[Trevmiesterj]

I was meandering about the SpartanTailgate and found a thread entitled "Sign in if Stanford gave you an erection".  Curious as to what that could possibly mean, I scanned further.

Turns out that MSU fans on this board have been putting down a $100.00 deposit in order to secure 4 RB tickets via a Stanford mobile phone promo.  While I am not certain of the specifics since this promotion is now closed, I believe it works something like this-

Put down a $100.00 deposit to purchase Stanford 2014 season tickets (I believe via mobile), then call in to order up to 4 RB tickets which will be sent to your purchase address.  Outside of the $100.00 deposit, the purchaser would not be on the hook to actually buy ANY season tickets.

When the promo finally ended MSU fans had purchased nearly 300 tickets this way.  I don't like their method of erection achievement one bit as the Rose Bowl crowd is looking greener and greener.

http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Board...23918412/1

Thank you for purchasing or renewing your Stanford Athletic tickets. For future reference, your order confirmation number is xxxxxx

If you are ordering 2014 Rose Bowl tickets:

We will charge your credit card for the price of your first choice of tickets.  PLEASE NOTE: This does not guarantee that you will receive seats at that price category. Seating is assigned based on your level of engagement with Stanford. If we cannot fulfill your order in your first choice of seating category, we will fulfill with the next best available seating at a lower price. Your credit card will be refunded for any price difference. Rose Bowl ticket orders are non-refundable.
For questions or additional information please call the Stanford Athletic Ticket Office at 1-800-Stanford.

[Trevmiesterj]

I was meandering about the SpartanTailgate and found a thread entitled "Sign in if Stanford gave you an erection".  Curious as to what that could possibly mean, I scanned further.

Turns out that MSU fans on this board have been putting down a $100.00 deposit in order to secure 4 RB tickets via a Stanford mobile phone promo.  While I am not certain of the specifics since this promotion is now closed, I believe it works something like this-

Put down a $100.00 deposit to purchase Stanford 2014 season tickets (I believe via mobile), then call in to order up to 4 RB tickets which will be sent to your purchase address.  Outside of the $100.00 deposit, the purchaser would not be on the hook to actually buy ANY season tickets.

When the promo finally ended MSU fans had purchased nearly 300 tickets this way.  I don't like their method of erection achievement one bit as the Rose Bowl crowd is looking greener and greener.

http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Board...23918412/1

Thank you for purchasing or renewing your Stanford Athletic tickets. For future reference, your order confirmation number is xxxxxx

If you are ordering 2014 Rose Bowl tickets:

We will charge your credit card for the price of your first choice of tickets.  PLEASE NOTE: This does not guarantee that you will receive seats at that price category. Seating is assigned based on your level of engagement with Stanford. If we cannot fulfill your order in your first choice of seating category, we will fulfill with the next best available seating at a lower price. Your credit card will be refunded for any price difference. Rose Bowl ticket orders are non-refundable.
For questions or additional information please call the Stanford Athletic Ticket Office at 1-800-Stanford.

[Trevmiesterj]

Definitely a stupid move.

I suspect that if tickets are going to MSU fans this could create a shortage.  Stanford alumni will not be pleased when they call in asking for and then potentially being denied.

[Trevmiesterj]

Definitely a stupid move.

I suspect that if tickets are going to MSU fans this could create a shortage.  Stanford alumni will not be pleased when they call in asking for and then potentially being denied.

[Brannerite]

It seems Stanford was short-sightedly trying to cash in on the demand for tickets without foreseeing the much larger hit it has now taken with alumni/booster relations.  It should have been clear to them that MSU fans were placing a significant number of deposits  that they intended to forfeit. But  instead of shutting down the promotion at this point, they simply raised the price point to $200, which did not deter the Spartans.

[Brannerite]

It seems Stanford was short-sightedly trying to cash in on the demand for tickets without foreseeing the much larger hit it has now taken with alumni/booster relations.  It should have been clear to them that MSU fans were placing a significant number of deposits  that they intended to forfeit. But  instead of shutting down the promotion at this point, they simply raised the price point to $200, which did not deter the Spartans.

[76lsjumb]

At a minimum, if the Ticket Office gets it act together, the lettered rows of the Stanford section should be the ones tending toward a greenish hue...

As for any who make it into the better seats, if all goes well during the game, and if the MSU fans are anything like those ASU fans, there should at least be some room for the Stanford folks to spread out in the fourth quarter...  :)

[76lsjumb]

At a minimum, if the Ticket Office gets it act together, the lettered rows of the Stanford section should be the ones tending toward a greenish hue...

