[The Magic Moose]

dee4life, on Feb 13 2008, 18:00, said:

Our last scottish cup quarter final was in 2006 against hamilton and the prices were the same as for a league game.fact

Both teams have to agree on the price of tickets.

[Flash]

My only grumble with the prices is that I don't see why the terracing and the stand should be the same price. I do understand that, at league games, some of our fans choose the terracing when it costs no more to sit in the stand, but they are pretty much the diehards. But here, we are trying to attract "floating" fans and they are less likely to want to pay £18 to stand behind one goal. There are only 1300 seats for home fans, so it is less likely that the occasional fan will be able to get a stand ticket. I think the terracing tickets should have been held at league prices.
I guess the argument is that you might as well try to get as much cash as possible from the GHs, but if it puts them off going at all it kind of defeats the purpose.

[FC_1919]

Skyline Drifter, on Feb 13 2008, 14:37, said:

Not entirely sure on that point. If you normally use your ticket but go through a cash turnstile you'll get it at the gate. If you normally go through a season ticket turnstile we'll have to issue it with your ticket from the office because the gate person won't have vouchers.

Which turnstile do you go to after collecting the ticket from the office?

Usually the one for the terracing just after the shop. I will ask on Saturday when I buy one.

[wee man]

dee4life, on Feb 13 2008, 17:57, said:

Even your some of your own fans are complaining,our prices are in line with most other 1st division teams.I was just asking what some queens fans are asking why the increase.

The price of the tickets comes down to simple economics. The demand is going to be high because it is a quarter final and therefore both teams believe there is an opportunity to make extra money from the game. The board would be failing the club and the fans in some respect if they did not take the opportunity.

This generates more income for both clubs and therefore makes available funds to the managers to strengthen the teams for the promotion push next year

[KingfaetheSooth]

wee man, on Feb 13 2008, 21:40, said:

The price of the tickets comes down to simple economics. The demand is going to be high because it is a quarter final and therefore both teams believe there is an opportunity to make extra money from the game. The board would be failing the club and the fans in some respect if they did not take the opportunity.

This generates more income for both clubs and therefore makes available funds to the managers to strengthen the teams for the promotion push next year

Eh? For fans, substitute shareholders. Most if not all of our shareholders are fans but not all our fans are shareholders.

[Distant Doonhamer]

DEX_Doonhamer, on Feb 11 2008, 23:57, said:

It is very early but what the hey

QoS 1-4 Dundee

Good work Dex

[FC_1919]

KingfaetheSooth, on Feb 13 2008, 22:34, said:

Eh? For fans, substitute shareholders. Most if not all of our shareholders are fans but not all our fans are shareholders.

Indeed.

But if we do crash out, I want to make as much money as possible.

[KingfaetheSooth]

FC_1919, on Feb 14 2008, 01:09, said:

Indeed.

But if we do crash out, I want to make as much money as possible.

Yeah me too. It might put off a few gloryhunters mind.

I actually think Queeens will flog their tickets quite easily though, due to this incredible run of form we are currently having. The fickle Dumfries floating football fans will be out in force.

[Skyline Drifter]

KingfaetheSooth, on Feb 13 2008, 22:34, said:

Eh? For fans, substitute shareholders. Most if not all of our shareholders are fans but not all our fans are shareholders.

Given that we have never paid a dividend and that nobody buys shares in Queen of the South for their investment potential, shareholders have absolutely no relevance at all except insofar as they might also be fans (and it's not even close to being the case that all shareholders are fans).

[Specky]

Good luck Queens in the 1/4 final, Hope you do well !!. We all really enjoyed our day oot at Palmerston and hopefully you can ram the comments of that Jambo prat Euan Cameron right down his throat about us getting "pumped" by you....

Queens all the way !!..

(can someone post after the game and let us know if Dundee brought anywhere near as many fans with them as us) cheers

[Flash]

Skyline Drifter, on Feb 14 2008, 11:21, said:

Given that we have never paid a dividend and that nobody buys shares in Queen of the South for their investment potential, shareholders have absolutely no relevance at all except insofar as they might also be fans (and it's not even close to being the case that all shareholders are fans).

