Football-friendly ticket policy angers some U students

Donate To GopherHole
The Governor and complaining U students are an embarrassment to the state of Minnesota on this issue.
 

I really hope they raise the price of hockey tickets because of this. I'd love to see tickets jump to $150.
 


GopherinPhilly said:
First off, Gov Dayton is a rich, spoiled out of touch dbag and the state doesn't fund the Athletics department so they can pound sand for all I care.
That said, I appreciate the frustration if you don't want to buy football tickets and then got locked out of hockey tickets, but guess what...thats the way it is. People are pissed because they have to make donations to get the best seats, but thats the way it is. We want to compete in all our sports...we must raise revenue. If bundling raises revenue by selling more football tickets then bully for the U! If you can't afford it or don't want it, then bully for you, dont buy it. But the idea that this practice is somehow unfair is idiotic...but the solution is simple. Next year, don't bundle hockey tickets with football, just triple the price of hockey tickets and cut the cost of football tickets in half. Supply and demand will balance it all out. Bully for econ 101!
Click to expand...

You are dead on. Next year the value / deal will be gone and hockey only students will pay through the nose!
 

17thAveHallofFame said:
As a current student here that is a 3-sport ticket holder here is my problem with the hockey whiners. From what I've experienced many of the UofM hockey fans don't give a crap about any of the other sports at the U, which is upsetting to me. They are the ones who instead of supporting basketball and football will actually openly make fun of them for not "winning championships" (not in a tongue in cheek kind of way like we some of us do when football loses). A large portion of the hockey only season ticket holders also happen to just be girls jersey chasing and supporting "their guys."

I sound jaded but honestly I don't care that much, I love Gopher hockey. Of course the hockey only fans have a right to only enjoy hockey, but "their" season tickets were sold out to other UofM students who decided to support more than just one sport at the U. That last sentence is worth repeating because it is the end all of this argument. These hockey tickets were legitimately sold out to other students, it really isn't unfair, it's the way life works.

I know a lot of the guys in MSA so I haven't heard the name of this idiot who wrote up the resolution but he has to be the most entitled sounding jackwagon on the student board and needs to get a grip on how life works.
Click to expand...

My favorite part about this statement is the U even called out in their press release that season tickets for hockey have sold out in the past leaving some students (i.e., a sh!t ton of students) on the outside looking in (it gets cold in winter).

You know what? SCREW IT: NO MORE TICKETS! FIRST COME FIRST SERVED! Dibs on the luxury boxes.

They had ample time to buy tickets. So do it.
 


bonin21 said:
They were $150 a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Man, I'd love to fast forward to May just to see if the U has the balls to do it. They'll sell out regardless, and it's be a nice FU to the handful of whiners who couldn't be caught dead at a Football game.

This wasn't about money. This was about maintaining their image of hating on basketball and football.
 

1) Hockey is in high demand and always sells out. We want more students at football and it doesn't sell out. Solution: Raise the hockey ticket prices, and do more promos (such as certain number of FREE student tickets) for football games. Maybe hockey tickets need to be a lot more expensive to balance supply and demand.


2) It is downright laughable and embarrassing for a state Governor to weigh in on, and apply pressure to change, a University sports ticket promotion.
 





The Governor is a hockey guy and is like most entitled hockey folks. Hockey arenas in this state get more public funding than sport and below the D1 and Pro level there isn't a one that breaks even. Most lose $150,000 or more a year. The hockey people have money and more than most, so the Governor has to make them happy heading into the election.

However, the U should not have not tied Hockey student tickets to football for students. Just lower the cost of Football tickets. They proved that they could get 10,000 student to games under Mason. They can get there again.
 

Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use? If this were any other product this would be met with understandable irritation. How many of you have ever cried foul when your cable company tries to pull this $h!t? If you have, you have NO right to talk. I don't blame these students in the slightest, and I'm not even much of a hockey guy. When you're a full-time student, eighty bucks is an awful lot to pay for something you don't need, don't want, and won't use. But because it's our beloved Gopher athletic department, we're willing to throw common sense to the wind.

Natural-born butt kissers, the lot of you. (And I'll bet any reply to this post is going to accuse me of being a Badger fan).
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use? If this were any other product this would be met with understandable irritation. How many of you have ever cried foul when your cable company tries to pull this $h!t? If you have, you have NO right to talk. I don't blame these students in the slightest, and I'm not even much of a hockey guy. When you're a full-time student, eighty bucks is an awful lot to pay for something you don't need, don't want, and won't use. But because it's our beloved Gopher athletic department, we're willing to throw common sense to the wind.

