Season tickets | Page 12 | Vital Football

Season tickets

I'd be careful renewing kids tickets. Just doing my nephews and it had him listed as an under-5, but last time we bought him a ticket we had to go to the next level and this wasn't showing on the website so had to contact ticket office.
 
Nice to see the club take on supporter feedback (whatever it was) and reevaluate a decision. Pity the SC haven’t done likewise.

For all we know, from when it was announced the funds were being returned, the SC might have been inundated with emails suggesting the CT projects the SC eventually put forward.

Maybe.

:whist:
 
Firstly, if you read my post properly, I assumed nothing. I said "for all we know". That isn't an assumption.

Secondly, as it happens, I know that the SC were involved in getting the extension to the "Welcome Home" discount ..... so well done the SC.

Perhaps then if as you say that the SC were involved in persuading the club to change their minds/ getting the extension to the WH discount then perhaps they could take a leaf out of that book & change their minds / relook at how thos crowdfunder is spent.....perhaps revisit the other options & have another vote 🤔
 
Perhaps then if as you say that the SC were involved in persuading the club to change their minds/ getting the extension to the WH discount then perhaps they could take a leaf out of that book & change their minds / relook at how thos crowdfunder is spent.....perhaps revisit the other options & have another vote 🤔

Is it just me who's quite happy that the new owners don't want to take the SC funds, and instead, are (or at least, seem to be) quite happy to fund everything that needs to be done ... they seem to be making a decent job of it so far.

As for the SC, I suppose that if they've had no other grief re their actions (except for the few voices on here) then they won't feel obliged to change their mind about anything.

For NZFC's benefit ..... I suppose yes, I'm assuming there's been no grief from other sources, though I'm more than happy to be corrected on this. (I'm basing the assumption on traffic on CL, FB and twitter).
 
Firstly, if you read my post properly, I assumed nothing. I said "for all we know". That isn't an assumption.

Secondly, as it happens, I know that the SC were involved in getting the extension to the "Welcome Home" discount ..... so well done the SC.
Actually I saw a tweet about it a week/days ago. Did the SC then jumped on the bandwagon? Would be wrong to give credit when its not due.
 
Actually I saw a tweet about it a week/days ago. Did the SC then jumped on the bandwagon? Would be wrong to give credit when its not due.

Again, you really ought to read posts more thoroughly NZFC. I merely said the SC were involved. (No assumption).

Of course there's been been lots of stuff on twitter, and FB ...... it's a sensible thing to do, and well done to the club for doing it.

The SC did as one would expect ... reflect the views of the fans ... that is what you want, isn't it?

Credit goes to each and every party who played a part (however small) in the decision to extend.
 
Again, you really ought to read posts more thoroughly NZFC. I merely said the SC were involved. (No assumption).

Of course there's been been lots of stuff on twitter, and FB ...... it's a sensible thing to do, and well done to the club for doing it.

The SC did as one would expect ... reflect the views of the fans ... that is what you want, isn't it?

Credit goes to each and every party who played a part (however small) in the decision to extend.

Your words "Secondly, as it happens, I know that the SC were involved in getting the extension to the "Welcome Home" discount ..... so well done the SC." -
My perception of your post (as you made no mention of those that tweeted) is : the SC were the only ones involved so all praise to them.
 
Your words "Secondly, as it happens, I know that the SC were involved in getting the extension to the "Welcome Home" discount ..... so well done the SC." -
My perception of your post (as you made no mention of those that tweeted) is : the SC were the only ones involved so all praise to them.

You're perfectly entitled to your perception, but given that's all it was, (a perception), maybe don't try and have a (misguided) pop at other posters. (y)

By the way, can I presume that you're happy about the SC reflecting the views of the fans to the club management team?
 
Selective sensorsorship - not surprising from a SC apologist

That wasn't censorship. You made two separate points in the one sentence, and I simply referenced the one to which I was replying.

I didn't think it worth the effort to respond to the other point ... similarly with the "apologist" remark. :rolleyes: