I don't think my post on "ask the club" on the 6/10/2013 was at all rude or nasty
and because it happened again some weeks later is why the "Heads should role" comment
its a service I paid for all other communications were ignored who else should I have gone to, as I said it is called "seagulls player"
We went (after a discussion on NSC during the match) to Paul Barber on 14 December at 4.30pm, had an email reply two hours later, the matter was taken up by PB with PERFORM and the FL within seven days. Ongoing negotiations have produced:
(a) A vastly improved service, partly due to PERFORM and partly due to the Albion installing a back up service
(b) An offer of a refund for the substandard service offered by PERFORM.
I'm not being critical of you, but there is a way to make a complaint, and IMO it should be professional, objective, stick to the facts, avoid emotions, and advise of potential consequences should the issue not be resolved to the benefit of all. In any negotiating scenario between two parties there are four outcomes, Win-Win, Win-Lose, Lose-Win and Lose-Lose.
History tells us that Win-Lose situations have a habit of metamorphising into Lose-Lose (the Treaty of Versailles being a classic example), so it was in the Albion's interest to take up the issue on our behalf, but in order to do that PB needed some concrete information, which is what we did during the debacle of the 'Boro match commentary.