Season ticket Academy donation.

[wooster 134]

I''ve not read through all the pages but, as an away season ticket holder, we don''t seem to be offered the £19 option - why is that?

We have to pay £20 for the right to get away tickets (at face value) and I assumed that was an administrative fee.

Some of it may go the Academy ....... 

[nutty nigel 7,535]

There''d be no real value in winning an away season ticket Wooster. Certainly not if it was 19 quud to enter the draws...

[......and Smith must score. 1,343]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."][quote user="TIL 1010"]He''s quite happy to give them £19 Smithy yet he won''t eat those cold sausage rolls poor old Cameron Newark was bleating about at the AGM. It''s off to Morrisons every match for him instead of putting money in Mr. McNallys coffers.[/quote]To be fair our Chief Exec''s idea of a competitive price for a sausage roll means there''s plenty of people like Nutty who would rather be a customer at Morrisons than a customer at Carrow Rd.Or should that be supporter ? [;)][/quote]

 

See this is a humourous way of talking bo11ox Smiffy. Like your inertia, whatever that is. The issue is the academy £19 and having to opt out. I have no problem with that. But that doesn''t mean you guys can make these huge judgements like "Oh so you''d be in favour of **something ridiculous**. No no, I have no problem with the academy £19 and the way it''s collected anything else feel free to run it by me first[;)]

 

Now is this the longest Morty thread ever where he''s failed to produce his sexual organ....

 

[/quote]Making assumptions and huge judgements is part of the fun, games and general b******s that is this message board.Talking of huge judgements how do you know Morty''s got the longest one on here ? Or have I misread that ? [;)]

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="......and Smith must score."]Talking of huge judgements how do you know Morty''s got the longest one on here ? Or have I misread that ? [;)][/quote]He''s got very short legs so it probably seems that way. [:S]

[......and Smith must score. 1,343]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="......and Smith must score."]Talking of huge judgements how do you know Morty''s got the longest one on here ? Or have I misread that ? [;)][/quote]He''s got very short legs so it probably seems that way. [:S][/quote][:D]

[morty 0]

[:|]

[The gut 0]

Seems like we''ve got a lot more customers than supporters on here.

I don''t get the feeling we are as one, you know, our club and us.

I''m also not getting the lack of knowledge of opting out and any deadlines - Without opening a single letter, making a call or logging into the internet I have known about it for months just by being in and around Norwich, the news and conversations with other fans. Even non season ticket holders I talk to seem to know all about it. I would even go so far as to say my 80 year old mother''s 90 year old female neighbour effin well knew about it.

I hope the club does read this thread and come to the conclusion that it is not good for public image so decide to raise the cost of all season tickets by £50 and give whatever they like from that to the academy. If the customers don''t like the price hike they can take their custom elsewhere.

[morty 0]

Lol.

[The gut 0]

Yep .... confirmed!

Mother knew all about it and was only discussing it with all the other old dears along the street last week.

She didn''t know when the bins went out, where she left her handbag or had the slightest clue where her marbles were but she knew you had to opt out of the academy.

[The gut 0]

*academy donation

[morty 0]

Ah well, I''m sure it was hilarious in your head as you typed it out.

[The gut 0]

nope.. nowhere near hilarious.

All true apart from the marbles.

[morty 0]

[quote user="The gut"]nope.. nowhere near hilarious.

All true apart from the marbles.[/quote]Course it is[:)]

[TIL 1010 4,746]

It is beginning to look as though those that pay the £19 for next season will get better value for money with 23 games as opposed to this season''s 19. [:)]

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]It is beginning to look as though those that pay the £19 for next season will get better value for money with 23 games as opposed to this season''s 19. [:)][/quote]Every cloud has a silver lining.[:D]

[GPs Beard 0]

Those of us with "friends" in the Financial Services sector, are today faced with new rules from FCA on the sale of "add-ins" (in this case insurance products like legal expenses tagged on to insurance policies.). FCA are very clear that they are not happy with "opt out" sales, and customers must "opt in" to anything they would like to buy.

It includes the phrase:

"The customer needs to actively confirm they want the policy"

(as opposed to actively confirming that they don''t.)

Now of course this is a Football Club we are talking about and not the insurance market, but it will be interesting to see next years season ticket renewals .....

[nutty nigel 7,535]

If it then results in less nineteen quids will that be seen as a good result?

[Well b back 3,207]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]If it then results in less nineteen quids will that be seen as a good result?[/quote]

Is our club above the law ? Selling a product this way is now illegal and will only result in a drop in numbers if people don''t really want to pay it but feel they were pushed into it.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

I would hope they''re not. If the law doesn''t apply to everyone then it wouldn''t be a fair law. That wasn''t what I asked though.

What I meant was if the law has changed and the club end up with less 19 quids will that be seen as a good result?

[Katie Borkins 1]

It will be a good result if everyone is absolutely clear on what they are being asked to contribute to up front, and can make an informed decision to donate additional money (in this case £19) rather than having the additional £19 added on to the cost of a service they have already paid in full for.

The issue here isn''t about Club income, it is about transparency to those paying their hard earned money.

If as a side effect the club makes less income then we are not short if bright sparks in he boardroom who can turn a quid or two on other promotional activities.

[Well b back 3,207]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]I would hope they''re not. If the law doesn''t apply to everyone then it wouldn''t be a fair law. That wasn''t what I asked though.

What I meant was if the law has changed and the club end up with less 19 quids will that be seen as a good result?[/quote]

If this was a bank people would be up in arms ?

If you feel people really would not opt in then that backs up the point the FSC is making?

I opted out 3 years ago. I assumed once I opted out I would always be out not put back in the year after. I was put back in the year after and did not realise having to pay for something I did not want to pay for. If this was £19 towards a player ie the Grant Holt collection I would happily pay.

[Lessingham Canary 99]

My understanding (our business is FCA registered) that the club is registered with them, but I cant see that this would be a concern as they are not selling regulated products as part of the process. There is new legislation coming out of the EU surrounding the use of card machines that will potentially have more impact on business''s going forward.

[nutty nigel 7,535]

Blimey!! My head''s spinning :)

I really don''t care about banks, Grant Holt collections, services, what each of us decides to do or even what we did 3 years ago. I was just asking if it resulted in less 19 quids to the academy do people see that as a good thing. My considered answer is no BTW.

You''re not gonna have that much room on your ballot papers in June...

[Katie Borkins 1]

I see fair and respectful treatment of paying customers as a good thing. I see providing transparency re: what they are paying for as a good thing. I see letting people decide whether to donate, rather than asking them to claw back an assumed donation, as a good thing.

In that context, whether the club takes less in donations is a side issue to the club treating supporters as informed donors rather than taking their donations for granted.

The club will probably make less money from it. In the scheme of things, the millionaire''s playground probably won''t be radically altered.

[Van wink 2,994]

Funding to the "millionaires playground" will not be effected one way or another by the number of season ticket holders that cough up, I would be delighted to be proved wrong by someone who could show a direct link between the two.

[Duncan Edwards 2,236]

Well this is complicated.

I worked in "Financial Services" for a few years and was incentivised to sell Life and Payment Protection policies alongside mortgages.

These policies were paid for upfront as a balance added to the mortgage balance. They were five year non-renewable policies. Thus, you were adding a premium to a mortgage that would have interest paid on it for the full term of the agreement yet would only cover for the first five years.

All of this was explained, people had to opt yes. People did.

It was a crap deal as anybody with an ounce of sense could see. I didn''t sell it. It was crap. I used to get disciplined for my stand. I worked for the Turners at the time, this policy of selling crap deals was helpful to them making their "fortune".

They ended up paying a "fair few quid" in compensation because the policies they were selling were crap. Just as I''d pointed out years previously.

The Academy thing is a lot different. You''re not going to pay interest hand over fist for years, you''re not paying for something that you don''t understand. It''s there, clear enough.

Contribute in the blind hope that we''ll snare another Sutton or Bellamy and feel warm inside that you might have helped. Opt out and still feel warm inside if we DO produce another star because it''s your club.

Nobody is getting robbed here. If you want to do it, do. If you don''t, don''t.

There''s no pressure and nobody is incentivising a qualified financial professional to sell something to you that they don''t believe in and will make you worse off.

Whatever happened to Andy and Sharon?

[Katie Borkins 1]

Freedom Finance Duncan? You probably worked with my dear darling ex-fiancé.

Anyway. My view is simple. Everything should be opt in and not opt out. Nothing should ever be assumed or taken for granted.

[TIL 1010 4,746]

[quote user="George Osborn"]Everything should be opt in and not opt out. Nothing should ever be assumed or taken for granted.[/quote][Y]