City Matters thread

Eccles Blue said:
Yes Alex but I’m talking about the months and months before that. As PB will tell you I was a thorn in his side at times I’m sure. It was a hit or miss situation. Maybe this month not next month!

Why I’m celebrating is that now the FA have made it part of the Terms of Reference they have to publish them. :-)
Click to expand...
Sorry, I understood what you meant - poor wording on my part. I agree it has been poor (and not even hit and miss) for too long.
 
Jam Tomorrow said:
Calling me a cynic but if the Premier League are behind this fans engagement thing you can bet the motive is political or money or both.
Click to expand...

The motive is clearly trying to show the government that the PL can increase fan involvement without an IR. Unfortunately for the PL, politicians are experts at producing and identifying bullshit so it won't make the slightest difference.
 
Engagement goes so far and actions speak louder than words. City’s Directors hiked up match day tickets despite giving encouragement that there would be price restraint (except for the “biggest games”), last season. That’s no surprise but why tell the porkies. Maybe it’s the norm in Bolton.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Engagement goes so far and actions speak louder than words. City’s Directors hiked up match day tickets despite giving encouragement that there would be price restraint (except for the “biggest games”), last season. That’s no surprise but why tell the porkies. Maybe it’s the norm in Bolton.
Click to expand...

Agree with you most of the time mate but I was highly sceptical when you said that previously though. The delights of living in a capitalist world. They're still trying to find their 'sweet spot' where they can fill the stadium at the highest price possible. Prices won't be frozen or eased until this no longer occurs in my eyes. With all the new 'fans' we're gaining this isn't going to happen any time soon unless there's a substantial drop off.

Unfortunately the club operates as coldly as any other business. I think most people see their club as an extension of their family and it grates that they're trying to milk us for every penny. Just because you can charge £90 for a ticket against Utd or price a childs ticket at £40 doesn't mean you should.
 
Edghill OG said:
Agree with you most of the time mate but I was highly sceptical when you said that previously though. The delights of living in a capitalist world. They're still trying to find their 'sweet spot' where they can fill the stadium at the highest price possible. Prices won't be frozen or eased until this no longer occurs in my eyes. With all the new 'fans' we're gaining this isn't going to happen any time soon unless there's a substantial drop off.

Unfortunately the club operates as coldly as any other business. I think most people see their club as an extension of their family and it grates that they're trying to milk us for every penny. Just because you can charge £90 for a ticket against Utd or price a childs ticket at £40 doesn't mean you should.
Click to expand...
I agree that it makes good business sense mate. City will milk the easy pickings and commercially, I don’t really blame them. Maybe they could be a bit more careful about what they lead fans to believe but that’s life and I’m always a bit cynical about promises from the suits anyway.

FWIW, there is now a higher number of families with kids with learning difficulties or autism asking to join the OSC Branch I run. They are very welcome. It could be indicative of City making it more difficult for “low Profit” customers to get tickets for home games, or it could be pure chance.
 
For those that are interested, City today published their Fan Engagement Plan 2023/2024 which they are required to do under the Premier League's new Fan Engagement Standard (FES). It outlines how the club intend to engage with supporters over the season. The FES outlines that the Premier League expect clubs to conduct a large part of their engagement via formally constituted groups, which is why City Matters take such a central role. In my view, I think the plan is a bit plain and doesn't go into season specific aims which I would have liked it do - such as ticket prices or criteria.

Overall news story: https://www.mancity.com/news/club/man-city-fan-engagement-plan-202324-63828993

Fan Engagement Plan: https://www.mancity.com/meta/media/guvnwkit/manchester-city-2023-2024_fan-engagement-plan.pdf

I think the Terms of References that have been produced alongside the Fan Engagement Plan are a lot more interesting. They codify and strengthen the governance of the group, such as the recruitment process and documentation, something I have been pushing for.

Terms of Reference: https://www.mancity.com/meta/media/1ujdh4hq/city-matters_2023-24-season_terms-of-reference.pdf
 
Alex - City Matters said:
In addition, the minutes for our first meeting of the season have gone live. Whilst the meeting was largely about the aforementioned Fan Engagement Standard/Plan and Terms of Reference, we also discussed the next steps to my report on Istanbul and the North Stand.

Click to expand...
Still no comment about the horrific experiences for 99% of us in Istanbul despite being asked. The club’s silence has been nothing short of disgraceful.
 
Alex - City Matters said:
In addition, the minutes for our first meeting of the season have gone live. Whilst the meeting was largely about the aforementioned Fan Engagement Standard/Plan and Terms of Reference, we also discussed the next steps to my report on Istanbul and the North Stand.

Click to expand...

Thanks Alex.

Can you add anything further to this section of the minutes?

In addition to one of the City Matters sub-groups focusing on the North Stand development over the course of this season and the duration of the full construction project, a separate meeting will be hosted by the Club to include City Matters and other fan groups within the next 8 weeks.

The Club will use this meeting to gather further views on the matchday experience.

PS. You probably forgot? Did you ask about the possibility of a live webcam covering the construction?

The Coop Live Arena webcam has been taken down for some reason.
Probably because the exterior build of the arena is pretty much completed?
 
Last edited:
It seems the club will only engage with the group it set up itself in the main.

"Wider engagement" then with its subgroups.
 
jrb said:
Thanks Alex.

Can you add anything further to this section of the minutes?

In addition to one of the City Matters sub-groups focusing on the North Stand development over the course of this season and the duration of the full construction project, a separate meeting will be hosted by the Club to include City Matters and other fan groups within the next 8 weeks.

The Club will use this meeting to gather further views on the matchday experience.

PS. You probably forgot? Did you ask about the possibility of a live webcam covering the construction?

The Coop Live Arena webcam has been taken down for some reason.
Probably because the exterior build of the arena is pretty much completed?
Click to expand...
Evening pal. That section is talking about the meeting that we’ve talked about to include 1894 on the North Stand. The club set the eight week timeline, so it should be arranged shortly.

Sorry - you’re right, I did forget. But have asked the club now. Don’t see why they couldn’t.
 
Corky said:
It seems the club will only engage with the group it set up itself in the main.

"Wider engagement" than with its subgroups.
Click to expand...

On Page 6 of the Standard you will note that all clubs are required to form a Fan Advisory Board (in our case City Matters) and, at least in my opinion, it is pretty clear throughout that the Premier League intend for this group to take the lead on official engagement with the club. I know that at least one other club with pretty established supporter groups have had to form new arrangements due to this. You can also see in the Standard that sub-groups are expected to be a key part of engagement.

Of course, the Standard does talk about continued engagement with the wider supporter base and existing channels like Official Supporter Clubs. This is covered by the final page of City’s Fan Engagement Plan. That said, I think this section is perhaps light on detail.

My point with all this, as I alluded to in my previous post, is that I think the Fan Engagement Plan is largely produced to meet the requirements of the Fan Engagement Standard. In that sense, it isn’t necessarily a true barometer of how well a club engages with its supporters. I’ve seen Wolves’ version and it resonates there. It is perhaps a downside of the new Standard that it is too focused around one representative group.

That’s not to say that City don’t engage beyond City Matters. They work with the 1894 Group on occasion, send out regular surveys and organise focus groups. Like with City Matters, whether they always listen to this feedback is another matter and I do think they could be better at engaging more generally.

I think there is also a link to my point about the Plan lacking season specific focus topics. The Standard requires clubs to outline the general topics that their Advisory Board may cover. However, a lack of more tangible and more detailed topics, in my view, makes it somewhat harder to evaluate success at the end of the season - as City Matters and other Fan Advisory Boards will be required to do. Of course, such targets aren’t the only way to measure the effectiveness of a group and we cannot always foresee pressing issues in advance (who would have thought that fan experience at the Champions League would have been one last season, for example), but they do help with overarching themes that are currently important to fans. Of course, the Plan and the Terms of Reference outline a number of governance standards that are easy to measure. My worry is that the evaluation at the end of the season is going to be focused on procedure (which is of course important) rather than the substance of results.
 
Last edited:
Alex - City Matters said:
Evening pal. That section is talking about the meeting that we’ve talked about to include 1894 on the North Stand. The club set the eight week timeline, so it should be arranged shortly.

Sorry - you’re right, I did forget. But have asked the club now. Don’t see why they couldn’t.
Click to expand...

Cheers Alex. Appreciate the updates.(on BM) Keep up the good work mate. :-)
 
Alex - City Matters said:
On Page 6 of the Standard you will note that all clubs are required to form a Fan Advisory Board (in our case City Matters) and, at least in my opinion, it is pretty clear throughout that the Premier League intend for this group to take the lead on official engagement with the club. I know that at least one other club with pretty established supporter groups have had to form new arrangements due to this. You can also see in the Standard that sub-groups are expected to be a key part of engagement.

Of course, the Standard does talk about continued engagement with the wider supporter base and existing channels like Official Supporter Clubs. This is covered by the final page of City’s Fan Engagement Plan. That said, I think this section is perhaps light on detail.

My point with all this, as I alluded to in my previous post, is that I think the Fan Engagement Plan is largely produced to meet the requirements of the Fan Engagement Standard. In that sense, it isn’t necessarily a true barometer of how well a club engages with its supporters. I’ve seen Wolves’ version and it resonates there. It is perhaps a downside of the new Standard that it is too focused around one representative group.

That’s not to say that City don’t engage beyond City Matters. They work with the 1894 Group on occasion, send out regular surveys and organise focus groups. Like with City Matters, whether they always listen to this feedback is another matter and I do think they could be better at engaging more generally.

I think there is also a link to my point about the Plan lacking season specific focus topics. The Standard requires clubs to outline the general topics that their Advisory Board may cover. However, a lack of more tangible and more detailed topics, in my view, makes it somewhat harder to evaluate success at the end of the season - as City Matters and other Fan Advisory Boards will be required to do. Of course, such targets aren’t the only way to measure the effectiveness of a group and we cannot always foresee pressing issues in advance (who would have thought that fan experience at the Champions League would have been one last season, for example), but they do help with overarching themes that are currently important to fans. Of course, the Plan and the Terms of Reference outline a number of governance standards that are easy to measure. My worry is that the evaluation at the end of the season is going to be focused on procedure (which is of course important) rather than the substance of results.
Click to expand...
The results of the surveys are never fed back. Click on them a year later and they haven't been closed.

The requirement for fan engagement was a Uefa thing first I believe for teams in their comps. If you want a decent sample size for a strata to be representative of a wider population you need 150 responses, not one person representing 36-40k people like we have for ST holders, big chance of responses being skewed then :)
 
jrb said:
Thanks Alex.

Can you add anything further to this section of the minutes?

In addition to one of the City Matters sub-groups focusing on the North Stand development over the course of this season and the duration of the full construction project, a separate meeting will be hosted by the Club to include City Matters and other fan groups within the next 8 weeks.

The Club will use this meeting to gather further views on the matchday experience.

PS. You probably forgot? Did you ask about the possibility of a live webcam covering the construction?

The Coop Live Arena webcam has been taken down for some reason.
Probably because the exterior build of the arena is pretty much completed?
Click to expand...
Each to their own, of course, do folk want to sit there and watch a stand being built?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top