• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

SAFC - Fan Ban & Ticket Cancellations


No comment on the foundation being willing to pay for the box but not given the chance. Sounds like Gemma is being very magnanimous with the club
Of course she is. Seen someone say she hasn’t got a problem with it so why should anyone else but she can hardly come out kicking off about what has been offered. It’s a disgrace, can’t believe they have done it. Even if it’s a 100k a year so what. Easy for me to say as it’s not my money but the owner should just pay it as custodian of the club.
 
I honestly think that's fair enough. They've offered a box for several seasons free of charge and are still offering a package for a few games. It's a decent compromise for me.

It's not the worst compromise, but how much is this making for the club realistically?

To put it in Burwell language, you do things like giving the box to BLF to improve "brand affinity" between the "business" and its "customers". It's the same reason why you'd improve the concourses, erect new statues, put up new signage etc. All that costs money that we don't necessarily need to spend. So looking at this in pure "return on investment" terms, is the £50k or so we get in incremental ticket revenue worth it given the damage it'll do to the club's brand? Because it's exactly this kind of thing that might make people think twice about buying a general sale ticket or a new bit of merch when the "product" on the pitch starts to fall away. Not sure the "opportunity cost" works here, to put it in Burwell-ese.

It strikes me as a penny wise, pound foolish business decision. And on a ethical, human, community level it's absolutely rancid.
 
Believe a box is 'only £50k' not the £100k being banded about on this thread. Im fairly sure we as fans could have quite easily supported that every season. I know i would have put money in each season to help fund it.

Clearly giving a professional response so that it isnt a case of cutting the charities nose off so to speak
Also this. Tick a box if you’re willing to pay a 2 quid levy to your season ticket price to fund it. Bet 90% of fans would have
 
The 6 games will be the least demand too, 3 promoted sides n shit ko ones probably.

Youd think getting millions of the local community this is just a little give back but no, profit rules.
Also this. Tick a box if you’re willing to pay a 2 quid levy to your season ticket price to fund it. Bet 90% of fans would have
That should never ever be necesary. Grim this.
 
Last edited:
The 6 games will be the least demand too, 3 promoted sides n shit ko ones probably.

Youd think getting millions of the local community this is just a little give back but no, profit rules.

That should never ever be necesary. Grim this.
I agree with you, I did say in my previous post that the owner as custodian of the club should pay it if the club needs the money that bad. I think my posts maybe got split up
 
It's not the worst compromise, but how much is this making for the club realistically?

To put it in Burwell language, you do things like giving the box to BLF to improve "brand affinity" between the "business" and its "customers". It's the same reason why you'd improve the concourses, erect new statues, put up new signage etc. All that costs money that we don't necessarily need to spend. So looking at this in pure "return on investment" terms, is the £50k or so we get in incremental ticket revenue worth it given the damage it'll do to the club's brand? Because it's exactly this kind of thing that might make people think twice about buying a general sale ticket or a new bit of merch when the "product" on the pitch starts to fall away. Not sure the "opportunity cost" works here, to put it in Burwell-ese.

It strikes me as a penny wise, pound foolish business decision. And on an ethical, human, community level it's absolutely rancid.
Bang on
 
Chelsea are blocking between 60,000 and 80,000 bots and have suspended 16,000 memberships as part of ongoing efforts to tackle ticket touting.

The Blues are among the most targeted clubs in the Premier League and have been affected by sophisticated criminal networks involved in the illegal resale of tickets.

There have been attempts to exploit tourists attending matches in a wealthy part of London, alongside supply-and-demand pressures as Chelsea appear to have outgrown the 40,000‑capacity Stamford Bridge.

In addition to rolling out new technology to block bots, Chelsea have increased the number of suspended memberships for misuse to 16,000, up from 5,000 previously.

The Blues also say there is a 94% non‑collection rate at ticket collection points for the 1,000 fans per match identified as potentially breaching club policy. Meanwhile, misuse of concessionary tickets has more than halved, most notably in the family stand.

Chelsea say they have invested in "additional resource" to address these issues.

However, criticism remains. The Chelsea Supporters' Trust (CST) says co-owner - which remains listed on the Premier League's unauthorised ticket websites page and sells Chelsea tickets at heavily inflated prices, often to American tourists - "undermines confidence, cuts across the wider fight against ticket touting, and reinforces a growing feeling among supporters that the system is not working in their interests".

Some Chelsea fan groups acknowledge the club's anti-touting measures are having an impact, but the CST has also expressed frustration over Champions League pricing, the membership structure and the potential ballot system for home fixtures.

Chelsea say they are consulting supporters on how to make the ballot system fairer and have told fans to expect changes next season.

A meeting is scheduled for Wednesday to discuss ticketing systems.

Looks like our problems are small change
 
I agree with you, I did say in my previous post that the owner as custodian of the club should pay it if the club needs the money that bad. I think my posts maybe got split up
Of Donald and Methven could afford to do it with the state of the club, clinging onto Cat 1 Academy status and no television money then there is no valid reason these can’t in my opinion.
 
If heads don't roll fir the absolute balls ups this club has done to the fans in the last 2 months .the pr has took such a battering since our best away result in years .the blr fiasco should be the last straw and senior officials at the club have to go .the ticket office is in the biggest mess it has ever been .every day more problems come out of the club .what a shame in our best season for 25 years
 
Back
Top