I can hazard a guess as to how most feel regarding this issue, but I was disgusted to find out CL group games will cost £40 for an adult ticket this year, a 33% price increase. There are already many calling for a boycott for the Genk game and it seems to be taking its toll as there are reportedly thousands of unsold tickets for tonights game.

One of the things I admire about City since their takeover is the fact Cook, even though he was in idiot listened to the fans and he was one of them. City made sure there wouldn't price out their traditionally working class Mancunian fanbase and whilst they are far wealthier the ethos of the club hasn't actually change a big deal. Even now the most expensive City ticket is £42, their CL group games are priced at £25 and they'll sell out without question.

I've spoken to many fans of other clubs that say Chelsea away simply isn't affordable. Spurs and Arsenal charge some away fans £35 whilst we charge Norwich £50. Swansea for instance paid £35 for the Emirates yet have to cough up £47-£50 to see us which is a similar level of football, it's outrageous.

Chelsea have a huge fanbase particularly in the South of England and Greater London/North Surrey in particular but a lot of the fans don't go anymore simply because they can't afford to. The club want a 60,000 seater stadium and we have the fanbase for it, but at these prices we'd be lucky to even half fill it.

One of many reasons why I loathe Bruce Buck, Gourlay and Kenyon is because they simply have no regard or feelings for the fans of the club and I feel they are just trying to turn us into a Manchester United of the South and Red Sox of USA. They are absolute clueless.

Look at what happened in Germany, fans revolted when they tried to push match tickets up to the equivalent of £20, they can charge less but the likes of Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund are far better run and financially healthier than any of the top 4 or 5 clubs in England.

IMO we are not too far away from a similar revolution in this country. Arsenal tickets for league games are now often on general sale, as are Spurs and same with us. QPR can't even sell out a game and this is their first PL season in 15 years or so. Fulham are trying to charge people £49 to see QPR at home.

Expect 30,000 to show up at best. Last time they charged £47 for a group game we had 24,000 show up. Not on

I can hazard a guess as to how most feel regarding this issue, but I was disgusted to find out CL group games will cost £40 for an adult ticket this year, a 33% price increase. There are already many calling for a boycott for the Genk game and it seems to be taking its toll as there are reportedly thousands of unsold tickets for tonights game.

One of the things I admire about City since their takeover is the fact Cook, even though he was in idiot listened to the fans and he was one of them. City made sure there wouldn't price out their traditionally working class Mancunian fanbase and whilst they are far wealthier the ethos of the club hasn't actually change a big deal. Even now the most expensive City ticket is £42, their CL group games are priced at £25 and they'll sell out without question.

I've spoken to many fans of other clubs that say Chelsea away simply isn't affordable. Spurs and Arsenal charge some away fans £35 whilst we charge Norwich £50. Swansea for instance paid £35 for the Emirates yet have to cough up £47-£50 to see us which is a similar level of football, it's outrageous.

Chelsea have a huge fanbase particularly in the South of England and Greater London/North Surrey in particular but a lot of the fans don't go anymore simply because they can't afford to. The club want a 60,000 seater stadium and we have the fanbase for it, but at these prices we'd be lucky to even half fill it.

One of many reasons why I loathe Bruce Buck, Gourlay and Kenyon is because they simply have no regard or feelings for the fans of the club and I feel they are just trying to turn us into a Manchester United of the South and Red Sox of USA. They are absolute clueless.

Look at what happened in Germany, fans revolted when they tried to push match tickets up to the equivalent of £20, they can charge less but the likes of Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund are far better run and financially healthier than any of the top 4 or 5 clubs in England.

IMO we are not too far away from a similar revolution in this country. Arsenal tickets for league games are now often on general sale, as are Spurs and same with us. QPR can't even sell out a game and this is their first PL season in 15 years or so. Fulham are trying to charge people £49 to see QPR at home.

Expect 30,000 to show up at best. Last time they charged £47 for a group game we had 24,000 show up. Not on

1. City will increase their match day tickets dramatically in the next couple of years.

2. We cant move to a bigger stadium due to CPO and appropriate / available sites in London.

3. How do you know what Buck, Gourley etc feel? I always thought Buck has done a good job. We are signing big players again.

4. This thread is very knee jerky

Edited September 13, 201113 yr by Zola

Agreed Myles. If we were in a flashy new stadium then I could perhaps understand the prices but we're not. I love the Bridge as much as the next person but the prices are ridiculous. If enough fans were to protest then perhaps the club would listen. Without sufficient ticket sales the club is f*cked.

What Zola said, especially number 4.

We do this thread every year, and always have done

Agreed Myles. If we were in a flashy new stadium then I could perhaps understand the prices but we're not. I love the Bridge as much as the next person but the prices are ridiculous. If enough fans were to protest then perhaps the club would listen. Without sufficient ticket sales the club is f*cked.

right....so we all stop going to games then, money stops coming in. We stop signing big talent. Roman disappears.

Yeah sounds great.

If it's been done before then I apologise but I only joined less than a year ago. I would be very surprised if City put up their prices significantly because fans up there are more fickle when it comes to prices and there isn't the attraction of London.

Man Utd even now despite everything don't charge more than £50 a game, I think Liverpool is similar, so I don't see City breaking there prices anytime soon, in terms of fanbase they can't compete with United or even Liverpool so they will have to keep their prices below United.

right....so we all stop going to games then, money stops coming in. We stop signing big talent. Roman disappears.

Yeah sounds great.

Nobody is saying that but sometimes you have to meet the fans half way.

Take Rosenborg for instance. 24,000 attendance and tickets £47 each. The club would make £1,128,000 on match day tickets alone.

If Rosenborg had even been priced at a reasonable £30 a ticket, we'd have had 40,000 in easily. In total the club would have made £1,200,000 on tickets alone. Plus they would have made more on shirt sales, merchandise and programmes etc.

Sometimes you have to spend to save.

....And about 1/3 of that 1.2 Million would be used to pay Terry, Drogba and Lampard's wages for one week of work.....

Edited September 13, 201113 yr by Zola

We do this thread every year, and always have done

Yorkley is right, this thread comes up every season and my response will always be the same. OF COURSE the club has lost touch with its fans – it happened a long time ago. But we are not alone and I would imagine many clubs are pretty much the same these days, unless we’re talking lower divison clubs and the likes of AFC Wimbledon. Any club trying to be successful and hit the big time is going to over stretch themselves with big singings and a huge wage bill and will have to fleece the punters to go some way to try and cover the costs. The club will try and convince us that us supporters are important but they really couldn’t give a toss who comes to the matches as long as numbers are coming through the turnstiles, paying over inflated prices for food and drink and parting with their hard earned dough in the wonderful megastore. Let’s face it, the likes of you, me and the 70 year old bloke who’s been coming since the ‘50’s who will grab a bite to eat away from the ground and go to the pub they always have done for a pre match beer (or 5!) and then watch the match with just the cost of the ticket going to our beloved club are not such an attractive proposition in modern football. The club will not shed any tears for us not going to games, all the time they have new style “fans” as long as those attending have the urge to spend, spend, spend………………………..and the old argument about the atmosphere being rubbish because of how are support is made up – you think the club are bothered about that as long as the cash keeps rolling?

Shame but it’s the way it is and I don’t think you can compare us & Arsenal etc with the northern clubs, ‘cos it’s always been cheaper up north and always will be ‘cos they don’t earn a great deal from racing pigeons or breeding whippets or going down tut pit which doesn’t actually exist any more anyway!

I’ve often wondered how much of a clubs income comes through gate receipts. A full house at £50 a ticket only covers the wages of a fraction of the squad and that is before the cost of the clubs match day staff, policing, electricity and lord knows what else they have to spend to host a fixture.

