Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Argus Letters re Parking in Coldean







Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
Now if you really want something to moan about why is a cheesburger around 50p more than a normal burger when the slice of processed cheese only costs around 1p!

That depends on how much you like cheeseburgers, not my cup of tea
 




Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
Why do you pay the same price for a cup of tea in a cafe even if you don't take milk or sugar - how is that fair?

Good effort but pointless, the issue is what you want to argue the toss over
 


Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,706
The Fatherland
Good effort but pointless, the issue is what you want to argue the toss over

Have you been drinking since I last visited this thread?
 




Ken Newbury

Active member
Feb 6, 2006
426
1/2 mile from LDC country
Good effort but pointless, the issue is what you want to argue the toss over

The point here is clearly that the cost of milk and sugar is charged to everyone who buys the cup of tea even if they chose not to use it - the cost of travel is charged to everyone who buys the ticket even if they chose not to use it. I've not seen anybody moan about the cost of tea, let alone go to court over it!

Night Night
 


Ken Newbury

Active member
Feb 6, 2006
426
1/2 mile from LDC country
Good effort but pointless, the issue is what you want to argue the toss over

The point here is clearly that the cost of milk and sugar is charged to everyone who buys the cup of tea even if they chose not to use it - the cost of travel is charged to everyone who buys the ticket even if they chose not to use it. I've not seen anybody moan about the cost of tea, let alone go to court over it!

Night Night
 


Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
The point here is clearly that the cost of milk and sugar is charged to everyone who buys the cup of tea even if they chose not to use it - the cost of travel is charged to everyone who buys the ticket even if they chose not to use it. I've not seen anybody moan about the cost of tea, let alone go to court over it!

Night Night

Jesus the self righteousness is amazing, yes I will go to bed just for you
 




Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
62,706
The Fatherland
Anyone can if they are charged twice for something, trust me

I have a feeling that your case might struggle on the grounds that you entered into the ST purchase with full knowledge of the cost and you were not forced into buying it.
 


Seagull on the wing

New member
Sep 22, 2010
7,458
Hailsham
As one of the first residents of Coldean....(Roundway) I would have been delighted to have the Stadium at Falmer and people parking....but there again there was only about 4 cars on the Estate...VTIC
 


Finally one of the few people who at least understands the point of the dispute.
The point of the dispute isn't whether a few fans might feel disgruntled about being expected to pay for something they are not using. The point is whether the Club will get permission to expand the stadium.

If everyone felt like Beach Hut, we'd never get 30,500 seats and we wouldn't be able to get to the Premier League and stay there.
 




Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
The point of the dispute isn't whether a few fans might feel disgruntled about being expected to pay for something they are not using. The point is whether the Club will get permission to expand the stadium.

If everyone felt like Beach Hut, we'd never get 30,500 seats and we wouldn't be able to get to the Premier League and stay there.

Sorry LB but what difference does that really make, so we all have to roll over for 8,000 more seats, why ?

The current situation works OK so any additional needs are a few more park and rides as no more trains can run.

Are the club to hold everyone to ransom by saying this is the only way we can have 8,000 additional seats
 


Sorry LB but what difference does that really make, so we all have to roll over for 8,000 more seats, why ?

The current situation works OK so any additional needs are a few more park and rides as no more trains can run.

Are the club to hold everyone to ransom by saying this is the only way we can have 8,000 additional seats
Why? Because without the support of the Green Party administration, we won't get permission to have the use of the land that will provide extra car parking or park and ride facilities that you and I both believe are necessary.

You might feel "held to ransom". I feel that thirty quid is a ransom worth paying.
 


Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
Why? Because without the support of the Green Party administration, we won't get permission to have the use of the land that will provide extra car parking or park and ride facilities that you and I both believe are necessary.

You might feel "held to ransom". I feel that thirty quid is a ransom worth paying.

OK so then why as stated previously should everyone have to pay £30 more - even cyclists and walkers to the ground.

Surely there can be a waiver in place if you can genuinely prove you have paid once to travel to the ground already ?
 




OK so then why as stated previously should everyone have to pay £30 more - even cyclists and walkers to the ground.

Surely there can be a waiver in place if you can genuinely prove you have paid once to travel to the ground already ?
I'd rather see a levy on every ticket than the introduction of a complicated system of administering rebates that could throw up loads of minor disputes and trivial, unresolved grievances.

It might be possible to find a way of rewarding cyclists and people who live within walking distance of the ground, but if you try to exempt rail season ticket holders and weekly Saver ticket holders, you are just making things too complicated.
 


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
57,294
Back in Sussex
OK so then why as stated previously should everyone have to pay £30 more - even cyclists and walkers to the ground.

Surely there can be a waiver in place if you can genuinely prove you have paid once to travel to the ground already ?

Really? Do you really that such an approach will we an easy and painless approach for all?

How would it work for people who have a rail season ticket that is due to expire sometime during the football season? (Most will - as the football season runs for 3/4 of the year)

How would it work for people who can not afford to buy annual rail tickets and buy monthly?

How would it work when someone doesn't renew a rail season ticket mid-season and requires a part-season club travel voucher arrangement?

How would it work for people with a rail season ticket and an Albion season ticket but would like to take the bus every now and again?

How would it work for people with a rail season ticket and an Albion season ticket but would like to use the park and ride every now and again?

How would it work for those who buy tickets match my match who do have a rail season ticket?

How would it work for those who buy tickets match my match who do not have a rail season ticket?

How do bus season tickets fit into all of this? (You're very 'rail ticket' focused - I wonder why)

These are only examples. There are a zillion scenarios that would require numerous different processes, transactions and significant administrative cost to the club. You don't see any of this of course because of the ridiculously simplistic world in which you seem to exist.
 


Beach Hut

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 5, 2003
72,318
Living In a Box
Jesus Bozza I can see the anger, chill out for once as you just totally go into cyber bully mode when you don't agree with someone.

I'll continue to debate with the more reasoned approach from LB, how can it be that complicated if say the club offer a three week period where the onus is on the STH to prove they have the travel issue paid for the whole duration of the impending season ?
 


Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
57,294
Back in Sussex
Jesus Bozza I can see the anger, chill out for once as you just totally go into cyber bully mode when you don't agree with someone.

I'll continue to debate with the more reasoned approach from LB, how can it be that complicated if say the club offer a three week period where the onus is on the STH to prove they have the travel issue paid for the whole duration of the impending season ?

I'm very chilled, but thanks for the concern.

And thanks for avoiding the awkward questions which, again, embarrass your fag-packet 'suits me sir' approach. It says it all.

And you've just proved my point with your question. As I said - most people will not be able to prove they have travel already paid for, for the duration of an entire football season. 3/4 of annual rail season tickets will expire during the season.
 






Bozza

You can change this
Helpful Moderator
Jul 4, 2003
57,294
Back in Sussex
In fact, given Amex season ticket renewals (or non-cancels given the DD payments used by most) will occur months before the season kicks-off, it is likely that literally NO-ONE will have a rail ticket that covers the duration of the football season at that time.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here