Supporters Survey: Key Findings

I'm really not arsed if they slap a sponsor's name on the stadium - i'll still be calling it Blundell Park rather than the Orsted Arena or whatever.

Going back to the main findings, I thought the key findings document was really poorly put together (much like the survey itself) - some of the summaries are very poorly explained, and there's things like "WOMEN'S TEAM" under a big red cross with zero elaboration as to whether that means supporters generally dislike the existence of Grimsby Town Women, or are just unhappy about the way the club covers their games (late and sporadic updates on the OS / inconsistent and sometimes no live updates on twitter etc).

If the 'Fan Experience Company' are responsible for both the original overly long survey as well as the shoddy key findings document I certainly wouldn't be bothering to commission them again if I was running the club!

Quoted from Northbank Mariner

Used to go out with a lass who's nickname was "kitkat"...I'll leave it there

When I played rugby my nickname was KitKat due to breaking my fingers most games.

It soon became KitKat chunky!

Quoted from Chrisblor

I'm really not arsed if they slap a sponsor's name on the stadium - i'll still be calling it Blundell Park rather than the Orsted Arena or whatever.

Going back to the main findings, I thought the key findings document was really poorly put together (much like the survey itself) - some of the summaries are very poorly explained, and there's things like "WOMEN'S TEAM" under a big red cross with zero elaboration as to whether that means supporters generally dislike the existence of Grimsby Town Women, or are just unhappy about the way the club covers their games (late and sporadic updates on the OS / inconsistent and sometimes no live updates on twitter etc).

If the 'Fan Experience Company' are responsible for both the original overly long survey as well as the shoddy key findings document I certainly wouldn't be bothering to commission them again if I was running the club!

Yeah I thought some aspects of the summary was really poor, including the exact point you mention. I would assume that the information passed to the club was far more useful but I wouldn't take it for granted!

Quoted from Chrisblor

I'm really not arsed if they slap a sponsor's name on the stadium - i'll still be calling it Blundell Park rather than the Orsted Arena or whatever.

Going back to the main findings, I thought the key findings document was really poorly put together (much like the survey itself) - some of the summaries are very poorly explained, and there's things like "WOMEN'S TEAM" under a big red cross with zero elaboration as to whether that means supporters generally dislike the existence of Grimsby Town Women, or are just unhappy about the way the club covers their games (late and sporadic updates on the OS / inconsistent and sometimes no live updates on twitter etc).

If the 'Fan Experience Company' are responsible for both the original overly long survey as well as the shoddy key findings document I certainly wouldn't be bothering to commission them again if I was running the club!

I agree with you, it was a poor survey with poorly presented results. I don't know what they showed the club but for us it was a very amateur attempt at best from what appears to be a professional company. It could have been done in house, saved money and been just the same. Next year they should use a more professional outfit.

Quoted from DB

I agree with you, it was a poor survey with poorly presented results. I don't know what they showed the club but for us it was a very amateur attempt at best from what appears to be a professional company. It could have been done in house, saved money and been just the same. Next year they should use a more professional outfit.

What exactly did you expect? The survey was a bit long winded I agree but the results look pretty much like many insight reports that you’d see in several sectors which is in reality what the exercise is.

I guess for some, they’ve likely never seen data analysis look like that or perhaps expected different. There could be a plethora of reasons why.

The survey was long winded but the results aren’t too far away from what I expected.

Perhaps people could approach the trust and share their views on the survey instead of just moaning on here or social media? Fans asked for a voice…

As for stadium naming rights, call the ground what the intercourse you want if it brings in cash. We’ll always call it BP, much like fans of every other club who’s sold the naming rights.

Ideally we'd sell the rights to BP.

I can’t believe there are people who have racked up thousands and thousands of posts on here over a period of years, but couldn’t hack spending 20 mins filling in a survey. But that’s just me…

“No singing section” was an interesting response but one I’d agree with. You can’t force it and end up with a contrived group of 100 kids waving banners and flags when we’re 3 down in the middle of February.

Quoted from ska face

I can’t believe there are people who have racked up thousands and thousands of posts on here over a period of years, but couldn’t hack spending 20 mins filling in a survey. But that’s just me…

“No singing section” was an interesting response but one I’d agree with. You can’t force it and end up with a contrived group of 100 kids waving banners and flags when we’re 3 down in the middle of February.

It took closer to 50 minutes for me mainly owing to the large number of open questions where you could write quite detailed feedback (absolutely fine), but also because it was full of sections which weren't relevant to certain sets of supporters (i.e. if I sit in the upper findus then why am I being asked about catering facilities in other parts of the ground, or if I never use the commercial facilities then why am I being asked questions which are only relevant to those that do) which could have been skipped with a bit of basic logic ("if Q6 answer 'no', skip to next page") added into the survey. It was also an issue of expectation management - the club's social media posts and website article suggested it would take about 10 minutes to complete, only for most users to find it was taking far longer than that once they'd begun completing it and there was no way to save your responses so you could return and pick up where you left off at a later date, but that’s just me…

Quoted from ska face

I can’t believe there are people who have racked up thousands and thousands of posts on here over a period of years, but couldn’t hack spending 20 mins filling in a survey. But that’s just me…

I think that's a fair point.  I found the survey a pain in the bottom but probably spent more time grumbling about it than completing it.  

Little bit disappointed with the report if I'm honest, a lot of 'many of you said...'.  Well how many?  

Truth be told I'm always slightly sceptical of surveys.  It's very easy to let them tell the story you want it to tell and without the full answers it does feel like it lacks a lot of transparency.  Don't particularly understand the viewpoint that the volume of responses means they can't share everything.  The survey asked a lot of questions, the report doesn't reflect that at all.  

Reluctant to grumble at the club regards this as it looks like they've commissioned an outfit to help but the support has been quite amateurish.  Learning curve I guess...Can't knock the club for looking to bring in those who supposedly know their stuff rather than try do everything in-house on the cheap.