Football attendances per capita

[craigkillie]

1 minute ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Feck off,fans are buying season tickets knowing the games are going to be played behind closed doors what a stupid view not even restricted.  

No idea what you're raging about here, but that's exactly my point. I doubt Celtic are going to have the brass neck to count the attendance at BCD games as 50,000 or whatever.

[PauloPerth]

6 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

Feck off,fans are buying season tickets knowing the games are going to be played behind closed doors what a stupid view not even restricted.  

[wastecoatwilly]

Just now, craigkillie said:

No idea what you're raging about here, but that's exactly my point. I doubt Celtic are going to have the brass neck to count the attendance at BCD games as 50,000 or whatever.

It's pedantic shiny ones,who cares, there is a number of reasons why a fan doesn't go to a game on any given day.

[craigkillie]

5 minutes ago, wastecoatwilly said:

It's pedantic shiny ones,who cares, there is a number of reasons why a fan doesn't go to a game on any given day.

Good for them. But if that fan doesn't go to a game on any given day then the club shouldn't pretend that they did.

[Moomintroll]

21 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

No idea what you're raging about here, but that's exactly my point. I doubt Celtic are going to have the brass neck to count the attendance at BCD games as 50,000 or whatever.

It is willy, he will be raging any time someone tells the truth about his Cult. You just need to try harder next time. If you really, really want it, then........ It still won't matter as nobody is allowed to criticise the Cult.

Edited July 19, 2020 by Perkin Flump
Fat, non gammony fingers.

[wastecoatwilly]

2 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Good for them. But if that fan doesn't go to a game on any given day then the club shouldn't pretend that they did.

I hope every club post attendances in closed door games just to show the support they have.
Pretend my arse.

[PauloPerth]

2 hours ago, Lebowski said:

12 hours ago, PauloPerth said:

Yeah I understand why, but it's a bit shite for comparing attendances. 
We can look at the table in the first post and pat ourselves on the back, but then the inaccuracy in our figures, and the limitations of capacity in some top divisions, e.g.Germany and England, make it hard to get any meaningful comparisons.

To be fair, I don't know about Germany, but that's exactly the same way as English clubs are counting attendances.

Fair enough, I always thought most English stadiums I've seen over the last few years looked fairly full, but then reading these articles, obviously not the case:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45158878

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-fc-empty-seats-15145262

You look at regular non category A Premiership matches from Tynecastle, Celtic Park, Easter Road (as examples, there's many clubs doing it as you say) and there's thousands of empty seats.

43 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Agreed, however I dare say it's a bit of a grey area. I can understand why clubs count season tickets as attendees. Whether there is an arse in the seat or not, the ticket for that match has been bought and paid for and legally (from a financial reporting POV at least) should be counted as an attendee as that seat is now occupied and no longer available to purchase.

As an example, Celtic selling 50,000 season tickets of a 60,0000 capacity and only 30,000 people actually showing up to matches in the depths of winter (and being declared as such) would suggest that there are still 30,000 tickets available to sell when that's not the case. 

 

I'm sure Dortmund had a big push last year to alleviate this issue. They run a sell-on scheme where ST holders who are not going to the match make their ticket available for public sale, I think the ST holders get reimbursed for it.

They were fed up on having loads of empty seats each game when there was a waiting list from locals and football tourists keen to attend. I think they threatened ST holders that they'd not be allowed to renew if they didn't make use of the facility and left their seat empty.

I tried to find the article to link but couldn't, but in searching found a bit about the emphasis Dortmund put on creating a good atmosphere.  

"While the club want to encourage fans to engage with them online, order food and send tweets, once the match starts, they want their fans to put their phones down, use their hands to clap, their eyes to watch and the voices to sing.

And to ensure that remains the case, the club are discussing plans to dip the wifi signal once the match begins. Supporting the team is the be all and end all. 

It is why Dortmund do not sell drinks in their corporate boxes during the game. It is why the stadium announcer demands fans return to their seats in time for the start of the second half. The club could allow fans to spend more money buying food and drink. But not at Dortmund."

More than 1000 fans travel from the UK to watch every home match, phenomenal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/29624410

 

 

[wastecoatwilly]

12 minutes ago, Perkin Flump said:

It is willy, he will be raging any time someone tells the truth about his Cult. You just need to try harder next time. If you really, really want it, then........ It still won't matter as nobody is allowed to criticise the Cult.

Is that you moonmins? bye bye sevco bye bye Celtic wait a minute hello sevco hello celtic.

[Moomintroll]

It vexeth me mightily that you buggers are still here, at least SSC laid one cheek low. Will continue to enjoy having a poke during the coming season but suspect your mob will prevail, stop pretending it is because the guy on 20k pw is trying harder than the guy on 1k nonetheless, it is because Capitalism and the free market economy that rasellickplc pretend to hate, or at least their Cult members do like good little cult members. Good luck all the same, desperate to get back to it.

[DA Baracus]

I always wonder which sponsors are fooled by the announced attendance. It's common knowledge that plenty of clubs inflate the attendance so seems like a sponsor would need to be a bit daft and/or naive to buy it.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

39 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Fair enough, I always thought most English stadiums I've seen over the last few years looked fairly full, but then reading these articles, obviously not the case:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45158878

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manchester-city-fc-empty-seats-15145262

You look at regular non category A Premiership matches from Tynecastle, Celtic Park, Easter Road (as examples, there's many clubs doing it as you say) and there's thousands of empty seats.

I'm sure Dortmund had a big push last year to alleviate this issue. They run a sell-on scheme where ST holders who are not going to the match make their ticket available for public sale, I think the ST holders get reimbursed for it.

They were fed up on having loads of empty seats each game when there was a waiting list from locals and football tourists keen to attend. I think they threatened ST holders that they'd not be allowed to renew if they didn't make use of the facility and left their seat empty.

I tried to find the article to link but couldn't, but in searching found a bit about the emphasis Dortmund put on creating a good atmosphere.  

"While the club want to encourage fans to engage with them online, order food and send tweets, once the match starts, they want their fans to put their phones down, use their hands to clap, their eyes to watch and the voices to sing.

And to ensure that remains the case, the club are discussing plans to dip the wifi signal once the match begins. Supporting the team is the be all and end all. 

It is why Dortmund do not sell drinks in their corporate boxes during the game. It is why the stadium announcer demands fans return to their seats in time for the start of the second half. The club could allow fans to spend more money buying food and drink. But not at Dortmund."

More than 1000 fans travel from the UK to watch every home match, phenomenal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/29624410

 

 

Maybe Dortmund fans don't need to go on P&B from their phones at the match to post " this is fucking dire" on the match thread? not criticizing, I've done it myself

[Monkey Tennis]

Even by his standards, a stunning display from Willy on this thread.

[Lebowski]

The word "attendance" should be a clue. If you're not there you're not in attendance. If Hibs are artificially inflating their attendance to attract sponsors then that's essentially fraud.

It's the paid attendance. Ie the number of tickets sold. I've no idea how Kilmarnock count their crowds, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do the exact same.

If this is a surprise to anyone who sees the FF lower at Hibs games I'm not quite sure what to say. That bit directly behind the goals is over 90% sold out through season tickets. But midweek games in particular you will be lucky if it's 30% full.

[craigkillie]

4 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

It's the paid attendance. Ie the number of tickets sold. I've no idea how Kilmarnock count their crowds, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do the exact same.

If this is a surprise to anyone who sees the FF lower at Hibs games I'm not quite sure what to say. That bit directly behind the goals is over 90% sold out through season tickets. But midweek games in particular you will be lucky if it's 30% full.

They should call it the number of tickets sold then. If you announce something as an attendance, then that implies that is the number of people actually present.

I am pretty sure Killie don't do the same because there were a couple of attendances last season which were barely more than the number of season tickets we sold.

[Lebowski]

They should call it the number of tickets sold then. If you announce something as an attendance, then that implies that is the number of people actually present.
I am pretty sure Killie don't do the same because there were a couple of attendances last season which were barely more than the number of season tickets we sold.

So on no occasion did Kilmarnock have less ST holders not attending than additional tickers sold? The average ST holder misses 15% of games at Hibs. These tend to be concentrated in midweek and TV games.

Your methodology isn't the attendance either btw. Corporate attendees don't click through a turnstile. If you think clubs are counting each person in the dear seats you're wrong. They will say they've sold x number of corporate seats and add that on to however they are calculating attendances.

I wouldn't object at all to there being either two attendances given (sold tickets and actual attendance) or every club reporting their attendance using the same methodology. But clubs competing for sponsorship are not going to use the lower figure when the clubs they're competing with aren't. Why should they?

[craigkillie]

21 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

So on no occasion did Kilmarnock have less ST holders not attending than additional tickers sold? The average ST holder misses 15% of games at Hibs. These tend to be concentrated in midweek and TV games.

Your methodology isn't the attendance either btw. Corporate attendees don't click through a turnstile. If you think clubs are counting each person in the dear seats you're wrong. They will say they've sold x number of corporate seats and add that on to however they are calculating attendances.

I wouldn't object at all to there being either two attendances given (sold tickets and actual attendance) or every club reporting their attendance using the same methodology. But clubs competing for sponsorship are not going to use the lower figure when the clubs they're competing with aren't. Why should they?

I've no idea what you mean with your first point. I am saying that Killie are not fudging their attendances by including people who aren't actually there, and my evidence for that is that we sold 4200 season tickets last season and yet had a couple of attendances which were barely more than that.

My methodology is very easy, and relates to the actual meaning of the word attendance. You count the number of people who are actually present at a game, including season ticket holders, those who pay at the game and people in hospitality. What clubs actually do is not relevant here, my definition is the only one which can actually be described as the "attendance".

If you think that lying to attempt to attract sponsorship is fine, why don't all clubs just announce attendances of 300,000? In reality, as the poster above said, sponsors will be aware of how many people are actually at games, so attempting to pull the wool over their eyes with clearly false figures isn't going to help. Clubs will probably tell them "here's how many season ticket holders we have" or whatever. The real reason for clubs releasing fake attendances is because they want to engage in public cock waving to pretend they're bigger clubs than they are.

[PauloPerth]

33 minutes ago, Lebowski said:

So on no occasion did Kilmarnock have less ST holders not attending than additional tickers sold? The average ST holder misses 15% of games at Hibs. These tend to be concentrated in midweek and TV games.

Your methodology isn't the attendance either btw. Corporate attendees don't click through a turnstile. If you think clubs are counting each person in the dear seats you're wrong. They will say they've sold x number of corporate seats and add that on to however they are calculating attendances.

I wouldn't object at all to there being either two attendances given (sold tickets and actual attendance) or every club reporting their attendance using the same methodology. But clubs competing for sponsorship are not going to use the lower figure when the clubs they're competing with aren't. Why should they?

Corporate tickets are surely a very small percentage, so the amount of corporate folk who have a ticket but don't show up isn't going to significantly change the figures.

Yes clubs can report it anyway they want, but don't use the word attendance, say tickets sold.

And if this is the way we give crowd figures these days then comparisons with the past etc are fairly pointless.

[PauloPerth]

3 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

The real reason for clubs releasing fake attendances is because they want to engage in public cock waving to pretend they're bigger clubs than they are.

[Lebowski]

I've no idea what you mean with your first point. I am saying that Killie are not fudging their attendances by including people who aren't actually there, and my evidence for that is that we sold 4200 season tickets last season and yet had a couple of attendances which were barely more than that.
My methodology is very easy, and relates to the actual meaning of the word attendance. You count the number of people who are actually present at a game, including season ticket holders, those who pay at the game and people in hospitality. What clubs actually do is not relevant here, my definition is the only one which can actually be described as the "attendance".
If you think that lying to attempt to attract sponsorship is fine, why don't all clubs just announce attendances of 300,000? In reality, as the poster above said, sponsors will be aware of how many people are actually at games, so attempting to pull the wool over their eyes with clearly false figures isn't going to help. Clubs will probably tell them "here's how many season ticket holders we have" or whatever. The real reason for clubs releasing fake attendances is because they want to engage in public cock waving to pretend they're bigger clubs than they are.

My point is that you're saying in no game last season was the attendance lower than the amount of season ticket holders at Kilmarnock. I'd be very hard pushed to make the same claim about Hibs, in particular our game v Ross County on a Wednesday night in February. The official attendance at that was 14.5k. That would suggest around 2k tickets sold over the ST amount. But looking at the stadium it looked like way more than 2k season tickets were unused.

What games were the attendances at Kilmarnock just above ST numbers?

Fwiw I don't disagree with your last point. But I do think that when other clubs are already doing this, not copying them is just putting yourself at a disadvantage. That's just basic game theory.

[RandomGuy.]

The clues in the name. 

Attendance is the number of people attending.

I'm almost certain you'll get Celtic and Rangers publishing wild figures about how many people viewed their matches online this season. Morons like willy will lap it up and claim its proof of their global fanbase, while decrying any club who don't announce the amount of viewers.