Very interesting: How Michigan Football's Greed Alienated Fans

Donate To GopherHole

Spoofin said:
I can give you twelve other reasons that have nothing to do with $. Most have to do with the type of Women that prefer house parties over the bar.
Click to expand...

Eh, the bar girls and the house party girls are one and the same. One is a cheaper date. The frat party girls, on the other hand...
...anyway, back to topic - costs are probably not being lowered because they are not regaining attendance by slightly lowering ticket prices, therefore they maximize revenues by charging the diehards more. This is a terrible long-term model, as it keeps a lot of would-be fans away. But modern American economics are all about short-term profits, and for that it works.
 

cncmin said:
Eh, the bar girls and the house party girls are one and the same. One is a cheaper date. The frat party girls, on the other hand...
...anyway, back to topic - costs are probably not being lowered because they are not regaining attendance by slightly lowering ticket prices, therefore they maximize revenues by charging the diehards more. This is a terrible long-term model, as it keeps a lot of would-be fans away. But modern American economics are all about short-term profits, and for that it works.
Click to expand...

This lazy rhetoric is often thrown around but never with any basis or backing in fact. Because you once heard the bankers made some bad trades that ultimately going bad on them the 'modern American [economy]" is only concerned with short-termed profits? Boy, don't tell that to telecommunications companies that are dumping billions into infrastructure (world-class) or the pharma industry who continues to pave the way for revolutionary drugs world-wide via massive R&D budgets. If you can find me some scientific proof that show that business today is more short-term focused than it used to be I'll be shocked because much like sayings like 'kids these days' our memory seems to only remember the good of the days gone bye withour realizing that maybe there was some crud along the way including in the philosophy of the American economy (including a real estate bubble in Florida that broke in 1920!).

Here's what matters. Due to changing demographics and ammenities, fans don't value going to games anymore because there are other options. The same thing is happening in retail. You'd never say that Target/Wal-Mart are putting short term dollars ahead of long term profit because the revolutionary change has nothing to do with them, much to their detriment. It's shifting social norms and the U of M is caught up in their own version much like the rest of college football.
 


maroonedinCA said:
This lazy rhetoric is often thrown around but never with any basis or backing in fact. Because you once heard the bankers made some bad trades that ultimately going bad on them the 'modern American [economy]" is only concerned with short-termed profits? Boy, don't tell that to telecommunications companies that are dumping billions into infrastructure (world-class) or the pharma industry who continues to pave the way for revolutionary drugs world-wide via massive R&D budgets. If you can find me some scientific proof that show that business today is more short-term focused than it used to be I'll be shocked because much like sayings like 'kids these days' our memory seems to only remember the good of the days gone bye withour realizing that maybe there was some crud along the way including in the philosophy of the American economy (including a real estate bubble in Florida that broke in 1920!).

Here's what matters. Due to changing demographics and ammenities, fans don't value going to games anymore because there are other options. The same thing is happening in retail. You'd never say that Target/Wal-Mart are putting short term dollars ahead of long term profit because the revolutionary change has nothing to do with them, much to their detriment. It's shifting social norms and the U of M is caught up in their own version much like the rest of college football.
Click to expand...

If there is are exceptions to the general trend I alluded to of corporations aiming for short-term profits to satisfy shareholders and other controlling entities, then my statement is proven false and I am supposed to "scientifically prove" a one-sentence general statement to satisfy your personal whims? Quality.

Your statement implies that greatly increased prices from tickets to concessions to parking - which are clearly profit-driven tactics - has an insignificant effect on ticket sales, which in turn has an insignificant effect on the long-term stability of fanbases. OK (?).

As a personal example, the NFL and NBA, due to obscene ticket prices and commercial-to-live action ratios on television, have largely lost me as a customer. I used to be strong fans of both. This year, I watched zero minutes of NBA basketball, and about a dozen total hours of NFL. College basketball, with excessive TV timeouts, has made all but Gopher games nearly unwatchable to me. College football appears to be progressing in the same direction. One can try to flip through 3 to 4 college football games on TV and a large portion of the time, all of those games will be on commercial break. Yikes already. And because I have lost interest in sporting leagues in general, I have little need for sporting networks such as ESPN anymore, which I watch less now than I did when I was watching Australian Rules Football and CFL football on ESPN as a child.

I don't even like watching soccer (because of the lack of action), but I found myself intrigued in meaningless World Cup games recently because it was never interrupted by stupid commercials (whereupon I'd surely have changed the channel). I understand how large the TV profits are for sports, and the tactics taken make strong short-term economic sense. This is more than clear by the excessive money in sports in 2014. But it doesn't seem like a tenable track to the long-term stability of professional sports, and college sports are earnestly following the pro sport economic models. Maybe I'm the only one getting turned off of the sports scene. Maybe not.
 


I think it is relevant to discuss the presence of the Vikings. I know there is disagreement on this board about how much having an NFL team hurts the Gophers. I certainly think it hurts more if we try to be the NFL JV team. What I mean by that is that the more our college football experience resembles the NFL experience, the more likely the Gophers are to be treated like a second-rate product to the Vikings. We have something that the Vikings don't with the fanfare, the alumni, and the marching band. Every time there is a break and we are piping in stadium music or running some absurd promotion rather than hearing our marching band, we are giving up what makes us different and what our advantage is over the Vikings. If the U tries to make Gopher football be more like an NFL experience, then we are the second best NFL show in town. If the U treats college football like college football, then we are the best college football show in the state.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I think it is relevant to discuss the presence of the Vikings. I know there is disagreement on this board about how much having an NFL team hurts the Gophers. I certainly think it hurts more if we try to be the NFL JV team. What I mean by that is that the more our college football experience resembles the NFL experience, the more likely the Gophers are to be treated like a second-rate product to the Vikings. We have something that the Vikings don't with the fanfare, the alumni, and the marching band. Every time there is a break and we are piping in stadium music or running some absurd promotion rather than hearing our marching band, we are giving up what makes us different and what our advantage is over the Vikings. If the U tries to make Gopher football be more like an NFL experience, then we are the second best NFL show in town. If the U treats college football like college football, then we are the best college football show in the state.
Click to expand...


Very, very, very well said.
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
 

cncmin said:
Yeah, well there's a reason the kids preferred to go to the $5 all-you-can-drink house party as opposed to the $5-per-drink bar.
Click to expand...

I still think dpodoll68 has a point. If this was a "college town", the giveaway may be more effective. When there are so many other options, I do think you have to put some price on it. I learned that from DJing days. BTW $5 for all you can drink is a price. $5 vs $5 dollars is really just assessing what is the better value.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom