
"I did not see the incident so I can't comment on it", in relation to you not seeing articles about only single seats being available.Schards#2 wrote:I have no idea what the "Arsene Wenger argument is"
I will - it's a cheap insult, given that the only articles regarding single seats I have seen relate to the Derby and Liverpool games as opposed to the Everton, West Ham and Wigan games that are the ones in question.Wycombe Royal wrote:"I did not see the incident so I can't comment on it", in relation to you not seeing articles about only single seats being available.Schards#2 wrote:I have no idea what the "Arsene Wenger argument is"
Call it a cheap insult if you want to.
They are the only ones in question in your argument, not mine. How many times do I need to say that there were empty rows of seats in the south west corner against Derby?Schards#2 wrote:I will - it's a cheap insult, given that the only articles regarding single seats I have seen relate to the Derby and Liverpool games as opposed to the Everton, West Ham and Wigan games that are the ones in question.
Schards out of interest when you are nastily insulting to people are they cheap or expensive insults ?Schards#2 wrote: Call it a cheap insult if you want to.
Voice of reason Dirk.Dirk Gently wrote:For information, this thread has now reached 31 pages
The last page on which I can see that there was some worthwhile debate on the topic in question, rather than "You said .... ", "I said....", "No, I didn't.......", "Prove it......" etc, etc, etc, ad infinitum was about page 24!
Is this a good use of everyone's time - including your own?
It fills in the spare time I have and is a welcome break from looking at Excel spreadsheets.Dirk Gently wrote:Is this a good use of everyone's time - including your own?
What goalposts ? No one mentioned goalposts !! I've never seen any goalposts....voyeur wrote:When they expand the stadium are they going to be moving the goalposts as well?
You can dodge the issue all you like.Behindu wrote:What goalposts ? No one mentioned goalposts !! I've never seen any goalposts....voyeur wrote:When they expand the stadium are they going to be moving the goalposts as well?
Step away, you'll blow a gasket.Schards#2 wrote:You can dodge the issue all you like.Behindu wrote:What goalposts ? No one mentioned goalposts !! I've never seen any goalposts....voyeur wrote:When they expand the stadium are they going to be moving the goalposts as well?
It won't alter the fact that I have never said the ticket office are liars and you simply don't have it in you to accept that.
Shame on you.
I think the whole 'ticket office are lying' thing stems from this little sequence of posts, i'll let the members of the HNA? public who are still coming back to this thread(god only knows why, but i do for some reason) decide how to interpret those postsSchards#2 wrote:So, these seats in the south of the upper west, there have been rows and rows of them empty for some games.Behindu wrote:Do you understand the concept of SINGLE SEATS ONLY being available for sale ?Schards#2 wrote:For Everton/West Ham/Wigan, the upper west, south end has had rows of empty seats that could accomodate 15-20 people sitting together.
How do you propose to sell seats that are already sold or contractually reserved for sponsors ??
Why will the ticket office not sell two or more of these empty seats together? If that's true, that's a serious failing in the ticket office as it's clear to see all these seats, all together are empty.
If they are set aside for corporate/sponsers, why would all the corporate people turn up for the Derby games but none for the previous three. That seems to stretch the laws of probability somewhat.
Far more probable, I would suggest, is that they are tickets that simply haven't been sold.
In the light of the falling demand, your reference to ducks is just a cheap insult.Dirk Gently wrote: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I would call it a duck.
You don't have to specifically use the word "duck" for your point to be made.
Don't you insult me like that! I specifically recall that in a thread 19 months ago you referred to a small aquatic animal of the Anatidae family.Baines wrote:In the light of the falling demand, your reference to ducks is just a cheap insult.Dirk Gently wrote: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I would call it a duck.
You don't have to specifically use the word "duck" for your point to be made.
Using the quote facility, show me where I said that anything was a duck.
I think that we should wait until the end of the season before deciding whether it is or is not a duck.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests