10 years later, TCF Bank Stadium is aging well

Donate To GopherHole
dpodoll68 said:
I don't know what the actual numbers are right now, but let's say there are 28,000 season ticket holders. Cutting the prices by x% across the board would require the number of season ticket holders to increase by the same x% - just to break even. If they cut season ticket prices by 10% across the board, will there be an additional 2,800 season ticket holders? If they cut by 20%, will there be an additional 5,600 season ticket holders? I very much doubt it, in either instance.
Click to expand...

dpo - We disagree on this topic and I'll give you my reasons and how I came to that conclusion. I apologize for the length of this response but I think this topic is too complex to try and summarize in a 4-5 sentence post.

Potential season-ticket holder base
First, I think give or take, our potential season ticket holder based is 35,000. The capacity of TCF is 50805. Approximately 10,000 are set aside for students and 3,000 for visitors. For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that 2000 are "premium" (i.e., suites, club) and the University will have about 1,000 they hold for their own purposes. That gets us to 34,805 so I'm just going to round up.
SUMMARIZE: 35,000 potential season ticket holders

Previous donation sections and amounts
The previous donation sections were the 16 sections between the 20’s. In my quick math, it appears that accounts for about 10,500 seats. However; a media report I saw awhile ago claimed that only 8,000 seats were originally requiring a donation. I’m going to say give the benefit of the doubt to the media and say only 8,000 seats required a donation.
These donation amounts were $100, $250 and $500. I don’t have the detail as to the size of each section and how many people were signed up but let’s just assume that the “Average” donation prior to the increase was $250.
SUMMARIZE: 8,000 seats requiring an average donation of $250

New donation sections and amounts
The media reports state that 28,000 seats now require a donation. Again, I haven’t done the math but let’s just say that the average donation amount is now $350. (Note: I think that is high but I’m trying to give the benefit of the doubt).
SUMMARIZE: 28,000 seats requiring an average donation of $350

Season Ticket Holder Numbers
Prior to the donation increases in 2014 the season ticket holder count was 33,385. This number was from a Star Tribune article I read about a year ago. Now of that 33,385, if 8,000 were paying an average seat donation of $250 and $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $4.640M. If the remaining 25,385 holders were only paying $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $8.377M. TOTAL REVENUE UNDER OLD MODEL: $13,017,050
With the new donations, the 2019 season ticket holder count is 21,689. Let’s say that of the 7,000 NON-DONATION seats, about 5,000 are being bought by season ticket holders. That means 16689 donation seats are being bought. 16689 x ($350 avg donation + $330 ticket) = $11,348,520 of revenue for donation seats. The non-donation seats are 5000 x $330 = 1,650,000 in revenue. REVENUE UNDER NEW MODEL: $12,998,520
These are nearly identical. I will readily admit that under the new model you are likely reaching the same amount of revenue but giving yourself a chance to maximize more revenue if you get new customers. However; I think this is a short-sighted approach because you are sacrificing 11,696 paying customers to essentially break even.
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
dpo - We disagree on this topic and I'll give you my reasons and how I came to that conclusion. I apologize for the length of this response but I think this topic is too complex to try and summarize in a 4-5 sentence post.

Potential season-ticket holder base
First, I think give or take, our potential season ticket holder based is 35,000. The capacity of TCF is 50805. Approximately 10,000 are set aside for students and 3,000 for visitors. For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that 2000 are "premium" (i.e., suites, club) and the University will have about 1,000 they hold for their own purposes. That gets us to 34,805 so I'm just going to round up.
SUMMARIZE: 35,000 potential season ticket holders

Previous donation sections and amounts
The previous donation sections were the 16 sections between the 20’s. In my quick math, it appears that accounts for about 10,500 seats. However; a media report I saw awhile ago claimed that only 8,000 seats were originally requiring a donation. I’m going to say give the benefit of the doubt to the media and say only 8,000 seats required a donation.
These donation amounts were $100, $250 and $500. I don’t have the detail as to the size of each section and how many people were signed up but let’s just assume that the “Average” donation prior to the increase was $250.
SUMMARIZE: 8,000 seats requiring an average donation of $250

New donation sections and amounts
The media reports state that 28,000 seats now require a donation. Again, I haven’t done the math but let’s just say that the average donation amount is now $350. (Note: I think that is high but I’m trying to give the benefit of the doubt).
SUMMARIZE: 28,000 seats requiring an average donation of $350

Season Ticket Holder Numbers
Prior to the donation increases in 2014 the season ticket holder count was 33,385. This number was from a Star Tribune article I read about a year ago. Now of that 33,385, if 8,000 were paying an average seat donation of $250 and $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $4.640M. If the remaining 25,385 holders were only paying $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $8.377M. TOTAL REVENUE UNDER OLD MODEL: $13,017,050
With the new donations, the 2019 season ticket holder count is 21,689. Let’s say that of the 7,000 NON-DONATION seats, about 5,000 are being bought by season ticket holders. That means 16689 donation seats are being bought. 16689 x ($350 avg donation + $330 ticket) = $11,348,520 of revenue for donation seats. The non-donation seats are 5000 x $330 = 1,650,000 in revenue. REVENUE UNDER NEW MODEL: $12,998,520
These are nearly identical. I will readily admit that under the new model you are likely reaching the same amount of revenue but giving yourself a chance to maximize more revenue if you get new customers. However; I think this is a short-sighted approach because you are sacrificing 11,696 paying customers to essentially break even.
Click to expand...

What's worse is that the 2017 tax bill eliminated the entire purpose of the "donations" which was to make part of the ticket cost tax deductible. They would be better off scrapping the current pricing structure and starting over with the goal being to maximize butts in seats.
 

howeda7 said:
What's worse is that the 2017 tax bill eliminated the entire purpose of the "donations" which was to make part of the ticket cost tax deductible. They would be better off scrapping the current pricing structure and starting over with the goal being to maximize butts in seats.
Click to expand...

The donation numbers weren't just there as far as tax benefits (granted for an individual that is nice) they calculate points based off "donations" and I belive other things as well so scraping the concept of donations would have thrown other systems into disarray. Causing those issues just because the tax code changed makes no sense.
 

We had no problem hovering near capacity until phase 2 of Scholarship Seating came into play.

2009 50,805
2010 49,513
2011 47,714
2012 46,637
2013 47,797
2014 47,865
__________Scholarship Seating phase 1__________
2015 52,355
__________Scholarship Seating phase 2__________ Single game prices were also adjusted in either 2015 or 2016.
2016 43,814
2017 44,358
2018 37,915

Per Shama
Public Season Tickets in 2015: 27,885
Public Season Tickets as of May 2019: 20,297

Phase 3 never happened because of the backlash of phase 2. The per seat donation in a very large portion of the stadium doubled the cost of attendance for those who wished to stay put. Only the upper deck corners became donation free.


From the Star Tribune in 2014:

• For lower-level seats between the 35-yard lines, there has been an annual $500 scholarship seating fee attached to each seat. That annual amount will rise to $650 next year, followed by $850, and then $1,000 in 2017.

• Lower-level seats between the goal line and the 25-yard line previously had no scholarship seating fees, but beginning next year it’ll be $150, followed by $300 and $500.

• The seats above those, in the second deck, will have new scholarship fees of $75, followed by $150 and $250.

The tax laws have also changed eliminating the possibility of deducting the seat donations.

This article from the Daily Gopher in 2014 articulates where and how much a single ticket was impacted with the introduction of Scholarship Seating.


We all want the same thing - a full house all the time. Full disclosure, I have season tickets and am not complaining about the prices. The attendance statistics however don't lie in the story they tell. Cost is absolutely an obstacle to a full house. If attendance is a priority for the U, there must be some middle ground in the revenue/attendance equation or nothing will change.
 

I’ve never been a fan of the mandatory donations per season ticket. First off, when a donation is mandatory, it’s no longer a donation...it’s a fee. Secondly, I spend a crap load at Goldy’s. I spend a crapload at the concessions. I do my best to get people into the seats for games. I might make a donation to the school or team on my own time, but the mandatory donation piece turned a lot of people, I know personally, off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


As far as getting more students to the games the solution seems simple...Turn the upper deck into a vaping section with coffee bars and updated wifi and the whole student body might show up.
 


DarrenTheGreek said:
These are nearly identical. I will readily admit that under the new model you are likely reaching the same amount of revenue but giving yourself a chance to maximize more revenue if you get new customers. However; I think this is a short-sighted approach because you are sacrificing 11,696 paying customers to essentially break even.
Click to expand...

And on top of that you're losing the money they spend on food and merch and ultimately proselytizing the experience to their friends and family for years to come. It's just incredibly short-sighted, especially in a town so full of entertainment options.
 
Last edited:

theTurning said:
As a reference to the upper deck plaza idea, it looks like Wisconsin is thinking the same thing for CR:
new-camp-randall-7.jpg


Would LOVE to see something like this in the near future.
Click to expand...

Totally like the idea of the deck plaza wrapping around the top of the second deck. A pretty affordable addition, and it'd really be something unique to TCF.
https://www.twincities.com/wp-conte...150915__07-aerial_TCFBankStadium_skybox-1.jpg
 



A bit of a stretch of the imagination here, but I'd like to see the center "M" and the Minnesota endzones lit up in fiber optic lights. Way back I saw this done at Disney World, where they ran fiber optic strands into a concrete sidewalk that light up a Mickey Mouse image when you walked on it. I tried pulling a patent for the idea of fiber strands to be used with field turf (complete field, you could show the routes players took on the previous play, have live updates of the first down line, etc), but some other firm beat me to it by a couple of months. In our case, just run a cable bundle under the turf to the middle of the field and each end zone, and pull them through for the lettering. This would be really easy to do the next time they install new turf.
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
dpo - We disagree on this topic and I'll give you my reasons and how I came to that conclusion. I apologize for the length of this response but I think this topic is too complex to try and summarize in a 4-5 sentence post.

Potential season-ticket holder base
First, I think give or take, our potential season ticket holder based is 35,000. The capacity of TCF is 50805. Approximately 10,000 are set aside for students and 3,000 for visitors. For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that 2000 are "premium" (i.e., suites, club) and the University will have about 1,000 they hold for their own purposes. That gets us to 34,805 so I'm just going to round up.
SUMMARIZE: 35,000 potential season ticket holders

Previous donation sections and amounts
The previous donation sections were the 16 sections between the 20’s. In my quick math, it appears that accounts for about 10,500 seats. However; a media report I saw awhile ago claimed that only 8,000 seats were originally requiring a donation. I’m going to say give the benefit of the doubt to the media and say only 8,000 seats required a donation.
These donation amounts were $100, $250 and $500. I don’t have the detail as to the size of each section and how many people were signed up but let’s just assume that the “Average” donation prior to the increase was $250.
SUMMARIZE: 8,000 seats requiring an average donation of $250

New donation sections and amounts
The media reports state that 28,000 seats now require a donation. Again, I haven’t done the math but let’s just say that the average donation amount is now $350. (Note: I think that is high but I’m trying to give the benefit of the doubt).
SUMMARIZE: 28,000 seats requiring an average donation of $350

Season Ticket Holder Numbers
Prior to the donation increases in 2014 the season ticket holder count was 33,385. This number was from a Star Tribune article I read about a year ago. Now of that 33,385, if 8,000 were paying an average seat donation of $250 and $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $4.640M. If the remaining 25,385 holders were only paying $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $8.377M. TOTAL REVENUE UNDER OLD MODEL: $13,017,050
With the new donations, the 2019 season ticket holder count is 21,689. Let’s say that of the 7,000 NON-DONATION seats, about 5,000 are being bought by season ticket holders. That means 16689 donation seats are being bought. 16689 x ($350 avg donation + $330 ticket) = $11,348,520 of revenue for donation seats. The non-donation seats are 5000 x $330 = 1,650,000 in revenue. REVENUE UNDER NEW MODEL: $12,998,520
These are nearly identical. I will readily admit that under the new model you are likely reaching the same amount of revenue but giving yourself a chance to maximize more revenue if you get new customers. However; I think this is a short-sighted approach because you are sacrificing 11,696 paying customers to essentially break even.
Click to expand...

I have been vocal against the "lower prices" group. I don't think the prices are great, but I believe the prices would have to be dropped too much to have a significant impact on ticket sales. Your prices show breaking even with season tickets. You recognise the lack of additional sales, but I don't think you appreciate how much those sales make.

titosantana said:
We had no problem hovering near capacity until phase 2 of Scholarship Seating came into play.

