|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 3, 2010 7:44:32 GMT
Edit/Bump
2013/14 - 16655
QPR Attendance
2012/13 17,779
2011/12 17, 295
2010/11 15,635
2009/10 13,348
2008/09 14,003
2007/08 13,958
2006/07 12,936
2005/06 13,440
2004/05 16,055
2003/04 14,784 (QPR's Promotion season)
2002/03 13,206 (Playoff Final Season)
-------------
[These Stats below, from Wikipedia, so can't absolutely vouch...)
1996-97 12,554 (First Season Down)
1995-96 15,683 (Prem Relegation)
1994-95 ??
1993-94 14,228
--------
Going Further Back...QPR Attendance Figures From Gordon Macey
1975/78 - 23,830
1976/77 - 21,085
1977/78 - 19,900
1978/79 - 16, 287 (Relegation under Burtensahw
1979/80 - 14,087
1980/81 - 10, 938 (Docherty/Venables)
1981/82 12,576 (Venables)
1982/83 - 12,806
1983/84 15,560 (First season back up)1984/85 14,148
1985/86 15,241
1986/87 13,987
1987/88 13,135
1988/89 12,286
1989/90 13,226
1990/91 13,524
1991/92 13,699
1992/93 14,969
Stats from an old Gordon Macey "Queens's Park Rangers..."
|
|
|
|
Post by Budgies Mullett on Sept 3, 2010 8:56:20 GMT
High ticket prices = low attendances.
Low ticket prices = high attendances.
I seem to remember it was £18 or so in 04/05. Get back to those prices and we will get those attendances/ higher matchday revenue/ local and national interest that our owners are so desperately seeking.
|
|
|
|
Post by canadaranger on Sept 3, 2010 9:02:50 GMT
A lot of people voted with their feet 5 years ago...
I can't think why...
Get rid of the (remainder of) the problem, do right by all those who were done wrong, and the 2000-3000 may come back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 3, 2010 9:05:17 GMT
"...QPR is one of the best supported football clubs in the Championship with attendance at home games averaging approximately 20,000, in the 2006/2007 season."
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 2, 2011 6:38:06 GMT
Bump: I didn't check back to our Premiership (and before) days
|
|
|
|
Post by gramps on Sept 2, 2011 15:16:39 GMT
I remember getting in for 6d in 19............. Oh, perhaps I had better not.
|
|
|
|
Post by harlowranger on Sept 2, 2011 19:25:07 GMT
16,055 was decent average for 04-05 , hope we can better that by far this year, would be nice to Average
17-18,000 this year .
After Bolton can still get plenty of full houses.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 2, 2012 7:15:46 GMT
And others last season Team Avg Home Atte Matches found Manchester United 75387 19 Arsenal 60000 19 Newcastle United 50162 19 Manchester City 47044 19 Liverpool 44253 19 Chelsea 41478 19 Sunderland 39095 19 Tottenham Hotspur 36026 19 Aston Villa 33965 19 Everton 33408 19 Stoke City 27225 19 Norwich City 26553 19 Wolverhampton Wanderers 25682 19 Fulham 25293 19 West Bromwich Albion 24904 19 Bolton Wanderers 23669 19 Blackburn Rovers 22551 19 Swansea City 19946 19 Wigan Athletic 18635 19 Queens Park Rangers 17295 19 Average 34629 www.football-lineups.com/tourn/FA_Premier_League_2011-2012/Stats/Home_Avg_Atte/And as Percentage of Stadium Filled Team Pld Total Highest Average Capacity Pct 1 Norwich City (12) 19 504409 26819 26548 26034 101.9% 2 Manchester United (2) 19 1432358 75627 75387 75769 99.4% 3 Arsenal (3) 19 1140006 60111 60000 60432 99.2% 4 Tottenham Hotspur (4) 19 684501 36274 36026 36310 99.2% 5 Chelsea (6) 19 788089 41830 41478 42055 98.6% 6 Fulham (9) 19 480576 25700 25293 25700 98.4% 7 Manchester City (1) 19 893851 48000 47045 48000 98.0% 8 Liverpool (8) 19 840808 45071 44253 45362 97.5% 9 Swansea City (11) 19 378978 20605 19946 20500 97.2% 10 Stoke City (14) 19 517290 27789 27226 28384 95.9% 11 Newcastle United (5) 19 948777 52389 49936 52387 95.3% 12 Queens Park Rangers (17) 19 328613 18076 17295 19148 90.3% 13 Wolverhampton Wndrs (20) 19 487763 27447 25672 28525 89.9% 14 West Bromwich Albion (10) 19 471165 26358 24798 28003 88.5% 15 Bolton Wanderers (18) 19 449729 26901 23670 28723 82.4% 16 Everton (7) 19 631333 39517 33228 40394 82.2% 17 Sunderland (13) 19 742813 47751 39095 49000 79.7% 18 Aston Villa (16) 19 643590 40053 33873 42551 79.6% 19 Wigan Athletic (15) 19 354038 22187 18634 25138 74.1% 20 Blackburn Rovers (19) 19 428474 26532 22551 31367 71.8% stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.htmlRead more: qprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=31573#ixzz25IJO5eJqqprreport.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=31573 |
