The mancityfans.net football forum

Craig Bardsley wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:

King Kev wrote:

City's first home game of the season, against Wolves on Saturday, has not sold out

That really is piss-poor!

Mate chill yer boots its a handful in the expensive seats up top with the living dead.
It will be full on Satdi,no danger.

I think you're probably right LAHAD, I don't have any fear about us selling out un-televised games on a Saturday at 3 o'clock against a team with a big away following like Wolves. I have my doubts however, that we'll be able to sell out midweek night kick-offs against the likes of Portsmouth and Fulham etc. I suppose time will tell. Chelsea's crowds haven't exactly gone through the roof since they came into money - okay so they pretty much always sell out the Bridge (at 41000) but away from home they're still a little hit and miss.

But Chelsea have never had a big support, they've had to build the extra from nothing. We've got a lot of fans that don't go to games who will be instantly caught up if/when we start winning things. Add the none UK fans that LAHAD mentions and it would only seem prudent to start planning for expansion now

lets all have a disco wrote:

Craig Bardsley wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:

King Kev wrote:

City's first home game of the season, against Wolves on Saturday, has not sold out

That really is piss-poor!

Mate chill yer boots its a handful in the expensive seats up top with the living dead.
It will be full on Satdi,no danger.

I think you're probably right LAHAD, I don't have any fear about us selling out un-televised games on a Saturday at 3 o'clock against a team with a big away following like Wolves. I have my doubts however, that we'll be able to sell out midweek night kick-offs against the likes of Portsmouth and Fulham etc. I suppose time will tell. Chelsea's crowds haven't exactly gone through the roof since they came into money - okay so they pretty much always sell out the Bridge (at 41000) but away from home they're still a little hit and miss.

If we win some trophies and start doing well,the extra circa 10-12k will be filled no doubt.
The Rags sell 75k nearly every week,we will get our fair share of overseas characters and Japanese Tourists.

I think we'd need a plane crash for our support to ever compare to theirs m8! And I don't say that with the intention to offend anyone but ever since Munich they've been the global institution they are and their success in recent years and just cemented that.

irblinx wrote:

Craig Bardsley wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:

King Kev wrote:

City's first home game of the season, against Wolves on Saturday, has not sold out

That really is piss-poor!

Mate chill yer boots its a handful in the expensive seats up top with the living dead.
It will be full on Satdi,no danger.

I think you're probably right LAHAD, I don't have any fear about us selling out un-televised games on a Saturday at 3 o'clock against a team with a big away following like Wolves. I have my doubts however, that we'll be able to sell out midweek night kick-offs against the likes of Portsmouth and Fulham etc. I suppose time will tell. Chelsea's crowds haven't exactly gone through the roof since they came into money - okay so they pretty much always sell out the Bridge (at 41000) but away from home they're still a little hit and miss.

But Chelsea have never had a big support, they've had to build the extra from nothing. We've got a lot of fans that don't go to games who will be instantly caught up if/when we start winning things. Add the none UK fans that LAHAD mentions and it would only seem prudent to start planning for expansion now

I agree 100%,imagine if we do well over the next 5 years and there is a massive supply for tickets and a waiting list for seasoncards the club will be kicking themselves for not expanding when there wasnt any pressure on the situation.
If you win trophies,build it and they will come.

lets all have a disco wrote:

irblinx wrote:
But Chelsea have never had a big support, they've had to build the extra from nothing. We've got a lot of fans that don't go to games who will be instantly caught up if/when we start winning things. Add the none UK fans that LAHAD mentions and it would only seem prudent to start planning for expansion now

I agree 100%,imagine if we do well over the next 5 years and there is a massive supply for tickets and a waiting list for seasoncards the club will be kicking themselves for not expanding when there wasnt any pressure on the situation.
If you win trophies,build it and they will come.

Quite right.

You plan NOW, not in 3 years. Suddenly saying 'DOH we need more seats'.

Why this is debateable is beyond me, it's blindingly obvious.

I remember that young, skinny, Mr LAHAD posting a very impressive pic of how the stadium would look with 3 tiers all round.
Any chance of finding it Mate......Just for another look....it was an excellent piece of work.

irblinx wrote:

Craig Bardsley wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:

King Kev wrote:

City's first home game of the season, against Wolves on Saturday, has not sold out

That really is piss-poor!

Mate chill yer boots its a handful in the expensive seats up top with the living dead.
It will be full on Satdi,no danger.

I think you're probably right LAHAD, I don't have any fear about us selling out un-televised games on a Saturday at 3 o'clock against a team with a big away following like Wolves. I have my doubts however, that we'll be able to sell out midweek night kick-offs against the likes of Portsmouth and Fulham etc. I suppose time will tell. Chelsea's crowds haven't exactly gone through the roof since they came into money - okay so they pretty much always sell out the Bridge (at 41000) but away from home they're still a little hit and miss.

But Chelsea have never had a big support, they've had to build the extra from nothing. We've got a lot of fans that don't go to games who will be instantly caught up if/when we start winning things. Add the none UK fans that LAHAD mentions and it would only seem prudent to start planning for expansion now

15 years ago Chelsea fans in Cornwall near me were like hens teeth. Now I'm surrounded by them. City will take a lot of that market!

Mind you, they are a fickle lot. I remember in the 70s they'd get shite crowds then all of a sudden spring out 55,000 for a cup game. I think Chelsea's fans tend to go completely underground in hard times, whereas we City fans just keep on fighting and fuck everybody else.

I did notice a load of empty seats against Hull which, given their now-consistent success, is piss-poor.

john68 wrote:I remember that young, skinny, Mr LAHAD posting a very impressive pic of how the stadium would look with 3 tiers all round.
Any chance of finding it Mate......Just for another look....it was an excellent piece of work.

Here you go pal.

Mr LAHAD Sir.....I think I love you....THANK YOU!

That piece of work looks superb.

That should go into the classic posts section...so we can drool over what the future could look like.

How about sticking on a 4th tier for 2020? Haha

I remember when people were discussing on here a couple of years back whether the third tier was possible etc and I thought "pie in the sky....we're NEVER gonna need that"

hahahahahhaaha love it these days

john68 wrote:Mr LAHAD Sir.....I think I love you....THANK YOU!

That piece of work looks superb.

That should go into the classic posts section...so we can drool over what the future could look like.

Here is a link for a bigger version.

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/8827/thirdtier.png

From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

Craig Bardsley wrote:...Chelsea's crowds haven't exactly gone through the roof since they came into money - okay so they pretty much always sell out the Bridge (at 41000) but away from home they're still a little hit and miss.

My brother inlaw is a lifelong Chelsea fan, he had to stop going to matches a couple of seasons ago due to the crazy price increases. Thankfully we shouldnt see the same sort of thing here.

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

I can't see how it can be true as I watched the game on Sky and there wasn't any empty seats on view.

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

John,
My contact is 100% on this. Also there are season tickets available if you want one.

Look at how they have applied for a license to stage 6 concerts next summer at the stadium, they need the money

bluwes wrote:

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

John,
My contact is 100% on this. Also there are season tickets available if you want one.

Look at how they have applied for a license to stage 6 concerts next summer at the stadium, they need the money

Old Baconface won't be happy with that - remember when he blamed Rod Stewart for losing him the title to Lids in 1992! Then again I suppose it gives him another excuse - maybe they should stage a few more Rugby games there as well to knacker the pitch up even more. Let's face it, they're new kit resembles something out of Superleague anyway!

bluwes wrote:

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

John,
My contact is 100% on this. Also there are season tickets available if you want one.

Look at how they have applied for a license to stage 6 concerts next summer at the stadium, they need the money

When you posted that I started to think which of their players we could buy to help them out and the only one I would consider is a £10m for Rio, thats it.

Lionel wrote:

bluwes wrote:

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

John,
My contact is 100% on this. Also there are season tickets available if you want one.

Look at how they have applied for a license to stage 6 concerts next summer at the stadium, they need the money

When you posted that I started to think which of their players we could buy to help them out and the only one I would consider is a £10m for Rio, thats it.

I'd rather saw my own leg off with a plastic knife than see that twat in a sky blue shirt

Lionel wrote:

bluwes wrote:

john68 wrote:

bluwes wrote:From a contact the Rags only got 67,000 on sunday against Brum, despite what the official figures say.

I don't doubt the veracity of that post and of those figure mate and I can see, if they are true, why the rags would be frightened to their financial death to announce them.
It has always been thought (by them) that there were an invisible 10,000 outside the stadium, who couldn't get tickets. If what you posted is true, it means that not only did they have a shortfall on their actual ticket sales, but they have lost that other 10,000 too.
Considering it is the 1st game of the season, with enthusiasm running high....that would mean a massive reduction in the popularity.

Their money men would be (or should be) near to panic stations. The only way they can go is downwards.

John,
My contact is 100% on this. Also there are season tickets available if you want one.

Look at how they have applied for a license to stage 6 concerts next summer at the stadium, they need the money

When you posted that I started to think which of their players we could buy to help them out and the only one I would consider is a £10m for Rio, thats it.

Is there any of them that you would buy?