2009 50,805
2010 49,513
2011 47,714
2012 46,637
2013 47,797
2014 47,865
__________Scholarship Seating phase 1__________
2015 52,355
__________Scholarship Seating phase 2__________ Single game prices were also adjusted in either 2015 or 2016.
2016 43,814
2017 44,358
2018 37,915

Per Shama
Public Season Tickets in 2015: 27,885
Public Season Tickets as of May 2019: 20,297
Click to expand...

2018 shows attendance at 38K. According to these numbers that is 16k+ in additional sales in 2018. If the average ticket price is $65(?) then the total on those extra tickets is over 1 million. That money is needed. I am willing to bet overall attendance this year is better than last year, so this number would only go up.
 

theTurning said:
And on top of that you're losing the money they spend on food and merch and ultimately proselytizing the experience to their friends and family for years to come. It's just incredibly short-sighted, especially in a town so full of entertainment options.
Click to expand...

I don't know about food.

They can't go a full quarter without running out of pretzels some games....
 

Livingat45north said:
Totally like the idea of the deck plaza wrapping around the top of the second deck. A pretty affordable addition, and it'd really be something unique to TCF.
https://www.twincities.com/wp-conte...150915__07-aerial_TCFBankStadium_skybox-1.jpg
Click to expand...

I have been suggesting that there could be some sort of inside club/ pub space for regular fans on the north side, in that empty concourse with all the big windows above the concessions and restrooms.

That Wisconsin rendering, showing a deck somehow extended outwards from the Wisconsin Fieldhouse over the south end zone seating is a great idea for them. I think their plan includes some interior club spaces inside the old UW BB arena upper deck. (they still use it for volleyball I think, but probably can give up some space up on top)

For Minnesota building some sort of east end zone party deck would be great idea. that space above the roof, next the small scoreboard is completely unused, and would add some shelter if it covered the walkway behind the current seats and a great gathering area.

I also think this space would make the upper deck end zone seats much more attractive, as a quick space to move up to for a drink, snack or change of pace from sitting in the metal benches. I realize if they ever expand above i a major way, this space would be demolished, so they can keep it pretty simple. (concrete deck, typical outdoor Minnesota outdoor lake bar look)

PS I visit Wisconsin a lot for work and amazed that to this day these people continue with no prompting to praise the greatness of Miller Park and even the Kohl Center _both terrible, dated places. I just politely listen and say nothing.. The last guy said that Miller Park was a Cadillac relative to the Yugo that Target Field is.
 
Last edited:



I love the idea of a party deck behind the second deck east end zone seats.

-Expand first deck end zone student sections - start by reclaiming the ones they took away a few years back. For the first couple years, 119 and 131 were part of the student section. Then, they were turned to regular sales when the students quit coming to games. I believe they might have done this on the sides of the second deck student section as well. Start by turning them back to student section turf and in turn eliminate some or all of second deck student section.

-turn second deck student section into a cheaper option for season tickets and single game sales to attract more young adults and their young kids to Gopher football.

-add that entertainment area behind the east seats and use the considerable space for creative things like a place for supervised kids to let off steam, places to get drinks, etc. etc. Make it an east answer to the west's plaza, with more to do. It is already fun to linger up there just for the view. It could be a spectacular place for adults and kids alike.

Seats would fill, concessions would be purchased. Economically I am assuming it would generate more money than all those empty benches do now, game after game. Back in the metrodome years, the second deck end zone seats were used to sell cheap season tickets and attract people to get their feet in the door of Gopher football. This seems like a great place and time to do that again.

Then, imagine the laws of supply and demand. If those seats do fill, the U could raise the price over time. Seems like a lot better model than raising the prices significantly when there is no demand and then wonder where all the people went.
 

I recently turned on the Old Neighbor WCCO by accident. Hadn't listened to it in several years. First thing I hear is Chad Hartman telling listeners TCF Stadium is sub par and that is a reason more fans aren't attending. What a terrible take and station. I guess they are showing loyalty to their St. Thomas football listeners; all 14 of them?
 

DarrenTheGreek said:
dpo - We disagree on this topic and I'll give you my reasons and how I came to that conclusion. I apologize for the length of this response but I think this topic is too complex to try and summarize in a 4-5 sentence post.

Potential season-ticket holder base
First, I think give or take, our potential season ticket holder based is 35,000. The capacity of TCF is 50805. Approximately 10,000 are set aside for students and 3,000 for visitors. For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that 2000 are "premium" (i.e., suites, club) and the University will have about 1,000 they hold for their own purposes. That gets us to 34,805 so I'm just going to round up.
SUMMARIZE: 35,000 potential season ticket holders

Previous donation sections and amounts
The previous donation sections were the 16 sections between the 20’s. In my quick math, it appears that accounts for about 10,500 seats. However; a media report I saw awhile ago claimed that only 8,000 seats were originally requiring a donation. I’m going to say give the benefit of the doubt to the media and say only 8,000 seats required a donation.
These donation amounts were $100, $250 and $500. I don’t have the detail as to the size of each section and how many people were signed up but let’s just assume that the “Average” donation prior to the increase was $250.
SUMMARIZE: 8,000 seats requiring an average donation of $250

New donation sections and amounts
The media reports state that 28,000 seats now require a donation. Again, I haven’t done the math but let’s just say that the average donation amount is now $350. (Note: I think that is high but I’m trying to give the benefit of the doubt).
SUMMARIZE: 28,000 seats requiring an average donation of $350

Season Ticket Holder Numbers
Prior to the donation increases in 2014 the season ticket holder count was 33,385. This number was from a Star Tribune article I read about a year ago. Now of that 33,385, if 8,000 were paying an average seat donation of $250 and $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $4.640M. If the remaining 25,385 holders were only paying $330 for the ticket itself, that revenue would be $8.377M. TOTAL REVENUE UNDER OLD MODEL: $13,017,050
With the new donations, the 2019 season ticket holder count is 21,689. Let’s say that of the 7,000 NON-DONATION seats, about 5,000 are being bought by season ticket holders. That means 16689 donation seats are being bought. 16689 x ($350 avg donation + $330 ticket) = $11,348,520 of revenue for donation seats. The non-donation seats are 5000 x $330 = 1,650,000 in revenue. REVENUE UNDER NEW MODEL: $12,998,520
These are nearly identical. I will readily admit that under the new model you are likely reaching the same amount of revenue but giving yourself a chance to maximize more revenue if you get new customers. However; I think this is a short-sighted approach because you are sacrificing 11,696 paying customers to essentially break even.
Click to expand...

Darren - thank you for taking the time to put together this well-thought-out post. You are correct - we disagree. I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. Assuming your math above is correct, we essentially break even with higher season ticket prices. However, you look at those 11,696 lost season ticket holders as a bad thing. Assuming the revenue is essentially the same, as you've illustrated, that's a wonderful thing! Those 11,696 customers (and many others) can still buy single-game tickets and potentially return to being season ticket holders when circumstances change. Even if 25% of them buy one single-game ticket at a conservative per-ticket price of $50, that's additional revenue of nearly $600,000 - and that's just one game! Of course, I would rather have more butts in the seats if everything else is equal, but my first priority is that the football program generate as much revenue as it legally and ethically can.
 

LesBolstad said:
I recently turned on the Old Neighbor WCCO by accident. Hadn't listened to it in several years. First thing I hear is Chad Hartman telling listeners TCF Stadium is sub par and that is a reason more fans aren't attending. What a terrible take and station. I guess they are showing loyalty to their St. Thomas football listeners; all 14 of them?
Click to expand...

Did Hartman really say that? That's an idiotic take, if true, and diminishes any sports credibility good ol' dad gave him. He must never attend college games anywhere else.
 
Last edited:

I failed to mention another change I'd like to see in TCF Bank Stadium: LED lighting. TCF Bank Stadium is a wonderful venue for night games but it actually is a tad dark, and shows up on TV to be a bit dreary compared to some of the stadiums that now have LED lighting. This one is nit picking but it would be nice to have it a bit brighter in there for night games.
 

Schnauzer said:
I failed to mention another change I'd like to see in TCF Bank Stadium: LED lighting. TCF Bank Stadium is a wonderful venue for night games but it actually is a tad dark, and shows up on TV to be a bit dreary compared to some of the stadiums that now have LED lighting. This one is nit picking but it would be nice to have it a bit brighter in there for night games.
Click to expand...

