Attendance looks dire..

[Col city fan]

So they lower the by by £10, and give away £7 worth of food and we only just get 27k for one game. If the price was dropped by just the £10 how many would come to every game? One offs are fine to attract people, but no guarantee people would come to them all. You'd have to drop season ticket prices also.

If there is an upturn in form and we do well (lets remember they were probably expecting to after spending so much) then more people would come anyway. If you've set prices low then you've lost out on income of people paying full whack to see a team doing well.

I dont think it's ONLY about an upturn in form, although that is important.

I think people also pay to see players who they believe to be big names.

An example of this would be when City signed Stan Collymore. I was a season ticket holder at the time anyway, but I knew quite a few people who said they were coming down to Filbert Street to see Stan play.

It was the same when we were in the Premiership under Micky Adams. If my memory serves me correctly we were playing most games with c. 27,000 - 30,000, and sometimes more. Many of those 'fans' would have got season tickets not only to see City, but maybe even moreso the teams we were playing against? I think games against Man Utd, Liverpool etc were played in front of a full house?

To now take this season, well who have we signed that will excite 'Joe Public' to pay to come to watch the team? I don't mean your diehard fans who will continue to attend whatever, I mean those people who maybe sit on the fence, say 'shall I or shan't I' and make up their minds based upon who they are going to see playing.

Pearson's emphasis on signing eager young players, relatively unknown, may not sway the 'unsures' for want of a better term, to part with their hard earned.

Perhaps if we had signed one or two more 'well known' players, attendances may have been increased somewhat. And would then increase still further if we had an upturn of form?

Just a thought? Though I understand what Pearson is trying to do, I personally would have been more excited if we had signed Murphy and Koren for example. And perhaps the 'fence sitters' may have been too?

[THEFATBASTARD]

I think you need to study the maths content in this video you posted.

Id like to divide her legs..

[Babylon]

I dont think it's ONLY about an upturn in form, although that is important.

I'm just giving a reason they don't lower the prices.

You are correct players do make a difference with regards what you are taking about. Although I'm not too sure those players would have tempted people that much.

[ADK]

I'd rather see an unheard of young frenchman with a quirky name than two old past it championship players.

[Col city fan]

I'd rather see an unheard of young frenchman with a quirky name than two old past it championship players.

Yes mate, YOU would...that's my point I guess. I would assume you know quite a lot about football and follow City closely. With respect, not everybody who chooses to come down and watch have a great deal of knowledge about all things City?

For example, I would have thought that Beckford put 'bums on seats' at least for the first few weeks of him signing. And I'm sure it would have had the same effect if we would have signed Owen for example.

I guess Babs is right. Murphy was not the best example I could have used, he was one of the first that sprung to mind as available this summer.

And my main point remains... Not everyone I'm afraid would see Nigel Pearson and his attempts to rebuild a young team of relative unknowns as 'sexy' enough, to coin a phrase, to make those same people part with their cash.

If, for example, we go on to beat Wolves in the next game AND we had signed Owen ( again I just use him as an example) I strongly suspect that the gate for the next home game would be a couple of thousand up on what it will be.