I assume that at the top clubs in England the vast majority of income comes through TV deals, sponsorship and prize money. Even merchandise probably generates a much greater profit than ticket sales.

Anyway, I agree with the sentiment that cheaper tickets and a ground full of fans is better than expensive tickets and a ¾ full stadium. As the pictures go around the world Chelsea’s all important global image could be done a lot of harm by pictures of empty plastic seats.

As for City, they can’t be compared. They are not really interested in commercial factors. Their sole aim is to promote Abu Dhabi through creating the world’s best football team. It would not surprise me to see them paying fans £25 to come to games to ensure that the images of the Etihad stadium show advertising hoardings emblazoned with ‘Visit Abu Dhabi’ backed by packed stands.

It can be noted that even with discounted tickets, City struggled to get the punters in for their FA cup games last year despite the fact that they were seemingly desperate to win a trophy after such a long period.

So I don’t know if it suggests losing touch with the fans or just a strange commercial decision to hike up the prices.

One other thing. Surely the club must know that as each year goes by, there is an increasing apathy towards these group stage matches? It’s practically impossible for the top clubs to fail to progress (by god Arsenal and Liverpool have tried their best at times!) which means that it isn’t very exciting and the novelty of playing European teams died years ago. So I’d think this is another factor that would lean them towards cheaper tickets to get bums on seats.

All I'm saying is being in London adds to the expense.

As of Monday, there will be 5 Chelsea home games to pay for.

1 Adult Ticket

Fulham - £25

Genk - £40

Arsenal - £64

Everton - £55

Swansea - £50

That's the best part of £250 in a short space of time on match tickets alone, for people like myself that have to travel now from outside of London travel expenses for those games would be about 1/2 of that £250. I don't see how that is sustainable, sooner or later even the tourists will get bored and that is when they will have to worry, the last thing you want to do is end up like Arsenal whereby the genuine fans are priced out and the stadium becomes like a soulless bowl.

Myles, I agree with your sentiments 100% but what Nibs said is bang on. This happened a long time ago. It's a gradual process that is designed to draw every last penny out of our pockets, year on year, and as a result, less people or ''real fans'' will not be able to afford a ticket.

It's a sad, sad, state of affairs, but to be honest, I don't lose any sleep over it. I just accept that that's the way it is now, and ''treat'' myself to a few games a season where I can afford it. Infact, I resent the club/football in general for being so greedy to the point where even if I could afford a season ticket, I would'nt take it now. Nearly all involved in football these days earn disgusting amounts of money, and couldn't care less about the common man. Money is the bottom line.

Mourinho made a comment a few years back that supported a ticket price of £50, saying that is was no different than going to the theatre. I disagree. It should be available to everyone, not an 'elite' group. I can easily spend £100 on a match day, and I don't have any other family to account for, so how do people with kids afford it?

I said a long time ago that before long, nearly every club in the premiership would be bought out by a rich investor and that it would eventually spell doom for 'Joe public'.

You are correct in saying that gate reciepts only make up a small fraction of revenue. The vast majority comes from TV deals, and sponsorship. Sid Lowe has an excellent article on The Guardian at the moment regarding TV money in Spanish football, where it's distributed even more unjustly. Clubs like Barca and Madrid make somewhere in the region of 120-130m Euros a season on TV rights alone. Lower league teams make 10% of that.

The bubble will eventually burst.

Just out of interest, why are you paying different prices for L'Arse, Everton and Swansea? AND, apparently overpaying for the first two.

All clubs are the same, from the PL to lower leagues they all rip off their own fans & sadly all fans take it no matter what the club charges, its just blind loyalty something which clubs havent an ounce of towards us fans.

Interesting article here

In the 20th year since the First Division clubs broke away from the Football League to keep the new satellite TV fortunes and form the Premier League, money has transformed the game – and the price of watching it. As the gradual changes each season are contemplated – 6.5% increases at Arsenal this year; prices frozen at Stoke City, the £10 adult ticket at Blackburn Rovers – awareness fades of the mighty disparity between what fans pay now and the prices before the Premier League was formed.

