Everton Ticketing Changes

[Lee Smith]

Yes, a relatively small amount of anecdotal evidence to back up the claim a lottery is seen as a fairer way of doing things.

For some it might well suit. For the vast majority who wish to be able to queue for one it wont be.

You're trying to make the new system sound like its a superior and fairer model when it's nothing like that. Fair enough if your family or mates get a better chance of a ticket, but at least acknowledge that and dont blithely state that a lucky dip is a major step forward from the age old queuing for a ticket for everyone. It's not. .

Like I’ve already said Dave, it doesn’t affect me (or my mates) whatsoever.

What about those who struggle to get access to a PC at the very specific required time on sales day in a “first come, first served basis”, or those who do not have a smartphone to access the internet and need to rely on phoning the box office and wait in an endless queue, only to be told after a 2 hours hold, “sorry, they sold out a while ago on the website?”.

We literally have another discussion going on in the stadium thread about the pitfalls of an all digital ticket system and how that affects those without the digital know how or access to a smartphone, and the consensus there is that it is wrong and that those people should have ways to access their tickets in other means to make it easier and fairer for all.

But now all of a sudden, when it comes to actually buying the tickets, you think it should be each man and woman for themselves, and if you can’t get access to the internet at 10am on a Monday, screw you? Not your usual socialist way I must say.

 

[Lee Smith]

Sounds like a con to me - no guarantees for your £60 outlay ? - a lucky dip draw ? Kings Dock was 60,000 thanks BK .....

At no point did the club say a membership would guarantee you a ticket Joey

 

[Joey66]

At no point did the club say a membership would guarantee you a ticket Joey

Exactly - a chance in a million ....

 

[wgtwiddle]

As someone who goes mainly for a day out with my lads (the entertainment value approaches zero mostly) I'm fine with this.

Get tickets, sorted. Don't, saved a few bob.

Wasn't ever keen on the 10 o'clock smash and grab so I'm ok with this. Suits me, guess it doesn't suit some others mind.

 

[DavenBlue]

If these revenue maximising exercises are successful and the ballot is oversubscribed for every game then soon they will do what some of the other "big" clubs have done and look to reduce the season ticket % of capacity to increase the % of tickets selling for the members prices.

I also think we might see a 3rd pricing category introduced for the members sale (rather than the existing Cat A and Cat B). It's clear the overall strategy is changing and why would we now sell tickets for the derby, as an example, at £60 if you believe you could shift them for £100.

The club, or new owners, now just want a customer sat in a seat who is paying the maximum they can extract from him/her.

 

[davek]

Like I’ve already said Dave, it doesn’t affect me (or my mates) whatsoever.

What about those who struggle to get access to a PC at the very specific required time on sales day in a “first come, first served basis”, or those who do not have a smartphone to access the internet and need to rely on phoning the box office and wait in an endless queue, only to be told after a 2 hours hold, “sorry, they sold out a while ago on the website?”.

We literally have another discussion going on in the stadium thread about the pitfalls of an all digital ticket system and how that affects those without the digital know how or access to a smartphone, and the consensus there is that it is wrong and that those people should have ways to access their tickets in other means to make it easier and fairer for all.

But now all of a sudden, when it comes to actually buying the tickets, you think it should be each man and woman for themselves, and if you can’t get access to the internet at 10am on a Monday, screw you? Not your usual socialist way I must say.

But that's always been the case with ticket purchasing. No change there. And those people (mostly) who cant be on a pc or phone all the time usually got a ticket somehow.

The adoption of the new system was a sleight of hand carried out by the club to increase the purchase of club membership. Naive to think otherwise. Not much to do with touting else they'd have shifted to it before flogging off the Roma tickets...or maybe they're relaxed about touts exploiting the Roma game...

Ballot = a reduced chance to get a match ticket...basically a rush to the bottom that now equalises all Everton members chances at coming up with a ticket. It cant be sold as a step forward for fairness; it's just a step back toward the unfairness a minority of fans experienced through the first come first served system.

 

[Harryflashman]

Exactly - a chance in a million ....

A million ? If that’s the case we’ve definitely gone under on the stadium capacity then that’s for sure

 

[Lee Smith]

But that's always been the case with ticket purchasing. No change there. And those people (mostly) who cant be on a pc or phone all the time usually got a ticket somehow.

The adoption of the new system was a sleight of hand carried out by the club to increase the purchase of club membership. Naive to think otherwise. Not much to do with touting else they'd have shifted to it before flogging off the Roma tickets...or maybe they're relaxed about touts exploiting the Roma game...

Ballot = a reduced chance to get a match ticket...basically a rush to the bottom that now equalises all Everton members chances at coming up with a ticket. It cant be sold as a step forward for fairness; it's just a step back toward the unfairness a minority of fans experienced through the first come first served system.

“Ballot = a reduced chance to get a match ticket...”

That’s simply not true is it David.

If there are say 10,000 members trying to buy 7,000 tickets, there is a 70% chance of being successful, no matter what the purchasing mechanism is, be it first come first serve or a ballot. It’s just that a ballot gives EVERYONE a level playing field.

Reading many comments here and on other platforms, I think deep down the real gripe with most people is that they’ve spunked out 60 notes on the (incorrect assumption) that it would more or less guarantee them a ticket.

 

[davek]

“Ballot = a reduced chance to get a match ticket...”

That’s simply not true is it David.

If there are say 10,000 members trying to buy 7,000 tickets, there is a 70% chance of being successful, no matter what the purchasing mechanism is, be it first come first serve or a ballot. It’s just that a ballot gives EVERYONE a level playing field.

Reading many comments here and on other platforms, I think deep down the real gripe with most people is that they’ve spunked out 60 notes on the (incorrect assumption) that it would more or less guarantee them a ticket.

It is though, isn't it? If you're there at the outset 10am and dig in then how can you get off the phone/pc without securing one of the '7000' tickets you hypothesise about? That's just common sense.

If you then dont have that option and put your name into the hat then you're not going to be certain of getting one of the 7000.

Seems obvious enough to me.

 

[Lee Smith]

It is though, isn't it? If you're there at the outset 10am and dig in then how can you get off the phone/pc without securing one of the '7000' tickets you hypothesise about? That's just common sense.

If you then dont have that option and put your name into the hat then you're not going to be certain of getting one of the 7000.

Seems obvious enough to me.

Not being funny Dave but you obviously have never been on the website at 10am trying to secure a ticket for the last few seasons

For one, there is always more members trying to secure a ticket than tickets available, even at 10am. And even if you are at your PC when the “queue” opens at 9am, at 10am, you THEN get put into ANOTHER Virtual Queue with a totally randomised number regardless of what point / time you physically joined the queue.

So the hilarious thing is, even the previous “first come first serve” that people want to revert to, wasn’t. It in itself was a lottery! It was basically a ballot, just with added steps and stress.

As I say, the people moaning the most are the people that spent £60 expecting to be guaranteed a ticket. And / or people who don’t appreciate / have no experience of, what an absolute ballache the old system was like.

 

[davek]

Not being funny Dave but you obviously have never been on the website at 10am trying to secure a ticket for the last few seasons

For one, there is always more members trying to secure a ticket than tickets available, even at 10am. And even if you are at your PC when the “queue” opens at 9am, at 10am, you THEN get put into ANOTHER Virtual Queue with a totally randomised number regardless of what point / time you physically joined the queue.

So the hilarious thing is, even the previous “first come first serve” that people want to revert to, wasn’t. It in itself was a lottery! It was basically a ballot, just with added steps and stress.

As I say, the people moaning the most are the people that spent £60 expecting to be guaranteed a ticket. And / or people who don’t appreciate / have no experience of, what an absolute ballache the old system was like.

And at the end of it all that in bold a ticket usually materialised. You could affect the outcome, in other words.

There's no getting round it: many people would prefer to stick with the old system that increased their chances of a ticket more than any new lucky dip system.

It's daft to see it any other way. And you still using some notion that people are agrieved because they thought they had a guaranteed ticket under first come first served sort of underlines the weakness of your position.

 

[Lee Smith]

And at the end of it all that in bold a ticket usually materialised. You could affect the outcome, in other words.

There's no getting round it: many people would prefer to stick with the old system that increased their chances of a ticket more than any new lucky dip system.

It's daft to see it any other way. And you still using some notion that people are agrieved because they thought they had a guaranteed ticket under first come first served sort of underlines the weakness of your position.

It’s not a weakness in my position whatsoever Dave, that’s a view I’ve seen expressed across social media, including this very thread. And I’ll stick by it, I think many of these are people who have paid the £60 under what they perceive as false pretences. And people thinking the number of memberships should have been capped.

“And at the end of it all that in bold a ticket usually materialised.” Haha you sure about that?! Again you sound like someone who has spent literally zero time on ticketing selling platforms reading posts from numerous frustrated members about how they are continually failing to land themselves a ticket, even when trying every single matchday.

“There's no getting round it: many people would prefer to stick with the old system”. Again, are you sure about that? Based on what? The fact that a vocal section of the fan base are complaining about it? The people who have something bad to say are usually the loudest. The majority of the people I’ve spoken to about it feel differently, and think it’s a step in the right direction for fairness.

The only thing Everton said when the memberships were announced was that FB+ would be “First priority access”, and FB would be “Second priority access”. And that more detailed information would be given at the start of the season. Which they have now done. “First priority access” is via the FB+ only ballot. They haven’t baited and switched or moved the goalposts whatsoever.

One other thing I would like to see the club do is have a system in place whereby if for example you are successful for match 1, then you have less chance for match 2 etc. That way you would spread out the amount of tickets even more fairly across the whole fanbase, similar to how they done it for STHs for the BMD Test Events.

Anyway we’re going round in circles here so I’ll leave it at this. I just personally think a ballot open only to FB+ members is the fairest way of doing things.

Have a good day my man.

 

[BluePaul86]

All very tory this tiered membership thing.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Alls I ever see from the FAB is them putting out statements about how they've never been consulted on anything from any owner or board member in the past 3 years lol I don't know why the club even bother with the charade

It's only box ticking excersise.. It has no power to hold club accountable, typical British quango.

 

[davek]

“And at the end of it all that in bold a ticket usually materialised.” Haha you sure about that?! Again you sound like someone who has spent literally zero time on ticketing selling platforms reading posts from numerous frustrated members about how they are continually failing to land themselves a ticket, even when trying every single matchday.

“There's no getting round it: many people would prefer to stick with the old system”. Again, are you sure about that? Based on what? The fact that a vocal section of the fan base are complaining about it? The people who have something bad to say are usually the loudest. The majority of the people I’ve spoken to about it feel differently, and think it’s a step in the right direction for fairness.

What you're doing here is saying that some people who were complaining about the old system were right, but that anyone complaining about the new system are just "a vocal section of the fanbase" with "something bad to say".

It's a crass representation.

What it boils down to is that it's not "fairer" as you claim, it's just one system that favoured some people being ditched for a new system that suits some other people.

One other thing I would like to see the club do is have a system in place whereby if for example you are successful for match 1, then you have less chance for match 2 etc. That way you would spread out the amount of tickets even more fairly across the whole fanbase, similar to how they done it for STHs for the BMD Test Events.

I agree with that.