Stop fucking exaggerating. Not a single poster has demanded £20 tickets and free beer. All anyone is saying is that if a load of singers are to move over to the rail seating part of the new stand then it has to be priced reasonably to entice them over. As @jrb stated, his season ticket in SS1 is now nearly £800. No-one’s asking for £300 season tickets but it has to be priced attractively if they want to maximise atmosphere.Yes but its a cash cow, like ours will be, you don't spend 300 million and give tickets away for £20, there has to be a compromise which is lost on a lot of people on here who want cheap tickets, oh and throw in a couple of free pints cos were loaded...
You have 3000 seats to start with, how many are in 1894 ? Sorry mate but its just excuses, youve been handed a HOME end on a plate which you wanted but now its 'Not Right' ?You’re looking at it too simplistically. What 1894 have said is that they don’t plan to move with the current proposals.
You’re trying to make the point that the club is giving us this perfect opportunity, but the reality is that it’s not perfect. They’re lumping hospitality sections in the key areas of the stand. They’re only putting 3k rail seats in stretched across the back and down the sides. They aren’t committing to a pricing policy. They aren’t adding new affordable season cards.
Atmosphere is not important to them.
It could easily be the perfect opportunity handed to us on a plate. But the priority is match day revenue (which is fair - but it’s not going to move me from SSL1).
If 1894 decide they don't want it then others will move into the 3000 seats which may become 4000 or more. It's entirely up to those in 1894 but they need to be carefull they don't cut off their noses to spite because they could end up regretting their deciision because of some unreasonable red lines and become sidelined.You have 3000 seats to start with, how many are in 1894 ? Sorry mate but its just excuses, youve been handed a HOME end on a plate which you wanted but now its 'Not Right' ?
The elephant in the room is that 1894 don't want to move there...the chance to have a proper home end and it appears they have spat their dummy out...why ?
I actually agree with this. SSL1 is shite. The view is shite and the acoustics are shite. It really does stink of biting of their noses. The new stand will clearly be miles better for both thoughs things. If the prices are at least matched with SS1, then there's no excuse in my opinion.If 1894 decide they don't want it then others will move into the 3000 seats which may become 4000 or more. It's entirely up to those in 1894 but they need to be carefull they don't cut off their noses to spite because they could end up regretting their deciision because of some unreasonable red lines and become sidelined.
When we surveyed our members the majority said they preferred being closer to the pitch and in level 1.I actually agree with this. SSL1 is shite. The view is shite and the acoustics are shite. It really does stink of biting of their noses. The new stand will clearly be miles better for both thoughs things. If the prices are at least matched with SS1, then there's no excuse in my opinion.
It's a worry for us FOCs, for sure..My OAP ticket has been hitherto funded by the,now scrapped,Winter Heating Payment.
Does anyone think that Ferran will take this into account ??
Relocating City fans from ESLI upto SS2/3 is actually minimum disruption and has advantages.When you're a group that's solely focussed on improving the atmosphere, you will inevitably have strong opinions on how this stand should look. The starting point would be for the majority of the stand to be safe standing, second to that would be attractive pricing for people to relocate and there would also be a list of things you wouldn't want to see, which would include hospitality areas. I think the fact the club sought to engage with 1894 and saw them as pivotal to unlocking this new home end meant they went in with full confidence, and that's slowly been eroded as proposals have been announced.
I think the fact that the club engaged on this quite late in the day, when plans were advanced and the application was due to be submitted led to a lack of trust that the engagement with fans was meaningful. This latest statement from the Club doesn't go far enough in their opinion, and I expect due to the process so far, they don't expect things to improve.
As I said, I think in spite of the fact it's not 100% what 1894 want right now, it ticks the boxes in a lot of ways. Firstly, it provides a huge number of seats in a single tier which is ideal for creating an atmosphere. Secondly, it is providing safe standing areas albeit initially not as many as desired. But the current issues with atmosphere are unlikely to be addressed. You could move the away fans and create a more vocal area in the SS. SSL3 being the ideal place to increase the atmosphere around the ground. But it requires thousands of people to move around the stadium and it's just unrealistic at this stage.
Work with what you've got and then push for more. If we can get singers in the 3,000 safe standing seats under the roof the atmosphere increases because of the acoustics. It's then inevitable that people want to move in to that stand to join in as time goes on. It's also inevitable that those wanting a more peaceful experience move elsewhere. The club are looking to get younger fans in the stand too, and they're the future and will probably want to stand and sing rather than sit in silence, especially with a section making noise behind them.
What I'd like 1894 to do is think about the mindset of non-singers. Would they want to sit in a stand behind the goal knowing they've got 3,000 likely raucous people stood up chanting all game? If I was someone who liked to sit and watch and only join in the occasional song I wouldn't fancy that personally. If they continue to work with the club or push it with members, they could say to City we have 6,000 who want to stand in the new NS can you accommodate that rather than 3,000? Or could you look to do it in the future? Could you also work with us on ticketing/relocation information so we can discuss with our members and wider fan base too.
It’s one of those things where we’ll have to agree to disagree.Was reading that and thinking, see now there is a reasonable take. Not one I fully agree with, but reasonable, and I get it.
Then it got to your 'atmosphere is not important to them line', and it all fell apart. Because the club have repeatedly said it is, based designs and the build around that, and continue to say it. Lying bastards, right!
You having an opinion of what you want to see in the stand is all great. Might even be right. You deciding the group won't move, all good too. Both hardly up for debate.
But the minute you throw that bit of innuendo conjecture in, it muddies your own point, and invites this type of reaction from me, and others btw. And becomes you vs the club.
How do you not see the optics of that, including in 1894's statements? I annoyed a few by saying it earlier, but I also genuinely can't understand that you guys can't consider that point openly.
To me you and the club have different takes on what makes an atmospheric end. That's all. But both want the same. On top of that, the club are balancing fanbase variety, financial sustainability, and longevity of the stand with that.