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 2, 2012 7:26:48 GMT
Can someone explain how a ground is 101.9% full?
Simply not possible.
Just like players giving 110% is not possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by blueeyedcptcook on Sept 2, 2012 7:28:51 GMT
I remember getting in for 6d in 19............. Oh, perhaps I had better not. I remember buying a ice cream cone for 1 penny in 19--. Be gads am I that old.  |
|
|
|
Post by alfaranger on Sept 2, 2012 7:59:44 GMT
I remember getting in for 6d in 19............. Oh, perhaps I had better not. I remember buying a ice cream cone for 1 penny in 19--. Be gads am I that old. [/quote And for those not old enough to remember thats 1/240th of a £ NOT 1/100th of a £ as it is today., |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 2, 2012 8:02:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 2, 2012 8:09:01 GMT
eee by gum, you were lucky....  when i were a lad, we got in for nothing, so there! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by grillr on Sept 2, 2012 11:55:42 GMT
Our away following at City yesterday was shocking - not even Championship standard and on a par with Fulham/Wigan. I was chatting to a bobby at half-time and he said we had 1300 fans there... hope the club didn't get lumbered with having to bear the cost of the empty seats and I can't see how any fans can moan if/when the club opts not to take a full allocation of tickets for our away games this season.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on Sept 2, 2012 11:58:05 GMT
Maybe some of those who spend their time mocking Fulham Fans, will quiet down a bit!
|
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Sept 2, 2012 12:30:56 GMT
Why's that Mac, it's still at least twice as many as they would take. ;D Wish I could have gone!  What makes me laugh though, is if you have the ability to get your tickets bought early you get the poniest of seats. Turn up on the day and you were in the lower tier!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on Sept 2, 2012 12:32:36 GMT
Maybe some of those who spend their time mocking Fulham Fans, will quiet down a bit! Not a chance, they took 56 to Man City a few years ago. It may have looked bad on TV but we had the upper tier as well which me mainly filled |
|
|
|
Post by calders on Sept 2, 2012 13:59:30 GMT
The Box office applied for the full 2,800 so we have to pay for what we didnt sell.  Maybe we should have sold the lower tier first so it didnt look as bad on TV. As for Fulham it's still more than they would take on a non Sky game! |
|
|
|
Post by gramps on Sept 2, 2012 14:06:45 GMT
eee by gum, you were lucky.... when i were a lad, we got in for nothing, so there! ;D When I were a lad, I remember the horse drawn carriage dropping us off right outside the gate. |
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Sept 2, 2012 14:37:47 GMT
Maybe some of those who spend their time mocking Fulham Fans, will quiet down a bit! Not a chance, they took 56 to Man City a few years ago. It may have looked bad on TV but we had the upper tier as well which me mainly filled Yeah was not as bad as it looked on the TV and I concur that whilst it wasn't that impressive, it's definitely more than Fulham would have done, and still a pretty decent following when you consider the proportion of away fans to our average home attendances (i.e. we don't have a big support compared to other prem teams but we have a healthy amount who go both home and away). I made it their yesterday but at the expense of going to Norwich because of how much away days cost - so whilst I do think away numbers are a good indication of support, it's hard to be hard on people when it costs so bloody much to go to football these days. I would say though that I was very disappointed with the atmosphere we generated yesterday. I don't know if it's the expectation levels or not but bar a few pockets of people near me in the lower tier, we offered very little vocal support. I like the new Granero song though (old tune, new words). I know not everyone likes to sing and whatever, but was pretty embarassed yesterday. Maybe I'm remembering things with rose tinted glasses, but I miss the times we took numbers to games like this and win, lose or draw, as long as the players but in a shift we'd support them for 90 mins. Asides from a few pockets of us, we were mostly silent until the goal. |
|
|
|
Post by grillr on Sept 2, 2012 14:56:24 GMT
Atmosphere was poor. In mitigation the team were so dozy and sluggish for first 25 mins it didn't exactly gee the fans up. I think when that simple floated cross came over from the left after a few minutes and Green opted to limply punch it away instead of taking it instead you could sense everyone groaning and going flat.... looked like a long and tortuous afternoon ahead at that point. I was in lower tier too - have to say it looked and sounded like a family stand; 50% of fans seemed to be mums and kids. It was very stark yesterday that your typical "bloke" Rs fan was sat in front of a telly/PC and not at the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jo-Onenil on Sept 2, 2012 20:48:24 GMT
1'300 away fans is not amazing, but it's far from ridiculous! Last season, seven clubs took less than that to Loftus Road, and we're far from Wigan or Bolton's 400.
Fulham took 300 to Old Trafford last year. We're far above that figure. As long as we take 1'000 away fans, I'm happy. Last season, we managed to take at least 1'200 everywhere bar Sunderland. We've got a good away support. Not always the noisiest but good in numbers.
Of course yesterday was a bad financial operation for the club.
|
|
|
|
Post by mfnc on Sept 2, 2012 20:58:16 GMT
away support is not the issue, we always have had a fantastic following with regard to that.
but as sure as my sh*t stinks i can tell anyone that this so called 45000 stadium we are all looking forward to will be half empty come matchday. whatever year it is.
the only reason beard wants that size is so to get more revenue from the entertainment industry, they can make big money BESIDES QPR on a matchday.
dont look forward to the plans. but be sceptical, ask why 45000, how they came to that number, where do we produce 30,000 more support to come along on a saturday, FLOATING SUPPORT? nah...always been floating support. if they cant answer those questions than it is because they can do very well without QPR.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 2, 2012 23:52:36 GMT
We once got 35k to a game, be nice if we could get that at every game.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Scooter on Sept 3, 2012 6:58:29 GMT
5.30 kick off. Live on TV. High ticket prices. No trains back to London post match (1, if you left 10 mins before th end). 1,300 in those circumstances is an excellent turn out
|
|
ingham
Dave Sexton
Posts: 1,896
|
Post by ingham on Sept 3, 2012 8:29:26 GMT
I think it has a lot to do with expectations. Attendances rose very tentatively in the mid-seventies, because our non-hard-core support assumed it wouldn't last.
To put it another way, it was 'wait and see'. 1976 was Paisley's first title. If it had been ours, and if we had won as many as he did in the next 8 or so years, the Club's size might have changed.
The ground would certainly have filled up, after one or two titles. And the longer it lasted, the greater the expectations, and the greater the likelihood that the hard core itself would have grown.
Provided success came first. And long term success. We all know football very well. Almost ANY smaller Club can overperform. But that's just the point. Everyone knows it is overperforming. We knew we were overperforming under Gregory.
Clubs like Arsenal, Everton, Spurs and United could perform badly, even very badly, and remain big Clubs. The expectation was there that once things were 'sorted out', they could have a go at the title. And they would remain there or thereabouts more or less forever.
When a small club slips from the gold standard, it vanishes. At least in terms of the challenging sides at the top.
And the Premiership has made things far worse. The title-winning or challenging minnows like QPR, Southampton, Ipswich, Burnley, Derby, Forest are nowhere near doing the same thing again.
The brilliant managers able to prise the top flight open for them simply don't exist, because the job is too hard, and the young, home-grown players don't either, for practical purposes. If they're good enough, the big Clubs get them. If they're journeymen, they probably won't even get a chance.
So the challenge remains. Become brilliant, perform superbly for a LONG TIME, and, of course, the Club will grow.
But that's the killer. The people who think that Clubs will grow because they're doing a bit more advertising - we're not successful, support us! - or because they now have lots of empty seats - get down here, it's far more expensive than it used to be when the football was wonderful! - won't make the slightest difference.
It's cash on delivery.
|
|
|
|
Post by canadaranger on Sept 4, 2012 8:55:50 GMT
I remember getting in for 6d in 19............. Oh, perhaps I had better not. 19?... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Sept 4, 2012 9:01:49 GMT
Let's just say Gramps saw Evelyn Lintott play for the Hoops.
|
|
|
|
Post by gthompson66 on Sept 4, 2012 20:30:52 GMT
The late kick off put me off. 1,300 is not bad in the circumstances. Fair play to all who went.
|
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Sept 7, 2012 10:40:13 GMT
away support is not the issue, we always have had a fantastic following with regard to that. but as sure as my sh*t stinks i can tell anyone that this so called 45000 stadium we are all looking forward to will be half empty come matchday. whatever year it is. the only reason beard wants that size is so to get more revenue from the entertainment industry, they can make big money BESIDES QPR on a matchday. dont look forward to the plans. but be sceptical, ask why 45000, how they came to that number, where do we produce 30,000 more support to come along on a saturday, FLOATING SUPPORT? nah...always been floating support. if they cant answer those questions than it is because they can do very well without QPR. I know a 45k stadium instinctually feels wrong but I saw this excellent post on not606 which perhaps offers some understanding The board want to build a stadium, not simply a football ground. That has a lot of bearing on the size chosen.
The stadium will be used by the Rs for a minimum of 19 PL games a season plus cup matches. Hopefully, in years to come, this will increase if European matches are played there. Of course there is no guarantee that we will be drawn at home in the cup.
There could be the chance of staging some international matches at the ground. Loftus Road has already seen some of these in the past .... and I'm not talking England games!
So we could be talking about as many as 30 games a year which could take good money.
That leaves over 90% of the time free for other events.
Other sporting events, music concerts, boxing, theatrical events, evangelical gatherings, etc will be the sort of thing that the board will try to bring to the new stadium.
When selecting the capacity of the stadium these events have to be considered. They will want to make the stadium appeal to the organisers of these events. So there needs to be someone with experience of hosting these sorts of events. Guess what .. the Rs have got Phil Beard!
It could be that the Rs only contribute 50% or even less to the total income from the stadium.
They should, and not doubt have, thought very carefully about this balance. I certainly trust them to come up with the right number.
The last thing that the board will want to do is to build a stadium and then have to expand it in 5 or 10 years time. Further expansion will cost money and reduce income during the building work.
So whether they decide on 30, 40 or 50 thousand as the capacity you can be damn sure that they will have done their homework.www.not606.com/showthread.php/167375-New-Stadium/page3 |
|
What makes me laugh though, is if you have the ability to get your tickets bought early you get the poniest of seats. Turn up on the day and you were in the lower tier!!! 
