---
title: "West Ham slammed for inflated mascot prices"
canonical: "https://readwestham.com/2020/02/11/west-ham-slammed-for-inflated-mascot-prices/"
type: "post"
language: "en-GB"
author: "Alex Murray"
section: "Feature Writers"
published: "2020-02-11T18:00:00Z"
modified: "2020-02-11T18:00:00Z"
---

# West Ham slammed for inflated mascot prices

Brighton CEO Paul Barber and ex-Crystal Palace chief Simon Jordan have blasted West Ham for charging over £700 for matchday mascots, and accused the Hammers of ‘cynical profiteering’.

In an investigation by the [Telegraph](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2020/02/10/exclusive-eye-watering-football-mascot-fees-criticised-mps-football/), West Ham were found to be one of the clubs charging over £500 for the chance for youngsters to be mascots, alongside Nottingham Forest, Norwich and Aston Villa.

Speaking to [talkSPORT](https://talksport.com/) on Jim White’s Tuesday morning show (10am-1pm), Barber attacked West Ham for charging so much for mascots, especially with Brighton charging over £350 less.

> It does seem a lot of money. I don’t think ripping people off or overcharging is acceptable.
>
> Making sure the packages are great value and making sure when the kids arrive they are treated like royalty \[is vital\]. At Brighton we do, the kids take part in the day for hours. We get feedback from parents saying it’s the best day out the kids have ever had.
>
> So getting the balance right in terms of the pricing and what you include with that – but also making sure it’s accessible to as many people as possible – is the way to go.

Meanwhile Jordan also attacked the Hammers, accusing them of ‘cynical profiteering’.

> When you start to move into five, six, seven hundred pounds and you’re not even getting the kit included in it, you’re starting to get into territory of cynical profiteering.
>
> It’s a bit ugly and not representative of what football should embody -which is giving something back to the supporters and the next generation, the lifeblood of a football club.

### Read West Ham’s verdict

Charging over £700 for a mascot does sound a bit absurd, and this story is another damaging bit of news for West Ham’s current owners.

[Gold and Sullivan have](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7982137/OLIVER-HOLT-apology-Mr-Sullivan-Mr-Gold-directionless-West-Ham.html) come under a lot of scrutiny recently, with fans attacking the pair for [broken promises](https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/west-ham-man-city-preview-owners-gold-sullivan-brady-culture-identity-a9324796.html) and many accusing them of “stealing the soul” of the club.

Being a mascot should be open to all, and West Ham pricing out some supporters really does not help the cause of the current owners in terms of improving their popularity with the fanbase.