If Anyone Can, City Can - ticketing!

[Blagdon red]

Just did an interview for Points West on this.

Interestingly, I also note that there appears to be NO 'booking fee' for buying Wycombe tickets. I got as far as the checkout and then stopped, as someone else has already sorted out my ticket for that game, so if anyone who completed the purchase process knows diferently, please say. If indeed there is no booking fee for these tickets - bought via the same software - then the argument that the fee is there to cover a per transaction cost from the supplier looks less than convincing.

 

[Ian M]

6 minutes ago, Blagdon red said:

Just did an interview for Points West on this.

Interestingly, I also note that there appears to be NO 'booking fee' for buying Wycombe tickets. I got as far as the checkout and then stopped, as someone else has already sorted out my ticket for that game, so if anyone who completed the purchase process knows diferently, please say. If indeed there is no booking fee for these tickets - bought via the same software - then the argument that the fee is there to cover a per transaction cost from the supplier looks less than convincing.

 

Not bought a ticket for Wycombe but very flimsy argument by BS as it isn't even per transaction but "per item"!

[TV Tom]

As I stated in a previous post, I bought tickets for next weeks Glousctershire 20/20 quarter final, the phone was answered within 10 seconds, purchased 5 tickets for £20 each, no admin fees, card fees or postage fees.

[thatcham red]

There is something in the way this business is structured internally from a cost budget perspective and how outsourced services are structured.

My point, when asked by BS today, is akin to Ian's above. Fundamentally the stadium is there to provide entertainment in various guises to an audience that needs to gain access on a paying basis. Key to that is selling a volume of tickets. It seems that associated costs of doing this have to be accounted for from ticket income, which is odd because presumably ticket income also gets to fund other things too. I realise they are not achieving full cost recovery, but at least hoping to offset a bit. Because the cost model is volume driven, we may ultimately become victims of our own success as sales grow. Maybe Wycombe and others operate on a flat fee or licensed agreement fro their ticketing services and amortise that with other costs. I don't know, I'm not an accountant.

The key is surely to encourage more ticket sales for all sports, make people feel good about doing it and cross-sell other products and services once they are in.

[Cider Queen]

You really have to wonder about city sometimes,  they don't half make hard work of things.  This season we should be trying to fill the stadium, not put people off coming and trying to rip off supporters.

 

I bought 5 tickets for the Pompey game 1 Adult and 4 concessions.. £5 extra we paid. That was the price of a concession ticket..  That is excessive.   Do they think the fans are stupid?

I'm glad radio Bristol picked this up and I'm glad the club have got negative press from it..  I really do wonder about the people running it sometimes!

[ForeverRed]

Many thanks for the update. I'm still not sure that they have explained this clearly or in layman's terms.

I don't want City to be seen in a negative light, as it also gives the bloody SAGs a reason to laugh at us for change, but they can't help shooting themselves in the foot

[Robin1988]

1 hour ago, thatcham red said:

Andrew Billingham responded to my points on the radio earlier and I believe a statement will be issued. The £1 charge is driven by the supply chain, in this instance the ticketing software provider. Bristol Sport absorbs 50% and passes the rest on to us. The key issues here are communicating this, applying it to all transactions including groups, POTD and print your own. It's important not to mix this up with credit card fees, which are already not passed on to fans.

This from the minutes of FAN in May:

"Members fed back their own reaction and those of other fans. The officers had already criticised the extra booking and service fees especially because they had not been mentioned when FAN had discussed the matters. There was common consensus from FAN to the club that it would be better to include any fees within the price."

It's not as if they didn't know it would be unpopular!

The Trust has also had long running debates around premium rate phone numbers as well as fees. We thought that battle was won.

Stu

This is less a Bristol Sport thing and more a business thing in general, but there's plenty of costs the club should factor into its business and not pass on. Are they going to tack on an air charge for the carbon dioxide sucked up by their a/c by each fan? No. They budget for a ticketing system, they pay for it. Simple.

[ChippenhamRed]

OK so I've only just seen Mark Kelly's response to my question in the Q&A.  Perhaps I am guilty of making the question too simple, but it's a disappointing response.  I think we all accept that the club incurs various different costs from various different companies, and that when we buy tickets we are contributing towards those costs.  The problem we have is with the separation of the cost of the booking fee from the price of the ticket, and the misleading way in which the price of the ticket is then presented - even if the small print does technically cover it.  It's devious and avoidable, it treats supporters with disrespect and leaves a bitter taste.  Not to mention the fact that it was previously agreed to drop such fees.

Unfortunately I suspect we will never get the straight answer to the question, though I am pleased this issue has generated some negativity publicity - hopefully the club will learn from it.

Kudos to @Dollymarie and @RedM for their excellent follow-up questions (it appears as a non-mod I can't respond?).

