General NUFC stuff

[Interpolic]

3 minutes ago, LFEE said:

I appreciate the ballot in theory is for members but it’s highly naive to think it how it operates doesn’t concern STH’s too. Made total sense by the club to invite them also.

 

A small proportion perhaps, any more than that - No.  This was supposed to be about members who don't have season tickets, and how to serve them better.

 

It's pretty tone-deaf to be moaning about not being able to get extra tickets as a season ticket holder, when demand far outstrips supply and members have to feed off scraps as it is.  I know it was taken away but it's obvious why it was.

[Interpolic]

These are the notes on the NUST website, about the workshop:

 

Ballot Working Group Supporter Event - Summary NUST had multiple board members in attendance both in person and online.

 

The key takeaways based on feedback from the club and attendees were:

 

• Transparency is key. Members would like to see the number of seats available in each section, success rates, number of entries for each ballot, total number of members etc.
• Members would like the ability to choose where they sit both for their access needs and to be able to sit with family/friends. This was particularly relevant for ambulant disabled fans and for those with young children where the parent has a season ticket and the child does not.
• There were discussions on rewarding members for loyalty/purchase history in the same way that away game attendance is rewarded. This could be done through a weighted ballot or a tiered membership system.
• There were discussions on preference of previous 10am member sale system versus the ballot with a suggestion raised around having a hybrid system in the future ie. ballot for certain percentage of tickets followed by general sale for remaining tickets and possible resale close to kick off for last minute returns.
• Frustrations were raised about the current resale process. There were suggestions that those unsuccessful in the ballot could be randomly allocated to a waiting list for returned tickets.
• Members would like notification if unsuccessful in a ballot to reduce anxiety on ballot draw day. The club fed back that their system can’t currently automate this, but it is the most requested feature from all the clubs who use the same provider so may be a future development.
• There was discussion around the possibility of club-controlled weighting of ballot results based on an individual’s success rate. So, for example, if successful in one ballot you would move to the bottom of the list or become ineligible for the next ballot. Conversely, there could be positive weighting of those who have been unsuccessful for a number of ballots.
• The ability to enter a ballot by price cap instead of seat category or the ability to enter more than one seat category was requested. The club said this was a possibility but would lead to another step in the ballot process with time constraints if you were successful in the ballot and then needed to log in and select your seat within a set timeframe.
• There was suggestion from the floor for a system to guarantee at least one game per season for members.
• Tables discussed unlimited memberships – many members felt they should be limited going forward. § Ideas on the introduction of an NUFC App for all functions in one place eg. Account, Ticket Sales, Ballot Entry etc.
• Ideas on how to prevent touts/bots/away fans from purchasing tickets. The club reiterated that they have bought third party tickets from resellers in recent months and all have been fake. They have put in increased measures to prevent bots and the challenge is to stay ahead of the game.
• Members who also attend Newcastle United Women’s games requested a better system for purchasing NUW home tickets.

 

The club will be holding a workshop in March focusing on match day atmosphere. NUST look forward to working with the club to ensure the opinions presented by supporters at this workshop are listened to and acted upon to improve the experience of Newcastle United members. It was great to meet everyone we had the pleasure of chatting to.

[LFEE]

34 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

A small proportion perhaps, any more than that - No.  This was supposed to be about members who don't have season tickets, and how to serve them better.

 

It's pretty tone-deaf to be moaning about not being able to get extra tickets as a season ticket holder, when demand far outstrips supply and members have to feed off scraps as it is.  I know it was taken away but it's obvious why it was.

I totally agree a small proportion if all things being equal. I’d imagine they would split things up in age groups and sex. Where the club might struggle from that is from those breakdowns how many who applied from the 4K where members compared to STH’s. 

Out of that 4K I feel you are assuming the majority would be Members but you might find that wasn’t the case.

 

It wasn’t just about members though was it? It was about anyone wanting to feedback on the new Ballot system which replaced the previous system. The main problem being you can’t choose your seat now which is having a knock on effect with enjoyment and atmosphere etc. So like I said STH’s would be Members biggest allies for this. 

 

I think it’s tone deaf if you don’t want to listen to other peoples views. The ballot system will of had a massive impact on those who sit alone at the match not able to have a chance to buy the odd ticket when that was the case and something they’d willingly/non paid extra for since early 90’s. Those who go as families or in a group as friends not so much. So nothing wrong at all in them using this as an opportunity to raise the effects lost.

 

Not sure why you see it as a STH Vs membership situation. I feel collectively most will have the same issues with it.

[Interpolic]

1 minute ago, LFEE said:

I totally agree a small proportion if all things being equal. I’d imagine they would split things up in age groups and sex. Where the club might struggle from that is from those breakdowns how many who applied from the 4K where members compared to STH’s. 

Out of that 4K I feel you are assuming the majority would be Members but you might find that wasn’t the case.

 

It wasn’t just about members though was it? It was about anyone wanting to feedback on the new Ballot system which replaced the previous system. The main problem being you can’t choose your seat now which is having a knock on effect with enjoyment and atmosphere etc. So like I said STH’s would be Members biggest allies for this. 

 

I think it’s tone deaf if you don’t want to listen to other peoples views. The ballot system will of had a massive impact on those who sit alone at the match not able to have a chance to buy the odd ticket when that was the case and something they’d willingly/non paid extra for since early 90’s. Those who go as families or in a group as friends not so much. So nothing wrong at all in them using this as an opportunity to raise the effects lost.

 

Not sure why you see it as a STH Vs membership situation. I feel collectively most will have the same issues with it.

 

It's not that it's STHs vs members - it's that there are a finite number of tickets available.  If STHs were still allowed to buy extra tickets there would be an even smaller amount of tickets available to members. 

 

Like I say, more than fine that some STHs were there but this conversation arose when Haydn said 80% of his table were STHs, with a lot of the discussion around matters that mainly affected STHs.  Tbf that summary from NUST suggests their conversation was pretty member-centric but obviously we're getting the accounts of different people sat at different tables here.

 

I don't think it's right if at an event that was primarily supposed to improve the experience of members there was over-representation of season ticket holders (if there was).  People will generally argue for changes that align with their own interests, and any movement back towards the old system would make the experience worse for members.  That's just the reality of the situation when there is a finite (and relatively small) amount of non-season ticket seats available.

[bobbydazzla]

1 hour ago, LFEE said:

Weirdly it might help shed all those who joined post Rafa and the less committed who seem to leave in their droves come 80-85mins…

 

With regards to STH having a say last night speaking as one in our defence we’ve lost the right overnight without any warning of the “chance” to buy a ticket so not going to the game alone. So single STH like myself have lost a lot in the match day experience also.

 

Im not allowed by the club to even buy a membership to restore that “chance” of a ticket.

 

I’d also imagine due to their/our experience of previous incarnation STH’s would be the biggest collective voice for wanting the ability to choose your seat return.

 

I appreciate the ballot in theory is for members but it’s highly naive to think it how it operates doesn’t concern STH’s too. Made total sense by the club to invite them also.

 

 

 

It was a meeting about Ballots, which primarily affects Members. For 6 of the 8 people on Haydn's table to be STH's is poor.

A few STH's being invited would be ideal, as their opinion counts and would be valuable. But Haydn's experience suggests there were quite a few STH's there

 

How many of those STH's there last night have had to pay £45 quid per game to sit in a part of the ground they didn't want to. Or sit for days pressing F5 in the hope a ticket pops up. Or missed a game because of a lucky dip.

 

And as for your point about STH not being able to buy a membership, just buy it in a friend or relatives name. There's nothing to stop you doing that, even though technically it's not allowed

 

I got 1 membership for me, 1 for the missus. She hates football and would never go to a game, but it gives me a better chance of a ticket

 

 

 

 

Edited February 21 by bobbydazzla

[LFEE]

I doubt all tables would’ve been 6/2 STH’s so probably an anomaly but again like I say depends on how many Members bothered to apply. The fact we have 90k approximately yet only 4K IN TOTAL appplied. Many will be STH out of that number rejected. 
 

Just have a slight concern of the actual number of Members that put themselves forward.

 

Just going back to my previous I meant to add I’ve a friend (STH since 90’s) whose wife and daughter are both members who couldn’t attend. Surely he has the right to attend and speak for them and himself and all the facets the change of system has caused?

