"Seems very positive at first glance. I can see a few of the usual ****s trying to drag it down and be negative." Who wrote that when the membership scheme first came out?
I would say that saying it seemed positive and that those who didn't were being negative ****s and dragging it down seems like approval. It can hardly be described as criticism.
Ignoring the absolute ****show my posts were at the time (I was in a really **** place, not going into it again), I was definitely skeptical from the very start. I remember having an argument at the time with a mate of mine when it was first announced, I thought it was a bad idea but he thought it was a great one. Funnily enough, he hates the Allams about as much as i do now
The feeling I remember was that the general opinion was that there was nothing wrong in principle with the membership scheme, it was the fact that the pricing structure was not acceptable, no concessions. As proved by the red card protest in the ground, which was a clear indication of what the vast majority of people thought of it.
You said the fans at the meeting approved the scheme though . Now I wasn't at this meeting either but unless they all conspired to lie they said they simply weren't given all the details of the scheme and were told they would be given another chance to look at it when it was finalised. That was the part of your post people objected to.
That was written when it was first leaked by Burns. At the time there was limited details available other than it being a Membership Scheme to replace Season Tickets. It was before any details had been released by the HDM, RH or the club. To suggest it was written “when the membership scheme first came out” is not true, maybe when it was first mentioned but at that time everybody, bar those at the meeting, knew nowt. There was a NDA in place to protect the details & even then those at the meeting were not given the full specifics. It was at a later date that it was recognised as a pile of ****.
That was posted on the day details were given on the HDM. Just after that post was one from Al Rawdah, who I haven't always seen eye to eye with, who instead of saying it seemed positive, quite correctly pulled the whole thing apart for reasons which have been proved correct.
It was leaked on the evening of the 15th March, after our 1-1 draw with Nottingham Forest. The HDM reported it the following day. The post that is being referred to that was initially made by Chazz was made at exactly 12:01am on the 16th. Before the HDM article. ****s knows why I give a **** and am being this pedantic. I'm very bored.
My like of the referred to post was the plain fact that, not only is any balancing view accepted, but fence sitting is more than likely to be howled down. Divide and conquer, mission accomplished. All will be well, and don't hold your breath on this, when they leave?
Mum Really? Here’s me thinking Al’s post which is quite a way further down the page makes it obvious that the HDM’s report had just appeared on their website & that Chazz’s post appears immediately after a post that states the HDM will release all the details the following day. Burns had tweeted a couple of teasers to claim an exclusive, the HDM rushed out an online report, after Chazz’s comment, to beat Burns’ morning show the following day. At the time of Chazz posting the only details available were the exclusive tweets from Burns & certainly not when “the Membership Scheme first came out”.
It was on the same day that Al Rawdah wrote he had read the details in the and stating why, he quite correctly, said it was a pile of crock. Was Chazz saying it was positive without actually knowing the details? Quelled horreure!
You are indeed, correct, Chazz. OLM also said 15-20% of children's tickets were used by adults. Did he know that from independent, verified sources or merely parroting what the Allams had said.
It was what Mooney claimed, though he later admitted he actually had absolutely nothing to back it up.
It was obvious throughout that section of the thread that OLM was passing on information given to people who attended the meetings. He did a good job.