It's what I said. Go back and look at who was making predictions, comparing with other clubs and challenging which meaning of concession would be used in interpretation of the rule. You are certainly one of the posters who has continually posed questions and theories about what might be done and what the outcome might be, so your claim of 'most of us said' is disingenuous to say the least.
He has a point. If the club phrased it like that it would rankle, but would still have an end result of adults paying more than seniors or kids.
The two can both happen. Early coments were around it being interesting to see how it pans out. Many of the others were simply people mulling over possible outcomes and actions. It's just sad that some people take everything literally and personally, or apply their own, often bizarre twists on others opinions, rather than in the spirit of open discussion.
This is what I wrote: "I know you're not a lawyer; even though your starting post made out you have expert knowledge, it was clear what you aren't." So we both agree you're not a lawyer, then? Right again, Fez.
