Season ticket prices 2016/2017

[Dave]

So are fans who currently use the lower dolman being consulted about their area being a standing/singing area?

 

[Turbored]

Not separately  ,but they were captured in the email that went round for the survey the other week

[Nogbad the Bad]

On 2/29/2016 at 17:12, hodge said:

 

 

1 hour ago, ChippenhamRed said:

You've completely missed the point. Where do the Atyeo singers go in this situation?

This potential problem is hardly unique to Bristol City.

Season ticket holders are relocated at grounds across the country when their seats are required to accommodate far larger away allocations for F.A. Cup games.

In our case it would be just 1,000 displaced - at other grounds, with larger capacities, it can be several times that number.

Fans who buy season tickets in these areas - like those in the Atyeo at AG next season - will be well aware they may have to move once or twice in an unusually successful F.A. Cup season.

As will the club, so a contingency plan will be in place.

[Dave]

It just appears that discussions are taking place, statements being made on OTIB and the people who will impacted have no clue. As a user of one of the wheelchair areas within, I can state that as things currently stand views will be blocked by standing in the Lower Dolman.

I respect the decision to remain in the Atyeo rather than not impact current season ticket holders in Dolman A and B, but what about ST holders in the Lower Dolman?

I am sure there are supporters who do not use OTIB, who are unaware these discussions are taking place, and the implications for them.

[ChippenhamRed]

8 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

 

This potential problem is hardly unique to Bristol City.

Season ticket holders are relocated at grounds across the country when their seats are required to accommodate far larger away allocations for F.A. Cup games.

In our case it would be just 1,000 displaced - at other grounds, with larger capacities, it can be several times that number.

Fans who buy season tickets in these areas - like those in the Atyeo at AG next season - will be well aware they may have to move once or twice in an unusually successful F.A. Cup season.

As will the club, so a contingency plan will be in place.

I'm not saying it doesn't occur elsewhere, but it can't be denied that this is one of the drawbacks of keeping fans in the Atyeo. If we were to draw Utd or Arsenal at home, suddenly our most vocal support - for a huge game - would be forced to disperse around the rest of the ground and/or into areas where standing won't be tolerated. That's a shame.

This is avoided if Atyeo fans are located elsewhere permanently - particularly if they could inhabit the lower Dolman as suggested.

To reiterate I am simply highlighting one of the issues, not telling anyone what they should do!

[WTMS]

2 hours ago, Countryfile said:

I attended the first meeting that was called to discuss the move to the Williams before the EE was redeveloped, from memory there were about 15 to 20 people present, and that was after it was advertised on here and on the clubs site.

Unless I'm mistaken all of the recent meetings have been by invitation only, and have not been advertised, if I'm wrong I apologise, but to me that kind of meeting is not representative of the fan base as a whole, and any decisions reached at such a meeting do affect the whole fan base.

If the meetings that have been held were more transparent, and minutes or some kind of record were available then perhaps a better understanding might be reached by everyone.

As an example what if anything has been discussed about what will occur if we have to give 15% of the available capacity to away fans for a cup tie? Please don't say that won't happen, because it looks like we will be in the third round next season, and there's a 50%  chance of a home draw, and if we are drawn at home it's highly likely that the visiting team would want their full allocation.

The Fans Advisory Network thought fans being moved out of the Dolman A-B,for fans from the Atyeo was a poor idea. So it appears do the Supporters Trust, and a section of fans within the Atyeo. That is a clear and evident theme. Avoid poor ideas.

Transparency would be a topic on its own.

[Kid in the Riot]

4 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

I'm not saying it doesn't occur elsewhere, but it can't be denied that this is one of the drawbacks of keeping fans in the Atyeo. If we were to draw Utd or Arsenal at home, suddenly our most vocal support - for a huge game - would be forced to disperse around the rest of the ground and/or into areas where standing won't be tolerated. That's a shame.

This is avoided if Atyeo fans are located elsewhere permanently - particularly if they could inhabit the lower Dolman as suggested.

To reiterate I am simply highlighting one of the issues, not telling anyone what they should do!

I don't really want to get into this debate as at the end of the day it is for the club to come up with a solution as to what happens in the once in a blue moon occassion that we draw a team at home that'll bring more than 2,700 in the cup.

But there are some simple solutions that could be implemented that would ensure Atyeo singers aren't dispersed around the ground. You could set aside a 1,000 allocation in say the Dolman and simply either a) not sell season tickets there, or b) sell season tickets there but on the provisio that for aforementioned once in a blue moon cup game you would have to move elsewhere in the Dolman.

As Nogbad says, arrangements like this exist at practically all the big grounds. It really shouldn't be seen as THAT big a deal. As long as everyone is clear on the arrangements prior to buying an ST then I don't see a problem.

[WTMS]

1 hour ago, Loon plage said:

It would have to be the whole of the lower though wouldn't it ?

Yes.

A suggestion was Atyeo then including the Lower Dolman in the longer term, or similar. Others could fill in more detail. 

[Up The City!]

4 hours ago, WTMS said:

A choice with real potential.

I agree, a choice with real potential of losing the club money. From time to time there will be clubs who can bring 4k to Ashton Gate. The likes of Leeds etc. At least 20k in lost income there. 

So yea thanks for being selfish. Maybe you will be willing to pay the club the money they will lose out on? Over the course of a season I can see 4 or 5 clubs who could potentially bring 4k. That's 100k a season we've lost out on just to accommodate your group, when in reality there is plenty of space in the SS.

[Up The City!]

Hang on a second, I've read many things where people say the SS would be terrible for a singing section, and now I'm reading the lower Dolman is being considered. Am I missing something? The LD has a high roof, as fans sing it will be directed onto the pitch, those at one end of the LD would not be able to hear those at the other end of the LD. Bonkers idea.

[ChippenhamRed]

10 minutes ago, WTMS said:

Yes.

A suggestion was Atyeo then including the Lower Dolman in the longer term, or similar. Others could fill in more detail. 

Genuine question with no intent to antagonise - why not use the lower Dolman from the start?

[Dave]

2 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Genuine question with no intent to antagonise - why not use the lower Dolman from the start?

One reason,  it will block views in the Wheelchair Areas.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, WTMS said:

The Fans Advisory Network thought fans being moved out of the Dolman A-B,for fans from the Atyeo was a poor idea. So it appears do the Supporters Trust, and a section of fans within the Atyeo. That is a clear and evident theme. Avoid poor ideas.

Transparency would be a topic on its own.

Are there any written records of the meetings between the group you represent and the club, and to be perfectly clear these are meetings that are by invitation only, and not FAN meetings.

[ChippenhamRed]

6 minutes ago, Dave said:

One reason,  it will block views in the Wheelchair Areas.

So, actually, it isn't a viable option for standing after all? If this is the case I agree it has to be the Atyeo. Having listened to all the arguments, pros and cons on both sides, my opinion is that the only decisive reason for using the Atyeo is its ability to tolerate standing.

IF standing CAN be tolerated elsewhere, I don't see the justification for continued use of the Atyeo. It disperses home fans across a larger area, thus leaving bigger gaps elsewhere, creates avoidable complications for cup games, and limits incomes when away followings could potentially be larger (such as Leeds).

Again, just my opinion and I do appreciate both sides of the debate.

[Kid in the Riot]

20 minutes ago, Just Red said:

I agree, a choice with real potential of losing the club money. From time to time there will be clubs who can bring 4k to Ashton Gate. The likes of Leeds etc. At least 20k in lost income there. 

So yea thanks for being selfish. Maybe you will be willing to pay the club the money they will lose out on? Over the course of a season I can see 4 or 5 clubs who could potentially bring 4k. That's 100k a season we've lost out on just to accommodate your group, when in reality there is plenty of space in the SS.

Unlike you, thankfully the club's current thinking appears to be along the lines of doing what's best for its OWN supporters and not handing a very obvious advantage to away clubs visiting Ashton Gate by giving them an enormous amount of tickets behind one goal.

The club will not be giving any more tickets than they have to for away clubs and I think the vast majority of City fans think that's a bloody good idea.

Oh and PS - £100k over the course of the season, whoopy do! That would cover ONE first team players wages for 10-12 weeks.

[ChippenhamRed]

1 minute ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Unlike you, thankfully the club's current thinking appears to be along the lines of doing what's best for its OWN supporters and not handing a very obvious advantage to away clubs visiting Ashton Gate by giving them an enormous amount of tickets behind one goal.

The club will not be giving any more tickets than they have to for away clubs and I think the vast majority of City fans think that's a bloody good idea.

Personally I welcome large away followings as they improve the atmosphere for both clubs, as it tends to make our support step up their game. I'm not convinced the net effect gives any advantage to the away team if the home support responds. 4000 away v 15,000(ish) home is not a battle we should fear in my opinion.

And generating additional income for the club is clearly to the benefit of its own supporters if that money ultimately enables the club to compete more effectively.

[Kid in the Riot]

3 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Personally I welcome large away followings as they improve the atmosphere for both clubs, as it tends to make our support step up their game. I'm not convinced the net effect gives any advantage to the away team if the home support responds. 4000 away v 15,000(ish) home is not a battle we should fear in my opinion.

And generating additional income for the club is clearly to the benefit of its own supporters if that money ultimately enables the club to compete more effectively.

It would not be a significant increase in revenue though, it would be minimal in the grand scheme of things. Don't forget there'd be increased policing/stewarding costs as well - and that can be eye-watering sums of money. Two clubs that would probably bring 4k - Leeds and Wolves - have significant numbers of trouble-makers.

And if a larger away following gives even the slightest advantage to the away side on the pitch then IMO it's simple: you don't do it.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Unlike you, thankfully the club's current thinking appears to be along the lines of doing what's best for its OWN supporters and not handing a very obvious advantage to away clubs visiting Ashton Gate by giving them an enormous amount of tickets behind one goal.

The club will not be giving any more tickets than they have to for away clubs and I think the vast majority of City fans think that's a bloody good idea.

If this is true then the club are not following their stated intention of filling the stadium, to turn away income, from any source, is financially stupid.

What the club seem to be doing is bowing to pressure from a small percentage of its own fans, which is not necessarily what is best for the club as a whole.

Heres a suggestion, what if all the Atyeo was given over to away fans, the space below the stand could be turned into a safe venue for away fans to have a drink and some food, bringing some much needed income to the club. There would be no need for segregation nets, and less supervision would be required saving more money.

[Kid in the Riot]

28 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Genuine question with no intent to antagonise - why not use the lower Dolman from the start?

Because it's not the start? Fans are already in the Atyeo and making it work. So, don't fix what isn't broken.

[ChippenhamRed]

7 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Because it's not the start? Fans are already in the Atyeo and making it work. So, don't fix what isn't broken.

By the "start", I mean the start of next season obviously, which in terms of stadium completion clearly is the start.

[ChippenhamRed]

11 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It would not be a significant increase in revenue though, it would be minimal in the grand scheme of things. Don't forget there'd be increased policing/stewarding costs as well - and that can be eye-watering sums of money. Two clubs that would probably bring 4k - Leeds and Wolves - have significant numbers of trouble-makers.

And if a larger away following gives even the slightest advantage to the away side on the pitch then IMO it's simple: you don't do it.

If this is our approach then presumably we would have no complaints if other clubs such as Coventry, MK Dons and Reading then starting treating us the same way, by limiting away attendances below what we might have taken.

Something to consider.

[Bristol Rob]

I would imagine that over the next few years away attendances will start to drop as more games get 'beamback' streams, giving clubs the chance to show away games at home, so it'll be less of an issue anyway.

[Kid in the Riot]

3 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

If this is our approach then presumably we would have no complaints if other clubs such as Coventry, MK Dons and Reading then starting treating us the same way, by limiting away attendances below what we might have taken.

Something to consider.

Of course not, they can do whatever the hell they like.

Good examples by the way! Our fantastic records at both the Ricoh and Stadium MK, in front of huge away followings, duly noted.

[ChippenhamRed]

3 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Of course not, they can do whatever the hell they like.

Good examples by the way! Our fantastic records at both the Ricoh and Stadium MK, in front of huge away followings, duly noted.

Yet you'd be happy to give up those large away followings that have benefited our team. It cuts both ways. Overall it works better for all clubs not to put a limit (within reason) on away followings. If we don't limit it and they don't limit it, the net effect is zero.

[Mad Cyril]

55 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

4000 away v 15,000(ish) home is not a battle we should fear in my opinion.

That was exactly the kind of public school arrogance that lead to the fall of Singapore to the Japs in 1942.

They brought flags and pyros and stole all our gin. We were daft enough to let It happen in the far east, for God's sake let's not let it happen in the Atyeo.

[WTMS]

1 hour ago, Dave said:

It just appears that discussions are taking place, statements being made on OTIB and the people who will impacted have no clue. As a user of one of the wheelchair areas within, I can state that as things currently stand views will be blocked by standing in the Lower Dolman.

I respect the decision to remain in the Atyeo rather than not impact current season ticket holders in Dolman A and B, but what about ST holders in the Lower Dolman?

I am sure there are supporters who do not use OTIB, who are unaware these discussions are taking place, and the implications for them.

Nothing has gone beyond asking about a section of the Lower Dolman. A section adjacent to the Atyeo.

A positive implication could be inclusion. A cool thing would be fans with disabilities feeling part of what occurs in the Atyeo via the Lower Dolman, being able to access a Atyeo Pub. These are ifs, and maybes.

What would be wrong would be those in the Atyeo attempting to exclude others, which is not correct at all.

 

1 hour ago, Just Red said:

selfish.

An alternative view is that delegates of the FAN, members of the SC&T and fans  from the Atyeo are being considerate.

58 minutes ago, Just Red said:

Hang on a second, I've read many things where people say the SS would be terrible for a singing section, and now I'm reading the lower Dolman is being considered. Am I missing something? The LD has a high roof, as fans sing it will be directed onto the pitch, those at one end of the LD would not be able to hear those at the other end of the LD. Bonkers idea.

Singing section would be your description, others could think of it as a possible extension of fans simply wanting to stand.

You can contact Bristol Sport via the Q&A on this site and propose ideas for the South stand. Start a thread on what you feel can be done. Nothing to lose.

[SecretSam]

On 29/02/2016 at 19:31, Bristol Rob said:

I think silver cars are quicker than black cars.

Anyone fancy a pointless argument?

This thread has lost all meaning.

Nah, red cars every time.  Same with bikes (the pedal kind).  I like red bikes.  I've got 3.

[Natchfever]

30 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Yet you'd be happy to give up those large away followings that have benefited our team. It cuts both ways. Overall it works better for all clubs not to put a limit (within reason) on away followings. If we don't limit it and they don't limit it, the net effect is zero.

Bigger grounds all built at the same time with large areas of seats given over to visitors or left empty.

[Jack Dawe]

47 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

If this is our approach then presumably we would have no complaints if other clubs such as Coventry, MK Dons and Reading then starting treating us the same way, by limiting away attendances below what we might have taken.

Something to consider.

I think the day MK decide to do this is some way off for now

[ChippenhamRed]

21 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Bigger grounds all built at the same time with large areas of seats given over to visitors or left empty.

Which is precisely the scenario that will apply to us next season.

And what has when they were built got to do with it?