Yes. the tickets do include train travel; my question was really whether people would be prepared to pay more (for the travel) if this meant better train services. I always drive so I already pay extra, ie for the parking, which of course is my choice.
If people pay more for train services, they are going to get the exact same train service they get currently.
Paying more will hit people such as me who don't ever use the trains. That would hardly be popular.
I think the suggestion was to remove the travel included in the ticket price and make train users pay for their tickets. If so the game ticket would be slightly cheaper.
All for this, should be able to include or exclude the travel subsidy based on need.Binning the travel tax supplement on STs is the only possible way something might change. Certainly from a train travelling perspective it might focus Southern's mind if they have to employ more staff to sell and check tickets (or run the risk of reduced income because some just bunk it). If we pay for our own train tickets and are delayed by 15 minutes we can claim reimbursement through the "delay / repay" scheme. I doubt the clock are claiming refunds based on the delays fans experience.
If the club is not willing to engage in dialogue with the train and bus companies, and agree and publish a "service level agreement" setting out the agreed level of service on matchdays, with penalties if the agreed services are not delivered, then how can we expect any improvement?
My understanding was that the original planning permission was predicated on "..... the ability of the club to provide good public transport links for spectators and to minimise the use of cars."
Brighton stadium secures approval
www.planningresource.co.uk
The club has just washed its hands of providing good public transport links. Where there is a will there's a way, but if there is no will, we're buggered and either like it or lump it.