Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

wonderpup

A Thought Experiment And A Question

Recommended Posts

I run a football club and the profitability of that club is increased by the number of people who come into the stadium on match day.

Therefore in order to maximize both the short term profitability of the club and to safeguard the clubs long term future two options suggest themselves:

1) To leave the doors fixed open on match day and sell a ticket to anyone and everyone who wants to come in, with no limit on numbers- since any attempt to limit either the numbers of people coming in or impose restrictions based on their viability as long term supporters of the club would result in damaging the economic perfomance of the club by reducing sales of tickets.

OR

2) To limit the number of people coming in to a safe number to avoid dangerous overcrowding and vetting those who do come in to ensure they are the type of supporters likely to provide the most value to the club over the long term. This strategy would limit the short term profitability of the club in terms of ticket sales but would in the longer term create a more stable and durable business model and avoid the risks associated with overcrowding.

On a purely rational basis it's clear that option two is the best, since it does not involve the dangerous need to have unlimited access to the stadium with all the risks this could bring of spectators being injured or fighting among themselves due to the overcrowded conditions and also offers the best chance of building a support base who would add value to the club over the long term.

However; access to the league in which the team plays is controlled by advocates of option one and they have threatened to make accessing the league difficult should I choose option two.

So- do I choose option one and risk the dangerous overcrowding that might spell disaster to the club- or do I choose option two and risk having my access to the league restricted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but they choose option 3) which is to hold a referendum on this, but in the week before, someone dies in the safely controlled crowd (option 2) - therefore people associate that option as very bad, and enough swing-voters vote for option 1) - even though the death was utterly irrelevant to the points of the referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increase the price of adult tickets by 50%, Have a discount 1 adult + 1 junior ticket at the previous adult ticket price. iow, bring a kid along or pay more.

The more youngsters there are, the less likely there is going to be trouble. Plus, kids get used to going to the match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run a football club and the profitability of that club is increased by the number of people who come into the stadium on match day.

Therefore in order to maximize both the short term profitability of the club and to safeguard the clubs long term future two options suggest themselves:

On a purely rational basis it's clear that option two is the best,

Option two is NOT the best of the two on a rational basis - as you have said you need to also ensure the short term profitability of the club and option two is designed to precisely limit this

Your question is either fundamentally flawed or the correct answer is option a (which will also guarantee the viability of the club as it will be allowed into the league - whereas there is the very real possibility that it will not be in the league with option b (goodbye long term future)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increase capacity and invest in the stadium facilities. Obviously.

Everyone agrees to the idea of building/extending the stands, but everyone is also ferociously opposed to building new stands next to their favourite seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're not thinking like a colossus of business. Run the club on a shoestring, pack in the punters for as long as they will come, saddle it with debt, rape the pension fund and finally sell it to some bloke in the pub for the price of a pint.*

*Any resemblance to events real or fictional is purely coincidental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Introduce a new 'Value Added Ticket' to be paid in addition to the normal entrance, start it at 2% and gradually ramp it up to 20%.

Use the funds generated to build a couple of large administration buildings on the other side of town. Fill them with lawyers and other criminal types and start up a complex protection racket around access to the Bovril hut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Increase capacity and invest in the stadium facilities. Obviously.

There is no way to plan what increase in capacity is required since the numbers entering the stadium are increasing unpredictably and at a rate faster than the devlopment of new facilites can be constructed, nor is there any interest in developing new facilites since the management are pursuing a cost cutting programme that involves shutting facilites down.

So while the management welcome the increased profitability derived from increasing gate receipts they have no intention whatsoever of making the investment required to accomodate the additional spectators entering the stadium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option two is NOT the best of the two on a rational basis - as you have said you need to also ensure the short term profitability of the club and option two is designed to precisely limit this

Your question is either fundamentally flawed or the correct answer is option a (which will also guarantee the viability of the club as it will be allowed into the league - whereas there is the very real possibility that it will not be in the league with option b (goodbye long term future)

So the only way to save the club is to endanger the well being of it's supporters? If so then why would they continue to support it?

