BehinduSchards#2
Citing the percentage of capacity is of no help when calculating the fall in demand though.
All games were sold out last year and many would have been hugely oversubscribed. Therefore, a fall in demand from, say 30,000 to 24,000 is a 20% drop but not reflected in the drop in the actual attendance.
Surely you are not still seriously suggesting there has not been a drop in demand this year as opposed to last year?
Citing % attendance is a lot more help than randomly picking a number purely to support your contention. You have no idea whether 30,000 people tried unsuccessfully to get tickets for any given game. It's a rubbish piece of spin.
I know you never thought about or read any of the posts presenting a different view to yours but it may not be a bad thing to try it one day.
Schards#2BehinduSchards#2
Citing the percentage of capacity is of no help when calculating the fall in demand though.
All games were sold out last year and many would have been hugely oversubscribed. Therefore, a fall in demand from, say 30,000 to 24,000 is a 20% drop but not reflected in the drop in the actual attendance.
Surely you are not still seriously suggesting there has not been a drop in demand this year as opposed to last year?
Citing % attendance is a lot more help than randomly picking a number purely to support your contention. You have no idea whether 30,000 people tried unsuccessfully to get tickets for any given game. It's a rubbish piece of spin.
I know you never thought about or read any of the posts presenting a different view to yours but it may not be a bad thing to try it one day.
You do talk some rubbish Behindu, Comparing attendances where one of the figures is the sell out figure is utterly meaningless as demand could have been 24,101 or it could have been 100,000.
Your implication is that because this years attendance was only 1-2% lower, that's the drop in demand. That is misleading, disingenuous spin of the worst sort.
Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
I struggle to see why you, and others refuse to acknowledge that demand has fallen when every, and I mean every, indicator shows that it has. There's no shame in it, it's not your fault, in many ways it's not even the clubs fault but it is a fact.
Go on, take a deep breath an acknowledge that demand has fallen, you'll feel better for it.
Woodcote RoyalSchards#2BehinduSchards#2
Citing the percentage of capacity is of no help when calculating the fall in demand though.
All games were sold out last year and many would have been hugely oversubscribed. Therefore, a fall in demand from, say 30,000 to 24,000 is a 20% drop but not reflected in the drop in the actual attendance.
Surely you are not still seriously suggesting there has not been a drop in demand this year as opposed to last year?
Citing % attendance is a lot more help than randomly picking a number purely to support your contention. You have no idea whether 30,000 people tried unsuccessfully to get tickets for any given game. It's a rubbish piece of spin.
I know you never thought about or read any of the posts presenting a different view to yours but it may not be a bad thing to try it one day.
You do talk some rubbish Behindu, Comparing attendances where one of the figures is the sell out figure is utterly meaningless as demand could have been 24,101 or it could have been 100,000.
Your implication is that because this years attendance was only 1-2% lower, that's the drop in demand. That is misleading, disingenuous spin of the worst sort.
Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
I struggle to see why you, and others refuse to acknowledge that demand has fallen when every, and I mean every, indicator shows that it has. There's no shame in it, it's not your fault, in many ways it's not even the clubs fault but it is a fact.
Go on, take a deep breath an acknowledge that demand has fallen, you'll feel better for it.
Yet more nonsense from one half of Terry and June.
Behindu They can;t sell the extra seats until they are built though....
As things stand their isn;t scope for special offers - we're selling out as near as damn it anyway.
If we have an extra 6000 seats we can get into 'kids free' / buy 4 get 1 free / buy Chelsea get Watford for half price type deals
Schards#2 You do talk some rubbish Behindu, Comparing attendances where one of the figures is the sell out figure is utterly meaningless as demand could have been 24,101 or it could have been 100,000.
Schards#2 Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
SkylineSchards#2 You do talk some rubbish Behindu, Comparing attendances where one of the figures is the sell out figure is utterly meaningless as demand could have been 24,101 or it could have been 100,000.
Surely it's no more meaningless than you plucking the number 30,000 (or 100,000) out of the air.Schards#2 Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
On the other hand, the fact that the Chelsea game this year sold out (and indeed had a higher attendance), despite going to 'general sale', surely indicates that there is the demand there from the 'casuals', as there must have been more of them buying this year than last?
Schards#2 Go on, take a deep breath an acknowledge that demand has fallen, you'll feel better for it.
Schards#2SkylineSchards#2 You do talk some rubbish Behindu, Comparing attendances where one of the figures is the sell out figure is utterly meaningless as demand could have been 24,101 or it could have been 100,000.
