Rule R7

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Chazz Rheinhold said:
So if we matched brightons ticket prices you'd be happy Peter?

I'm totally against taking away concessions but when you look at how cheap we made concessions prices there really wasn't a flood of young supporters coming in. 50 quid or summat like a season yet it didn't work.
Click to expand...
No, that is just one of many things the club could do. They seem to be doing very little of what a sensible football club would do.
 
Chazz Rheinhold said:
So if we matched brightons ticket prices you'd be happy Peter?

I'm totally against taking away concessions but when you look at how cheap we made concessions prices there really wasn't a flood of young supporters coming in. 50 quid or summat like a season yet it didn't work.
Click to expand...

So the answer is make it even harder to come? That makes no sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petersaxton and dennisboothstash
Hull City AFC (DMD) said:
In deed. It just seemed some seemed to be hanging a lot on definitions, interpretations of rules and the PL.

That just seems to lead to dissapointment, and a lack of other action. None of it seems to be addressing the current round of evictions.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure many are banking on the Premier League getting the scheme scrapped, they're just keen to get the Premier League's take on it to find out of anything at all will be done.

We all know the club will do as little as they can get away with to comply.

I think the pricing and seat moves are inextricably linked, both have to be addressed as one issue, I'm not sure what could possibly be achieved with regard to seat moves without it involving a significant change in the membership scheme.
 
originallambrettaman said:
I'm not sure many are banking on the Premier League getting the scheme scrapped, they're just keen to get the Premier League's take on it to find out of anything at all will be done.

We all know the club will do as little as they can get away with to comply.

I think the pricing and seat moves are inextricably linked, both have to be addressed as one issue, I'm not sure what could possibly be achieved with regard to seat moves without it involving a significant change in the membership scheme.
Click to expand...

This thread and earlier ones about the rule are directly related to the Prem as they are the ones that would enforce it, unless people take a private action.

The seat move is liable to go ahead even if the away fans can't move there or the scheme is scrapped, and is to a fair degree separate to the scheme. If I recall correctly, it was presented as being separate.

The link could possibly be the move being a way of getting away from the ne corner needing to be charged the same as the sw.

The fact remains, the seat move is important, and seems to be mentioned very little. Sadly, those affected are already affected.
 
This proposal to put away fans in Upper West? Are they looking at the north end or south end of West? This will surely affect season pass holders in Upper having shuffle along anyway?
also it affects where people might want to sit in Lower West. Do you want to be below a load of away fans??
 
originallambrettaman said:
I'm not sure many are banking on the Premier League getting the scheme scrapped, they're just keen to get the Premier League's take on it to find out of anything at all will be done.

We all know the club will do as little as they can get away with to comply.

I think the pricing and seat moves are inextricably linked, both have to be addressed as one issue, I'm not sure what could possibly be achieved with regard to seat moves without it involving a significant change in the membership scheme.
Click to expand...
I have to say I do think they can be considered separately
The membership scheme isn't the reason behind the seat moves
The stated reasons are wanting to create a better atmosphere in the 'lower bowl' (ok really it may be about reducing costs of stewarding if we'd stayed down too) and putting the away fans in Upper West
Neither of those things are dependent on the scheme and both of those could remain even if the scheme itself was scrapped completely
I'm not saying there should be separate campaigns, but they are separate issues in my mind. We know they'll move people outside of changing while schemes anyway so if by some miracle the scheme changed and concessions were applied right round the stadium most people would see that as a victory but evictions mght still happen regardless
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
Chazz Rheinhold said:
This proposal to put away fans in Upper West? Are they looking at the north end or south end of West? This will surely affect season pass holders in Upper having shuffle along anyway?
also it affects where people might want to sit in Lower West. Do you want to be below a load of away fans??
Click to expand...

The proposal is for the away fans to be north end of West Upper and it's over half the stand, there's only four or five blocks available for City fans.

There's actually about the same number of seats available as there were pass-holders in there last season, but many groups can't remain together and have refused to sign up as a consequence.
 
originallambrettaman said:
The proposal is for the away fans to be north end of West Upper and it's over half the stand, there's only four or five blocks available for City fans.

There's actually about the same number of seats available as there were pass-holders in there last season, but many groups can't remain together and have refused to sign up as a consequence.
Click to expand...
So even being allowed to stay in Upper they have to move to the wing of it rather than, I imagine, being sat on the half way line.
I can honestly see us giving the full Upper to away teams to make money.
 
dennisboothstash said:
I have to say I do think they can be considered separately
The membership scheme isn't the reason behind the seat moves
The stated reasons are wanting to create a better atmosphere in the 'lower bowl' (ok really it may be about reducing costs of stewarding if we'd stayed down too) and putting the away fans in Upper West
Neither of those things are dependent on the scheme and both of those could remain even if the scheme itself was scrapped completely
I'm not saying there should be separate campaigns, but they are separate issues in my mind. We know they'll move people outside of changing while schemes anyway so if by some miracle the scheme changed and concessions were applied right round the stadium most people would see that as a victory but evictions mght still happen regardless
Click to expand...

There's two lots of seat moves, those who are being moved out of the West Upper so it can potentially be used for away fans and those in the rest of the ground who have to move to get the cheaper prices.

The latter is inextricably linked to the membership scheme and I'm really not sure what could be done separately to address the West Upper issue?
 
originallambrettaman said:
We can't now (other than for cup games), we've already sold memberships in there.
Click to expand...

Signing up for the scheme gives the club a fair few 'rights' over fans. Subject to notice, they could most likely shift the rest of the upper west to make room.
 
originallambrettaman said:
We can't now (other than for cup games), we've already sold memberships in there.
Click to expand...
Wouldnt say cant with this lot.
Do you know how many we have sold up there? I imagine there are very few kids up there, so i can see a lot renewing.
Whats the running total on passes anyway not seen it for ages?
 
originallambrettaman said:
There's two lots of seat moves, those who are being moved out of the West Upper so it can potentially be used for away fans and those in the rest of the ground who have to move to get the cheaper prices.

The latter is inextricably linked to the membership scheme and I'm really not sure what could be done separately to address the West Upper issue?
Click to expand...

The latter aren't evictions, they are people choosing to move to save money. I accept that is inextricably linked to the scheme, but I wasn't talking about them
The former though is people being evicted like me and others were previously, regardless of whether they are happy to pay a higher price or not
What could be done separately is a campaign to keep the Upper West open for home fans and leave the bloody away fans where they are. If there had been a successful campaign to leave the away fans where they were last time I very much doubt we would be seeing it again. But even if I'm wrong that could be campaigned for...couldn't it?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
dennisboothstash said:
The latter aren't evictions, they are people choosing to move to save money. I accept that is inextricably linked to the scheme, but I wasn't talking about them
The former though is people being evicted like me and others were previously, regardless of whether they are happy to pay a higher price or not
What could be done separately is a campaign to keep the Upper West open for home fans and leave the bloody away fans where they are. If there had been a successful campaign to leave the away fans where they were last time I very much doubt we would be seeing it again. But even if I'm wrong that could be campaigned for...couldn't it?!
Click to expand...

You're assuming that most want the away fans to stay where they are, I'm not sure that there aren't a fair few who'd like that area returned to home fans, with the away fans moved upstairs.

I've no idea if that's the case, I just wouldn't assume that everyone thinks things should stay as they are currently.
 
My wife spoke to someone at the club & they said the other half of the west upper is for us for match day sales! We asked because it would affect our decision to move or not! I'm below the west! She said deffo not away fans!
 
  • Like
Reactions: petersaxton
originallambrettaman said:
You're assuming that most want the away fans to stay where they are, I'm not sure that there aren't a fair few who'd like that area returned to home fans, with the away fans moved upstairs.

I've no idea if that's the case, I just wouldn't assume that everyone thinks things should stay as they are currently.
Click to expand...
I'm not assuming anything, I was pointing out that the evictions and the scheme are separate
You said you didn't know what could be done to campaign against the evictions, but of course things could be done if there was a will to.
However if some of our fans actually want their fellow fans in Upper West to be evicted so that away fans can have their seats instead then there won't be a will. Personally I think them wanting that to happen is disgraceful, but there you go
You seem to be suggesting that there are a 'fair few' that think like that. I think that is a shame to put it mildly

I know you aren't speaking for the trust, but in hindsight maybe the trust should have asked their members views on the evictions, separate to the scheme, and then people would have known how many of our own fans actively want other City fans to be kicked out of their seats.?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DMD
The greengrocer said:
My wife spoke to someone at the club & they said the other half of the west upper is for us for match day sales! We asked because it would affect our decision to move or not! I'm below the west! She said deffo not away fans!
Click to expand...

It's not just match day sales, the club have been plugging membership sales in there all week. The club are definitely planning to trial away fans in there this season, whether they'll get SAG approval remains to be seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back