I just wanted to make sure that I have understood this correctly. If there is a stadium with 14.000 capacity and there is 3.500 regular seats, 7.000 executive seats and 3.5 VIP seats, and there are 9.000 fans showing up for a friends. With the stage set and how I have understood it, will the distribution of the fans then be like this?

Regular (25% of the stadium and then of the friendly attendance) = 2.250
Executive (50% of the stadium and then of the friendly attendance) = 4.500
VIP (25% of the stadium and that of the friendly attendance) = 2.250
Total (100% of the stadium and the total friendly attendance) = 9.000

I think it is like this, but would like a verification Since it could justify for a suggestion for the possibility to tear down seats to maximize income compared to seat distribution and not be penalized because of a stupid mistake in the start of the game

Then there could be a justification for the ability to tear down seats, since a stadium with 1.000 regular seats, 9.000 executive seats and 3.500 seats would have a higher income in friendly games than a stadium with 2.000 regular seats, 9.000 executive seats and 3.500 VIP seats. Bsed on 9.000 people showing up for the friendly game.

With that said, if calculated over two weeks (a home game and an away game), then it evens out pretty good. It actually adds more to the profit having the extra regular seats by an extra 4.482 over the two weeks. If there are cup games, then the profit becomes even bigger.

So my conclusion is that there is no need to change the current system, as it now.

*crawls back into his turtle shell*

The interesting fact is how huge a difference in friendly income there is between a correct developed 10.000 stadium (1.000 regular, 5.500 exec. and 3.500 VIP) and huge stadium like -gbs- (52.195 seats) and Budapest Wolves (50.938 seats), that also are the ones with the highest ticket income.

In friendlies the income is great in the 10.000 seats stadium than the two huge stadium, because of the distribution of the "few" tickets sold and afterwards distributed out between the different types of seats.

So I guess the morale of the story is, a huge stadium (even if the ticket income is huge) doesn't always give the best friendly income.

Will85 wrote: jespernohr wrote: So I guess the morale of the story is, a huge stadium (even if the ticket income is huge) doesn't always give the best friendly income. But the league-income compensates plenty of course

Yup! Totally agree, but I was looking from the manager "looking for a good friendly income" point of view and I just found it interesting