What to do with Section 117?

[Bienemy4life]

I'd like to put the students right behind the visitors.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

I'd like to put the students right behind the visitors.

That's definitely a recipe for trouble.

 

[Burrito]

I'd like to put the students right behind the visitors.

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[GoBuffs08]

Over the last 5 years CU has averaged 4 wins a season. The product on the field has totally sucked. What makes CU think that they would sell 117 out to the general public? They would end up getting a mix of people moving from other locations, but they are not going to generate many new ticket holders by doing this. Most season ticket holders have had ample opportunity to upgrade seats over the last 5 seasons.

I think it should stay the student section. I like seeing the students have good seats for the games. It improves the overall atmosphere.

This is a discussion that can be revisited when CU is winning 9-10 games a year and the AD is not forced to sell 4 for $40 every other game just to get people to show up.

 

[dply]

That is what kansas has. But they also have the track buffer.

 

[FChairbanks]

my seats are in 118 and i voted to keep 117 available for students; as long as the students keep filling the section on game day. i like the atmosphere at mid-field and, believe it or not, section 118 feeds off of the energy from 117 most of the time. from my perspective, 118 is filled with a mix of long-time donors/season ticket holders, special a.d. seating, and families of student-athletes. the dynamic changes slightly each year, but most of the folks sitting around us have been there for decades, and thankfully, they don't just sit on their hands during the games. i attribute part of that to the influence from 117...

if you move 117 to donor/season ticket holders i think you will lose the student dynamic at mid-field, which can be very important during big games. the east side of the stadium would turn into a mirror of the west side.

and who the **** wants that to happen?

 

[Buffnik]

I look at it simply from a competitive standpoint. To win, we need to be better than our competition. The financial management of our assets is a big part of that.

So let's look at our new conference rival, the University of Utah and see how it compares to CU on this issue. After all, the Utes are the main program we need to be better than to get where we want to be in all our sports.

Student Athletic Fee
University of Colorado: Included in the tuition all students pay. Any student taking 3 or more credit hours pays $28.50 per semester.
University of Utah: Included in the tuition all students pay. Both residents and non-residents pay $76.22 per semester.

Student Tickets
University of Colorado: I couldn't access the student ticket price info without having a student ID. However, it has been reported here that season tickets are $100 for general admission seating in the student sections.
University of Utah: Every students receives a complimentary general admission ticket to every home game. A second "guest ticket" can be purchased by students on a single game basis ($20, $30 or $50 - depending on the game). There's also the MUSS section in the lower deck of general admission that is free ($160 for a guest). Best seats means register early and these students are expected to be the big cheer section.

Stadium Capacity
University of Colorado: Folsom Field holds 53,613.
University of Utah: Rice-Eddles Statium holds 45,017.
Here are the stadium sizes in the Pac-12: Arizona - 57,803; Arizona State - 73,379; Cal - 71,799; Oregon - 54,000; Oregon State - 45,674; Stanford - 50,000; UCLA - 91,136; USC - 93,607; Washington - 72,500; Washington State - 35,117.

Student Seating
University of Colorado: All the white sections on the following stadium map.

University of Utah: The light gray sections on the following stadium map.

Basically, CU students pay $157.00 a year to support the AD and get a football ticket ($57 for no ticket) while UU students pay $152.44 a year to support the AD and get a football ticket.

So, UU gets a lot more money from the students than CU does since it is drawing its full amount from every single student. But by comparison, CU students get exceptionally better seats (UU's student section gets seats equivalent to the CU Visitors section plus a bit up the sideline to the 25).

Given the need to compete and the fact that CU is at a stadium capacity disadvantage versus every other program in the South (other than Utah), the need to maximize the value of existing seats is put at an even greater premium for us.

When viewing the CU stadium map, the section that jumps out as under-monetized is 117. I love the students. I love that we have such a huge student section. But putting students in 117 is a poor use of an AD asset.

If it were up to me, the CU student section would go from 108 through 115, surrounding the south endzone.

 

[wsp4820]

When viewing the CU stadium map, the section that jumps out as under-monetized is 117. I love the students. I love that we have such a huge student section. But putting students in 117 is a poor use of an AD asset.

If it were up to me, the CU student section would go from 108 through 115, surrounding the south endzone.

Everyone keeps saying this, but I still don't see where the numbers are coming to back this up. MAYBE, in a few years if we are competing for P12 championships and MNCs and there is a corresponding spike in demand for tickets, I start to understand this. The fact of the matter is we can't sell out our stadium as it is and there are plenty of premium seats available if people really wanted them. It also seems to assume that the students will keep paying the exact same athletic fee if the best student tickets are taken away. Maybe that happens, maybe it doesn't.

 

[Unleash Hell]

How will we continue to rush the field?

Hey now, we've gone two straight wins without rushing the field

 

[Buffnik]

Everyone keeps saying this, but I still don't see where the numbers are coming to back this up. MAYBE, in a few years if we are competing for P12 championships and MNCs and there is a corresponding spike in demand for tickets, I start to understand this. The fact of the matter is we can't sell out our stadium as it is and there are plenty of premium seats available if people really wanted them. It also seems to assume that the students will keep paying the exact same athletic fee if the best student tickets are taken away. Maybe that happens, maybe it doesn't.

I answered you privately, but I'll repeat it in the public area for everyone.

If the students had 109 instead of 117, then there is no difference in student fees or attendance.

Basically, you've opened up 50 rows of seats that you can sell in 117 for $700 apiece ($300 donation + $400 ticket) versus the seats you are selling in 109 for $320 ($25 donation + $295 ticket). Assuming each section seats 2,500 people for easy math (50 rows x 50 seats per row), 117 has a potential value of $1,750,000. However, 109's potential value is $800,000. After making this move, we could lose half the 109 ticket holders, not pick up any extra, and still come out ahead.

 

[BlackNGold]

Buffnik:

Great writeup. I think you will be hard pressed to find many other major programs that give the students such prime tickets.

CUAD has been trying to raise the athletic fees for years and has been denied. The $57 per year fee is ridiculously low. We all pay fees and taxes for the common good. We pay 1.0% RTD sales tax on everything we buy even though most of us do not use mass transit (something the students get great benefit from), we pay 0.1 % sales tax for Football Stadium(Invesco) and we pay 0.1% for the cultural district. So a $28.50 per semester charge for athletic fees is a drop in the bucket - less than the Starbucks expenses in a month. The argument that the fees somehow garantee prime seating does not compute.

 

[wsp4820]

I answered you privately, but I'll repeat it in the public area for everyone.

If the students had 109 instead of 117, then there is no difference in student fees or attendance.

Basically, you've opened up 50 rows of seats that you can sell in 117 for $700 apiece ($300 donation + $400 ticket) versus the seats you are selling in 109 for $320 ($25 donation + $295 ticket). Assuming each section seats 2,500 people for easy math (50 rows x 50 seats per row), 117 has a potential value of $1,750,000. However, 109's potential value is $800,000. After making this move, we could lose half the 109 ticket holders, not pick up any extra, and still come out ahead.

The problem is, who is going to buy up those 2500 seats at 700/seat? It's not going to be the people that just lost their seats in 109. Likely, it's going to be the people who are currently paying 600/seat. I mean, as I understand it, it's no trouble to get a seat in a 700/seat section as it is right now, so there isn't some contingent of buyers just waiting for more prime seating to open up. Thus, at best you're likely adding $250,000 per year of revenue there. Then, you have to find people willing to fill the 2500 newly available 600/year seats. Again, as I understand it, there are currently seats available at this level. The only way this works you have enough people at each donation level that want to pay extra to move up a level. First, I don't think you'll sell anywhere close to another 2500 seats at 700/seat. Second, I don't think there's such a swell of demand of ticket holders looking to move up. Finally, this all assumes that the student athletic fee remains constant (not a sure thing, you'd definitely get some pushback) and demand for student tickets at the 115/year (and rising) cost remains the same when you remove 2500 of the best seats.

I mean, I understand the point in principal. Yes, selling seats at 700/seat is much better than 100/seat. But, in practice I still don't understand where the demand is going to come from to actually make it work until the team is consistently competing for P12 championships and MNCs.

 

[fatbuff]

If the admin kicks the students out of their section for $, it kind of makes it hard to argue that players are supposed to be students first, and then athletes. If you move the student section, you had better relax the requirements for getting athletes into school.

 

[dply]

Didn't we all rag on the corn for moving their students out of their seats to accomodate more blue-hairs?

 

[Buffnik]

The problem is, who is going to buy up those 2500 seats at 700/seat? It's not going to be the people that just lost their seats in 109. Likely, it's going to be the people who are currently paying 600/seat. I mean, as I understand it, it's no trouble to get a seat in a 700/seat section as it is right now, so there isn't some contingent of buyers just waiting for more prime seating to open up. Thus, at best you're likely adding $250,000 per year of revenue there. Then, you have to find people willing to fill the 2500 newly available 600/year seats. Again, as I understand it, there are currently seats available at this level. The only way this works you have enough people at each donation level that want to pay extra to move up a level. First, I don't think you'll sell anywhere close to another 2500 seats at 700/seat. Second, I don't think there's such a swell of demand of ticket holders looking to move up. Finally, this all assumes that the student athletic fee remains constant (not a sure thing, you'd definitely get some pushback) and demand for student tickets at the 115/year (and rising) cost remains the same when you remove 2500 of the best seats.

