrounding Dortmund (7.3 million) than there are in the whole of Scotland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruhr_Metropolitan_Region

There are no more than 10 professional football clubs in that region, of whom only two (Schalke and Dortmund) are regularly in the top division nowadays. Whereas in Scotland you have 20-odd fully professional clubs competing for less people.

Dortmund (and Schalke) therefore have a much bigger supporter base and less competition. It's admirable they've kept the ticket prices down but they are able to generate vast revenues from the wider support base (selling shirts, TV rights) that simply isn't available to SPL clubs.

LancashireHibby
18-10-2012, 09:17 AM
4 quid for a pie at kidderminster!!
A mate of mine reckons that's for a home-made cottage pie that they sell though, so you're paying for something decent rather than the usual cremated mass produced pie.

hibee92
18-10-2012, 09:35 AM
BBC Sport ‏@BBCSport (https://twitter.com/BBCSport)
#BBCPriceofFootball (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23BBCPriceofFootball&src=hash) reveals average price of cheapest ticket in English football has risen 11.7% in 12 months - five times rate of inflation

Mental.

cocopops1875
18-10-2012, 09:52 AM
A mate of mine reckons that's for a home-made cottage pie that they sell though, so you're paying for something decent rather than the usual cremated mass produced pie.
I noticed pre-season at east fife i had 1x Scotch pie 1x Steak pie 1x Bovril and got change from a fiver, how much at ours would that be ? Oh and they were magic and hot

DC_Hibs
18-10-2012, 10:18 AM
In Germany the fan is king. The Bundesliga has the lowest ticket prices and the highest average attendance of Europe's five major leagues. At Borussia Dortmund their giant stand holds 26,000 and costs little more than £10 for admission. Clubs limit the number of season tickets to ensure everyone has a chance to see the games, and the away team has the right to 10% of the available capacity. Match tickets double as free rail passes with supporters travelling in a relaxed atmosphere in which they can sing, drink beer to wash down their sausages, and are generally treated as desirables: :cb

Hurrah, we have a winner. I wondered how long it would take for someone to peddle more inaccuracies about German football prices.

Been going 6 seasons home and away and regularly pay EUR30-40 for away games. The standing tickets are limited home and away and if you take 30 seconds to check your Dortmund figures on their english webpage you will see £10 (or little more) is incorrect even per game for season ticket holders.

I did pay only 11 or 12 Euros to stand at a Mainz top tier game a few weeks back as there are plenty standing tickets as a percentage of their stadium. Some clubs have the bare minimum standing places if any and most sell out to season tickets and are not available on match to match basis. Standing are also the first to go for away fans. Eintracht Frankfurt fans wanting to go to Stuttgart next weekend who missed initial batch of cheaper tickets will now have to pay €44 face value, plus 10% handling change from Frankfurt and then postage....unless they go out their way to pick tickets up. They could order for neighbouring - and similar - Stuttgart sections for EUR31 though and a good thousand will.

Yes there are a lot of cheaper tickets in Germany and yes its a better product BUT don't believe the hype. Friday, Saturday and Sunday games in the top division with very little notice of dates and times often. Add in start times of 18:00 on a Friday and 20:15 on a Monday for Bundesliga 2. Every single game is televised and TV is King.

Match ticket as travel card varies massively between clubs with a lot of them covering travel only in the city of game - which is still a bonus - and some covering the entire region.

Hibee87
18-10-2012, 10:19 AM
Im sure scotland is top on the average atendees compared to population. It has been said many times before but its simply as this. lower ticket prices, worse players, worse players, less fans etc

Mikey
18-10-2012, 10:46 AM
And....... reducing prices wouldn't guarantee fans returning.

We were told that fans would come back when results improved, but we're on a good run and a genuine challenger for second (which is where we are just now) but the upturn is minimal.

And we were also told that people would come back if Rangers were punted to the 3rd division, which they duly have been.

How can anyone be sure that the shortfall created by reducing prices (by say 30%) would be made up by fans returning and increased merchandising sales?

People might say that they would come along to games, and buy more stuff while they're there, but would they really?

Broken Gnome
18-10-2012, 10:49 AM
Fair enough.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983

Mikey
18-10-2012, 10:52 AM
Very poor show by Hibs to refuse to give details.


BBC runs an annual 'Price of Football' survey. Hibernian declined to participate in the survey this year because the Club believes the survey does not accurately explain or explore the breadth of the ticket offers currently available to the supporters of different clubs, nor does it examine the investment made by Clubs in the facilities it offers supporters.

From here.......

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983

Frogga
18-10-2012, 11:01 AM
Don't ask me why but the other day I was looking at Genk's website and noticed they get an average gate of 20,000 which is impressive considering the population is only 65,000 according to wiki. Maybe I'm completely missing something but Hibs could give them a ring and ask them what their trick is.

The Harp Awakes
18-10-2012, 11:02 AM
Fair enough.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983

Nope, you can't argue with Hibs reasoning for not taking part in the survey.

The one thing Hibs pricing strategy does though is discourage 'walk-up' fans from attending games. The prices for Category A matches are too high IMO, particularly because these games are usually televised.

Pretty Boy
18-10-2012, 11:02 AM
Fair enough.

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983

Well done Hibs imo.

Stevie Reid
18-10-2012, 11:04 AM
From here.......

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983

:agree:

Nothing poor about that.

Dalkeith
18-10-2012, 11:13 AM
From here.......

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20121018/wide-range-of-offers-just-the-ticket_2262950_2951983


nice statement but im sure we are not the only club with a wide range of offers,

VickMackie
18-10-2012, 11:16 AM
Good statement.

A wee funny in there 'do we have his permission to mention him'!

Gatecrasher
18-10-2012, 11:18 AM
nice statement but im sure we are not the only club with a wide range of offers,

Other clubs weren't headlined as the most expensive place in Scotland to watch football last year when the offers Hibs put on didn't reflect that (as per Hibs statement)

Saorsa
18-10-2012, 11:18 AM
nice statement but im sure we are not the only club with a wide range of offers,I'm sure we're not but the survey is far too simplistic tae be of any real value IMO therefore I dinnae have a problem with Hibs no taking part in it.

Dalkeith
18-10-2012, 11:22 AM
Other clubs weren't headlined as the most expensive place in Scotland to watch football last year when the offers Hibs put on didn't reflect that (as per Hibs statement)


and last year other clubs had offers on as well,

marinello59
18-10-2012, 11:25 AM
nice statement but im sure we are not the only club with a wide range of offers,

No they are not. So let's just give them no credit for the decent offers they do provide and give the club we love a damned good kicking.

Dalkeith
18-10-2012, 11:28 AM
No they are not. So let's just give them no credit for the decent offers they do provide and give the club we love a damned good kicking.

whos giving them a klicking?

marinello59
18-10-2012, 11:34 AM
nice statement but im sure we are not the only club with a wide range of offers,


and last year other clubs had offers on as well,


whos giving them a klicking?


Apologies. I read that as negative spin from yourself. Sorry if I got that wrong.

Dalkeith
18-10-2012, 11:36 AM
Apologies. I read that as negative spin from yourself. Sorry if I got that wrong.

no probs mate, maybe i could have worded it better but no negative stuff from me (well not on this thread):greengrin

3pm
18-10-2012, 11:42 AM
80% of people get in without paying the full price?!?!

Gatecrasher
18-10-2012, 11:46 AM
and last year other clubs had offers on as well,

The point that I was making is that Hibs were headlined on the web site as the most expensive place to watch football in Scotland when the survey only highlighted the most expensive Season Tickets we have where overall Easter Road isn't as expensive as they were making out due to the offers and the stadium also has better facilities than a lot of our rivals as well. Hibs obviously felt they didnt need the negitive press again this year and declined to take part. They have since put a very good statement on the web site explaining why.

superfurryhibby
18-10-2012, 11:47 AM
I was looking at football stats website and the attendences make for interesting reading. I checked out the crowd sizes for the early 70's to mid 70's, when I started going to games. As we all know, this was a magnificent era for Hibs with the best football seen at ER since the time of the Famous Five, What surprised me was the fairly poor attendences for games outwith the O/F, Hearts and Europe. Leaague games against lower table sides were often getting well less than 10,000, despite the probablity of a goal fest.

Prices relative to income were considerably more reasonable, the football was better than that seen at ER for 20 years and yet the crowds were pretty modest for the more mundane fixtures.

Not sure of the answers in terms of pulling bigger crowds, just adding some further food for thought.




http://www.fitbastats.com/hibs/club_records_league_attendance.php

Speedy
18-10-2012, 11:51 AM
And....... reducing prices wouldn't guarantee fans returning.
We were told that fans would come back when results improved, but we're on a good run and a genuine challenger for second (which is where we are just now) but the upturn is minimal.

And we were also told that people would come back if Rangers were punted to the 3rd division, which they duly have been.

How can anyone be sure that the shortfall created by reducing prices (by say 30%) would be made up by fans returning and increased merchandising sales?

People might say that they would come along to games, and buy more stuff while they're there, but would they really?

I'd agree with this. There were times last season where we'd have struggled to fill the stadium with freebies.

Broken Gnome
18-10-2012, 11:57 AM
Nope, you can't argue with Hibs reasoning for not taking part in the survey.

The one thing Hibs pricing strategy does though is discourage 'walk-up' fans from attending games. The prices for Category A matches are too high IMO, particularly because these games are usually televised.

True - would say that is particularly emphasised by how bad the last few years have been. £28 in the past (say 2004 - 2009) would have been worth paying for OF and Hearts games because we had a shot at winning and you were optimistic of a decent game. Of late, thinking of the August derby in particular, the price is one reason you could throw on top of umpteen others for deciding against attending.

The Sea-gull
18-10-2012, 12:11 PM
Good to see the club come out and explain why Hibs never took part. Can't argue with there reasoning really.

One of these they were damned if they did, damned if they didn't situations. If they took part there would be the most expensive club in Scotland tag again and if they didn't then folk reading the survey perceive the club as unco-operative and as having something to hide.

Granted, folk reading the survey probably won't read the statement on Hibs' website explaining why they never took part but our fans will read it.

Part/Time Supporter
18-10-2012, 12:15 PM
I was looking at football stats website and the attendences make for interesting reading. I checked out the crowd sizes for the early 70's to mid 70's, when I started going to games. As we all know, this was a magnificent era for Hibs with the best football seen at ER since the time of the Famous Five, What surprised me was the fairly poor attendences for games outwith the O/F, Hearts and Europe. Leaague games against lower table sides were often getting well less than 10,000, despite the probablity of a goal fest.

Prices relative to income were considerably more reasonable, the football was better than that seen at ER for 20 years and yet the crowds were pretty modest for the more mundane fixtures.

Not sure of the answers in terms of pulling bigger crowds, just adding some further food for thought.




http://www.fitbastats.com/hibs/club_records_league_attendance.php

That's why Hibs (through Tom Hart) were one of the biggest supporters of going to a 10 (now 12) team Premier Division in the mid 70s. More games against Rantic, Hearts, Dundee teams, Aberdeen, less (or none) against East Fife, QOTS and so on.

Part/Time Supporter
18-10-2012, 12:17 PM
80% of people get in without paying the full price?!?!

That will be including adults who bought STs as part of family deals with kids or OAPs.

cheltenhamhibee
18-10-2012, 03:36 PM
A mate of mine reckons that's for a home-made cottage pie that they sell though, so you're paying for something decent rather than the usual cremated mass produced pie.


It is the cottage pie, had it a couple of times and it is fantastic, they also make proper oxtail soup as well and is just as good :thumbsup:

NAE NOOKIE
18-10-2012, 06:02 PM
Got to agree that nearly £30 for an OF or Derby match is too much ... we probably lose money with prices like that for matches which are live on the telly.

