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

Last nights consultation on membership

Recommended Posts

Just a quick update. From the notes I have seen from the other ones probably not a huge amount to add but the main suggestions were

Any cost - direct debit

If lots of people in one house buy overall cost capped ie a family discount

Season ticket holder starting points to be 150 ish instead of 1000

System made simpler re quees online

It was confirmed that there will be no changing the system where if somebody turns up with 40 memberships that one person can carry on buying all those tickets.

It was also confirmed that we had bought the land outside the City Stand and Barclay. This for the first time ever allows officially stadium expansion once the roads are adopted. We were told anyone who had previously said they could expand the stadium ( the land was bought 3 weeks ago ) was not being completely honest with us. The club now have the deeds, but I reckon if it ever happens it will be on the Jerrold as they spoke of relocating the car park.

Edited by Well b back
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this.

Can you expand, if possible, on your comment relating to “system made simpler re queues online”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Well b back said:

The club now have the deeds, but I reckon if it ever happens it will be on the Jerrold as they spoke of relocating the car park.

Maybe we'll do a Spurs and turn the stadium by 90 degrees, meaning 3 seasons playing at Portman Road...

I'm joking by the way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was at the consultion too, and due respect to Ben and the team for fronting this. They didn't get an easy ride at times, but took the comments on board, and welcomed ALL feedback. 

On point also is that the new system will be launched in Jan, to conicide with the season ticket renewals, however this seasons away attendance record will not count due to the perceived unfairness of availability to get tickets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GMF said:

Thanks for this.

Can you expand, if possible, on your comment relating to “system made simpler re queues online”

Yes they are looking at lots of ways. The 9 am Monday morning rush was even noted by the club as a pure lottery. I think we have to appreciate that they are going to take away all the ideas from all the meetings and although they openly say they will never please everyone they will look at lots of ideas and then put them back. My view was that how they do that depends on the scheme ie if you are garunteed 2 big games for instance no one will buy a ticket they will apply, should it be ( dare I use the word ) Loyalty based then people will have their window to get them in. They also were going to speak to the people that run the ticket system to see if they can change some of the anomaly’s that exist at present. They were also asked ( which they seemed to take on board ) that once logged in you are given 10 minutes instead of 30 to stop people ringing their mates, but I stress that was a suggestion by fans.

A couple of things I probably should have thought to put was ( I am trying to remember these figures ) there are 7551 away premier, 550 standard and roughly the same amount of home premier. There are just under 22000 season ticket holders. I was quite shocked to hear that for most home games between 1500 and 1800 people do not use their seats. It was agreed that the club should ( they also advised this was something already started ) be more active in getting these back into buy back. One suggestion was that you are given £15 for putting your seat into buy back but that is paid into the season ticket holders bank account shortly after the game was played, not next year and that way you also get your money if you don’t renew.

Decisions will be made over the coming months, with the heads of fans groups involved. I would hope however that the information fed back by fans at their various meetings will prove more of a basis of their decision.

Any points based scheme it was stressed will not involve this seasons away games but based on the 1 or 2 previous championship seasons.

Of course ( please don’t let this happen ) should we get relegated this particular problem goes away next year, but of course will hopefully then raise its head again the year after.

Hope this all helps as I didn’t just want to repeat the previous threads.

The bit about the ground was interesting especially as Ben had responsibilities for Highbury becoming The Emirates. He seemed like he couldn’t wait to find a way to persuade the rest of the board.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why buy that useless narrow strip of land fronting Carrow Road if it was not to be used to assist in future ground redevelopment ? Obvious it will be the City Stand to increase capacity and not the South Stand or Jarrold as you described it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Why buy that useless narrow strip of land fronting Carrow Road if it was not to be used to assist in future ground redevelopment ? Obvious it will be the City Stand to increase capacity and not the South Stand or Jarrold as you described it.

Maybe because it available, future planning and good opportunity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

Maybe because it available, future planning and good opportunity?

Indeed but it is the first step in rebuilding the City Stand as it is of no other use whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Why buy that useless narrow strip of land fronting Carrow Road if it was not to be used to assist in future ground redevelopment ? Obvious it will be the City Stand to increase capacity and not the South Stand or Jarrold as you described it.

He said they got it for next to nothing. He also indicated I beleive ( please feel free to correct me anyone that was there ) they need to consider relocating the car park. No plans could be disclosed as that would have put the price up. He also indicated he sent the owners of each piece of land a ridiculously low offer for what as it stood was 2 useless bits of land and gave them 3 weeks to take it or leave it. He did at one point use the words new stadium, so all I can tell you is that he said all those that previously mentioned stadium expansion were not really telling the truth as this was impossible to do prior to the purchase of this land and if it would have been possible the price of that land would have been ridiculously more. So we were all hoodwinked.

So in answer to your question none of us know as there were never any previous plans and as yet there is no idea where the money would come from and the feasibility study has yet to be done, so not sure how you know more than everybody else as if this goes ahead surely all options are on the table

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Well b back said:

He said they got it for next to nothing. He also indicated I beleive ( please feel free to correct me anyone that was there ) they need to consider relocating the car park. No plans could be disclosed as that would have put the price up. He also indicated he sent the owners of each piece of land a ridiculously low offer for what as it stood was 2 useless bits of land and gave them 3 weeks to take it or leave it. He did at one point use the words new stadium, so all I can tell you is that he said all those that previously mentioned stadium expansion were not really telling the truth as this was impossible to do prior to the purchase of this land and if it would have been possible the price of that land would have been ridiculously more. So we were all hoodwinked.

So in answer to your question none of us know as there were never any previous plans and as yet there is no idea where the money would come from and the feasibility study has yet to be done, so not sure how you know more than everybody else as if this goes ahead surely all options are on the table

Not suggesting i know more than anybody else but i do know that The City Stand was initially built with foundations substantial enough to be able to add to the size. That fact was known by speaking to Chase himself back in the day which was supported some years later by Doncaster and Munby at SCG meetings so this purchase of that land at the back of the stand strongly hints that this is the way forward.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went last night and well b back sums it up well. It was sometimes hard to hear what was being offered from the floor as the use of microhones was a bit haphazard but there was a lot of debate with many sensible suggestions including how to rejig the current membership scheme regarding loyalty and cost. It was confirmed that the club would have introduced a membership scheme had the club failed to gain promotion but how it would have varied from the present one was not revealed.

There was some discussion about reducing the length of time you have to book a ticket online. The current setting is 30 mins and some felt this was too long. The top table of three made the point that the online system is run by an external company which services some other Premier League clubs so a lot of things are out of the club's control. It seems that those who physically queue outside the ticket office are at some disadvantage especially when online sales are not completed and the tickets are suspended in the basket too long.

Ben Kensell admitted that having gained promotion the club's agenda this season had been to maximise revenue, particularly from advertisers, as the club's stay in the Premier League may be brief. A sensible stategy but you couldn't help thinking maximising revenue was precisely why the membership scheme was set up too.

As someone else has said on here this season's purchasing history will be null and void and will count for nothing next season but it was confirmed that last season's purchasing history, ie, the promotion season will be taken into account when a new membership scheme emerges.

I must say I was impressed with Ben and have some sympathy for all the grief he's taken over this. He couldn't apologise enough for the crazy way the club introduced the membership scheme. Dealing with fall-out of this kind is probably part of his job description but the membership scheme must have been a Board decision from which they're mostly all keeping a low profile while he's been hung out to dry to deal with the flak. Apart from one or two early sharp exchanges it was a fairly amicable sharing of views and Ben was happy to let the meeting run on. It eventually wound up after three hours, far longer than most meetings I've attended at Carrow Rd.

Finally I musn't forget to thank the catering staff who laid on some very tasty snacks to keep us going through our marathon session.

 

 

 

Edited by ......and Smith must score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is worth adding that all those present were invited to submit written comments and suggestions, which many did. This input will be consolidated  and sent by email to all who attended last night.

Another note to add - Ben Kensell said that the purchase land to extend the curtilage of the stadium would enable the club to maximise all commercial opportunities which are available. So it will not simply mean more seats. 

 

This is the first such meeting I have attended, and I was mighty impressed with the three club representatives. Ben K does not suffer fools, and why indeed should he? Some of the early comments from the floor were simply rude. I couldn't help reflect that a number of season ticket holders believe that they are entitled to a ST for life as well as other privileges. I am still reflecting on whether that should be the case. 

 

Finally, and most importantly, Ben offered some very heartfelt apologies for the ill-conceived Membership scheme. I didn't make a note of his precise comment, but it was along the lines of it being a regret that he will bear for the rest of his life. Strong stuff. The meeting concluded with a round of applause, which I think can be taken as a sign that all is best forgotten and forgiven.

 

 

Edited by Pugin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

Why buy that useless narrow strip of land fronting Carrow Road if it was not to be used to assist in future ground redevelopment ? Obvious it will be the City Stand to increase capacity and not the South Stand or Jarrold as you described it.

It’s very simple and is being missed by most. It is to stop anyone else buying it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

It’s very simple and is being missed by most. It is to stop anyone else buying it. 

What on earth could you do with it GPB ?  It is only of use to NCFC as part of a plan to develop the ground.

Edited by TIL 1010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

What on earth could you do with it GPB ?  It is only of use to NCFC as part of a plan to develop the ground.

Unless the plan is a long term one in which Phase 1 is extending the South stand (to house the city stand supporters) before rebuilding the city stand some time after?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

What on earth could you do with it GPB ?  It is only of use to NCFC as part of a plan to develop the ground.

Again I will stand corrected if necessary but he was quite specific that had there been any planning ( ever ) this land would have cost a fortune. He however as I understood told the owners that they had a worthless piece of land and he was going to make one offer open for 3 weeks and if they didn’t sell he told them them they would own their worthless bit of land forever as this was a one off opportunity that would not be offered again. He was categoric that anybody that said they could build were not being truthful as without that land it was not possible. He also ( I think mentioned ) that we would also have to adopt the road. It seemed his ambition to get the money from the board. I did not realise his Arsenal / building the Emirates connection till he mentioned it, so maybe it really is on the table now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Well b back said:

Again I will stand corrected if necessary but he was quite specific that had there been any planning ( ever ) this land would have cost a fortune. He however as I understood told the owners that they had a worthless piece of land and he was going to make one offer open for 3 weeks and if they didn’t sell he told them them they would own their worthless bit of land forever as this was a one off opportunity that would not be offered again. He was categoric that anybody that said they could build were not being truthful as without that land it was not possible. He also ( I think mentioned ) that we would also have to adopt the road. It seemed his ambition to get the money from the board. I did not realise his Arsenal / building the Emirates connection till he mentioned it, so maybe it really is on the table now.

I'd imagine that he was pretty junior at Arsenal at the time they built the Emirates so would take that with a slight pinch of salt.

I suspect what he was alluding to is that the club needed to get its hands on that land to stop them from being ransomed in the future by the landowners once/if they go public with any rebuilding plans for the City Stand.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Well b back said:

Again I will stand corrected if necessary but he was quite specific that had there been any planning ( ever ) this land would have cost a fortune. He however as I understood told the owners that they had a worthless piece of land and he was going to make one offer open for 3 weeks and if they didn’t sell he told them them they would own their worthless bit of land forever as this was a one off opportunity that would not be offered again. He was categoric that anybody that said they could build were not being truthful as without that land it was not possible. He also ( I think mentioned ) that we would also have to adopt the road. It seemed his ambition to get the money from the board. I did not realise his Arsenal / building the Emirates connection till he mentioned it, so maybe it really is on the table now.

This is definitely what Ben said.

It was a good move by the club but I’m curious why the owners of the land sold it cheaply. They must have known that the club would only have made an offer if they were looking to expand the stadium. 

Who owned the land ? Wouldn’t surprise me if it was the city council in which case the dear old ratepayers have been shafted.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious that the expansion idea has picked up a little momentum, but now in a very practical sense. I know its been spoken about almost since the day of the completion of the South Stand, but this appears to be the first actual step to get the ball rolling on this even if the next step might be some years down the line. 

 

I think perhaps the club have really looked at the success of the bond scheme, the demand for tickets including the up take in membership for this season and the models for self-sustainability and know that, for a club our size, we compete by having a strong academy and maximising our match day revenue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Well b back said:

He said they got it for next to nothing. He also indicated I beleive ( please feel free to correct me anyone that was there ) they need to consider relocating the car park. No plans could be disclosed as that would have put the price up. He also indicated he sent the owners of each piece of land a ridiculously low offer for what as it stood was 2 useless bits of land and gave them 3 weeks to take it or leave it. He did at one point use the words new stadium, so all I can tell you is that he said all those that previously mentioned stadium expansion were not really telling the truth as this was impossible to do prior to the purchase of this land and if it would have been possible the price of that land would have been ridiculously more. So we were all hoodwinked.

So in answer to your question none of us know as there were never any previous plans and as yet there is no idea where the money would come from and the feasibility study has yet to be done, so not sure how you know more than everybody else as if this goes ahead surely all options are on the table

I recall that a feasibility study was done under McNasty and the plan was to get the capacity up to 35,000 with a new City Stand for 30-40 million pounds.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

This is definitely what Ben said.

It was a good move by the club but I’m curious why the owners of the land sold it cheaply. They must have known that the club would only have made an offer if they were looking to expand the stadium. 

Who owned the land ? Wouldn’t surprise me if it was the city council in which case the dear old ratepayers have been shafted.

 

It was owned by the council as whenever general gardening maintenance was carried out it was by men in hi viz Norse jackets using council vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Big Vince said:

I recall that a feasibility study was done under McNasty and the plan was to get the capacity up to 35,000 with a new City Stand for 30-40 million pounds.

That’s interesting as if I understood the comments correctly there was no chance this could be done without this land and eluding to a plan would have increased the cost of the land. It did seem strange that he out of the blue suddenly mentioned the buying of the land and the fact he wanted the stadium expanded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That "feasibility study" is nothing more than some exercise by a student architect as far as I can glean. I don't think anything was ever commissioned by the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

It was owned by the council as whenever general gardening maintenance was carried out it was by men in hi viz Norse jackets using council vehicles.

It wasn’t owned by the Council, it was owned by one of the companies involved with the development of Riverside Retail Park and presumably retained as a ransom strip. 
 

The land behind the Barclay has also been acquired from one of the Network Rail property holding companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most feasible way I can see to add a second tier to the City stand with a decent capacity would be to extend it back over the road, essentially putting Carrow Road itself into a tunnel with the new second tier overhead supported by pylons/support pillars every 30ft or so which would need to be anchored in that strip of waste ground. It would create a rather nice little colonnade along the side of the stadium for fans to walk along undercover. If something along those lines is indeed the plan, it may also fit with the comments about changing the car park - I suspect there may be some regulations about requiring direct roadside access to the stadium for emergency situations and/or for tall vehicles which may not be possible with a 'tunnel' along the City Stand, so perhaps the thinking is to reroute Carrow Road the other side of the stadium to run directly alongside the stand instead of curving around the car park? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GMF said:

It wasn’t owned by the Council, it was owned by one of the companies involved with the development of Riverside Retail Park and presumably retained as a ransom strip. 
 

The land behind the Barclay has also been acquired from one of the Network Rail property holding companies.

Why was it maintained by men wearing NORSE hi viz jackets ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Why was it maintained by men wearing NORSE hi viz jackets ?

NORSE used to maintain a lot of privately owned land in the City. 

They probably still do.

 

 

Edited by nutty nigel
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Why was it maintained by men wearing NORSE hi viz jackets ?

Just because they were (are) maintaining it, doesn’t mean they own it. Probably an obligation linked to maintaining land adjacent to the public highways. 

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  

×