I mean, I understand the point in principal. Yes, selling seats at 700/seat is much better than 100/seat. But, in practice I still don't understand where the demand is going to come from to actually make it work until the team is consistently competing for P12 championships and MNCs.

So you wouldn't be opposed to this if you were on the committee and compelling numbers were presented to you that the demand for premium seats would be enough to add hundreds of thousands of dollars to AD coffers next year?

 

[wsp4820]

So you wouldn't be opposed to this if you were on the committee and compelling numbers were presented to you that the demand for premium seats would be enough to add hundreds of thousands of dollars to AD coffers next year?

Perhaps. I guess I value this more than some others, but I think the noneconomic value of having the students stretch out through those sections and stand right behind the team is high. I think it makes a great gameday atmosphere and (when the stadium is full) home-field advantage. Thus, I'm very opposed to the proposals people have made to put students in, for example 110-113 and 207-211. I'm less opposed to the "trade" of 117 for 109. However, I think the economic gains would have to be enough to outweigh the noneconomic losses.

Just doing the spitball math and considering the current conditions, I don't see how the economic gains can be that great.

 

[jrod212]

what are you all f v cking queers?

were you not students? who the hell would want to move the students out of the good section.

how about this great IDEA. have security going through the student section throwing out people who arent actually students? have them thrown out of the entire game and not allowed to return to the stadium.

should i run a poll about that?

god you guys are f#@#$$ fags

 

[jrod212]

put that in your pipe and smoke it, bitch.

old fu ckin foagies. get a life!

 

[Junction]

what are you all f v cking queers?

were you not students? who the hell would want to move the students out of the good section.

how about this great IDEA. have security going through the student section throwing out people who arent actually students? have them thrown out of the entire game and not allowed to return to the stadium.

should i run a poll about that?

god you guys are f#@#$$ fags

Classy.

I am now much more anxious to make sure your wants are looked after.... :rolling_eyes:

 

[Buffnik]

So it's gay, old people who are the problem here? Thanks for enlightening us jrod.

Congratulations on making it more difficult for a number of thoughtful, intelligent people on your side of the issue. I'm not sure they're appreciating your help.

 

[sackman]

what are you all f v cking queers?

were you not students? who the hell would want to move the students out of the good section.

how about this great IDEA. have security going through the student section throwing out people who arent actually students? have them thrown out of the entire game and not allowed to return to the stadium.

should i run a poll about that?

god you guys are f#@#$$ fags

The sense of entitlement runs deep in this one.

 

[wsp4820]

If nothing else, this is the most hotly contested issue since Pinder/Miller.

 

[Buffnik]

If nothing else, this is the most hotly contested issue since Pinder/Miller.

It's definitely hotter than Pinder.

 

[AlferdJasper]

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.

^^^^
yeah, all that.

 

[PhillyBuff]

i actually hated those seats....

best seats in the house is the landing at the goal line front row South East Endzone. My *** was planted there all 4 years....

Now back to the point.... it is such a small stadium, that CU should do exactly what maximizes revenue. I always thought that section was for grad students and seniors anyway....

 

[PhillyBuff]

I stand corrected, the wealthy peeps have across the field and ofcourse, high above where they can drink and throw **** at the students :smile2:

 

[FChairbanks]

i actually hated those seats....

best seats in the house is the landing at the goal line front row South East Endzone. My ***** was planted there all 4 years....

Now back to the point.... it is such a small stadium, that CU should do exactly what maximizes revenue. I always thought that section was for grad students and seniors anyway....

I stand corrected, the wealthy peeps have across the field and ofcourse, high above where they can drink and throw ***** at the students :smile2:

what the **** is *****?

is it plural for ****? and if so, how many do you have...

is it plural for ****? and if so, do you actually collect that ****?


enquiring minds want to know...

 

[Daaah]

I liked the seats front row in the south endzone where you could rip down those signs and throw them on the field/into the stands/at john sanchini.

 

[Quattro]

If anything move the student seats behind the opposing bench.

 

[buffwoman526]

Quick question - is this an actual debate about what could be happening or is this an allbuffs what if type thread?