stevegrant

Thanks for the confession.

Hilarious.

Personally, if the club want an option that costs them nothing (entirely within their right to do so), I don't see a problem with those who want to be able to pay over a longer period of time (which is a privilege, not a right, but one that many were understandably expecting to be available again this year) being charged interest by the finance provider. The club get 100% of the money up front, so as far as the club are concerned, the transaction has been completed. Taking the adult ST renewal price in the Northam (£328 ), and charging an APR of 20% over six months, that's £32.80 extra the fan is paying for the added convenience of not having to pay for it all in one go. I don't think many would complain at that, and if, say, 1000 fans use that option, the club have an extra 1000 season ticket holders and the finance company have made more than £30k. Everyone's happy.

Congratulations, you can use the quote function. Did your post actually have a point?

Being able to afford a season ticket under a pricing option, even if you pay 5% more (10% APR, over 6 months, an extra £16.40 on a £328 renewal) is infinitely preferable to not being able to afford a season ticket under any price option, IMO. Season ticket holders are the best gauge for football clubs budgeting for a season. They are guaranteed revenue which the club already has in the bank at the start of the season, regardless of how the season then pans out on the field. Matchday sales are totally variable, based on a multitude of factors, and therefore are very difficult to confidently predict (unless you're Arsenal, Man United, etc). It's a hell of a gamble by the club to isolate a significant number of its core support. I genuinely hope it doesn't backfire on them, but can't help but feel that it might.

Er, I presume you missed the bit in the pricing policy article on the OS which stated that the last time for ANYONE to buy a season ticket is the day before the start of the season, August 6th? Also, given that we're in June, how do you suggest people save from three monthly paydays, let alone four, in that time? June, July, August if you're lucky enough to be paid on or before the 6th of every month...

Did you read the opening post? They've already said they operate many schemes which are at zero cost to the football club - they make their money on interest payments and late payment charges, etc. I used the term "discount" in terms of how Cortese may view season ticket holders. While they're there for every game and give the club more money in advance (and, for me, are right at the top of the tree in terms of their worth to the club), over the course of the season they do get a substantial discount on the matchday ticket price.

If they don't want to offer a payment plan, why not say so, rather than lie (there's no other way of describing it, as Stu's enquiry to Zebra proves) and hide behind "administration costs"? I've no real issue with them removing the option, that's entirely up to them -although IMO they either dropped a bollock by not giving notice that it was happening or it was done intentionally to forcibly reduce the number of "discount" supporters - but the attempt to pull the wool over fans' eyes and to then either offer no explanation or give a cut-and-paste response that, to be honest, is an insult, is not a particularly good way of keeping the fanbase onside. They might get away with it if we start the season well and then run away with the league. After all, football is like no other business, customers don't just take their business to their competitors. However, for it to make those who have been loyal season ticket holders in the past (particularly in the last 6 years of utter turd) seriously consider whether they might have better things to spend their money on, that's quite staggering.

Wasn't that just last season's one, which the club ran themselves, not as a proper "credit" facility, hence why it got abused? I'm sure I remember the forms for the previous years (run by external companies) all had interest charged.

From what I know (a relative amount, given that my old man's worked for a bank for more than 30 years), the credit card application works out a rough figure in terms of "available" monthly cash - after you provide your salary and any other credit commitments - and comes up with a round figure (in thousands, I think my first card - a week after I turned 18 - had a limit of £500, but not heard of any limits as low as that since) that fits into their algorithm for "affordability", which has got much stricter in the last 12-18 months. It then checks that amount against your credit rating. If it thinks you could afford the monthly repayments on the full balance (and it has to assume the worst-case scenario), it will let you have the card. If not, "access denied", etc, obviously. However, that's not a true reflection on the suitability of the applicant. While they may not be suitable for a credit card with a limit of, say, £5,000, they may be able to quite comfortably afford the repayments if the limit was £500, but the application doesn't test against that. There's no value in the credit card provider giving you a 0% deal on a credit limit that low.

Obtaining credit on a short-term deal for £328 is far easier than obtaining credit for a credit card (particularly one with a 0% balance transfer or purchases offer), where the starting limits are almost always at least £1000 (I've had a few in the last couple of years, none of which have had a starting limit of less than £8,000, each of which I've had to phone up to reduce). Obtaining credit itself isn't the issue for the vast majority of people (except those with particularly bad credit histories, defaults, CCJs, etc), it's the amount being lent. I don't think I've seen a credit card application that asks you how much credit you want, they simply give you a credit limit. If that limit is beyond your means according to your credit score, you get turned down.

They wouldn't have to do any of that. They get all of the money from the finance company at the point of the application being approved. Once that's happened, as far as the club are concerned, they're a paid-up season ticket holder. Any defaults or chasing up is the responsibility of the finance company.

All well and good having one (I had one at 18, big deal), it's another matter entirely understanding financial responsibility.

If you've nothing to actually add to the debate, I suggest you don't say anything at all. I'm rather intrigued how someone (presumably, going by your username) 20 years of age can preach to other people about the virtues of 0% credit cards. Still, it's not as if extending lines of credit to unsuitable customers hasn't got this country in trouble in the recent past...

Low-scoring but thoroughly entertaining game, I thought.

From an impartial administrator's point of view, it would be nice if you'd practice what you preach.

No real insider knowledge, just fag-packet maths really. Last year, with crap attendances and general bad feeling, we still had revenues of about £13m. The wage bill was obviously trimmed substantially in the summer with players retiring and out of contract, and then Rasiak was sold in August (his wages were probably on a par with Lambert and Hammond combined). I'd estimate our wage bill is somewhere in the region of £8m-9m... massive for League One, but arguably we have a Championship squad. We've made a net loss of about £2.5m in transfers, but attendances are much higher (nearly 80,000 extra tickets sold just in league games, plus a few well-attended cup games thrown in as well) and then the JPT revenue. I'd estimate revenues to be around the £16m mark. Of course, we are now not having to frantically pay off an overdraft with a crippling interest rate, nor are we having to pay £2-3m a year on the stadium mortgage. I'd guess at a profit of about £1m once tax has been taken into account.

Isn't there a 28-day period after the vote for objections to be raised?

When was that ever said?

The club will almost certainly make a profit this season despite having spent the best part of £3m in transfer fees - astronomical by this division's standards.

The main implementation cost of the online booking system was absorbed years ago, I think it cost upwards of £500k initially to set up with AudienceView, although I assume there is an ongoing licence and support contract with them which obviously has to be paid for. The phone lines only cost significant money on the rare occasions it's particularly busy, when they then use an external call centre in Dunstable, which obviously comes at a cost. At all other times, it's whatever the cost of running an 0800 number - no idea whether that's a fixed monthly/annual fee or on a pence-per-minute-per-call basis.

Online is almost certainly the quickest. You only get a choice of block and "level" rather than any individual row or seat (although personally I think you should be able to select a block and view a grid of all the available seats in that block and select an individual seat), and once it gets to the staff actually processing it, the card payment's already been done automatically so all that's needed is to print the ticket and put it in an envelope. One or two minutes per transaction at the very most.

In which case, why isn't it applied to tickets sold at the ticket office window as well? Presumably they're not unpaid volunteers, after all...

I think you have far too much time on your hands, Sir

Unless of course the club's plan is to send all tickets by recorded delivery...