Non Season Ticket Holders Unite - Ticket Plans For Next Season

[Springal]

ERRRRR, Card doesnt come back, phone up club and say Ive had my ticket stolen, club issues you a new card = REALLY RISKY!

And how many times do they do this before realising what is going on and charging you a £20 admin fee each time ?

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

If this is true, then somebody at the club is a f***ing IDIOT.

This

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

So what happens now with all those season ticket holders who can make MOST but not all games, but now discover that they have no way of selling on their seat to someone else for the games they can't make WITHOUT parting with their smartcard - how likely are they to renew next time round ?

As we're moving to season ticket smartcards, there should be an effective ticket exchange in place for ALL fans to use, not just those with PSL's. This is totally counterproductive, and WILL lead to banks of empty seats, particularly on evening games, which can be difficult for some to get to with work commitments, or those with young kids who only bring them at weekends.

Ridiculous.

and this

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

HKFC is right. That answer from Insider suggests a woefully inadequate response from the club.

If new STHs find that they were only able to attend 15 or 16 matches out of 23, they will question the wisdom of renewing UNLESS selling match tickets back to the club for re-sale is made as easy as possible. This really isn't rocket science.

The club will suffer when only half the season tickets are renewed because of this (if we have a mediocre season). I can't believe they are being so STUPID as to not offer a proper ticket exchange to all STHs.

and this too.

I know for a fact that we wlll be missing a minimum of three home games next season - if these games are sold out, (and as we are away for both Boxing Day / New Years Day it's quite lokely that we'll be missing one of the more attractive games) HOW crazy would it be to have empty seats at such games when the club could resell the tickets at full price. (and OK we'd get a percentage back too.)

I know that a ticket exchange can only come into operation once the game is a sellout, butthat could be quite often next season.

IF the club has no plans for a Ticket exchange, then they are just throwing money away.

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

The club aren't getting any EXTRA income from programme / food / drink because the unsold program will go to the club shop ( where it will eventually be sold ), the food goes back in the freezer, and the drink goes back in the fridge. Therefore all that is happening is that the club is probably going to sell the products to someone else at a later date ( and it will probably go to a guest of a corporate sponsor who WILL pay for it at the next game ).


Indeed there is absolutely NO reason to think the 'casual fan' who replaces the STH would want food or a programme/ merchandise anyway, more likely that they WON'T buy one, because they are LESS able to afford it, and LESS committed to the club as a whole.

Where a 'casual' replaces a STH, turnover might ( or might not ) increase, but there is no change to the bottom line of the accounts. Profit and turnover are not the same.

I can't believe I just read that.

We might as well have 5,000 any fans turn up for games instead of 22,000 we'll just sell everything 'next time'.

I guess M&S, Tesco have the same idea - "Don't worry if you don't buy anything today, we'll just sell it another day"

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

I know that HKFC 'asked the club' about this some time ago - but have we heard anything official from the club recently?

 

[Drumstick]

Far as I'm aware ticket exchange has been on of perks to psl from start, if people have paid 500 big ones with this partly in mind, then club sets up a free ticket exchange I'd imagine a few angry Psl holders.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I know that HKFC 'asked the club' about this some time ago - but have we heard anything official from the club recently?

HKFC's post to ATC was last Friday (20th May) and supports one from Basingstoke Seagull earlier last week; Insider's response to this was that the club were looking at a Ticket Exchange Scheme and would be anouncing details shortly, hopefully this week - there is no mention of 1901 or PSL in any of these posts.
There has been no club announcement on this as yet, just 8 pages of ? initiated by someone who doesn't seem to have looked at ATC Q&A's before posting details of the current 1901 and PSL exchange/sale arrangements obtained from the Ticket Office. I'm sure I heard about both of these at my STH presentation in January.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

With PSL's the club have the dilemma of how to operate a ticket exchange system if ordinary STH's are included. Will there be a 2 tier system ? ie matchday tickets are sold out 3 weeks before the game so any PSL's who decide to sell their "match entitlement" will go to the top of the list and if the "ticket" is sold get a credit after a x% commission is taken off and regular STH's wait until 1 week before the game before they can put their "match entitlement" up for sale via the club's online database and if the "ticket" is sold get a credit after a higher y% commission is taken off.

 

[Crouch End Seagull]

I hear you AADoo but the response I got from the club suggests they've decided that there won't be an exchange scheme unless you have a PSL.
The person who responded to me also stated that fans should continue to use NSC to exchange spare tickets - which again indicates that there will be no club sanctioned Ticket Exchange Scheme. many of you may wish to wait until there's an official announcement but if you're bothered about it what harm in let the club know your feelings now. Or maybe no one is bothered and just wants to argue about lost burger sales.

 

[Beach Hut]

This PSL business seems another rip off, I had really hoped the club would sort it out.

Now at my presentation I was told you are allowed to actually request match tickets so maybe that is the only way forward to sell on ?

 

[sully]

These are essentially the same thing, or at least integrated; no scheme approval means no safety certificate so no lease signed over so no need for a ticket exchange for the disorganised and/or desperate.

I'd appreciate not being called disorganised and / or desperate if that's ok with you. I'm neither, but I would like to see a sensible exchange system that credits me for the games I attend having purchased a season ticket holder's unused seat.

Because of where I live, a season ticket is not an option, but I get to as many games as I can. I realise I'll be disadvantaged and low down on the "loyalty points" list, but that's part of the price I have to pay for not currently living locally.

It doesn't make me disorganised. In many ways I'm quite the opposite, as it means I've got used to having to be on my toes for getting tickets to the games I can attend.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

I hear you AADoo but the response I got from the club suggests they've decided that there won't be an exchange scheme unless you have a PSL.
The person who responded to me also stated that fans should continue to use NSC to exchange spare tickets - which again indicates that there will be no club sanctioned Ticket Exchange Scheme. many of you may wish to wait until there's an official announcement but if you're bothered about it what harm in let the club know your feelings now. Or maybe no one is bothered and just wants to argue about lost burger sales.

Think I would have pm'd this email to Insider and asked him to clarify on ATC if this is the Club'sposition. If proved correct, then the club employee is actually advising ticket holders to breach the Ground Regulations. I would have asked Insider to clarify this point too as you can (in principle) get banned for this.

 

[Bozza]

Think I would have pm'd this email to Insider and asked him to clarify on ATC if this is the Club'sposition. If proved correct, then the club employee is actually advising ticket holders to breach the Ground Regulations. I would have asked Insider to clarify this point too as you can (in principle) get banned for this.

Sounds a wee bit unnecessary.

The club have said many times that they will continue to 'turn a blind eye' to passing tickets on, appreciative as they are, that not all season ticket holders can go to all games.

 

[Easy 10]

In the United Kingdom resale of football tickets is illegal under section 166 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 unless the resale is authorized by the organizer of the match, such as what viagogo is doing through its partnerships with clubs Chelsea, Manchester United and Everton
166 Sale of tickets by unauthorised persons.E+W[F1
(1)It is an offence for an unauthorised person to—
(a)sell a ticket for a designated football match, or
(b)otherwise to dispose of such a ticket to another person.]
(2)For this purpose—
(a)a person is “unauthorised” unless he is authorised in writing to sell [F2or otherwise dispose of] tickets for the match F3. . . by the organisers of the match;
[F4(aa)a reference to selling a ticket includes a reference to—
(i)offering to sell a ticket;
(ii)exposing a ticket for sale;
(iii)making a ticket available for sale by another;
(iv)advertising that a ticket is available for purchase; and
(v)giving a ticket to a person who pays or agrees to pay for some other goods or services or offering to do so.]
(b)a “ticket” means anything which purports to be a ticket; and
[F5(c)a “designated football match” means a football match of a description, or a particular football match, for the time being designated for the purposes of [F6this section by order made by the Secretary of State].]

[F7(2A)An order under subsection (2)(c) may designate descriptions of football matches wherever played or when played at descriptions of ground or in any area specified in the order.
(2B)The power of the Secretary of State to make an order under subsection (2)(c) shall be exercisable by statutory instrument which shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.]
(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.
(4)F8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(5)Section 32 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (search of persons and premises (including vehicles) upon arrest) shall have effect, in its application in relation to an offence under this section, as if the power conferred on a constable to enter and search any vehicle extended to any vehicle which the constable has reasonable grounds for believing was being used for any purpose connected with the offence.
(6)The Secretary of State may by order made by statutory instrument apply this section, with such modifications as he thinks fit, to such sporting event or category of sporting event for which 6,000 or more tickets are issued for sale as he thinks fit.
(7)An order under subsection (6) above may provide that—
(a)a certificate (a “ticket sale certificate”) signed by a duly authorised officer certifying that 6,000 or more tickets were issued for sale for a sporting event is conclusive evidence of that fact;
(b)an officer is duly authorised if he is authorised in writing to sign a ticket sale certificate by F9. . . the organisers of the sporting event; and
(c)a document purporting to be a ticket sale certificate shall be received in evidence and deemed to be such a certificate unless the contrary is proved.
(8)Where an order has been made under subsection (6) above, this section also applies, with any modifications made by the order, to any part of the sporting event specified or described in the order, provided that 6,000 or more tickets are issued for sale for the day on which that part of the event takes place.
Annotations:Annotations are used to give authority for changes and other effects on the legislation you are viewing and to convey editorial information. They appear at the foot of the relevant provision or under the associated heading. Annotations are categorised by annotation type, such as F-notes for textual amendments and I-notes for commencement information (a full list can be found in the Editorial Practice Guide). Each annotation is identified by a sequential reference number. For F-notes, M-notes and X-notes, the number also appears in bold superscript at the relevant location in the text. All annotations contain links to the affecting legislation.


Amendments (Textual)

F1S. 166(1) substituted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(2), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

F2Words in s. 166(2)(a) inserted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss.53(3)(a)(i), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

F3Words in s. 166(2)(a) repealed (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(3)(a)(ii), 65, 66(2)(3), Sch. 5; S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)(vi)

F4S. 166(2)(aa) inserted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(3)(b), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

F5S. 166(2)(c) substituted (27.9.1999) by 1999 c. 21, ss. 10, 12(2) (with s. 12(3))

F6Words in s. 166(2)(c) substituted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(3)(c), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

F7S. 166(2A)(2B) inserted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(4), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

F8S. 166(4) repealed (1.1.2006) by Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (c. 15), ss. 174, 178, Sch. 17 Pt. 2; S.I. 2005/3495, art. 2(1)(u)(xxxvi) (subject to art. 2)

F9Words in s. 166(7)(a) repealed (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(5), 65, 66(2)(3), Sch. 5; S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)(vi)

[F10166ASupplementary provision relating to sale and disposal of tickets on internetE+W(1)Nothing in section 166 makes it an offence for a service provider established outside of the United Kingdom to do anything in the course of providing information society services.
(2)If—
(a)a service provider established in the United Kingdom does anything in an EEA State other than the United Kingdom in the course of providing information society services, and
(b)the action, if done in England and Wales, would constitute an offence falling within section 166(1),
the service provider shall be guilty in England and Wales of an offence under that section.
(3)A service provider is not capable of being guilty of an offence under section 166 in respect of anything done in the course of providing so much of an information society service as consists in—
(a)the transmission in a communication network of information falling within subsection (4), or
(b)the storage of information provided by a recipient of the service,
except where subsection (5) applies.
(4)Information falls within this subsection if—
(a)it is provided by a recipient of the service; and
(b)it is the subject of automatic, intermediate and temporary storage which is solely for the purpose of making the onward transmission of the information to other recipients of the service at their request more efficient.
(5)This subsection applies at any time in relation to information if—
(a)the service provider knew when that information was provided that it contained material contravening section 166; or
(b)that information is stored at that time (whether as mentioned in subsection (3)(b) or (4)) in consequence of the service provider's failure expeditiously to remove the information, or to disable access to it, upon obtaining actual knowledge that the information contained material contravening section 166.
(6)In this section—
“the Directive” means Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce);
“information society services”—
(a)has the meaning set out in Article 2(a) of the Directive (which refers to Article 1(2) of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC of 20 July 1998); and
(b)is summarised in recital 17 of the Directive as covering “any service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by means of electronic equipment for the processing (including digital compression) and storage of data, and at the individual request of a recipient of a service”;
“EEA State” means a state which is for the time being a member State, Norway, Iceland or Liechtenstein;
“recipient of the service” means any person who, for professional ends or otherwise, uses an information society service, in particular for the purposes of seeking information or making it accessible;
“service provider” means any person providing an information society service.]
Annotations:Annotations are used to give authority for changes and other effects on the legislation you are viewing and to convey editorial information. They appear at the foot of the relevant provision or under the associated heading. Annotations are categorised by annotation type, such as F-notes for textual amendments and I-notes for commencement information (a full list can be found in the Editorial Practice Guide). Each annotation is identified by a sequential reference number. For F-notes, M-notes and X-notes, the number also appears in bold superscript at the relevant location in the text. All annotations contain links to the affecting legislation.


