A band 4 season ticket for a new applicant is £600. With the 5% loyalty discount it's £570.
At this moment in time it seems quite clear they can't say what you're suggesting.
What i'm saying is that they can always hide behind the fact that increases could have been more and that is where part of the discount is. It's a lie but you can't prove it.
Like the 'deal' you get at a car dealer, or volume discount in a trade deal.
The bottom line is that I will be paying more for my ticket next season than last season, which means I did not get a reduction that I had been promised (for the record I didn't expect it unless we were still in the Championship).
I'm not angry about it because it's what I expected, very handy to bring out this news while the euphoria of Saturday is still about.
This is ****ing disgusting. Add me to the list of people who are pissed off with this. like someone else said bit odd it isnt reaching the maximum number of complaints like the one desperate for tickets for saturday.
So if we have stayed for the past 5 years and watched all the dross that has been dished up in recent years, kept our side of the agreement and turned up, then we get ****ed off with a 5% discount which will save me 30 quid on a new applicant who may or may not have bothered to buy a season ticket in the championship.
Could Doc please explain why there isnt a legal obligation for them to agree to this offer? it was an offer made in writing to which we went into a contract with West Ham. Surely once they buy the club they inherit all of its contracts?
Am i right/wrong assuming the old regime borrowed against projected season ticket sales?
If this is the case,a discount would reduce our ability to pay off the debts,and basically should never have been offered ???
beckton wrote:
So maybe they should have called it a 20% discount for us lucky ones with everyone else getting a mere 15% discount.
I think they would try that if they could. I understand the anger, but I am so cynical I expected them to grab back more than they handed over.
The only message they would understand is people not renewing, but they hope that there will be a queue of people waiting to get a ST so people won't take the risk of not renewing.
This is a sad consequence of becoming a PL side. Maximise income opportunities.
Iron Mark wrote:Just to balance it out a little...
If you purchased something and were told that you had to give something based on a promise by the previous owner, how would you feel?
When you buy a business you have a obligation to honour the contracts made. I wouldn't have minded if they had said they were pulling the scheme as soon as they took over, at least giving people the choice to renew or not. I would have renewed regardless but am very angry about the decision and the way its been handled.
e1hammer wrote:
When you buy a business you have a obligation to honour the contracts made. I wouldn't have minded if they had said they were pulling the scheme as soon as they took over, at least giving people the choice to renew or not. I would have renewed regardless but am very angry about the decision and the way its been handled.
Was there ever a contract? I know it was mentioned a lot but was it anything other than something the previous owners said they would like to do?
Iron Mark wrote:Just to balance it out a little...
If you purchased something and were told that you had to give something based on a promise by the previous owner, how would you feel?
Well as theyre no doubt honouring promises/commitments made by the previous owners to the banks and Sheff Utd, I'd have factored it into the "cost" of buying the club.
Westbourne Bill wrote:
Well as theyre no doubt honouring promises/commitments made by the previous owners to the banks and Sheff Utd, I'd have factored it into the "cost" of buying the club.
There is a difference between set owed amounts and the ST deal though isn't there?
They had no idea what the ST price would be when it comes into affect, so how could they know how much they would be losing with the Icelandics 20% discount?
JBs Caravan wrote:Am i right/wrong assuming the old regime borrowed against projected season ticket sales?
If this is the case,a discount would reduce our ability to pay off the debts,and basically should never have been offered ???
I honestly dont care about the debts the club has, they knew the debts the club had when they decided to buy in. I assume they would have done their due diligence and seen that there was a 20% offer to season ticket holders when they purchased the club, otherwise why have the acknowledged it by giving 5%.
The debts are not the problem of the thousands of season ticket holders who have helped keep the club afloat and watched utter **** some seasons and stuck by them.
Iron Mark wrote:
There is a difference between set owed amounts and the ST deal though isn't there?
They had no idea what the ST price would be when it comes into affect, so how could they know how much they would be losing with the Icelandics 20% discount?
beckton wrote:
Who sets the season ticket prices then?
When the offer was made, the Icelandics. And it would be difficult to know what the price would be when the offer was meant to come into play, hence it would be hard to include it in the budget.
Newham Trading Standards helpline 020 3373 9937, if I can sneek out of the office for a few minutes I'll give them a call, unless one of you guys get the first.
West Ham United offered me a contract. I accepted that contract and renewed my ticket and have done so since. The terms of the contract specify that I should get a reduction of 20% on my ST for next season.
The tone of this thread is far too cynical and defeatist. If the club don't honour the contract I , for one, will not let it go. It would only take one person to take the matter to a small claims court and generate publicity for the flood gates to open for everybody. If you are entitled to the discount there is no way you should setlle for less than 20%. Under Contract law the case is pretty much open and shut in our favour. My contact is with the club and not Gullivan.