What to do with Section 117?

[sackman]

There seems to be a pretty healthy debate going on about Section 117. For those of you who are not in on the debate, I'll explain: Section 117 is student seating. It is in the East side of the Stadium, lower bowl, from the 35-50 yard line. Students pay $100/Year for student tickets, and section 117 is, from what I can gather, general admission for any student ticket. It's all first come, first serve.
Right across the aisle, in section 118, are folks who pay $300/Year in seat surcharges on top of the $400+ per year in tickets. So on one side of the aisle, you have somebody who paid over $700 for his seat, and on the other side of the aisle, somebody who paid $100 for his seat. Both get the exact same view of the game.
Students, of course pay tuition and fees, so the argument is that they pay more than just $100. OTOH, the guy who paid $700 isn't going to classes, using the Rec Center or any of the other myriad of services offered to the students, either.

The discussion is whether to move the student section around the South End Zone, and up into the second level of the South End Zone and open up Section 117 for high dollar donors.

Poll forthcoming.

 

[DeNiro]

I know it's all about $$$, but I would like to keep the student section where it is to help keep the noise and home field advantage. I sit in section 2 and sometimes there are people who only paid $10 to be at the game, I don't really care, I just look at it as I am giving more money to the school and AD.

 

[dio]

How will we continue to rush the field?

 

[Daaah]

I know it's all about $$$, but I would like to keep the student section where it is to help keep the noise and home field advantage. I sit in section 2 and sometimes there are people who only paid $10 to be at the game, I don't really care, I just look at it as I am giving more money to the school and AD.

The thing is, is....

It's not all about the money. Having the students front and center creates a better atmosphere for the entire stadium. To sequester them to the cheap seats at the far end of the the stadium would be a mistake, imo.

 

[Mick Ronson]

in the early 00's, 117 wasn't general student seating. it was grad students, law peeps, and maybe seniors and such. i had seats there for 5 years as a grad group. we got ****ed a couple times by the ticket office trying to get group tickets together, but the seats were always good...minus getting hosed on the Nebraska ticket....which you had to apply for and never got the same or good tix you had before.

in about 02 you had to pay extra for the CSU ticket at Mile High. i paid about 35$ for 117 tix inna day.....which is redonkulous. they are like 3 times that now.

 

[RLH]

The rest of the story...

The CUAD receives about $1.25M annually from the "athletic fee." This is included in every student's bill, grad and undergrad. It is guaranteed money. In exchange, the CUAD has agreed to give the students about 10K tickets and have the student section stretch to mid-field.

Seats in 117 are not general admission, they are reserved.

 

[absinthe]

The CUAD receives about $1.25M annually from the "athletic fee." This is included in every student's bill, grad and undergrad. It is guaranteed money. In exchange, the CUAD has agreed to give the students about 10K tickets and have the student section stretch to mid-field.

Seats in 117 are not general admission, they are reserved.

thanks for those numbers, looks like the 1.25 is about what the potential revenue gain from those seats is. What is the fee per student these days? also is this one of the fees you can opt out of?

 

[wsp4820]

thanks for those numbers, looks like the 1.25 is about what the potential revenue gain from those seats is. What is the fee per student these days? also is this one of the fees you can opt out of?

If I remember correctly, I don't think you can opt out of any fees. There are some fees you can opt into.

 

[InTheBuff]

I voted to move the students out but would like to see if students would be willing to pay extra to have the privilege to those awesome seats.. maybe bring back the idea of a student section with reserved seating.

 

[RLH]

No, you can't opt out. UGGS (United Government of Grad Students) has been fighting it for years but the CUAD and Administration won't budge. No idea how much it is now...plus that $1.25M figure was from 2005, the last year I worked there.