As for any who make it into the better seats, if all goes well during the game, and if the MSU fans are anything like those ASU fans, there should at least be some room for the Stanford folks to spread out in the fourth quarter...  :)

[TreeFitty]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

[TreeFitty]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

[Mick]

At a minimum, if the Ticket Office gets it act together, the lettered rows of the Stanford section should be the ones tending toward a greenish hue...

As for any who make it into the better seats, if all goes well during the game, and if the MSU fans are anything like those ASU fans, there should at least be some room for the Stanford folks to spread out in the fourth quarter...  :)

I'm betting third quarter.  Early.  Seriously.

[Mick]

At a minimum, if the Ticket Office gets it act together, the lettered rows of the Stanford section should be the ones tending toward a greenish hue...

As for any who make it into the better seats, if all goes well during the game, and if the MSU fans are anything like those ASU fans, there should at least be some room for the Stanford folks to spread out in the fourth quarter...  :)

I'm betting third quarter.  Early.  Seriously.

[stupac2]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

What's wrong with dynamic pricing? Also, I think they just weren't anticipating this. I mean, I certainly wouldn't have thought of it. It seems like once they realized what was happening they put a stop to it. I wouldn't be shocked if they straight-up refunded the deposits from addresses in Michigan (though I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't).

[stupac2]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

What's wrong with dynamic pricing? Also, I think they just weren't anticipating this. I mean, I certainly wouldn't have thought of it. It seems like once they realized what was happening they put a stop to it. I wouldn't be shocked if they straight-up refunded the deposits from addresses in Michigan (though I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't).

[Mick]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

First, and I say this based upon limited information, I don't get the sense that Stanford cares overmuch about its alumni with respect to Stanford events.  So their pricing schedule does not surprise me in the slightest.  The department needs to balance its budget, so it will be more concerned about income than alumni relations.  I suspect that if it ever becomes important enough to LSJU to alter those priorities, it will happen, but I don't anticipate that will happen any time soon.

Second, I have yet to find a Stanford administrator who impresses me as an above-the-middle-manager rank, so to speak, and I've met a fair number of less-than-competent administrators, across a number of Stanford functions in a number of capacities.  Quite possibly competent administrators exist and I just haven't met them yet.  Quite often, I have customer experiences at Stanford that just leave me dumbfounded, particularly given that optimizing the customer experience is my core function, so to speak.  I know Stanford pays considerably below benchmark for administrative positions, presumably with the correlating skill sets, so I shouldn't be surprised.  And it clearly isn't important to Stanford to have bulletproof administrative functions, perhaps LSJU doesn't feel the brand impact warrants the additional investment.  Not certain, but I'll still expect mediocre service in dealing with Stanford, until the University feels it is important to change.

[Mick]

Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

First, and I say this based upon limited information, I don't get the sense that Stanford cares overmuch about its alumni with respect to Stanford events.  So their pricing schedule does not surprise me in the slightest.  The department needs to balance its budget, so it will be more concerned about income than alumni relations.  I suspect that if it ever becomes important enough to LSJU to alter those priorities, it will happen, but I don't anticipate that will happen any time soon.

Second, I have yet to find a Stanford administrator who impresses me as an above-the-middle-manager rank, so to speak, and I've met a fair number of less-than-competent administrators, across a number of Stanford functions in a number of capacities.  Quite possibly competent administrators exist and I just haven't met them yet.  Quite often, I have customer experiences at Stanford that just leave me dumbfounded, particularly given that optimizing the customer experience is my core function, so to speak.  I know Stanford pays considerably below benchmark for administrative positions, presumably with the correlating skill sets, so I shouldn't be surprised.  And it clearly isn't important to Stanford to have bulletproof administrative functions, perhaps LSJU doesn't feel the brand impact warrants the additional investment.  Not certain, but I'll still expect mediocre service in dealing with Stanford, until the University feels it is important to change.

[stupac2]

Second, I have yet to find a Stanford administrator who impresses me as an above-the-middle-manager rank, so to speak, and I've met a fair number of less-than-competent administrators, across a number of Stanford functions in a number of capacities.

This is absolutely true when it comes to undergrad housing/dining. When that story broke about the eating clubs I wasn't even remotely surprised, they've been pulling that kind of dumb crap for years. I won't bother going into too much detail, but one thing that I found pretty horrid was they replaced every single shower nozzle in the dorms with one of those "water efficient" ones that makes it so you need to shower for 3 times longer just to get soap off. I can't imagine how anyone with long hair managed to take a shower in under an hour, it was that bad. They clearly never even tried the damned things. I just bought a pipe wrench and a shower head and replaced them every time, so I could shower in 5 minutes instead of 15.

It's little things like that, taking something that could be a good idea but just DOING it without actually thinking about how it effects people that happened constantly and showed how incompetent they all were. My dealings with individuals were not any better.

[stupac2]

Second, I have yet to find a Stanford administrator who impresses me as an above-the-middle-manager rank, so to speak, and I've met a fair number of less-than-competent administrators, across a number of Stanford functions in a number of capacities.

This is absolutely true when it comes to undergrad housing/dining. When that story broke about the eating clubs I wasn't even remotely surprised, they've been pulling that kind of dumb crap for years. I won't bother going into too much detail, but one thing that I found pretty horrid was they replaced every single shower nozzle in the dorms with one of those "water efficient" ones that makes it so you need to shower for 3 times longer just to get soap off. I can't imagine how anyone with long hair managed to take a shower in under an hour, it was that bad. They clearly never even tried the damned things. I just bought a pipe wrench and a shower head and replaced them every time, so I could shower in 5 minutes instead of 15.

It's little things like that, taking something that could be a good idea but just DOING it without actually thinking about how it effects people that happened constantly and showed how incompetent they all were. My dealings with individuals were not any better.

[SUBuddha]

Last year I applied for an Asst. Dean's position in housing. They seemed really happy to have an alum apply. Then no response to calls after, and not even a rejection letter 1 year later.

[SUBuddha]

Last year I applied for an Asst. Dean's position in housing. They seemed really happy to have an alum apply. Then no response to calls after, and not even a rejection letter 1 year later.

[Greyhound]

The seats turned out to be not just awful but significantly worse than tickets Stanford gave away to various social-services groups for the mentally disabled.

Sounds a lot like the seating arrangements for the ill-fated Seattle Bowl back when. Our seats were so far out in right field (literally, since it was in a baseball stadium) the sight lines were awful. Yet plenty of prime seats along the third base line were filled with free tickets or even empty.

[Greyhound]

The seats turned out to be not just awful but significantly worse than tickets Stanford gave away to various social-services groups for the mentally disabled.

Sounds a lot like the seating arrangements for the ill-fated Seattle Bowl back when. Our seats were so far out in right field (literally, since it was in a baseball stadium) the sight lines were awful. Yet plenty of prime seats along the third base line were filled with free tickets or even empty.

[Trevmiesterj]

The Stanford Daily...

Stanford Rose Bowl ticket allotment sells out rapidly; Spartans fans suspected

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/12/11/...suspected/

This lone comment says it all:

MSUDersh
• 22 minutes ago

Thanks for the tickets, Stanford! I got four as did dozens of my Spartan friends!! Looks like it will be a sea of green in Pasadena on Jan. 1!!!

[Trevmiesterj]

The Stanford Daily...

Stanford Rose Bowl ticket allotment sells out rapidly; Spartans fans suspected

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/12/11/...suspected/

This lone comment says it all:

MSUDersh
• 22 minutes ago

Thanks for the tickets, Stanford! I got four as did dozens of my Spartan friends!! Looks like it will be a sea of green in Pasadena on Jan. 1!!!

[BigEasyCard]

Perhaps a small consolation, but since the seats are assigned by "level of engagement" with Stanford, the MSU fans who purchased through our Ticket Office should end up together in the worst seats in the Cardinal allotment.

Geaux Cardinal!

[BigEasyCard]

Perhaps a small consolation, but since the seats are assigned by "level of engagement" with Stanford, the MSU fans who purchased through our Ticket Office should end up together in the worst seats in the Cardinal allotment.

Geaux Cardinal!

[stupac2]

Perhaps a small consolation, but since the seats are assigned by "level of engagement" with Stanford, the MSU fans who purchased through our Ticket Office should end up together in the worst seats in the Cardinal allotment.

Geaux Cardinal!

It'll probably end up being pretty similar to a home game for me, since opposing fans tend to be in the upper decks around my section.

[stupac2]

Perhaps a small consolation, but since the seats are assigned by "level of engagement" with Stanford, the MSU fans who purchased through our Ticket Office should end up together in the worst seats in the Cardinal allotment.

Geaux Cardinal!

It'll probably end up being pretty similar to a home game for me, since opposing fans tend to be in the upper decks around my section.

[Roberton3]

[quote author=TreeFitty link=topic=9107.msg77763#msg77763 date=1386780858]
Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

What's wrong with dynamic pricing? Also, I think they just weren't anticipating this. I mean, I certainly wouldn't have thought of it. It seems like once they realized what was happening they put a stop to it. I wouldn't be shocked if they straight-up refunded the deposits from addresses in Michigan (though I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't).
[/quote]

I agree.  Also, what's wrong with "Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand"?  That seems like a very good approach if you're trying to (a) ensure a good crowd for even the low-demand games and (b) ensure a pro-Stanford crowd for the big games (Stanford fans will be much more inclined to buy a ticket to Stanford-SJSU than opposing teams' fans will be).  For the promo that's the subject of this thread, the AD set the deposit far too low, but the basic idea of tying Rose Bowl tickets to a Stanford season ticket purchase is pretty smart.

[Roberton3]

[quote author=TreeFitty link=topic=9107.msg77763#msg77763 date=1386780858]
Anyone else get a feeling that the Stanford ticket office is just run incredibly poorly or short-sightedly.

1. Dynamic pricing
2. No alumni deals beyond recent alums.
3. Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand.

I get that it's a business, and money is the point to this stuff, but I just wish their goal for bowl games was "we will work our hardest so every person with a Stanford affiliation who wants a ticket can buy a ticket at face value" instead of  "we will work our hardest to sell every ticket and maximize our profit in the process."

What's wrong with dynamic pricing? Also, I think they just weren't anticipating this. I mean, I certainly wouldn't have thought of it. It seems like once they realized what was happening they put a stop to it. I wouldn't be shocked if they straight-up refunded the deposits from addresses in Michigan (though I also wouldn't be surprised if they didn't).
[/quote]

I agree.  Also, what's wrong with "Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand"?  That seems like a very good approach if you're trying to (a) ensure a good crowd for even the low-demand games and (b) ensure a pro-Stanford crowd for the big games (Stanford fans will be much more inclined to buy a ticket to Stanford-SJSU than opposing teams' fans will be).  For the promo that's the subject of this thread, the AD set the deposit far too low, but the basic idea of tying Rose Bowl tickets to a Stanford season ticket purchase is pretty smart.

[TreeFitty]

I agree.  Also, what's wrong with "Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand"?  That seems like a very good approach if you're trying to (a) ensure a good crowd for even the low-demand games and (b) ensure a pro-Stanford crowd for the big games (Stanford fans will be much more inclined to buy a ticket to Stanford-SJSU than opposing teams' fans will be).  For the promo that's the subject of this thread, the AD set the deposit far too low, but the basic idea of tying Rose Bowl tickets to a Stanford season ticket purchase is pretty smart.

I don't think this approach does either of these things particularly well. Its a good approach if you want to guarantee that low-demand games are sold out, but it doesn't actually put people in the seats. You have oregon, usc and nd fans buying the packages and not using the tickets for the other games. Hell, even Stanford fans don't go to those games. Stanford sold out every game this season, but it definitely didn't look that way to those of us who went to the games.

[TreeFitty]

I agree.  Also, what's wrong with "Tying big games to buying tickets to games with low demand"?  That seems like a very good approach if you're trying to (a) ensure a good crowd for even the low-demand games and (b) ensure a pro-Stanford crowd for the big games (Stanford fans will be much more inclined to buy a ticket to Stanford-SJSU than opposing teams' fans will be).  For the promo that's the subject of this thread, the AD set the deposit far too low, but the basic idea of tying Rose Bowl tickets to a Stanford season ticket purchase is pretty smart.

I don't think this approach does either of these things particularly well. Its a good approach if you want to guarantee that low-demand games are sold out, but it doesn't actually put people in the seats. You have oregon, usc and nd fans buying the packages and not using the tickets for the other games. Hell, even Stanford fans don't go to those games. Stanford sold out every game this season, but it definitely didn't look that way to those of us who went to the games.

[stupac2]

I don't think this approach does either of these things particularly well. Its a good approach if you want to guarantee that low-demand games are sold out, but it doesn't actually put people in the seats. You have oregon, University of Spoiled Children  and nd fans buying the packages and not using the tickets for the other games. Hell, even Stanford fans don't go to those games. Stanford sold out every game this season, but it definitely didn't look that way to those of us who went to the games.

It's really not hard to get butts into your seats. When I couldn't make the first two games of the season I gave the tickets to a random fan who expressed interest on reddit. If I can't make it then I'm making sure there's a butt in my seat and they're wearing red. I get that Oregon/ND fans aren't going to do that, but why can't Stanford fans?

[stupac2]

I don't think this approach does either of these things particularly well. Its a good approach if you want to guarantee that low-demand games are sold out, but it doesn't actually put people in the seats. You have oregon, University of Spoiled Children  and nd fans buying the packages and not using the tickets for the other games. Hell, even Stanford fans don't go to those games. Stanford sold out every game this season, but it definitely didn't look that way to those of us who went to the games.

It's really not hard to get butts into your seats. When I couldn't make the first two games of the season I gave the tickets to a random fan who expressed interest on reddit. If I can't make it then I'm making sure there's a butt in my seat and they're wearing red. I get that Oregon/ND fans aren't going to do that, but why can't Stanford fans?

[fullmetal]

I will be amused to some degree if the Rose Bowl turns out mostly green on Jan. 1st due to the inept handling of this situation.  It will be very clear on television and to the attendees in person how much Stanford cared about getting fans/alumni support for the team at the game.  I hereby nominate this bowl game's ticket shenanigans for the title of the Great MSU Land Grab.

[fullmetal]

I will be amused to some degree if the Rose Bowl turns out mostly green on Jan. 1st due to the inept handling of this situation.  It will be very clear on television and to the attendees in person how much Stanford cared about getting fans/alumni support for the team at the game.  I hereby nominate this bowl game's ticket shenanigans for the title of the Great MSU Land Grab.

[Farm93]

Even Miller picked up on the trend.
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...wl-tickets

I suspect the $100 deposit idea was DUMB!  The better path would have been to require a purchase of season tickets for 2014 with no refund or to allow that $100 deposit only for account holders that had some Stanford football ticket activity in the last 1-3 years.  The ticket purchasing games likely had a very small impact since there were probably very few season ticket deposits made on Monday.  Having worked in the office back in the day, I would guess the office could not really handle more than a few dozen requests in a single day.

So fine, Stanford gets $100 and MSU fans go the game.  It is not really worse than the alternative.  Ticket brokers blitz the website on Tuesday at 4PM any buy up all remaining tickets, and then SELL them at a significant profit to.....MSU fans.

My bigger worry with this $100 deposit idea is that it will actually tie up seats at Stanford Stadium.  I hope the AD sends out letters in very, very early 2014 announcing the 2014 ticket pricing AND announcing that the deposit only holds seats until Feb 1, 2014 or whatever.  I just hate the idea that Stanford will discourage real season ticket holders with a waitlist type situation when these mythical season ticket holders have moved on.

Finally - I sure hope that level of engagement will put new 2014 season ticket deposits well behind every other category (big AD donors, big university donors, season ticket holders, smaller donors, students...........$100 deposit customers).

If I am in row 1-12 while some MSU fan gets tickets directly from Stanford in row 30, THEN I will be upset.  At the moment, I think Stanford found a way to get $100 from MSU fans and found the perfect group to allocate to those first few rows of the Rose Bowl.

[Farm93]

Even Miller picked up on the trend.
http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/...wl-tickets

I suspect the $100 deposit idea was DUMB!  The better path would have been to require a purchase of season tickets for 2014 with no refund or to allow that $100 deposit only for account holders that had some Stanford football ticket activity in the last 1-3 years.  The ticket purchasing games likely had a very small impact since there were probably very few season ticket deposits made on Monday.  Having worked in the office back in the day, I would guess the office could not really handle more than a few dozen requests in a single day.

So fine, Stanford gets $100 and MSU fans go the game.  It is not really worse than the alternative.  Ticket brokers blitz the website on Tuesday at 4PM any buy up all remaining tickets, and then SELL them at a significant profit to.....MSU fans.

My bigger worry with this $100 deposit idea is that it will actually tie up seats at Stanford Stadium.  I hope the AD sends out letters in very, very early 2014 announcing the 2014 ticket pricing AND announcing that the deposit only holds seats until Feb 1, 2014 or whatever.  I just hate the idea that Stanford will discourage real season ticket holders with a waitlist type situation when these mythical season ticket holders have moved on.

Finally - I sure hope that level of engagement will put new 2014 season ticket deposits well behind every other category (big AD donors, big university donors, season ticket holders, smaller donors, students...........$100 deposit customers).

If I am in row 1-12 while some MSU fan gets tickets directly from Stanford in row 30, THEN I will be upset.  At the moment, I think Stanford found a way to get $100 from MSU fans and found the perfect group to allocate to those first few rows of the Rose Bowl.

[g1313]

I also think the AD set themselves up as a scapegoat here - my suspicion is that the majority of green in the red sections of the stadium will be due to Stanford season ticket holders deciding to buy some extra tickets to resell (which could easily pay for their whole trip if the stubhub prices hold up)

[g1313]

I also think the AD set themselves up as a scapegoat here - my suspicion is that the majority of green in the red sections of the stadium will be due to Stanford season ticket holders deciding to buy some extra tickets to resell (which could easily pay for their whole trip if the stubhub prices hold up)