The committee have already made it very clear in their representations to the club that supporters want concessions, although even back then it shouldn't have needed pointing out. Ignoring them and putting it to a ballot is insulting. It suggests the club don't believe they are representative which is ridiculous since it was the club that selected them. There shouldn't even be a decision to be made about whether concessions come back. The club should simply listen to what the committee has said and act upon it. If it really needs verifying yet again they should simply ask the committee to put it to their representatives and see what feedback they get. A ballot controlled by the club just smacks of Ehab trying to pull a trick again.
It won't matter. As someone else alluded to, Ehab can announce whatever numbers he wants and that's why it'll be a ballot controlled by the club.
If the ballot is carried out by email (if at all) perhaps the Trust should ask people to copy them into the reply so that they can keep track of some votes at least in order to be able to call bullshit on the results publicised? Or email them screenshots/photos if it is a paper or online ballot. What do we do if the ballot is no concessions or the concessions previously suggested by The Club (that's the name now right?)? I certainly wouldn't vote for concessions that benefit nobody and penalise some, but then I couldn't consciously vote for no concessions. Perhaps we should all agree to manually add a third option to the form along the lines of "real concessions offering discounted entries for OAP, disabled and young supporters".
OK if the entire committee want concessions reintroducing then that doesn't require a debate, but you might still want to be careful what you accept later when there could be a question that the committee are split on but you've accepted they can decide everything on behalf of fans...just be careful you aren't confusing democracy with the fact that you know on this occasion it will be an answer you like Who decides what an acceptable concession package is for example? I'm not happy that there are so many people involved who have no democratic accountability and don't represent anyone (so therefore couldn't, as you suggest, take it back to the people who they represent to ask them) so wouldn't be happy if they decided how much kids pay. On balance I prefer that we all get a say, not some people who represent no one but themselves (I accept a few of them do represent members of their organisation)
The ballot's supposed to start tomorrow, so they're not going to do any more consulting on it, they'll have already decided what they're going to do. It's pretty much guaranteed that it will be some sort of fudge, we'll find out how much of one shortly.
I think your in danger of falling into the Allam trap and just drawing the debate out for ever and ever with nothing changing from what we have today. Some won't want concessions (selfish ****s) some will be happy with 10% others will demand 20% and then there are all the age groups, students, unemployed and the like. The more you ask the more confused it becomes. The ultimate answer has to come from the club, the supporters will get what they are given.
do you want to a) reintroduce concessions and kill thousands of puppies and fairies and have everyone that comes to watch City poked in the eye with a big stick and made to stand with their back to the game b) leave it as it is
Fairies are ****ing evil, so I'd be ok with that. Been poked with worse. Not watching the game wouldn't be that bad either. Swap puppies for kittens and its a no brainer.
Press conference for next game; Nigel, what would you say to those supporters who claim that Hull City is not the best run club in the league and is now playing home games in front of the lowest crowds that the KCOM stadium has seen? On the positive side, a larger proportion of supporters are paying full price than ever before. And we'll win the warm up.
Babs would complain about all that standing and demand people knelt on the seat with their back to the pitch.