The CUAD knows VERY well how much revenue is out in the stadium. I remember purchasing a program (from a company in Omaha, NE...NU fans but really good guys) which would allow us to look at revenue changes when we changed the price of different sections and parking. It would take into consideration what donors/tix holders were currently paying and compute the new contribution. This seems simple, but there are A LOT of variables. Bottom line, pricing is a political issue...sort of the third rail for the CU Administration.

 

[wsp4820]

thanks for those numbers, looks like the 1.25 is about what the potential revenue gain from those seats is. What is the fee per student these days? also is this one of the fees you can opt out of?

1.25 million plus the 115 (at least) per student that sits in that section. Obviously they'd still make some of that money if they move the students, but I have no idea if they'd be able to charge as much per student ticket or if as many students would purchase student tickets if 117 wasn't an option anymore. Probably would be a slight loss, but not that much.

 

[MtnBuff]

Three things
1) The student fees were approved with the idea that the students would get access to those seats. The AD recieves the money and although they could get a lot more by moving the students it would violate the spirit of the agreement if not the letter.

2) This is college football. A big part of what makes it great is having the energy and enthusiasm of the students play a prominent part in the game experience for everyone. Keep them front and center, let them be loud and crazy, let the players on the field and the fans in the stands know they are there. When the TV cameras get a sideline shot let it also capture a bunch of students having a great time. Remember what happened with the Broncos crowds when the blue collar fans got bumped out of the way for the wine and cheese crowd when they changed stadiums, the entire atmosphere went downhill. In a college stadium this is even more important.

3) These students are hopefully the future full price ticket buyers. Make going to the games an event, let it be one of the great memories of their time in school, give them a reason to want to return and buy the big money tickets on the other side in a few years when their careers are established. Every business relies on a stream of new customers to replace those who die off or go away. Treat those prospective customers poorly and you lose them for life, treat them well and you have long term potential.

 

[Buffalo Brad]

I voted to move the students out but would like to see if students would be willing to pay extra to have the privilege to those awesome seats.. maybe bring back the idea of a student section with reserved seating.

I brought this option up in the other thread on this topic. I think it is a great answer. Move the students out of 117 and let them opt into a fee that provides them with reserved seating in 117. It should be discounted versus the cost of a donor buying these seats but would secure the AD some incremental revenue. Set aside half of the sectino for student upgrades and use the other half to increase seat availabity to donors at full price. Pretty good middle of the road solution.

 

[wsp4820]

I brought this option up in the other thread on this topic. I think it is a great answer. Move the students out of 117 and let them opt into a fee that provides them with reserved seating in 117. It should be discounted versus the cost of a donor buying these seats but would secure the AD some incremental revenue. Set aside half of the sectino for student upgrades and use the other half to increase seat availabity to donors at full price. Pretty good middle of the road solution.

Totally problematic. What donor is going to pay full price to sit in a section half full with students? Alternatively, what student is going to pay extra to sit in a section where all the old guys tell them to sit down and shut up because they can't see the game? It's an all or nothing proposition on this section.

 

[sackman]

At $1.25MM, with 30,000 students at CU-Boulder, that comes to a grand total of $41.66 per year in student fees that to to the athletic department. If Sec 117 was a concession to get the student fees, I'd suggest cutting the student fees to $30/Year and opening up Section 117.

 

[tante]

it is reserved seating, but lets be honest, that section is GA for all intents and purposes. I say leave the kids in that section.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

Just what we need in 117 a bunch of old bags sitting on their hands mimicking the morgue across the field.

 

[Buffalo Brad]

My guess is you would get a pretty good mix of folks who enjoy the atmoshpere of being near the students. There are some of us alumni who like to have fun and enjoy a loud and proud section of fans who like to show emotion, stand up and be loud.

 

[wsp4820]

At $1.25MM, with 30,000 students at CU-Boulder, that comes to a grand total of $41.66 per year in student fees that to to the athletic department. If Sec 117 was a concession to get the student fees, I'd suggest cutting the student fees to $30/Year and opening up Section 117.

I wonder if they've crunched the numbers on this yet. I kind of doubt it would be the huge cash influx everyone seems to think it would be.

Taking these numbers as an example, they'd lose about 300,000 per year in fees to open up the section to full paying donors. On the flip side, they'd have to open up another section that is currently full priced to move those students into. Considering our results as of late (4 for 40, etc) that'd probably be clost to a wash, but in slightly better times (or against better traveling opponents), you're giving up something.

Also, it seems that those in favor of booting the students out of the section are assuming that the seats will be filled with entirely new donors (abs was calculating a net gain of 650/seat yesterday at 2000 seats for 1.3 million dollar net gain). I doubt that to be the case. What will happen is folks like you, Sacky, might consider upgrading their seats to move into 117. I don't know what you pay now, but if you're in 119, how much of an extra donation and ticket price would you be willing to pay to move over a couple sections? It's not going to be all of the sudden a section filled with people paying an additional 700/seat. It will mean that someone like you will pay, say 100/seat more per year and they'll have to find someone to pay for the seats you left behind in 119. If they filled it up with all people such as yourself, they'd gain 200,000/year (using 100 per seat increase) but they'd need to find 2000 people willing to pay the 600/seat (or whatever) you currently pay. These are rough numbers, but I think you see the point. I guarantee you there aren't 2000 people out there just waiting for more premium seats to open up so they can jump in.

I know this post is approaching Mtn Buff length, but the bottom line is that I don't think moving the students makes near (or necessarily any) as much economic sense as you guys are saying, and that doesn't take into account the noneconomic factors that people like Daaah and myself have been touting.

 

[wsp4820]

it is reserved seating, but lets be honest, that section is GA for all intents and purposes. I say leave the kids in that section.

It's not reserved anymore. CUBuffs.com

 

[wsp4820]

My guess is you would get a pretty good mix of folks who enjoy the atmoshpere of being near the students. There are some of us alumni who like to have fun and enjoy a loud and proud section of fans who like to show emotion, stand up and be loud.

I expect the population of people willing to pay 700/seat/year yet are willing to be mixed in a section of students is about 3. At best.

 

[MtnBuff]

I wonder if they've crunched the numbers on this yet. I kind of doubt it would be the huge cash influx everyone seems to think it would be.

Taking these numbers as an example, they'd lose about 300,000 per year in fees to open up the section to full paying donors. On the flip side, they'd have to open up another section that is currently full priced to move those students into. Considering our results as of late (4 for 40, etc) that'd probably be clost to a wash, but in slightly better times (or against better traveling opponents), you're giving up something.

Also, it seems that those in favor of booting the students out of the section are assuming that the seats will be filled with entirely new donors (abs was calculating a net gain of 650/seat yesterday at 2000 seats for 1.3 million dollar net gain). I doubt that to be the case. What will happen is folks like you, Sacky, might consider upgrading their seats to move into 117. I don't know what you pay now, but if you're in 119, how much of an extra donation and ticket price would you be willing to pay to move over a couple sections? It's not going to be all of the sudden a section filled with people paying an additional 700/seat. It will mean that someone like you will pay, say 100/seat more per year and they'll have to find someone to pay for the seats you left behind in 119. I guarantee you there aren't 2000 people out there just waiting for more premium seats to open up so they can jump in.

I know this post is approaching Mtn Buff length, but the bottom line is that I don't think moving the students makes near (or necessarily any) as much economic sense as you guys are saying, and that doesn't take into account the noneconomic factors that people like Daaah and myself have been touting.

I think you are correct, they aren't going to find 650 brand new people off the streets who weren't going to games just because they couldn't sit in 117. Virtually all would come from other places in the stadium and the potential gain in revenue would not justify the loss in having the students front and center or the negative publicity that would result from the move. This is a program that needs to keep good news coming in and stay away from the negatives at this time.

 

[wsp4820]

I think you are correct, they aren't going to find 650 brand new people off the streets who weren't going to games just because they couldn't sit in 117. Virtually all would come from other places in the stadium and the potential gain in revenue would not justify the loss in having the students front and center or the negative publicity that would result from the move. This is a program that needs to keep good news coming in and stay away from the negatives at this time.

I'm not even sure the gain in revenue would justify the loss in revenue that would be necessary to move the students out of 117 (assuming you'd have to renegotiate the athletic fee).

 

[Buffalo Brad]

I expect the population of people willing to pay 700/seat/year yet are willing to be mixed in a section of students is about 3. At best.

You maybe right on that front and the whole conversation is pretty mute at this point because they are not selling out the seats that run $700 now. Until we have a supply problem, my guess is that we will not see any changes at all.

As to the arguement about not generating any incremental revenue, I guess I fall on the other side. If guys like Sacky upgrade, you will get incremental revenue from them, open up their lower cost seats that may attract new season ticket holders and the students really are a wash anyway. They are going to sit in a section whether it be 117 or another. By giving them the lower cost section, you free up higher revenue seats. Again, this assumes you can sell all seats which we cannot do at this time (nor have we done even in the best years). The bottom line is that until you get closer to selling out the stadium and can stop heavily discounting seats, it really does not matter.

 

[NW Buff]

Leave the students where they are. One of the goals of the AD should be to cultivate lifelong football fans and future donors. Give the students a good football experience and cultivate a future. Treat them like crap in the end zone and they'll be less likely to be fired up about it later in life.

That and the fact that you'd need to change the athletic fee if you're going to shaft the students.

 

[wsp4820]

You maybe right on that front and the whole conversation is pretty mute at this point because they are not selling out the seats that run $700 now. Until we have a supply problem, my guess is that we will not see any changes at all.

As to the arguement about not generating any incremental revenue, I guess I fall on the other side. If guys like Sacky upgrade, you will get incremental revenue from them, open up their lower cost seats that may attract new season ticket holders and the students really are a wash anyway. They are going to sit in a section whether it be 117 or another. By giving them the lower cost section, you free up higher revenue seats. Again, this assumes you can sell all seats which we cannot do at this time (nor have we done even in the best years). The bottom line is that until you get closer to selling out the stadium and can stop heavily discounting seats, it really does not matter.

I guess what I'm saying is that even assuming that you fill 117 with upgrades and a couple new donors AND manage to find new donors to fill all the seats of donors that upgraded, the incremental gain isn't that big and not worth it (at least to me) to put the loudest and most intense (during the games) fans all in one corner of the stadium.

 

[Buffalo Brad]

I guess what I'm saying is that even assuming that you fill 117 with upgrades and a couple new donors AND manage to find new donors to fill all the seats of donors that upgraded, the incremental gain isn't that big and not worth it (at least to me) to put the loudest and most intense (during the games) fans all in one corner of the stadium.

Sounds like we are in the same spot. I agree that the revenue bump right now would not be worth it. Maybe in the future (a big maybe), but not now.

 

[absinthe]

I wonder if they've crunched the numbers on this yet. I kind of doubt it would be the huge cash influx everyone seems to think it would be.

The foundation has crunched the numerbs and every year since the seat license has been in effect they have requested the switch to be blocked by the admin.

 

[wsp4820]

The foundation has crunched the numerbs and every year since the seat license has been in effect they have requested the switch to be blocked by the admin.

I guess I'm confused. Is the AD trying to make the switch but the Foundation is pressuring the University administration to block it? Shouldn't they all reach the same conclusion?

 

[absinthe]

I guess I'm confused. Is the AD trying to make the switch but the Foundation is pressuring the University administration to block it? Shouldn't they all reach the same conclusion?

this is what I know:

Foundation wants the switch and has been agitating for it.
School Admin is Anti.

No know official AD position, although i assume it would fall inline with their fund raising arm.