Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, MarkDavis1986 said:

This is exactly why this announcement and the tone leaves a sour taste.

" You can click these three options, we encourage you to take 1 or 2"... if you read the fine print then sure you can email to get a refund.

 

When I read earlier as well I didn't realise cup matches weren't included so unless you buy matches on behalf of your friend it is a credit you can only use for 21/22 season. I originally thought this was a good option until I saw this pointed out.

 

The article from Jon Lansdown is icing on a shitty cake for me, we've fallen on hard times so much so we've put people on furlough but our players don't want to reduce their salaries to top up 🤑

I’m with you mark - it’s an education in how never to communicate with your ‘customers’. Considering most have become accustomed to life without football, really ain’t the time to bite the hand that feeds. 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, optored said:

I can't see how it is legally enforceable that you have to claim a refund by midday Tuesday.  You are entitled to a refund for any service/product not supplied.  It's not up to Bristol sport to decide when you apply for it.

I wondered this too! The very narrow window and time limit seems a bit strange.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I wondered this too! The very narrow window and time limit seems a bit strange.

They are breaching contract fundamentally, offering a remediation but making one option hidden plus time-limited. I’d rather be consumer than supplier in that instance. 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MarkDavis1986 said:

This is exactly why this announcement and the tone leaves a sour taste.

" You can click these three options, we encourage you to take 1 or 2"... if you read the fine print then sure you can email to get a refund.

 

When I read earlier as well I didn't realise cup matches weren't included so unless you buy matches on behalf of your friend it is a credit you can only use for 21/22 season. I originally thought this was a good option until I saw this pointed out.

 

The article from Jon Lansdown is icing on a shitty cake for me, we've fallen on hard times so much so we've put people on furlough but our players don't want to reduce their salaries to top up 🤑

Why would they include cup matches when they can't guarantee we'd have a home cup game next season? If they did that and it happened you'd then have loads of fans complaining about that instead. Which clubs have actually reduced the salaries of their players rather than deferred? As I've only seen deferrals and its just the length of time that differs.

19 minutes ago, 29AR said:

Option 1 option 2 option 3 click here ... read below for a statement not clearly offering option 4.  There’s no read on lecture there. If you can’t see the general pop are being misled then you have higher standards than anyone would hold the general population to - courts included I have zero doubt. I’m not a layman; I was misled 

From what I can read of that law its not a case of being mislead or not, 'There is a general principle that the more unusual a clause, the more attention should be drawn to it', the point I'm trying to make here is the clause (or option in this case) that you'd most likely expect to see is the refund option so there is nothing unusual about the clause, in fact the club have drawn attention to the unusual clauses (options) and made them clear. So given the option of a refund isn't unnatural it doesn't need to have special attention drawn to it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

How (as well) is this academy funding quantified? Never knew it was struggling before, but if they said, 'if 10,000 of you donate to the academy, we can buy 'x' for it.

Don't think they're specifying it is, its just a case of if that's where you'd like your money to go within the club then that can be facilitated rather than option 2 which would seem it just goes in the pot so to say.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hodge said:

Why would they include cup matches when they can't guarantee we'd have a home cup game next season? If they did that and it happened you'd then have loads of fans complaining about that instead. Which clubs have actually reduced the salaries of their players rather than deferred? As I've only seen deferrals and its just the length of time that differs.

From what I can read of that law its not a case of being mislead or not, 'There is a general principle that the more unusual a clause, the more attention should be drawn to it', the point I'm trying to make here is the clause (or option in this case) that you'd most likely expect to see is the refund option so there is nothing unusual about the clause, in fact the club have drawn attention to the unusual clauses (options) and made them clear. So given the option of a refund isn't unnatural it doesn't need to have special attention drawn to it. 

They are breaching contract. We pay for attendance to 23 league games. This is an offer to accept that breach. It’s a compensatory offer and they should not hide the cash refund in the way they did - ignore the legality, no comment on that just observations... morally they’ve got this wrong 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nibor said:

I honestly read the email several times and came to the conclusion that literally any grown up who has at least some English could to a better job of communicating.  For the giant army of suits you see at Ashton Gate if you go to any event they run, I've yet to see any evidence of competency.

Unsure about this. Been there for football, rugby and a concert. Not sure what you're getting at, seems run alright to me. Perfect? No but what is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, man in the middle said:

Sad to hear some fans think like this. BCFC means more than this to most I hope. All teams pay £££ to players that’s football I’m afraid 

BCFC means a lot to me, if we were on the brink I'd help the club absolutely and already have put a lot of time and money into it over the years. 

However again they are using this loyalty and making the average Joe pay. If we had financial issues then I would like to see pay cuts from the players, or Lansdown to cover this. Not asking fans to lose hundreds of their own money so players can drive top of the range cars and have nice houses. We really aren't all in this together financially. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, hodge said:

Why would they include cup matches when they can't guarantee we'd have a home cup game next season? If they did that and it happened you'd then have loads of fans complaining about that instead. Which clubs have actually reduced the salaries of their players rather than deferred? As I've only seen deferrals and its just the length of time that differs.

From what I can read of that law its not a case of being mislead or not, 'There is a general principle that the more unusual a clause, the more attention should be drawn to it', the point I'm trying to make here is the clause (or option in this case) that you'd most likely expect to see is the refund option so there is nothing unusual about the clause, in fact the club have drawn attention to the unusual clauses (options) and made them clear. So given the option of a refund isn't unnatural it doesn't need to have special attention drawn to it. 

Check Europe for salary reductions. Here I'm unsure any have taken it. Lower League clubs who furloughed players aside, didn't Millwall or Luton do similar?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, man in the middle said:

Noted, but every penny counts. Only premier league teams can survive on corporate money only

You should look at some of the PL losses for last season, operating and real!!

Mental. Mental in a League with so much profile and cash.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Check Europe for salary reductions. Here I'm unsure any have taken it. Lower League clubs who furloughed players aside, didn't Millwall or Luton do similar?

I did mean to specify England, we'd be very much on our own if we did that. Wouldn't be able to do it without player consent for fear of breach of contract and players being allowed to leave for free, so if the players didn't agree to the idea its a non starter.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Red Exile said:

our emails arrived at 17.58 and 17.59 - not sure why they wouldn't all be sent at the same time but they are being sent...

**** me, is it an issue now that there was a maximum 60 second delay/gap of emails being received 🤦‍♂️ the club can't win

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hodge said:

I did mean to specify England, we'd be very much on our own if we did that. Wouldn't be able to do it without player consent for fear of breach of contract and players being allowed to leave for free, so if the players didn't agree to the idea its a non starter.

I don't know if there are any apart from the aforementioned lower league clubs however when Spurs and other clubs furloughed their non playing staff and the fans were rightly annoyed the clubs reversed their decision.

This obviously didn't happen here, I don't know if the same pressure was made by our supporters club (?)

I know the PFA were in negotiations with the Premier League and possibly the EFL about Wage reductions but that went quiet after the PL players made their own joint contribution to NHS charities together.

Jon Lansdowns statement just doesn't sit right with me that he's coming across like we've hit such bad times that they can't afford to refund us and therefore encourages us to take no refund and instead streaming and maybe our names on the 3rd kit. I'm lucky that I haven't been hit with furlough however I'm sure many fans have as well as redundancy.

Edited by MarkDavis1986
Grammar
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Spoons said:

19 pages of panic. Very few considered posts. 

Oh come on, we’ve both posted on this forum for ages. This is very tame. It’s people on a Friday night discussing contract law for goodness sake.

Wait until we lose our first 5 games back, that’ll be a meltdown 😵

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Lydered said:

**** me, is it an issue now that there was a maximum 60 second delay/gap of emails being received 🤦‍♂️ the club can't win

....simply trying be helpful - the emails hadn't all been sent at the same time, hence some folk might not have got them at the same time as others. Amongst the many things I've found fault with down the years that's not one of them!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So just so we’re clear, what exactly is this threat about losing your season ticket benefits all about? 

The only potential benefit I can think of is priority playoff tickets, and clearly the playoffs aren’t going to be taking place in packed stadiums, so what exactly is it they’re threatening? 

I was all set to just take the streams, having paid in full for 2019/20 and 2020/21 STs, but the way they’ve gone about it makes me want to tell them to F right O. 

  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Oh come on, we’ve both posted on this forum for ages. This is very tame. It’s people on a Friday night discussing contract law for goodness sake.

Wait until we lose our first 5 games back, that’ll be a meltdown 😵

I was delighted to see the discussion switch to the case law of Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd. I am just wondering if we'll move on to Donoghue v Stevenson when we start discussing who was at fault for our 1st defeat back.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven’t received my refund email & I'm starting to wonder if it’s because I'm a carer for my son. Elliott has received his email & wants to do option 2, although if anyone from City is reading this, he also wants his name on the tracksuits! Can anyone else shed some light on this? If this is the case, as Elliott is under 12, we won’t be able to stream the games. Which means I will have one very unhappy little boy on my hands, as I’ve already told him that we can watch the games. COYR 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

The only potential benefit I can think of is priority playoff tickets, and clearly the playoffs aren’t going to be taking place in packed stadiums, so what exactly is it they’re threatening? 

My guess would be, if City were to make the Play Off final and 10k tickets were made available to each club, as the FA are thinking of doing for the FA Cup final, you’d lose your place in the priority queue. 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Betty Swallocks said:

My guess would be, if City were to make the Play Off final and 10k tickets were made available to each club, as the FA are thinking of doing for the FA Cup final, you’d lose your place in the priority queue. 

Well thank god I don’t have to worry about that :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BRISTOL86 said:

So just so we’re clear, what exactly is this threat about losing your season ticket benefits all about? 

The only potential benefit I can think of is priority playoff tickets, and clearly the playoffs aren’t going to be taking place in packed stadiums, so what exactly is it they’re threatening? 

I was all set to just take the streams, having paid in full for 2019/20 and 2020/21 STs, but the way they’ve gone about it makes me want to tell them to F right O. 

No free stream as they’re offered in a sense for free to season ticket holders so you can’t get a refund and a free stream 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Betty Swallocks said:

My guess would be, if City were to make the Play Off final and 10k tickets were made available to each club, as the FA are thinking of doing for the FA Cup final, you’d lose your place in the priority queue. 

Difficult one that. Right now I think I would find it difficult to want to be part of such a small crowd in such a huge stadium, I guess it would still be Wembley? I think we should all be there together or not at all. 

Also right now I am not feeling the love I did for the game with all that’s still going on with working through the past couple of months at an intense pace and juggling home life too. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dollymarie said:

 

I get that bit, but it also makes it sound like SHOULD we get in the play offs and SHOULD we get to Wembley, that I wouldn’t be counted as a season ticket holder, so should the rules be relaxed by then and we could go to Wembley, I won’t be counted as a season ticket holder so won’t be able to get tickets. 
 

It also doesn’t make it clear that I won’t be affected discount etc wise next season. 
 

 

More chance of Rovers building a new ground!

Although, If you are feeling lucky - you could put some money on those three coming in 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess if you take the refund and lose your 'season ticket' holder status you may lose your existing seat next year... plus any new 'early bird' discount for ST holders if you have not already paid for 20/21 or took a refund on it when offered earlier in lockdown. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nomad said:

I guess if you take the refund and lose your 'season ticket' holder status you may lose your existing seat next year... plus any new 'early bird' discount for ST holders if you have not already paid for 20/21 or took a refund on it when offered earlier in lockdown. 

The e-mail I received, and the City website, state that it’s only ST benefits for the current season that are affected:

 Should you choose the pro-rata refund option you will forego your status as a season card holder and all associated benefits for the current season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...