That's gotta be another one of those where you sit things too.
 

Schnauzer said:
I love the idea of a party deck behind the second deck east end zone seats.

-Expand first deck end zone student sections - start by reclaiming the ones they took away a few years back. For the first couple years, 119 and 131 were part of the student section. Then, they were turned to regular sales when the students quit coming to games. I believe they might have done this on the sides of the second deck student section as well. Start by turning them back to student section turf and in turn eliminate some or all of second deck student section.

-turn second deck student section into a cheaper option for season tickets and single game sales to attract more young adults and their young kids to Gopher football.

-add that entertainment area behind the east seats and use the considerable space for creative things like a place for supervised kids to let off steam, places to get drinks, etc. etc. Make it an east answer to the west's plaza, with more to do. It is already fun to linger up there just for the view. It could be a spectacular place for adults and kids alike.

Seats would fill, concessions would be purchased. Economically I am assuming it would generate more money than all those empty benches do now, game after game. Back in the metrodome years, the second deck end zone seats were used to sell cheap season tickets and attract people to get their feet in the door of Gopher football. This seems like a great place and time to do that again.

Then, imagine the laws of supply and demand. If those seats do fill, the U could raise the price over time. Seems like a lot better model than raising the prices significantly when there is no demand and then wonder where all the people went.
Click to expand...
This a great idea. For this and other good ideas to come to fruition, those in power at the U need to swallow some pride...something I don't believe any of them have the courage to do....

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
The donation numbers weren't just there as far as tax benefits (granted for an individual that is nice) they calculate points based off "donations" and I belive other things as well so scraping the concept of donations would have thrown other systems into disarray. Causing those issues just because the tax code changed makes no sense.
Click to expand...

They can't calculate points based off of how much you pay for your ticket just the same?
 

LesBolstad said:
I recently turned on the Old Neighbor WCCO by accident. Hadn't listened to it in several years. First thing I hear is Chad Hartman telling listeners TCF Stadium is sub par and that is a reason more fans aren't attending. What a terrible take and station. I guess they are showing loyalty to their St. Thomas football listeners; all 14 of them?
Click to expand...

He is an idiot and sub par to boot. College stadiums are not NFL stadiums and TCF is one of the best college stadiums. Pretty much all Big Ten stadiums have bench seating. The bank is one of the few with an open concourse with a view of the field. He is just bitter I guess and riding the coattails of dear old Sid.

Go Gophers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 


maroonfive said:
He is an idiot and sub par to boot. College stadiums are not NFL stadiums and TCF is one of the best college stadiums. Pretty much all Big Ten stadiums have bench seating. The bank is one of the few with an open concourse with a view of the field. He is just bitter I guess and riding the coattails of dear old Sid.

Go Gophers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Chad Hartman needs to get around. I've been to games at Illinois, Iowa, Northwestern, Ohio State, and Wisconsin plus the Citrus Bowl before it was effectively rebuilt into its current form. Ohio State and Wisconsin had size and certainly atmosphere, but can't hold a candle to TCF Bank Stadium for actual spectator facilities nor can the other three Big Ten schools. I haven't been in Kinnick Stadium since the north end zone stand opposite the students was torn down and replaced by a new grandstand, but I was underwhelmed by the atmosphere due to the shallowness of the two sideline stands with single decks. The noise went up and away from the field rather than down towards it as is generally the case in a steeper multi level seating deck stadium.

People don't refuse to come to Gopher games over the stadium with the exception of some people who don't want to sit outside once the weather gets cold. The place has had some issues with handling a full to near full crowd with congestion in the concourses, long rest room and concession lines, and a lack of wi-fi overtaxing cellular data networks which then fail. However true sellouts with enough ticketed fans turning up to legitimately call it a full house have happened very rarely for the Gophers since the team fell apart in 2010, the TCU and Nebraska games in 2015 come to mind and probably nothing since. The Vikings had no trouble drawing for far worse weather and more overly taxed stadium facilities in 2014 and 2015. So no one can use such inconveniences as a real explanation or excuse for the Gophers.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Darren - thank you for taking the time to put together this well-thought-out post. You are correct - we disagree. I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. Assuming your math above is correct, we essentially break even with higher season ticket prices. However, you look at those 11,696 lost season ticket holders as a bad thing. Assuming the revenue is essentially the same, as you've illustrated, that's a wonderful thing! Those 11,696 customers (and many others) can still buy single-game tickets and potentially return to being season ticket holders when circumstances change. Even if 25% of them buy one single-game ticket at a conservative per-ticket price of $50, that's additional revenue of nearly $600,000 - and that's just one game! Of course, I would rather have more butts in the seats if everything else is equal, but my first priority is that the football program generate as much revenue as it legally and ethically can.
Click to expand...