But the fact that we are losing out to English clubs wages wise shouldnt be much of a shock really, its always been that way, its just that clubs lower down in England than used to be the case can pay more than SPL clubs these days.

But the truth is that as a whole English football is drowning in a sea of debt which makes the debt of Scottish clubs look like a puddle in comparison. They can sustain that debt because of TV money, but nothing lasts for ever. ..... does it !

Perhaps we are better off making no effort to compete with English football, or even comparing ourselves to them, because in the long run we will probably be better off.

Number69
18-10-2012, 09:06 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

Ok so some shocks in here, but can anyone answer why we didnt respond?

Le Tache acting all shrewd again or simply the usual WE DO NOT TALK TO THE PRESS rule? I'm sick of never reading news about us tbh!

Saorsa
18-10-2012, 09:08 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

Ok so some shocks in here, but can anyone answer why we didnt respond?

Le Tache acting all shrewd again or simply the usual WE DO NOT TALK TO THE PRESS rule? I'm sick of never reading news about us tbh!look in this thread

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?247991-cost-of-football

Scouse Hibee
18-10-2012, 09:10 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

Ok so some shocks in here, but can anyone answer why we didnt respond?

Le Tache acting all shrewd again or simply the usual WE DO NOT TALK TO THE PRESS rule? I'm sick of never reading news about us tbh!

The Tache realising a reply will not match what we have actually declared :greengrin

Number69
18-10-2012, 09:16 PM
look in this thread

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?247991-cost-of-football

Ach where did that come from??:thumbsup:

heretoday
18-10-2012, 09:36 PM
I last saw Hibs at home versus Inverness and I can't say the experience was value for money. Let's face it, it's a labour of love.

hibeedonald
18-10-2012, 10:12 PM
Me and my dad went to Hibs Dundee, was definitely value for money sitting in West for a change with a good view. Can't get a ST as I'm at uni, but will make more games this season.

Bishop Hibee
18-10-2012, 11:11 PM
£50 for my first ST in season 86/87. If it had gone up in line with inflation it would have been around £121 this season.

If we paid less the quality of player would go down but lets face it, it's hardly earth shattering as it is. It's a labour of love getting the ST to guarantee sitting amongst mates and family.

Having said that, I'd pay more if it meant under 16's could get in for a fiver. A walk up price of £12 is brutal. Before the comments about reduced ST's for kids etc., not every bairn can or wants to go to every home game and certainly many 14/15 year olds don't want to sit next to Ma or Pa!

Pete
19-10-2012, 03:52 AM
Here's a wee job for you. Away and find another club that's done the same and it's worked for them.

See ye later :greengrin

Remember Motherwell did this and ended up in administration, and I'm sure there are other examples. What would happen to Hibs if they tried that and their income halved?

I wish people would stop using Motherwell as an argument against lowering ticket prices.

Motherwell had to hand back tickets for a national final which tells you all about their potential fan base. It didn't work because there were never going to be that many people interested. I think we fall into a different category altogether.

It would only work if it was a league-wide thing and everyone agreed to lower prices at the same rate...or if our club done it very gradually. I agree that the short term results would be catastrophic should we simply halve the ticket price.

Personally, I think it's time for Scottish football to admit that we are never going to compare to England and re-invent itself using a socialist model. A fair distribution of all gate money, low prices and to begin with, somewhere where the top English clubs can farm their youngsters out for experience. If the league is sold as competitive, exciting and accessible, then I reckon people will want to go along if it actually turns out like that over a period of time.

Something has to be done as price rises for football have got out of hand and can't continue. People can point to attendance figures all they want but they can't argue with the fact that pressure is growing with every season on the normal fan who doesn't have money to burn.

Phil MaGlass
19-10-2012, 08:44 AM
Hurrah, we have a winner. I wondered how long it would take for someone to peddle more inaccuracies about German football prices.

Been going 6 seasons home and away and regularly pay EUR30-40 for away games. The standing tickets are limited home and away and if you take 30 seconds to check your Dortmund figures on their english webpage you will see £10 (or little more) is incorrect even per game for season ticket holders.

I did pay only 11 or 12 Euros to stand at a Mainz top tier game a few weeks back as there are plenty standing tickets as a percentage of their stadium. Some clubs have the bare minimum standing places if any and most sell out to season tickets and are not available on match to match basis. Standing are also the first to go for away fans. Eintracht Frankfurt fans wanting to go to Stuttgart next weekend who missed initial batch of cheaper tickets will now have to pay €44 face value, plus 10% handling change from Frankfurt and then postage....unless they go out their way to pick tickets up. They could order for neighbouring - and similar - Stuttgart sections for EUR31 though and a good thousand will.

Yes there are a lot of cheaper tickets in Germany and yes its a better product BUT don't believe the hype. Friday, Saturday and Sunday games in the top division with very little notice of dates and times often. Add in start times of 18:00 on a Friday and 20:15 on a Monday for Bundesliga 2. Every single game is televised and TV is King.

Match ticket as travel card varies massively between clubs with a lot of them covering travel only in the city of game - which is still a bonus - and some covering the entire region.

What I find strange in Germany is as you say TV is king for the scheduling of games, BUT, most football fans actually go to the game rather than watch it on TV, the whole matchday experience is better, friendlier and relaxed, my experience is that it is overall cheaper due to the 2.5 BILLION € yes 2.5 BILLION € 4Year deal with sky and the previous one of 1.5 Billion €(from what I remember). I went to see Schalke v PSG a couple of seasons ago, packed stadium, you can have a beer and on some match days you can sit with opposing fans.
Anyhoos Scottish fitba is well overpriced,as we all can agree, players are well over paid, and until we remedy players wages we will only stay overpriced.
Mibbe Hibs didnae want tae be embarrassed again like last year with being compared with the rest.

Golden Bear
19-10-2012, 09:15 AM
hibs have now officially explained their position as to why they didn't participate in the survey.


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/price-of-football-survey-hibs-explain-refusal-to-take-part-1-2588266

StevieC
19-10-2012, 10:15 AM
80% of people get in without paying the full price?!?!

I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss.
Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.

Golden Bear
19-10-2012, 10:23 AM
I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss.
Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.

:agree:

I tend to agree Steve. They've done more harm than good.

marinello59
19-10-2012, 10:41 AM
I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss.
Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.

The club simply couldn't win here. Remember when this was published last year, it became a hibs.net FACT that we were much more expensive than other clubs to follow. I am not so sure that other clubs could produce a similar average figure but assuming that was the case there would not be many with such a difference between the headline figure and what people actually pay. I would suggest that the whole survey is flawed and our not taking part makes very little difference. The club were very quick to come out with an expanation. In the past I think our club has been to slow let people know about the good things they actually do....free tickets etc......it was good to see that rectified. Hibs have supplied the information that the people who really matter should know, Hibs supporters. Letting a distorted survey deter some from attending would have been folly. (IMHO of course.:greengrin)

IWasThere2016
19-10-2012, 10:43 AM
I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss. Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.

Have to agree. Our fans would want to see it, and it might do Hibs no harm to see the figures at a glance on a (albeit crude) like for like basis.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 10:54 AM
I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss.
Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.


:agree:

I tend to agree Steve. They've done more harm than good.


Have to agree. Our fans would want to see it, and it might do Hibs no harm to see the figures at a glance on a (albeit crude) like for like basis.

Anyone that keen and that bothered can open up the BBC list in one web browser window, and the Hibs statement in another.

The Hibs decision not to get involved is explained, understandable, and absolutely no big deal - I cannot believe that people are even remotely bothered by it, especially in wake of the release of a statement that includes the headline figures that BBC would have used anyway.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 10:58 AM
The club simply couldn't win here. Remember when this was published last year, it became a hibs.net FACT that we were much more than other clubs to follow. I am not so sure that other clubs could produce a similar average figure but assuming that was the case there would not be many with such a difference between the headline figure and what people actually pay. I would suggest that the whole survey is flawed and our not taking part makes very little difference. The club were very quick to come out with an expanation. In the past I think our club has been to slow let people know about the good things they actually do....free tickets etc......it was good to see that rectified. Hibs have supplied the information that the people who really matter should know, Hibs supporters. Letting a distorted survey deter some from attending would have been folly. (IMHO of course.:greengrin)

:agree:

Spot on. Hibs didn't want to get involved because they felt that last year's survey was presented in a misleading fashion and led to bad publicity. Now people are saying that not wanting to get involved due to fear of bad publicity is bad publicity, and that the release of our own statement highlighting the range of costs and offers is misleading.

StevieC
19-10-2012, 11:18 AM
The Hibs decision not to get involved is explained, understandable, and absolutely no big deal - I cannot believe that people are even remotely bothered by it, especially in wake of the release of a statement that includes the headline figures that BBC would have used anyway.

You are correct that it's not a big deal. It wasn't a big deal last year either, when we were portrayed as the most expensive (when there was little more than the cost of a pie difference between most clubs).

IMO by refusing to be involved this year it's come across as a little petty, and resulted in an incomplete survey .. which at the end of the day is produced as an interesting article for us (the fans).

I've actually enjoyed reading the Premiership figures and comparing the costs at the various clubs, it wouldn't have been much of a read if half of them had refused to provide the figures.


Spot on. Hibs didn't want to get involved because they felt that last year's survey was presented in a misleading fashion and led to bad publicity.

In what way was it misleading? The figures produced were the ones provided by the Club.
The cost of the cheapest adult walk-up ticket was added to the cost of a programme, pie and a cup of tea, at every club in the country, and this provided a table that ultimately had a top team and a bottom team.

It's an interesting read and gives us, the fans, a chance to compare not just our own division but those elsewhere, from the Premiership to the Blue Square Premier. How many of us have had a wee peak at the Scottish 3rd division? :wink:

If teams start refusing to provide information then the survey is pointless and its us that miss out on an interesting comparison. Some, like yourself, probably aren't bothered one way or the other but I personally find it interesting and worth a read .. so my view remains that Hibs were wrong not to take part.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 12:01 PM
You are correct that it's not a big deal. It wasn't a big deal last year either, when we were portrayed as the most expensive (when there was little more than the cost of a pie difference between most clubs).

IMO by refusing to be involved this year it's come across as a little petty, and resulted in an incomplete survey .. which at the end of the day is produced as an interesting article for us (the fans).

I've actually enjoyed reading the Premiership figures and comparing the costs at the various clubs, it wouldn't have been much of a read if half of them had refused to provide the figures.



In what way was it misleading? The figures produced were the ones provided by the Club.
The cost of the cheapest adult walk-up ticket was added to the cost of a programme, pie and a cup of tea, at every club in the country, and this provided a table that ultimately had a top team and a bottom team.

It's an interesting read and gives us, the fans, a chance to compare not just our own division but those elsewhere, from the Premiership to the Blue Square Premier. How many of us have had a wee peak at the Scottish 3rd division? :wink:

If teams start refusing to provide information then the survey is pointless and its us that miss out on an interesting comparison. Some, like yourself, probably aren't bothered one way or the other but I personally find it interesting and worth a read .. so my view remains that Hibs were wrong not to take part.

You don't need me to tell you that you are entitled to your opinion, and I know that I am not going to change that, much like mine will not change. I'm sure many, many people found it interesting, much like you did - as you correctly stated, I couldn't care less, how much other clubs charge for watching football and all that goes with it has no bearing on how much I pay, and has no effect on the fortunes of Hibs.

Last year's findings were presented in a way that provided bad publicity for Hibs, and Hibs have taken issue with that - I can understand why, last year's BBC report contained the statement "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch SPL football" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14366743), which is a bare faced lie (even with the information that is provided afterwards) and patently untrue when you look at the table they drew up: - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14367632 (such a table does not seem to have been compiled this year, incidentally).

Whilst yourself and many others may think that the way that BBC calculated the information last year was fair enough, there are plenty of people (myself included) who never buy any food or drink at matches, or indeed a programme. What the BBC did in 2011 was misleading, had the combination they used been led with most expensive ticket (which would surely have made more sense given they seemed determined to outline most expensive clubs), Hibs would have been nowhere near the top.

Hibs are only the most expensive in one combination of numerous variables, and I can understand why the club were not happy with things being presented in such a way. As such, Hibs declined to be subject to such cherry picking again, and instead released a full statement outlining all the offers available, as well as the most expensive tickets. Anyone of a Hibs inclination can check it on our website, just as any fan from any other team can if they really want to compare - though if any supporter of any other team looks at the fact that we didn't contribute this year and that that makes us look petty, I truly couldn't care any less.

Beefster
19-10-2012, 12:03 PM
I think that the club statement is a bit misleading. I'm assuming that the 80% is based on anyone not paying the full price "adult" cost, and includes child, future, family tickets to bring the average cost down to £236. Not wanting it to sound like I'm having a go at the Club but every other team in the survey could have produced a similar average figure. The purpose of the survey is to collate basic figures and I see no reason not to provide figures. There is always going to be a team branded as most expensive and a team branded as cheapest, it's the nature of the survey, but it's still interesting to read. If other teams refused it would be a waste of a survey and it would be our loss.
Wrong decision by Hibs not to be involved IMO.

Agree. Very petty by Hibs.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 12:05 PM
Agree. Very petty by Hibs.

Totally disagree - information was presented in a selective fashion by the BBC last year, then presented as Hibs being "the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL", which was a complete lie.

Lucius Apuleius
19-10-2012, 12:09 PM
Totally disagree - information was presented in a selective fashion by the BBC last year, then presented as Hibs being "the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL", which was a complete lie.

I agree. They seemed to take the most expensive walk up ticket for Hibs (£28) and use that as their base. The cheapest walk up for an OF game was I am told over £30.

jacomo
19-10-2012, 12:35 PM
Fascinating story here on clubs in the English Championship experimenting with a dynamic pricing model this season:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19716087

Basically, book earlier to get cheaper tickets, and although I am not sure about the idea of walk-up tickets being very expensive, it's a very interesting experiment and one Hibs should watch closely.

Season ticket holders guaranteed to still get the best deal if attending every home game.

FranckSuzy
19-10-2012, 12:54 PM
I think the statement from Hibs is spot on and more to the point, good on them for taking a stance. We are not the pushover on or off the field that we have been in the past IMHO.

WheresTheBevvy?
19-10-2012, 12:54 PM
were we not the most expencive day out a few years back?

marinello59
19-10-2012, 01:14 PM
were we not the most expencive day out a few years back?

HAve you found the bevvy and neglected to read the thread?:greengrin

son of haggart
19-10-2012, 01:42 PM
You don't need me to tell you that you are entitled to your opinion, and I know that I am not going to change that, much like mine will not change. I'm sure many, many people found it interesting, much like you did - as you correctly stated, I couldn't care less, how much other clubs charge for watching football and all that goes with it has no bearing on how much I pay, and has no effect on the fortunes of Hibs.

Last year's findings were presented in a way that provided bad publicity for Hibs, and Hibs have taken issue with that - I can understand why, last year's BBC report contained the statement "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch SPL football" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14366743), which is a bare faced lie (even with the information that is provided afterwards) and patently untrue when you look at the table they drew up: - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14367632 (such a table does not seem to have been compiled this year, incidentally).

Whilst yourself and many others may think that the way that BBC calculated the information last year was fair enough, there are plenty of people (myself included) who never buy any food or drink at matches, or indeed a programme. What the BBC did in 2011 was misleading, had the combination they used been led with most expensive ticket (which would surely have made more sense given they seemed determined to outline most expensive clubs), Hibs would have been nowhere near the top.

Hibs are only the most expensive in one combination of numerous variables, and I can understand why the club were not happy with things being presented in such a way. As such, Hibs declined to be subject to such cherry picking again, and instead released a full statement outlining all the offers available, as well as the most expensive tickets. Anyone of a Hibs inclination can check it on our website, just as any fan from any other team can if they really want to compare - though if any supporter of any other team looks at the fact that we didn't contribute this year and that that makes us look petty, I truly couldn't care any less.

There's a table here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

Celtic appear to have the most exensive entry level ticket at £23, and the hghest top price (with Hibs, Hearts and St Johnstone next)

Re dynamic pricing Hearts tried that at the start of this season with season toickets - not well managed and went down like a lead balloon but if we do it again next year it will be interesting to see the response We have a small batch of cheapest tickets (£18) - around 1,000 - and these tend to sell out in the week before the lowest attended games. Maybe Hibs could try that with one of the stands, but I guess Petrie would be concerned the effect might just be fans who would have paid the £22 switching down.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 01:46 PM
There's a table here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19842397

Celtic appear to have the most exensive entry level ticket at £23, and the hghest top price (with Hibs, Hearts and St Johnstone next)

Re dynamic pricing Hearts tried that at the start of this season with season toickets - not well managed and went down like a lead balloon but if we do it again next year it will be interesting to see the response We have a small batch of cheapest tickets (£18) - around 1,000 - and these tend to sell out in the week before the lowest attended games. Maybe Hibs could try that with one of the stands, but I guess Petrie would be concerned the effect might just be fans who would have paid the £22 switching down.

That's just an alphabetical one, last year they did this: -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14367632

son of haggart
19-10-2012, 01:51 PM
That's just an alphabetical one listing costs though, last year they did this: -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14367632

This years provides all the same figures, you just have to add them up...

poolman
19-10-2012, 01:52 PM
Anyone that keen and that bothered can open up the BBC list in one web browser window, and the Hibs statement in another.

The Hibs decision not to get involved is explained, understandable, and absolutely no big deal - I cannot believe that people are even remotely bothered by it, especially in wake of the release of a statement that includes the headline figures that BBC would have used anyway.



:agree: A lot of twisted knickers here today about nothing

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 01:59 PM
This years provides all the same figures, you just have to add them up...

Funnily enough, I realise that - my point has always been that they didn't make up a table like they did last year.

500miles
19-10-2012, 02:00 PM
Have to agree. Our fans would want to see it, and it might do Hibs no harm to see the figures at a glance on a (albeit crude) like for like basis.

Why would the club allow the BBC to mislead their readers to our detriment? If the BBC bothered to produce a balanced, informed article, then the club should participate. However, if lazy journalism is only going to make the club look bad, then why should we assist them at all? So our fans have something to read, regardless how misleading it is?

son of haggart
19-10-2012, 02:08 PM
Funnily enough, I realise that - my point has always been that they didn't make up a table like they did last year.

Wasn't being sarcastic. It's fairly simple to work it out and maybe they accepted the criticism that it isn't a simple matter of ranking on a package of costs to give an overall price



Either that or the BBC staff can't add up any more or use spreadsheets (now I'm being sarcastic...)

Beefster
19-10-2012, 02:11 PM
Totally disagree - information was presented in a selective fashion by the BBC last year, then presented as Hibs being "the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL", which was a complete lie.

In what way was it a lie? We were the most expensive (either out on our own or jointly with other clubs) on standard adult category B walk-up ticket, programme, pie and cup of tea IIRC.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 02:11 PM
Wasn't being sarcastic. It's fairly simple to work it out and maybe they accepted the criticism that it isn't a simple matter of ranking on a package of costs to give an overall price



Either that or the BBC staff can't add up any more or use spreadsheets (now I'm being sarcastic...)

Fair enough. But what you have just stated is what my point has been all along - Hibs refused to get involved because of the way the information was presented last year, and the BCC have presented the info differently this year.

Stevie Reid
19-10-2012, 02:14 PM
In what way was it a lie? We were the most expensive (either out on our own or jointly with other clubs) on standard adult category B walk-up ticket, programme, pie and cup of tea IIRC.


Last year's findings were presented in a way that provided bad publicity for Hibs, and Hibs have taken issue with that - I can understand why, last year's BBC report contained the statement "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch SPL football" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14366743), which is a bare faced lie (even with the information that is provided afterwards) and patently untrue when you look at the table they drew up: - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14367632

What the BBC did was misleading, had the combination they used been led with most expensive ticket (which would surely have made more sense given they seemed determined to outline most expensive clubs), Hibs would have been nowhere near the top.

Hibs are only the most expensive in one combination of numerous variables, and I can understand why the club were not happy with things being presented in such a way. As such, Hibs declined to be subject to such cherry picking again, and instead released a full statement outlining all the offers available, as well as the most expensive tickets. Anyone of a Hibs inclination can check it on our website, just as any fan from any other team can if they really want to compare - though if any supporter of any other team looks at the fact that we didn't contribute this year and that that makes us look petty, I truly couldn't care any less.

I have used sections of one of my earlier replies. It is a lie.

Lucius Apuleius
19-10-2012, 03:30 PM
In what way was it a lie? We were the most expensive (either out on our own or jointly with other clubs) on standard adult category B walk-up ticket, programme, pie and cup of tea IIRC.

Pretty sure they used the Cat A price mate.

StevieC
19-10-2012, 04:15 PM
Pretty sure they used the Cat A price mate.

No, they used the CAT B price.

I just don't get the "misleading" take on this. The survey had no hidden agenda, it was simply a collation of figures collected from clubs and followed up with an article. It wasn't lazy journalism it was an article put together for the benefit of the fans to have a wee read and hopefully find some of the differences interesting.

If the BBC didn't bother doing this articles because one or two teams took the hump we'd all be on here discussing nothing more than the team selection (and Rangers/Hearts demise). The article has has probably created more interest due to Hibs refusing to release figures than what it actually costs a 17 year old student to get into Easter Road and have a steak pie and a bovril instead of a mince pie and tea. If every team adopted Hibs attitude of not releasing figures then there'd be no article and no thread and no discussion.

FFS we were the most expensive team last season because our pies were 20p more expensive than the ones at Ibrox! If anyone saw anything more into than exactly that then I'd be very surprised. It's an interesting comparison, it's encouraged some debate, it NEEDS teams to release figures though. Hibs didn't and I don't think they've done themselves any favours.

StevieC
19-10-2012, 04:26 PM
I have used sections of one of my earlier replies. It is a lie.

Where is the lie?

They collated a table, based on figures provided by the clubs, to find the cheapest walk-up game which included a programme, pie and a cup of tea.

Because our pies were 20p more expensive than Ibrox, and because we provide better facilities than the foosty paddock in the old stand at Tynecastle, we ended up being the most expensive.

Lots of reasons above as to why we might have been more expensive than others, but at the end of the day Beefster is right, we WERE the most expensive.

Golden Bear
19-10-2012, 04:31 PM
Regardless of how you dress it up, it doesn't look good that one club out of 166 failed to respond and that Club happened to be Hibs.

Hibs may have felt hard done by last year and I presume they made their misgivings known to the Beeb, but that fact alone shouldn't have prevented them from participating in this year's survey.

A poor show imo.

Lucius Apuleius
19-10-2012, 04:49 PM
No, they used the CAT B price.

I just don't get the "misleading" take on this. The survey had no hidden agenda, it was simply a collation of figures collected from clubs and followed up with an article. It wasn't lazy journalism it was an article put together for the benefit of the fans to have a wee read and hopefully find some of the differences interesting.

If the BBC didn't bother doing this articles because one or two teams took the hump we'd all be on here discussing nothing more than the team selection (and Rangers/Hearts demise). The article has has probably created more interest due to Hibs refusing to release figures than what it actually costs a 17 year old student to get into Easter Road and have a steak pie and a bovril instead of a mince pie and tea. If every team adopted Hibs attitude of not releasing figures then there'd be no article and no thread and no discussion.

FFS we were the most expensive team last season because our pies were 20p more expensive than the ones at Ibrox! If anyone saw anything more into than exactly that then I'd be very surprised. It's an interesting comparison, it's encouraged some debate, it NEEDS teams to release figures though. Hibs didn't and I don't think they've done themselves any favours.

OK I will stand corrected as I cannot be bothered trawling through pages of Hibs net to find it. However I am pretty sure our #23 was not the most expensive ticket. That is what matters to me, I really don't give a flying one how much a programme, a cup of tea (did they check which tea bags were being used, maybe a higher quality) or a pie cost? These are all non essential incedentals as far as I am concerned. I do agree people were getting their knickers in a twist over nothing. Now once again memory may be playing tricks on me but I seem to recall much hand wringing and weeping tears of despair as to why we were the most expensive team to go and watch. We were not. Unless you bought a programme, a cup of high quality tea and a pie. WTF drinks tea at a football match anyway? Why was the survey not done for a Mars bar and a cup of juice instead? Maybe we would have been cheaper. Doubt it, but who knows. It was a selective survey taht put us at the top of a list that a lot of people then used to berate the club. This year they decided not to participate. Personal opinion, big fn deal. If people see this as a negative to Hibs then they are more to be pitied than scolded in my humble opinion.

joe breezy
19-10-2012, 05:09 PM
Very poor show by Hibs to refuse to give details.

Lazy and unprofessional

IWasThere2016
19-10-2012, 06:08 PM
Why would the club allow the BBC to mislead their readers to our detriment? If the BBC bothered to produce a balanced, informed article, then the club should participate. However, if lazy journalism is only going to make the club look bad, then why should we assist them at all? So our fans have something to read, regardless how misleading it is?

The article is balanced. The clubs are all asked for the same info. Do you really expect every club to respond as Hibs did or the journo to make sense of such responses over the various leagues? There's nothing lazy about the piece - that is just a convenient line to defend our contrived response - IMHO.

Eyrie
19-10-2012, 06:14 PM
Given that Hibs were the only club not to respond, why didn't the BBC make the effort to check the prices for itself?

I have no problem with how the club has handled this.

ekhibee
19-10-2012, 06:20 PM
Are we to assume then that every survey that the BBC put out, Hibs will not participate in? Because that in effect is what they are saying. They're still in the huff about last years survey, this survey is different. Are we to believe that every other club in Scotland and England are being mislead, and really, it's our board that have hit the nail on the head? I don't think so. And if you consider what fans were having to pay to watch that pish last season, Hibs were extortionate. Can't believe Dunfermline were dearer than us to watch, so our club were overcharging more than anybody else cos we were that close to being relegated. Still got a ST though. Mustve bumped my head about three seasons ago and never quite recovered...

Hiber-nation
19-10-2012, 06:21 PM
Where is the lie?

They collated a table, based on figures provided by the clubs, to find the cheapest walk-up game which included a programme, pie and a cup of tea.

Because our pies were 20p more expensive than Ibrox, and because we provide better facilities than the foosty paddock in the old stand at Tynecastle, we ended up being the most expensive.

Lots of reasons above as to why we might have been more expensive than others, but at the end of the day Beefster is right, we WERE the most expensive.

Yep and the publicity Hibs are generating by not publishing is surely worse than that they would have had if they had supplied the info.

If any other SPL club hadn't given this info we'd all be laying into them.

marinello59
19-10-2012, 09:12 PM
Yep and the publicity Hibs are generating by not publishing is surely worse than that they would have had if they had supplied the info.

If any other SPL club hadn't given this info we'd all be laying into them.

What bad publicity? Apart from a few adverse remarks on here the backlash has passed me by. The clubs response was to provide Hibs supporters with far more information than the flawed survey did. Why the hell should we let the media misrepresent us?

Hiber-nation
19-10-2012, 09:23 PM
What bad publicity? Apart from a few adverse remarks on here the backlash has passed me by. The clubs response was to provide Hibs supporters with far more information than the flawed survey did. Why the hell should we let the media misrepresent us?

The only club in Britain except Braintree Town? Its just daft.

500miles
19-10-2012, 09:43 PM
The article is balanced. The clubs are all asked for the same info. Do you really expect every club to respond as Hibs did or the journo to make sense of such responses over the various leagues? There's nothing lazy about the piece - that is just a convenient line to defend our contrived response - IMHO.

The article is not balanced. Different clubs offer different discounts. If a club were to offer a single price for all fans, then prices for fans who receive no discount would drop in line with the rise in children, oaps, families, etc.

It would be easy for the BBC to do comparisons for families, or even throw in average ticket prices, but they've represented the figures to present the potential expense of football, as the actual expense, which, for the majority, is considerably lower.

StevieC
19-10-2012, 11:42 PM
The article is not balanced. Different clubs offer different discounts. If a club were to offer a single price for all fans, then prices for fans who receive no discount would drop in line with the rise in children, oaps, families, etc.

It would be easy for the BBC to do comparisons for families, or even throw in average ticket prices, but they've represented the figures to present the potential expense of football, as the actual expense, which, for the majority, is considerably lower.

Discounted prices are not included in the survey, it is based on a walk up supporter attending a game and buying himself (or herself) a programme, pie and a cup of tea. Every club is asked to provide the same level of information, ie walk up ticket costs, and the table then provides a "day out" cost based on these figures.

It is therefore balanced.

Now let's suppose that someone had the time to go through all the possible discount options at every single club and after months of lengthy research came up with a figure that represented the average cost of a season ticket, and that this cost turned out to be the most expensive at Hibs .. would we then refuse to provide figures for the next survey?

To be the only league team to refuse to provide the figures, regardless of what spin you put on it, does not look good.

IWasThere2016
20-10-2012, 04:16 AM
The article is not balanced. Different clubs offer different discounts. If a club were to offer a single price for all fans, then prices for fans who receive no discount would drop in line with the rise in children, oaps, families, etc.

It would be easy for the BBC to do comparisons for families, or even throw in average ticket prices, but they've represented the figures to present the potential expense of football, as the actual expense, which, for the majority, is considerably lower.

The questions are straight, and consistent to all willing to participate. It is balanced.

Our reply is like something a politician would spout to Paxman on Newsnight where they hear the question but have something else they have to say to try and score a political point. Alternatively, RP is just getting in some practice for the AGM :greengrin

Eyrie
20-10-2012, 08:58 AM
The questions may be straight and consistent, but they are also a simplistic approach to a complex matter. Surely the average season ticket price actually paid by an adult for that season could be included as a more representative figure than minimums and maximums which may apply to only a small proportion of the fans?

Individual game tickets are trickier to calculate, but the normal figure could be used - in our case Category B as that is used for nine of our eleven league visitors.

bingo70
20-10-2012, 09:18 AM
Not read this whole thread but is it fair to say that at full price we are one of the most expensive which is why the club won't comment on it?

I personally think the club could do with a simpler pricing structure, one price for all games and not category A or B games (do we have category C games?)

I think with this it would be easier to clarify how much cheaper it is for season tickets instead of pay at the gate so easier to encourage people to buy ST's and considering most category A games are on the tele i'm not sure we see any benefit of increased prices for the big games as people just aren't paying the extra.

Would also mean Hibs could contribute to surveys like these with confidence we would show up as being good value rather than having to explain a range of potential discounts a lot of people aren't eligable for.

Golden Bear
20-10-2012, 10:04 AM
Average price doesn't mean a thing other than it being a statistic. Especially if you're in the group who happen to be eligible for zero discount through no fault of their own.

Ageism is rife I tell you.

:grr::greengrin

bingo70
20-10-2012, 10:10 AM
Average price doesn't mean a thing other than it being a statistic. Especially if you're in the group who happen to be eligible for zero discount through no fault of their own.

Ageism is rife I tell you.

:grr::greengrin

That's what i was thinking but are they including season tickets as a discounted ticket? Suppose everyone is entitled to that discount but i'm pretty sceptical about how much cheaper that actually works out to be.

Stevie Reid
20-10-2012, 12:53 PM
Where is the lie?

They collated a table, based on figures provided by the clubs, to find the cheapest walk-up game which included a programme, pie and a cup of tea.

Because our pies were 20p more expensive than Ibrox, and because we provide better facilities than the foosty paddock in the old stand at Tynecastle, we ended up being the most expensive.

Lots of reasons above as to why we might have been more expensive than others, but at the end of the day Beefster is right, we WERE the most expensive.

The lie is perfectly clear, as I have already highlighted - the BBC report flatly stated that "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch SPL football", and we clearly weren't. Therefore, it was a lie.

bingo70
20-10-2012, 01:09 PM
The lie is perfectly clear, as I have already highlighted - the BBC report flatly stated that "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch SPL football", and we clearly weren't. Therefore, it was a lie.

Depends on the wording of the question they asked surely?

If the survey was to find the most expensive ground for average walk up and pay at the gate supporters then hibs would have been the most expensive, no? :dunno:

The fact that there is discounts for people that may go regularly or for people with kids is irrelevant if the purpose of the survey was to find the most expensive ground for someone to just walk up and pay as a one off.

Stevie Reid
20-10-2012, 01:19 PM
Depends on the wording of the question they asked surely?

If the survey was to find the most expensive ground for average walk up and pay at the gate supporters then hibs would have been the most expensive, no? :dunno:

The fact that there is discounts for people that may go regularly or for people with kids is irrelevant if the purpose of the survey was to find the most expensive ground for someone to just walk up and pay as a one off.

No, using the criteria that you have stated above, Hibs are nowhere near most expensive, and this is partly my problem with it all.

If you look at my earlier posts in the thread you will see why I take issue with what the BBC said (and the context is was said in). That Hibs were most expensive in the combination of costs that they used is not being argued with - but a blanket statement that "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL" was a complete lie.

Lucius Apuleius
20-10-2012, 01:21 PM
Depends on the wording of the question they asked surely?

If the survey was to find the most expensive ground for average walk up and pay at the gate supporters then hibs would have been the most expensive, no? :dunno:

The fact that there is discounts for people that may go regularly or for people with kids is irrelevant if the purpose of the survey was to find the most expensive ground for someone to just walk up and pay as a one off.

Not to labour a point but I still don't see how we could be the dearest. They took our most expensive walk up ticket (so I am told ) 28 squiddlies. They did not take der hun or celtc's most expensive walk up ticket.

bingo70
20-10-2012, 01:25 PM
No, using the criteria that you have stated above, Hibs are nowhere near most expensive, and this is partly my problem with it all.

If you look at my earlier posts in the thread you will see why I take issue with what the BBC said (and the context is was said in). That Hibs were most expensive in the combination of costs that they used is not being argued with - but a blanket statement that "Hibernian is the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL" was a complete lie.


Not to labour a point but I still don't see how we could be the dearest. They took our most expensive walk up ticket (so I am told ) 28 squiddlies. They did not take der hun or celtc's most expensive walk up ticket.

Cheers, that'll teach me for jumping into a thread without reading it first :greengrin

Stevie Reid
20-10-2012, 01:27 PM
Not to labour a point but I still don't see how we could be the dearest. They took our most expensive walk up ticket (so I am told ) 28 squiddlies. They did not take der hun or celtc's most expensive walk up ticket.

If you look at my earlier posts you will find links to the BBC report and table. They used the same criteria for everyone, but inaccurately stated that ER was the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL.

Lucius Apuleius
20-10-2012, 01:33 PM
If you look at my earlier posts you will find links to the BBC report and table. They used the same criteria for everyone, but inaccurately stated that ER was the most expensive place to watch football in the SPL.

Ah, too many Stevies. :-)

We agree then!!

Beefster
20-10-2012, 03:53 PM
Not to labour a point but I still don't see how we could be the dearest. They took our most expensive walk up ticket (so I am told ) 28 squiddlies. They did not take der hun or celtc's most expensive walk up ticket.

You're told wrong. They took the category B ticket - £22, a programme, a cup of tea and a pie. We had the most expensive ticket, tea, pie and programme.