Could the rugger boys embarass us with the first 27,000 attendance at the revamped Ashton Gate?

[Merrick's Marvels]

4 hours ago, Miahdennehy said:

Just because you repeat a lie often enough., it doesn't make it true.

Loving the hypocrisy here. Try telling your fellow gAssholes that mate - in fact, why not propose it as a new club motto for your lot. It fits perfectly.

"We took 40,000 to Wembley last year" your nillionaire owner publicly stated just a couple of weeks ago, this being just the latest example in a litany of lies and deluded statements to emanate from the mouths of the blue few in recent times. 

[ChippenhamRed]

4 minutes ago, Ashton1 said:

Would be nice to see our stadium full , just can't see it. Bristol rugby club has never had massive support compared to us/football. But you never know in big one of games. We will see . 

Bristol city v Newcastle / Aston villa ??? 23-25k me thinks ?? 

No segregation means two clubs can both bring as many as they like. Bath in particular. It's not just about Bristol's support.

[glynriley]

1 hour ago, ChippenhamRed said:

....which is exactly why your "it's not fair" argument does not stack up.

The thing is, by doing £10 tickets, you limit the number of times you can offer up discounts as the club have always said buying a ST is the cheapest way to watch.

If you discount tickets to no lower than the equivalent cost of a ST, you can offer them more often.

There will be plenty of games next season where the crowd could do with a little boost, games just before Christmas, or when the likes of Burton, Rotherham and Barnsley roll into town. By discounting to no lower than the ST match by match price, these sorts of reductions can be implemented more frequently. A West Stand ST holder is paying the best part of £25 per match, how many times could you offer £10 tickets there before you need to cut off the deal? They could do 10 games at that price if they felt the need, couldn't do that at a tenner.

 

 

[semblar]

3 minutes ago, glynriley said:

The thing is, by doing £10 tickets, you limit the number of times you can offer up discounts as the club have always said buying a ST is the cheapest way to watch.

If you discount tickets to no lower than the equivalent cost of a ST, you can offer them more often.

There will be plenty of games next season where the crowd could do with a little boost, games just before Christmas, or when the likes of Burton, Rotherham and Barnsley roll into town. By discounting to no lower than the ST match by match price, these sorts of reductions can be implemented more frequently. A West Stand ST holder is paying the best part of £25 per match, how many times could you offer £10 tickets there before you need to cut off the deal? They could do 10 games at that price if they felt the need, couldn't do that at a tenner.

 

 

Assuming £30 POTD for non-promotional matches, they could offer £10 tickets five times before it became less than £25 average - the sixth would take it below. I really can't see them doing a £10 offer six times in a season....

[...]

I am not a rugby fan, as such, but I like to see Bristol succeed - with the obvious exception.

I hope Bristol rugby fill the ground every bloody week.

Good luck to them.

Their success can only help BCFC.

 

Uncle TFR

[glynriley]

7 minutes ago, semblar said:

Assuming £30 POTD for non-promotional matches, they could offer £10 tickets five times before it became less than £25 average - the sixth would take it below. I really can't see them doing a £10 offer six times in a season....

Do you really think POTD prices in the West stand will be £30?

I'd be surprised, they were  £31 and £33 in the Dolman last season for non members.

[Nogbad the Bad]

I think people may be overestimating the pulling power of Aston Villa and Newcastle.

Do they sell out stadiums wherever they go?

Not to my knowledge, and unless City are doing particularly well I don't reckon the fixtures will sell out at AG either.

I'm thinking in terms of an 18-19k average next season, with the top gates about 22-23k.

Which in itself is pretty good imo., especially considering it would be our best average since 1980, our last season in the old Div.1 when we averaged 18,932.

[Rich]

1 hour ago, Miahdennehy said:

That Rovers STOLE the ground- they just didn't. They did a clever bit of business, but to say they stole it is ridiculous. Did Bristol City steal the money from their creditors in 1982? No, they had got themselves into all sorts of trouble and took what was- at the time- the most sensible route they could take.

Clauses are put in contracts for all sorts of 'reasons' , but when they are invoked, it's because a company wants to use them to their advantage, something Rovers know all about when Sainsburys did exactly that.

I totally get football rivalry, to a degree I even enjoy it, but when fans just start making things up to suit, I think it gets a bit daft.

That Rovers did a clever bit of business is not in doubt. Just like they tried to do a clever bit of business in making a last ditch offer for Ashton Gate in 82. Which would have done nothing for the creditors but benefitted BRFC greatly.

The more you deny something happened, doesn't mean it's untrue.

Arthur Holmes was installed as the savior and chairman of Bristol Rugby, he was a BRFC supporter.

He loaned them the money to build the centenary stand, as they could not afford to build it themselves.

He then loaned them money to keep going, and then invited BRFC in as tenants to cover the interest on his loans.

Two years passed by and in that period a deal was agreed between Holmes and Dunford about forming the Memorial stadium company.

The rugby club had been relegated and were losing money hand over fist, Holmes wanted what was now £2m back from the rugby club.

The deal was struck where the company was valued (assets) at £4m. BRFC/Dunford bought a 50% stake in that company for £2m. A clause was put into the contract to allow any party to buy out the other party for £10k should anyone go bankrupt.

Holmes took his £2m leaving the rugby club still short of and still losing money hand over fist.

Within six months of that deal being signed (and I think it was five months), Holmes called in the administrators and filed for bankruptcy. The £10k clause was subsequently invoked and the property wing of Dunfords dairies had purchased £4m of real estate for £2m, though Dunford once quoted it as £6m.

Let's be honest, there was only ever going to be one party going bust, the rugby club.

The rugby club directors were not happy with the deal. Surprisingly, they were less unhappy when land at Filton was taken from the rugby club and distributed amongst the remaining shareholders, including Holmes.

Holmes was then made a life President of BRFC, for what was stated as, "services to the club".

One has to ask why Dunford took the opportunity to explain and try to scotch rumours about the deal, when writing Holmes's obituary, which accounted for about two thirds of it..

[...]

4 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

I think people may be overestimating the pulling power of Aston Villa and Newcastle.

Do they sell out stadiums wherever they go?

Not to my knowledge, and unless City are doing particularly well I don't reckon the fixtures will sell out at AG either.

I'm thinking in terms of an 18-19k average next season, with the top gates about 22-23k.

Which in itself is pretty good imo., especially considering it would be our best average since 1980, our last season in the old Div.1 when we averaged 18,932.

Correct.

 

Uncle TFR

[glynriley]

4 minutes ago, cynic said:

I'm expecting the prices in the West Stand to be close to £40 POTD.

Which makes discounting to £10 extremely unlikely.

As SL once said "I'm not paying for someone else to watch football".

 

Exactly, so if they did feel the need to reduce prices for certain games, making the reduction from £40 to £25 is still a significant saving and does not impact the price a ST holder has payed.

This kind of thing could be rolled out across all stands on a far more regular basis than offering a one off game at £10.

[CotswoldRed]

17 hours ago, cityboy said:

No chance

I'd be amazed if Bristol have more than City. 

[Miah Dennehy]

2 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Loving the hypocrisy here. Try telling your fellow gAssholes that mate - in fact, why not propose it as a new club motto for your lot. It fits perfectly.

"We took 40,000 to Wembley last year" your nillionaire owner publicly stated just a couple of weeks ago, this being just the latest example in a litany of lies and deluded statements to emanate from the mouths of the blue few in recent times. 

Err, hows does that make me a hypocrite/

[Miah Dennehy]

1 hour ago, Rich said:

That Rovers did a clever bit of business is not in doubt. Just like they tried to do a clever bit of business in making a last ditch offer for Ashton Gate in 82. Which would have done nothing for the creditors but benefitted BRFC greatly.

The more you deny something happened, doesn't mean it's untrue.

Arthur Holmes was installed as the savior and chairman of Bristol Rugby, he was a BRFC supporter.

He loaned them the money to build the centenary stand, as they could not afford to build it themselves.

He then loaned them money to keep going, and then invited BRFC in as tenants to cover the interest on his loans.

Two years passed by and in that period a deal was agreed between Holmes and Dunford about forming the Memorial stadium company.

The rugby club had been relegated and were losing money hand over fist, Holmes wanted what was now £2m back from the rugby club.

The deal was struck where the company was valued (assets) at £4m. BRFC/Dunford bought a 50% stake in that company for £2m. A clause was put into the contract to allow any party to buy out the other party for £10k should anyone go bankrupt.

Holmes took his £2m leaving the rugby club still short of and still losing money hand over fist.

Within six months of that deal being signed (and I think it was five months), Holmes called in the administrators and filed for bankruptcy. The £10k clause was subsequently invoked and the property wing of Dunfords dairies had purchased £4m of real estate for £2m, though Dunford once quoted it as £6m.

Let's be honest, there was only ever going to be one party going bust, the rugby club.

The rugby club directors were not happy with the deal. Surprisingly, they were less unhappy when land at Filton was taken from the rugby club and distributed amongst the remaining shareholders, including Holmes.

Holmes was then made a life President of BRFC, for what was stated as, "services to the club".

One has to ask why Dunford took the opportunity to explain and try to scotch rumours about the deal, when writing Holmes's obituary, which accounted for about two thirds of it..

I'm saying that Rovers didn't steal the ground (look up steal in the dictionary if you want) , the fact is they didn't steal it. That really is a fact and not a matter of opinion.

[BigTone]

13 minutes ago, Miahdennehy said:

I'm saying that Rovers didn't steal the ground (look up steal in the dictionary if you want) , the fact is they didn't steal it. That really is a fact and not a matter of opinion.

Acquired using dubious methods then

[Trueredsupporter]

Could the rugger boys embarass us with the first 27,000 attendance at the revamped Ashton Gate? No and us is now part of the same thing in Bristol Sport.

[BigTone]

2 hours ago, Taxi for Rennie said:

I am not a rugby fan, as such, but I like to see Bristol succeed - with the obvious exception.

I hope Bristol rugby fill the ground every bloody week.

Good luck to them.

Their success can only help BCFC.

 

Uncle TFR

Bloody Hell Unk., I'm agreeing with you again !!!

[BS4 on Tour...]

The first full house at our revamped stadium will be anything but an embarrassment - I don't care if it's generated by the football or rugby team. It will still be a great day for Mr Landsown and South Bristol.

[PFree]

It's time to open up and embrace Bristol Sport, in answering the OP's original question, I'm not sure how Bristol Sport can lose when we are all in the same camp??

Rugby isn't my game but good luck to them and well done, deserved.

[Major Isewater]

20 hours ago, CodeRed said:

 

 

Going forward Bristol Rugby are the primary BS brand. Increased exposure and upstream marketing opportunities enabled by brand focused media exposure will drive revenue growth and generate increased footfall and profit maximisation. Therefore stadium occupancy can be expected to surpass secondary brands.

 

Bristol Sport

[Bristol Rob]

Still not sure why anyone would be embarrassed.

[Red Army 75]

I think Bristol will sell out a few times next season good luck to them . Rovers will be spewing. Hopefully we will come close a couple of times as well . It looks like a good move getting them down the gate

[RedorDead BCFC]

I wouldn't be surprised if there is a bit of clever accounts going on with the ground share. Bristol Rugby pay X amount to rent the ground for BCFC increasing the income on BCFC side to compete better. 

I don't think Rugby has the same sort of hindrance do they as FFP do they? That being the case they won't care about running zero profit. 

But as to the title of the thread I can't see why Bristol Rugby challenging us to selling out the stadium first, but I doubt the average attendances will be higher. 

[42nite]

27,,000

I hope someone's sorted the parking by then!

[havanatopia]

16 minutes ago, 42nite said:

27,,000

I hope someone's sorted the parking by then!

Number 1 priority bar none.

What is the latest on Ashton Gate station meanwhile?

[weeble]

8 hours ago, Xiled said:

If I remember correctly, Rovers paid £10,000 to buy Bristol Rugby's remaining ownership of the Memorial Ground in 1998 when the rugby club went into administration.  This clause was put in place to protect both tenants in the event that either entered financial difficulties.  The idea being that sport could continue on the site.  Rover's total cost of ownership by that point was just over £1M.

13 years later, Rovers thought they had sold the stadium site to Sainsbury's for £30M.

Had the sale to Sainsbury's gone through, would any of the proceeds been channelled to the rugby club?  I don't think so.  Good piece of business for Rovers but all at the expense of Bristol Rugby.

Tell me where the lie is.

The rugby club were going to sell the entire ground to a distribution company's pension fund for £2.3m. Rovers paid £2.3m for a 50% share of the ground. The ground was then owned by the Memorial Stadium Company with each club holding half the shares. If either club entered administration, the other could buy the remaining half for £10,000, ensuring there was somewhere for either/both clubs to play.

No, the proceeds of any sale would not have gone to the rugby club. They are legally a separate entity, in exactly the same way City are from their pre 1982 incarnation.

[Bristol Rob]

Who cares about how Rovers got the Mem.

They had a contract with a clause that allowed them to do so, just like Sainsbury's had a contract that allowed them to walk away from buying the Mem.

And it isn't as if the blue few are anything but completely accepting of this. They haven't moaned, complained or offered to spend their money in different shops. No sir.

[Son of Fred]

11 hours ago, glynriley said:

And rightly so. Why should someone who may only go to that one game get a better deal than someone who has committed themselves, and their money, for the entire season.

If they want to do one off offers to get people through the gates, the price should not be lower than a ST holder has paid.

My ST in the Dolman works out at £17.43 per match so if they were to sell an equivalent seat at a discounted rate the price should be £17.50 .

Don't think many ST holders would have a problem with doing deals like this to help fill the ground, especially for games against the lesser lights.

Not sure anyone should get upset about one or two cheap deal games..if it benefits the club and let's face it,were supporters,but its not surprising how precious some can be!

[Jack Dawe]

Can we - ie City fans, on a City forum - not make up lies, half-truths, b0ll0cks, full on delusions, the lot, on our own bloody forum, without a Few coming on here correcting us at every f&#*ing turn? The ones on this thread now, they seem to be self-appointed moderators on here, prissly going about wagging their (many) Few fingers at every perceived untruth and slight to their "good" name. If not here, where can we go to chat lies, half-truths and delusions among ourselves without a couple of Few tossers following us going (screws up face, adopts whiny voice) "you can't say that, that's not true, how dare you..."?

There's enough of them on the dreary, tiresome thread named after them. What next? Blue Fewers in the Robins, the 3 Lions, outside El Rincon, on a Saturday next season, eavesdropping on every conversation, moderating any sh1te spoken about their precious club, tapping miscreants on the shoulder and hissing (face/whiny voice): you can't say that, not true?

You've got you're own bloody thread, Fewers, isn't that enough for you? Can you just leave us alone now on the rest of this place? I'm not and never am on your forum, how about you p1ss off back to yours (where you can say what you like about us, I do not care) or at least hover on the thread dedicated to you so you can be sure we are still obsessed with you and will never forget you, and leave the rest of us alone, so we can do what we always used to do before the internet ie talk sh1te about you tw4ts when we fancy (amongst other topics of conversation, occasionally) without you ever knowing about it and sticking your sensitive Few Blue noses into our business? Ffs!

If any Villa or Newcastle fans want to come on and tick us off though: please, you're more than welcome...

 

[JamesBCFC]

13 hours ago, Robert the bruce said:

The club wouldn't do it.would be backlash from the st holders..

Would be none from me, my season ticket works out at under £6 a game. I am an u22, so cheaper than the full adult, but even so, why would 1 game where everyone pays £10 create a huge backlash? ST holders still get a better deal if they go to all the games, which is the point of it, no?

anyone who would moan about that is incredibly petty imo

[HoldenBall]

4 hours ago, Jack Dawe said:

Can we - ie City fans, on a City forum - not make up lies, half-truths, b0ll0cks, full on delusions, the lot, on our own bloody forum, without a Few coming on here correcting us at every f&#*ing turn? The ones on this thread now, they seem to be self-appointed moderators on here, prissly going about wagging their (many) Few fingers at every perceived untruth and slight to their "good" name. If not here, where can we go to chat lies, half-truths and delusions among ourselves without a couple of Few tossers following us going (screws up face, adopts whiny voice) "you can't say that, that's not true, how dare you..."?

There's enough of them on the dreary, tiresome thread named after them. What next? Blue Fewers in the Robins, the 3 Lions, outside El Rincon, on a Saturday next season, eavesdropping on every conversation, moderating any sh1te spoken about their precious club, tapping miscreants on the shoulder and hissing (face/whiny voice): you can't say that, not true?

You've got you're own bloody thread, Fewers, isn't that enough for you? Can you just leave us alone now on the rest of this place? I'm not and never am on your forum, how about you p1ss off back to yours (where you can say what you like about us, I do not care) or at least hover on the thread dedicated to you so you can be sure we are still obsessed with you and will never forget you, and leave the rest of us alone, so we can do what we always used to do before the internet ie talk sh1te about you tw4ts when we fancy (amongst other topics of conversation, occasionally) without you ever knowing about it and sticking your sensitive Few Blue noses into our business? Ffs!

If any Villa or Newcastle fans want to come on and tick us off though: please, you're more than welcome...

 

The 15ers normally get touchy when it hits home with them.. a home that they probably stole..