North Stand All Man Utd

RE: 'your words, not mine'

When some people were going on about the ticket prices, I seem to remember you said something about 'Man Utd reserves'.

And I'm just saying I don't think we'd sell 20,000 tickets. Understand?

 

can you point me in the direction of me saying something about man utd reserves? nt

 

Can't find it..

..maybe it wasn't you.

But, you get my point, I don't think we'd sell 20,000.

 

Question.

What's the additonal cost to the club to police a category A, (or B) game when the north stand is segregated?

 

No idea. Question, whats the potential gain from splitting it? ie what is the potential gain from merchandise sales for the game? What is the potential gain from repeat custom from fans entertained who decide to come back? What is the potential gain from the extra support in the game? That ones easy and I can answer you that, potentially the gain from the additional support COULD be worth a big tie in the next round compared to sitting at home and watching the draw without us in it.

Was your question aimed at hinting that you know the cost and that it is the reason that the stand is not being split?

 

I'm saying you need to know all the facts.

You don't know any of them it seems.

 

He knows everything nt

 

Thats correct but maybe that is down to the club.

They broke their customer charter by raising ticket prices for the game (will the trust challenge them over this?) when all they needed to do to stay within it was to explain the reason for the price increase. Had they done this then nobody would have complained about the charter but they chose not to so people got angry and annoyed.

They chose to give the north stand to man utd instead of splitting it as it is designed and (admittedly only a few) people have been annoyed by this too. Could they not have said that manchester united had been given the north stand because south yorkshire police were going to charge them x amount more if it was split or that it wasnt allowed? Let the idiots at the police get the flak not the club.

 

can't find it?

Guess why that is. It's because I never said it so stop making things up

 

unlike you who thinks the 'moon is made of cheese'

your words, not mine

 

The ticket price has to be agreed between the two clubs. nt

 

it does yes but that doesn't explain anything does it

It could be the case that manchester united wanted to charge £40 and barnsley wanted to charge £19 and that the FL/FA stepped in and set the ticket price of £25. It could be that Man utd said they wanted £40 and barnsley wanted £19 and that as a compromise the club settled on £25 because the FA/FL could well have set the price at £30 had they got involved. Or it could be that barnsley approached man utd with an offer of £25 per ticket and manchester united were happy with that.

My point was that the customer charter says that in the event of the ticket policy being changed (as it was) then they would explain the reason for doing so 'at the earliest opportunity' via the official site, chronicle etc. They didn't do that and it caused fans to become angry when there was no need.

 

Do you ever stop moaning? nt

 

aye

see above/below in the bit about mascots

 

The ticket price has to be agreed between the two clubs.

 

RE: How much more revenue though?

Extra stewarding and policing no doubt. The costs on this game will probably swallow up the revenue, with us only getting 45% of ticket sales.

 

Just looked.

And its says "usually"

 

The ticket price has to be agreed between the two clubs. nt

 

Am i being thick here?? How was the North Stand designed to be split? Ive never seen any railings, barriers or a brick wall down middle showing that it was 'designed to be split'!!

 

This debate's getting extremely tedious now.

(zzz)