LFC Ticket Prices 2016/17: 47% of existing seats increase, compared to 39% decreasing

on 08.02.2016

Under the new ticket pricing structure announced by Liverpool FC last week, 75% of seats in the three existing stands will increase in price.

LIVERPOOL, ENGLAND - Saturday, September 25, 2010: Supporters queue at the Liverpool ticket office at Anfield. (Photo by David Rawcliffe/Propaganda)

Statistician Dan Kennett has done the calculations, seeking to dispel any myths about the new ticket prices and provide only the facts and only focussing on the currently existing seats.

Writes Kennett:

Next season, Liverpool will sell over 860,000 non-hospitality tickets for Premier League games, via a combination of season tickets (40%) and match tickets (category A 13%, category B 21% and category C 6%).

I found myself increasingly frustrated at the polarised coverage over £9 and £77 tickets – less than 3,000 of the 860,000 that will be sold (0.3%).

Article continues below

LFC chief executive Ian Ayre has urged fans to “look at the facts” so I decided to take him up on this offer and crunch the numbers myself.


– extended capacity seats in new Main Stand upper tier are excluded

– all hospitality tickets are excluded

– 760,000 Premier League season tickets and match tickets are included

– 6 x category A, 10 x category B, 3 x category C games

Other considerations:

– In the 2015 BBC Price of Football survey, LFC had the 4th most expensive cheapest season ticket and the 3rd most expensive cheapest match ticket.

– According to the 2015 UK Government report, Liverpool was home to 8 of the 100 most deprived areas in England, with 134 of 298 areas in the 1st decile.

Article continues below

– Only 1 of the 4 stands at Anfield is being redeveloped (Main Stand). The other 3 will have the same view, seat and facilities as now.

– UK inflation was between -0.1% and 0.1% for 10 months of 2015.

– The new Premier League TV deal is a 71% increase on the previous one, and starts next season (2016/17).

All graphics with permission from @DanKennett.



CapbCZhWEAE3J_b (1)

NEWS: Liverpool considering ticketing structure review after unprecedented Anfield walkout


Article continues below

Fans Are Reading

More LFC news, opinion & videos

Fan Comments

Comments are retrospectively moderated. Some could be subject to delays before publication. They must obey the comment policy. Comments load below.

Please only discuss the article above. General chat can be made on our forums at forums.thisisanfield.com


  1. This should have been article no.1 when the price revision was announced. If the numbers quoted are correct, proper article to understand what Ayre and Co. has done.

    • More opinions then facts and figures on this site…when their job should be to present those facts and let us make up our minds for ourselves really.

        • I wasn’t in Anfield for the game, you trying to call me out or something?

          The point I’m making is that this should have been the article that should have preceded the reaction/op-ed pieces. Ofcourse I understand that Kennet must have only posted this yesterday but the narrative had long been set from the moment this news came out.

          • Really poor comment by TIA. Whether or not you walked is both private and irrelevant to the opinion you put forth. I agree completely with your thoughts on this being opinion driven with a little bit of mob mentality thrown in.

        • Bad comment. So what if he would have been there and not walked out? Many did, and I am sure they had their reasons.
          And what he said to begin with is that maybe a lot of confusion to certain things would have been avoided if an article of this kind would have been the first thing people could have read, which I actually agree with. So maybe it would be ok with a different tone to the people on here, at least from the representatives for TIA themselves, instead of comments implying both one and the other? No wonder there is so much namecalling instead of constructive discussion at this site, when looking at this.

        • I wasn’t at the game, I can only get to the midweek games, but I wish I had been. A lot of my mates who were there were undecided until the last minute, put simply they wanted to see how many others walked before they did. I think that’s wrong and anyone intending to walk should have made the decision before the game and not simply follow the lead of others, but if I’m going to be totally honest I might have done the same..

          • Not totally Stan, I think they wanted to support the demo and walk but it was still a difficult decision for them to make, hard decisions become easier to make when you realise so many others will support that decision..

        • Above is just some very very limited in detail graphs, not exactly conclusive proof for anything other than someone here has an agenda. As fir whether or not Abyss walked out, none of your business and they shouldn’t be shamed by you one way or the other… Tell me, did you walk out, or did you just not happen to be there for that game.

  2. I suppose we should keep in mind that inflation alone accounts for 2-3%, so everyone should expect that kind of increase on a regular basis. Otherwise it looks OK in some instances, but just a few of those top end increases are the most notable problem. I’d say up to and including 5% increases are not too bad, offset mostly by most of the decreases, although why anyone would bother doing that remains a mystery. Why not just keep most prices the same or give them only a universal small increase? As everyone has already noticed it’s really the higher end increases that are the problem. Anfield will have more seats with the new stand and yet existing seats that are nowhere near the new development have somehow gone up by an amount well over inflation. It’s not entirely logical.

    I suppose the only thing I’d say is that with a newly developed stadium on the cards now Liverpool have, from a purely logistical point of view, an opportunity to sell some premium seats. Most of the added capacity is actually going to be quite far away from the action in the second tier, so you can’t really push high paying hospitality or corporate up there, they won’t be bothered paying the prices. It’s hard to get away from the problem that the best seats at Anfield are right there in the middle of the stand, where people have been getting decent value for their money for a long time. So if the club want to have some high paying customers, some people with money to really pay a bit extra, what are they going to sell them? People won’t pay extra unless the seats are really really good, so unfortunately some of those existing seats cop a price increase.

    I guess as fans the simple question we have to ask ourselves is if we are willing to accept gate money as a substantial source of revenue for the club. If so, then do we want to get high paying fans in the door? If we want high paying fans to come in and spend a bit more money to top up the coffers then those seats have to come from somewhere. Alternatively we just say no, that Anfield is not a place to just raise money and that family always, always comes first. In which case the money has to come from somewhere else, which is an entirely different story.

    • I am of a similar opinion myself. That given the increase in capacity, they could simply have kept the freeze on ticket prices and just added the good new measures they introduced this year. I also think that maybe timing has a bit to do with this as well. I’m not entirely sure the backlash would have been this bad if the team had been doing well and we were on course for top 4 or something. It tempers the mood certainly. Matchday revenues I have been hearing from consecutive reports, are anyway waning in importance in recent years. Commercial revenue is the big fish. We are, again I’m told, doing fairly well on that front under fsg. Is it possible to increase the no of hospitality seats while keeping the price freeze on the general admission tickets?

      • I do think there is a dilemma there. The new seats in the main stand, being second tier, are not going to be all that attractive for hospitality. If people are going to pay a premium, they will want the premium seats. If all the best seats in the stand are locked into existing prices then, while it’s great for the existing fans who get those seats, it doesn’t help much to generate revenue for the club. Matchday revenue can make a big difference if you add it up across every competition, it’s why Arsenal had no hesitation in moving to a bigger stadium and they are now in great financial shape despite the cost of building.

          • They were converted in 77 pound seats, is what I think happened. Now they are essentially these super premium seats. I wonder if the club had simply taken those seats away and allocated them to hospitality it would have been worse, or would people have noticed? I guess that there are season ticket holders in those seats, so they would want to renew, and suddenly the renewal is 77 quid per match and they are not impressed. I kind of understand what the club is trying to do. You have to open up the stadium to people who want to pay more, otherwise you’re not doing yourself any favours. The harsh reality for some is that there are plenty of people who will be willing to pay 77 pounds for those seats, so is the club really in a position to turn down that kind of money? I would say they probably are, and they should have no trouble doing so, it’s only a small amount of money. But still, there are these small questions that need to be solved.

          • There’s also the background of pumping money into the club each year. LFC have lost money for 6 of the last 7 years, fsg are carrying something like 170m of debt so the club could keep spending and not fall foul of ffp.
            We’re basically Bolton with more benevolent owners!

    • As a follow up to one of your points, a price freeze for next season would have been the easiest to implement, the least controversial and would have had minimal effect on overall revenue..
      It wouldn’t however have addressed the issue of more affordable tickets for kids and families but my own opinion is that the increased revenue from the extended capacity, the increase in hospitality and the new TV deal should still have made that possible to some degree. My gut feeling is that if FSG do rethink the pricing for next season it might be something akin to a price freeze with just some minor tweaks, time will tell..

      • What I’m a little disappointed about with all of this is how the fans seem to be directing all their anger at the owners when in reality most of this money is being taken up by the players and their agents in wages and transfer fees. Yes, they’ve made a poor decision to increase the overall ticket prices by 2mil but somehow I feel the same level of anger would be directed if they kept the overall prices the same while implementing the 77 pounds pricing structures along with some of the discounts.

        Yes, we’re making more money from the TV deals now but so are the rest of the 19 clubs in EPL who we’re going to be competing against. Increase in hospitality tickets money is all meant to go towards paying off the money spent in expanding the Main Stand. It’ll literally be paying for itself for the moment. Commercial deals and sponsors seem like the only avenue which is giving us the edge over other mid-table Premier League clubs. Otherwise, we’ll still be playing catch-up financially with Chelsea, United, City and Arsenal.

        Perhaps FSG made the wrong decision to come up with this multi-tiered pricing system but I can’t really understand the level of outrage over a 2mil increase. I realize fans were unhappy with the current pricing structure of the tickets as well but this increase seems to have tipped them over the edge.

        • “FSG” is a convenient label to blame. FSG is not synonymous with Liverpool, so people can talk very negatively about FSG, but at the same time not have to bring themselves to talk negatively about “Liverpool”. We could talk similarly about players but still, even the players are closer to what we might want to call “Liverpool” so, FSG are an easier target, and they are the ones making the decisions so it takes little complex thought to hold them completely responsible. Of course in reality agents and players are the ones who are milking the club for all they can get and they do so ruthlessly. Even those loyal to the club will negotiate the best contract for themselves, that’s what most all of us would do in the same situation.

          What I’d actually like to see is the players association getting together and donating some of their earnings directly back to the fans in terms ticket discounts and give-aways. That is a way they could directly help fans, and doing so out of their own pocket. It wouldn’t take much either, not if a majority of players in a club pooled together. That would also build some good will between players and club and it would leave the administrators and owners out of the equation, where frankly they should be most of the time.

        • I think that the owners did listen to the supporters groups by going a little way to reducing some tickets to increase availability and affordability to lower income age groups. It seems however that they might have tried to recoup that plus a little extra with the other tickets that increased in price which from a business point of view sounds logical. What I don’t understand and see as an error of judgement is that the £2 mil in additional revenue gained is ‘paltry’ in comparison to the increased revenue from the extra seats and hospitality, with overall club revenue expected to increase by 20% min next season to aprox £360 mil I don’t think there was a need to do that. I absolutely agree with your comments about playing catch up with the clubs you mention but the £2 mil isn’t going to achieve that and was a PR disaster. To put it in perspective the Mancs sponsorship deal with Chevrolet is worth £200 million, or 100 x what the prices rises will bring into our club. We were the first club to introduce serious commercial sponsorship with the Hitachi shirt deal, other clubs and their fans mocked us at the time but then we sat back and watched while United took it to a whole new level, we’ve been playing catch up ever since…

          • I fully agree and have been saying that from the first moment onwards that they probably should have kept it even overall at the very least. I’m getting the feeling the new discounts and price reductions may themselves not be more than 3-4mil. If FSG can go one step further and continue to implement the price discounts while freezing the rest of the tickets then that would be a really good move on their part and would likely get the fanbase back on board – that would likely mean an overall reduction in 5-6mil. But worth the positive PR for them.

          • That would be a great resolution, getting the fan base back on board is something that needs to happen sooner rather than later

        • As the guys from TIA have just pointed out (see comment below) 75% of tickets in the Kop, Annie Road and Centenary stands have increased in price, it’s an interesting and revealing stat..

          • I’m a little skeptical of that considering the fact that LFC have said on their official website –
            – 64 per cent of season ticket prices will decrease or freeze.
            – 45 per cent of matchday tickets will see a price decrease.

