Re: season tickes sales are down

[jon breiner]

That does not surprise me.  It is not so much the tickets being down as much 
as which tickets are down.  Since I was unable to move to better seats, most 
of the bigger donors continued.  A few left of course as they were able to 
move many of the BIG time donors down and also come up with the 40 seats 
behind the visitors bench.  Since I like giving WAG's, I'd say if overall 
ticket sales are down 11%, UCATS donations are down 5% since it is skewed. 
Of course, if the budget called for an increase, that is a major screw-up. 
Truly it is the year after that concerns me the most.  I still think many 
who had already given their money decided to let it ride.  With only about a 
week to pull the money out, I doubt many did, even though some did.

Next year is the key and if they do not know why it is down 11% this year (I 
think they know but wont say it), I have concerns.

Jon



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "dfairchild" <address@hidden>
To: "dfairchild" <address@hidden>; <address@hidden>
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 7:48 AM
Subject: [UC Basketball] season tickes sales are down


> Despite all the speculation on this board -  the truth is season ticket
> sales are down 11% from this point last year.
> "UC reports it has sold approximately 5,100 season tickets. Last year at
> this time, UC had sold 5,700 and ended up at 5,900."
>
> It makes you wonder about the competence of the UCATS or the athletic
> department:  According to someone with good inside sources - there had not
> been a drop in ticket sales.  It appears the athletic department/UCATS is
> operating in a state of denial.
>
> Here is a bizarre comment by Goin.  It appears he is still operating on a
> short leash.
> "UC officials don't know if the drop is a protest by fans who are unhappy
> that Huggins' contract was terminated."
>
> Finally, it astounds me how inept the athletic department has been at
> selling the basketball program.  We have talked a lot on this board about
> the lack of attention to the area of ticket sales.  I cannot believe they
> were only able to operate at 69% capacity.  As I pointed out last year -
>
> http://bearcatnews.com/basketballforum/200501/msg00392.php
>
> the cheap seats were never cheap (until this year!) - peole were expected 
> to
> spend $22 for a seat in the top row!  By not lowering those ticket prices 
> =
> it assured there would be a supply of tickets, except for the biggest 
> games.
>
> As people have testified here, it was cost effective to not get season
> tickets because they could easily get a ticket for a game, including 
> paying
> a broker for better seats for big games.
>
> The reality of the low percentage of season tickets is the athletic
> department needs some guidance from the business school - a combination of
> marketing, price point analysis, and customer service would have solved 
> this
> problem a long time ago!!!
>
> DF
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.7/156 - Release Date: 11/2/2005