[Dollymarie]

It'll be covered on tonight's points west for anyone interested. 

[ciderbeans]

Sorry if this has already been answered but is the Wigan game pay on the day? 

[The Chaplain]

http://www.bristol-sport.co.uk/news/booking-fees-update-group-statement/17905

 

 

[Septic Peg]

I think it's really a case of terminology. You can't possibly call it a 'booking fee' when you POTD. You aren't 'booking' a ticket. That would apply if done previously.

I think if they renamed it 'service fee' or 'admin fee', the bitter pill might swallow a bit better but it's still shocking that you are charged a fee if you buy a ticket minutes before taking your seat.

You don't pay a fee at the cinema when you rock up to watch the latest romantic comedy unless you book the tickets before...

[Scrumpy Dziek]

Nope, nothing about about removing booking fees when this 'state of the art ticketing system' was originally announced  http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130517-green4solutions-826939.aspx

 

[Blagdon red]

6 minutes ago, Scrumpy Dziek said:

Nope, nothing about about removing booking fees when this 'state of the art ticketing system' was originally announced  http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130517-green4solutions-826939.aspx

 

That was the previous system. How quickly they come and go!

However, the message from the club then was refreshing and so different to the one we are getting now:

"The removal of booking fees was something I felt passionately about. There is no worse feeling than seeing a price and then just as you're about to pay, that price goes up! The price we advertise is the price supporters will pay – it is so important we are transparent. It's the right thing to do."

[ChippenhamRed]

1 hour ago, The Chaplain said:

http://www.bristol-sport.co.uk/news/booking-fees-update-group-statement/17905

 

 

I don't agree with the club's stance on this, but I am willing to give them credit for addressing the question pretty much head-on, including the suggestion that the ticket price should include the fee. The reasoning is dubious, but it's a better and more detailed response than I was expecting.

[ChippenhamRed]

6 minutes ago, Blagdon red said:

That was the previous system. How quickly they come and go!

However, the message from the club then was refreshing and so different to the one we are getting now:

"The removal of booking fees was something I felt passionately about. There is no worse feeling than seeing a price and then just as you're about to pay, that price goes up! The price we advertise is the price supporters will pay – it is so important we are transparent. It's the right thing to do."

Where is this from?

[!james]

6 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Where is this from?

Post 164 

[Selred]

Has everyone got £4 to pay on the day of the game? (Even if you have got a season ticket).

To keep cost of tickets low the club have announced everyone needs to pay an additional £1 for electric, £2 for stewards and £1 for the cleaners per game. They have kindly sent me this break down as they want these costs to be transparent (although advertised no where).

[Charliesboots]

1 hour ago, The Chaplain said:

http://www.bristol-sport.co.uk/news/booking-fees-update-group-statement/17905

 

 

Ok, I challenged this afternoon as promised, I'll tackle that after.

Firstly this statement is pretty flip flop and contradictory to what I was told earlier. 

I, along with a few other notable guests in a quite direct message said "the fee is bollocks" "needs incorporating" "counter intuitive to perception" "not a deal we would have signed if it were our business"

Was told they would listen and reflect and from the look on some faces I don't believe that they were expecting us to raise the issue and taken aback.

@Blagdon red @Dollymarie I'm sure you guys are going to press the club further on this on behalf of supporters and if it's any help we will push the matter this end too as its pretty hard to ignore us when we see them in the same room every match day. 

 

[Blagdon red]

45 minutes ago, Charliesboots said:

Ok, I challenged this afternoon as promised, I'll tackle that after.

Firstly this statement is pretty flip flop and contradictory to what I was told earlier. 

I, along with a few other notable guests in a quite direct message said "the fee is bollocks" "needs incorporating" "counter intuitive to perception" "not a deal we would have signed if it were our business"

Was told they would listen and reflect and from the look on some faces I don't believe that they were expecting us to raise the issue and taken aback.

@Blagdon red @Dollymarie I'm sure you guys are going to press the club further on this on behalf of supporters and if it's any help we will push the matter this end too as its pretty hard to ignore us when we see them in the same room every match day. 

 

We will. Personally I don't find the 'transparency' argument holds water at all. With Lisa Knights saying on TV tonight that the £1 represents only half of the fee they are charged by the software company, where is the 'transparency' in that? 50% is 'hidden'. And if they have to pay this fee to the software company, why no fee (it appears) on away tickets sold via the same system?

And, as others have pointed out, the money taken in ticket sales will, of course, be allocated in their internal accounting to a variety of cost centres. So why do they choose to break out just this element as something to charge separately to the supporter? And then only 50% of it?

And last but not least, why do it when your own FAN consultation body has made it clear to you that many supporters don't like such fees?

IMHO, it's plain bonkers.

(And that's to say nothing of the lack of advertising of the fee, which appears to breach ASA guidelines)

[Charliesboots]

13 minutes ago, Blagdon red said:

We will. Personally I don't find the 'transparency' argument holds water at all. With Lisa Knights saying on TV tonight that the £1 represents only half of the fee they are charged by the software company, where is the 'transparency' in that? 50% is 'hidden'. And if they have to pay this fee to the software company, why no fee (it appears) on away tickets sold via the same system?

And, as others have pointed out, the money taken in ticket sales will, of course, be allocated in their internal accounting to a variety of cost centres. So why do they choose to break out just this element as something to charge separately to the supporter? And then only 50% of it?

And last but not least, why do it when your own FAN consultation body has made it clear to you that many supporters don't like such fees?

IMHO, it's plain bonkers.

(And that's to say nothing of the lack of advertising of the fee, which appears to breach ASA guidelines)

With you all the way.

[Northern Red]

If someone had turned up on Saturday with £10 in their pocket, solely to cover what they thought was the advertised admission change, would they have been refused entry for not having the extra quid to pay? 

That statement from the club is pisspoor.

[Maesknoll Red]

I must admit, if I was walking up on the day and there were booking fees and anything more involved than handing over my cash and walking in, I'd be inclined to go back to the pub.  IMHO it's taking the piss and the club seem to stumble from one PR / commercial farce to another.

[Red Exile]

There's a lot of money and ambition and confidence at the Gate these days...but not always a corresponding level of common sense. You'd expect someone to be paying a bit more attention to the very sensible voices representing supporter interests, especially now, when the club needs to build the fan base. 

[City Rocker]

 

 

Surely the BS statement spectacularly misses the point? The Portsmouth game should have been advertised at £11, not £10. If the ticket price includes an admin fee, then fine, but just tell us the total cost in advance. You can't announce the add ons at point of sale, having already published the price without.

[Cider Queen]

10 minutes ago, Red Exile said:

There's a lot of money and ambition and confidence at the Gate these days...but not always a corresponding level of common sense. You'd expect someone to be paying a bit more attention to the very sensible voices representing supporter interests, especially now, when the club needs to build the fan base. 

Exactly..  You would have thought filling the ground would have been priority..  All that extra money from food and drink would more than cover this additional cost.

It frustrates me that the club could get it so wrong. They've heard that the fans are not happy about paying and the put out this BS statement.   They are so out of touch from their supporters it's quite scary. 

Unfortunately it's the occasional supporters that will be most affected by this and these are exactly the fans that club want to fill the stadium and ones that get fed up easily and won't bother returning if they don't like how they are treated.

[Red Exile]

...this particular gem made me laugh:

'Bristol Sport chief executive Andrew Billingham said: “We have come a long way since the days of being unable to sell cup tickets online to season card holders or not being able to offer the opportunity to print at home."

Not so long ago it was perfectly possible to print tickets at home...but that was bizarrely scrapped when the system before last (if my memory is correct) was introduced. All of a sudden being able to do something that was available years ago is presented as a step forward...and one which incurs additional cost. 

[City Rocker]

44 minutes ago, ojjy said:

Exactly..  You would he thought filling the ground would have been priority..  All that extra money from food and drink would more than cover this additional cost.

It frustrates me that the club could get it so wrong. They've heard that the fans are not happy about paying and the put out this BS statement.   They are so out of touch from their supporters it's quite scary. 

Unfortunately it's the occasional supporters that will be most affected by this and these are exactly the fans that club want to fill the stadium and ones that get fed up easily and won't bother returning if they don't like how they are treated.

Point is, the extra quid is of absolutely no consequence. It's the lack of transparency (contrary to the ironically worded statement) that is the problem. I speak as an advocate of the club, never having found reason to critisise the administration in the past. Just a matter of principle really, tell me the full price, don't add a sneaky surcharge at the till!

 

[Northern Red]

11 minutes ago, City Rocker said:

Point is, the extra quid is of absolutely no consequence. It's the lack of transparency (contrary to the ironically worded statement) that is the problem. I speak as an advocate of the club, never having found reason to critisise the administration in the past. Just a matter of principle really, tell me the full price, don't add a sneaky surcharge at the till!

 

Absolutely my view as well. An extra quid is neither here nor there for most people, but don't take your "customers" for idiots. Otherwise don't be surprised if they behave as customers do, and withdraw their custom.

[Big C]

I think the main issue is if you look at the PDF on the Wigan tickets page on the OS. It states all the prices for the game but there is no mention of the booking fee anywhere. So all those prices are incorrect. It was my understanding that you should be able to have the option to pay the price advertised even if its only available to those people who turn up between the hours of 2am and 3am on Monday morning wearing a Santa outfit. They should at least mention the booking fee on the PDF or have the prices stated as from £20etc..