If anything, this confirms that the rants are justified.
Agreed. Here is how the math works out using the nine schools cited in the article above for my family to buy seats in a comparative section (with apologies for the crude editing from excel):
Gopher Ticket Price Comparison and Rankings for similar seats
Seat Location: Chairbacks in Section 137.
School BaseTicket Donation Total Variance Avg@7Gm Variance PerGameCost for 4
Nebraska $392.00 $1,000.00 $1,392.00 $797.33 $198.86 $163.29 $795.43
Minnesota $310.00 $500.00 $810.00 $215.33 $115.71 $30.76 $462.86
Michigan $455.00 $350.00 $805.00 $210.33 $115.00 $30.05 $460.00 **
Penn State $355.00 $100.00 $455.00 $(139.67) $65.00 $(19.95) $260.00
Iowa $395.00 $50.00 $445.00 $(149.67) $63.57 $(21.38) $254.29
Wisconsin $315.00 $100.00 $415.00 $(179.67) $59.29 $(25.67) $237.14
MichiganSt $308.00 $100.00 $408.00 $(186.67) $58.29 $(26.67) $233.14
Purdue $273.00 $100.00 $373.00 $(221.67) $53.29 $(31.67) $213.14
N'western $249.00 $- $249.00 $(345.67) $35.57 $(49.38) $142.29
Averages: $339.11 $255.56 $594.67 $84.95 $339.81
**Donation was either $200 or $350, I used the higher donation for comparative purposes.
When you look at the numbers, it will cost my family more to attend a game than anywhere other than Nebraska. We own 4 tickets and have used them for bringing our kids to a couple of games and friends to other games. Normally, we pay for our friends in an effort to grow our tailgate group. Our existing group is a core of 10 (with 12 tickets). 2 tickets will be gone from one couple for sure and we will likely give up 2 of our seats. We have had our tickets since graduation from the University in 1994 and have attended all home games other than 2 (both for stupid weddings in Chicago and NYC) in that time. My wife and I are alumni and donate annually to the Golden Gopher Fund, CLA and belong to UMAA. Our donations to each of those areas will be reduced accordingly. The end result for the University will simply be a rough reallocation of the dollars I provide them from a couple of areas to effectively the Golden Gopher Fund. We are not large contributors by any sense of the word, but we donate just over 4 figure amounts annually with lifetime donations in the low/mid 5 figure range. Our cost effective rises from the current rate of $44/game to $115 per game with the donation. We are fortunate enough to be financially secure to swing this if we wish to, but as long time supporters of the program, it is a bitter pill to swallow and one that will get looked at carefully. It certainly makes a customer feel unappreciated after spending many dollars for the Wacker years, Mase's meltdowns and the Brewster debacle. Business history is full of companies that lost their way after making seemingly smart decisions. Somewhere there was a guy who thought that "New Coke" was a great call. Somewhere there was a guy at Kodak who said that digital cameras would never catch on. Will this be Norwood's "New Coke" moment?
The cons that I see with this are the following:
- Alienates your most loyal clientele while not having a replacement client base.
- While generating additional dollars, it will generate fewer bodies in seats, in particular the best seats.
- Recruiting benefits from dollars for scholarships, but is somewhat offset by a lesser gameday atmosphere when on official visits.
- Likely more visiting fans in the seats via corporate seats similar to Mariucci.
- Likely redirects small donors who would otherwise donate to the facilities drive.
- Pushes some to view Gopher athletics as a value rather than affinity sale (i.e. We want results when we pay that much over the norm)
The pros that I see with this:
- Shores up ability of Ath Dept to be independently operated without general funds injection or borrowings.
- Dollars go to the Scholarship Fund to pay cost of attendance for non-revenue sport athletes if required (i.e. the dollars go to student-athletes not administrators).
- Allows other donations to be directed to the facilities plan rather than splitting between scholarship funding and facility planning.
Overall, I think this plan is ill-conceived and will hurt the University with both the public at large and with their season ticketholders. The rollout was mishandled without question which leads one to believe that there is a certain amount of tone-deafness to the process as a whole. I suspect that The Aspire Group who handles ticket sales and I believe I heard did the study for this plan has done a good job with statistical analysis and comparative study, but made the simple mistake of not understanding the marketplace. They wouldn't be the first to do so without question.