In 1989-90, the year of Lord Justice Taylor's report following the Hillsborough disaster, in which he recommended stadiums become all‑seat, fans watched Alex Ferguson's Manchester United play the very top clubs for a cheapest price of £3.50. With cumulative inflation of 77.1% since, according to the Bank of England, United supporters who stood on the Stretford End or United Road terraces then would now pay an equivalent £6.20 to watch Ferguson's Premier League champions. But the cheapest ticket at all-seat Old Trafford this season is £28, lower than at other top clubs yet still representing inflation of 700%. Mostly, United's prices are higher; the £28 seats are available only in the lower tiers of the East and West Stands, not in swathes as they were across the terraces of old.

Matches against the clubs in Arsenal's current category A price, Chelsea, Liverpool, Tottenham Hotspur, Manchester United and Manchester City, could be watched in 1989-90, on the North Bank at Highbury, for £5. Now, at the 60,000-seat Emirates Stadium, which is becoming noted for high prices and including English football's first £100 seat, the cheapest ticket for a category A game is £51. That represents inflation, since the Taylor Report, of 920%.

After the wreckage of Hillsborough, the Football Supporters' Association argued against all-seat stadiums, principally because it believed clubs would use them as a platform to raise ticket prices. When addressing and rejecting that argument, Taylor famously wrote in his report: "Clubs may well wish to charge somewhat more for seats than for standing but it should be possible to plan a price structure which suits the cheapest seats to the pockets of those presently paying to stand."

The judge cited a price of £6 for seating at Ibrox Park, quaint compared to the prices now at the grounds, rebuilt according to Taylor's recommendations and which formed the foundation for football's revival. "I do not think Taylor saw the commercial revolution around the corner, beginning with the increase of television money," Rogan Taylor, chair of the FSA then, now director of Liverpool University's football industries group, says.

"Of course, the grounds have improved out of all recognition, but the ticket price increases have not mostly been necessary to pay for that – they are now going into the arms race of escalating players' wages. When I go to Liverpool now [cheapest adult price £45 for category A matches compared to £4 in 1989-90] I don't mostly see a bourgeois, middle-class crowd, but ordinary people who must be stretching to afford it. And the two groups who were clearly excluded when the prices went up were older people who had stuck with the game through some terrible times, and young people."

For all the game's problems in the 1980s, watching football was a rite of passage in which children, mostly boys, graduated from being taken to matches, to watching as young men, with very few excluded because it cost too much.

The figures from 1989-90, collated for the Labour government's Football Task Force, show the cheapest season ticket at Anfield was just £60 and £96 at United – the equivalent prices with inflation would be £106 and £170 now – but the actual lowest-priced season tickets this season are £725 at Liverpool and £532 at Old Trafford (1,108% and 454% inflation respectively).

Clubs were usually neither sophisticated nor commercial enough then to conduct demographic analysis of their own supporters, but the memory and images of young people at grounds are borne out by research done at the time by Leicester University's Sir Norman Chester Centre. Surveys of fans were carried out for Coventry City, in the old First Division, finding in 1983 that 22% of supporters were aged 16-20. At Aston Villa in 1992, 25% of the crowd was 16-20; at Arsenal, 17% of fans were 16-20.

Premier League surveys for years show a consistent reduction in the proportion of young people, who pay full price from 16. By 2006-07 the proportion of fans aged 16-24 was 9%; in 2007-08, the figure was 11%. Last season it bounced back to 19%, which the Premier League said was due to improvements in the way its survey is carried out.

According to the Premier League's research, 13% of season-ticket holders are under 16 and the average age of an adult supporter is 41 – the core whose loyalty was nurtured when attending games was affordable to almost all.

"We must accept that some people feel they are excluded because they cannot afford the prices," the Premier League's spokesman, Dan Johnson, acknowledged. "But many clubs work hard to attract fans with affordable deals, and there are different opportunities to attend.

"Twenty years ago many people were excluded for different reasons: the atmosphere was hostile and many grounds inadequate. We argue the experience has improved enormously, crowds have increased hugely, and a wider section of society feel comfortable coming to football."

Crowds do remain at historic highs. The average Old Trafford attendance last season was 74,864, just below United's 75,769 capacity, while at the Emirates Arsenal played to crowds averaging 59,930, nudging full houses of 60,361. Overall, Premier League grounds were full to 92% of capacity, down from a high of 94% in 2005‑06.

Clubs in poorer, northern areas, including Bolton, Blackburn and Wigan, are working hardest to maintain crowds, so offering the cheapest deals. In this recession, though, the top clubs cannot assume fans will keep paying a large slice of their incomes on expensively priced football tickets either. On Tuesday, more than 4,000 Old Trafford tickets remained on sale for United's match on Monday against Spurs. After years of sell-outs United – since their US-based owners, the Glazers, began to raise ticket prices – have not been guaranteed to fill the ground.

"Some Premier League clubs do offer good deals," says Malcolm Clarke, chair of the Football Supporters' Federation, "but the prices at top clubs, and particularly London clubs, are mostly outrageous. They are beyond the reach of many younger people who used to have access to football, and now, if they are interested, they are watching the game in the pub.

"Football, by tradition, was always accessible to almost everybody, and in the current economic climate, with jobs and standards of living under threat, there is a great danger an increasing section of the community will be priced out."

Football's glittering success since the Premier League was formed tells a contradictory story: the clubs operate well-respected community programmes aimed at "social inclusion" for young people in their neighbourhoods – while mostly pricing them out of going to matches.

Just out of interest, why are you paying different prices for L'Arse, Everton and Swansea? AND, apparently overpaying for the first two.

The prices are different according to Categories. Arsenal is an AA game, Everton is an A game and Swansea is a B game.

so what is a fulham game then at £25, i live not far from swansea so ill be looking to get a ticket when we play the swans away. £50 for swansea is way way too much

I think the club has shot itself in the foot here, 40000 x £15 and £25 is not gonna be a million miles away from 30000 x £40, and if the cup games I've been to since the sensible pricing policy came about in 2003 are anything to go by then the megastore will probably take quite a hit as well, it has always been jammed full of kids with their parents at these games, people who only make the very occasional visit nowadays and make the most of it availing themselves of the facilities on offer, still we'll see the result of this price hike in an hour or so. I get the feeling though that it's going to be our first home cup game in almost 4 years where you'll see a lot of empty seats on show.

I do feel a little annoyed at the club here, since 2003 when Ken Bates first dropped prices to attract more fans in every domestic cup game has been a sell out, or very near. I've pretty much given up on attending home games regularly now and usually plump for 2 or 3 cup games, it's really the only reason I bother renewing my membership, which is in itself a ticket tax as it's not good for much else. Surely the atmosphere generated by a full house coupled with the introduction to the live match experience for a lot of young blues is worth whatever the shortfall in revenue may be, and I really don't feel that it would be a significant amount once other takings from the many retail outlets are added in. I really can't understand the club's thinking on this one.

Edited September 13, 201113 yr by MKBlue

I think attendance was 33,000 today - can't imagine Genk will be much more than 20,000. The ecoonomy is bad, we don't have THAT BIG a fan base and not much novelty in Europe anymore as already said.

Yeah 33,000 tonight for our first CL match and the return of Ballack.

In the end the back pocket is the only way to get a message through. Rosenborg with only 24000 was a tipping point to some of the CL prices coming down at the end of the Jose era, perhaps this will be similar.

In the end it all comes down to balancing the books and maximising revenue. With a smallish stadium and a big wage bill to pay, the high ticket prices are to be expected in a way. Something is going to have to give in the long run, and if we can't expand Stamford Bridge, the only way the ticket prices will come down will be if the club moves to a new ground.

Yeah 33,000 tonight for our first CL match and the return of Ballack.

In the end the back pocket is the only way to get a message through. Rosenborg with only 24000 was a tipping point to some of the CL prices coming down at the end of the Jose era, perhaps this will be similar.

In the end it all comes down to balancing the books and maximising revenue. With a smallish stadium and a big wage bill to pay, the high ticket prices are to be expected in a way. Something is going to have to give in the long run, and if we can't expand Stamford Bridge, the only way the ticket prices will come down will be if the club moves to a new ground.

I cant see why anyone thinks if we move to a new bigger stadium ticket prices will drop, they wont someone will have to pay for the new stadium & it'll be us fans in the long run, have prices dropped at Arsenal? no yet they get an extra 30,000+ every home game & are now one of the dearest clubs for ticket prices.

The only way ticket prices will drop is if fans vote with their feet by not turning up on a regular basis & that also goes for away fans & the club bring in a wage cap, otherwise tickets will continue to rise, it wont be that long before a normal ticket is £100, unless us fans do something about it before then then we'll only have ourselves to blame once we're all priced out totally.

I dont think football is for the working class anymore. I mean im 28 and this season is the first season i have been able to get a season ticket and to be honest to me it was a lot of money but it was something i had to have at least once in my lifetime so i went for it, will i renew next season, im not sure. I dont think the clubs (not just ours) worry too much if you dont turn up because other people will. If chelsea dont sell enough tickets to season ticket holders or memebers they will just stick them on sale to the public and they will get sold that way. I wish that it wasnt that way but i cant see anything we can do to change it.

The prices are different according to Categories. Arsenal is an AA game, Everton is an A game and Swansea is a B game.

I thought that related to the chances of getting a ticket and loyalty points. I didn't realise we had different prices for those categories. Ooops!

I cant see why anyone thinks if we move to a new bigger stadium ticket prices will drop, they wont someone will have to pay for the new stadium & it'll be us fans in the long run, have prices dropped at Arsenal? no yet they get an extra 30,000+ every home game & are now one of the dearest clubs for ticket prices.

The only way ticket prices will drop is if fans vote with their feet by not turning up on a regular basis & that also goes for away fans & the club bring in a wage cap, otherwise tickets will continue to rise, it wont be that long before a normal ticket is £100, unless us fans do something about it before then then we'll only have ourselves to blame once we're all priced out totally.

That is certainly true of Arsenal, but they had waiting lists for years to get season tickets at Highbury. I think it came to the point here this season where there was no wait, and the loyalty points required were the lowest ever.

If we built a ground at 60,000 we simply couldn't fill it charging what we do. I think if that price were more reasonable then that kind of capacity could be justified. That was my argument.

Sorry I didn't want this to become a stadium discussion, because that has been done to death. Just out of interest, where did you find that article you posted? It was quite well written.

I think attendance was 33,000 today - can't imagine Genk will be much more than 20,000. The ecoonomy is bad, we don't have THAT BIG a fan base and not much novelty in Europe anymore as already said.

I was at the game last night but I don't see why anyone in their right mind* would pay upwards of £40 to watch us play a bunch minnows from the Belgian league, in a game that probably won't have any bearing on anything, at night when you have to get up for work the next day, and it's live on the box. I guarantee you if I had watched the game at home last night, I would have enjoyed a better atmosphere and had a better view! As it was I was stuck up in the heavens. Gourley has got it all wrong, and I can't believe his short-sightedness. Higher prices do not necessarily equate to more revenue. It's basic economics. A full ground is the preferable option every single time, for so many reasons. Last night was an important game, it was against decent opposition, it was the return of Ballack. There were less than 34,000. Mata must have been looking around thinking, "Is this the big club I joined..?".

* I am not in my right mind.

Of course the other option to guarantee higher attendance is to force season ticket holders to buy tickets to all group and cup matches (I think Man Utd may do this) though I'm not sure this would go down too well so they probably won't