Surely it's no more meaningless than you plucking the number 30,000 (or 100,000) out of the air.Schards#2 Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
On the other hand, the fact that the Chelsea game this year sold out (and indeed had a higher attendance), despite going to 'general sale', surely indicates that there is the demand there from the 'casuals', as there must have been more of them buying this year than last?
Given that the Chelsea game sold out last year, the fact the the attendance this year was higher is irrelevent in every way imaginable to the question of demand.
The fact that it went to general sale demonstrates that fewer people with points were interested so they became available to people with no points. People with no points would also have been interested last year but, as we know, the tickets never got close to being on general sale.
To try and suggest that the fact that more people with zero points bought a ticket compared to last year (when they would have been unable to) is an indication of greater demand, is laughable in the extreme.
Schards#2SkylineSchards#2 Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
On the other hand, the fact that the Chelsea game this year sold out (and indeed had a higher attendance), despite going to 'general sale', surely indicates that there is the demand there from the 'casuals', as there must have been more of them buying this year than last?
Given that the Chelsea game sold out last year, the fact the the attendance this year was higher is irrelevent in every way imaginable to the question of demand.
The fact that it went to general sale demonstrates that fewer people with points were interested so they became available to people with no points. People with no points would also have been interested last year but, as we know, the tickets never got close to being on general sale.
To try and suggest that the fact that more people with zero points bought a ticket compared to last year (when they would have been unable to) is an indication of greater demand, is laughable in the extreme.
BehinduSchards#2 Go on, take a deep breath an acknowledge that demand has fallen, you'll feel better for it.
Schards, you are just showing that you have not read all the deabte on this.
There is no need for me to take a deep breath. I've not been arguing that numbers aren't slightly down. In fact I don't think ANYONE has been arguing that ! What has been questioned is whether a small measureable drop is of any significance to expansion plans - I've argued all along that there are more significant reasons for expanding. I've also conceded that the expansion can;t be considered a definite starter and the baord need to keep plans under review.
I really can;t be bothered repeating all the points to someone who so clearly is not interested in a discussion. You can be quite insufferable at times and this is one of those times.
There have been a couple of really excellent threads on Hob Nob of late where lots of people with differing views have actually DISCUSSED things in a civilised manner without calling easch other 'Tossers' and whilst managing to accept other people's views. If I recall correctly you weren;t involved. What a surprise....
SkylineSchards#2SkylineSchards#2 Chelsea sold out quickly last year despite being linked to another game. I don't thing an estimated demand of 30,000 for that game in isolation is any way unreasonable and probably a considerable underestimate.
On the other hand, the fact that the Chelsea game this year sold out (and indeed had a higher attendance), despite going to 'general sale', surely indicates that there is the demand there from the 'casuals', as there must have been more of them buying this year than last?
Given that the Chelsea game sold out last year, the fact the the attendance this year was higher is irrelevent in every way imaginable to the question of demand.
The fact that it went to general sale demonstrates that fewer people with points were interested so they became available to people with no points. People with no points would also have been interested last year but, as we know, the tickets never got close to being on general sale.
To try and suggest that the fact that more people with zero points bought a ticket compared to last year (when they would have been unable to) is an indication of greater demand, is laughable in the extreme.
You really aren't bothering to read posts properly, are you? Where exactly did I say that it indicated 'higher demand'? That's right - nowhere.
I said it indicated the demand was there from the 'casuals', because more of them must have bought tickets this year than last. And they are surely the ones which the club will be trying to attract with the new seating, hoping to then turn them into regulars, and even (god forbid) Season Ticket Holders.
I never said the demand from the 'casuals' was higher than last year - only you have so far had the temerity to claim the intimate knowledge to actually put numbers on that figure - I just said that the demand was there. It might even be the case that there were more people wanting to go to the game this year than last, but because the stadium has a finite size we can't know whether this is true or not.
I await your response to this message with great anticipation. Not because I think it will actually have any valid reasoning in it, but simply because I'm looking forward to seeing how you manage to misread, misinterpret, and twist what I have said this time.
Schards#2 Chelsea 2006/2007 - tickets linked to less attractive game, sold out several days before the match.
Schards#2 Chelsea 2007/2008 - tickets not linked to less attractive game, sold out the day before the match.
Schards#2 If you can't see that demand for one was greater than the other then I pity you.
Behindu I guess I could go two ways.
I could rant and rave and call Schards a twisting tosser (and may well get support for that..)
Or I should just sadly shake my head and let him hang himself.
Schards you win no points for twisting what other people say, or failing to consider arguements that you don't agree with. In your response you simply invent things, or ignore what has been said many times.
I just can't see the point in behaving like you do, especially over such a relatively peripheral matter like whether you are right that 'demand' has fallen for tickets.....
Schards#2 I would reply but it's clear you won't actually read the content.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests
