Interesting statement that outlines how iFollow works financially: Club Statement
Man literally wants the income from other clubs. Why should he get to keep 20,000 I follow sales when his average attendance is 50 blokes and a whippet
His whole logic though is based on away ifollow purchases being direct replacements for fans who would of attended in person
The methodology seems to be in the ok but maybe they could allow the home side to keep the money from away sales up to what their away end holds?
Tellingly it's sad that Colchester could only get 478 of their fans to part with a tenner to watch them.
That’s how it works in L2, 500 for the home team then rest away for the away sales, in L1 they’re doing something based on historical away attendances. In the Championship whoever sells the packages gets all the cash.Yeah, my post was more of a generic 'this is how iFollow works for clubs' rather than a comment on whether it's the right way or not. I wasn't aware of the methodology behind it, so found it quite interesting - I naively assumed that we'd get 100% of iFollow sales from our website / fans (minus any cut that the EFL and iFollow get, of course)
The methodology seems to be in the ok but maybe they could allow the home side to keep the money from away sales up to what their away end holds?
Tellingly it's sad that Colchester could only get 478 of their fans to part with a tenner to watch them.
Because how many are watching illegally down the pub?
That’s my thinking (on both counts). Surely if your away end holds 1500 you should get income from the first 1500, with any more going to the away team. Likewise those with bigger grounds/away ends, they’ve invested in the club’s infrastructure so they can capitalise on ticket sales.
And yes, really poor that Colchester aren’t getting more streaming. What is their average attendance? Suppose you then have to wonder about the demographic of their fan base.
Agreed, its the BCD bit thats causing the issue at the moment. Once grounds are opened back up ticketing arrangements will be as they were previously. When they then allow all games to be streamed, and we all know it will happen eventually, each club will be able to offer their own subscription and keep the money.The future of this is all matches will be streamed, both teams will have the footage and whichever club a supporter buys it from keeps that money. Bigger clubs always want the lion's share and threaten to throw a paddy if they don't get their way and the authorities will cave in.
Don't agree that home team should get all the revenue.
You're just going to encourage pirating if you tell people you need to pay for this game but all the money is going to your league rivals.
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. I assumed there would be some consistency across the EFL, or at a minimum across L1 and L2. Every day is a school day.I think in League Two
That’s how it works in L2, 500 for the home team then rest away for the away sales, in L1 they’re doing something based on historical away attendances. In the Championship whoever sells the packages gets all the cash.
So for every £10 you spend on ifollow CCFC get £8. No other club is making any money.
What Holt is suggesting is that the home team keeps all the revenue generated for that match. With the wage cap that essentially means they’d be on a level playing field with Ipswich, Pompey, Sunderland, Hull etc. It’s ludicrous.
He's on one again
Surely he gets that other clubs are selling many more subscriptions which is why they get more money? Is he going to start wanting shares of away kit sponsorship money too?
He ties himself up in knots so much. Remember when we all thought he was good.
I don't really get the amnosity towards him, he makes a reasonable point about the loss in revenue (granted he ignores any savings from not actually opening the ground to fans and that ifollow away tickets > in number than match tickets to be sold in many cases). He's on the same side as Cov and all the other clubs in this regard.
Sounds just like the PL mentality about not sharing income with the FLHe just seems pissed off that other teams have more fans, and wants a piece of everyone else’s pie, selling about 1or 2 hundred iFollow passed is piss poor, let’s face it the are a non league team punching well above
Sounds just like the PL mentality about not sharing income with the FL
If I was him I'd be too embarrassed to publish figures showing only 99 of your own fans thought it was worth spending a tenner to watch you play.Those takings are painful viewing in all honesty.
True, but the pyramid is sickeningly top heavy with money (as we all know).If I was him I'd be too embarrassed to publish figures showing only 99 of your own fans thought it was worth spending a tenner to watch you play.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?