Would it not make more sense to find a more sane league to play in? One that did not have an irrational attatchment to the idea of unlimited entry to the stadium irrespective of the consequences?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run a football club and the profitability of that club is increased by the number of people who come into the stadium on match day.

Therefore in order to maximize both the short term profitability of the club and to safeguard the clubs long term future two options suggest themselves:

1) To leave the doors fixed open on match day and sell a ticket to anyone and everyone who wants to come in, with no limit on numbers- since any attempt to limit either the numbers of people coming in or impose restrictions based on their viability as long term supporters of the club would result in damaging the economic perfomance of the club by reducing sales of tickets.

OR

2) To limit the number of people coming in to a safe number to avoid dangerous overcrowding and vetting those who do come in to ensure they are the type of supporters likely to provide the most value to the club over the long term. This strategy would limit the short term profitability of the club in terms of ticket sales but would in the longer term create a more stable and durable business model and avoid the risks associated with overcrowding.

On a purely rational basis it's clear that option two is the best, since it does not involve the dangerous need to have unlimited access to the stadium with all the risks this could bring of spectators being injured or fighting among themselves due to the overcrowded conditions and also offers the best chance of building a support base who would add value to the club over the long term.

However; access to the league in which the team plays is controlled by advocates of option one and they have threatened to make accessing the league difficult should I choose option two.

So- do I choose option one and risk the dangerous overcrowding that might spell disaster to the club- or do I choose option two and risk having my access to the league restricted?

You choose option #1 but offer a discount for annual membership with the benefit of guaranteed entry (capacity set aside). Thus, you get the benefit of taking money from anyone who turns up on the day and also getting cash-flow upfront from people buying the annual membership (season ticket).

The keenest supporters will either make sure they get there early enough to guarantee entry assuming there is an actual finite capacity of the stadium, or, will buy the season ticket.

The flaw in the analogy you posit is that the stadium does indeed have an actual finite capacity beyond which no more people can physically fit through the doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be so overbearing and dictatorial, your term managing the club will end and you will be back in the stands soon.

So allow the bloody supporters their rights to set their own gate limits and stop being a facist.

Edit, maybe with less management the club could win the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increase the price of adult tickets by 50%, Have a discount 1 adult + 1 junior ticket at the previous adult ticket price. iow, bring a kid along or pay more.

The more youngsters there are, the less likely there is going to be trouble. Plus, kids get used to going to the match.

+1

As with all hobbies you need to get kids involved.

And women.

Don't know how many women go to football though. Or could be persuaded to.

Allotments - more women have allotments or come along and do a bit than I think they used to. but without encouraging a new generation of plotters to get involved the future will be grim.

Not helped by some of the current over 60s who to be frank are insults to the very oxygen we breathe. It is entertaining watching them explode at various trigger words like BBQ and socialising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T

So the only way to save the club is to endanger the well being of it's supporters? If so then why would they continue to support it?

Would it not make more sense to find a more sane league to play in? One that did not have an irrational attatchment to the idea of unlimited entry to the stadium irrespective of the consequences?

If in your thought experiment you only give two options (and usually in thought experiments you stay within the parameters set) plus the stipulation of the one league you wish to be a member in, I stand by my first answer to you.

If you don't like it, either tell me why I'm wrong or reframe your question

Do I agree with the league or the short and long term goals of the football club, and that the options given me are the best way forward, no, not really - you asked me to choose one of your two proposals. I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you get in a lot of legal trouble if you allow unlimited access? Overcrowding of stadia is a big no-no these days, and although I assume that we're not talking about a big league club here I don't know if the rules only apply to those over a certain size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe the narrow mindedness!! Forget the football, it's getting such bad press. Rip out the seating, and anything else that gets in the way and run the grounds as a refugee camp. You'll then be making money everyday of the year ;¬) If you aim high enough you could be the entrepreneur who launches the Refugee Industrial Complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Next General Election   91 members have voted

    1. 1. When do you predict the next general election will be held?


      • 2019
      • 2020
      • 2021
      • 2022

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.