|
|
Post by coverpoint on Jul 25, 2021 14:38:30 GMT
Hundred - if less than 100 balls bowled - full refund
T20 - only if less than 10 overs (60 balls) bowled - full refund
RLODC and County championship - less than 19.5 overs in that competition in the same season - can attend another game in the same competition in the same season for free. What happens if it is the last game?
How can they justify having such vastly differing T&Cs?
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jul 25, 2021 18:49:33 GMT
Hundred - if less than 100 balls bowled - full refund T20 - only if less than 10 overs (60 balls) bowled - full refund RLODC and County championship - less than 19.5 overs in that competition in the same season - can attend another game in the same competition in the same season for free. What happens if it is the last game? How can they justify having such vastly differing T&Cs? I think you have a point but having different T&Cs in an unregulated market (ie other than finance, insurance etc) is not unreasonable. What I find more annoying is the way T&Cs are not presented clearly before you buy. I’m quite clear, for example, when I book a hotel on booking.com whether it’s money up front, no cancellation, cancellation up to certain date etc. This information should clearly presented as you book so that you can make your own judgement. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Jul 25, 2021 19:00:46 GMT
Hundred - if less than 100 balls bowled - full refund T20 - only if less than 10 overs (60 balls) bowled - full refund RLODC and County championship - less than 19.5 overs in that competition in the same season - can attend another game in the same competition in the same season for free. What happens if it is the last game? How can they justify having such vastly differing T&Cs? I think you have a point but having different T&Cs in an unregulated market (ie other than finance, insurance etc) is not unreasonable. What I find more annoying is the way T&Cs are not presented clearly before you buy. I’m quite clear, for example, when I book a hotel on booking.com whether it’s money up front, no cancellation, cancellation up to certain date etc. This information should clearly presented as you book so that you can make your own judgement. With the greatest of respect I have to disagree with you. It's the same product a cricket match under ECB regulations and therefore I see absolutely no reason why there should be a full refund in the event of no play. |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jul 25, 2021 20:14:56 GMT
I think you have a point but having different T&Cs in an unregulated market (ie other than finance, insurance etc) is not unreasonable. What I find more annoying is the way T&Cs are not presented clearly before you buy. I’m quite clear, for example, when I book a hotel on booking.com whether it’s money up front, no cancellation, cancellation up to certain date etc. This information should clearly presented as you book so that you can make your own judgement. With the greatest of respect I have to disagree with you. It's the same product a cricket match under ECB regulations and therefore I see absolutely no reason why there should be a full refund in the event of no play. I think there are 3 distinctly separate products here, with different target audiences. The more generous refund rules for The Hundred reflect the ECB's desperation to sell tickets. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Jul 25, 2021 21:29:27 GMT
With the greatest of respect I have to disagree with you. It's the same product a cricket match under ECB regulations and therefore I see absolutely no reason why there should be a full refund in the event of no play. I think there are 3 distinctly separate products here, with different target audiences. The more generous refund rules for The Hundred reflect the ECB's desperation to sell tickets. Why is the refund policy for the hundred and T20 so much more generous than 50 overs and county championship? They are all cricket tickets and should be treated the same way. |
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jul 26, 2021 5:04:15 GMT
I don’t think having different policies for different products is unusual. Airlines mainly have different policies for low-cost economy, regular economy, business class and first class travel. During Covid, they have offered terms, sometimes with a degree of opacity, if travel is not possible.
Sussex priced the T20 at a relatively high level of £30. I think they would have had trouble selling the limited number of tickets if they had not offered good terms. Indeed, tickets did not sell particularly quickly. I can’t comment on the Hundred as I know nothing about its pricing but to get their target customers of families through the door, they had to offer generous refund terms in case of poor weather.
Tickets for CC games and RLODC games are more modestly priced and the price presumably does not include a hidden fee for insurance. As I said originally, as long as the terms are clear, I think it is fine. I have more irritation that many airlines are offering free rebooking of flights but don’t tell you that, if there is a price difference you, will have to pay that difference which could be a considerable amount.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jul 26, 2021 7:40:19 GMT
I think there are 3 distinctly separate products here, with different target audiences. The more generous refund rules for The Hundred reflect the ECB's desperation to sell tickets. Why is the refund policy for the hundred and T20 so much more generous than 50 overs and county championship? They are all cricket tickets and should be treated the same way. Because the tickets are more expensive, and so there is more for the punter to lose if the weather intervenes. Do you not agree that they are separate commercial products? They are priced very differently. Why should they be treated the same way? Commerce drives prices. A cup final is 'just a football match', but it is priced much higher than your average football league match. |
|
|
|
Post by gmdf on Jul 26, 2021 8:32:51 GMT
I remember when I first went to see cricket (late 1960s) there was often a notice by the entrance: "No play guaranteed; no money refunded".
So maybe things have improved!
|
|
