If you must fill the donor sections with nondonors something is wrong. You could reduce the size of your donor sections, but I guess that requires work. I'm all for a full stadium, but there is a reason you have donor sections. I want every breathing soul at out games, but I also want the privledges that come with being a donor. At this point there are few if any privledges to donating. Again sorry for not donating soley out of the goodness of my heart, I'm just an awful person.
FB "mini-packs" (3 or 4 game)
- Thread starter NWIAclone
- Start date
You still end up in the same situation. You will sit crappy relative to the other donors like you are now, therefore having you sit next to a bunch of non-donors AND those non-donors having better seats than the original plan...
People are complaining about donating more than their section. Like donating $1,000 but sitting in the $500 section.
For example, let's say that you donate $1000, but you can only get into
Section 12 instead of 11. You end up having people around you that either donated less, or didn't donate at all (and bought a single or minipack)
How let's say the donor seating was reduced. Let's say that Section 11 is now the $500 section and Section 10 is now the $1000 section.
You will donate your $1,000 but likely end up in Section 11 instead of 10 (therefore not sitting at your donor level). People will be able to by singles or minipacks in your same section. You now have people buying singles or minipacks and sitting in a better section in this scenario (Section 11) instead of the other scenario (Section 12).
You can do it with the $100 section. Let's say that Section 14 becomes non-donor and Section 13 is now the $100 section. You donate $100, and sit in Section 13 (the old $250 section). You then have non-donors still sitting right next to you, except they are in Section 14 instead of Section 15. So now the non-donors are getting better seats than in the previous scenario.
Hopefully that makes sense. You end up getting better seats than now, but so will the non-donors, and you'll still complain about this problem.
The only way to solve this problem, IMO, is simply to sell out the donor sections, and that won't happen until we put a product on the field that gets the fans excited, and when the economy bounces back.
Okay, I understand your answer now. However, I don't think Cyclone06 was talking about non-donors getting better seats than they have now, but rather getting better seats than donors. Or maybe I misunderstood there, too.
Yes, sell out the donor sections. Make them smaller, to fit the actual donor level. OR leave the donor sections the size they are, and when mini-packs are offered, DO NOT allow them to contain seats in donor areas. People will see some of those seats open game after game and ask about them next year, leading to increased donor/season ticket sales. If the only way to buy a seat is to have a donation at the level it commands, eventually either people will donate for an opportunity to sit there or the donor sections will be reduced in size.
Or not.
I get what you guys are saying, it's just that the athletic dept is always going to drink the kool-aid and believe donations will increase.
Let's say you reduce the amount of donor seating we have now and only donors can sit in the donor sections. For this upcoming year, it'd probably be fine. But what if 4 or 5 years down the road, the team gets better, ticket demand increases?
Well the athletic dept will then increase the amount of donor seating again. You will have the effect that happened not too long ago, where you'd force people to donate or to donate more to keep their seats. When my friends went from donating $100 to $250, they were kind of ****** about it, but still did it. If their seats went back to $100, they'd be happy, but if 2 years later they bumped it back up to $250 then they'd be bothered again and may not donate at all. It's a matter of business to incrementally increase donations, but the effect of slashing and raising prices will be negative.
I think offering seats in donor sections helps with minipack sales. Casual fans want to get decent seats, and there are a lot that hate hillsides. If the Cys Pack and End Zone do not have a lot of availability, then I think it makes sense to put people where the seat is open.
Again, I view the whole mini-pack sales thing as something that the athletic department would ideally NOT want to do. I view these as trying to cut their losses. They are season ticket seats they could not sell, and they could not collect donations on.
The combination of this rebuilding combined with the economy I believe has a big effect on these season tickets. Let's face it, there aren't 30,000 hardcore football fans. There are a good amount that are casual fans, that only want to go if the team is going to be good.
My friends parents in law are a good example. They get season tickets every year and live in Ankeny. At the beginning they will go to the games. Once the team starts to fade and/or if they stop going. They still renew, but money isn't that big of an issue for them. There are others who behave in the same way, but the money is more significant and may opt not to renew.
Now, going back to the original issue. What you are displaying is the nature of our society. You don't really care about where you are at, you care where you are at relative to people around you.
It isn't good enough that you donate money, help the department, and get pretty good seats. If someone who donated less got those same seats, then it's giong to bother you. You can't be happy with your status, but only your status relative to those around you.
I don't know you guys, but I would assume that if you made enough money to pay all of your bills, live comfortably, pay for your kids college, have enough for retirement, etc., you wouldn't feel good about it if everyone around you was able to do so but took an easier route. Instead of looking how great your life is, it's just all about how those lazy bastards are at the same level as you but did less.
You are the only ones who can control how you feel. Donating to the department helps a lot. It goes a long way. If knowing that you're helping the department achieve it's goals more than some of the others around you doesn't make you feel good, then that's the way you feel and honestly there's no way to change that.
Life isn't fair. Some people go to school for 10 years to make $150,000 a year. Others may come up with a brilliant idea and become millionaires.
Is it fair that you pay what you do to get your seats and others pay less to seat in similar seats for a portion of the season? No. But if you enjoy your seats, have fun at the game and are able to afford to do it does it really matter that much? Are you honestly allowing for people you don't know that happen to not donate ruin your experience? I had hillside tickets for the Nebraska game, but I snunk to seats on the 50 in an expensive donor section. From looking around, everyone around me still had a good time, and I didn't ruin their day...
You can't control what others do, but you can control your attitude. You guys are lucky you can be in a position where you can donate money and get season tickets. Others of us are behind on our bills, getting creditors calling us every day, and stressing out about more important things in life. There are a lot of people that would switch places with you.
Now you don't want us to say that you're fortunate, but you are. Obviously you don't feel that way, but if you look around, step back and realize the important things in life, you will see that blowing a gasket over football tickets is petty.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
My manager at work was talking about this mini-pack this morning. He was ecstatic about the whole thing.
For context, he's a UT grad, and he was comparing the prices to buying tickets for a game down there at UT, and it blew his mind that he could have anything resembling good seats. Apparently, he loves the upper-deck seats the most.
For context, he's a UT grad, and he was comparing the prices to buying tickets for a game down there at UT, and it blew his mind that he could have anything resembling good seats. Apparently, he loves the upper-deck seats the most.
I love upper-deck also. I like to see the play unfolding in front of me. IMO, when you're lower you get more of a feel to the speed of the game, but you miss on some key vantage points.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I like where we are, on the high end of the lower deck. I've never watched from the upper-deck, but I think it would be a blast.
But this is the point. If they were hillsides only, do you think he buys them? Maybe, but he'll be more excited if they are better seats. He isn't an ISU alum so he's probably not ever considering ISU season tickets.
He doesn't sound like a guy holding out hoping for a mini-pack, but rather jumping on the mini-pack because it's a good deal. That's what the athletic dept wants, instead of having empties.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
We're agreeing too much, so I need to find something to flame you about.
He's exactly the guy they're looking for. He's 50+, and not looking to sit on the grass.
If it were just hillsides, I am pretty sure he'd pass.
On a strange plus side, buying the tickets was kind of his stress outlet after a day of laying off a third of our production employees. Sounds like that announcement was sudden for him, too:no:
Friend and I sat in pretty decent donor seats last year and got in trouble for "standing up to often". Old fart ran and told security we stood to often......forgive me for praising a great play! I almost prefer upper deck now. (they seem to encourage the drinking of a flask as well!)
NO BAD SEATS IN JACK TRICE SO LETS FILL THEM UP!!!:biggrin:
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
revkah is told to sit down often. She's on the short side, so she stands a lot. Apparently, people have trouble seeing over a woman that isn't even 5 feet tall.:wideeyed:
Plus we never get told to sit down. We sit in the second row of the upper deck so we never have to look over people ahead of us as well
I'm saying you change it each year to fit the demand. They could go back to the same set up next year, knowing that there may need to be a section shrink prior to tickets going out for reallignment, if the section does not fill up. Once the place sells out, the whole stadium is donor, and we're filling in the south end and winning big 12s
I'm thinking they do not do this because there are so many people who probably choose to sit in a spot outside of their donor sections, or would not want to move if higher level space remained open.
I will trust that this is the most economical way to pack the stadium every week, and in the end, aside from more Ws, thats what I want.
That reminds of an experience my brother and I had at Kinnick in 2006. I was offered tickets 20 rows up on the 50 for the Purdue game that year, and of course I jumped at them. I remember being told at least 1/2 a dozen times throughout the course of the game to sit down by the blue hairs and donors seated around me.
Fast forward to Senior Day later that year against Wisconsin, which my brother and I also had tickets for. This time we were in the North end zone, all the way at the top under one of the auxiliary scoreboards. It was around 35 degrees that day, and I had smuggled 4 bottles of Baileys inside my coat, which I proceeded to mix into my coffee. No one said a thing.
Give me the "cheap" seats anytime. I don't like being told to sit down, or that I'm being too loud. I like a little blue language every once in a while.
MPLS
Well written post expressig your views. Thank you.
Do not agree, but I appreciate the post as written.
The challenge I have is you are equating someone having a problem with this to a negative in their personality. That is an assumption and assertion your part, judging them and their reasons for concerns.
Again most that have expressed concern really have not had a big problem with the min-paks it has to do with the overall donor benefits, implementation etc.
And yes, frankly, if you are told that you have to make do x to qualify for these benefits and then this is suspended later, then they do have a discussion point and should not be told just to be happy that they can donate.
We agree to disagree.
Well written post expressig your views. Thank you.
Do not agree, but I appreciate the post as written.
The challenge I have is you are equating someone having a problem with this to a negative in their personality. That is an assumption and assertion your part, judging them and their reasons for concerns.
Again most that have expressed concern really have not had a big problem with the min-paks it has to do with the overall donor benefits, implementation etc.
And yes, frankly, if you are told that you have to make do x to qualify for these benefits and then this is suspended later, then they do have a discussion point and should not be told just to be happy that they can donate.
We agree to disagree.
I get what you're saying and I appreciate the response.
We just see things like this all the time:
Getting a free rental car upgrade, getting comped in a room at Vegas, etc.
I had friends who went on a honeymoon to Cancun. The place they stayed was only 25% full and they got upgraded to a big suite with a private pool, for almost nothing extra. I am sure there was someone at that hotel that booked a similar room at the normal price.
What about someone who buys a $60 shirt, only to see it on a clearance rack for $20 somewhere else just a month or so later?
Or someone who has the same degree as you with similar experience getting paid more than you?
Donating for ISU and getting your seat, is like choosing stocks. You can either choose the one who has a good Expected Value and low variance (donating getting season tickets), or you can choose one who has a similar Expected Value and very high variance (mini-packs).
The one with high variance could end up presenting a better situation, but it could also present a worse one.
By waiting things out you are taking a bigger risk that could result in a bigger reward. By jumping on things early, you have less of that risk but you could end up paying more than someone else.
It's all about econ and stats. I can promise that if demand for ISU season tickets goes up, the people who don't buy season tickets hoping to get a mini-pack will eventually get burned, while those that donate will know what they're getting.
From the beginning, I said I do not view donating as a price of tickets. I look at donating as money you aren't obligated to give, in doing benefits the Athletic Department. That's why it's called a donation. To me, the tickets are $350 for season tickets. Think of it as a logic problem.
There are 2 types of people out there. People who do something good, just for the sake of doing it, and people who do something good hoping to get something in return. I'm not saying who's right or wrong, but if you're donating only for hopes in getting something back, then you're going to be dissapointed with not only season tickets, but with other things in life.
I am an alum fresh out of grad school so I purchased a couple 3 game mini-packs just because it is the most economical choice for me (living in Kansas City and not wanting to travel for all the home games). I just got section 3 row 5 for the Iowa game, approx. even with the south endzone. According to the ticket chart this is a season ticket area w/ donation required so I am not really sure what they are doing in the 3 game pack. The other day I was getting in the upper deck for all 3 games! Regardless I am very excited to get what seem to be great tickets for the Iowa game but on top of that it kind of makes me concerned that season ticket sales might not be so hot this year that they are including seats of this caliber in the mini-packs. Perhaps I just got lucky?