Open Letter on Season Tickets and Pricing | Club announce price freeze on "general admission season tickets & PL match tickets" for next season (p163)

I'm not really here said:
it's absolute bullshit, no chance all 50 would have voted against the boycott without any form of coercion
Click to expand...
I wasn’t there. I’m not certain what happened. I’ve said how many Branch secs usually attend who can advise the OSC leadership and vote.

Some people are getting a bit carried away with themselves on here. Maybe the OSC had good reason for what they decided. Maybe they didn’t
and let down fans. We don’t know how the discussion went.

Amongst the hysteria (it’s a bit like The Crucible on here when there’s a chance to give the OSC a good kicking), here’s some more information.

Flexi-golds (get rid of them by all means and especially cut the set up fees) don’t stop generational support. In fact City do the job of getting parents and kids their seats together for flexi-golds.

What is this strike being talked about. City are refusing to meet City Matters so there is no CM atm and there is no strike. If the message most reps are sending helps with ticket price restraint then great.

People like Kevin Parker and Alan Galley dedicate themselves to helping fellow Blues. Kevin is often available 7 days a week You might not like them. Fair enough.

Danny Wilson, Roel deVries, Ferran Soriano and Khaldoon are in charge of ticket pricing at City.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
What is this strike being talked about. City are refusing to meet City Matters so there is no CM atm and there is no strike. If the message most reps are sending helps with ticket price restraint then great.
Click to expand...

This isn’t accurate.

Currently, it has been one day shy of five weeks since several fan groups sent the open letter to the Club. It’s four weeks today that the Club agreed to hold the meeting on season tickets. As of yet, there is still no date.

What me, and five other City Matters representatives, are doing is to refuse to meet with the Club in any other forum until that meeting is set.

At the moment, there are two main meetings and several sub-group meetings in the diary. Likewise, as Chair, there are other meetings that I have with the Club. However, as it stands, several of us would not be attending those meetings. So, there is in fact a strike.
 
Last edited:
Alex - City Matters said:
This isn’t accurate.

Currently, it has been one day shy of five weeks since several fan groups sent the open letter to the Club. It’s four weeks today that the Club agreed to hold the meeting on season tickets. As of yet, there is still no date.

What me, and five other City Matters representatives, are doing us to refuse to meet with the Club in any other forum until that meeting is set.

At the moment, there are two main meetings and several sub-group meetings in the diary. Likewise, as Chair, there are other meetings that we have with the Club. However, as it stands, several of us would not be attending those meetings. So, there is in fact a strike.
Click to expand...
What you’ve try to do for fans is great Alex but iMHO, unless the main City matters group is meeting, it really isn’t happening. Especially with regards the ticket pricing fall out
 
Tim of the Oak said:
What you’ve try to do for fans is great Alex but iMHO, unless the main City matters group is meeting, it really isn’t happening. Especially with regards the ticket pricing fall out
Click to expand...
That’s precisely the point, Tim. I want to be at the table with the Club. But currently, there isn’t a table to be sat at (regarding season tickets).
 
TheGhost said:
If there was 50 people in attendance and there was not one single person who voted against then that makes it even worse. Eight I can conceivably understand being swayed but not 50.
Click to expand...
Why don’t you tell us through how the discussion went. I don’t know myself
 
I'm not really here said:
Letting reps act how they see fit defeats the purpose of their position, they need to be acting on the will of the people they REPresent.

Just screams of 'what can I get out of this' rather than 'what can I do for the people I'm representating'

I'm at least glad that the majority of CM reps seem to understand their role.
Click to expand...
It's not the Soviet Politburo you tool. Reps are elected to represent their members in the best way they see fit. Some feel that boycotting meetings is the right thing and some don't.

And anyone who uses the 'They're only in it for what they can get out of it' is a complete fucking turd.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Why don’t you tell us through how the discussion went. I don’t know myself
Click to expand...
I understand where you're coming from Tim, but many of us just can't believe it was a 100% vote against, I would believe a majority vote against, even 80/20 split vote against, but 100? That sounds like a North Korean election result.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Maybe the member who I paid their power bills for so their family didn’t freeze during winter would have a different opinion.

Maybe the Ukrainian bombing victims who had wheelchairs provided through the OSC are grateful too.

I only know Wayne in your former Branch and he comes across as a top Blue. Especially him and Henry helping feed the homeless.

You can say the OSC is all about tickets and you are welcome to your views. The reality is a bit different I’m afraid.
Click to expand...
I have never once said that the OSC is all about tickets. Tickets are not what the OSC is about.
I agree about Wayne and Henry who are good friends of mine.
I said I resigned because of other things that disillusioned me.
Please do not put words into my mouth @Tim of the Oak.

I had the right to join an OSC I also have the right to resign from the OSC.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I bet most of these pricks aren't even OSC members.
Click to expand...
Do we need to start posting our membership cards on here now aswell? A lot of us are members, myself included, and that's the reason some of us are fuming, a decision by the group representing us that we pay to be members of, was made without any consultation or chance to vote on the matter.
 
Tim of the Oak said:
Why don’t you tell us through how the discussion went. I don’t know myself
Click to expand...
Therein lies the issue. It's the OSC's job to tell us.

Speaking as an OSC member, I am disappointed by the stance taken - mainly because as far as I am aware there was no opportunity for my views to be taken into account on this issue.

It is incumbent on the OSC exec to urgently clarify:
  1. Who was canavassed for their opinions on how the OSC should respond
  2. If individual branches were asked for opinions, how these fed into the process
  3. Who was allowed a vote on the matter.
It's all well and good them saying it's a unanimous decision, however I could realistically claim that I have unanimously taken a vote involving only myself and I have decided that I unanimously disagree with their stance. Democracy is as much about transparency of process as it is the actual act of taking a vote. The former is in extremely short supply here.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
When there's a vote in your local council chamber, or in the House of Commons, do your elected representatives contact you and ask how you feel about the issues, and which way they should vote?

Who elected you, or anyone else involved in the 1894 Group to speak on behalf of City fans? The truth is that you're a self-appointed, unaccountable group who have set themselves up as the 'authentic' voice of City fans. Do you speak top all your members (a group that includes me) before making statements?

I deliberately didn't participate in the survey as it seemed to me, and as someone else pointed out, it was very slanted towards getting the answers you wanted. I refuse to complete any of the surveys we get asked to do, officially or unofficially, if I don't feel they're designed to achieve a particular outcome. I was particularly horrified that far more people thought a few 'tourists' (an emotive word that you and others have weaponised) in home sections was a more important issue than pricing, which impacts all of us who regularly attend games.

Also your constant demonisation of City Matters & OSC, both of which have a clear mandate and documented constitution or rules, is becoming very McCarthyite and quite worrying. Basically I feel 1894 is turning into something like the MAGA movement, using populism and a few slogans to whip up emotions while taking no responsibility for outcomes.

I've said to the group and Dante that you are the ideal base for a Supporters Trust but you won't take that step. I think I realise why now. If you did, you'd have to behave responsibly and take accountability, and you don't want that. You'd rather stand on the sidelines and throw mud at elected groups and individuals.
Click to expand...
Thanks for completely missing the point Col. By the way, 1894 doesn't demonise the OSC or City Matters. We work with both groups and we work well with them, as we do with other City fan groups. I was expressing a personal opinion - not an 1894 opinion - about last night's vote, no more, no less. Perhaps you should canvass the opinion of the wider OSC membership on what happened last night mate instead of deflecting - you might find that there are a lot of very unhappy OSC members out there. Edit: I see since your post that more OSC members have commented and you're claiming some of them aren't even members. Fucking hell!

By the way, discussions about a Supporters Trust are under way. You know this because you even mentioned it to me in a PM a few months back that it was in one of the 1894 mailers that was sent out to members.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
I bet most of these pricks aren't even OSC members. They're like the Trump-supporting morons. Anything they don't like is 'fake news' even when it's a fact.
Click to expand...
It’s not too much to as the following is it?

What was the motion and who voted and who were they representing?
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
It's not the Soviet Politburo you tool. Reps are elected to represent their members in the best way they see fit. Some feel that boycotting meetings is the right thing and some don't.

And anyone who uses the 'They're only in it for what they can get out of it' is a complete fucking turd.
Click to expand...

It would be nore helpful to everyone if the OSC provided some sort of explanation.

The club have consistently fucked about on this issue, including their mandated fan liaisons. City Matters refusing to meet with them on topics that City decide they want to talk about before the one the fans want to talk about seems a strong message and sensible strategy.

What argument in the face of Citys belligerence could the OSC have against this? Especially when it appears to undermine City Matters position. Why would anybody wish to do that? How does that help the fans? And you can see how a unanimous vote over such an emotive issue where the will seems so clear, would lead people to believe that there has to be ulterior motives here.

We have basically all the City fan groups aligned here. In fact we have a coalition of groups that are not City groups from other fanbases all fighting on the same issue.

The OSC decided to break that solidarity. And they did it with 100% unanimous vote. I think people are well within their rights to ask for an answer to why that is.
 
How bad would our club's refusal to listen to its supporters need to get, before we reached the point of forming an alternative football club? And, incidentally, that is a serious question! And daft as it may sound, ask yourself this; what is the point of claiming to support a team that you can no longer afford to see play? How many of us on here would be City, or even football fans at all, if it wasn't for the fact we could catch affordable buses to Maine Road, and pay with pocket money levels of cash to get through a turnstile?
 
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