Close Season Survey

Hecho

Why the proxies?

pepsipete wrote:

Why the proxies?

Not me Pepsi, just in "honour" of multis and trolls.

Done.   ...and dusted.

However...  Disappointed not to see some type of questions along the type I suggested below.

Rickler wrote:

Angry wrote:

do the club actually take into account the results of these surveys? for example every year the fans who take part in them state the food n drink at home park is either too expensive and is of poor quality yet the club never addresses this issue. If anything they make it worse.

Which brings us to why I wanted a list of the questions...   (Thanks Homeslice)

Can we add the question:  How satisfied are you with the clubs responses to these surveys?

Or/and, Which of the surveys major complaints, (list of) has been most unsatisfactorily dealt with by the club?

In less than 36 hours, this year's survey has already generated more responses than last year and is well on the way to four figures.

Thank you all for your participation.

Rickler wrote:

Done.   ...and dusted.

However...  Disappointed  not to see some type of questions along the type I suggested below.

Rickler wrote:

Angry wrote:

do the club actually take into account the results of these surveys? for example every year the fans who take part in them state the food n drink at home park is either too expensive and is of poor quality yet the club never addresses this issue. If anything they make it worse.

Which brings us to why I wanted a list of the questions...   (Thanks Homeslice)

Can we add the question:  How satisfied are you with the clubs responses to these surveys?

Or/and, Which of the surveys major complaints, (list of) has been most unsatisfactorily dealt with by the club?

and still no answer from John or anyone connected to these surveys on their validation aka the point of them when there is no evidence to support the fact the club takes little if not any real interest in the results.
Nor is there any conviction from fan groups or the trust to push the club to act upon fan concerns these survey results raise, like the catering for example.

You'll forgive me for not answering immediately, Angry.

The survey is in progress, so I'm inclined not to comment too directly until it concludes, to avoid any sense of influencing how it is perceived - that's best left to you, based on your own experience of this process.

In my view, the two things are separate.

The survey is a snapshot of opinion and has intrinsic value for that.

What the club do with the results and how they are held to account by outside observers is the second stage of the process.

Undoubtedly, repetitive concerns such as the catering offer, the loss of a supporters bar and so on give the impression that little changes, year on year.

That's one way of looking at it.

As always, there are always others.

John_Lloyd wrote:

You'll forgive me for not answering immediately, Angry.

The survey is in progress, so I'm inclined not to comment too directly until it concludes, to avoid any sense of influencing how it is perceived - that's best left to you, based on your own experience of this process.

In my view, the two things are separate.

The survey is a snapshot of opinion and has intrinsic value for that.

What the club do with the results and how they are held to account by outside observers is the second stage of the process.

Undoubtedly, repetitive concerns such as the catering offer, the loss of a supporters bar and so on give the impression that little changes, year on year.

That's one way of looking at it.

As always, there are always others.

its not immediately john, i have been asking that for the last two seasons. The club have been ignoring the results for longer

John_Lloyd wrote:

You'll forgive me for not answering immediately, Angry.

The survey is in progress, so I'm inclined not to comment too directly until it concludes, to avoid any sense of influencing how it is perceived - that's best left to you, based on your own experience of this process.

In my view, the two things are separate.

The survey is a snapshot of opinion and has intrinsic value for that.

What the club do with the results and how they are held to account by outside observers is the second stage of the process.

Undoubtedly, repetitive concerns such as the catering offer, the loss of a supporters bar and so on give the impression that little changes, year on year.

That's one way of looking at it.

As always, there are always others.

Hi John,

So OK...    Knowing that Glastonbury beckons, (deffo go see Kamasi) I'll join you in ignoring my questions about what  fan opinion might be, regarding being ignored by PAFC.
 
But, considering some of what you have said in the past and considering what PAFC have  recently written:

PAFC on theBaggo Wrote wrote:

This season's survey closely matches the format of previous editions, to allow for comparative analysis where possible, with a small number of amendments and new questions to reflect the changes that have taken place in the last 12 months.

The club has had an opportunity to contribute to the structure and content of this survey and, as in previous years, it is hoped that it will offer Home Park an independently sourced and useful snapshot of current fan opinion.

Read more at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I must ask you...   Regarding the buying of the ground...  Since James Brent  took  umbrage with you at a fan meeting recently regarding how the question was originally phrased, did he take the opportunity to change the wording?

And if so, how?


Thanks...   I hope you enjoy  the mud.

Evening Nigel!

Thanks for the reminder about Kamasi - I'll definitely try to fit him in to the schedule.

As for the survey and the club's response to it and their use of the opportunity to insert topics for questions, you'll appreciate that it's a balancing act to accommodate multiple opinions in this process.

Now that the survey is established in structure, it makes sense to avoid significant changes or additions so that year on year analysis can be done more fairly.

Some suggested questions have been considered for addition, but most of these were rather "of the moment" and may only have temporary significance.

The club had no say in the wording of the freehold question - an offer was mooted, but not ultimately made. It's the AFT survey, after all - its independence is one of its merits.

As for what the club actually do with the results, that is another question. Repeated concerns over the catering offer, the PA, the Grandstand and the FPC suggest that not much ever changes.

That's the club's responsibility - but it's also ours too.

We must keep holding the board to account when it is necessary and appropriate.

John_Lloyd wrote:

Evening Nigel!

Thanks for the reminder about Kamasi - I'll definitely try to fit him in to the schedule.

As for the survey and the club's response to it and their use of the opportunity to insert topics for questions, you'll appreciate that it's a balancing act to accommodate multiple opinions in this process.

Now that the survey is established in structure, it makes sense to avoid significant changes or additions so that year on year analysis can be done more fairly.

Some suggested questions have been considered for addition, but most of these were rather "of the moment" and may only have temporary significance.

The club had no say in the wording of the freehold question - an offer was mooted, but not ultimately made. It's the AFT survey, after all - its independence is one of its merits.


As for what the club actually do with the results, that is another question. Repeated concerns over the catering offer, the PA, the Grandstand and the FPC suggest that not much ever changes.

That's the club's responsibility - but it's also ours too.

We must keep holding the board to account when it is necessary and appropriate.

John
As it is an AFT Survey, independent of the club as you say, is there any reason why there is no reference to it on the AFT website or any e-mail communication (with a link to the survey) to its members?
I note with interest that the response to the survey is near or beyond record levels but I wonder if it will be fully representative of AFT members, particularly if as many don't always subscribe to message boards or the PAFC official site.

Surveys are very, very complicated things to devise, action and interpret. There's a whole industry that has built up around them and it's a specialised area of mathematics, even within what could loosely be defined as Statistics or Data Handling, all of its own.

However it is what it is and its main selling points are that lots of people respond and that it remains true to itself in terms of year-on-year consistency.

As such, given that the surveys pre-date AFT by some years, it is never truly going to be an AFT survey unless its respondents are restricted to AFT members and if that happens there'll be fewer respondents which will undermine its most significant strength.

If AFT truly wanted to consult its members then it should do so by ways of its own devising although what worth there would be in, basically, re-inventing this particular wheel I don't know.

I'm puzzled as to why AFT has not endorsed it more openly though; that makes little sense.

John_Lloyd wrote:

Evening Nigel!

Thanks for the reminder about Kamasi - I'll definitely try to fit him in to the schedule.

I originally read that as Kagami!!!

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

John_Lloyd wrote:

Evening Nigel!

Thanks for the reminder about Kamasi - I'll definitely try to fit him in to the schedule.

I originally read that as Kagami!!!

You think you got problems.  SFD thinks he's John Lloyd...

I'm going to start counting the pointless digs Rickler makes in my direction.

I should have though of this years ago because we'd be into hundreds by now but as it is...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

LOl. You sure can dish it out but can't take it at all...    

and it wasn't a pointless dig.  It was making the point you can't help but butt in all the time, even taking it upon yourself to answer for someone else.

You literally cannot shut the feck up, you have to be in every thread even when you don't know what you're talking about

Examples off the top of the head would be:  Players medical insurance and here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

and here:  https://www.argyletd.com/t9678p25-mp-shot-at-constituency-surgery#307074

Worse than all of that though....

You're a complete humourless bore.

Bye.

I'm sorry to have accidentally reminded you of Kagami-san.

As for the AFT promotion of the survey, I must admit I didn't know that it wasn't on the site. The AFT, the club and I agreed on a coordinated launch of the survey at 10am two Tuesday's ago, so I thought that had been done.

This year's survey has already garnered more responses than any past incarnation, which is pleasing to see, particularly after suggestions elsewhere that it was not going to be supported this year as it had been before.

I'm sure it's an oversight from the AFT leadership and that it will be rectified shortly, now that you have brought it to our attention.

That should lead to even greater levels of participation.

I shall post a link on the website tomorrow!

SteelCannon wrote:

I shall post a link on the website tomorrow!

If I may...

I have to admit, I rarely if ever visit the AFT website, so in addition, If I am typical, sending an email to all members might turn out to be much more useful?

Emailing all AFT members would make the most sense.