The £2 hike for gameday is fairly common. There are a number of clubs have done the same for years (Huddersfield is the first one I remember doing it). It's all to try and get people buying in advance really.

All your other points though, I don't think any sane person would argue with. I get the club is a business and needs to be run as such, but it does often feel like the fans that are still sticking with it are being constantly asked to put more and more money in to make up for those that are no longer on board.

^ This

How much effort would have been involved for the club to personally phone up 45 people and explain the decision, at the same time making a discount offer on their 2017 Season Tickets? Not really all that much - certainly it would have been much better in terms of publicity and goodwill.

In terms of 3rd parties not speaking up, well if other such 3rd parties didn't speak up we'd still have slavery and a bunch of other unpleasant practices going on somI woUld hope that the Odsal 45 appreciate the support they have been given from 3rd parties. Loyal fans of all clubs deserve our support, though we are always going to be in volved in a bit of banter as well, this is not one of those times and those people who will have budgeted, unlike the Bulls, will have to find that additional money for 5 years or walk.

Did you really just compare 45 people being told their deal (struck with the clubs owners previous to two administrations) to the abolition of slavery???

Oh, its just been confirmed you actually did

I'd happily take on board such a comment had it not been from a supporter of a club that systemically shafted opposition fans by increasing gate prices at will.

I'd also take note from someone not associated with a club that itself had issues paying the tax man (among others) in their very recent history.

Those in glass houses and all that e

As a 3rd party fan, I see your point but I also see what Blotto is saying too. Whilst we can have an opinion on the subject, we have so far only seen what has been written by a clearly disgruntled supporter and the comments of one who whilst clearly upset with the decision has also appreciated the comments (said in private) made by the club owner.

Whilst I agree, it doesn't look like good moral or business sense from the outside, something has obviously triggered it that we are not seeing here as I doubt for one second the club have taken this decision lightly or not considered the repercussions of doing so. What ever it is, the club must feel the pain of the negative attention is worth the gain, whatever that is.

It's a poor do, but (especially over the past decade) I think all Bulls fans have been ripped off by a succession of inept owners anyway.

Serious question, is this putting fans off renewals until you know exactly what's going on?

Hard to tell Maurice.

I have said I will buy a season ticket but I was waiting for the court date, no I'm waiting until the next. Once the end of the month comes I will have to buy it and just hope.

Me personally, no.
Terrible timing and pr for the club but tbh I'm used to the club just stumbling from one embarrassment to the other, it's been this way for the past ten years.

I think the winding up order is. Personally, I intend on buying one, but I am waiting until nearer the discount deadline at the end of the month. Partly because I'm a bit skint, but largely because it'll be after the next hearing.

I've spoken to quite a few other fans though that aren't buying yet because they are scared the club is in the gutter and don't know what's happening.

As has been discussed at length on here before, it's counter productive. But with people not swimming in money, you can't really blame them for being weary about parting with their money.


As far as this thing with 10 year tickets goes, I don't think it's been widely enough reported to have a big effect. Short of a few comments on social media and those that read the LE letters page, I don't think it's particularly well known about.

Speaking personally, yes

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. It has always been my understanding that paying for anything on a credit card makes the credit card company as liable as the supplier in the case of non performance. There are some exceptions of course but I can not see any problem with buying my own season ticket (over £100 minimum) on my own credit card (the wife pays for her own on her own credit card - as opposed to an additional user on mine) Should the club go tits up I would expect the credit card company to shell out. If some legal member has further info on this I would be pleased to hear from them. My own take on this is embodied here www.moneysavingexpert.com/shoppi ... -purchases

Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. It has always been my understanding that paying for anything on a credit card makes the credit card company as liable as the supplier in the case of non performance. There are some exceptions of course but I can not see any problem with buying my own season ticket (over £100 minimum) on my own credit card (the wife pays for her own on her own credit card - as opposed to an additional user on mine) Should the club go tits up I would expect the credit card company to shell out. If some legal member has further info on this I would be pleased to hear from them. My own take on this is embodied here www.moneysavingexpert.com/shoppi ... -purchases