[LFEE]

18 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

It was a meeting about Ballots, which primarily affects Members. For 6 of the 8 people on Haydn's table to be STH's is poor.

A few STH's being invited would be ideal, as their opinion counts and would be valuable. But Haydn's experience suggests there were quite a few STH's there

 

How many of those STH's there last night have had to pay £45 quid per game to sit in a part of the ground they didn't want to. Or sit for days pressing F5 in the hope a ticket pops up. Or missed a game because of a lucky dip.

 

And as for your point about STH not being able to buy a membership, just buy it in a friend or relatives name. There's nothing to stop you doing that, even though technically it's not allowed

 

I got 1 membership for me, 1 for the missus. She hates football and would never go to a game, but it gives me a better chance of a ticket

 

 

 

 

 

“How many of those STH's there last night have had to pay £45 quid per game to sit in a part of the ground they didn't want to. Or sit for days pressing F5 in the hope a ticket pops up. Or missed a game because of a lucky dip.”

 

All the STH’s I know including me still do all this… 😆

 

…logged in for family & friends who we’d usually queue for on the previous system and after long wait would if successful have the same choice of seats as Members (mainly in the gods unless lucky) or put out of our misery and end search empty handed. 
 

Quite astounded you don’t think STH’s and many members are totally interconnected.

[Interpolic]

There were only 120 attendees though, if there weren't enough members among the 4k to ensure they were the vast majority then I'd be surprised.

[Wallsendmag]

1 hour ago, LFEE said:

Weirdly it might help shed all those who joined post Rafa and the less committed who seem to leave in their droves come 80-85mins…

 

With regards to STH having a say last night speaking as one in our defence we’ve lost the right overnight without any warning of the “chance” to buy a ticket so not going to the game alone. So single STH like myself have lost a lot in the match day experience also.

 

Im not allowed by the club to even buy a membership to restore that “chance” of a ticket.

 

I’d also imagine due to their/our experience of previous incarnation STH’s would be the biggest collective voice for wanting the ability to choose your seat return.

 

I appreciate the ballot in theory is for members but it’s highly naive to think it how it operates doesn’t concern STH’s too. Made total sense by the club to invite them also.

 

 

 

Excuse my ignorance here but surely as a ST holders, you already have your ticket/place guaranteed for every home match anyway?

[LFEE]

13 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

There were only 120 attendees though, if there weren't enough members among the 4k to ensure they were the vast majority then I'd be surprised.

I agree totally. However. As a small sample size and excluding those on here I know. None of the (dozens) members I know bothered yet the STHs I know did. No STH’s successful but it’s a reminder that on here and on Social Media reality can be warped.

 

 

[Interpolic]

7 minutes ago, LFEE said:

I agree totally. However. As a small sample size and excluding those on here I know. None of the (dozens) members I know bothered yet the STHs I know did. No STH’s successful but it’s a reminder that on here and on Social Media reality can be warped.

 

 

 

Yeah fair enough, we're touching on another point here as well that relates to wider ticketing matters. Without transparency re numbers from the club there is only anecdotal evidence, which is unreliable and can lead to warped perspectives as you say.

 

Applies to home tickets, away tickets, cup final tickets, and even how they're selecting the composition of these workshops. 

 

The club should be more forthcoming with this stuff imo as it's not helping. Numbers and how people are selected, for everything - think this would solve a lot of issues before there's a chance for resentment to build. 

 

Unless there is some unfairness going on that they don't want to admit to (surprising levels of away tickets given to corporate for example) and I wouldn't be surprised if that's the reason they're so coy. If they're not willing to share the info then people will arrive at their own conclusions. 

[LFEE]

7 minutes ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

Excuse my ignorance here but surely as a ST holders, you already have your ticket/place guaranteed for every home match anyway?

Our own yes. The family and friends we’ve helped buy tickets for to go to the game with us for many years previously no!

 

I’ve always spent a huge chunk of my time helping others trying to get tickets for NUFC. Even for random strangers on here I’ve never met usually traveling far & wide.

 

Thats why I question why someone like me shouldn’t be able to have their say. The fact I have a ST to me is irrelevant.

 

The fact I understand the very fabric of the club and its fanbase and what effect the changes have had, even slightly nuanced, on them both is all that matters IMO. That and I’m not afraid to voice my opinion regardless of authority.

 

You could have ended up with 120 Members and many might not have a clue or if they do no ability to articulate it. So the ticket status is largely irrelevant in their cases.

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bobbydazzla]

11 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Our own yes. The family and friends we’ve helped buy tickets for to go to the game with us for many years previously no!

 

I’ve always spent a huge chunk of my time helping others trying to get tickets for NUFC. Even for random strangers on here I’ve never met usually traveling far & wide.

 

Thats why I question why someone like me shouldn’t be able to have their say. The fact I have a ST to me is irrelevant.

 

The fact I understand the very fabric of the club and its fanbase and what effect the changes have had, even slightly nuanced, on them both is all that matters IMO. That and I’m not afraid to voice my opinion regardless of authority.

 

You could have ended up with 120 Members and many might not have a clue or if they do no ability to articulate it. So the ticket status is largely irrelevant in their cases.

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're guaranteed to get into every game. Yes, you've experienced the frustration of the ballot, resale etc. But you're helping others. If you fail, you still get to go the game.

 

Your opinion about the Ballot counts, but I'd argue less so than people who are just Members. And many of them would bite your hand off for a Season Ticket.

 

You're basically saying. I've got my big cake and I get to eat a new piece every week. But I also want to have a say in how others who can't have a full cake get to bake their weekly slice of cake and eat it, because I know some people who like eating slices of cake and I sometimes help them to bake their slice of cake.

 

Or summat like that.

 

 

 

 

[Wallsendmag]

31 minutes ago, LFEE said:

Our own yes. The family and friends we’ve helped buy tickets for to go to the game with us for many years previously no!

 

I’ve always spent a huge chunk of my time helping others trying to get tickets for NUFC. Even for random strangers on here I’ve never met usually traveling far & wide.

 

Thats why I question why someone like me shouldn’t be able to have their say. The fact I have a ST to me is irrelevant.

 

The fact I understand the very fabric of the club and its fanbase and what effect the changes have had, even slightly nuanced, on them both is all that matters IMO. That and I’m not afraid to voice my opinion regardless of authority.

 

You could have ended up with 120 Members and many might not have a clue or if they do no ability to articulate it. So the ticket status is largely irrelevant in their cases.

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think when demand is as high as it is it should be strictly 1 ticket per supporter. Not fair on members paying £37 a year just to get a chance of entering ballots if supporters who already have their seats guaranteed are allowed to buy further tickets imo.

 

Pretty sure the likes of Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea etc don't allow STH the chance to purchase additional tickets for home games, which is only right.

[LFEE]

21 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

You're guaranteed to get into every game. Yes, you've experienced the frustration of the ballot, resale etc. But you're helping others. If you fail, you still get to go the game.

 

Your opinion about the Ballot counts, but I'd argue less so than people who are just Members. And many of them would bite your hand off for a Season Ticket.

 

You're basically saying. I've got my big cake and I get to eat a new piece every week. But I also want to have a say in how others who can't have a full cake get to bake their weekly slice of cake and eat it, because I know some people who like eating slices of cake and I sometimes help them to bake their slice of cake.

 

Or summat like that.

 

 

 

 

No. More like there’s a load of people pretending to want eat cake even though they don’t really love it just mearly like it. Then there’s those who love cake but have gone off the idea by the time they get a chance of a slice. Then there’s those who say they love cake but when given a slice they decide it’s not the slice of cake they want and want to return it for a different slice. Or there’s those who just need one slice of cake but try to get two in hope they get one but might end up with two depriving someone of a slice. Then their is those who buy as many cakes as they can even when they don’t like cake to sell to those that do for more money etc

 

Or maybe I know all of these cake issues and happy to convey my vast cake eating experience on behalf of others…

[bobbydazzla]

I like to sit at home in front of my laptop and master bake 

 

 

[LFEE]

10 minutes ago, Wallsendmag said:

 

I think when demand is as high as it is it should be strictly 1 ticket per supporter. Not fair on members paying £37 a year just to get a chance of entering ballots if supporters who already have their seats guaranteed are allowed to buy further tickets imo.

 

Pretty sure the likes of Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea etc don't allow STH the chance to purchase additional tickets for home games, which is only right.

Wasn’t the reason I was arguing that STH’s should be able to share their opinions on ballots. I’ve already given an example of a family of 3 match goers where the two Members couldn’t attend yet the STH could so argued surely he could speak for all 3?

 

However saying as you brought it up. Don’t forget STH did pay for memberships without choice for the option. There was never an opt out option to save money. Was just a way of charging more at the time with little although occasionally handy benefit at the time.

 

Now they’ve removed the option they didn’t reduce the price of the STH after reducing its benefits. They put the price up by around 15%. They maybe could’ve allowed STs to join the ballot at a cost (£37). The fact you can’t get a chance to legitimately take someone of your choosing I argue is harsh. I understand the club just want the “individual/guest” to each have their own membership so they can know who’s attending etc for stats but what I’m suggesting doesn’t minimise the chances for Members getting a match day ticket. Probably would’ve lead to less memberships being bought and a clearer picture overall ironically of demand.
 

That like I say would be to discuss for a different workshop.

 

 

 

 

[Interpolic]

8 minutes ago, LFEE said:

but what I’m suggesting doesn’t minimise the chances for Members getting a match day ticket

 

Eh I don't understand? If there are 35k season ticket holders and a few thousand decide they want an extra ticket each game then that dramatically decreases a member's chance of getting a ticket.

 

Unless you're saying the ones being brought along will generally be members, in which case I don't think it's fair if it's a "it's who you know" situation either.

 

If a member gets a ticket and wants to sit near a season ticket holder and that seat's free then cool, if the club can facilitate it somehow then great. But I really think STHs should be allowed to control their own ticket only, especially when the chasm between demand and supply is so extreme. 

 

And I think most members would feel the same way, which is the main reason we were saying a workshop about predominantly members issues should have been mostly composed of members. 

 

 

Edited February 21 by Interpolic

[LFEE]

37 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

Eh I don't understand? If there are 35k season ticket holders and a few thousand decide they want an extra ticket each game then that dramatically decreases a member's chance of getting a ticket.

 

Unless you're saying the ones being brought along will generally be members, in which case I don't think it's fair if it's a "it's who you know" situation either.

 

If a member gets a ticket and wants to sit near a season ticket holder and that seat's free then cool, if the club can facilitate it somehow then great. But I really think STHs should be allowed to control their own ticket only, especially when the chasm between demand and supply is so extreme. 

 

And I think most members would feel the same way, which is the main reason we were saying a workshop about predominantly members issues should have been mostly composed of members. 

 

 

 

I’ve not suggested once controlling more than one ticket. A STH isn’t allowed to buy a membership to ballot. I’m saying they should be allowed to buy one at £37 to ballot as and when and bring someone to the game occasionally if successful. These would most likely be people who’ve bought memberships. However they would currently all have to have memberships each. So what you get is people applying for as many games as possible to justify the cost when I wouldn’t have been surprised that they were quite happy going to the odd game they were invited to. I’ve seen this mentality with many members. 

[Interpolic]

6 minutes ago, LFEE said:

I’ve not suggested once controlling more than one ticket. A STH isn’t allowed to buy a membership to ballot. I’m saying they should be allowed to buy one at £37 to ballot as and when and bring someone to the game occasionally if successful. These would most likely be people who’ve bought memberships. However they would currently all have to have memberships each. So what you get is people applying for as many games as possible to justify the cost when I wouldn’t have been surprised that they were quite happy going to the odd game they were invited to. I’ve seen this mentality with many members. 

 

Well that's what I'm saying - I don't think a STH should be allowed to buy extra tickets. I would imagine most members are the same since they're not daft and know it's a numbers game. It's already pretty bloody difficult to get a ticket and what you suggest would make it even harder. 

 

The thing about people applying for more tickets than they may have done otherwise is a fair point I guess but when the ballot success rate is apparently 30-40% I don't think this is having as big an impact as opening it up to 30-odd thousand season ticket holders would. 

 

Also I appreciate what you're saying about what you've heard about member behaviour but it's all anecdotal. It's based on people in or around your circle and not necessarily reflective of the 80k members or whatever it is. Everyone makes their own assumptions about other people's behaviour and their motives, myself included. 

[LFEE]

1 minute ago, Interpolic said:

 

Well that's what I'm saying - I don't think a STH should be allowed to buy extra tickets. I would imagine most members are the same since they're not daft and know it's a numbers game. It's already pretty bloody difficult to get a ticket and what you suggest would make it even harder. 

 

The thing about people applying for more tickets than they may have done otherwise is a fair point I guess but when the ballot success rate is apparently 30-40% I don't think this is having as big an impact as opening it up to 30-odd thousand season ticket holders would. 

 

Also I appreciate what you're saying about what you've heard about member behaviour but it's all anecdotal. It's based on people in or around your circle and not necessarily reflective of the 80k members or whatever it is. Everyone makes their own assumptions about other people's behaviour and their motives, myself included. 

It’s natural human behaviour. Think of it as the gym. No one if they can help it wants to pay for a year. No gym however wants to risk allowing to pay a pro rata fee to visit. It’s always much higher daily fee.

 

So those that pay for the day stay in longer than they want to. Those who pay yearly attend more than they want to but maybe aren’t as committed. Either option leaves the gym generally as full as possible so harder to get on the equipment with the most money brought it regardless. Thats what the new system was like. The old system felt more daily pro rata. Either way cake is being burned off 😆

 

Anyway I fear we are venturing more towards Memberships rather than the actual ballot process itself. The workshop was never going to be about who can or can’t enter. Out of interest if you had your say at the workshop what would’ve been your list of suggestions out of interest?

[Interpolic]

38 minutes ago, LFEE said:

It’s natural human behaviour. Think of it as the gym. No one if they can help it wants to pay for a year. No gym however wants to risk allowing to pay a pro rata fee to visit. It’s always much higher daily fee.

 

So those that pay for the day stay in longer than they want to. Those who pay yearly attend more than they want to but maybe aren’t as committed. Either option leaves the gym generally as full as possible so harder to get on the equipment with the most money brought it regardless. Thats what the new system was like. The old system felt more daily pro rata. Either way cake is being burned off 😆

 

Anyway I fear we are venturing more towards Memberships rather than the actual ballot process itself. The workshop was never going to be about who can or can’t enter. Out of interest if you had your say at the workshop what would’ve been your list of suggestions out of interest?

 

Well I should start by saying that I've actually quite liked the process this season  But I think that's due to my own quite unique personal circumstances. I was in London for 15 years and not going to many home games. Back up now and I've been successful in about half of the ballots so better than most, and I have found it really easy to get tickets in the resale. And I've really liked sitting all over the ground in areas I hadn't been in much, but I know that's unusual. 

 

Like I say though I think I'm a bit out of sync with others with the above, so I wouldn't have went in saying it was all hunky dory. Personally what I'd have suggested are (these are with the assumption that the ballot stays and specific seat selection is not possible):

 

- allow people to apply for more than one category, if they wish to 

- facilitate some sort of preference centre for members, so they can say on their account their preference is "East Stand > Gallowgate" etc 

- members are also given a score for number of consecutive ballots they've been unsuccessful on. Once this gets to a certain number (say 5?), they are guaranteed a ticket the next time they apply 

- this score resets to 0 any time they're successful. Members should be able to see their score in their account, full transparency 

- the ballot is drawn sequentially taking into account the above "rules". So guaranteed tickets are dished out first, with the member's preferences taken into account

- if a member has specified east stand and they are drawn when there are east stand tickets available they'll get one there, if not it moves to Gallowgate etc 

- I personally think the resale is fine as it is and rewards persistence much like the queue used to, but they need to stop releasing all these Youth tickets if possible cos it's frustrating AF

- just total transparency re numbers. When you're applying for categories then you should know the number of tickets available for each 

- some consideration re limiting memberships, it seems they're just trying to rake in as much cash as possible with this and it lessens the value of the membership 

 

I'm a data analyst and much of the above could be done with some pretty basic data analytics modelling I reckon but if their systems are super limited then maybe it's not possible. But I do think stuff needs to happen to stop these mad situations where people have a 0/15 record or whatever, which is always possible when it's completely random. 

 

None of the above tackles the match atmosphere issue as much as allowing selection of specific seats would, so if they can find a way to make that work with a ballot then that would potentially be best. I can see why that could be really quite difficult though. 

 

 

Edited February 21 by Interpolic

[SteV]

26 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

Well I should start by saying that I've actually quite liked the process this season  But I think that's due to my own quite unique personal circumstances. I was in London for 15 years and not going to many home games. Back up now and I've been successful in about half of the ballots so better than most, and I have found it really easy to get tickets in the resale. And I've really liked sitting all over the ground in areas I hadn't been in much, but I know that's unusual. 

 

Like I say though I think I'm a bit out of sync with others with the above, so I wouldn't have went in saying it was all hunky dory. Personally what I'd have suggested are (these are with the assumption that the ballot stays and specific seat selection is not possible):

 

- allow people to apply for more than one category, if they wish to 

- facilitate some sort of preference centre for members, so they can say on their account their preference is "East Stand > Gallowgate" etc 

- members are also given a score for number of consecutive ballots they've been unsuccessful on. Once this gets to a certain number (say 5?), they are guaranteed a ticket the next time they apply 

- this score resets to 0 any time they're successful. Members should be able to see their score in their account, full transparency 

- the ballot is drawn sequentially taking into account the above "rules". So guaranteed tickets are dished out first, with the member's preferences taken into account

- if a member has specified east stand and they are drawn when there are east stand tickets available they'll get one there, if not it moves to Gallowgate etc 

- I personally think the resale is fine as it is and rewards persistence much like the queue used to, but they need to stop releasing all these Youth tickets if possible cos it's frustrating AF

- just total transparency re numbers. When you're applying for categories then you should know the number of tickets available for each 

- some consideration re limiting memberships, it seems they're just trying to rake in as much cash as possible with this and it lessens the value of the membership 

 

I'm a data analyst and much of the above could be done with some pretty basic data analytics modelling I reckon but if their systems are super limited then maybe it's not possible. But I do think stuff needs to happen to stop these mad situations where people have a 0/15 record or whatever, which is always possible when it's completely random. 

 

None of the above tackles the match atmosphere issue as much as allowing selection of specific seats would, so if they can find a way to make that work with a ballot then that would potentially be best. I can see why that could be really quite difficult though. 

 

 

 

Some very valid points worthy of consideration there 👍

 

Really can’t understand why total transparency on numbers is so hard 🤷🏽‍♂️

 

Do think we’re pissing in the wind talking about going back to limited membership though. Horse has bolted now.

[Interpolic]

6 minutes ago, SteV said:

Some very valid points worthy of consideration there 👍

 

Really can’t understand why total transparency on numbers is so hard 🤷🏽‍♂️

 

Do think we’re pissing in the wind talking about going back to limited membership though. Horse has bolted now.

 

Yeah tbf I disliked how they did it the previous season more. Just cutting off memberships with no warning, when in previous seasons I could have bought the membership with the first ticket I was after. Meant I couldn't buy a ticket using the proper method all season. 

 

If they did limit it again but were more transparent about numbers then it'd probably be total carnage trying to get one. On balance I think they'll keep it as it is now, but it's not too good a situation. It'll bring in more revenue but it dilutes the value of it. 

 

 

Edited February 21 by Interpolic

[SteV]

1 minute ago, Interpolic said:

 

Yeah tbf I disliked how they did it the previous season more. Just cutting off memberships with no warning, when in previous seasons I could have bought the membership with the first ticket I was after. Meant I couldn't buy a ticket using the proper method all season. 

 

If they did limit it again but were more transparent about numbers then it'd probably be total carnage trying to get one. On balance I think they'll keep it as it is now, but it's not too good a situation. It'll bring in more revenue but it dilutes the value of it. 

 

 

 

They need to get some kind of tier structure in place. Don’t know how that works mind, as every option seems to be fraught with problems.
 

But eventually they’ll have to come with something to more or less eradicate away fans and ‘Jonny one-game’ getting preference over more committed members.