Disgusting, or just business?

[Rogstanley]

Nah, not having this. Being a mascot at a football match is just for fun, it’s not educational, important or particularly meaningful outside of being a fan. Kids who don’t get to be mascots aren’t going to be disadvantaged by it. There’s undoubtedly loads of kids who like Disney stuff whose parents will never be able to afford to take them to Disneyland either. Such is life.

[Ted Maul]

It's a far cry from the days when you would pray for that letter to come through your door as a Pepsi Junior Fox (never happened for me).

 

Disgusting really. The principle of paying anything is bad enough, but the prices are extortionate to boot. 

 

I love what our owners have done for us- they've brought us success beyond our wildest dreams. I suppose a part of that is down to them progressing the club as a commercial business, but I do wish it was more accessible to the community and working classes like it used to be.

 

Still, in my view it's better to be a successul club in the top flight than a relic of a club rotting in the lower leagues, banging on about history and tradition. 

[Bluetintedspecs]

I personally feel it's disgusting and it  should 100% be free and a draw to win the privilege,not a bonus for the privileged!

[Ian Nacho]

Absolutely disgraceful. I thought the whole idea was fulfill the dreams of kids by going on the pitch and meeting their favourite players. Charging them is criminal. 

[Farrington fox]

I think that its bloody shameful. But then if parents are prepared to pay it, they are their own worst enemy. 

[Izzy]

Thing is, the club could quite easily not charge for this and just do a random draw each week for anyone who's entered.

 

They probably don't generate that much income/profit from mascot packages over a season (in the grand scheme of things) and could quite easily give it away for free as a gesture of goodwill.

 

Could even be seen as a 'loss leader' to generate fans of the future but instead it smacks of 'penny pinching' a bit.

[BenTheFox]

1 minute ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

Thing is, the club could quite easily not charge for this and just do a random draw each week for anyone who's entered.

 

They probably don't generate that much income/profit from mascot packages over a season (in the grand scheme of things) and could quite easily give it away for free as a gesture of goodwill.

 

Could even be seen as a 'loss leader' to generate fans of the future but instead it smacks of 'penny pinching' a bit.

Spot on. If you treat people like customers, they'll behave like customers. Whereas if the going gets tough, they'll more likely stick with you if you treat them like supporters. 

[Tuna]

I never knew you had to pay to become a mascot. Just doesn't seem right to me at all, should be a privilege not something you pay for. The prices are obscene. Who can afford near enough £400 - £600 ??? Ridiculous.

[BenTheFox]

27 minutes ago, Ted Maul said:

It's a far cry from the days when you would pray for that letter to come through your door as a Pepsi Junior Fox (never happened for me).

 

Disgusting really. The principle of paying anything is bad enough, but the prices are extortionate to boot. 

 

I love what our owners have done for us- they've brought us success beyond our wildest dreams. I suppose a part of that is down to them progressing the club as a commercial business, but I do wish it was more accessible to the community and working classes like it used to be.

 

Still, in my view it's better to be a successul club in the top flight than a relic of a club rotting in the lower leagues, banging on about history and tradition. 

There doesn't have to be such a trade off. Some of the biggest clubs in the world have open training sessions and serve local food/beer at the games for example, yet have a huge global appeal. 

[Ted Maul]

1 minute ago, BenTheFox said:

There doesn't have to be such a trade off. Some of the biggest clubs in the world have open training sessions and serve local food/beer at the games for example, yet have a huge global appeal. 

Absolutely, we should be doing more.

 

An Everards Old Original and Walkers sausage cob at half time would be unreal. 

[CollinsLCFC]

Can't they believe they charge for giving kids the opportunities to be mascots.

 

The amount clubs can afford to splash on players wages, luxury travel and all the rest, and charge the fans ridiculous amounts just for their child to mascot for the day.

 

It should be a privilege, engaging with the kids and fans, not a business idea. 

 

 

[Izzy]

18 minutes ago, CollinsLCFC said:

Can't they believe they charge for giving kids the opportunities to be mascots.

 

The amount clubs can afford to splash on players wages, luxury travel and all the rest, and charge the fans ridiculous amounts just for their child to mascot for the day.

 

It should be a privilege, engaging with the kids and fans, not a business idea. 

 

 

You're right.

 

The club have got dozens of different revenue streams and this really doesn't have to be one of them.

[Dan]

We're a shambles off the pitch so no surprise we're on that list.

[Wymsey]

Just send Jim an email, and he'll sort this out..

Edited 8 March 2018 by Wymeswold fox

[Nick]

2 hours ago, Col city fan said:

A point was made earlier on the radio. 

In theory, only the richest kids could be mascots and if they chose to, again and again and again, every other week.

It's surely priced out of most people's means?

Agreed Col, I was listening to this earlier too. You listen to TalkSPORT a lot? I mainly do when I’m driving or making dinner but Spotify goes on when the wife comes home and we have a G&T!

[Vardinio'sCat]

 

 Squeeze out every last drop of money, that is the modern way.

 

When I was young kids were a little bit protected from commercialism. At some point that changed.

 

 

Edited 8 March 2018 by Vardinio'sCat

[Stadt]

The Thais are big on respect 

[BenTheFox]

Laughable that there are people on here trying to excuse it. 

[Manwell Pablo]

7 hours ago, 5waller5 said:

Just don't pay it. No drama.

 

But someone will that's the point. Which you've completely missed.

 

wont be a little lad who's had fck all his entire life from the monselll who's rattled in 40 goals for aylestone united under 9s, it'll be some posh kid from who goes to Leicester grammar who probably supports Manchester City on the odd week he's not watching the tigers. Thats probably an exaggeration I admit but still, it's an illustration of the club putting up barriers to those less well off.

 

I follow tennis and boxing vigorously and I hear plenty of criticsms of both in terms of the way the sports work but football has easily made the biggest u turn in my lifetime, boxing in particular at least admits what it is and always has done. The other two are exaggerations of what they were in the 90s football can be unrecognisable at times and this is a prime example. 

 

We wont sell Riyad Mahrez, a finite resource, for 65 million quid because "we don't need the money" yet we charge for mascots to generate enough revenue per annum to pay his wages for one week. Excluding a lot of the lads who probably live and breath the club, the ones with posters on their walls  and the programs in their top draws, at the expense of those who can afford it? That's not for me.

Edited 9 March 2018 by Manwell Pablo

[Dan]

17 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

But someone will that's the point. Which you've completely missed.

 

wont be a little lad who's had fck all his entire life from the monselll who's rattled in 40 goals for aylestone united under 9s, it'll be some posh kid from who goes to Leicester grammar who probably supports Manchester City on the odd week he's not watching the tigers. Thats probably an exaggeration I admit but still, it's an illustration of the club putting up barriers to those less well off.

 

I follow tennis and boxing vigorously and I hear plenty of criticsms of both in terms of the way the sports work but football has easily made the biggest u turn in my lifetime, boxing in particular at least admits what it is and always has done. The other two are exaggerations of what they were in the 90s football can be unrecognisable at times and this is a prime example. 

 

We wont sell Riyad Mahrez, a finite resource, for 65 million quid because "we don't need the money" yet we charge for mascots to generate enough revenue per annum to pay his wages for one week. Excluding a lot of the lads who probably live and breath the club, the ones with posters on their walls  and the programs in their top draws, at the expense of those who can afford it? That's not for me.

It's unbelievable really. It's a drop in the ocean for them and now something that's become a PR own goal.

 

The greed of clubs in the Premier League is genuinely hard to comprehend.

[DB11]

I remember when I was a kid I was a mascot, didn't cost anything it was just that you were entered into the draw for being a Junior Fox Member. My brother was also a mascot the season before.

[MPH]

8 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

But its not the kid that pays, so surely there outlook would be the same regardless

I just meant the general excitement surrounding winning a prize as opposed to the air of expectancy you get when paying for something..

[stripeyfox]

It's sheer money grabbing. The old system of putting kids names in a hat and drawing out a "mascot" is fairer and more inclusive.

 

There's simply no justification whatsoever for charging for this kind of thing. But, alas, that is the way it is now.

 

They even charge for birthday announcements on the scoreboard!
 

 

 

 

 

[CosbehFox]

Sums up the commercial side of the club, disgusting 

[SemperEadem]

How much was it previously to be a Junior Fox member?