Oh no, Coyle, you didn't! (Did you?)

Donate To GopherHole
everybody knows my name

everybody knows my name

Freakishly Hyperintelligent
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
2,655
Reaction score
488
Points
83
last week, the Athletic Department took a bold step to address its unwanted supply and retreating demand. It cut prices for basketball and hockey. Season tickets for hoops will now begin at $340. For hockey: $500.

By dropping season ticket prices, it could also drop single-game prices, hopefully winning back fans repelled by pro fees for middling collegiate fare.

But the university always seems to have a gun pointed at its foot. This moment was no different. It couldn't resist running a sleight of hand on its most loyal fans.

While official prices declined, “scholarship seating” fees – the university’s version of a seat license – rose correspondingly, meaning most season ticket holders won't see any savings at all.

Take, for example, a primo season seat for men’s hockey. Last year, it would have cost $700 per ticket, with a $300 mandatory gift. Total: $1,000

Next season that same seat will sell for $500, but with a $500 “scholarship seating” fee. Total: $1,000.
Click to expand...

http://www.citypages.com/news/the-m...-tMADxHSkeoRmjNbKQsM7Vtv7axV7iHgQvDBWwppuaexc
 

Hockey attendance has been horrendous.

I hear they're changing start times next year to not be "Why the hell would you play then?"

If football has had any good "advantage" it is that start times have been within a range of expectation. Hockey not so much....

Would help if I could find them on TV easier.
 

The snake [emoji216] is a work of art. His ability to alienate himself from the common person is remarkable.
 


bleedsmaroonandgold said:
Wow. The incompetence is stunning.
Click to expand...

I don't get the "incompetence" comment as it relates to the lowering of basketball & hockey tix. The U has lots of unsold tix in less desirable sections (hoops bench upper deck/puck corners & behind net). In order to entice customers to buy them they lowered the prices. Sound reasoning.

The better seats, chairbacks etc, no change.

Incompetence would have been to maintain status quo.
 


Ope3 said:
I don't get the "incompetence" comment as it relates to the lowering of basketball & hockey tix. The U has lots of unsold tix in less desirable sections (hoops bench upper deck/puck corners & behind net). In order to entice customers to buy them they lowered the prices. Sound reasoning.

The better seats, chairbacks etc, no change.

Incompetence would have been to maintain status quo.
Click to expand...

The point is the underhanded method of maintaining the status quo while pretending to reduce the cost to the consumer.
 

everybody knows my name said:
The point is the underhanded method of maintaining the status quo while pretending to reduce the cost to the consumer.
Click to expand...

Disagree in describing it as "underhanded method". The original press release indicates which zones will be a wash as far as increasing scholarship seating and reduction of ticket prices.

Again, good deals for the seats that nobody was buying previously.
 

everybody knows my name said:
The point is the underhanded method of maintaining the status quo while pretending to reduce the cost to the consumer.
Click to expand...

You are right in that this would do nothing for season ticket holders. However the story does mention this might lead to a drop in the price of single game tickets.
 

It’s really hard to maintain pricing power on season tickets and donations when the alternative is picking up the same seats for half of face with a few taps in an app 10 minutes before kickoff. Or staying home and watching it in perfect HD.

I routinely go to Wrigley Field for less than a $10 get in (then move way down) and Wrigley supposedly is the most expensive ticket in MLB.
 



Better get your tickets now. First come first serve.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

I think the question is not so much with the policy - it's with how it was rolled out.

Like most people, I saw a headline in the Strib - "Gophers cut season ticket prices for Men's basketball and hockey."

The initial story in the Strib - to the best of my knowledge - did not even mention the increase in seat donations. I found out about that from Gopher Hole, where someone had posted the entire press release, and the seating donation increases were mentioned - albeit way down in the release.

so, the way it was rolled out, it feels like a bait and switch.

The Gophers would have been better off to frame the story differently.

"Gophers cut season ticket prices for less-popular seats. Initiative aimed at getting new fans to purchase entry-level season tickets."

That isn't as sexy, but it's more accurate.

Hey, I may not be a public relations professional. but, I've covered news for small-market radio stations for 30+ years, and I've read more press releases than I can count. If I can see the issue - why couldn't anyone at the U see the issue?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
I think the question is not so much with the policy - it's with how it was rolled out.

Like most people, I saw a headline in the Strib - "Gophers cut season ticket prices for Men's basketball and hockey."

The initial story in the Strib - to the best of my knowledge - did not even mention the increase in seat donations. I found out about that from Gopher Hole, where someone had posted the entire press release, and the seating donation increases were mentioned - albeit way down in the release.

so, the way it was rolled out, it feels like a bait and switch.

The Gophers would have been better off to frame the story differently.

"Gophers cut season ticket prices for less-popular seats. Initiative aimed at getting new fans to purchase entry-level season tickets."

That isn't as sexy, but it's more accurate.

Hey, I may not be a public relations professional. but, I've covered news for small-market radio stations for 30+ years, and I've read more press releases than I can count. If I can see the issue - why couldn't anyone at the U see the issue?
Click to expand...

This is correct.
 

Ope3 said:
Disagree in describing it as "underhanded method". The original press release indicates which zones will be a wash as far as increasing scholarship seating and reduction of ticket prices.

Again, good deals for the seats that nobody was buying previously.
Click to expand...

I didn't see that. Was there a different release sent than this?
https://gophersports.com/news/2019/...nnounced-for-mens-basketball-mens-hockey.aspx

I'm not an accountant so I may be totally off base on this, but I wonder if there is a difference between how ticket sales revenue is put on the books compared to "donation" revenue that makes this a more attractive way to price the tickets.
 



I don't understand this post. The prices definitely dropped significantly for hockey. I found a 2014 -2015 season ticket map

Old Zone 4:
$750 total
New Zone 4:
$500 total

Old Zone 3:
$850 total
New Zone 3:
$700 total

Old Zone 2:
$950 total
New Zone 2:
$900 total

Old Zone 1:
$1,050 total
New Zone 1:
$1,000 total

It's not like the prices have gone down since 2014 so I assume it's actually even more of a price decline than that. I feel like the author here was just making **** up.
 
Last edited:

HopHead said:
I didn't see that. Was there a different release sent than this?
https://gophersports.com/news/2019/...nnounced-for-mens-basketball-mens-hockey.aspx

I'm not an accountant so I may be totally off base on this, but I wonder if there is a difference between how ticket sales revenue is put on the books compared to "donation" revenue that makes this a more attractive way to price the tickets.
Click to expand...

I saw this within minutes of seeing Gophers official release/email, so I may have been confusing which was which.

http://www.startribune.com/new-goph...t-prices-what-s-cheaper-what-s-not/508785072/

Regardless, if you click on the link of the Gophers release Season Ticket holders would know they are paying the same price. However, I concede that could have been prefaced better.
 

fmlizard said:
It’s really hard to maintain pricing power on season tickets and donations when the alternative is picking up the same seats for half of face with a few taps in an app 10 minutes before kickoff. Or staying home and watching it in perfect HD.

I routinely go to Wrigley Field for less than a $10 get in (then move way down) and Wrigley supposedly is the most expensive ticket in MLB.
Click to expand...

Or get two tickets for the price of three frozen pizzas. And you were going to eat pizza anyway.
 

MennoSota said:
The snake [emoji216] is a work of art. His ability to alienate himself from the common person is remarkable.
Click to expand...

What if this shifting from ticket price to donations was a way for Minnesota to reduce the revenue it needs to share with the other Big 10 schools, would it change your opinion?

I'm not sure that's true but another poster (2nd Degree Gopher) suggested that's the case for football in another thread.
 

Ope3 said:
What if this shifting from ticket price to donations was a way for Minnesota to reduce the revenue it needs to share with the other Big 10 schools, would it change your opinion?

I'm not sure that's true but another poster (2nd Degree Gopher) suggested that's the case for football in another thread.
Click to expand...
It's still over priced for the market. Coyle [emoji216] is going to end up having to sell single game tickets at lower prices or the barn will average 9000 again in 2019-20.
Other businesses figure this out. Sell tickets for cheaper and make your money off concessions and merchandise.
 

MennoSota said:
It's still over priced for the market. Coyle [emoji216] is going to end up having to sell single game tickets at lower prices or the barn will average 9000 again in 2019-20.
Other businesses figure this out. Sell tickets for cheaper and make your money off concessions and merchandise.
Click to expand...

They just lowered the price for the vast majority of unsold tix to about $20/game. If they have to go lower than that, then really what's the point?

Beer sales (if approved) are expected to increase the revenue by $250,000, peanuts by Power 5 standards but may also help get more fannies in seats.
 

HopHead said:
I'm not an accountant so I may be totally off base on this, but I wonder if there is a difference between how ticket sales revenue is put on the books compared to "donation" revenue that makes this a more attractive way to price the tickets.
Click to expand...

I had the same thought. From a tax standpoint, is the "donation" part of the ticket treated as a contribution to the school, whereas the ticket price isn't?
 

Ope3 said:
They just lowered the price for the vast majority of unsold tix to about $20/game. If they have to go lower than that, then really what's the point?

Beer sales (if approved) are expected to increase the revenue by $250,000, peanuts by Power 5 standards but may also help get more fannies in seats.
Click to expand...
They haven't started single game sales. Second, from what I read the seat back prices went up, which offsets the reduction in ticket prices so that there is no actual change in what a person pays. That's just shifting costs, not lowering costs.
You are welcome to pay the same price as last year if you wish.
 

Livingat45north said:
I had the same thought. From a tax standpoint, is the "donation" part of the ticket treated as a contribution to the school, whereas the ticket price isn't?
Click to expand...
I thought the new tax laws made ticket donations less attractive/valuable to the consumer???

Sent from my phone using Tapatalk
 

At some point a lot of schools are going to have to concede that the real money is in television and other forms of digital mass distribution (BTN) and make sporting tickets be like getting tickets to the taping of The Daily Show or something. The TV product which makes the real money is better when the stadium is full, so there's incentive to almost give tickets away to liven up the TV show.
 

MennoSota said:
They haven't started single game sales. Second, from what I read the seat back prices went up, which offsets the reduction in ticket prices so that there is no actual change in what a person pays. That's just shifting costs, not lowering costs.
You are welcome to pay the same price as last year if you wish.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is shifting costs for the season ticket holder but if the U only has to share the ticket revenue and not the scholarship donations it's a substantial net gain.

The goal with lowering the bench seats to $340 (or $20/game based on a 17 game schedule) is that that have fewer single game seats to sell.
 

fmlizard said:
It’s really hard to maintain pricing power on season tickets and donations when the alternative is picking up the same seats for half of face with a few taps in an app 10 minutes before kickoff. Or staying home and watching it in perfect HD.

I routinely go to Wrigley Field for less than a $10 get in (then move way down) and Wrigley supposedly is the most expensive ticket in MLB.
Click to expand...

I used to love going to Wrigley.... but I don't anymore. The remodel makes it just like any other park plopped on top of the remains of a historic / timeless park.
 

I agree with those that have said the smart policy is to get ahead of this with a full stadium policy and focus on secondary sources of revenue.

The ski industry is an interesting example. When I was growing up a season pass out west was a big deal. You had to ski 20-30 days for it to make sense. Now you can buy an Epic pass with unlimited skiing at about two dozen resorts all over the continent for $900. In PEAK season it pays for itself in about 5 days. They just want to generate interest and demand and get you there to spend your $$.

Charge a market rate for the seats to fill the place. Put the beer and food vendors in the aisles or deliver to the seats. The floor for what you could charge for the parking spots is the current stubhub rates. Figure it out, even if it nets less $$ in the short term it will be worth it to have the full house. It will be more fun and it will help the team. It’s gotta help with recruiting to have a full house, right?

They will never do this without a declared (not publicly but within the dept) full stadium strategy.

I wish some deep pocketed guy or gal would step up and offer a donation to support this experiment and make up the gap for five years so that the department would have the courage to try it.
 

Are you a football season ticket holder? If not you opinion is unwanted.
 

I remember reading an article a while back - don't remember where - but the gist of the article was a prediction that, in the future, pro sports and major college sports would basically become a "made-for-TV" event. there would be a relatively small in-person audience, but the main focus would be on the people watching on TV, computers and other electronic devices. The article went on to say that this would mean smaller and less ornate stadiums (built at a lower cost) with just enough seating for the people who really wanted to be there in person. The stadiums of the future would be designed like a big TV studio.

Who knows if that would happen - but if attendance at sporting events keeps declining, it might happen by attrition.
 


fmlizard said:
At some point a lot of schools are going to have to concede that the real money is in television and other forms of digital mass distribution (BTN) and make sporting tickets be like getting tickets to the taping of The Daily Show or something. The TV product which makes the real money is better when the stadium is full, so there's incentive to almost give tickets away to liven up the TV show.
Click to expand...

This is being talked about in the NFL. Just one case is my neighbor: 39 years old, he and wife work from home and have 4 kids. The entire family goes nuts for sports and wear seasonal gear per teams playing. Both U of M grads too. They have their friends over every Sunday for the Vikes and often for other teams. They would never even dream of going to a stadium...would wreck their entertainment experience. They have all the pay per view channels and love the "having friends over for games". This is increasing and at some point you are correct that tickets could be free to very cheap. Way too much work and hassle to park, wait to leave and keeping track of the kids. Even my own kids who started at the dome and been to road games are saying "ehh, TV better plus I can have my friends over and grill". The whole thing is close to life support especially in our market. Sad.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom