Hearts v Queens

[Homer Thompson]

51 minutes ago, Aylo vanal said:

It's not. 

You can't charge fans £450 for a stream then make all the home games available for a tenner. 

 

Giving away other free stuff doesn't solve the problem. I'm paying £32 a game I think so 18 quid is still a decent saving on what it's costing most St holders. 

It's all a rip off but what can you do, hopefully we are allowed back soon. 

It is and you can. 

Hearts didnt sell streaming season tickets. If they had, you're argument would be perfectly valid. Hearts sold season tickets based on physically attending games and if that becomes possible before the end of the season you'll get the chance to. Presumably, you'll be happy to give up that right seeing as how you've got your moneys worth from the streaming?

The fact that Hearts sold massively over-priced season tickets and then the ability to physically attend was taken away is not a justification for over charging PPV streaming.

And of course giving away other "stuff" solves the problem. If you pay £200 more this season for your season ticket than the cost of PPV would be for the whole season and you get £200 off next seasons ticket, are most fans really going to have a problem with that? Theres a could chance a lot of them would decline it anyway to keep the money in the  club.

Obviously, we can debate the rights and wrongs of this all day, but keep in mind that the only other club to take this stance, as far as I know, is Livingston.  

[Aylo vanal]

1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said:

1 hour ago, Aylo vanal said:

It's not. 
You can't charge fans £450 for a stream then make all the home games available for a tenner. 
 
Giving away other free stuff doesn't solve the problem. I'm paying £32 a game I think so 18 quid is still a decent saving on what it's costing most St holders. 
It's all a rip off but what can you do, hopefully we are allowed back soon. 

They shouldn't be allowed to charge so much for a Championship ST in the first place tbh. It should reflect the level you're playing at not the size of club.

Correct, they know the fans will fork out though. 

[Aylo vanal]

22 minutes ago, Mr X said:

It is and you can. 

Hearts didnt sell streaming season tickets. If they had, you're argument would be perfectly valid. Hearts sold season tickets based on physically attending games and if that becomes possible before the end of the season you'll get the chance to. Presumably, you'll be happy to give up that right seeing as how you've got your moneys worth from the streaming?

The fact that Hearts sold massively over-priced season tickets and then the ability to physically attend was taken away is not a justification for over charging PPV streaming.

And of course giving away other "stuff" solves the problem. If you pay £200 more this season for your season ticket than the cost of PPV would be for the whole season and you get £200 off next seasons ticket, are most fans really going to have a problem with that? Theres a could chance a lot of them would decline it anyway to keep the money in the  club.

Obviously, we can debate the rights and wrongs of this all day, but keep in mind that the only other club to take this stance, as far as I know, is Livingston.  

I'm not defending Hearts for the way they sold the St it's been a f**k up from the start. They fixed it in probably the o ly way they could though. 

 

I'm still not happy with the way they were mis sold tbh. I've not had my moneys worth. 

For Hearts to give 200 quid off next year's tickets would leave them uncompetitive which is why they won't do it. 

You still can't charge a third of the price for streaming as your main customers/fans are paying. 

[Homer Thompson]

5 minutes ago, Aylo vanal said:

I'm not defending Hearts for the way they sold the St it's been a f**k up from the start. They fixed it in probably the o ly way they could though. 

 

I'm still not happy with the way they were mis sold tbh. I've not had my moneys worth. 

For Hearts to give 200 quid off next year's tickets would leave them uncompetitive which is why they won't do it. 

You still can't charge a third of the price for streaming as your main customers/fans are paying. 

If they want to remain competitive they could use the extra money they've got from this years season tickets.

You can because the two arent the same thing. As I said, you didnt buy a streaming season ticket

[Falcor Roar]

6 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Hearts have had a lot of criticism over the years for financial mismanagement

Hearts have also had a lot of criticism over the years from people who think Hearts should give the product away for buttons

Maybe these people could just argue amongst themselves

I think most are generally happy to pay out this season with an understanding that it won't be value for money, rather it's a gift to the club. There are some complaints about the manner in which the club marketed the tickets and outlined the terms and conditions I think. I'm not sure whether we knew at the time how many games we were getting in a season. 

I personally question the customer/product chat that comes out the club these days while also simultaneously expecting the fans to donate. It's a lack of awareness imo, we're not customers and it's not merely a product, if it were we wouldn't be selling much of it. 

All will be forgiven if we pull of a hilarious victory next week anyway...

[topcat(The most tip top)]

I think most are generally happy to pay out this season with an understanding that it won't be value for money, rather it's a gift to the club. There are some complaints about the manner in which the club marketed the tickets and outlined the terms and conditions I think. I'm not sure whether we knew at the time how many games we were getting in a season. 
I personally question the customer/product chat that comes out the club these days while also simultaneously expecting the fans to donate. It's a lack of awareness imo, we're not customers and it's not merely a product, if it were we wouldn't be selling much of it. 
All will be forgiven if we pull of a hilarious victory next week anyway...

The Hearts support may not have taken legal ownership of the club quite yet but I think the foundation of hearts has already changed the way we collectively relate to it.

It’s our club, we’ve saved it from one massive crisis already and there’s an understanding that we’re going to have to be a big responsibility in resolving this one.

[lennyzer0]

19 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

19 hours ago, Aylo vanal said:

It's not. 
You can't charge fans £450 for a stream then make all the home games available for a tenner. 
 
Giving away other free stuff doesn't solve the problem. I'm paying £32 a game I think so 18 quid is still a decent saving on what it's costing most St holders. 
It's all a rip off but what can you do, hopefully we are allowed back soon. 

They shouldn't be allowed to charge so much for a Championship ST in the first place tbh. It should reflect the level you're playing at not the size of club.

I've seen this argument a fair bit, and I genuinely think it's an odd one.

Football is a product like any other, and Hearts own the rights to their part of it. They 'should' be able to charge whatever they want - like anything else, purchasers/fans are entitled to either pay the price they charge or not.

And even if that weren't true, why would it reflect the size of the league? Are Morton fans poorer than St Mirren ones somehow?

(none of which is to say that I think £18,50 is a good price to watch Hearts play QoS on a stream on the telly. It's not and - putting to one side the question of Jambo ST prices - Hearts may well end up making less money in total than they would have done with a more reasonable pricing structure).

Edited December 14, 2020 by lennyzer0

[Homer Thompson]

I've seen this argument a fair bit, and I genuinely think it's an odd one.
Football is a product like any other, and Hearts own the rights to their part of it. They 'should' be able to charge whatever they want - like anything else, purchasers/fans are entitled to either pay the price they charge or not.
And even if that weren't true, why would it reflect the size of the league? Are Morton fans poorer than St Mirren ones somehow?
(none of which is to say that I think £18,50 is a good price to watch Hearts play QoS on a stream on the telly. It's not and - putting to one side the question of Jambo ST prices - Hearts may well end up making less money in total than they would have done with a more reasonable pricing structure).

I think the argument is about the quality of the league rather than the size.

You might pay £100 to go see a top band play but you wouldn't pay the same to see a cover band play the same songs in your local pub.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

30 minutes ago, Mr X said:

I think the argument is about the quality of the league rather than the size.

You might pay £100 to go see a top band play but you wouldn't pay the same to see a cover band play the same songs in your local pub.

We're The Beatles returning to play a secret gig at The Cavern Club mate.

Tbf, I agree the price is too high but we're not going to be bringing it down and the same points every match thread are getting old already

[19QOS19]

I think the argument is about the quality of the league rather than the size.

You might pay £100 to go see a top band play but you wouldn't pay the same to see a cover band play the same songs in your local pub.

This.

We're The Beatles returning to play a secret gig at The Cavern Club mate.
Tbf, I agree the price is too high but we're not going to be bringing it down and the same points every match thread are getting old already

Which is understandable but your annoyance should be directed at your greedy board, not the complaining away supporters.

[Insert Amusing Pseudonym]

23 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

This. Which is understandable but your annoyance should be directed at your greedy board, not the complaining away supporters.

I'm not annoyed tbf, just think it's boring going over it every game from a Hearts pov.  

Most of the match threads are 80% about PPV.

[19QOS19]

I'm not annoyed tbf, just think it's boring going over it every game from a Hearts pov.  
Most of the match threads are 80% about PPV.

Your boredom is only going to get worse over the season, with fans rightly moaning. It's your BoD fault though, not theirs is all I'm saying.

[Darren]

On 13/12/2020 at 14:15, 19QOS19 said:

They shouldn't be allowed to charge so much for a Championship ST in the first place tbh. It should reflect the level you're playing at not the size of club.

Hearts are entitled to charge whatever they want. If people are willing to stump up, even better for the club.

I think people are mental for paying those prices but each to their own.

[Homer Thompson]

I'm not annoyed tbf, just think it's boring going over it every game from a Hearts pov.  
Most of the match threads are 80% about PPV.

Doesn't that tell you something?

Hearts are entitled to charge whatever they want. If people are willing to stump up, even better for the club.
I think people are mental for paying those prices but each to their own.

They are. Equally fans are entitled to question it.

I think it's pretty obvious that lots of fans aren't happy to pay it. It's only better for the club if the extra they're charging makes up for the fans who decide not to pay at all.

[19QOS19]

Hearts are entitled to charge whatever they want. If people are willing to stump up, even better for the club.
I think people are mental for paying those prices but each to their own.

They are. My argument is that the league authorities should be setting caps to take that away from clubs.

[Monkey Tennis]

13 hours ago, lennyzer0 said:

Football is a product like any other, and Hearts own the rights to their part of it. They 'should' be able to charge whatever they want - like anything else, purchasers/fans are entitled to either pay the price they charge or not.

And yet it's us who get accused of being Tories.

Weird.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

They are. My argument is that the league authorities should be setting caps to take that away from clubs.

That’s not an argument

That’s just a statement of belief

An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

[paranoid android]

8 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 

That’s not an argument

That’s just a statement of belief

An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

 

No it isn't. 

[lennyzer0]

23 hours ago, Mr X said:

I think the argument is about the quality of the league rather than the size.

You might pay £100 to go see a top band play but you wouldn't pay the same to see a cover band play the same songs in your local pub.

Ah, that's a fair point and one I hadn't considered (though, have you seen the standard of the Premier league?).

I do think the point still parially stands though - Hearts vs Dundee or Dunfermline or Ayr or whatever is unlikely to be much less of spectacle of flowing football than Hearts vs St Mirren or Hamilton or Motherwell.

But yeah, the general standard is obviously slightly higher the higher up the leagues you go.

(and, of course, Rangers fan pay fortunes to watch a cover band every week)

[topcat(The most tip top)]

4 hours ago, paranoid android said:

No it isn't. 

I've told you once