- Jun 27, 2012
- 14,019
My dad being one of them.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Travel subsidy [NOT] being scrapped for next season?
- Thread starter spongy
- Start date
My dad being one of them.
KJP
Well-known member
Not sure about anyone else but have you seen this graph?
What is it?
Hampster Gull
New member
- Dec 22, 2010
- 13,462
This
spanish flair
Well-known member
Well all these people who say they won't be removing the travel as part of the ticket, should think back and remember he took our money before then scrapped the transport for some fans, so he could do it again.
Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!
Primary data is fact
You mean the Board did/could.
spanish flair
Well-known member
He and the Board yes.
Generally not that fussed if it goes. I usually have to come down for the weekend in anycase so never see much of the benefit - plus the extra is about 3 quid if i do have to buy the full ticket. Selfish, maybe - but if it means more talent on the pitch, I don't really mind.
Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!
Primary data is fact
He and the rest of the Board - a collective decision, albeit a crap one.
Sure the decision and accompanying communication was agreed 'days' ago .... pity they just can't get on with it
More than a £50 rise for a lot of people. Much more.
If they did exactly that I would tell them to do one out of principal. I can accept reasonable increases but that would be underhand and taking the piss.
I'd imagine that a couple of decisions were made a few days ago, the one being announced being contingent on our league position as at last night. I knew I'd be able to find a downside to yesterday's win if I tried hard enough.
spanish flair
Well-known member
I agree and a move which lost them credibility in my eye's as I felt conned by the move.
And the article Chailyjem posted, that some of Barbers comment's rubbed further salt into the wounds of many fans.
Lord Bracknell
On fire
The issue is not just about subsidies paid by the club and charges paid by fans, it's also about the availability of transport to get to games and the parking that is available, if you choose to use your car.
It's essential that everyone involved in decision making is happy with what they are expected to do - and, as far as bus and train operators are concerned, this means reaching an agreement that ensures that the costs of providing the transport are being met.
If the payments made by the club to the bus and train operators were to cease, there would be no obligation on the operators to provide any extra buses or trains, over and above those that would run on a non-match day. This would mean that some people (many thousands?) simply wouldn't be able to get to the match.
You might argue that the train operator or the bus company would benefit from fares paid by people travelling to matches, but - if the practical measures to collect the fares and check the tickets can't be put in place - it may be that the operator would prefer to live with a situation where not every intending passenger could actually get on the train or bus. They are, after all, under no obligation to provide the transport.
The answer is therefore to negotiate a balanced solution, which involves every participant - football club, bus company, train operator and match ticket purchaser - feeling that the contribution that they are being asked to make is a reasonable one.
My view is that the club simply "removing the subsidy" will not achieve a transport system that will ensure that everyone who buys a match ticket could actually get to the game.
It's essential that everyone involved in decision making is happy with what they are expected to do - and, as far as bus and train operators are concerned, this means reaching an agreement that ensures that the costs of providing the transport are being met.
If the payments made by the club to the bus and train operators were to cease, there would be no obligation on the operators to provide any extra buses or trains, over and above those that would run on a non-match day. This would mean that some people (many thousands?) simply wouldn't be able to get to the match.
You might argue that the train operator or the bus company would benefit from fares paid by people travelling to matches, but - if the practical measures to collect the fares and check the tickets can't be put in place - it may be that the operator would prefer to live with a situation where not every intending passenger could actually get on the train or bus. They are, after all, under no obligation to provide the transport.
The answer is therefore to negotiate a balanced solution, which involves every participant - football club, bus company, train operator and match ticket purchaser - feeling that the contribution that they are being asked to make is a reasonable one.
My view is that the club simply "removing the subsidy" will not achieve a transport system that will ensure that everyone who buys a match ticket could actually get to the game.
Totally, but I'm sure they would have discussed the possibilities up the ying yang for the past x weeks. I can't believe the Board are all sitting there still trying to come to a decision
This reminds me a bit of s**t boss I once had. When I confronted him on why he didn't give the information out to the business when he had it, his reply was "because I don't have to"
Anyway I'm off to enjoy a nice lunch, no phone, and look forward to joining in later
Official Old Man
Uckfield Seagull
How many cars have two or more occupants and park at a P&R?
From that total, how many pass by the Amex?
From that total how many are going to stop, drop off their passengers, and proceed to the P&R with one paying person.
Or worse they now get Wife to drop them off.
Either scenario will mean a minimum 500 cars dropping off and collecting, arguments with the police and disgruntled fans.
From that total, how many pass by the Amex?
From that total how many are going to stop, drop off their passengers, and proceed to the P&R with one paying person.
Or worse they now get Wife to drop them off.
Either scenario will mean a minimum 500 cars dropping off and collecting, arguments with the police and disgruntled fans.
That's what I thought. Southern could be royally pi$$ed off and stop the Brighton-Lewes matchday schedule, which I doubt makes them money. Result = carnage
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
£160 for me, which would be a dealbreaker.
Barham's tash
Well-known member
Clearly everyone's circumstances are different and sorry for picking on your post here but why the sense of entitlement?
At the moment a WSU season ticket makes the cost per game c£20 v £34 for a match day ticket. If they remove/increase the travel subsidy then it will still be markedly cheaper than on a match day basis.
There are many ways to skin a cat - go and buy a network railcard so you get a 1/3 off all travel perhaps?
Don't get this sense of entitlement that has appeared in our fan base since we moved to the Amex.
Hillian1
( . ) ( . )
What sense of entitlement is that then?
I am merely saying that I cannot afford the extra £160 per season to watch us play.
If they remove the travel, I won't renew.