Is this a bit?
 


I’m pretty sure gate revenue is down over the last several years but I don’t have easy access to the necessary documents at the moment. Do you? I’ll look at it later perhaps. I disagree with your post for a number of reasons including unquantifiable intangible/marketing reasons but it’ll have to wait.
 

dpodoll68 said:
Darren - thank you for taking the time to put together this well-thought-out post. You are correct - we disagree. I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. Assuming your math above is correct, we essentially break even with higher season ticket prices. However, you look at those 11,696 lost season ticket holders as a bad thing. Assuming the revenue is essentially the same, as you've illustrated, that's a wonderful thing! Those 11,696 customers (and many others) can still buy single-game tickets and potentially return to being season ticket holders when circumstances change. Even if 25% of them buy one single-game ticket at a conservative per-ticket price of $50, that's additional revenue of nearly $600,000 - and that's just one game! Of course, I would rather have more butts in the seats if everything else is equal, but my first priority is that the football program generate as much revenue as it legally and ethically can.
Click to expand...

So you prefer for the Gophers to do worse this season, in terms of attendance.

Interesting ...
 

dpodoll68 said:
I love how so many of the suggestions are in the vein of dropping ticket prices (losing revenue), minimize/lose the ads (losing revenue), allow students to bring in their own alcohol (losing revenue), make tailgating cheaper/more accessible (losing revenue), and so on. I get the feeling that if some people were given free suite tickets on the 50 yard line, a free limousine driver dropping them off at the curb, free limitless food and drink delivered to their seat, and zero ads throughout the game, they would still find a way to complain.

And then, to top it off, we are supposed to pay P.J. Fleck whatever it takes to keep him here. When you cut all the revenue streams to the bone, where is the money to pay him supposed to come from? "Not my problem!"

Some day, Gophers fans will figure out that you have to pay your fair share if you want to have a premium program.
Click to expand...

Totally agree DP. I had season tickets dating back to 2003 (FR year) and unfortunately had to drop them last year (2018) due to time constraints of driving and family situation (I'm a single Dad of a 3 year old little boy, 3 hour commute one-way on game day and so on + work and community involvement obligations). Right now, time management is important. As my son gets older, we hope to be able to attend/get ST's back but now, we make a game once, maybe twice a year. And that's fine with us. I'm not a person to tell people how to spend their money. There are a number of, I would say affordable(?), options for tickets for Game days. Just have to take your time to find them and choose what works best for your situation.

I think the U has done a pretty good job with the mobile ticket pass (I forget the official name) and various other options to try to get people in the door. Let's face it, for conference opponents, if you're getting tickets for under $20, the team is probably playing like hot garbage.
 

This is from the U NCAA financials documents

Ticket sales (football) per year

2018 11,098,000 ( 7 home games )
2017 9,989,000 (5)
2016 12,474,000 (7)
2015 10,512,137 (6)
2014 14,024,000 (6)
2013 11,474,840 (7)
2012 11,238,000 (7)

I’m not seeing all the extra revenue the price hikes brought in and in fact it looks like the opposite occurred. Sure, that trend will likely reverse in 2019 with the record. I thought it was common knowledge it’s more expensive to gain a new customer than keep an existing one. Predicting revenue on record setting seasons is a gamble...and the empty stadium look saps energy, saps enthusiasm, doesn’t look good to recruits and that’s X fewer number of future fans. Furthermore when all (or a significant chunk of ) the talk after a huge win and upcoming game is about the empty stands and fan turnout it’s not a good look and doesn’t generate enthusiasm as the place to be. A crowd attracts a crowd. Butts in the seats.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom