Football tix e-mail to UM faculty/staff
Athletic Department e-mail from this afternoon re: UM faculty/staff about football tickets:
U-M Faculty/Staff,
A limited number of season tickets are available for the 2014 Michigan Football Season to U-M Faculty/Staff. As a U-M Faculty/Staff member, season tickets are offered at a 10% discount ($409/seat vs. the regular price of $455/seat). Each Faculty/Staff member is allowed a maximum of two (2) season tickets at this reduced rate, with any additional tickets being regular price. If you already hold Faculty/Staff season tickets, any new season tickets under this offer will be regular price.
Additionally, the required donation typically associated with the opportunity to purchase Michigan Football season tickets is $500, but for a limited time, U-M Faculty/Staff can take advantage of a special offer of an entry donation of only $100. Keep in mind, the Preferred Seat Donation (PSD) associated with season tickets will be applicable for the renewal of these additional tickets for the 2015 season.
For only $818 (plus a $15 service charge), U-M Faculty/Staff can be the proud owners of two (2) season tickets for the 2014 Michigan Football Season with the opportunity to renew season tickets as long as you like.
You may also opt to have your season ticket cost deducted from your paycheck in three installments (July, August, September - entry donation not eligible for payroll deduction).
Only U-M Faculty/Staff have been offered this combined ticket price discount and donation discount.
I don't remember receiving such an e-mail in recent years so I'm guessing the AD is really sweating about season ticket sales for 2014.
I just dont see them discounting or cutting ticket costs to move tickets. Seems as though the AD would rather have empty seats at the stadium instead of lowering prices and actually selling out. Its simple supply and demand, but our AD's ego wont let him admit he was wrong to treat the ticket buying public like his cash machine.
I can't imagine Brandon would be okay with having thousands of unsold tickets. That kind of thing can snowball - once fans see that it's not necessary to buy season tickets to get seats to every game, more could decide not to renew the next year. It's absolutely in the AD's best interests to find a way to get all the tickets sold.
People are making Brandon into some kind of diabolical villain when he's really just continued the ticket policies set in motion by his predecessors. We've progressively raised ticket prices for a generation now. We never hit the breaking point because either the team was strong or the schedule was good. Now we're hitting the perfect storm, coming off a 7-6 season and having our worst schedule in forever, and it looks like the breaking point has finally been hit.
I do think some kind of discounted packages are going to be offered this summer. They're not going to just let 10K tickets go unsold.
Too lazy to look it up, but Brian posted a piece I think in the last year where it was shown that the average ticket price was basically constant with respect to inflation for the entire history of Michigan football until Brandon showed up.
Rising prices as the result of overall economic activity is one thing, gouging consumers because you think extorting their love of UM or the football team will make them pay a higher price is another thing.
I think their worst scenario is unsold seats and they'll discount before letting that happen. They'll try to disguise with reduced PSDs and other gimmicks if possible but they have to sell those tickets.
App State (2013: 4-8)
Miami Ohio (2013: 0-8, 0-12)
Utah (2013: 5-7, 1-3 vs Top 25)
Minnesota (2013: 8-5, 1-3 vs Top 25)
Penn State (2013: 7-5, 2-1 vs Top 25)
Indiana (2013: 5-7, 0-2 vs Top 25)
Maryland (2013: 7-6, 0-2 vs Top 25)
| 2 0 1 4 | |
| Date | Opponent |
| Aug. 30 | APPALACHIAN STATE |
| Sept. 6 | at Notre Dame |
| Sept. 13 | MIAMI (Ohio) |
| Sept. 20 | UTAH |
| Sept. 27 | MINNESOTA* |
| Oct. 4 | at Rutgers* |
| Oct. 11 | PENN STATE* |
| Oct. 18 | Bye |
| Oct. 25 | at Michigan State* |
| Nov. 1 | INDIANA* (HC) |
| Nov. 8 | at Northwestern* |
| Nov. 15 | Bye |
| Nov. 22 | MARYLAND* |
| Nov. 29 | at Ohio State* |
| Dec. 6 | Big Ten Championship Game |
I don't think you'd find many people on here that would be against playing powerhouses home and home every year. Even though we got manhandled back in 2012 by Alabama, I liked seeing where we stack up against top teams. I have no problem with an AD who puts us in a position to prove ourselves.
