|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307 |
It is but its a far less important component than it once was. Those teams that you mention receive less than 30% of their income from matchday income but I would be fairly sure that wasn't always the case.
United will be back because their revenue is still massive and only set to grow largely thanks to previous success and an ability to attract commercial contracts like Adidas due to their global following
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Vish no Newcastle are not a bigger club than us. But for us tro exploit our popularity both locally and around the world we need a stadium to match our status. Had Manchester United not expanded capacity to 75k there is no way they would be the size they are today around the globe. The revenue at the gate is a small part of it if you were in China watching on TV which is the most impressive product old trafford or anfield ? And I know you will say success well we seem to be behind on that score as well revenue = success in modern football over the long term. The Newcastle analogy was a stupid one and you either dont get it or you are being obtuse. How can the Newcastle analogy be stupid as your emphasis is on the size of the stadium. So if you have no argument you call it stupid? I agree, it's the size of their stadium that allowed United to get more revenues and be successful, but that was when gate revenue had the lion share of overall revenue which is on the decline as a proportion for a few years now. Saying that it is the size of OT that allowed United to sign such a deal with Adidas is completely stupid. You are living in the past, this is why you are struggling to get it, football has changed since it went global with TV worldwide broadcast.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Vish no Newcastle are not a bigger club than us. But for us tro exploit our popularity both locally and around the world we need a stadium to match our status. Had Manchester United not expanded capacity to 75k there is no way they would be the size they are today around the globe. The revenue at the gate is a small part of it if you were in China watching on TV which is the most impressive product old trafford or anfield ? And I know you will say success well we seem to be behind on that score as well revenue = success in modern football over the long term. The Newcastle analogy was a stupid one and you either dont get it or you are being obtuse. How can the Newcastle analogy be stupid as your emphasis is on the size of the stadium. So if you have no argument you call it stupid? I agree, it's the size of their stadium that allowed United to get more revenues and be successful, but that was when gate revenue had the lion share of overall revenue which is on the decline as a proportion for a few years now. Saying that it is the size of OT that allowed United to sign such a deal with Adidas is completely stupid. You are living in the past, this is why you are struggling to get it, football has changed since it went global with TV worldwide broadcast. I never said that, its part of the overall package. And as for all you oh so knowledgeable people who can predict the future saying stadium experience is a lesser part of football I hope you are right as if you are wrong we have nowhere to turn. Watching the world cup final on TV sunday night to camera constantly panned back from ariel shots of the stadium. Why did they do that if the stadium is not part of the product offering? Marketing globally is the future I agree but large crowds and impressive stadia are intrinsic to the offering.
Last edited by Stanley Park; 15/07/14 11:05 AM.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307 |
The stadium experience is far, far, far more important for the match going fans. It is relatively irrelevant to the tv audience.
Either way, there will not be an extreme event where football is played in a green screen with no fans as you often throw out as an argument. There will still be 45,000+ fans even if no work is ever done and they seem capable of making enough noise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446
1st Team Squad
|
|
1st Team Squad
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,446 |
most impressive scenes in the premier league last season weren't at Old Trafford or the emirates it was the sight of the small little kop, in an old tatty ground! so this notion that the bigger the stadium the more attractive it will be to sponsors is utter nonsense!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
The stadium experience is far, far, far more important for the match going fans. It is relatively irrelevant to the tv audience.
Either way, there will not be an extreme event where football is played in a green screen with no fans as you often throw out as an argument. There will still be 45,000+ fans even if no work is ever done and they seem capable of making enough noise. Its not the point the stadium is part of the product I dont agree whenever I am watching a big game the stadium is part of it not the main thing but part of the deal. Imagine the FA cup final played at west brom hawthorns stadium. Would it be the same? If the TV fans were not interested in the spectacle why do the TV companies employ a helicopter ? sky always have an airship at televised games. None of the other big clubs seem very hooked into this small stadium idea I wonder why that is ?
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,307 |
Its a very limited thing, they show maybe 1 or 2 mins max of the outside of the stadium and thats it.
Do you think the stadium is more, less or of equal importance to match going fans as those watching on tv?
It wouldn't be the same because the FA Cup is always played at Wembley?
You place a huge emphasis on the stadium as its what you enjoy and its long being the benchmark for revenue and big clubs but that is not currently what is important. We won't agree ever on the stadium issue as it appears to be a generational thing as much as anything so I'll leave it at that
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,542
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,542 |
I'm confused as to the direction of this thread - unless Adidas are sponsering the stadium....?
Nothing's changed. Big clubs will continue to rake in bigger deals and a few clubs will always win the league. There's not going to be any breakaway league, that's what the CL is for. They just want more cash & the product is the Premierleague. It's not slowing down anytime soon.
You can only put 11 men on the pitch and we still managed to finish above big spending Chelsea last season.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 27,628 |
Its a very limited thing, they show maybe 1 or 2 mins max of the outside of the stadium and thats it.
Do you think the stadium is more, less or of equal importance to match going fans as those watching on tv?
It wouldn't be the same because the FA Cup is always played at Wembley?
You place a huge emphasis on the stadium as its what you enjoy and its long being the benchmark for revenue and big clubs but that is not currently what is important. We won't agree ever on the stadium issue as it appears to be a generational thing as much as anything so I'll leave it at that None of the top clubs in Europe have a small stadium plenty of the lesser tier do I presume you are satisfied with that which us fair enough. I remember when Liverpool were also one of europes top clubs i want to see those days again which makes me a pariah with the FSG crew. We won't do that by having a poor team and a top stadium no but we actually must do both if we are to rival barca Munich United city etc long term. We are not doing that under FSG for financial constraints so the long term future is pretty much mapped out
Last edited by Stanley Park; 15/07/14 12:16 PM.
IF YOU WANT TO BE HEARD SPEAK SOFTLY - BOB PAISLEY
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Its a very limited thing, they show maybe 1 or 2 mins max of the outside of the stadium and thats it.
Do you think the stadium is more, less or of equal importance to match going fans as those watching on tv?
It wouldn't be the same because the FA Cup is always played at Wembley?
You place a huge emphasis on the stadium as its what you enjoy and its long being the benchmark for revenue and big clubs but that is not currently what is important. We won't agree ever on the stadium issue as it appears to be a generational thing as much as anything so I'll leave it at that None of the top clubs in Europe have a small stadium plenty of the lesser tier do I presume you are satisfied with that which us fair enough. I remember when Liverpool were also one of europes top clubs i want to see those days again which makes me a pariah with the FSG crew. We won't do that by having a poor team and a top stadium no but we actually must do both if we are to rival barca Munich United city etc long term. We are not doing that under FSG for financial constraints so the long term future is pretty much mapped out A 58k seater is not a small stadium as you want everybody to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