Amendments (Textual)

F10S. 166A inserted (6.4.2007) by Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 (c. 38), ss. 53(6), 66(2)(3); S.I. 2007/858, art. 2(k)

So you could have saved yourself three acres of smallprint if you'd bothered reading the first line. Selling on a football ticket IS perfectly legal if its done through an authorised channel, which is exacly what Fulham FC do via Seatwave, and is precisely what the Albion should be doing as well.

And contrary to what you claim, the funds from the resale go back to the STH, not the club (you do NOT need a PSL to get your money back).

And contrary to what you claim, just like every other STH, you will always get 1st refusal on renewing your existing seat - the club are not going to oust you from your WSU perch and lob you over to the back corner of the family stand. You didn't need to splash out five-hundred quid for that.

I've said it before. You've been sold a PUP.

 

[Easy 10]

Far as I'm aware ticket exchange has been on of perks to psl from start, if people have paid 500 big ones with this partly in mind, then club sets up a free ticket exchange I'd imagine a few angry Psl holders.

They'll have a LOT more angry locked-out Albion fans than a sprinkling of PSL holders if we have signs of numerous empty seats in the stadium at "sold out" games, owing to the club refusing to implement a ticket exchange scheme for STH's, which is standard practice at every other club.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Sounds a wee bit unnecessary.

The club have said many times that they will continue to 'turn a blind eye' to passing tickets on, appreciative as they are, that not all season ticket holders can go to all games.

Don't agree Bozza; a PM to Paul would have given him the opportunity to clarify/resolve the situation with the TO, KB, RH etc in the absence of a predictable binfest like the one we have now.

 

[Crouch End Seagull]

Simple question and no offence meant but why would a comment from "The Insider" have any more credence than an email direct from the club?

 

[Albion Dan]

And how many times do they do this before realising what is going on and charging you a £20 admin fee each time ?

£20 is hardly a massive hardship is it? If you'd sold the ticket for that you'd be break even at worst and thats in the unlikely event someone does a runner with the ticket. All of this obviously becomes completely immaterial if the club starts acting like a proper customer focussed business with demand outstripping supply and implements the exchange system that keeps everybody happy, except whichever moron dreamt up the PSL scheme.

 

[raymondbriggs]

So you could have saved yourself three acres of smallprint if you'd bothered reading the first line. Selling on a football ticket IS perfectly legal if its done through an authorised channel, which is exacly what Fulham FC do via Seatwave, and is precisely what the Albion should be doing as well.

And contrary to what you claim, the funds from the resale go back to the STH, not the club (you do NOT need a PSL to get your money back).

And contrary to what you claim, just like every other STH, you will always get 1st refusal on renewing your existing seat - the club are not going to oust you from your WSU perch and lob you over to the back corner of the family stand. You didn't need to splash out five-hundred quid for that.

I've said it before. You've been sold a PUP.

West Ham have a great version of the sell on scheme.
You give up your unwanted seat and they sell it on,they get all the cash and you get a fuzzy feel good feeling for helping out your team and fellow fans.
NOT all teams have the standard practice of which you speak.
The same "loyalty" con trick is standard practice in the Prem.