Support truly
independent journalism
Premier League ticket prices have risen by an average of 6.7 per cent, according to figures supplied to the Independent by the Football Supporters’ Association [FSA] and supplementary analysis, with Crystal Palace the only one of last season’s 17 surviving clubs to not raise their prices. Nottingham Forest have been responsible for the biggest increase, with an average across their category range of over 20 per cent.
These are facts that sour the distinctive emotion that comes with this weekend of the year. There is little excitement for fans like the return to stadiums after a summer away, with the good weather only warming the glow that comes with the optimism from so many new signings. Except, fans are now feeling very different emotions as a consequence of those signings.
That’s because there have also never been costs like this weekend. Many clubs have directly cited “meeting demand for spending on players” as a justification for raising ticket prices. It has meant, perhaps more than feeling the excitement of those players, fans have felt the squeeze. They have less money. Some have had to stop going altogether. Senior supporters, younger fans and those usually eligible for concessions have felt it the most, amid a wider shift. Supporters groups are fearful that concessions are gradually being conditioned out of the Premier League amid a wider push for increased revenue. Some even wonder whether season tickets will eventually go in the long-term.
If that sounds extreme, as one of the major issues entering the new season, you only have to consider how much has changed in the last four years. The FSA have especially noted the drastic swing from how fans were spoken about amid the closed doors of the pandemic and the European Super League to these rises now. It has gone from “football without fans is nothing” to football looking to wring everything possible out of them. Such inflated numbers – and season ticket prices of £3,000 at Fulham – are all the more important against the bombast that comes with a new Premier League season, while begging the question of what the competition is now about.
There are examples from every club, across every category of ticket, including Palace given that supporters protested against plans to remove discounted tickets for state workers in April. Details about the potential removal of concessions at that time brought fury at Arsenal, Tottenham Hotspur and Wolves. While there were row-backs at both Molineux and Arsenal, the ‘Save Our Seniors’ campaign at Spurs described the proposals as “unethical and unnecessary”. West Ham United, who are currently witnessing the most strident supporter criticism from the Hammers United group, do not have kids' prices for the first home game against Manchester City. Even outside stadiums, City have been accused of “corporate greed” by the MCFC Disabled Supporters Association over new charges for disabled parking spots on match days.
Meetings saw the champions attempt to justify the charges by “pointing to the fact that just over half of the Premier League clubs already charge disabled fans for parking”. This is a common theme since virtually every attempt by supporters’ groups to resist increases has seen clubs argue the same chain of logic. They need to match rivals’ spending, but profit and sustainability rules require more drastic solutions, which requires more match-day revenue. One representative balked at how some clubs “fatuously challenged back by asking how they would raise money if they didn’t put prices up”. Premier League chief executive Richard Masters echoed this theme on Wednesday, stating how clubs “are competing with each other”. He did point to the caveat that they have regulations around tickets, and the average price is “still £36.80”.
But does this really aid “competition”? To use Fulham as one example, the cumulative revenue from increasing ticket prices by 18 per cent in Craven Cottage’s three old stands was less than the difference in prize money payments from finishing 14th or 15th.
This is why that chain of logic is just a circular logic, that makes little sense amid the Premier League’s immense wealth. Clubs are squeezing their supporters for amounts that are negligible in elite football, to just spend more money on player wages, when they already pay a cumulative £2bn more than any other European league. The result of this is to mostly keep the league as it is, with position anchored to wage bills.
All of that forms one of those absurd macroeconomic case studies, where huge money drives an irrationality that somehow sustains itself. More broadcasting money has conversely caused an increase in ticket prices rather than lowering them. As with much in modern football, the pursuit of profit may erode what first made the game profitable. This diminishes the authenticity and atmosphere in which football sells itself. And all of this for increases that barely cover a reserve goalkeeper. Clubs could collectively agree to break this cycle.
Hence many fan representatives are wondering whether there is a greater longer-term calculation to this. Another response from clubs in discussions is that “secondary ticketing demand shows people will pay more – so why should they not benefit”?
Along the same lines, US capitalist owners look at Premier League football and believe ticket pricing is hugely undervalued. That’s especially so given its immense international scale, and how it contrasts with the money-making events of NBA and NFL fixtures.
That’s why there is a growing suspicion that, instead of season-ticket holders, some owners would rather they could just sell one-off tickets for far higher prices. The Premier League has become an international tourist event, after all, in the same way Barcelona were a decade ago. The buyers of such tickets would in turn be much more likely to spend more money in club shops. Masters outright rejected such arguments, but many supporters representatives still see all this as the beginning of a bigger shift.
West Ham supporter Richard Bridge went as far as describing it as “social cleansing of Premier League football at worst, gentrification at best”.
It is possibly where there is an intersection between the various interests that have bought the game, and why this is actually a story beyond the core crucial issue of everyday cost to everyday fans. Both capitalist and state owners essentially want to turn clubs into international vehicles, unmoored from their communities, but still trading off that identity. Capitalist owners want to do it to make as much money as possible. State owners want to do it for international influence.
That’s how the issue feeds into the wider question of where modern football is going, since there is the danger of just leaving these community institutions as glossy husks. A generation of local fans, who the clubs are ultimately supposed to represent, could be priced out.
“Our concern on behalf of supporters of Premier League clubs is once that damage is done, it’s done,” the FSA’s Tom Greatrex says. “And you’re undermining a large part of what makes English football special.”
There are only two surprises to this. The first is the sudden speed of it all, with Greatrex describing a “relentless push to increase ticket prices since the European Super League”. The second is that it is happening amid the push for an independent regulator. Ticket prices weren’t within the remit of the body under the last government’s white paper, but shifts like this are almost certain to bring moves to change that.
It is where there could be a positive to all this, that itself echoes the Super League. The rises could similarly bring supporters together. The FSA are already planning more “coordinated action”, after a vote on a motion brought by Spirit of Shankly. Just as clubs look at each other for justification for raising prices, fan groups can look to each other for support in standing up.
