Lost revenues from cup tie?

mrb85 · January 9, 2015

Just thinking, given that we lost maybe c5-8000 on the gate for the WHU cup game this week because the game was shifted from the weekend and being shown live on TV, did we actually make any money from the tV coverage?

Lost matchday income could then have been around £100-150,000. Anyone know what the TV fee received would have been?

Woolly Blue · January 9, 2015

mrb85 said:
Just thinking, given that we lost maybe c5-8000 on the gate for the WHU cup game this week because the game was shifted from the weekend and being shown live on TV, did we actually make any money from the tV coverage?

Lost matchday income could then have been around £100-150,000. Anyone know what the TV fee received would have been?

72k ( per club by the way )

Khalekan · January 9, 2015

mrb85 said:
Just thinking, given that we lost maybe c5-8000 on the gate for the WHU cup game this week because the game was shifted from the weekend and being shown live on TV, did we actually make any money from the tV coverage?

Lost matchday income could then have been around £100-150,000. Anyone know what the TV fee received would have been?

To be honest mrb, I don't think the crowd was much affected by TV coverage.

Deffo made more dough with it being on TV than not, I would say.

squonk · January 9, 2015

lost a fiver meself

Brennan · January 9, 2015

mrb85 said:
Just thinking, given that we lost maybe c5-8000 on the gate for the WHU cup game this week because the game was shifted from the weekend and being shown live on TV, did we actually make any money from the tV coverage?

Lost matchday income could then have been around £100-150,000. Anyone know what the TV fee received would have been?

I don't understand your question.

The lower gate doesn't change the fact that we made money from it being on TV.

mrb85 · January 9, 2015

Brennan said:
I don't understand your question.

The lower gate doesn't change the fact that we made money from it being on TV.

What don't you understand? Someone has said that we only got £72,000 off BT. Now, there's no doubt that for a weekend, non-televised, game we'd have got a crowd of more like 30,000 than the measly 22,500 that we did. That extra 7,000 or so in attendance would have generated some £150,000 of additional gate money and other matchday income, with half of this going to Everton. So net income from having to allow BT their live coverage was more or less zero.

Brennan · January 9, 2015

mrb85 said:
What don't you understand? Someone has said that we only got £72,000 off BT. Now, there's no doubt that for a weekend, non-televised, game we'd have got a crowd of more like 30,000 than the measly 22,500 that we did. That extra 7,000 or so in attendance would have generated some £150,000 of additional gate money and other matchday income, with half of this going to Everton. So net income from having to allow BT their live coverage was more or less zero.

The wording of your question was just a bit weird.

'Did we make money from the TV coverage' well, yes. We didn't 'lose' money.

We got 32,000 for QPR at home in the cup last year, on a Saturday. The main difference then wasn't that it was on a Saturday, but that we were playing good football and there was a good vibe about the place.

If we'd been in the top 6 when West Ham were drawn in the cup we'd have sold a lot closer to 32,000. The fact that it was moved to a Tuesday didn't have a massive impact, imo. When season ticket holders have paid £500 a pop to watch absolute crap the last thing they want to do is pay £20 to watch us play in the FA Cup, regardless of the time and day.

mrb85 · January 9, 2015

Brennan said:
The wording of your question was just a bit weird.

'Did we make money from the TV coverage' well, yes. We didn't 'lose' money.

We got 32,000 for QPR at home in the cup last year, on a Saturday. The main difference then wasn't that it was on a Saturday, but that we were playing good football and there was a good vibe about the place.

If we'd been in the top 6 when West Ham were drawn in the cup we'd have sold a lot closer to 32,000. The fact that it was moved to a Tuesday didn't have a massive impact, imo. When season ticket holders have paid £500 a pop to watch absolute crap the last thing they want to do is pay £20 to watch us play in the FA Cup, regardless of the time and day.

Tell me, when was the last time we didn't get 30,000 or more for a non-televised cup tie against PL opposition, irrespective of how badly we'd been playing?

For a start, West Ham would have brought more like 2,000 than the 400 they officially brought.

Little Ralphy · January 9, 2015

mrb85 said:
What don't you understand? Someone has said that we only got £72,000 off BT. Now, there's no doubt that for a weekend, non-televised, game we'd have got a crowd of more like 30,000 than the measly 22,500 that we did. That extra 7,000 or so in attendance would have generated some £150,000 of additional gate money and other matchday income, with half of this going to Everton. So net income from having to allow BT their live coverage was more or less zero.

Its actually 45% of the gate to each team and 10% to the pool for that game. I guess its probably very similar to the TV money at the end of the day. If we'd have been in better form I've little doubt the gate would have been higher.

Joey66 · January 9, 2015

That red lot are never off the TV so it must pay as they do not moan - gives them a star player with the TV revenues every year = rediculous look at this weekend Sunderland v that lot hardly a classic is it?

TheBlueGibbon · January 9, 2015

Joey66 said:
That red lot are never off the TV so it must pay as they do not moan - gives them a star player with the TV revenues every year = rediculous look at this weekend Sunderland v that lot hardly a classic is it?

Depends on whether or not it features a beachball.

emb · January 9, 2015

Joey66 said:
That red lot are never off the TV so it must pay as they do not moan - gives them a star player with the TV revenues every year = rediculous look at this weekend Sunderland v that lot hardly a classic is it?

They also have a waiting list for season tickets and a much wider catchment for home games.

Commercially there's not much they aren't better at than us.

mrb85 · January 10, 2015

Joey66 said:
That red lot are never off the TV so it must pay as they do not moan - gives them a star player with the TV revenues every year = rediculous look at this weekend Sunderland v that lot hardly a classic is it?

I don't think the away club gets a share of the TV revenue for league games though. For RS home games the effect of live TV coverage is probably only to reduce the potential demand for tickets, but not enough as to mean they get less than a full house, so there is no trade off between TV money and gate money.

BirkenheadBlue · January 10, 2015

If i remember rightly, the home side doesn't get all the gate income from FA Cup games anyway. I believe you take out the home side's expenses, then it gets split 3 ways between FA, home and away clubs (not sure on the exact % split)

So in all likelihood, the tv money from the televised game will have comfortably made up for what we lost due to decreased attendance.

EDIT: Just realised i somehow managed to miss the post above from @Little Ralphy

Eggs · January 10, 2015

Joey66 said:
That red lot are never off the TV so it must pay as they do not moan - gives them a star player with the TV revenues every year = rediculous look at this weekend Sunderland v that lot hardly a classic is it?

......could be if we see another beach ball.