Personally I'd rather take our lumps playing good teams home and home every year than watch us play UMass or UConn every freaking year. Who knows? In a few years those games could become competitive and could help us reach the NCG.
I can't wait to get tickets on stubhub this year for a seriously discounted price.
The AD is making my decision to not renew better everyday.
Ditto. I was already going to miss the App State game due to a wedding in my family (obligations, ugh) and I already had a pair to the PSU game arranged. I figure the other 5 games should be pretty cheap compared to renewing and PSD. Plus now if I decide I'd rather stay home and watch from the couch I can!
Someone said in another thread that the problem is that UM treats it's fans like consumers and not people who more likely than not have a tangible connection to the school. They have treated us like crap for years and are lucky that it has taken this long for people to return the favor.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to inform you that there is zero chance I buy season tickets this year, no matter how discounted the rate is. As your Head Football Coach Brady Hoke likes to say, "This is Michigan for god's sake." When you can field a team that can win morre than 7 or 8 games a season, then we can talk about season tickets. Until then, I will be enjoying the Michigan Brand of football from my couch.
Sincerely,
Darker Blue
I love your letter. But given that i wrote not one, not two but three "I am so freaking pissed off right now I am seriously considering cancelling my 25 years of season tickets support" and got zero response I wouldnt hold your breath on getting a reply.
But your letter is better.....WAY better than anything I scribed.
The fourth time's the charm
You've mentioned writing to Brandon before without luck, but have you ever published your letter here?
I published the first one which was basically a rant on the craptastic team we were fielding and questioned the cost of the tickets relative to the results. The second one I did not publish (I still have it though I'm sure) which was a much stronger written letter asking why I should have to pay a premium via seat licencing and face value for tickets for the "priviledge" of my seats each year. Both of my first two were sent directly to Brandon himself. My third was inside my season ticket survey response which I was unable to save before sending. None of these warranted even a "thank you for writing" response from the Athletic Department and in all three I rattled my "I'm really going to cancel these" threat.
As you may remember other posters get a bit testy with me during that time on this topic so I tried to back off commenting on the subject and didnt see any point in rehashing it any further with a thread topic. People clearly knew where i stood and lots of posters were getting pissed at me for beating the drum as loud and long as I did. I'm only chiming in now cause posts like these and the one from Friday on the emails sent to students indicate I wasnt alone in my frustrations and angst.
Money talks. As much as I hate the idea of an empty Michigan Stadium I love the idea of effecting real change on ticket prices/policies. That being said, Go Blue and go Team 135!
There, now your letter makes some sense.
I now fully understand the lone post from Friday that I saw pointing out about how awful and fair-weathered most Michigan fans are these days and how much they complain about everything.
I want to be able to take my son to a game, I'd like to watch Michigan football without being advertised to at a loud volume the entire game, I'd like to watch football at a reasonable price with lots of fans and have fun. Some people want to keep the tickets they've had for 30 years without spending ridiculous amounts. Some people love Michigan but don't wish to prove their love through money every year.
Speaking only for myself and nobody else, the only thing keeping me from buying season tickets is the ungodly cost. I grew up in the early 60s as a Michigan fan (family tradition), and MSU and OSU kicked our ass back then for the most part.
I just can't justify four figures for a pair of seats, not when I've got a bathroom that needs a re-do and a daughter in grad school.
Of course, if the price is an issue to a person, then no one would find any fault with someone not renewing for that reason. The higher prices over the years is a reality of reinvesting into new facilities...look at all of the sports that will have new facilities within the past few and next few years. If i were a non-revenue sport athlete at Michigan, I would absolutely think Brandon is the greatest AD ever as he has led to new facilities for almost every sport.
Dave Brandon has essentially exploited the fact that 110,000 people every week love Michigan football enough to put themselves over a financial barrel in order that Michigan can have new men's and women's lacrosse programs (among other things, obviously, but these are new things that no one was particularly clamoring for).
If that exchange had been made explicit, don't you think most people would prefer football ticket prices more in line with historical norms?
I also don't need a flyover every game. Especially quiet flyovers.
What else can you do? If we don't show Brandon that we mean business then he will just keep doing whatever he wants despite the fact that we don't win shit.
Don't you think it's absurd that prices have not decreased at all for students and fans despite the fact that the home schedule this year is awful and our team last year was awful?
If tickets were still 50 for crappy games and 75 for good games we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
As for the schedule, some years its better and some years its worse. Its better to keep it relatively smooth to avoid huge jumps when the schedule is good next year as the huge jump would result in even more complaining.
I said it the other day in another thread, the fact that our "fans" have so much hatred for the athletic department is pretty incredible, doesn't bode well for the future. I live in NYC and I can't wait for the season and am already trying to decide which games I will travel for.
Fans are pissed because they are being treated with contempt. Fans have regularly made it known that they want to maintain the tradition of not having advertising in Michigan Stadium. Rather than honor that expressed desire, our athletic department tries to squeeze every penny they can out of dancing curly fries and video boards and anything else they can do while trying to keep a straight face and say that the exclusion of ads means a lot to them too.
Fans who have paid large sums of money for years to attend events and support Michigan athletics have seen prices and new fees rise exponentially (Brian broke down in a fairly recent post how the price relative to inflation was steady for virtually 100 years until Dave Brandon arrived on campus). Basketball fans who supported the team in lean years have been pushed out of their seats now that the team is good. Most people will only accept being treated like suckers at a carnival for so long.
Most fans love the traditions of the Michigan Marching Band and viewed a football Saturday in the Big House as a damn near perfect experience. Now those cozy thoughts are drowned out by Neil Diamond and an assortment of 80's rock bands.
People are pissed at the athletic department because they are being extorted for a constant stream of cash while the product they love is being dramatically altered, and in the opinion of most that alteration isn't improving things. Acting like those people aren't "real fans" because of that reaction is fucking ridiculous.
A
Fucking
MEN.
You have absolutely nailed it from my perspective PurpleStuff.
Also agree with music being too loud. Maybe they think we can't hear.
But here's a question: Would you rather have advertising and lower prices? I wouldn't mind that. I'm not sure how many arenas/stadiums are left with no advertising. Are there a lot? I honestly have no idea. It is a way to make $$.... Sorry if this has been covered.
Michigan football has had more reasonable ticket prices and no advertising for basically its entire existence. The only reason the choice comes up is if you assume that absolute profit maximization is and should be the model for amateur athletics.
Michigan football already creates a ridiculously large sum of money through (reasonably priced) ticket sales, actually voluntary donations, TV money, etc. And the players are still just getting an education and a place to live/eat for four years. All that revenue maximization ends up doing is creating a pile of cash that has to go to some construction company or into the already full pockets of guys like Brandon, Hoke, and Beilein.
Making really rich guys even richer and putting an extra building or two on campus (that you may be able to pay for anyway if you just ask nicely for the cash) doesn't justify inconveniencing, much less tormenting, your core audience. It is probably bad for business in the long term and it doesn't lead anywhere particularly beneficial even if it works from a revenue perspective.
I totally agree with these posts. I'm not here to say Dave Brandon is evil for the way he's running the AD -- I hate much/most of it (football-wise, as well as in other areas) -- but it's his department to run. If they can maximize profits doing it their way, and that's what they care about, more power to them. I'm just finding myself less and less interested in being a part of it.
I renewed my season tickets this year almost entirely due to family/friends pressure to keep our large block of tickets together and not have random people sitting in the middle of them (where my tickets are). For the first time in my life, though, I felt zero excitement about buying my tickets this year. I guess in some ways it could be called fair-weathered, but for me at least, it's not even about the product on the field, or really even the schedule -- I never felt this way during the lowest of the RR years -- but the whole experience (of going to games, dealing with the AD, all of it), and the detachment I feel that was never there before. As attending Michigan games moves closer and closer to the experience of attending NFL games, the less I'm interested in going. They may not care, and many my fellow fans may not care -- I don't have any ill-will towards the "don't let the door hit you on the way out" crowd, and I understand their sentiment. But I don't think I'm alone in feeling like the unique experience that is/was attending a Michigan football game is dying, and as the costs increase, I'm warming to the idea of just watching on TV. I take no joy in that, or in seeing an empty stadium, but I also don't want to sit in that empty stadium created by what I think is a lot of corporate greed.
There is no advertising in the stadium, which is shocking compared to what almost all other D1 programs have done. Mgoblue videos that encourage you going to volleyball games aren't advertising. "Brian did a post..." Did that post consider national ticket prices for teams like Michigan, and how those costs have risen in the same period? I didn't see the article, but surely you understand that not everything rises with in line with inflation (like, for example, college tuition - are you waging an online war against MSC for the outrageous tuition increases over the last decade?). College football interest has risen enormously over the last several years, and I imagine ticket prices at most schools have done the same. If M is above the norm in those increases, then you have a valid point.
Basketball fans being pushed out - that's the market. Wins equal demand. Would you propose that they be allowed to stay in those seats and pay the same amount? That would be arbitrage - they could buy from M and sell them on the stubhub for double and profit for the next 20 years. Would that make sense to you?
The music is terrible.
"Alteration isn't improving things." The new towers at the stadium are an incredible upgrade. There are new facilities being erected all over campus that are state of the art. You have a new basketball stadum and facilities that are unrecognizable from the prior interior of the building. Yost. You have a new Schembechler Hall. You have non-revenue sports winning Olympic medals and title after title.
Costs are high, I get it. Maybe at a turning point in college football. Piling that entire issue on David Brandon is unreasonable, irrational, and "fucking ridiculous".
I appreciate the debate, so I hope this doesn't sound in poor form, but I don't think a lot of people on this board have an in-depth understanding of economics. When I said cost above, I was referring to the cost to the consumer, which is the price from M's standpoint. I wasn't saying that M's costs have risen, so therefore prices have to rise (although that may be true partially or totally, I don't have access to M's books). From a producer's standpoint, costs and price are two totally different things. If you can produce something for $1 and sell it for $100, you do so. My point was that demand for college football has increased dramatically over the last several years, not only at Michigan but across the country, and with that demand I assume ticket prices have increased at most schools. That's the market, not Brandon. You're right, I'm not providing any data on that beyond the anecdotal - I have friends at other schools and they bitch about high prices too. Oregon State or Georgia or some of these one-off policies don't seem to be the norm, and I don't think I agree with them anyway. Free student tickets? For who? What about all the students who don't get free tickets? Is it OK that you give free tickets to some students, and then they sell those on the open market? Why not just pass out money to those who stand in line?
If you don't run it as a business, you're going to have arbitrage, which means somebody will get tickets for cheaper and sell them on the open market, and the school will lose money while that person gains. It doesn't make sense that you would do that. This is what they were trying to address with dynamic pricing. I personally feel that went too far and screwed season ticketholders over, but I understand the concept (and many other schools have gone to this).
You don't like the updgrades? OK. But what I was addressing in my post was Purplestuff's assertion that he's not getting anything in return. That's bunk. You're getting an absolute upgrade of all the athletic facilities (though I think when PS was saying that, he probably meant wins, which is silly - you can't say "I paid my money, I demand more wins", not that this has stopped the majority of this board from doing so). Maybe you don't want that, but if the goal is successful athletic programs, facilities are probably as important as coaching, academics, and tradition in recruiting. The AD's goal is successful athletic programs.
App State, ugh. Schedules aren't nearly as easy as people around here would like to assume. I'm sure Brandon would have liked to schedule Texas, but that wasn't happening. App State vs. some generic MAC team or other low-level opponent, I don't have a preference. And yes, I was destroyed the day they lost the first one. But it's been several years and I've been able to get over it.
The emails prove that demand has decreased. Why? Because the prices haven't changed in several years and the stadium was full for the last several years. For 2013, the price was at market. The schedule is weak this year (sometimes that happens), and the losses over the last several years have driven buyers away. Just like the malaise that fell on this blog - going from ND "Rows of Teeth" to Akron to Sparty - so has the same fallen on a lot of the fanbase. If you think the proper action was to reduce the price, that's fine. But I'd disagree, and I'm almost certain anyone in business would as well. If you drop the price you set a precedent for the future - if the team loses, prices will go down. What you do instead is exactly what Brandon is doing - market to people who are customers or near customers and try to spur a purchase. Discounts of some type may be next, then discounted package deals to the public. May not sell them all. But it's not because of extortionist pricing policies from the Great Satan AD. All these emails prove to me is that demand is lower. If the team went 10-2 last year, this wouldn't be an issue. And since, again, all the people in charge of winning already care more about winning than anybody on this board, the constant wailing against Brandon seems sophmoric.
April 22nd, 2014 at 10:22 AM ^
The mission of the Athletic Department is to support and supplement the mission of the University of Michigan by providing intercollegiate and recreational sports programs. The development of successful teams and quality recreational sports programs, with a focus on the welfare of our student-athletes, is inherent to our mission. The Athletic Department is dedicated to the principle that the pursuit of excellence in intercollegiate athletics must be accomplished within the framework of an academic community committed to providing equitable opportunities for all student-athletes, students, and faculty.
...and not a word about maximizing revenue or avoiding arbitrage.
April 22nd, 2014 at 10:49 AM ^
is this a serious point? I think so many of you are starting out with the "EVIL DAVE BRANDON" notion so ingrained in your head that you'll propose arguments - any argument - that in a typical debate you would never employ. Such is my supposition that a lot of this is politically driven.
Yes, avoiding arbitrage is not in the mission statement. It has never been in anyone's mission statement ever. Again I don't think you know what that means - it means selling at a price too low, so that someone buys it and resells in another market (stubhub) for a gain with little or no effort. This means that money that should go to the university would go to someone else. Would rather sell tickets for $10, have all the scalpers buy them, and them re-sell them to fans for $85? This is nonsensical. So let's sell tickets at a reduced rate to graduates or loyal fans or really good people who bring awareness to that disease by riding their bike from Maine to California. Who's going to determine who those people are? You? Whoever you pick, why did you pick them for a discount, and not others? Let's give a discount to everybody who wants tickets? OK, let's sell them all for $20. The school loses a bunch of money for an event its putting on. If demand is 110,000 for tickets at $85, there's probably a demand of 1,000,000 for tickets at $20. There are going to be long lines and busy phones and locked up internet connections, but OK they're all sold for $20. What now? Good? Some chunk of those people will say "Thanks Dave!", and go to the games. If you're not among them, you'll probably throw rocks at his house because you're jealous that you weren't included. Many of the others will sell the tickets on stubhub for $85. What's the point of that? That's giving out free money. That's arbitrage, and no you don't put that in the mission statement. Maximizing revenue allows you to re-invest in the programs. That's inherent in the statement above.
April 22nd, 2014 at 11:32 AM ^
I thought this was part of the changes that have been contraversial. For a long time, Michigan tickets were below "market" and there was a higher demand than what the cost required. The AD used a points system to decide who should get the tickets to attend. The points were a combination of being an alum, years season tickets were held, and donations (yearly and overall amount). This system ensured that there would always be a demand and also allowed a system to reward beyond just a monetary value.
Dave Brandan has changed this model to a pure "market cost" model, that only rewards monetary (on a yearly basis, not on a overall basis) and devalues loyalty. This method may maximize revenue and lost cost on the secondary market, but does not ensure there will always be demand as you are operating at the point where demand and supply flucuate.
I believe for a non-profit university that has a long term goal (135 years old), the first model is a better overall model. I did not mind moving closer to the market value, but believe that leaving some profit on the table so loyalty, long term donations, and being an alum is rewarded, while ensuring the Big House is packed.
April 22nd, 2014 at 12:03 PM ^
But what it provides you is access to better parking spots - which many disparage but a party in the blue lot is almost better than going in for the game -, road games, and other special offers. Not sure if at one time this allowed buying below market, but my guess is no. And that's just a guess, I wasn't a season ticketholder then. That was likely before PSDs and recent explosion in pricing (and facilities arms race, and coaching salaries, and everything else).
The out-sized demand for tickets is what set a lot of this off-kilter. Like NASCAR, maybe it spiked to an unsustainable level and is now coming back down.
"Again I don't think you know what that means - it means selling at a price too low, so that someone buys it and resells in another market (stubhub) for a gain with little or no effort."
I'm well aware of what it means.
It doesn't mean selling at a "price too low" - it means taking advantage of different pricing in differing markets... and yes, it means the supplier has set the price too low to maximize profit on that sale.
The problem is - measuring cost and benefit merely in dollars and cents.
"The school loses a bunch of money for an event its putting on."
You can't "lose" potential income. If you decide to lower prices (even to zero) you haven't lost anything.
"Many of the others will sell the tickets on stubhub for $85. What's the point of that?"
Goodwill, fostering loyalty, rewarding long term fans, rewarding alumni, fostering donations (both to the athletic and academic sides), etc, etc.
See: Garth Brooks and never charging more than $25/ticket, or the $20/ticket Kid Rock concert series, or paper tickets at below market prices to prevent scalpers from overcharging fans (instead of just raising prices to the microeconomic equilibrium between supply/demand).
April 22nd, 2014 at 10:41 AM ^
April 22nd, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^
I appreciate your views as well. I'm concerned with some of the things that are happening in athletics as well - the Nebraska TVs in the bathrooms was awesome for some, for me it seemed like the absolute picture of excess.
But maximizing revenue allows the school to invest in other sports. Do they pull back on the construction of all these new facilities? Then they could reduce the cost, and price to cover costs as you suggest. But there still would be the issue of market - if they lower prices, more people will want to buy. This will drive prices right back up in the secondary market. Those lucky enough to be on the season ticketholders list would benefit tremendously, but the school would lose that revenue, which I believe is rightfully theirs.
We may be reaching a critical mass in terms of college football prices - the widespread lack of interest from students across many universities may be the canary in the coal mine. If that's the case, then prices will drop - but they will drop everywhere, not just at Michigan. And my issue is that the larger problems and real debate is being consistenly sidestepped, because the mob (at least on this board) keeps screaming evil Dave Brandon so loudly that no one else can think. And "shitty pizza salesman dur-hurr" jokes, eugh. This board is better than that.
While I don't hate Dave Brandon, I do think he's somewhat of a tasteless asshat.
My problem in a nutshell is that Brandon is a meddler.
The guy presides over a world class/world famous athletic dept., one of the few that are easily in the black, with a mind numbingly large budget . . . and he can't fucking leave it alone.
Seriosly, this a place where your uber rich alumni are donating business schools, indoor feildhouses, quarter of a BILLION dollar stadium renovations, and he's fucking around with curly fries and macaroni noodles?! WTF?!
Schmooze your big donors, count your cash like scrooge mcDuck and call it a day.
By all accounts Dave Brandon does a great job keeping the Bill Martin $ train rolling along, and that's got to be at least 1/3 of your job. Make some good coaching hires, and build some facilities when needed and thats it. End of job description.
I might be wrong in my estimates, but I would think that TV contracts, Alumni donations, athletic apparel agreements & ticket sales are probably at least 95% of your budget income. Other than ego, why is Dave Brandon messing aroiund with small-time fringe advertising, mascots, skywriting, dicking around with the band & other traditions?
Because he's a meddler; an egotistical meddler that tripled his marketing budget & staff and now they are in a desperate search for a WOW experience to justify it all.
What I find so laughable, is that he seems to be trying to create a sterile bland, NFL-like game day experince, while simultaneously employing minor league baseball-like tactics and gimmicks. That disconnect, coupled with the endless PR speak comes off as pretty sleazy sometimes. Michigan just doesn't need these tactics, $ arms race or not.
You can be a good CEO and a "shitty pizza salesman" at the same time.
April 22nd, 2014 at 10:19 AM ^
The athletic department should work under a "loyalty business model" and not be hung up on maximizing short (or even medium) term revenue.
If you're not going because of the team's record last year, that makes you a fairweather fan. I'm sorry. You're not going because the team won 7 games last year and you call yourself a Michigan fan?
Not exactly. One doesn't have to go to the games to be a fan. When you buy a ticket to a game, are you purchasing the right to cheer for your team in person or are you purchasing entertainment? If it's the former, then you're right. If it's the later, it becomes increasingly difficult to justify the expenditure if the "entertainment" is subpar.