The true impact of SEO?

[Stone Valiant]

Last season the attendances for the first homes games (League only) were

 

2010/11 > 2011/12

6444 > 5889

5750

5360

5777

8443

6420

8607

5587

5681

5163

 

That takes us to beyond the Xmas period

 

The average after the first 5 games was 6355 and after 10 games was 6323 (so not much deviation)

 

So please bear these numbers in mind as a comparison when thinking about id SEO is a success or not as we see the attendance figures for home league games over the coming season.

 

The moment there is a home game with lass than 5000, alarm bells should start to go off that SEO is working and going to be hitting the board - lets hope they see sense and bail out in time to rescue the season and our club!

 

So first game done, figures already down by 555. Need to do comparison on home gate only as well. I'll put some charts together and ask Rob to keep them published!

[saintvaliant]

Lowest opening home gate since 2006.

 

If my maths are right, there were 570 fewer Vale fans there today than at the first home game of last season.

[Utch]

I agree with that, 570 less. Vale had beaten Bury away and QPR away though so that would have boosted the crowd last year.

 

There was 85 fewer Vale fans there today than the year before against Rochdale, which was also the very first game of the season.

[saintvaliant]

I agree with that, 570 less. Vale had beaten Bury away and QPR away though so that would have boosted the crowd last year.

 

There was 85 fewer Vale fans there today than the year before against Rochdale, which was also the very first game of the season.

 

Thanks Utch - thought I was about right.

 

Be interesting to see how many folk bother with midweek. I see Bury got a point against Hudders today which should give us a bit of encouragement.

 

Not seen anything about ticket prices so I assume it's the full whack - will be interesting how many are prepared to fork out £20 for what looks a tough tie.

[dave8509]

Last season the attendances for the first homes games (League only) were

 

6444

5750

5360

5777

8443

6420

8607

5587

5681

5163

 

That takes us to beyond the Xmas period

 

The average after the first 5 games was 6355 and after 10 games was 6323 (so not much deviation)

 

So please bear these numbers in mind as a comparison when thinking about id SEO is a success or not as we see the attendance figures for home league games over the coming season.

 

The moment there is a home game with lass than 5000, alarm bells should start to go off that SEO is working and going to be hitting the board - lets hope they see sense and bail out in time to rescue the season and our club!

 

SEO not as successful as predicted though, some were saying 3500 so a big difference.

 

Plus you have to compare the attendance with the leauge position that we are in over these games plus another small point, lots of people I know just can't afford the cost of two games in a week and certainly cannot find the cost of a season ticket.

I thing it will make a difference but more like 500 to 1000 maximum in real terms.

 

Anyway I predict bratty will go in the next few weeks anyway so carry on marching but get in to support the CLUB.

[Twitters]

2010 - Port Vale vs Chesterfield

6444 including 459 visitors

Total = 5985 home fans

 

2011 - Port Vale vs Crawley Town

5889 including 474 visitors

Total = 5415 home fans

 

Total loss of support for the first home game = 10%

 

So the question is, how can anyone claim that losing 10% of your customers is a good thing?

[deanleese]

Do you believe there were less than 500 away supporters?

[vale_park_valiant]

2010 - Port Vale vs Chesterfield

6444 including 459 visitors

Total = 5985 home fans

 

2011 - Port Vale vs Town

5889 including 474 visitors

Total = 5415 home fans

 

Total loss of support for the first home game = 10%

 

So the question is, how can anyone claim that losing 10% of your customers is a good thing?

 

its not, but it happens in business day in day out and plenty of them survive, 10% is not a great number in the scheme of things, clutching at straws springs to mind? considering at the EGM the 'MAJORITY' want change

[Twitters]

its not, but it happens in business day in day out and plenty of them survive, 10% is not a great number in the scheme of things, clutching at straws springs to mind? considering at the EGM the 'MAJORITY' want change

 

Three facts for you:

 

1 - A business already making losses cannot sustain more losses without new investment

2 - 10% is a significant number, you are losing 1/10th of your revenue

3 - The majority of shareholders did want change.

 

 

Dean - A Crawley fan on the radio claimed there was 2,000 there. That is bull but I don't believe there was under 500.

[Utch]

There is already a thread on this.

 

Take a look at the first home game of 2009/10 compared to the match today.

[Badgerspaws]

No-one can disagree with the actual figures. Obviously, also no-one can prove that it is all a result of SEO. I have not purchased a season ticket for the first time in many years and would have thought that the SEO leaders would be a little disappointed that the gate did not show a bigger reduction.

[melv]

its not, but it happens in business day in day out and plenty of them survive, 10% is not a great number in the scheme of things, clutching at straws springs to mind? considering at the EGM the 'MAJORITY' want change

 

10% is not a great number?

 

Would you like your pay cut by 10%?

[vale_park_valiant]

10% is not a great number?

 

Would you like your pay cut by 10%?[/quote

 

it happens, business's sustain far greater margins and still survive comfortably, and this is after one game so how can it be claimed the SEO is working after one ******* game?

[nodge]

It's not, I was working today and gutted to nit be able to attend.

 

My last game was February but I decided that much as I want the board out I was cutting my nose off to spite my face.

 

I hope something gives sooner or later, as it's horrible to see our own at each others throats.

 

I want the board to step down, remove the 24.9% rule and get a real investor in with a vision.

 

I respect those for making their stance, I couldn't do it but it doesn't make them any less of a supporter. People handle things differently and people need to respect that.

 

That 10% are sorely missed not only financially but vocally too. SEO, B&G or otherwise they're all the heartbeat of the club.

 

Two men can resolve this whole debacle by stepping down

[deanleese]

Three facts for you:

 

1 - A business already making losses cannot sustain more losses without new investment

2 - 10% is a significant number, you are losing 1/10th of your revenue

3 - The majority of shareholders did want change.

 

 

Dean - A Crawley fan on the radio claimed there was 2,000 there. That is bull but I don't believe there was under 500.

 

Thanks Twitters... On Sky sports news there looked more than 500 more like 800.