Comparable views

An archive of news, events and discussion leading up to and post West Ham United's historic move from Upton Park to Stratford in 2016.

Moderators: Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks, Gnome

Locked
User avatar
AlfieG
Posts: 4792
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:20 am
Location: London
Has liked: 1 like
Total likes: 4 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by AlfieG »

Westbourne Bill wrote:Here's another example...

I've gone from the very front row of the west upper, in line with the penalty spot and band 2 to.......about 12 rows back in the equilavent upper tier of the new east stand. I'm now just outside the penalty area admittedly but much further away....with a band 1 price tag.

I've had the same seat for about 8 seasons and a S/T on and off for over 50 years. The only comparable aspect is that it will still take me 3 hrs to get to every home game.

Marvellous.
Bill, not being facetious but why did you decide to pay more if you are underwhelmed by the new seat position?
User avatar
MD_HM
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:00 am
Location: London
Has liked: 38 likes
Total likes: 339 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by MD_HM »

The biggest mistake is the club should never have used the word "comparable" as that's what the gripe now and angle those against the move are hanging on to.

I never went to my appointment thinking the options that were going to be given to me would be comparable to what I have now as I know it's a totally different stadium, it's like comparing a peach with a flat peach; the same thing but different :D

I was disappointed with options given but you make a choice to renew or not simple as that.

They basically looked after the highest paying customers first over how long you might have had a cheaper seat for. Same as when traveling, first/business class customers get better treatment than those in economy etc... However with football there is the tribal element that hasn't been considered so us fans will feel pissed off.

Taff: priority on away tickets you mention is an interesting example... Yes we get to pick tickets first (just like we get to pick Olympic Stadiam season tickets first) however when they allocate away tickets the quality of the view isn't given on how early you get your application in or the number of points you have (I just got better palace tickets sticking it in on the last day than a mate did who already had them in before) the only time you can guarantee a better view on away tickets is when they have different price bands and you pay more.

What happens when we get to the OS and reach the FA Cup final with 40k season ticket holders?

I don't agree with the way the club have done it, it should have been on length of season ticket first as the number 1 criteria and I have said that all along but as a grown man I can choose if I want to renew or not
User avatar
Westbourne Bill
Posts: 7445
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 5:49 pm
Location: W Sussex
Has liked: 127 likes
Total likes: 329 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Westbourne Bill »

AlfieG
That's a fair question. I'm part of a group of 10 and to be honest it wasn't until we had opted for making the best of a bad job and started to get our credit cards out that someone spotted the 25% deposit we were being asked for equated to band 1, not 2. Certainly the rep didn't make that clear at the time we were looking at options. If I had been going on my own I may well have walked away and decided against a ST next year and reviewed the situation in year 2 when I think the situation will be better.

Because of these threads I went expecting to be underwhelmed...and I am.
User avatar
HalfTimePie
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:39 am
Location: Essex
Total likes: 1 like

Re: Comparable views

Post by HalfTimePie »

I do understand peoples point of view where by those with longer serving season tickets should get priority but........what if they all chose to upgrade and take all the allocation for band 1 and 2's? Then when it comes down to having a comparable seat they will be the ones who get a worse view than what they had at the Boleyn.

Band 4's with a bad view now could end up with a lower tier few rows from the front on the half way line view. Leaving a band 1 or 2 who has a good half way line view now to sit up in the gods.

They cant please everyone I guess so they just chose a business decision.

I don't agree with what they did personally but I guess we just have to live with it and wait until the 2017 season when we haven't won anything and watch all the glory hunters ( :P ) disappear and swap your seat
User avatar
Hugh Jargon
Posts: 5941
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 2:50 pm
Has liked: 170 likes
Total likes: 475 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Hugh Jargon »

My original appointment was early Aug but I had to reschedule much later because I was on holiday. Club refused an earlier appointment.

Gone from front row upper in the east to row 56. Trying not stress too much because I reckon there will be plenty of £99 seats up.for grabs season after next.
Chris BMU
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 10:54 pm
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Chris BMU »

Not saying it's right but they couldn't allocate to longest term holders first because they haven't decided yet where the seats are for bands 3 and 4. They are trying to sell as many more expensive seats as they can, and the lower band seats will be located in wherever is left.

If we do get to a cup final, they had better allocate those tickets to longest term holders first. If they try allocating cup final tickets to the higher paying newbies first, they are going to lose a lot of long time loyal supporters.
User avatar
taffhammer
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by taffhammer »

MD_HM wrote: Taff: priority on away tickets you mention is an interesting example... Yes we get to pick tickets first (just like we get to pick Olympic Stadiam season tickets first) however when they allocate away tickets the quality of the view isn't given on how early you get your application in or the number of points you have (I just got better palace tickets sticking it in on the last day than a mate did who already had them in before) the only time you can guarantee a better view on away tickets is when they have different price bands and you pay more.
The principal of selling single tickets to loyal members first rather than letting them have 2 extras is what i was refering to. They don't do it when you buy an away ticket but do when it comes to the Olympic stadium, and that means the loyal supporter has been put to the back of the queue so they can sell more club 1966 and band 1. Which is why they didn't say where the bands begin and end. When it comes to December its gonna be choas. Don't forget the vast majority of band 4's are the ones who sing and they are going to be right up the back.......if they bother.
User avatar
Rocketron
Posts: 12907
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2004 7:45 pm
Location: Kumb on feel the noize We've got David Moyes
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 49 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Rocketron »

Chris BMU wrote:Not saying it's right but they couldn't allocate to longest term holders first because they haven't decided yet where the seats are for bands 3 and 4. They are trying to sell as many more expensive seats as they can, and the lower band seats will be located in wherever is left.

If we do get to a cup final, they had better allocate those tickets to longest term holders first. If they try allocating cup final tickets to the higher paying newbies first, they are going to lose a lot of long time loyal supporters.
Please read this back to yourself and realise the issues some of us have.
1. They could have planned all four bands before inviting people.
2. They could have ensured longevity counts
They chose not to do so. I think we all know why.
Their interest is in making as much money as possible. They don't care who sits in the OS as long as they pay top dollar.
Why do you expect them to change from this model if we get to a cup final ?
User avatar
Westbourne Bill
Posts: 7445
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 5:49 pm
Location: W Sussex
Has liked: 127 likes
Total likes: 329 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Westbourne Bill »

I mentioned it on another thread, but I keep reminding myself that in complete contrast Spurs have asked their ST holders whether they think they should be allowed to add guests to their application for seats at their new stadium. Im told the concensus is "no".

I guess theyre not so worried about filling theirs.
danm79
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:09 pm
Has liked: 29 likes
Total likes: 94 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by danm79 »

Chris BMU wrote: If we do get to a cup final, they had better allocate those tickets to longest term holders first. If they try allocating cup final tickets to the higher paying newbies first, they are going to lose a lot of long time loyal supporters.
Seen this questioned a few times, surely this is a simple one and has nothing to do with length of ST, banding etc. Would it not be:

Bond Holders
Away Season Ticket Holders
PP apps
ST holders with no PP
Members with PP
Members
General Sale
Chris BMU
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 10:54 pm
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Chris BMU »

danm79 wrote:
Seen this [ how to allocate cup final tickets ] questioned a few times, surely this is a simple one and has nothing to do with length of ST, banding etc. Would it not be:

Bond Holders
Away Season Ticket Holders
PP apps
ST holders with no PP
Members with PP
Members
General Sale
Probably right but by a vast majority the biggest group there is ST holders with no PP. And the question there is, how do they prioritise within that group?
Chris BMU
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 10:54 pm
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Chris BMU »

Rocketron wrote:Chris BMU:
Not saying it's right but they couldn't allocate to longest term holders first because they haven't decided yet where the seats are for bands 3 and 4. They are trying to sell as many more expensive seats as they can, and the lower band seats will be located in wherever is left.

If we do get to a cup final, they had better allocate those tickets to longest term holders first. If they try allocating cup final tickets to the higher paying newbies first, they are going to lose a lot of long time loyal supporters.

Rocketron:
Please read this back to yourself and realise the issues some of us have.
1. They could have planned all four bands before inviting people.
2. They could have ensured longevity counts
They chose not to do so. I think we all know why.
Their interest is in making as much money as possible. They don't care who sits in the OS as long as they pay top dollar.
Why do you expect them to change from this model if we get to a cup final ?
You read it back too please Rocketron, I think we are saying pretty much the same thing. I wasn't supporting it, just trying to explain how it has got to where it is. And as you say, it is all about making the most money. Maybe a little bit about fears of a half empty stadium, and perhaps they are surprised how fast sales have gone.

It is only gradually becoming clear how it is turning out because it has been a long process and a new situation. And not much transparency. But if a cup final came along, it would be immediate and high profile and would likely get very emotional.
danm79
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:09 pm
Has liked: 29 likes
Total likes: 94 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by danm79 »

Chris BMU wrote: Probably right but by a vast majority the biggest group there is ST holders with no PP. And the question there is, how do they prioritise within that group?
Forgot corp, 1966 etc

I would guess 900 bond holders, 400 away ST, 5000 corp etc, 5000ish with a PP....wouldn't actually leave that many for ST general sale - don't most clubs just do a lottery type draw in this sort of situation?

I would suggest attending an away game for any ST holder to get a PP would be a good idea if they are optimistic of a cup final and wanted to make sure of a ticket.
Chris BMU
Posts: 372
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2003 10:54 pm
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Chris BMU »

If we are going to sell 40,000 STs then it leaves quite a lot actually in the ST general sale category - about 30,000!
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32083
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1780 likes
Total likes: 2058 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

A question for anyone who has had an appointment and has also been to an event where they've visited their seat (or one with a similar view)

How did the actual view compare to the computer image at the appointment?
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
Posts: 9992
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: On my computer trying to keep up with the Sky fixture changes
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 8 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by hadleighhammer »

MD_HM wrote:The biggest mistake is the club should never have used the word "comparable" as that's what the gripe now and angle those against the move are hanging on to.
You mean they should have been honest and said "Your view will be far worse than what you have today as there will be a only partially covered running track in front of you and that we will have sold the best seats to the +1s and corporates"?

Not going to sell many that way. Better just to lie and call it comparable.
User avatar
MD_HM
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:00 am
Location: London
Has liked: 38 likes
Total likes: 339 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by MD_HM »

hadleighhammer wrote:
You mean they should have been honest and said "Your view will be far worse than what you have today as there will be a only partially covered running track in front of you and that we will have sold the best seats to the +1s and corporates"?

Not going to sell many that way. Better just to lie and call it comparable.
Comparable could be your in the upper now and you will be in the upper at the OS, it could mean you have an isle seat now you will have one in the OS, it could be you are in Row 20 now so will be in Row 20 at the OS, it could be you are currently inline with the penalty area and you will be at the OS.

It could mean one of those things it could mean all of them.

It's down to interpretation and there lies the problem

And those against the move from the start are just using it as the "viewing distance" must be comparable which any one with half a brain cell always knew that the distances would be further away.

BUT further away doesn't mean a worse view, just a different one.

Anyone that sits in the Upper now that gets a seat in the Upper at the OS will have a good and I would say comparable seat (I've sat in the upper at the OS and it's a good view)

Anyone that sits in the Lower now and gets a seat in the Lower at the OS I think can be classed as getting a comparable view as well

If not by your own choice your having to from lower to upper then I think it's fair to say the seat offered isn't comparable to the one you currently have, although that still doesn't mean a bad view just different to what you have now.
User avatar
Big George
Posts: 13289
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: ENFP-T
Has liked: 135 likes
Total likes: 276 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by Big George »

MD_HM wrote:
Comparable could be your in the upper now and you will be in the upper at the OS, it could mean you have an isle seat now you will have one in the OS, it could be you are in Row 20 now so will be in Row 20 at the OS, it could be you are currently inline with the penalty area and you will be at the OS.

It could mean one of those things it could mean all of them.

It's down to interpretation and there lies the problem

And those against the move from the start are just using it as the "viewing distance" must be comparable which any one with half a brain cell always knew that the distances would be further away.

BUT further away doesn't mean a worse view, just a different one.

Anyone that sits in the Upper now that gets a seat in the Upper at the OS will have a good and I would say comparable seat (I've sat in the upper at the OS and it's a good view)

Anyone that sits in the Lower now and gets a seat in the Lower at the OS I think can be classed as getting a comparable view as well

If not by your own choice your having to from lower to upper then I think it's fair to say the seat offered isn't comparable to the one you currently have, although that still doesn't mean a bad view just different to what you have now.
Utter nonsense. Look at the original post. The guy was row d in the chicken run now row 56 (out of 65) in the upper tier for a band two ticket at the OS.

Also, I've sat in row 8 upper tier of the OS and watched the rugby a few weeks back, couldn't see a thing on the far side. (I was level with the try line)
User avatar
MD_HM
Posts: 7677
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:00 am
Location: London
Has liked: 38 likes
Total likes: 339 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by MD_HM »

Read again.

I have said if you have had to move from lower to upper then it's not comparable. How many of our 24k season ticket holders fall into this category though? And some might have wanted to move to sit with a bigger group etc...

I have sat in the last row of the East Upper, which will actually now be blocked off and could see everything so you are either lying or have really bad eye sight of you couldn't see anything from row 8 of the upper.

I've not seen one other poster that is neutral to the move state the upper tier was a bad view
User avatar
hadleighhammer
Gentrified
Posts: 9992
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 6:18 pm
Location: On my computer trying to keep up with the Sky fixture changes
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 8 likes

Re: Comparable views

Post by hadleighhammer »

MD_HM wrote: BUT further away doesn't mean a worse view, just a different one.
.
Going to get one of the Band 5 STs up the back of the upper tier then or sticking with your upgrade? The views no worse, just "different".
Locked