|
|
 headingly_mariner |
|
 Vodka Drinker  Posts: 5,764
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,314
Gold Stars: 113
|
I have never had an issue with Bax and was extremely sorry to see him leave the Trust Board. However he hasn't been formally involved in any of the discussions post-survey certainly at Board level so I'm unsure where this inference has come from. You probably wouldn't expect me to say any other but the entire Trust board are committed to enacting the findings of the survey.
The survey was pretty clear in showing that the fans want change. They were clear on questions about paying for a seat on the board. It’s also clear from the responses that many people want the Trust to oppose the checkatrade and push for new ownership. How long ago was the survey? The things that Bax said were never publically addressed by the Trust. How can the Trust be in a position that sees someone at the the club write a statement for the Trust to publish as its own? |
|
|
|
|
|
| ska face |
|
 Vodka Drinker Posts: 7,173
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 80.94%
Rep Score: +60 / -14
Approval: +21,529
Gold Stars: 831
|
The things that Bax said were never publically addressed by the Trust. How can the Trust be in a position that sees someone at the the club write a statement for the Trust to publish as its own?
I can’t remember that being said. Thought it was more along the lines of the club publishing their own statement without the Trust fully agreeing the wording? Was it the one related to taking the results of the survey forward? This is why I’ve been asking for more accountability at the club and transparency around the official comms channels...for years. |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| rancido |
|
 Vodka Drinker Posts: 7,487
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 80.3%
Rep Score: +41 / -10
Approval: +6,526
Gold Stars: 96
|
IMHO if people don`t step out from the fanbase and help in anyway they can then based on what we have seen previously the football club will continue to fall behind other clubs. I have no desire to spend my life thumping the keyboard in frustration and anger at all things GTFC but that`s how it`s been for a long while.GTFC do some fantastic things that go under the radar and are not always fully appreciated but the main criticism from the fans is the lack of Oooomph to change anything.The ST being a prime example no drive from the office and no noticeable change in 40 year`s on how they are sold.When fan`s question this the Club seem to take umbrage rather than embrace the idea that actually maybe with some leg work we could sell a greater %.Nobody at GTFC seems to want to do that leg work clearly they read the Fishy so why not answer some questions.Here are 3 reasonable ones......
In the last 40 year`s prior to this Season in relation to ST sales what have those employed in the GTFC ticket office done to try and further increase sales?
GTFC have approx. 7000 seats for home supporters with an average home gate around 4500 what do you think other than obvious on field success you can do to sell those other 2500?
The matchday experience at BP is often diluted by problems with parking.Have the football club ever explored a short/long term solution to this for example a park and ride scheme from what was Pleasure Island?
A park and ride scheme is normally done to alleviate the problems caused by traffic entering a town or city. All you would be doing in creating such a scheme at the old Pleasure Island site is create more traffic going down North Sea Lane. Also any traffic coming in from the A180 would go past BP to get to a park and ride scheme - a bit silly don't you think! Any park and ride scheme would have to involve a site on one of the main roads entering NE Lincs , which are the A180, A46, A16 or A18. There is no way the club could afford such a scheme on it's own and as such would need council help. And there is no way the council would fund a scheme that would really only benefit the club for 23 occasions a year and that's assuming all those matches would attract 7,000+ gates to be cost effective. You would still get most local traffic using the surrounding streets and park free as opposed to paying for a park and ride. |
| The Future is Black & White.
"The commonest thing on this planet is not water , as some people believe, but stupidity ". Frank Zappa |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1mickylyons |
|
|
Posts: 9,066
Posts Per Day: 1.53
Reputation: 75.68%
Rep Score: +42 / -14
Approval: +9,380
Gold Stars: 56
|
A park and ride scheme is normally done to alleviate the problems caused by traffic entering a town or city. All you would be doing in creating such a scheme at the old Pleasure Island site is create more traffic going down North Sea Lane. Also any traffic coming in from the A180 would go past BP to get to a park and ride scheme - a bit silly don't you think! Any park and ride scheme would have to involve a site on one of the main roads entering NE Lincs , which are the A180, A46, A16 or A18. There is no way the club could afford such a scheme on it's own and as such would need council help. And there is no way the council would fund a scheme that would really only benefit the club for 23 occasions a year and that's assuming all those matches would attract 7,000+ gates to be cost effective. You would still get most local traffic using the surrounding streets and park free as opposed to paying for a park and ride.
It was just a large carpark that`s unused rancido the past 2 Seasons I would have suggested the former Ramsdens toystore carpark but a lot of work going on now so that`s out.I still think if it was looked into properly and stagecoach or whoever brought in it might be an option to do a park and ride.The baffling thing is gates are lower now than in the 80s when huge away followings were commonplace that bumped us up way over 7k where the hell did all the cars go? |
|
|
|
|
|
| norfuk mariner |
|
Beer Drinker  Posts: 120
Posts Per Day: 0.06
Reputation: 65.55%
Rep Score: +0 / -2
Approval: +200
Gold Stars: 2
|
In the seventies the cars parked in the side streets such as Bramhall Street. Then there were few car owners who lived there. Today there is one or even two cars at every house!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1mickylyons |
|
|
Posts: 9,066
Posts Per Day: 1.53
Reputation: 75.68%
Rep Score: +42 / -14
Approval: +9,380
Gold Stars: 56
|
In the seventies the cars parked in the side streets such as Bramhall Street. Then there were few car owners who lived there. Today there is one or even two cars at every house!
Spot on .You think back to Spurs and an 18k crowd I don`t recall it being the hassle to get away afterwards it is when you have 5-6k now? |
|
|
|
|
|
| headingly_mariner |
|
Vodka Drinker Posts: 5,764
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,314
Gold Stars: 113
|
I can’t remember that being said. Thought it was more along the lines of the club publishing their own statement without the Trust fully agreeing the wording? Was it the one related to taking the results of the survey forward?
This is why I’ve been asking for more accountability at the club and transparency around the official comms channels...for years.
I believe you should be looking for the statement clarification on February 2nd. 2 part tweet from the Trust clarifying its own statement. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ska face |
|
Vodka Drinker Posts: 7,173
Posts Per Day: 1.21
Reputation: 80.94%
Rep Score: +60 / -14
Approval: +21,529
Gold Stars: 831
|
Right, so you have this clarification... [tweet]95949639974537216[/tweet] [tweet]959496428279214080[/tweet] ...relating to this statement ( https://t.co/a1RVD3Thkx) ...which is being claimed was written by the club and posted all behind The Chair’s back so that Jon Wood wouldn’t be forced off the club board. Is that right? |
|
| Logged |
|
|
|
|
| FishOutOfWater |
|
Barley Wine Drinker  Posts: 12,827
Posts Per Day: 2.15
Reputation: 87.01%
Rep Score: +52 / -7
Location: Goole
Approval: +6,564
Gold Stars: 37
|
Rotherham are a bigger club than GTFC. Fact. Higher attendances, higher turnover, better players, consistently higher up in the football pyramid, all in the past twenty years. They've even got a brand new stadium sorted. They overtook us years ago and have remained ahead ever since like many other clubs who were our peers. We're getting left behind and our fanbase has got to face up to facts and stop clinging onto past histories which have no influence on how the club competes in the present never mind the future..
Maybe we should have chosen the multiple administration route that they took and we too could have had some kind of renaissance? |
|
|
|
|
|
| headingly_mariner |
|
Vodka Drinker Posts: 5,764
Posts Per Day: 0.98
Reputation: 64.4%
Rep Score: +34 / -21
Approval: +10,314
Gold Stars: 113
|
Right, so you have this clarification... [tweet]95949639974537216[/tweet] [tweet]959496428279214080[/tweet] ...relating to this statement ( https://t.co/a1RVD3Thkx) ...which is being claimed was written by the club and posted all behind The Chair’s back so that Jon Wood wouldn’t be forced off the club board. Is that right?
I believe it is being suggested that the 2 part tweet was written by someone at the club as they were unhappy with the first statement from the Trust. Could Bax confirm this? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site Home
News
Football
Season
Database
Club
POM
Contact
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
headingly_mariner
Logged
