Broken Promises - Why Do We Do It?

[CammyF 6,879]

Yes it's upto Murray to maximise revenue streams.

 

But you say you want to see better football on the one hand and want to pay less for it on the other hand. Surely you must see the two are unlikely to go hand in hand. Think it's a seperate point to Murray's mismanagement (although obviously the two can impact on each other).

 

Not what I said at all - if Rangers were playing wonderful football, had a thriving youth development, had a team full of skillful players, I don't think anyone would mind paying the 'going rate'.

 

I was merely pointing out that other clubs in better leagues offer better value for money and are willing to help fans who have bleed themselves dry supporting a club, in these current financial recession. SMD on the other hand still wants us to pay top $ for the current dross.

 

Cammy F

[Gazza_8 233]

Not what I said at all - if Rangers were playing wonderful football, had a thriving youth development, had a team full of skillful players, I don't think anyone would mind paying the 'going rate'.

 

I was merely pointing out that other clubs in better leagues offer better value for money and are willing to help fans who have bleed themselves dry supporting a club, in these current financial recession. SMD on the other hand still wants us to pay top $ for the current dross.

 

Cammy F

 

Exaclty how I see it.

[CammyF 6,879]

It is also worth remembering that under this current regime TBO have had 20 members banned from Ibrox for prolonged standing. The 20 members banned were picked at RANDOM and included some members that weren't even at the game in question. This is despite fans of visiting clubs, Aberdeen and Celtc in particular standing for the entire 90 minutes every time they visit Ibrox.

 

TBO have also been referred to as causing more problems for the club than Hibs, Aberdeen and Celtc fans combined. Yip, thats right, the current regime believe that a band of fans who bring colour, noise, humour back to the stadium whilst giving the team the ONLY backing at Ibrox cause more problems than fans who sing songs celebrating the death of 66 Rangers fans and who sing songs in celebration of terrorists. I haven't even mentioned the casual element that two of those three bring to Ibrox.

 

Also, this is a regime that watched as Rangers fans were victimised at Parkhead and were 90 times more likely to be arrested than Celtc fans. The man in charge of security at the match in question is now employed by RANGERS. The same man was in charge when Fernando Ricksen was struck by a lighter thrown from the Celtc fans. To this day, the culprit hasn't been identified. Niether has the person who throw a mobile phone at the recent OF game at Parkead,

 

As for cost, in the past, Rangers rightly heralded Ibrox as a brilliant state of the art stadium. In the past few years, this has also been allowed to be eradicated. Ibrox is looking it's age and is badly in need of a make-over. Maybe I should tell SDM to take what he needs for this makeover from MY bank account.

 

Cammy F

Edited April 17, 2009 by CammyF

[Super_Ally 0]

Not what I said at all - if Rangers were playing wonderful football, had a thriving youth development, had a team full of skillful players, I don't think anyone would mind paying the 'going rate'.

 

I was merely pointing out that other clubs in better leagues offer better value for money and are willing to help fans who have bleed themselves dry supporting a club, in these current financial recession. SMD on the other hand still wants us to pay top $ for the current dross.

 

Cammy F

 

It's maybe the way I phrased it.

 

However, the "product" is poor at the minute. So you (quite rightly) think the cost should go down.

 

When the cost goes down, we have less money to spend, so the product likely gets worse.

 

As such your new lower ticket cost is no longer paying for as high a quality product. So the price should go down, according to your logic (which I gues really is correct).

 

So we have less money and can't afford as high a quality a player. I'm sure you see where this is going.

 

Either you support your club and accept the good times with the bad (as you undoubtedly do). Or you behave like a customer.

 

There must be some other answer, but I don't see it.

[CammyF 6,879]

It's maybe the way I phrased it.

 

However, the "product" is poor at the minute. So you (quite rightly) think the cost should go down.

 

When the cost goes down, we have less money to spend, so the product likely gets worse.

 

As such your new lower ticket cost is no longer paying for as high a quality product. So the price should go down, according to your logic (which I gues really is correct).

 

So we have less money and can't afford as high a quality a player. I'm sure you see where this is going.

 

Either you support your club and accept the good times with the bad (as you undoubtedly do). Or you behave like a customer.

 

There must be some other answer, but I don't see it.

 

The answer is a club that is managed properly. A club who don't assit strip and sell of the family silver. A club that has long term plans and ambitions.

 

Look at clubs like Porto and Lyon who you would class as smaller than Rangers, who have managed to assemble teams (over the course of several seasons) that have dominated their domestic leagues whilst doing well in Europe. These clubs have also gotten recognised youth development as well as having an established scouting system in place.

 

For what it's worth, when we visited Porto in the CL under AMc, the average price for a ticket to watch Porto in their brand new spanking stadium was E15.

 

If these clubs can do it, why can't we?

 

I also believe that there is more to supporting your club than turning up week-in week-out. As a fan and / or a customer, you have the right to question the way OUR club is run, to demand that the custodians share our culture, share our ambition and the likes. We must also expect that the custodians would defend us in the face of constant hostility from the press.

Edited April 17, 2009 by CammyF

[alanmidd 0]

 

Personally, I found it an easy decision to cancel my ST. The money I was being asked to pay to watch dross on the pitch wasn't value for money! Spending �£2.50 on a pint of Tennents IS money well spent!

 

No way, Tennents is piss water!

 

I was in 2 minds whether to cancel mine for next year, but like Cammy I just couldn't face missing out on the games come Saturdays

[CammyF 6,879]

No way, Tennents is piss water!

 

I was in 2 minds whether to cancel mine for next year, but like Cammy I just couldn't face missing out on the games come Saturdays

 

Officially, I'm still undecided

 

There are many valid reasons not to renew and the only reason I have for renewing is, well, its what I do and have always done!

 

Is this enough to justify renewing and giving SDM the pleasure in believing that we'll blindly folloe on no matter who badly he is running OUR club?

 

Cammy F

[Super_Ally 0]

The answer is a club that is managed properly. A club who don't assit strip and sell of the family silver. A club that has long term plans and ambitions.

 

Look at clubs like Porto and Lyon who you would class as smaller than Rangers, who have managed to assemble teams (over the course of several seasons) that have dominated their domestic leagues whilst doing well in Europe. These clubs have also gotten recognised youth development as well as having an established scouting system in place.

 

For what it's worth, when we visited Porto in the CL under AMc, the average price for a ticket to watch Porto in their brand new spanking stadium was E15.

 

If these clubs can do it, why can't we?

 

I also believe that there is more to supporting your club than turning up week-in week-out. As a fan and / or a customer, you have the right to question the way OUR club is run, to demand that the custodians share our culture, share our ambition and the likes. We must also expect that the custodians would defend us in the face of constant hostility from the press.

 

I'm not saying you don't. But I don't think saying oh the football isn't nice anymore, the results aren't as good, i'm keeping my money in my pocket is the way forward either. Though of course blindly putting money in isn;t right either.

 

Also Porto's tickets are E15 you say? How did the exchange rate compare there. What's supply and demand like? How do average wages and cost of living compare? And what was Porto's income like from other sources, mainly t.v.? Too easy just to look at their ticket prices and say ours should be less. We no doubt pay more for everything than they do not just football.

 

As I say though, making a lot of income from other avenues not open to us, such as t.v. will likely influence ticket prices.

 

I remember Pete was at a Hoffenheim game recently, I think, and will be able to confirm but are Bundesliga tickets not pretty cheap comparatively?

[CammyF 6,879]

Did the tour of The Allience Arena couple of years back and I'm sure you could pick up a cheap ticket for E20 for Bayern games and E10 for 1860 games (2nd division).

 

Bayern also limit the number of season tickets they sell so to increase revenue from match to match sales. This also helps tourists, people who don't always go to games and I suppose, glory hunters get tickets as and when they want.

 

As for supply and demand, IIRC, Porto had a waiting list for season tickets, and a healthy average attendence and I dont think they'll get much more from TV than we currently do.

 

I don't have the answer, and can see both sides of the coin and I'll have huge regrets no matter what my decision is!!

 

Cammy F

Edited April 17, 2009 by CammyF

[Super_Ally 0]

As for supply and demand, IIRC, Porto had a waiting list for season tickets, and a healthy average attendence and I dont think they'll get much more from TV than we currently do.

 

Cammy F

 

Had no idea about the first point. Just assumed that due to likely lower average wage compared to cost of living, football tickets might be a seldom realised luxury. However will bow to your superior knowledge. That however supports your argument not mine, so don't know where that leave me.

 

As to the second point I would be highly suprised if the t.v. sponsorship and other commercial revenues were not far higher for Porto than us.