Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
KiwiScot

Crystal Palace Tickets

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

Let's also be honest and not pretend like the system we had before wouldn't still have resulted in people missing out tickets and complaining about that system on here and social media.

I'd argue there was a general acceptance that our previous system was fair. I don't remember many whines about not getting tickets last time we were in the Premier League. The only objection I heard with any regularity was that it overly favoured season ticket holders, which was easily adjusted.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

No that's not what I'm saying.

Look buddy, I am in favour of a loyalty based system that rewards loyalty while including as many fans a possible.

You guys seem to be in favour of a loyalty based system and keeping it as small as possible.

We are just going to have to disagree.

 

I didn't think it was, but it's how it comes across.

But we are certainly not in favour of a loyalty system that keeps the pool as small as possible. The only loyalty system that does that is the current one, which we all agree is dreadful.

We are all in favour of including as many fans as possible in the loyalty scheme, and by having a sliding scale, everyone's loyalty is rewarded at roughly the right level.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

You say the system is wrong but we mustn't point out why because people may be offended?

 

?!?

The system is wrong for multiple reasons. Those reasons are almost exclusively down to choices made by the people who designed that system. It isn't about offending people, it is about directing criticism at the people who created and can solve the issues. The 750 aren't that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

 

We are all in favour of including as many fans as possible in the loyalty scheme, and by having a sliding scale, everyone's loyalty is rewarded at roughly the right level.

No it doesn't. It rewards the majority of loyalty at a much higher level.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I didn't think it was, but it's how it comes across.

But we are certainly not in favour of a loyalty system that keeps the pool as small as possible. The only loyalty system that does that is the current one, which we all agree is dreadful.

We are all in favour of including as many fans as possible in the loyalty scheme, and by having a sliding scale, everyone's loyalty is rewarded at roughly the right level.

This. It really isn't that hard to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, king canary said:

This. It really isn't that hard to understand.

Then you obviously can explain to me why it's fair that someone who went to 10 games can get priority for 20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

Then you obviously can explain to me why it's fair that someone who went to 10 games can get priority for 20.

What I'm saying is that someone who goes to 10 games deserves to be ahead of someone who want to 5 games in the pecking order. A sliding scale scheme achieves that. It doesn't mean they'd automatically get priority- if there were 3,000 fans who made 11 games or more then they would technically have priority for none.

What you seem to want is some unworkable and convoluted scheme that involves someone who went to 10 being in a priority group for 10 games but not for any others. If you can explain how that would work, great. Otherwise you're just lashing out for the sake of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your system is modelled on what happened last season and would only be fair if the people in the system did what they did last season.

This isn't happening.

So now adding to the elite group just adds to the unfairness. 

Reward loyalty with it's just reward.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

No it doesn't. It rewards the majority of loyalty at a much higher level.

 

9 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Then you obviously can explain to me why it's fair that someone who went to 10 games can get priority for 20.

But not everyone who went to 11 games last year wants to go to 19 this year. Not everyone who went to four wants to go to nine this year. They have the option to, as they did last year, but they probably won't.

And the only way to implement the system you seem to be proposing is to cap the amount of games people can attend, which is a completely unprecedented system that I don't think any club has ever done.

And let's not forget that the current system, in theory, allows someone who attended zero games last season to attend 19 this year. That's more unfair than giving someone who attended 10 the same possibility.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

Your system is modelled on what happened last season and would only be fair if the people in the system did what they did last season.

This isn't happening.

So now adding to the elite group just adds to the unfairness. 

Reward loyalty with it's just reward.

 

You continue to not make any actual suggestions yourself.

No system is entirely fair- you can always find people who feel wronged by it. Last season was about as fair as anything workable that I can think of and is pretty much the accepted norm at every other club in the country. It seems only you are so exercised by it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Hell will freeze over before there's an answer to this.

You not answering my question to you NN? 

Have you contacted the club with your views and suggestions, as you seem to very vocal on this. What is your suggestion. 

Is it one rule for one and one for others? 

Sounds elitest to me! 

Thought you were off anyways. 

Nice to know you've missed me, having only posted 3 times since May. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

 

But not everyone who went to 11 games last year wants to go to 19 this year. Not everyone who went to four wants to go to nine this year. They have the option to, as they did last year, but they probably won't.

And the only way to implement the system you seem to be proposing is to cap the amount of games people can attend, which is a completely unprecedented system that I don't think any club has ever done.

And let's not forget that the current system, in theory, allows someone who attended zero games last season to attend 19 this year. That's more unfair than giving someone who attended 10 the same possibility.

Exactly.

What we know is, based on the clubs figures when launching this scheme, we had 750 people who did 10+ away games last season. So even if they all decided to go to all 19 games then it would leave 2,250 to be distributed on a sliding scale. So even in Nutty's worst case scenario of the apparently 'selfish and greedy' wanting to commit the horrible crime of going to away game, there is still a fair few tickets left for the people who did, 7, 8, 9 games last season. I can't see any sensible objection to a sliding scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nutty doesn't want to criticise the club and the members of the management who thought it up and approved it. Instead he is finding fault with the fans who are deemed the 'elite'. 

Delia Smith could walk into Carrow Road with a machine gun and spay bullets at the Barclay, and he'd probably defend the club and criticise the fans for being in the way.

It's not the 750's fault that the system is s hite, it's whoever implemented it.

Edited by Hoola Han Solo
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there we have it. Despite continually disagreeing with this system from day one it is assumed that I'm part of an agenda against true and loyal fans instigated by the wicked club.

The system is totally unfair. Perhaps if we could have taken that as a given this debate might have got somewhere . As it was Tilly and Kingo took exception to me suggesting the group was elitist and wanted me to call those outside the 750 less loyal. Had I have done so I think the reaction would have been worse. After all it's a bitter pill to do 9 games and be in the scrum without being accused of being less loyal.

As for where we are now. A 10 gamer doing 20 puts more pressure on this seasons ticket availability than a 2 gamer doing 5. What is so wrong with making sure loyalty is rewarded first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

 

But not everyone who went to 11 games last year wants to go to 19 this year. Not everyone who went to four wants to go to nine this year. They have the option to, as they did last year, but they probably won't.

And the only way to implement the system you seem to be proposing is to cap the amount of games people can attend, which is a completely unprecedented system that I don't think any club has ever done.

And let's not forget that the current system, in theory, allows someone who attended zero games last season to attend 19 this year. That's more unfair than giving someone who attended 10 the same possibility.

The current system isn't fit for purpose. If the aim is to find a fairer system than that you have set the bar incredibly low.

How about drawing names out of a hat?

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

What is so wrong with making sure loyalty is rewarded first?

Isn't that what we all want?

 

1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

The current system isn't fit for purpose. If the aim is to find a fairer system than that you have set the bar incredibly low.

How about drawing names out of a hat?

But many of us have suggested a far fairer system: the sliding scale. It's a proven system that nearly every club uses which rewards loyalty.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

The system is totally unfair. Perhaps if we could have taken that as a given this debate might have got somewhere . As it was Tilly and Kingo took exception to me suggesting the group was elitist and wanted me to call those outside the 750 less loyal. Had I have done so I think the reaction would have been worse. After all it's a bitter pill to do 9 games and be in the scrum without being accused of being less loyal.

Ahahaha seriously, you definitely should have been a politician, the spin you produce is quite impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Isn't that what we all want?

 

But many of us have suggested a far fairer system: the sliding scale. It's a proven system that nearly every club uses which rewards loyalty.

As I said the sliding scale relies on the uptake being the same as the model of last season. If not it gives too much advantage to some of the groups.

And I never did suggest a cap. I just suggested leaving the priority group when the loyalty had been matched.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, king canary said:

Ahahaha seriously, you definitely should have been a politician, the spin you produce is quite impressive.

Stuck in a corner cry spin..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nutty nigel said:

As I said the sliding scale relies on the uptake being the same as the model of last season. If not it gives too much advantage to some of the groups.

Would the fan who goes to 8-10 games in the Championship go to considerably more than 8-10 in the Premier League? I don't think demand would exactly double.

And as has been said, whilst the sliding scale is the fairest option, it obviously isn't without its pitfalls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

As it was Tilly and Kingo took exception to me suggesting the group was elitist and wanted me to call those outside the 750 less loyal.

If it isn't spin I'm sure you can find where I said you should call people outside of the group 'less loyal.' That is your spin.

You asked how other than elite to describe the group. I suggested loyal. That doesn't automatically mean I think people who went to 9 should be described as less loyal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, king canary said:

If it isn't spin I'm sure you can find where I said you should call people outside of the group 'less loyal.' That is your spin.

You asked how other than elite to describe the group. I suggested loyal. That doesn't automatically mean I think people who went to 9 should be described as less loyal.

 

Then it doesn't define the group does it.

You'd make a poor politician....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

Would the fan who goes to 8-10 games in the Championship go to considerably more than 8-10 in the Premier League? I don't think demand would exactly double.

And as has been said, whilst the sliding scale is the fairest option, it obviously isn't without its pitfalls.

I think the demand would be much more because once you're in the elite group you don't have to use the tickets you get for every game. And if you read this thread I'm not alone in thinking that. However if loyalty was rewarded like for like as I suggested nobody would apply for tickets they weren't going to use and the tickets would go down the priority groups fairly. (Your sliding scale could be used).

I think this is fair as i think it properly rewards loyalty while making more tickets available for more people. A wider group but one where loyalty is also rewarded. Your way I believe is a much more closed shop that I don't see as being fair. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Then it doesn't define the group does it.

You'd make a poor politician....

In the current climate, there isn't much competition to be anything other than a poor political! 

Anyway NN, what would your suggestion be, for a fair system, or are you still avoiding the question, like say a politian would!? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

I think the demand would be much more because once you're in the elite group you don't have to use the tickets you get for every game. And if you read this thread I'm not alone in thinking that. However if loyalty was rewarded like for like as I suggested nobody would apply for tickets they weren't going to use and the tickets would go down the priority groups fairly. (Your sliding scale could be used).

I think this is fair as i think it properly rewards loyalty while making more tickets available for more people. A wider group but one where loyalty is also rewarded. Your way I believe is a much more closed shop that I don't see as being fair. 

Maybe I'm just being a bit thick here, but I don't understand your system, particularly the bold parts. Can you explain?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bold 1: -

So once you're in the elite you can buy tickets for every game. There is no limit to the amount of times. And there's also no requirement for you to use the ticket.

Bold 2 :-

If your sliding scale of people were in your priority groups but ended their priority when they matched last seasons loyalty it would enable more tickets to go down through the groups fairly.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, GMF said:

Bearing in mind that there were also 3 Cup away games, it’s actually 26 in total, out of which you only had to attend ten.

And, whilst it’s hardly their fault that the ‘priority’ bar for this season was ten games, it has actually had one unexpected consequence on their ticket purchasing tendencies of the priority members.

For example, last season, if they couldn’t, or chose not to go to a particular fixture, they simply wouldn’t buy a ticket. Now, in comparison, there’s a growing number who, simply because they get first dibs on all matches, are still buying a ticket and just passing them on to friends or family - it may benefit them (with another count for next season’s tally) but it’s leaving fewer available for subsequent sale days. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

For example, last season, if they couldn’t, or chose not to go to a particular fixture, they simply wouldn’t buy a ticket. Now, in comparison, there’s a growing number who, simply because they get first dibs on all matches, are still buying a ticket and just passing them on to friends or family - it may benefit them (with another count for next season’s tally) but it’s leaving fewer available for subsequent sale days. 

Is there actually any evidence for that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×