Seat License

[MattK]

So "crappy" tickets cost less and "good" tickets cost more, and this is a point of contention?

I'm sure you're aware that the point of contention is asking people to pay even more for their good tickets in 1/2 empty venues.

[diverdo]

There is also discussion in the "New Tulane Athletics Priority Seating Refinements" thread.

I am one of the chumps (6 seats for football, 2 each for basketball and for baseball) who will be asked to pay lots more for the same seats: this year $1500 + ticket cost; next year, something like $3000 + ticket cost! I contacted the Smart People in the Athletic Department and got a quick call back from a nice young lady who assured me that my calculation was correct and they really appreciated my past support - end of story.
This plan is well intentioned but it completely craps all over the 6.7% of fans who have been loyal supporters for (literally) decades of losing seasons. The Smart People of the Athletic Department couldn't tell me the percentage of tickets purchased by their precise 6.7% chumps - my guess is 10-20%!!
The Smart People of TU Athletics need to find a way to not reduce the number of tickets purchased by this long-suffering group besides telling them their only alternative is to move to cheaper seats! Because real alternatives are to really buy less tickets or buy no tickets at all.

My suggestion to the Smart People is a simple one that is a WIN-WIN for all:
Guarantee that no current season ticket holder is worse off under the new plan

[LSU Law Greenie]

There is also discussion in the "New Tulane Athletics Priority Seating Refinements" thread.

I am one of the chumps (6 seats for football, 2 each for basketball and for baseball) who will be asked to pay lots more for the same seats: this year $1500 + ticket cost; next year, something like $3000 + ticket cost! I contacted the Smart People in the Athletic Department and got a quick call back from a nice young lady who assured me that my calculation was correct and they really appreciated my past support - end of story.
This plan is well intentioned but it completely craps all over the 6.7% of fans who have been loyal supporters for (literally) decades of losing seasons. The Smart People of the Athletic Department couldn't tell me the percentage of tickets purchased by their precise 6.7% chumps - my guess is 10-20%!!
The Smart People of TU Athletics need to find a way to not reduce the number of tickets purchased by this long-suffering group besides telling them their only alternative is to move to cheaper seats! Because real alternatives are to really buy less tickets or buy no tickets at all.

My suggestion to the Smart People is a simple one that is a WIN-WIN for all:
Guarantee that no current season ticket holder is worse off under the new plan

And this has been my problem from the beginning - it craps on the most loyal fans (the 6.7%) who have been buying tickets and trying to get friends to come to games for literally decades of losing seasons. I'm keeping my 4 basketball season tickets (moving to a non donation section - contacted Tulane today to move my tickets and they emailed back and said "no problem and now we owe you a $200 refund" so they just lost $200). I'm NOT renewing my 4 baseball season tickets and reducing my football season tickets from 16 to 4. So for just me its a net loss to Tulane of 16 season tickets. I know, I could buy extra football tickets in a non donation section to give to friends or clients but call me old fashioned, when I give people tickets I like to sit by them. Overall, I think some people may upgrade but it could actually cause Tulane to have a net decrease in season tickets.

It all comes down to winning and winning on a consistent basis. If Tulane had been to the NCAA tournament in baseball and basketball the last few years and been to a bowl game or two in football in the last few years I could actually understand because the demand would be there. Say what you will, Memphis easily had more fans than Tulane in Yulman stadium on Friday night.

[windywave]

So "crappy" tickets cost less and "good" tickets cost more, and this is a point of contention?

I'm sure you're aware that the point of contention is asking people to pay even more for their good tickets in 1/2 empty venues.

Not really the two major complaints distilled are "I can't buy unlimited tickets for one donation" and the alternative offered is to buy cheaper seats. If you look at it on a per game level it is not a significant amount of money IMO for a game. Until Tulane non club seats are over a buck fifty per game I will still think games are a deal.

[ml wave]

So "crappy" tickets cost less and "good" tickets cost more, and this is a point of contention?

I'm sure you're aware that the point of contention is asking people to pay even more for their good tickets in 1/2 empty venues.

Not really the two major complaints distilled are "I can't buy unlimited tickets for one donation" and the alternative offered is to buy cheaper seats. If you look at it on a per game level it is not a significant amount of money IMO for a game. Until Tulane non club seats are over a buck fifty per game I will still think games are a deal.

Do you wind up having to pay more or less under this system?

[windywave]

So "crappy" tickets cost less and "good" tickets cost more, and this is a point of contention?

I'm sure you're aware that the point of contention is asking people to pay even more for their good tickets in 1/2 empty venues.

Not really the two major complaints distilled are "I can't buy unlimited tickets for one donation" and the alternative offered is to buy cheaper seats. If you look at it on a per game level it is not a significant amount of money IMO for a game. Until Tulane non club seats are over a buck fifty per game I will still think games are a deal.

Do you wind up having to pay more or less under this system?

More or less what? My donation stays the same and if I chose to buy football tickets I would have to donate less to get good seats than I do now without buying seats.

You really want to start the circle jerk where out of town fans aren't real fans because we don't go to every game and don't have season tickets? Piss off

[ml wave]

[redacted]

No, I don't have any criteria for who's a "real fan" or not but there's a put up or shut up aspect to this. Also, your thoughts on pricing are hilariously out of line. If we charged $150/game for the product we put out there, you'd be the only one in the stadium. Theoretically, anyway.

[ml wave]

[redacted by noladave]

Our games should be cheap, we're terrible and no one goes. In light of those facts, some people feel it is a poor decision to raise donation requirements for those that buy a large number of season tickets. This is evidenced by said people reducing the number of tickets they are buying. Since Dannen is on record as saying that they want to lower ticket prices to increase attendance (basic supply/demand stuff here, try to keep up), this policy seems to not be having the desired effect. As a non-season ticket holder, your contention that the increases aren't that bad hold zero weight. Also, you seem to do a lot of name calling, are you not ok or did you just forget the rules?

[ml wave]

[edited by Noladave]

Everyone makes one donation, and it's the people buying a ton of tickets that the AD should probably be concerned with. The sample set of our season ticket holders is small, and probably not something we want reduced.

No offense taken either way, don't worry.

[tjtlja]

This thread needs a lot of cleaning.

[noladave]

Cleaned up...

Guys, follow MLwave, and make your point without the name calling.

It will get to the point of people being put on a weeklong (or longer) vacation.....

[ml wave]

Guys, follow MLwave

As always, a solid life philosophy...