Sorry mate but you cannot demand the list of issues below as “red lines” and expect to be taken seriously. Discuss, negotiate, influence. whatever, but demanding these as non negotiables is simply not realistic.
1894 GROUP STATEMENT RESPONSING TO THE CLUB'S NORTH STAND ANNOUNCEMENT
Our club, Manchester City, looks to keep growing. We applaud that ambition and having a 60,000+ capacity stadium, with state of the art facilities, capable of hosting a Champions League Final, is something to be proud of. It is worth noting the capacity was reduced by 2,000 seats recently to accomodate bigger advertising boards.
We asked the club not to be directly referenced in their statement, which was announced today, as we disagree with some of the plans as they currently stand.
The club wanted 1894 Group to become "anchor tenants" in the North Stand. We only had one committee member in attendance at 3 meetings but there were 4 meetings overall and invites given to all members of Citymatters, who were all able to give views representing their own demographic of the club's supporters.
This ultimately makes things harder to convince the club around atmospheric needs but we decided we should still try.
At the first opportunity we had to meet the club, we were asked to sign an "NDA" - a non-disclosure agreement with the club. We were unhappy about this, but we made this public on social media and emailed our members to ask whether we should engage with the club on this basis. A large majority told us to get involved as best as we could. This was April 2024.
What is important to note, though, is that there was an exceedingly short period of "fan consultation" between 28th February and 26th March 2023, and City submitted the planning application the following month. By July 2023, Manchester Council had already approved the club's plans. So It's difficult to see what anyone from any fan group could have done to alter the club's pre-determined plans for this stand at any stage, with images of the new stand already being released into the public domain.
For us to be anchor tenants, the stand would have to represent the wishes and principles of our members.
We entered into these meetings in good faith and brought some suggestions to the table and we said both publicly and privately that the club should open out a fuller consultation to all supporters but notably to existing North Stand season card holders, to allow fans to suggest amendments and improvements.
We had almost 1,500 supporter responses and our red lines were :
*That the stand should be built with acoustics in mind and the position of "singers" central to the stand.
* Pricing plans for season card and match day prices laid out for the next 5 years for the North Stand and other areas of the ground as a comparison - vital if supporters are expected to make a long term move. 1894's position is two year freeze on season and match day tickets to allow fans to catch up followed by inflationary rises only after the 2 years have been completed.
* Maintaining the current 70% ratio of season card holders amongst the 8,000 extra capacity to reverse the recent trend of not releasing new season tickets. (ie 5,600 season cards - not the extortionate Flexi Gold)
* 7,000 - 8,000 rail seats in North Stand Level 2.
* An 18-25 year old section.
* Additional rail seating in South Level 3 to mirror the noise coming from a higher atmospheric section in North Stand Level 2 so that the two ends are encouraged to sing to each other.
* A re-think from the club on the positioning, indeed the addition of general admission / hospitality seats in an "atmospheric" North Stand from what had been disclosed on images over the last few months.
We say today's update from the club lacks detail.
There is no detail on prices, no detail on the numbers of season cards being made available. We noted that Flexi Gold tickets were made available previously and as such many fans fear that the club's business plan might involve offering more Flexi Gold tickets across the ground including for the new North Stand. This would not enhance the atmosphere as not only would it price enthusiastic fans out of attending football, it would mean different people in the seats each game which does not lend itself to the atmosphere improving. Liverpool currently have this problem where only 1,000 of their new 8,000 Anfield Road upper tier has been made available to season ticket. The atmosphere has subsequently dipped.
The lack of detail around seasoncard numbers is very worrying.
More detail is required on the position of the rail seating area or areas and under what circumstances would those areas be increased.
We welcome the mention of ringfenced tickets for 18-21 year olds however we feel more detail is required. Would these be within the rail seating area only or in other areas? We believe ringfencing tickets for 18-25 section would help more fans financially.
In summary, we believe the stand has been designed with commercial revenues in mind over atmosphere. We think the club would be happy to have an improved atmosphere in the stadium but we do believe their priority would be to maximise revenue at all costs and as such some of the ideas presented to the club haven't been taken up.
There is always time to take on board fans' feedback and make changes and our door remains open.
but it is negotiation. points were made privately and publicly. it got us to the commitment of 3000 standing places when originally there was no commitment. then the commitment was moved to "it can go beyond 3000" and we've said privately ok what's the basis for this and in which direction within the stand would they go ? so ball is in club's court. the 18-21 tickets came from us. we did say originally 18-25, they came back with 18-21. we've had countless wins over the years. and we have also said to the club we can still collate names of people who might still want to go over there but we are allowed to call out the club's policies. Maybe if fans were organised in the early 90s we wouldn't have had disasters like the Platt Lane / Umbro Stand. It would have been called out in advance. You are intimating that if we said different things we'd have a better offer from the club on the table, that's not realistic, in fact as we have just explained it would be an even worse offer from the club. It's the club fucking this up not the fans or any fan group.
We have the club selling returned tickets straight to 3rd party sites and those tickets being snapped up by tourists at £250 each - see saturday's post from "the ghost" at 8.59pm, where are the guarantees that they won't do the same in the north stand ? Or would you just go along with what they say regardless ?
We have what , supposedly 120,000 fans on a waiting list and they bypass those waiting to flog to non City fans, which also puts crowd safety at risk. They don't reveal how many tickets gets released to these 3rd party sites, so there is not a trust between fans and the club because they are not coming clean. They do not respect any of us enough. Flogging tickets to anyone - they already do this in the south stand which dilutes a singing area completely.
For us it is about the detail. Not just the glossy pictures and "let's go there anyway".
Your views/ ideas carry no responsibility - ever - because you've never got involved in any process, not tried to make any difference yourself, just pontificated and gave the impression it's easy to gain concessions with the club that somehow you've got a way of doing things that would guarantee a blue wall at that end. You haven't though otherwise you would have got involved this last decade. Sorry if that sounds a bit personal but from here that looks factual. They are not offering a "home end" - certainly not the sort we all want.
Are you seriously suggesting we don't raise these issues that fans have requested us to do so, at a time when the ground is going more and more corporate and more and more soulless, when you yourself , who won't move, but wants thousand of other people to move for your own amusement, you want all these people with legitimate concerns to move again without enough guarantees put in place for them on prices, now and in the future and no information about a comparison between the north stand and the rest of the stadium ? it's easy for you to raise expectation and say people have got it wrong - because you literally don't need to do anything else.
We had overwhelming support for our statement and our stance - and why wouldn't we, it was based on canvassing thousands of people. Yes we take on board everyone's views, including yours, but the directors do not want an intimidating noisy ground, they want it nice and comfortable for tourists and corporates, that's it. there is no focus on protecting existing rights for City fans notably being able to carry on the family traditions of supporting City by your kids and grandkids getting seasoncards, which protects the heritage, identity and noise levels.
And by the way that’s just our stance. You seem to think the only people in the room were 1894 group and the club. All of Citymatters 12 reps attended and we had just one person present. No focus on what Citymatters said or did in those meetings DD? We went public because we were uncomfortable about having to sign an NDA. Reps from the OSC and CM also attended and have not gone public with any information/ statement whatsoever when it could be argued they had greater numbers than we did to gold the club to account. OSC for example had 40,000 members ?
If you were going into meetings with the club DD what would you be saying and how would you secure it ? And how would you guarantee that what you agree on would be what the fans really want ? You'd have to do the same as us, ask fans what they want the club to guarantee and go into a meeting with those points. So you'd end up arguing for the same things we are, because you wouldn't get any other set of answers/feedback.
We know what we have at the moment which isn't perfect but it can get going if if the singing areas are protected and not undermined, a lot of fans do want to stay put as they are near the away fans and many have moved a couple of times already in the last 20 years - often at the club's request. Forced out by new corporate areas. Remember this is only a debate now because the club refused to move the away fans ten years ago when the fans wanted them to, please do not lay the blame at fans DD this is all on the club- directors who will be moving on in the future yet expect us to put up with their version of a match day experience - a corporate ground with a forced atmosphere and a bellend starting songs over the tannoy instead of letting things build naturally. Fans around the ground are saying tell me about something even better than we have now. they won't move unless they are inspired, unless there is a commitment from the club to make it an atmospheric end which can be measured tangibly. It looks like the stand is not built for the likes of me and you. It is built for the tourists that come on a hotel/meal/ticket package. Why would you relocate there ?
I think a lot more people take us seriously than they do you DD. but if you would have joined us maybe you could have been going in there yourself ? we are not going to be thrown under the bus by the club and have them say "1894 agreed to this" when the new end is a let down. We can't recommend people swop ends until we know there are protections in place, to make it a true atmospheric end. having 8,000 different people there every weke paying £88 a ticket will not guarantee that. It starts with an attitude change from the club to value what fans are saying and change track.
Once again if you think you can do better, feel free to organise your own group, do it through bluemoon which has a large membership, ask to met the club and see how far you get. that's not being facetious, that's throwing it to you. If you have genuine frustrations and feel you could better- get off your arse and do something.