Are the directors not fans? I don't mean in the sense that they have to pay to get in, but are they not still fans?

[Skyline Drifter]

Specky, on Feb 14 2008, 12:34, said:

Good luck Queens in the 1/4 final, Hope you do well !!. We all really enjoyed our day oot at Palmerston and hopefully you can ram the comments of that Jambo prat Euan Cameron right down his throat about us getting "pumped" by you....

Queens all the way !!..

(can someone post after the game and let us know if Dundee brought anywhere near as many fans with them as us) cheers

Thanks.

Though it's a virtual certainty that Dundee will bring more than you. They are getting 2,200 tickets and I will be astonished if they don't sell the vast majority at least.

Flash, on Feb 14 2008, 13:22, said:

Are the directors not fans? I don't mean in the sense that they have to pay to get in, but are they not still fans?

Well, yes, obviously. The directors are all "fans". Not sure what your point is or what relevance it has to the section you highlighted in bold?

Did you misinterpret somehow what I said? KftS said most if not all of our shareholders are fans and I suggested that we're well short of that position. I would imagine anyone who has bought shares since Norman Blount put them on sale is a fan. Otherwise why would they buy them? But there remain a large number of shareholders from before then who mostly inherited their shares, a fair proportion of whom are no longer in Dumfries or even in Scotland and, I expect in dozens of cases don't even know they are shareholders.

[Flash]

Skyline Drifter, on Feb 14 2008, 13:34, said:

Thanks.

Though it's a virtual certainty that Dundee will bring more than you. They are getting 2,200 tickets and I will be astonished if they don't sell the vast majority at least.




Well, yes, obviously. The directors are all "fans". Not sure what your point is or what relevance it has to the section you highlighted in bold?

Did you misinterpret somehow what I said? KftS said most if not all of our shareholders are fans and I suggested that we're well short of that position. I would imagine anyone who has bought shares since Norman Blount put them on sale is a fan. Otherwise why would they buy them? But there remain a large number of shareholders from before then who mostly inherited their shares, a fair proportion of whom are no longer in Dumfries or even in Scotland and, I expect in dozens of cases don't even know they are shareholders.

Fair enough. I thought the directors owned the vast majority of the shares and that including the fans who have bought them since the Blount era there wouldn't be all that many shareholders left, certainly not enough to mean we were "well short" of most shareholders being fans.
Would it be more accurate to say that the vast majority of the shares are owned by fans, then? This is more relevant anyway, because if 99% are owned by 5 people who are fans and the remaining 1% by 200 who aren't, it isn't really all that important that the 5 are outnumbered by the 200.
Edited to add
Had a look at the list of shareholders. There are about 725 or so individual shareholders. The vast majority live in Dumfries and surrounding area. About 10 live overseas.
How can you tell from that list which of the shareholders are fans and which of them aren't?

This post has been edited by Flash: 14 February 2008 - 14:51

[Skyline Drifter]

Flash, on Feb 14 2008, 13:55, said:

Had a look at the list of shareholders. There are about 725 or so individual shareholders. The vast majority live in Dumfries and surrounding area. About 10 live overseas.
How can you tell from that list which of the shareholders are fans and which of them aren't?

You're getting facetious now. And there are a lot more than 725 shareholders. Your list is either out of date or partial.

In my capacity as share registrar I've attempted to trace or been contacted by plenty who are not fans. I never said it wasn't the case that "most" shareholders were fans. It's just patently short of being the case that "all" of them are. And not short by half a dozen by any means. When I said we were "well short" of all shareholders being fans I meant in terms of number of shareholders, not percentage of shares held quite obviously.

This post has been edited by Skyline Drifter: 14 February 2008 - 16:17

[Captain_Sensible]

I fancy Queen of the South to win this one to set up a St. Mirren v Queens Semi Final at Hampden.

[Flash]

Skyline Drifter, on Feb 14 2008, 16:14, said:

You're getting facetious now. And there are a lot more than 725 shareholders. Your list is either out of date or partial.

In my capacity as share registrar I've attempted to trace or been contacted by plenty who are not fans. I never said it wasn't the case that "most" shareholders were fans. It's just patently short of being the case that "all" of them are. And not short by half a dozen by any means. When I said we were "well short" of all shareholders being fans I meant in terms of number of shareholders, not percentage of shares held quite obviously.

List is from November 2007. It is the full one, just that I didn't fancy counting all the names, so I multiplied the number on the first page by the number of pages. However, there are fewer names on page 1 than on the rest, so my rough calculation was wrong. It could be as many as 900 or so.
I wasn't being facetious. I just didn't know how you could tell from a list of several hundred people which ones were fans and which weren't. However, now I do know.

[qos1969]

Regarding the pricing for this game,the board have taken a big gamble in my opinion,i think they should have left it at £15 and made the concessions say £8 a pop,normally £3 for under 16s is pretty cheap!I think that they they would almost certainly have ensured a full house of over 6000,this way i think theyre gambling on the appeal of the tie,i think we'll be lucky to have between 4500 and 4800 at the game,although i'll be happy to see the ground full,if it is i'll be very surprised.
Incidentally fair play to Dundee if they can shift over 2200 tickets,i'd be very surprised if they do.

This post has been edited by qos1969: 14 February 2008 - 22:22

[dundeebarry]

qos1969, on Feb 14 2008, 22:19, said:

Regarding the pricing for this game,the board have taken a big gamble in my opinion,i think they should have left it at £15 and made the concessions say £8 a pop,normally £3 for under 16s is pretty cheap!I think that they they would almost certainly have ensured a full house of over 6000,this way i think theyre gambling on the appeal of the tie,i think we'll be lucky to have between 4500 and 4800 at the game,although i'll be happy to see the ground full,if it is i'll be very surprised.
Incidentally fair play to Dundee if they can shift over 2200 tickets,i'd be very surprised if they do.

I'd be surprised if we sold more than 2200 too, but we'll be there in numbers, qos1969. I would estimate a traveling support somewhere around the 1500 - 1700 mark.

Lets say 1653.

No , 1654.

[kirkyblue2]

dundeebarry, on Feb 15 2008, 00:06, said:

Lets say 1653.

No , 1654.

Going,going,gone...

On the prices I think it should be cheaper to stand £15 or £16 but I'll still be there although it may put off the part timers with their shiny new scarfs.

[calcutta]

kirkyblue2, on Feb 15 2008, 10:15, said:

Going,going,gone...

On the prices I think it should be cheaper to stand £15 or £16 but I'll still be there although it may put off the part timers with their shiny new scarfs.

depends on your point of view, I would pay a premium to ensure that I got to stand rather than having to sit

[kirkyblue2]

calcutta, on Feb 15 2008, 11:21, said:

depends on your point of view, I would pay a premium to ensure that I got to stand rather than having to sit

It's not really a big issue but £16 say to stand behind the goal where the view of the game isn't as good as the stands would have been fairer imo and would probably ensure a sell out.
Also if some Dundee fans decide to stand up will they be forced to sit as they do at their ground?

[KingfaetheSooth]

Skyline Drifter, on Feb 14 2008, 11:21, said:

Given that we have never paid a dividend and that nobody buys shares in Queen of the South for their investment potential, shareholders have absolutely no relevance at all except insofar as they might also be fans (and it's not even close to being the case that all shareholders are fans).

That's true. My point was, that many Queens fans and more importantly casual fans would rather see the price a couple of quid cheaper without any thought to more money being made by the club. They look after their own wallet rather than the P&L accounts of Queen of the South Ltd.

[queenslad]

We have had the discussion in previous years how to increase revenue through the gates and it has been suggested that we should raise the price for league games by a couple of pounds to same level as Dundee, Saints etc.

Now that Queens have done this for a Q/F match where we have a great chance of success some fans are unhappy. Just wait until Queens start charging for parking in old Tesco site and there will be more uproar. Granted two pound can be a lot of money for some supporters espically familys' etc but you cannot even buy a pint or bottle of beer (in a pub) for that price.