01-16-2017, 05:04 AM
#1) I definitely feel bad for the old-timers. I purchased season tickets for the first time this year (my section narrowly missing the required donations), and far and away, in my section, the longstanding season ticket holders around me are the core of Stanford's support in the stands. They are the ones welcoming the new fans. They are the ones screaming, on occasion even standing in the shady side, and bringing the energy. So, I think it would be a dear loss if the new "donations" led to losing these fans.
#2) Although required donations do look like a common practice, I would be upset if it affected my section also. I don't like how it's a new, surprise fee. The idea that new fees could spring out of nowhere is troubling and it makes loyalty feel unappreciated.
#3) In terms of whether I think this will work, of course, I don't know and who knows. But from my experience, I recall that I was interested in trying to get seats in 111-112,114-115 but they were already sold out, even in an even year. So, if the donation was reasonable, I think I would have tried to get seats in 111,112,114 or 115. I wonder if this is something they've been planning and were waiting for an odd-numbered year to try it. I don't have any charts to prove this, but I would guess this ends up working OK in the short-run, for 2017.
In the long-run, to my understanding, all stadiums -- not just Stanford's -- have decreasing attendance (on average) due to constantly-evolving HD broadcasts. I would imagine this move will magnify the dramatic number of season ticket pick-ups during odd years and drop-offs during even years. It kills the incentive I think many long-term fans have to maintain their subscriptions during lean years. Why stick with and cheer for a losing team when you can easily pick up great seats with a small donation during the good times?
So I worry that this is a short-sighted business decision that will boost the bottom line in 2017, maybe for a few years, but could be a costly move and could even threaten the program if things ever got Buddy-Ball bad again.
And in terms of generating more revenues, I could just think of other ways to make more money and so many untapped opportunities. For example, I think there is significant untapped upside in merchandising, in food and beverages, and in other events and services. Oh yeah, and how about getting the Pac-12 Network on DirecTV? Or even Netflix?
But in the end, I have to say, if anything really makes me stop getting season tickets, it's going to be the last-minute kick-off times and that damn Pac-12 After Dark. I would pay more for seats if it meant more attractive kickoff times that I could actually plan for.
#2) Although required donations do look like a common practice, I would be upset if it affected my section also. I don't like how it's a new, surprise fee. The idea that new fees could spring out of nowhere is troubling and it makes loyalty feel unappreciated.
#3) In terms of whether I think this will work, of course, I don't know and who knows. But from my experience, I recall that I was interested in trying to get seats in 111-112,114-115 but they were already sold out, even in an even year. So, if the donation was reasonable, I think I would have tried to get seats in 111,112,114 or 115. I wonder if this is something they've been planning and were waiting for an odd-numbered year to try it. I don't have any charts to prove this, but I would guess this ends up working OK in the short-run, for 2017.
In the long-run, to my understanding, all stadiums -- not just Stanford's -- have decreasing attendance (on average) due to constantly-evolving HD broadcasts. I would imagine this move will magnify the dramatic number of season ticket pick-ups during odd years and drop-offs during even years. It kills the incentive I think many long-term fans have to maintain their subscriptions during lean years. Why stick with and cheer for a losing team when you can easily pick up great seats with a small donation during the good times?
So I worry that this is a short-sighted business decision that will boost the bottom line in 2017, maybe for a few years, but could be a costly move and could even threaten the program if things ever got Buddy-Ball bad again.
And in terms of generating more revenues, I could just think of other ways to make more money and so many untapped opportunities. For example, I think there is significant untapped upside in merchandising, in food and beverages, and in other events and services. Oh yeah, and how about getting the Pac-12 Network on DirecTV? Or even Netflix?
But in the end, I have to say, if anything really makes me stop getting season tickets, it's going to be the last-minute kick-off times and that damn Pac-12 After Dark. I would pay more for seats if it meant more attractive kickoff times that I could actually plan for.