            Something doesn’t add up here or maybe I’m misinterpreting the LFC website or Dan Kennet’s stat here. Or I’ve understood both correctly and one of the two are wrong here.

          • Definitely call BS on that stat…either it’s true but incredibly misleading or it’s just plain wrong.

            Most of the extra revenue from matchday tickets is being made off of the Main Stand and Anfield Road tickets. You can have a look for yourself here.

            https:// twitter. com/JayMcKenna87/status/694932488758652928/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

          • One of their graphs also says that 80% of Kop seats were frozen or reduced. Meaning the majority of that statistic comes from seats outside of the Kop. Namely the Anfield Road stands.

          • And the Centenary stand of course, there’s so much conflicting information on the exact detail which adds to the confusion, I’m going to wait and see what the clubs response is to the unrest, maybe then we’ll have something definitive…

    • Tickets not in the new main stand, now have a better view, hence the rise…:) as in, the new stand.

  3. If I am offered the chance to retain my seat it what is currently Row C in the Paddock, I will have to pay 20% (£160) more. To pay the same as I am currently paying, I would have to move to the Upper Stand some 50-60 rows back from where I presently sit. I go to the match with 2 friends and we have sat with same group of people surrounding us for many years. They include pensioners and people who are not that mobile any more. Individuals will have to make some difficult decisions.

    There are thousands of us who are being offered a similar choice. Pay up, move, or give up your seat – and thanks for your loyalty over the years!

  4. Look, I’m not averse to reason, and reasoned discussion changing my opinion, but what am I supposed to do with those graphs, come now TIA, your just clouding it all with these poor ill explained graphs, or no explanation at all…. I have no issue with people trying to get the club to make wholesale changes for every fan, what I have issue with is this obvious attempt to curry favour, without really explaining anything… You have brought in your “expert” but he has said nothing we don’t already know, all you’ve done is rather poorly tried to illustrate your political leaning with half ar5ed graphs that mean, well, not a lot. Percentages, give us actual numbers, tell us what their overall profit change will be as a whole, not sneakily for a few tickets while ignoring the reductions…..

  5. Couldn’t agree more.. I suppose it’s just a natural rebel flaw alot of us have, it’s just about deciding when is reasonable to rebel, and when is just getting caught up in the energy of an otherwise non story… Don’t get me wrong, if we could get our tickets fro the same price as they do in the Bundesliga, I’ll be all over them, but what people forget, while they whinge about the club and its wage structure, you’d be hard pressed to find many players outside of Bayern that earn anywhere near what most PL players do, and they still beg the club to spend more still…. You just can’t win…us or the team.

  6. Having been swayed by Ian Ayre I now stand embarrassed in the light of these figures. Someone somewhere needs to pull strings to put LFC back in the mainstream of fair play to fans else they will lose what is rightfully the heart of the club.

  7. Price increases one thing but charging more money to pay for this poorly assembled, shambolic excuse for a team. Squandering millions on a new deal for a terrible keeper our best being sold to be replaced by garbage and asking the fans to just suck it up and take the hit! and the board to keep making the same recruitment mistakes is what is running the club down and why people involved in recruitment are not getting fired beggars belief. Leicester are proving it can be done without billions if FSG worried more about the on pitch performance, then the balance sheet would take care of itself our support is colossal worldwide.

  8. Percentages are meaningless when you just pick some of the stadium seats to base then on.

    100% of seats on the kop were frozen or reduced.

    See what i did there?

    Either use complete data sets or just don’t bother.

    And if you think it’s a league wide issue then demonstrate against the league and its sponsors not hurt the club and the team.

    And at some point when you have time look at the money the owners have put directly into the club to stop it getting fined for ffp and to keep spending going. Perhaps you’ll see that the £30m bonanza coming from TV has been coming in every year – straight from the owners pockets.

    • Although one of the graphs says that around 8,000 kop seats had a 0-5% increase so your statistic is wrong. I understand your point though. Leaving out data that disproves your point introduces bias to the statistics.

Leave a Reply