Natural-born butt kissers, the lot of you. (And I'll bet any reply to this post is going to accuse me of being a Badger fan).
Click to expand...

Valid points. But a lot students absolutely want to go to games for both teams. So they bought the tickets at a lower price than previous years because they could buy them as a package deal.

For most customers of a cable company, you are buying TV services and would like internet. They bundle them together to give you a discount. Whereas the alternative is getting services from two different companies.

Sure, open up single season sport season ticket packages when the bundles go on sale. Fine. But to say the U is trying to get more money out of students is completely false. Ticket prices didn't spike and you got a discount for buying tickets for multiple sports.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use? If this were any other product this would be met with understandable irritation. How many of you have ever cried foul when your cable company tries to pull this $h!t? If you have, you have NO right to talk. I don't blame these students in the slightest, and I'm not even much of a hockey guy. When you're a full-time student, eighty bucks is an awful lot to pay for something you don't need, don't want, and won't use. But because it's our beloved Gopher athletic department, we're willing to throw common sense to the wind.

Natural-born butt kissers, the lot of you. (And I'll bet any reply to this post is going to accuse me of being a Badger fan).
Click to expand...

You're such a BADger fan :p
 



Didn't realize the G-Governor had this kind of sway with President K-Kaler. I mean he's not even an University alumnus...d-damn cheeky Eli if you a-ask me!
 

Good. Then they should keep the option to buy bundled season tickets without compelling people who don't want them to pay for them.

The kind of action that the students took here was necessary in this case because, like most cable companies, the Athletics Department enjoys a local monopoly. The students have no one else they can buy this product from (unlike in a hypothetical free market, where if a company is charging too much or selling a good you don't want, you can look for another company who is selling a more desirable product and/or selling it at a better price). To restrict their choices like this just seems like an anti-customer policy to me.

I engage with multiple Gopher sports, too. Mostly basketball, but also football, and due to a family connection I keep tabs on the swim team and other Olympic sports. But I don't think forcing people to do the same is a good way to be carrying on.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use?
Click to expand...

Is it really that hard to understand that that's the way the world works? When I say hold the vegetables when I order a meal at a restaurant, do they lower the price? Nope. When I want to watch the Vikings play Green Bay, do I have to pay for an exhibition game ticket? Yep. When I wanted to watch the Gophers and Badgers play at the dome, did I have to pay for a ticket to the Toledo game? Yep. Can I just pay for ESPN without paying for ESPN2? Nope.

The student section at Mariucci Arena will be packed his year because University of Minnesota students bought hockey season tickets. All students had that opportunity.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use? If this were any other product this would be met with understandable irritation. How many of you have ever cried foul when your cable company tries to pull this $h!t? If you have, you have NO right to talk. I don't blame these students in the slightest, and I'm not even much of a hockey guy. When you're a full-time student, eighty bucks is an awful lot to pay for something you don't need, don't want, and won't use. But because it's our beloved Gopher athletic department, we're willing to throw common sense to the wind. Natural-born butt kissers, the lot of you. (And I'll bet any reply to this post is going to accuse me of being a Badger fan).
Click to expand...

Is it really that hard to understand that the true value of a student hockey ticket is $174 and the football ticket was a freebie so that the football games would be better attended, more fun, and less embarrassing when ESPN pans the student section with their cameras?
 

Maximus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that that's the way the world works? When I say hold the vegetables when I order a meal at a restaurant, do they lower the price? Nope. When I want to watch the Vikings play Green Bay, do I have to pay for an exhibition game ticket? Yep. When I wanted to watch the Gophers and Badgers play at the dome, did I have to pay for a ticket to the Toledo game? Yep. Can I just pay for ESPN without paying for ESPN2? Nope.
Click to expand...

Or, to translate this into what you're actually saying: "I don't have an argument. Things are the way they are because they are the way they are because they are the way they are."

But you know what? Let's set THAT insurmountable flaw aside, as well as the fact that it's a lousy attitude to have, and the fact that some of these comparisons aren't even relevant (a separate and complete product is a very different matter from a side dish). Imagine for a moment that these policies didn't exist before. And then imagine that suddenly the policy changed and customers WERE put on the hook for these things. You'd expect the customers would complain, right? Nobody likes it when they have to pay for something that they didn't before.

Or are you saying they shouldn't complain? Do you think the customer should be a doormat who just swallows any old crap that gets shoveled their way?
 

Sudsy Gopher said:
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

So the stupid, income-laundering, drug-addled, Trust Troll is telling one of the State's few genuine leaders what to do. Holy Hanna.
 

badgergopher said:
Is it really that hard to understand that the true value of a student hockey ticket is $174 and the football ticket was a freebie so that the football games would be better attended, more fun, and less embarrassing when ESPN pans the student section with their cameras?
Click to expand...

Students do not have an obligation, financial or otherwise, to make the fan section look good on Saturdays. They already pay their tuition and do their classwork, which is the full extent of their obligation to the University. They can go "woo" in front of the camera if they think it's fun (and if they do, great - I did my share of wooing at the Barn), but I don't see how it's productive to force them to do so.

If the U wants to suspend their discount, by all means, they can do so. Just don't be surprised when the student section turns up empty.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Or, to translate this into what you're actually saying: "I don't have an argument. Things are the way they are because they are the way they are because they are the way they are."

But you know what? Let's set THAT insurmountable flaw aside, as well as the fact that it's a lousy attitude to have, and the fact that some of these comparisons aren't even relevant (a separate and complete product is a very different matter from a side dish). Imagine for a moment that these policies didn't exist before. And then imagine that suddenly the policy changed and customers WERE put on the hook for these things. You'd expect the customers would complain, right? Nobody likes it when they have to pay for something that they didn't before.

Or are you saying they shouldn't complain? Do you think the customer should be a doormat who just swallows any old crap that gets shoveled their way?
Click to expand...

Wow. Pointing out others fallacies. Hmmmm well you only chose cable companies because you knew people already have a negative connotation of them and then made the big stretch to say that they are the same as gopher athletics. Appealing to emotions and faulty analogy. Shenanigans
 

Com_Cool said:
Wow. Pointing out others fallacies. Hmmmm well you only chose cable companies because you knew people already have a negative connotation of them and then made the big stretch to say that they are the same as gopher athletics. Appealing to emotions and faulty analogy. Shenanigans
Click to expand...

No, I chose cable companies because, like Gopher athletics, cable companies possess local monopolies. Where I live, I don't have a choice of carrier - it's Frontier Communications or nothing. This is the case in a great number of places. They are not "the same," but it's a comparable situation. (Like all monopolies, both college athletics and cable service monopolies are enabled and bolstered by the state, but let's try not to get too deeply immersed into politics, shall we?)
 

As an alumni, I pay $700 + change for one season ticket. A student pays $179 for Hockey and gets football free. Where is the problem. I would love to see 4,000 students at each hockey game and less empty corporate seats, but most of those cooperate seats are bringing in $1,000 or more when you add in premium seating cost. Bottom line is, they have to make as much money as possible in the three profitable sports to pay for the other 17 that are loosing money.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
No, I chose cable companies because, like Gopher athletics, cable companies possess local monopolies. Where I live, I don't have a choice of carrier - it's Frontier Communications or nothing. This is the case in a great number of places. They are not "the same," but it's a comparable situation. (Like all monopolies, both college athletics and cable service monopolies are enabled and bolstered by the state, but let's try not to get too deeply immersed into politics, shall we?)
Click to expand...

Where is the monopoly for Gopher football or hockey? I would argue that the professional sports (to my chagrin) are more popular and more expensive. Your main argument relies on the fact that they are charging monopoly inflated prices which they are not. There is also other division I college hockey in the state.
 

dlw4gophers said:
As an alumni, I pay $700 + change for one season ticket. A student pays $179 for Hockey and gets football free. Where is the problem. I would love to see 4,000 students at each hockey game and less empty corporate seats, but most of those cooperate seats are bringing in $1,000 or more when you add in premium seating cost. Bottom line is, they have to make as much money as possible in the three profitable sports to pay for the other 17 that are loosing money.
Click to expand...

Alumni aren't currently accruing thousands of dollars in student loans to pay their tuition like most of the students are.

In both cases, students and alumni, the Athletics Department is charging as much as they can get away with. Most students couldn't possibly pay that much for tickets, so they don't charge that much. (This part isn't a complaint, just an observation).
 

Com_Cool said:
Where is the monopoly for Gopher football or hockey? I would argue that the professional sports (to my chagrin) are more popular and more expensive. There is also other division I college hockey in the state.
Click to expand...

A student of the University of Minnesota can effectively be ruled out of the market for season tickets for other schools. You might have a few grad students who went to undergrad at other institutions who might have an interest, but that's it. They're the only game in town for these students when it comes to college sports - and any Vikings/Wild ticket packages beyond the single game level are expensive enough to price college students out of the market. The Athletic Department holds all the leverage here - they could have flatly said "no."

It's to the credit of Teague, Kaler, and the Department that they conceded anyway. It's a sign that they really do care about the students - a rare instance of a college sports administrator actually sticking to the mythological integrity the NCAA so often fails to adhere to.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Or, to translate this into what you're actually saying: "I don't have an argument. Things are the way they are because they are the way they are because they are the way they are."

But you know what? Let's set THAT insurmountable flaw aside, as well as the fact that it's a lousy attitude to have, and the fact that some of these comparisons aren't even relevant (a separate and complete product is a very different matter from a side dish). Imagine for a moment that these policies didn't exist before. And then imagine that suddenly the policy changed and customers WERE put on the hook for these things. You'd expect the customers would complain, right? Nobody likes it when they have to pay for something that they didn't before.

Or are you saying they shouldn't complain? Do you think the customer should be a doormat who just swallows any old crap that gets shoveled their way?
Click to expand...

So, to be clear, you are asking us to completely throw aside all precedent (which by the way is what legal rulings are based upon), and IN ADDITION, apply an alternate reality as a thought exercise to this situation?

In that case, yes I agree, in some alternate fantasy universe of yours where seller behavior is completely different than current reality, this scenario may make me upset. Fortunately, we live in the real world and this is a perfectly reasonable, intelligent, business-savvy, and legitimate way to sell a good and/or service.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
A student of the University of Minnesota can effectively be ruled out of the market for season tickets for other schools. You might have a few grad students who went to undergrad at other institutions who might have an interest, but that's it. They're the only game in town for these students when it comes to college sports - and any Vikings/Wild ticket packages beyond the single game level are expensive enough to price college students out of the market. The Athletic Department holds all the leverage here - they could have flatly said "no."

It's to the credit of Teague, Kaler, and the Department that they conceded anyway. It's a sign that they really do care about the students - a rare instance of a college sports administrator actually sticking to the mythological integrity the NCAA so often fails to adhere to.
Click to expand...

Do you feel that 175 dollars is a monopoly inflated price?
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Good. Then they should keep the option to buy bundled season tickets without compelling people who don't want them to pay for them.
Click to expand...

They didn't. Single sport ticket packages were available when the school year started for Basketball and Hockey. Or you could buy a bundle ahead of the school year for a discount. Hockey tickets sold out, so if you didn't buy early, you were out of luck. So either students wanted to buy two season ticket packages anyway and took advantage of the opportunity, or students decided that $174 was the value of a hockey ticket and the football tickets were a nice bonus.

What's so hard to understand that a team that almost won a National Title and is at the top of all preseason polls would have a huge demand among the student population to watch the games?

The after effect? More students have been showing up to Gopher football games and the hockey student section is once again sold out. As it would have been anyway.
 

BBQ Platypus said:
Is it really that hard to understand that when people buy something, they DON'T want to pay extra for something they'll never use? If this were any other product this would be met with understandable irritation. How many of you have ever cried foul when your cable company tries to pull this $h!t? If you have, you have NO right to talk. I don't blame these students in the slightest, and I'm not even much of a hockey guy. When you're a full-time student, eighty bucks is an awful lot to pay for something you don't need, don't want, and won't use. But because it's our beloved Gopher athletic department, we're willing to throw common sense to the wind.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is a terrible argument ... literally no understanding of business or economics.

Think of it this way: the hockey tickets are in very high demand, and so as a basic business decision the U could justifiably decide, let's raise student hockey prices to $175. Still not anywhere near "true" market value [we know this from sales of regular/corp tix at Mariucci], so students get a break, but more realistic. The U could also decide, although it wouldn't have to, let's throw in free football tickets as an added bonus -- you can use them or not, as you wish. Nobody should have any problem with that arrangement.

So what you people are really complaining about is (a) you didn't anticipate that the packages would cause the hockey tickets to sell out this summer and you missed the boat, and (b) the marketing/packaging of the deal (which again might go back to (a), that because of the way it was marketed you didn't really realize that high package sales inevitably meant hockey tickets gone).
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom