Alternatives to the current queue ticket system for GF tickets

[Norris Lurker]

(originally posted as part of the Queue Ticket Pooling thread, but I decided to separate it to prevent that one going off on a tangent).

If the point of the queue ticket system was to stop people camping overnight, Blind Freddie could see that wouldn't work.

Our membership tickets are barcoded and scanned when we go into the ground, so it shouldn't be too hard for the club to track how many games members have attended. An alternative system could be that the club could then allocate queue tickets to every member according to how many games they've attended. For example, premiership club members who attended all 12 games would be randomly allotted the best queue ticket numbers, then premiership club members who attended 11 etc down to premiership club who attended none, then full club members with 12, full club members with 11 etc. The queue tickets would then be sent out along with the barcode letters, or even included as part of the barcode letter.
The limit of 8 tickets per transaction would still apply, and the position in the queue would be determined by the worst queue ticket number of the barcode letters. So every game you miss would push you and anyone else you wanted to buy tickets for back in the queue - would make any member think twice before missing a game and therefore hopefully reduce the number of no-show members at any game.
That way, members who attended the most games would be the ones who get to go to the grand final. Also you'd only need to queue once.

[sharpie]

Doesnt work for everyone. I am a swans member and a SCG member. At all SCG games I use my SCG membership card to enter the ground. As such my Swans membership only gets scanned a few times a year, mostly as Homebush.

And I'm sure there are plenty of other examples of situations similar to this, or otherwise, that show simple entry numbers is inequitable.

But I do agree that there must be a better way.

[Mel]

Most members I know, including my group of seven and nearly all members around us go to each and every game. I think there would be over 5000+ that have attended each game at least this year. Unless they limit the tickets to one for each person who attended all games, there wouldn't be enough to go around.

I reckon they should just let us buy them on Saturday morning (reserving enough for the guaranteed people) or at least get a queue ticket straight after the game. I'm still happy to camp out if it means a GF ticket though.

[cruiser]

Re: Alternatives to the current queue ticket system for GF tickets

Originally posted by Norris Lurker
(originally posted as part of the Queue Ticket Pooling thread, but I decided to separate it to prevent that one going off on a tangent).

If the point of the queue ticket system was to stop people camping overnight, Blind Freddie could see that wouldn't work.

An alternative system could be that the club could then allocate queue tickets to every member according to how many games they've attended.

No, dont like that. This year I missed three home games for reasons completely beyond my control. But I also flew down to Melbourne for two away games but your idea doesnt count away games.

[j s]

Re: Re: Alternatives to the current queue ticket system for GF tickets

Originally posted by cruiser
No, dont like that. This year I missed three home games for reasons completely beyond my control. But I also flew down to Melbourne for two away games but your idea doesnt count away games.

Away games attended should definitely count - tix would need to be bought thru the club obviously.

Then factor in years of membership too!

[sharpie]

I've got a whiff of that "I'm a better supporter than you are" argument around here somewhere.

[j s]

Originally posted by sharpie
I've got a whiff of that "I'm a better supporter than you are" argument around here somewhere.

Any kind of non-arbitrary priority system is going to have that aspect - it's inevitable.

[adnar]

But with a membership I have payed for 12 home games, If I choose not to attend them why should that matter to the club.. The fact that most people will have attended all games should not disadvantage those of us who have had to miss a game or 2 for whatever reason.

I missed the bombers TS game, but I travelled to perth to the final, should I have an even bigger advantage?

[SwallowdaFonz]

Other alternative ways of allocating the chance to buy limited GF tickets:

* Base it on date of membership renewal - the sooner the club receives your renewal, the higher your priority for any GF tickets later that season.

* Base it on years of membership.

* Do a ticket ballot, like for the Olympics but in less time.

* The club could auction all of its 10,000 GF tickets on e-Bay, and use the $ to make membership renewals for 2006 free. ;-)

I don't really like any of these. They would all be open to complaints similar to those above, and none seem clearly better than an allocation based on preparedness to queue up for hours on the street.

[Young Blood]

These systems would unfair and no improvement on the queueing system. There will always be exceptions to any rule you use to try to measure loyalty or commitment. For example:
* members who were sick during the year and couldn't attend games
* members who lived interstate in the past and couldn't justify the cost of membership
* junior members who aren't old enough to be long-term members
* members who struggle to scrape together their membership fee each year, and so renew at the last minute.

[anne]

Why not just pay the $75?

[hammo]

Originally posted by anne
Why not just pay the $75?

At the start of the year it never seems worthwhile but now I know what I'll be doing next year!!

[anne]

I look on it as a contribution to the club and my gambling for the year.

[Schneiderman]

Originally posted by Young Blood
These systems would unfair and no improvement on the queueing system. There will always be exceptions to any rule you use to try to measure loyalty or commitment. For example:
* members who were sick during the year and couldn't attend games
* members who lived interstate in the past and couldn't justify the cost of membership
* junior members who aren't old enough to be long-term members
* members who struggle to scrape together their membership fee each year, and so renew at the last minute.

But the club already allocates seats at the ground based on seniority/loyalty, so how is this different. The simple fact is that members who put more into the club deserve more back. When I was newly joined, I was not upset when my request for stand seats was knocked back twice, and even now I am not sitting where I'd ideally like. Its just a fact that I have only paid membership for 5yrs whereas others have done it for 10 or 20 or more years. Without those members the club may well be gone.

I like the idea of preferential treatment to people who pay more. Whether its through an extra arbitray amount at the beginning of the year, by attending a greater number of games, or by holding a continuous membership over a long period of time, those people who advance the financial standing of the club deserve some rewards.

[cruiser]

I've got a better idea - lobby the AFL to increase considerably the allocation to the competing clubs.