Leeds away £47

[Guinness Guzzler]

Ironic you say that, since Leeds are literally offering a reciprocal deal.

As we have turned down the opportunity for
plenty of such deals in the past few years, I won't hold my breath we'll see any reduction.

The club don't give a shit about their own away fans, and instead want to maximise their profit from home games.

Mentioned this to the RAWA board, we're going to make sure it's brought up in good time and discussed with the club. No guarantee that they'll go for it of course, but at least if they choose not to they'll be aware that the decision and reasoning will be shared with the fans. Hopefully that'll help them come to the right decision. Would obviously be better if Leeds just charged a fair price to begin with like

 

[NorthCountryBoy]

For an adult with a child it’s cheaper than Coventry.

True but still screwing our fans more overall I reckon (vast majority are adults). I’m passing Sheffield that day but no way I’m going now.

 

[SAFC2012]

Mentioned this to the RAWA board, we're going to make sure it's brought up in good time and discussed with the club. No guarantee that they'll go for it of course, but at least if they choose not to they'll be aware that the decision and reasoning will be shared with the fans. Hopefully that'll help them come to the right decision. Would obviously be better if Leeds just charged a fair price to begin with like

Any club who does agree reciprocal deal are just harming their own fans as far as I can see. If I’ve understood it correctly, the offer is a) Sunderland fans pay £47 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 (or whatever the cost is that Sunderland would charge for that particular game) or b) Sunderland fans pay £32 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 at Sunderland.

Surely even Mr Davison wouldn’t need to spend too much time looking into the 2 options and making the correct decision.

Any club who doesn't agree reciprocal deal are just harming their own fans as far as I can see. If I’ve understood it correctly, the offer is a) Sunderland fans pay £47 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 (or whatever the cost is that Sunderland would charge for that particular game) or b) Sunderland fans pay £32 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 at Sunderland.

Surely even Mr Davison wouldn’t need to spend too much time looking into the 2 options and making the correct decision.

 

[Guinness Guzzler]

Any club who does agree reciprocal deal are just harming their own fans as far as I can see. If I’ve understood it correctly, the offer is a) Sunderland fans pay £47 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 (or whatever the cost is that Sunderland would charge for that particular game) or b) Sunderland fans pay £32 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 at Sunderland.

Surely even Mr Davison wouldn’t need to spend too much time looking into the 2 options and making the correct decision.

Apparently there might be nuances to it which may make it difficult for the club to implement it, but we haven't had the discussion yet so I wouldn't want to say anything in case it's not accurate. Regardless, by bringing it up at least we'll be able to minute the response and if it can't happen through no fault of the club, at least people's ire can be directed elsewhere! Agree that if its a simple price agreement the club should definitely forego the small amount from the Leeds fans in order to help our fans not be ripped off. I don't think the club would be opposed to it at all tbh

 

[Hmmmmmm returns]

True but still screwing our fans more overall I reckon (vast majority are adults). I’m passing Sheffield that day but no way I’m going now.

Sheff Wed play Ipswich soon, some tickets for home fans are £51 - when will the madness end??

 

[CraigyLee]

Why can’t they just follow the prem and cap it at £30

 

[Guinness Guzzler]

Why can’t they just follow the prem and cap it at £30

Because the EFL don't want to get involved. Hopefully with the new TV deal renewed pressure can be put on them but at the minute their stance is that it's purely for the clubs to decide. Which is pathetic if you ask me, but as we saw during covid where there was a huge backlash about paying for PL games, whilst we were just expected to keep paying through the nose for crap EFL coverage, if it's not in the top flight no one seems to give a fuck and it gets little to no coverage

 

[NorthCountryBoy]

Apparently there might be nuances to it which may make it difficult for the club to implement it, but we haven't had the discussion yet so I wouldn't want to say anything in case it's not accurate. Regardless, by bringing it up at least we'll be able to minute the response and if it can't happen through no fault of the club, at least people's ire can be directed elsewhere! Agree that if its a simple price agreement the club should definitely forego the small amount from the Leeds fans in order to help our fans not be ripped off. I don't think the club would be opposed to it at all tbh

Last year SAFC refused a reciprocal with Reading cos it’d infringe on the budget that had already been set. The way the minutes read there was no nuance other than cash. Hopefully you can push them hard on it this year mate.

 

[HarrogateMackem]

Last year SAFC refused a reciprocal with Reading cos it’d infringe on the budget that had already been set. The way the minutes read there was no nuance other than cash. Hopefully you can push them hard on it this year mate.

They refused to do it a couple of times in League one as well. I think Blackpool being one of the teams? Again, different owners I think.

In the PL we refused one with Swansea, Hull and Everton at different times iirc. Although I appreciate, different owners again.

 

[Guinness Guzzler]

Last year SAFC refused a reciprocal with Reading cos it’d infringe on the budget that had already been set. The way the minutes read there was no nuance other than cash. Hopefully you can push them hard on it this year mate.

Will do mate. Apparently the potential blocker would be a condition of the arrangement that Leeds may insist upon, and it might take it out of the club's hands, but if that's the case I'll try and make sure it's minuted. Budget-wise I'd certainly hope they could account for this early enough. It would likely cost them around £30k, but the game will likely have a higher than normal attendance and it would certainly be a move which would show they're capable of making the right decision where fans are concerned. Fingers crossed they agree to it, even though the EFL really should step up and take it away from the clubs

 

[tunstallhill]

Will do mate. Apparently the potential blocker would be a condition of the arrangement that Leeds may insist upon, and it might take it out of the club's hands, but if that's the case I'll try and make sure it's minuted. Budget-wise I'd certainly hope they could account for this early enough. It would likely cost them around £30k, but the game will likely have a higher than normal attendance and it would certainly be a move which would show they're capable of making the right decision where fans are concerned. Fingers crossed they agree to it, even though the EFL really should step up and take it away from the clubs

sorry for my ignorance, but how could it cost sunderland £30k if we charge leeds fans £32 instead of £32 ?

 

[PTID]

No use asking the football league to step in etc, only the fans can change this, by refusing to buy over inflated priced tickets, but they won't , its not the way of the British, therefore they will continue to be exploited with high ticket prices, replica strips, food, drink, you name it. The bottom line is, British football supporters are MUGS.

 

[Voice of fair play]

No use asking the football league to step in etc, only the fans can change this, by refusing to buy over inflated priced tickets, but they won't , its not the way of the British, therefore they will continue to be exploited with high ticket prices, replica strips, food, drink, you name it. The bottom line is, British football supporters are MUGS.

Surely it’s needs to be a joined up effort from away fans to stop going to force prices down, it would not have to be for that long either, a month of no away fans going would force home clubs a rethink imo on the cost.

Problem is logistically getting everybody to do it, but as I say the positive is imo they would not have to do it for long if everybody did it, and a joint effort

 

[Fleagle]

Any club who does agree reciprocal deal are just harming their own fans as far as I can see. If I’ve understood it correctly, the offer is a) Sunderland fans pay £47 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 (or whatever the cost is that Sunderland would charge for that particular game) or b) Sunderland fans pay £32 at Leeds and Leeds fans pay £32 at Sunderland.

Surely even Mr Davison wouldn’t need to spend too much time looking into the 2 options and making the correct decision.

That can’t be it as it doesn’t make any sense to Leeds.

Judging by what they’ve agreed with Cardiff they do expect the other club to discount for their fans, but will then match the absolute price (and so offer a much bigger discount) to the visitors at their place. What they aren’t doing, as it would be mad, is to say “as long as Sunderland agree to charge our fans exactly what they were going to charge anyway, we’ll give Sunderland fans £15 per head off”.

 

[dred73]

Something surely has to be done man! Sheff Wed first now these, taking the piss out of fans.

You must be logged on to see media items

Something surely has to be done man! Sheff Wed first now these, taking the piss out of fans.

You must be logged on to see media items

We are being charged the same as Leeds fans who are seated directly opposite us.
Behind the goals is cheaper as it is in most grounds but unfortunately these are for home fans.

 

[Guinness Guzzler]

sorry for my ignorance, but how could it cost sunderland £30k if we charge leeds fans £32 instead of £32 ?

Might be wrong but I believe the reciprocal price agreement means we'd agree a price lower than what we'd normally charge them. Depending on number of away fans etc we'd lose a bit if a £25 or £28 agreement was reached. For example Cardiff charged Leeds £21 a ticket under the agreement, I've just had a look and Cardiff's next home game is Sheff Wed (presumably both would be a category A type fixture) and Sheff Wed fans are paying £24

 

[EssexYid]

The thing is, its JUST at this level.

The Premier League have a price cap for away fans until 2025 with a maximum of £30 - which is reasonable in my opinion.

Fact is most Premier League clubs can afford to charge lower prices after fan protests and petitions they eventually voted the £30 maximum ticket price in.

Unfortunately most EFL clubs very much rely on their gate receipts as they are a major source of income in regard to annual revenue some clubs owners will unfortunately charge as much as they can get away with and happily exploit loyal working class fans.


Ticket prices for Sunderland are very low in general compared to most other clubs which is admirable and fan friendly those prices also help Sunderlands excellent attendances but the downside is that the low pricing policy affects the finances of Sunderland regarding annual revenues

Some fans were protesting at Spurs home game v Manchester United on Saturday regarding high match day ticket prices but they are simply wasting their time, Spurs games sell out months in advance and as long as that continues Daniel Levy will just laugh at them.

Regarding Saturdays game v Manchester United it was £78 to stand behind the goal and up to £103 for sideline tickets and there were NO concession prices at those prices so being ripped off is not just at your level is it.

 

[Real class of 92]

Might be wrong but I believe the reciprocal price agreement means we'd agree a price lower than what we'd normally charge them. Depending on number of away fans etc we'd lose a bit if a £25 or £28 agreement was reached. For example Cardiff charged Leeds £21 a ticket under the agreement, I've just had a look and Cardiff's next home game is Sheff Wed (presumably both would be a category A type fixture) and Sheff Wed fans are paying £24

We haven't played Cardiff at home. They agreed £24 at their place so for our first game of the season they were charged the same price £24. Birmingham charged us £30 and they will be charged the same at ER. Ipswich and Wednesday refused to enter into a reciprocal agreement.

 

[HarrogateMackem]

We haven't played Cardiff at home. They agreed £24 at their place so for our first game of the season they were charged the same price £24. Birmingham charged us £30 and they will be charged the same at ER. Ipswich and Wednesday refused to enter into a reciprocal agreement.

So what's in it for Leeds? You'd of been charged those prices anyway?

Or is it a case the other team charges Leeds the equivalent of Cat C or something and not the top Category as you would normally be?

 

[Real class of 92]

So what's in it for Leeds? You'd of been charged those prices anyway?

Or is it a case the other team charges Leeds the equivalent of Cat C or something and not the top Category as you would normally be?

I think it is an attempt to bring in fairer pricing for away fans. Our West Stand seats are £47 for home fans and without a reciprocal arrangement we cannot differentiate for away fans in the same stand. Other clubs supporters are quite rightly are unhappy with the cost of of attending ER.

Cardiff reduced the cost of tickets to Leeds fans when we play them next year which enabled us to do the same to them for first game of the season. So by discounting our prices we were able to reciprocate by matching that for their fans. Nothing in it for Leeds financially as they reduced income from £47 to £21 per ticket although it did mean Cardiff's support was much healthier at ER than it would have otherwise have been.

It seems as if The FSA see this as the way forward in the EFL to ensure reasonable pricing for away fans.

You must be logged on to see media items