Seasoncard Amnesty

[city986]

Don't understand why people are getting so upset about photo id ,its my driving licence, its on my passport, its on my work id,its on my forklift licence christ the only thing its not on is my season ticket and if it needs to go on there fair enough, but there again I very rarely miss a match

 

[cityzen81]

The bigger question is what have these people got to hide that have photo ID but are unwilling to show it?

 

[peoffrey]

The bigger question is what have these people got to hide that have photo ID but are unwilling to show it?

My friend Ivor Smallcock is really embarrassed to show his ID. Never says why.

 

[Scotty76]

Well then you haven't read what I've written, or simply haven't understood it. You've just taken one view, your own, and ignored all the other factors that come into play. And again I'll stress that no decision has been made and there's still a wide divergence of views on this.

Not at all. I didn't say they've decided to, I said they're considering it. Transferring names is understandable, but proving who has earned what points is difficult. So they shouldn't be allowed.
I know someone who changed the name on a seasoncard that had a lot of points, they didn't get to keep any of those points, which was right.
The opinion of not transferring points, but transferring names is the safest option, otherwise it's open to manipulation.

 

[RegMuffin]

The bigger question is what have these people got to hide that have photo ID but are unwilling to show it?

Nothing.

2 things.

1. We live in a free society not a police state. And
2. There's a big difference between confirming your identity upon request, for ticket collection purposes and having a mandatory photo on a season ticket which means it then cannot be shared.

Photo ID isn't about being covid compliant which is being implied.

 

[Phil1]

Let’s be honest here, whatever decision is made will piss one group of people off one way or another.
Like anything new that’s brought in the idea should be to cause as least disruption as possible, but sadly somebody will always feel hard done by.
C’est la vie..

 

[cityzen81]

Nothing.

2 things.

1. We live in a free society not a police state. And
2. There's a big difference between confirming your identity upon request, for ticket collection purposes and having a mandatory photo on a season ticket which means it then cannot be shared.

Photo ID isn't about being covid compliant which is being implied.

No doubt we have all loaned out our Seasoncards over the years, however it is in the T&C's that they shouldn't be used by anyone else.

There is NO conspiracy going on and even if the club choose to exercise their right to enforce the rule and photo ID or a photo on the SC is they way they go about implementing it then there is nothing anyone can do.

Those are the conditions you signed up to when taking out the card, so you'll either have to like it or lump it.

 

[RegMuffin]

No doubt we have all loaned out our Seasoncards over the years, however it is in the T&C's that they shouldn't be used by anyone else.

There is NO conspiracy going on and even if the club choose to exercise their right to enforce the rule and photo ID or a photo on the SC is they way they go about implementing it then there is nothing anyone can do.

Those are the conditions you signed up to when taking out the card, so you'll either have to like it or lump it.

After 40 years of being a season ticket holder I think I'm at the stage where I neither need to like it nor lump it. I suspect this will be the straw etc etc

 

[liamctid]

It was a typical City Matters meeting where they played back the suggestions they'd come up with. Some were sensible and some got challenged quite heavily, which I think caused the club to change their thinking. Some we're still discussing among ourselves as a group and there are some widely contrasting views.

I'll give you one example, which we're still hotly discussing, which is what happens to points when a seasoncard is transferred under the amnesty, which is obviously a hot topic. I have to stress that there is no decision on this but there a number of options, some of which we discussed:

1. Full transfer of all points, added to any the new owner already had. so if they had 1,000 in their own name and there were 10,000 on the card they'd have 11,000 after the transfer
2. Transfer of all points but with a maximum limit so that the new owner only got the higher of their own points or the points on the old card. So that's 10,000 after the transfer
3. Transfer of the last 3 (or 5) year's points earned on the card, plus their own points. So maybe 2,000 transferred plus the 1,000 already earned by the new owner, making 3,000
4. Part transfer of points on a percentage basis (say 50%) and the remainder either lost or kept by the old card holder (if they wanted them). So that would be 5,000 plus the 1,000 already earned.
5. Transfer by agreement, where the person named on the card is still alive and agrees with the new owner how to split the points. So the old owner might want to give them 7,500, which can be added to their own 1,000.
6. As would happen with anyone taking out a new seasoncard, 1,000 points plus any points they had in their own name. so if they had 1,000 points themselves, they end up with 2,000 after the transfer.

There's another consideration. The more points someone stands to get, the more incentive they have to take advantage of the amnesty, which the club wants, particulalry as it needs to ensure all contact data for ticket holders is up to date. But there's a large element of unfairness in (1) and (2) potentially, which has been pointed out already and is an argument I understand fully.

If we go with option (6) on the other hand, it's fairer on the surface but what if you've built up most of the points on the ticket you've been using, which is in someone else's name? You wouldn't see that as "fair" and might decide to sit out this current crisis until all the restrictions are off and you could use it again. But if you don't transfer it then you won't be coming to games while those restrictions are on.

So we have to try to balance a number of competing factors.

Not sure if it would take loads of work to achieve this, but have they considered only transferring points gained from home fixtures? That would show who the "points whores" are!

 

[bluesmith]

It was a typical City Matters meeting where they played back the suggestions they'd come up with. Some were sensible and some got challenged quite heavily, which I think caused the club to change their thinking. Some we're still discussing among ourselves as a group and there are some widely contrasting views.

I'll give you one example, which we're still hotly discussing, which is what happens to points when a seasoncard is transferred under the amnesty, which is obviously a hot topic. I have to stress that there is no decision on this but there a number of options, some of which we discussed:

1. Full transfer of all points, added to any the new owner already had. so if they had 1,000 in their own name and there were 10,000 on the card they'd have 11,000 after the transfer
2. Transfer of all points but with a maximum limit so that the new owner only got the higher of their own points or the points on the old card. So that's 10,000 after the transfer
3. Transfer of the last 3 (or 5) year's points earned on the card, plus their own points. So maybe 2,000 transferred plus the 1,000 already earned by the new owner, making 3,000
4. Part transfer of points on a percentage basis (say 50%) and the remainder either lost or kept by the old card holder (if they wanted them). So that would be 5,000 plus the 1,000 already earned.
5. Transfer by agreement, where the person named on the card is still alive and agrees with the new owner how to split the points. So the old owner might want to give them 7,500, which can be added to their own 1,000.
6. As would happen with anyone taking out a new seasoncard, 1,000 points plus any points they had in their own name. so if they had 1,000 points themselves, they end up with 2,000 after the transfer.

There's another consideration. The more points someone stands to get, the more incentive they have to take advantage of the amnesty, which the club wants, particulalry as it needs to ensure all contact data for ticket holders is up to date. But there's a large element of unfairness in (1) and (2) potentially, which has been pointed out already and is an argument I understand fully.

If we go with option (6) on the other hand, it's fairer on the surface but what if you've built up most of the points on the ticket you've been using, which is in someone else's name? You wouldn't see that as "fair" and might decide to sit out this current crisis until all the restrictions are off and you could use it again. But if you don't transfer it then you won't be coming to games while those restrictions are on.

So we have to try to balance a number of competing factors.

Point 1 could be really used to people's advantage and give mega points to certain people, for example we have a lapsed season ticket holder who has 15k points and another with 20k who is contemplating giving up if I am reading point 1 correct the lapsed season ticket holder could take the others season ticket and have combined points of 35k which would under the current conditions get them tickets for every big game for next few 10 years. Hopefully this has been noted by CM and City as it would be farcical.