From what I can tell, once you've clicked and the message comes up you're done.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The process isn't fair. You're applying as a group so the tenure should be the average of that group. That's the only fair way to do it and that's what they should have done. As it stands you are getting no recognition for being a long term STH if you've got a family member with say 10 years in your group.
They don't have to do it the other way. The fair way is to average the tenure for the full group! The two unfair methods would have been to base it on the longest tenure of the group or the shortest tenure of the group. The club have chosen the second unfair method. It's not complicated, you're applying as a group so average the tenure for the group.
But people would be unhappy with that too that’s the point. You can’t please everyone. If you’re a sensible person you accept that, if you’re not you kick off and say you’re being victimised.
AndyRJ
Player Valuation: £6m
I really don't understand this way of thinking.
You don't buy season tickets as a group. You buy as an individual. Why do you think it's fair to group together with others and artifically bump supporters up the list who have a shorter tenure? How is that in any way 'fair' to the thousands of supporters who aren't in a group?
It's your choice as an individual if you want to sit with others and there is a mechanism for doing so. You either want to sit with them, and are prepared to sacrifice being able to choose your seat sooner, or you don't. What means more to you, the potential for a perceived 'better' seat or continuing to sit with the same people you do now?
I'm quite happy for under 18s to be dealt with differently and the club have implemented a system to do so. What I wouldn't be happy with is supporters below me on the list, who are over 18, jumping ahead in priority because they are able to join a group who have 23+ year tenures.
As an example. You could have one person with a 23+ year tenure and two others with say 5. The average of their three tenures would be 11 years which would bump the two lowest ahead of me. It wouldn't matter at all if the longest tenure also reduced to 11 as they would all still be ahead of me.
Explain how that is any way fair?
Last edited:
aj79
Player Valuation: Free Transfer
Completely agree with this. It would leave the whole system open to manipulation and abuse, which is what I think Everton are trying to avoid and the complaints that would follow that.
As far as I’m aware groups can be up to 6 people. You could have a “genuine” group of 5, all on 23. One of said groups mates or (brothers, mates brother etc etc) is on 5 but wants to sit slap bang in the middle of the South Stand and doesn’t want to chance getting down to 5. By my maths he could jump himself up to a 20…….if the other 5 lads were all happy to do the favour. Be the equivalent of standing at a packed bar for ages behind some bloke getting a mega round, and just as he is about to pay a disembodied voice from about 4 back
“Hey, Bri, you gettin served lad? Get us 2 Guinness and a Carling lad and I’ll sort you out in a minute”
“No worries lad……2 Guinness and a Carling please love”
It would be carnage!
Agree with that tbh, this seems the best way to go about it. People who wish to sit together will still be able to, and not at the expense of other fans. Any group averaging about 12 years will likely have an easy time picking where to sit imo.
There won't be any bad seats at the ground, but obviously ones that will be more indemand than others. The club could also possibly hold back seats that alot of people have got their eyes on to sell at inflated prices in general admission deals similar to other clubs.
There won't be any bad seats at the ground, but obviously ones that will be more indemand than others. The club could also possibly hold back seats that alot of people have got their eyes on to sell at inflated prices in general admission deals similar to other clubs.
Jacko93
Player Valuation: £35m
That's a choice though. If you want to lose tenure, it's to nobody else's detriment. If you bring others up beyond some tenure, it might be.
They were never going to keep everybody happy, it's an impossibility. Personally I'm gutted about the kids tenure thing, but I understand why they've done it as they have, and have tried to minimise the impact. At least we know where we are, and I can plan accordingly.
Jacko93
Player Valuation: £35m
Thats what I'm doing, but they'll be sitting with their Ma, back home.
They can share my Dads when he kiffs it.
23 years boi!
That’s a bit harsh.
I bought one share with a bonus from work, about 10 years ago. Not for any return, just to be “involved” in the club.
I’m a bit hurt with that one.
C’mon people are all ready sitting together why should they suffer a detriment to stay sitting together! Averaging it out is a lot fairer than the proposed option of just taking the lowest tenure.
Of course it’s fair, it takes account of everyone’s tenure not just the lowest and ignoring the long serving STH. I don’t think people are going to start taking advantage and if that really was an issue you can resolve it by just operating average group tenure for those people who already sit together or those people who are already registered with club for friends and family members! At the minute you’re going to have thousands of STH with full 23 years who’s loyalty is going to count for nothing!