Goodbye Dynamic Ticket Pricing!!

Submitted by umbig11 on March 31st, 2015 at 1:19 PM

In another great move by our new AD!

"The 2015 tickets will not be dynamically priced, which is the practice of continually adjusting single-game ticket prices based on real-time market conditions with the biggest factor being fan demand and ticket scarcity. Individual tickets will go on sale in July."

 

http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/033115aaa.html

Mod edit: Added ChuckieWoodson's table since it seemed like a waste to delete it. JGB.

Game Date End Zone Maize/Blue Victors/Valiant
Oregon State Sept. 12 $80 $90 $100
UNLV Sept. 19 $55 $65 $75
Brigham Young Sept. 26 $80 $90 $100
Northwestern (HC) Oct. 10 $75 $85 $95
Michigan State Oct. 17 $95 $105 $115
Rutgers Nov. 7 $65 $75 $85
Ohio State Nov. 28 $95 $105 $115

 

Comments

Canadian

March 31st, 2015 at 1:25 PM ^

Again a great idea executed brutally. There should've been a price floor lower than face value for those games that don't sell. That floor could've been set at season ticket price and it would've had a better chance of succeeding. I personally didn't have to deal with it but a few friends of mine did.

MichBlueEagle

March 31st, 2015 at 5:18 PM ^

I will gladly take that headache away for you for any games this fall. I need to get my 8 year old son down for a game before his mother turns him into a Ohio State fan. The Big Game, The Big Team, The Big Tradition, The Big House, and The Harbaugh.

WindyCityBlue

March 31st, 2015 at 1:29 PM ^

....but I didn't mind dynamic pricing.  Most people can't but tickets directly from the school, so going to a game likely means buying from a friend or ticket scalper.  Having dynamic pricing allows for the school to reap the benefits (or pitfalls) of changing prices, not the ticket scalper.  I would prefer it that way.  Like I said, I can be convinced otherwise.

This is probably one of the best years in many for Michigan to reap the benefits from dynamic ticket pricing.  Having a nive home slate and HARBAUGH and all means tickets are probably going to be priced higher this year.  This is clearly something Brandon would not do...and I like that. 

wolverine2003

March 31st, 2015 at 1:50 PM ^

Honestly, I'm not sure.  In my experience, it was always my practice to buy extra tickets for people up front because you wanted to make sure you had them.  A Michigan ticket was something of value that people wanted, not something that was a commodity that the whole risk in price change was placed on me.  It is not good business when the policy is "If our team is good, we will charge you more.  If our team is bad, you paid too much for your tickets but that's  your problem."

wolverine2003

March 31st, 2015 at 1:50 PM ^

Honestly, I'm not sure.  In my experience, it was always my practice to buy extra tickets for people up front because you wanted to make sure you had them.  A Michigan ticket was something of value that people wanted, not something that was a commodity that the whole risk in price change was placed on me.  It is not good business when the policy is "If our team is good, we will charge you more.  If our team is bad, you paid too much for your tickets but that's  your problem."

UM2k1

March 31st, 2015 at 2:09 PM ^

I like getting rid of the dynamic pricing, but the face values in the table upsets me.  With PSD, tickets and the processing fee, I pay $76.43 per ticket for seats in the endzone as a season ticket holder.  The athletic department is now selling 3 of the 7 games (including homecoming) for less than that.  It would only cost $10 more to buy individual tickets to all the home games than purchasing season tickets.  That option would also make attending games like UNLV and Rutgers optional, which would save money.  I would be even more upset if I were in the Victors sections, as those season tickets cost $151.43 each (substantially more than all of the individual tickets).

 

If the athletic department wants to keep season ticket holders, and not rely on individual sales to fill all of the games (let alone the lower tier ones), they need to take a long hard look at what, if any, benefit the fan receives from purchasing season tickets.  I was likely not going to renew this year had the coaching situation not played out as it did, and am now not certain about next year.  The opportunity to save $10 per year (if you WANT to attend every game) does not seem worth it, when one could save over $500 and still go to home opener, MSU and OSU...

HokelessRomantic

March 31st, 2015 at 6:23 PM ^

You can claim 80% of the "gift" but that not your ultimate deduction. Your net effect is your tax bracket multiplied by 80% of the gift. It's not a great deal by any means, so the poster is right in saying its substantially more expensive to buy season tix. As far as your comment on priority points, they mean nothing unless you see value in owning season tix. Even then, the AD keeps raising the threshold for points so only the top tier givers reap any real benefit from them. You need to have given half a million dollars to get a good parking pass anymore.

LSAClassOf2000

March 31st, 2015 at 4:12 PM ^

The very last thing Brandon launched at Domino's was one of the things that brought it out of the market share gutter - the "new" formula, moving away from that infamous carboard sort of quality of the crust and the "are you sure this is cheese?" quality of the cheese, so there was that. The performance overall was mostly flat overall from the IPO to his actual departure. I still remember the self-depreciating ads which gave you the impression that perhaps they were trying. For a long time, Domino's was dead last in its market in just about every category. 

The Mad Hatter

March 31st, 2015 at 3:21 PM ^

I have no idea what Hackett's political affiliations are, and I don't want to know.  But were he to run for Governor in 2018, not only would I vote for him, I would campaign for him too.

He seems to be turning the river of shit left by DB into a beautiful clear stream pretty damn quickly.

Blue Mike

March 31st, 2015 at 3:14 PM ^

The funny thing is, wouldn't this be the year for dynamic pricing to work?  In the past it was a terrible idea because interest dropped as the season went along, so prices (theoretically) dropped as well. But this year, with the Harbaugh factor and schedule, I'd guess that interest should go up, meaning ticket prices would go up and either the university makes more money, or tickets sell out earlier.  WIn/win either way.

I actually thought "dynamic pricing" was about having different ticket prices based on the opponent.  Didn't all tickets used to be the same price?  When I saw the press release, I thought dynamic pricing was alive and well.  I guess this is better?

Amutnal

March 31st, 2015 at 3:28 PM ^

I payed like $800 for two OSU tickets a couple years ago before the season started, only to see our team play terribly and enter the Game with a crappy record vs a solid OSU team. I ended up selling them online at a huge loss. With dynamic ticket pricing there was no way for the ticket price to correct itself without the buyer taking a huge hit. The burden shouldn't be on the consumer, it should be on the supplier. When the product fails to deliver it angers the consumer and creates contempt, which potentiate the fan vitriol and expedited his firing. However, if the team was good, I would not have been upset. The product has has to be good and meet expectations for dynamic pricing to work.