| Update on fans returning 18:24 - Sep 15 with 17358 views | 442Dale |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/54158891
So some could have fans back at weekend, however “ Those in local lockdown areas were told they would not receive permission to take part in the test events.”
|  |
| |  |
| Update on fans returning on 08:44 - Sep 23 with 2717 views | mikehunt |
To me it boils down to whether we are a “club” or whether we are purchasing a commodity. If you have the club mentality, you pull together and see things through: good or bad. If you regard it as purchasing a product then, of course, you will want refunding if you haven’t received what you have purchased.
I don’t want that to sound like good supporter, bad supporter but just to highlight differing attitudes. |  |
| The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance. |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 09:18 - Sep 23 with 2649 views | electricblue |
Now that it is looking less and less to attend a live match at your local football club for maybe 6months what about bringing in a 4wk winter break for the lower league teams...
This could prolong the season for another month giving the supporter a chance to attend the final month or two also the break could help towards combating the virus.... |  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 09:41 - Sep 23 with 2599 views | SuddenLad |
| Update on fans returning on 21:24 - Sep 22 by 442Dale |
Genuinely didn’t realise that!
However, hopefully should games themselves not be affected, we can still have the option to watch ifollow for free rather than a refund. |
For free? I think each match watched (or iFollow code issued) will be deducted from any refund that may be offered/sought. However, that remains unclear. I hadn't even thought about it until the latest directives were issued.
Main stand SC holders will have paid £15 per game for 23 home games, but are being issued with voucher codes valued at £10 per home match.
Would the SC refund, therefore, be £5 per home game played and £15 for unplayed games? How will SC holders in other parts of the ground be refunded? Their purchase price per game will be less than the £10 value of the match code issued for them to watch the game.
It's a bit of a nightmare scenario for all involved. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Update on fans returning on 09:43 - Sep 23 with 2604 views | nordenblue |
| Update on fans returning on 08:30 - Sep 23 by rochdaleriddler |
I do zero pints deep. |
Good stuff, its whatever everyone feels comfortable with,if thats your release then fair play RR |  | | |
| Update on fans returning on 10:04 - Sep 23 with 2570 views | DaleiLama |
| Update on fans returning on 09:41 - Sep 23 by SuddenLad |
For free? I think each match watched (or iFollow code issued) will be deducted from any refund that may be offered/sought. However, that remains unclear. I hadn't even thought about it until the latest directives were issued.
Main stand SC holders will have paid £15 per game for 23 home games, but are being issued with voucher codes valued at £10 per home match.
Would the SC refund, therefore, be £5 per home game played and £15 for unplayed games? How will SC holders in other parts of the ground be refunded? Their purchase price per game will be less than the £10 value of the match code issued for them to watch the game.
It's a bit of a nightmare scenario for all involved. |
Finding a one-size-fits-all solution to SC refunds will indeed be a minefield.
I did wonder last night whether if the club knew there would be no (fan-attended) games, it could potentially suggest refunding all SCs back to Sandy price levels and fans would benefit marginally on the cost of an ifollow pass/game (not sure if the club would be disadvantaged in this scenario, but shouldn't be). Hopefully goodwill all round?
What would happen if crowds were readmitted later in the season though?
More patience needed! [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 10:08]
|  |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 10:48 - Sep 23 with 2488 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Update on fans returning on 09:43 - Sep 23 by nordenblue |
Good stuff, its whatever everyone feels comfortable with,if thats your release then fair play RR |
I’ve avoided busy ones, and sat outside mostly, that option looks to be over now |  |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 11:00 - Sep 23 with 2459 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Update on fans returning on 08:44 - Sep 23 by mikehunt |
To me it boils down to whether we are a “club” or whether we are purchasing a commodity. If you have the club mentality, you pull together and see things through: good or bad. If you regard it as purchasing a product then, of course, you will want refunding if you haven’t received what you have purchased.
I don’t want that to sound like good supporter, bad supporter but just to highlight differing attitudes. |
I thought that last season, I knew the club could not have foreseen what happened, and for the few games missed, and given I had paid £150 and already watched most games I decided not to seek a refund. However paying £200 and potentially not seeing any games is different. I watched about 20 mins of iFollow on Sunday , it’s not for me. | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 12:31 - Sep 23 with 2364 views | D_Alien |
There's also the small (literally, in comparison to SCs) matter of those who've bought a DFRC (including me)
Another two free passes would cover it (plus a bit more for goodwill), but those passes should be for games of our choosing. (Hint, hint, if the club are reading)
As i posted yesterday, it's fun and games with many different points of view
What i don't want to see from the club is any repeat of the linking of refunds/no-refunds to extraneous issue such as charities. Just keep it simple and in-house, or not at all
And what about another WALL ??? How much wall-space will be needed for those who don't want a refund this time with attendant publicity? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Update on fans returning on 12:51 - Sep 23 with 2324 views | judd |
| Update on fans returning on 12:31 - Sep 23 by D_Alien |
There's also the small (literally, in comparison to SCs) matter of those who've bought a DFRC (including me)
Another two free passes would cover it (plus a bit more for goodwill), but those passes should be for games of our choosing. (Hint, hint, if the club are reading)
As i posted yesterday, it's fun and games with many different points of view
What i don't want to see from the club is any repeat of the linking of refunds/no-refunds to extraneous issue such as charities. Just keep it simple and in-house, or not at all
And what about another WALL ??? How much wall-space will be needed for those who don't want a refund this time with attendant publicity? |
Well you can gladly have the wall space that I adorn... |  |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 12:59 - Sep 23 with 2294 views | D_Alien |
| Update on fans returning on 12:51 - Sep 23 by judd |
Well you can gladly have the wall space that I adorn... |
I knew you'd see things in the round, you've done enough of them | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 13:16 - Sep 23 with 2248 views | dawlishdale |
I think that is a fair and sensible statement from the club. Let's wait & see what they say next week. | | | |
| Update on fans returning on 13:51 - Sep 23 with 2174 views | judd |
| Update on fans returning on 13:16 - Sep 23 by dawlishdale |
I think that is a fair and sensible statement from the club. Let's wait & see what they say next week. |
Agree with that. It's been issued quickly and there's a hope to offer options quickly too. | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 17:41 - Sep 23 with 1909 views | Statzdale |
My wife and I are both members at LCCC and obviously not seen any cricket at EOT this summer. Obviously I hope that Dale supporters see action sooner rather than later.
But the worse case scenario obviously happened and we were offered either a full refund, to donate it to LCCC or to use it to either fully pay or towards our 2021 membership.
Hopefully, as mentioned above I hope supporters see the lads ASAP when this terrible situation subsides and you don't have to make that decision. | | | |
| Update on fans returning on 18:37 - Sep 23 with 1798 views | Dalenet |
| Update on fans returning on 08:44 - Sep 23 by mikehunt |
To me it boils down to whether we are a “club” or whether we are purchasing a commodity. If you have the club mentality, you pull together and see things through: good or bad. If you regard it as purchasing a product then, of course, you will want refunding if you haven’t received what you have purchased.
I don’t want that to sound like good supporter, bad supporter but just to highlight differing attitudes. |
The days when we were a club of fans that emptied our pockets regardless have gone for me. It has to be a two way street. The poor sods that were ticket holders last year and who have lost their jobs due to covid won't feel that the club has done anything to make them feel like a fan. The dale family died several years ago. It has to be about what is fair and giving people choice. I totally respect any decision that any fan makes to donate cash to the club week in week out. Personally I took a risk but didn't expect this outcome to be a donation. Most of us didn't claim a refund last season but I also respect that some people needed to do that.
The club has a great solution with iFollow (assuming they don't mess that up) to argue that we have seen games this season. As fans we pay different prices for our seats based on where we want to be in the stadium. ifollow means we all get the same product and should therefore pay the same price. Its not as though the seated ticket holders were allowed to trade down to the Sandy Lane during the restricted period. So some groups of our fans were always exposed to more risk than others. There would be uproar if there was a more restricted access solution for say 400 fans per game and only those that paid £335 for their ticket would be allowed in.
A simple credit to our ST account for anybody paying more than £230 once the season ends and we know what we've seen (online or in the stadium) would seem a low risk solution and would avoid the club needing to pay anything in refunds. The FL is working with the Government on a financial scheme to compensate clubs in some way so the club can evaluate its options when they have the details. And of course anybody like yourself could opt to donate the credit [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 19:35]
| | | |
| Update on fans returning on 18:52 - Sep 23 with 1758 views | D_Alien |
| Update on fans returning on 18:37 - Sep 23 by Dalenet |
The days when we were a club of fans that emptied our pockets regardless have gone for me. It has to be a two way street. The poor sods that were ticket holders last year and who have lost their jobs due to covid won't feel that the club has done anything to make them feel like a fan. The dale family died several years ago. It has to be about what is fair and giving people choice. I totally respect any decision that any fan makes to donate cash to the club week in week out. Personally I took a risk but didn't expect this outcome to be a donation. Most of us didn't claim a refund last season but I also respect that some people needed to do that.
The club has a great solution with iFollow (assuming they don't mess that up) to argue that we have seen games this season. As fans we pay different prices for our seats based on where we want to be in the stadium. ifollow means we all get the same product and should therefore pay the same price. Its not as though the seated ticket holders were allowed to trade down to the Sandy Lane during the restricted period. So some groups of our fans were always exposed to more risk than others. There would be uproar if there was a more restricted access solution for say 400 fans per game and only those that paid £335 for their ticket would be allowed in.
A simple credit to our ST account for anybody paying more than £230 once the season ends and we know what we've seen (online or in the stadium) would seem a low risk solution and would avoid the club needing to pay anything in refunds. The FL is working with the Government on a financial scheme to compensate clubs in some way so the club can evaluate its options when they have the details. And of course anybody like yourself could opt to donate the credit [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 19:35]
|
Some good ideas there
Just to add, the issue over iFollow wouldn't be about access as such, but about free access
On that point, it appears there can't be discounted access, only fully paid or free
The club certainly wouldn't be looking to deny access to anyone not in possession of a SC who was willing to pay the £10 fee | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 19:25 - Sep 23 with 1681 views | Nigeriamark |
| Update on fans returning on 18:52 - Sep 23 by D_Alien |
Some good ideas there
Just to add, the issue over iFollow wouldn't be about access as such, but about free access
On that point, it appears there can't be discounted access, only fully paid or free
The club certainly wouldn't be looking to deny access to anyone not in possession of a SC who was willing to pay the £10 fee |
I also don't think the club would have any problems with the DFRC ticket holders picking which matches they want to to use their I follow vouchers for, but it will be I Follow who decide. |  | | |
| Update on fans returning on 19:31 - Sep 23 with 1670 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Update on fans returning on 18:37 - Sep 23 by Dalenet |
The days when we were a club of fans that emptied our pockets regardless have gone for me. It has to be a two way street. The poor sods that were ticket holders last year and who have lost their jobs due to covid won't feel that the club has done anything to make them feel like a fan. The dale family died several years ago. It has to be about what is fair and giving people choice. I totally respect any decision that any fan makes to donate cash to the club week in week out. Personally I took a risk but didn't expect this outcome to be a donation. Most of us didn't claim a refund last season but I also respect that some people needed to do that.
The club has a great solution with iFollow (assuming they don't mess that up) to argue that we have seen games this season. As fans we pay different prices for our seats based on where we want to be in the stadium. ifollow means we all get the same product and should therefore pay the same price. Its not as though the seated ticket holders were allowed to trade down to the Sandy Lane during the restricted period. So some groups of our fans were always exposed to more risk than others. There would be uproar if there was a more restricted access solution for say 400 fans per game and only those that paid £335 for their ticket would be allowed in.
A simple credit to our ST account for anybody paying more than £230 once the season ends and we know what we've seen (online or in the stadium) would seem a low risk solution and would avoid the club needing to pay anything in refunds. The FL is working with the Government on a financial scheme to compensate clubs in some way so the club can evaluate its options when they have the details. And of course anybody like yourself could opt to donate the credit [Post edited 23 Sep 2020 19:35]
|
Whilst accepting what you say about the pricing of iFollow , I still think a refund option is needed, I’ve never bought an iFollow pass in my life, I certainly don’t want to pay £200 for one | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 19:51 - Sep 23 with 1636 views | Nigeriamark |
| Update on fans returning on 19:31 - Sep 23 by rochdaleriddler |
Whilst accepting what you say about the pricing of iFollow , I still think a refund option is needed, I’ve never bought an iFollow pass in my life, I certainly don’t want to pay £200 for one |
I think it would be difficult to charge people who live in the UK 200 quid for 23 games when overseas fans like myself get 46 games ( I got FA cup last year as well) for 140 quid ( it was only 110 last year). The point of only giving it to overseas fans was to stop potential drops in crowds, but if no-one can get in this season, that reason vanishes. There needs to also be a plan to let home fans also get away matches on I-follow too, at least for as long as the ban lasts. They can't match the overseas exile price, which is cream on top as we don't get to many home or away games so are not affecting crowds anyway, but perhaps the cost of a home season ticket ( sandy) for 46 I follow games wouldn't be a bad compromise ( less the games that would have passed while they work it out) | | | |
| Update on fans returning on 20:31 - Sep 23 with 1566 views | TipperaryDale |
A lot of fans who bought a season ticket, and who probably won't be active on this board, don't have the means (nor the inclination) to watch streaming online, especially the older fans.
Ifollow, to me, is not a substitute for live football - it could be given as an option to those fans who want it, but if they don't they shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
An option for the club could be to roll-over STs for the next season for those fans who want to do that. I think flexibility is key; what is acceptable to some would be completely useless for others. A range of options would be good. |  | | |
| Update on fans returning on 20:49 - Sep 23 with 1508 views | boromat |
There's a lot of talk of unissued shares. Maybe this could be one of the options. I think there was a valuation of £6 per share. Maybe a good idea would be to allow fans to have a refund in the form of shares either in full or with the left overs after an ifollow season pass is taken off the sum (so depends which stand your in).
Surely the more fans that are shareholders the better. It helps with any future hostile takeovers which are quite unlikely in the current circumstances but still... | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 21:07 - Sep 23 with 1468 views | judd |
| Update on fans returning on 20:49 - Sep 23 by boromat |
There's a lot of talk of unissued shares. Maybe this could be one of the options. I think there was a valuation of £6 per share. Maybe a good idea would be to allow fans to have a refund in the form of shares either in full or with the left overs after an ifollow season pass is taken off the sum (so depends which stand your in).
Surely the more fans that are shareholders the better. It helps with any future hostile takeovers which are quite unlikely in the current circumstances but still... |
There needs to be an EGM/AGM to pass (or otherwise) the share issue resolution but it's a good idea, especially if shares were priced more appropriately. | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 21:30 - Sep 23 with 1414 views | Sandyman |
As posted on a separate thread, if Wigan Athletic can't be sold lock, stock and barrel for £3.3 million in the current market, expecting a buyout of the remaining Dale shares at £6 each, which will not gain total control, is fantasy.
It's going to be incredibly tough surviving without match day income for all clubs in this environment.
I bought my season card expecting a limited season. I think most did (but may be wrong of course). My money will stay with RAFC and I'll appreciate the iFollow codes as they come through. How the club survives beyond that, who knows. An anodyne statement on the club website and similar from David "Mr TV" Bottomley on SSN confirms nothing. The parsimony party is in full swing. Who has the stealth or wealth to stay up? Could be worse - we could be bootleg buckets 10 leagues down. Unlikely  |  | | |
| Update on fans returning on 21:40 - Sep 23 with 1393 views | judd |
| Update on fans returning on 21:30 - Sep 23 by Sandyman |
As posted on a separate thread, if Wigan Athletic can't be sold lock, stock and barrel for £3.3 million in the current market, expecting a buyout of the remaining Dale shares at £6 each, which will not gain total control, is fantasy.
It's going to be incredibly tough surviving without match day income for all clubs in this environment.
I bought my season card expecting a limited season. I think most did (but may be wrong of course). My money will stay with RAFC and I'll appreciate the iFollow codes as they come through. How the club survives beyond that, who knows. An anodyne statement on the club website and similar from David "Mr TV" Bottomley on SSN confirms nothing. The parsimony party is in full swing. Who has the stealth or wealth to stay up? Could be worse - we could be bootleg buckets 10 leagues down. Unlikely |
The universally known Robbie in his area has actually done something far less anodyne:
https://www.cu-fc.com/news/2020/september/robbies-letter-to-pm/ | |
| |
| Update on fans returning on 22:24 - Sep 23 with 1335 views | rochdaleriddler |
Speaks a lot of sense, his letter may be a bit long for our PM to read though if the press is to be believed | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
