Exactly right. I'm not a 1901-er and on the face of it it's a pathetic complaint, but it's the principle. We all know the club is losing money and we accept that it has to make whatever savings it can, but Mr Barber does occasionally sound as if he should be working for SASTA the way these changes are announced. As with the Seven Stars bar row earlier the club need to be more honest and up-front when announcing these measures instead of hiding behind weasle-words, trying to justify the changes with faux market research, and probably worse: announcing them ex post facto.. We CAN take the honesty Paul, try us. After all, what was that slogan again? #Together?.As has been mentioned already in earlier posts, the free Tea/Coffee removal isn't the thrust of this issue, it's the sneaky way it was done and then posted in a press release after the club got all the 1901club 5-year renewals signed and sealed. We all realise the club is losing money until they can get promotion to the promised land, but don't start taking the fan's for mugs, and that's wherever they sit in the stadium.
If the coffee genuinely costs too much then withdraw it prior to 5 year sign ups. And don't waste money issuing superfluous cards and screw that up as well.
This.
I would also argue that PB is on a sticky wicket claiming that the free tea/coffee isn't contractual. He may be right that it is isn't written in the contract, but if the club have provided it foc at their cost for the last 3.5 years, and at the supplier's cost for the previous 1.5 years (source: PB's email), then, under Common Law, I would say there's a strong custom and practice precedent that has been set. Could they have explicitly removed the custom and practice prior to getting the new contracts in place? Yes, of course - as they did with communicating that friendlies, etc. are no longer included. The unilateral retrospective action would, imo, be viewed dimly by a Court given there's a 5 year precedent.
Personally, I'm not that bothered by it - the queue for the tea was long, and there was always a scrum around the milk, which always ran out anyway. However, the principle of the thing is wrong, and, imo, is quite possibly breach of implied contract anyway.
Court?!!!
It's a cup of tea FFS!
*Sigh*
The cost saving argument is rather undone by the incredibly lavish presentation boxes and 1901 enamelled badges (what kind of nonce will wear one of those) that accompanied the unnecessary new cards and lanyards.
Personally, I'm not that bothered by it - the queue for the tea was long, and there was always a scrum around the milk, which always ran out anyway.
The type of person who might wear an enamelled badge might also wear a Union Flag waistcoat to work, perhaps?
Well l'll be wearing mine.
Badge or waistcoat?
The type of person who might wear an enamelled badge might also wear a Union Flag waistcoat to work, perhaps?
Did anyone here look at or respond to the survey sent out to 1901ers?
I'm just curious if it was along the lines of "Please rank these in order of importance to you" and then listed various aspects of the 1901 package, with those that scored the lowest, such as friendlies and hot drinks, being culled.
I ask because if that was the format, it may not mean that hot drinks are viewed as not important to 1901 Club members, just less important than some other elements. Less important doesn't necessarily equate to not important.
Very much the latter. It was never - which of these could you do without to save money. It was along the lines of how important do you rate the following. In hindsight, you can see what they were doing but not at the time. No-one in good conscience is going to rate free tea and coffee as high as the view from my seat for example. In honesty, I only drank the coffee at day games which are becoming fewer. And it wasn't very nice. It is no great loss to me and I won't be buying one to replace it. It was nice on a cold afternoon to have your half time beer, get a coffee when the queue had died down and take it back to your seat as something warm. It was a nice touch but would in no way have been a deal breaker if they would have said they were removing it as part of the renewal pack when they mentioned contractual changes such as friendlies and European games.Did anyone here look at or respond to the survey sent out to 1901ers?
I'm just curious if it was along the lines of "Please rank these in order of importance to you" and then listed various aspects of the 1901 package, with those that scored the lowest, such as friendlies and hot drinks, being culled.
I ask because if that was the format, it may not mean that hot drinks are viewed as not important to 1901 Club members, just less important than some other elements. Less important doesn't necessarily equate to not important.