2010/11 entrance fees

[AndyKirkup]

Just got an email back from Helen saying she's passed my comments on to Keith.

At least they'll read my message if nothing else.

[Pigman]

The point I will argue, and I will be seeking legal advice about it once I have a definitive answer from the BSP, is how can it be legal to force a football club to charge customers the same across the board for an inferior product. Standing behind a goal does not equate to sitting in a seat along the touchline, so why should I be charged the same???

I'm bloody annoyed about this and the more I think about it the more annoyed I get, its yet another example of the stupidity of the people who are running the game, they put into action rules but they don't think about the impact of those rules on either clubs or supporters. I would like to see, word for word, what this directive from the BSP is - perhaps the club would like to publish it on the official website???

Once I know I'll be approaching Trading Standards intially to see what they have to say about it. My gripe isn't with the club, its with whoever sent out this directive (which I still haven't seen !!!!!).

[coltrane]

Isn't it the case that the club set the pricing policy and that the conference have instructed the club that away supporters have to be offered admission to the ground at the same rate as the lowest home supporters. How this is achieved is down to the club not to the conference, the club can choose to put away supporters in any part of the ground but still have to charge them the same rate as the lowest price tickets, it is the club that have decided to raise PDB ticket prices to get around this rule not the conference, your argument is therefore with the club.

[Pigman]

I see Cambridge United ticket prices are £17 for the stands and £14 for the terrace - so doesn't this directive apply to them??? Or will they charge us £14 for a seat?? I presume they'll shove us in that shed and charge us £14, but what will they do when Luton visit? Charge £14 across the board???

[Pigman]

Isn't it the case that the club set the pricing policy and that the conference have instructed the club that away supporters have to be offered admission to the ground at the same rate as the lowest home supporters. How this is achieved is down to the club not to the conference, the club can choose to put away supporters in any part of the ground but still have to charge them the same rate as the lowest price tickets, it is the club that have decided to raise PDB ticket prices to get around this rule not the conference, your argument is therefore with the club.

Have you seen the wording of the directive then Coltrane?? If so, please send me a copy as I have no idea if what you've said above is true.

If I find what you have said to be true, then I won't set foot in Nene Park again as I don't like being ripped off and thats how I'd feel !! Still, I'm only one fan so that won't hurt the bottom line too much will it?

[Trek]

I see Cambridge United ticket prices are £17 for the stands and £14 for the terrace - so doesn't this directive apply to them??? Or will they charge us £14 for a seat?? I presume they'll shove us in that shed and charge us £14, but what will they do when Luton visit? Charge £14 across the board???

Cambridge United will offer away fans a spot on the Habbin Terrace for those wishing to stand at £14 and I guess seats in the South Stand at £17 will be provided in line with the prices in their main stand occupied by home supporters so they won't have a problem unless, of course, they don't open a section of the Habbin Terrace.

I believe the Conference can do sweet FA if the Club ignore this directive. The Conference management seem to be making up the rules on the hoof, surprise, surprise. :evil:, just because they've had a complaint from two other clubs who Matt wouldn't or couldn't name. The Club were told early July!!

The main poin thatt I put to Matt was that it appeared not to have been put to the Conference AGM so I fail to see how they can enforce this 'directive' (note not regulation).

Although it does not personally affect me I'm concerned over the impact it will have on our crowds and resulting finance and am more angry now that when I first read the OWS statement lat week.

[ron manager]

Still feels like the club are using this as an excuse to raise prices too me, call me cynical

[Trek]

Still feels like the club are using this as an excuse to raise prices too me, call me cynical

That wasn't the impression Matt gave me but I wish they would use a bit more grey matter to resolve with the Conference. I also wish KC would get personally involved since with his legal background and business saavy I'm sure he could resolve.

[Mad Dog]

Still feels like the club are using this as an excuse to raise prices too me, call me cynical

Not really. The prices would have been almost finalised well before July. They wouldn't have announced them so late if it provided an 'excuse.'

[Mad Dog]

I believe the Conference can do sweet FA if the Club ignore this directive. The Conference management seem to be making up the rules on the hoof, surprise, surprise. :evil:, just because they've had a complaint from two other clubs who Matt wouldn't or couldn't name. The Club were told early July!!

The main poin thatt I put to Matt was that it appeared not to have been put to the Conference AGM so I fail to see how they can enforce this 'directive' (note not regulation).

Although it does not personally affect me I'm concerned over the impact it will have on our crowds and resulting finance and am more angry now that when I first read the OWS statement lat week.

You know Trek, that is an excellent point and the club could very well make a case based on that at the FA. If it wasn't brought up at the AGM how can they justify bringing in additional regulations, and unilaterally? The fact you say Matt has said that the club is talking to the FA is a positive development.