On the subject of attendance. . .

[akaGatorhoops]

I think this a good program and hopefully one that is increasingly used. . .

http://www.gatorcountry.com/football/article/uaa_makes_donating_tickets_even_easier/16042

[HALLGATOR]

I like it. lots better than letting the tickets go unused.

[tupacbiff]

Another poor decision. Giving away tickets does not work it cheapens tge product and makes the ticket the opposite of scarce.

[Bradass]

Another poor decision. Giving away tickets does not work it cheapens tge product and makes the ticket the opposite of scarce.

I...I just...wow. Did you read the article?

[g8rboy]

I...I just...wow. Did you read the article?

Apparently not

[rserina]

I...I just...wow. Did you read the article?
I've always found that reading just gets in the way of tendentious opinions.

[gatorcal]

I...I just...wow. Did you read the article?

Boooooo charity!

[swampgas44]

I...I just...wow. Did you read the article?

Tupac feels obligated to hijack every thread whether he reads the content or not. :shhh:

[tupacbiff]

Yes read the article. I am all for charity. However my point was if u give something away for
Free it lowers the perceived value this making it less prestigious to attend.

You want to ramp up attendance u don't give
Tickets away for free be it to
Charity or
Not.

[gatorbogey]

great!
this is how it should be done. ticket holders have the option to donate their unused tix to a charity - or to a friend. perfect. good way to build the fan base.

[g8tr96]

great!
this is how it should be done. ticket holders have the option to donate their unused tix to a charity - or to a friend. perfect. good way to build the fan base.


I agree 100%.

And if we can donate them to the Military, Police Dept's and or Fire Dept's, then all the better.

[akaGatorhoops]

Pac's opinion aside, I know the UAA is excited about the program and hoping it becomes widely used. Pass the word on, as it obviously relies upon fan participation.

go gators!

[go82uf]

100% support. Don't see how this cheapens anything. Tough tickets will still be tough to get.

[your_perfect_enemy]

Yes read the article. I am all for charity. However my point was if u give something away for
Free it lowers the perceived value this making it less prestigious to attend.

You want to ramp up attendance u don't give
Tickets away for free be it to
Charity or
Not.

I understand your argument if they were just giving tickets away to the general public, but I'm not sure it applies here. Without this system, 95+% of the tickets being donated would have gone unused (I'll assume some people would have a change of heart and end up going) but by giving them to under privileged kids or friends you know who want them I'd guess at least 85+% of them would be used, which increases attendance. Is your argument these people who got the tickets for free would be less likely to go in the future if they had to pay?

[MoscowGtr]

Yes read the article. I am all for charity. However my point was if u give something away for
Free it lowers the perceived value this making it less prestigious to attend.

You want to ramp up attendance u don't give
Tickets away for free be it to
Charity or
Not.

You don't know what you are talking about--even after claiming, twice, to have read the article. The school is not giving tickets away for free. It is making it easier for existing ticket holders to give their tickets to people who will use them. This helps to avoid situations in which the game is a sell-out, but there are empty seats. This is exactly the sort of thing that has haunted backetball attendance (season ticket holders failing to use their tickets).

It has nothing to do with giving the tickets away as an initial matter.

[g8rboy]

giving away an already paid for ticket, is not free. people who would not have shown up and filled a seat, now get to do so. brilliant.

[twodaparty]

You don't know what you are talking about--even after claiming, twice, to have read the article. The school is not giving tickets away for free. It is making it easier for existing ticket holders to give their tickets to people who will use them. This helps to avoid situations in which the game is a sell-out, but there are empty seats. This is exactly the sort of thing that has haunted backetball attendance (season ticket holders failing to use their tickets).

It has nothing to do with giving the tickets away as an initial matter.

Never try to convince someone who Is very stubborn, that they are wrong.

The end.

[ArtVandelay]

Yes read the article. I am all for charity. However my point was if u give something away for
Free it lowers the perceived value this making it less prestigious to attend.

You want to ramp up attendance u don't give
Tickets away for free be it to
Charity or
Not.

I've been saying this for years on here. Please give me the proper credit if you are going to basically steal my posts...

[tupacbiff]

I did rea the article and understand it. Despite what you say they are giving away the tickets be it in the secondary market.

Giving something away for free cheapens the product. Yes sometimes it makes sense when launching a new product to get the word out.

However in terms of a sporting event it hurts tge secondary market and the perceive value of the event. Why not come up with an idea to rancorous he the ticket buyer to attend rather than provide a system to give the ticket away?

[akaGatorhoops]

From a purely economic standpoint, 'pac's basic theory has merit. Something given away for free will obviosuly have less value than something that has scarcity and cost. That being said, I can not imagine how a fan giving a purchased ticket to a friend or charity would do anything other than help fill the o'dome with people seeking to attend.

[RayUF07]

I did rea the article and understand it. Despite what you say they are giving away the tickets be it in the secondary market.

Giving something away for free cheapens the product. Yes sometimes it makes sense when launching a new product to get the word out.

However in terms of a sporting event it hurts tge secondary market and the perceive value of the event. Why not come up with an idea to rancorous he the ticket buyer to attend rather than provide a system to give the ticket away?

So all of the NFL players with foundations that provide tickets to kids and others less fortunate are cheapening the product?

LOL! I've heard it all.


I was going to attend the UF-USC football game this year, but since Joey gave his tickets to Bill and Suzie gave hers to Bob, I decided against it. The product was so cheap it wasn't worth it anymore.....

[RayUF07]

From a purely economic standpoint, 'pac's basic theory has merit. Something given away for free will obviosuly have less value than something that has scarcity and cost. That being said, I can not imagine how a fan giving a purchased ticket to a friend or charity would do anything other than help fill the o'dome with people seeking to attend.

Exactly! The theory is correct, it just does not apply in this situation.

[akaGatorhoops]

However in terms of a sporting event it hurts tge secondary market and the perceive value of the event. Why not come up with an idea to rancorous he the ticket buyer to attend rather than provide a system to give the ticket away?

Not true. The secondary market is not impacted, as the ticket was already sold and is "off the market". The people using donated tickets were likely not from the pool of secondary buyers. Thus, neither supply nor demand were impacted.

As for the latter suggestion, it is a fine ideal but not based in reality. People may live out of town, may be ill, have work obligations, travel requirements, family needs or any other host of reasons that preclude attendance. In those cases, a system that makes it easier for the ticket holder to assure usage... is a good system.

[akaGatorhoops]

I will give Tupac credit for one thing . . . .no one brings attention to a subject, thread or column quite like he does!
I wish he would comment on all of my writings!! :)

[REM08]

giving away an already paid for ticket, is not free. people who would not have shown up and filled a seat, now get to do so. brilliant.

Several of you have made this point and I don't agree. I'm not saying Im' for or against this idea. But I think its logical to state that a percentage of the arena sitting in seats that were of no cost to them - constitutes free tickets.

I'm a Kentucky football fan and know something about free tickets. I went to college at a Christian school 15 miles south of Lexington and always knew that if the Cats were having a bad year and were about to play a bad opponent in bad weather, I could count on someone handing out free tickets in my schools cafeteria the day before th game. To this day, the thought of paying to see a game is somewhat colored by having received free tickets (Im' not trying to compare UK football in 30 degree weather with UF basketball though). As far as I can tell, the UK football ticket strategy served as an empty stimulus. Unless the product on the field (or court) is appealing enough to the population that has the capability of seeing it, free tickets aren't going to help. For UK football, the fans in the seats will correspond with the product on the field - free tickets or not.

The thought pattern for you guys would have to be that there are just some people who don't realize how much they'd like to see UF basketball. They go for free and get hooked - ending up paying for tickets in the future. I think there's also something to the stand looking fuller that could help perception of others thinking of going to a game. The product on the court for you guys is great. I normally don't like free tickets but if it ever works it may have a chance for you guys.

[tupacbiff]

So all of the NFL players with foundations that provide tickets to kids and others less fortunate are cheapening the product?

LOL! I've heard it all.


I was going to attend the UF-USC football game this year, but since Joey gave his tickets to Bill and Suzie gave hers to Bob, I decided against it. The product was so cheap it wasn't worth it anymore.....

Yes, what if instead of giving those tickets to charity they opted to charge $25k for the ticket? Wouldn't that make it more scarce/prestigious?

An easy example is the 12-12-12 benefit. When tix were $25 not such a big deal to attend. Now the scalpers got their hands on them and jacked the price to $10k for the good seats it is much more of an event to be at. Perceived value. At $25 no one asked me about it now that the jacked prices made the paper friends are callin to see if I can hook them up.

To your second point...you took it a step too far. The question is are you more likely to attend if you bought the ticket or were given a free one? At a certain price I think it's obvious that what you have paid would have an impact on attending. Maybe if it's $5 for a ticket you could eat that loss. However if you paid $5,000 aren't you more likely to attend?

[akaGatorhoops]

Several of you have made this point and I don't agree. I'm not saying Im' for or against this idea. But I think its logical to state that a percentage of the arena sitting in seats that were of no cost to them - constitutes free tickets.

I'm a Kentucky football fan and know something about free tickets. I went to college at a Christian school 15 miles south of Lexington and always knew that if the Cats were having a bad year and were about to play a bad opponent in bad weather, I could count on someone handing out free tickets in my schools cafeteria the day before th game. To this day, the thought of paying to see a game is somewhat colored by having received free tickets (Im' not trying to compare UK football in 30 degree weather with UF basketball though). As far as I can tell, the UK football ticket strategy served as an empty stimulus. Unless the product on the field (or court) is appealing enough to the population that has the capability of seeing it, free tickets aren't going to help. For UK football, the fans in the seats will correspond with the product on the field - free tickets or not.

The thought pattern for you guys would have to be that there are just some people who don't realize how much they'd like to see UF basketball. They go for free and get hooked - ending up paying for tickets in the future. I think there's also something to the stand looking fuller that could help perception of others thinking of going to a game. The product on the court for you guys is great. I normally don't like free tickets but if it ever works it may have a chance for you guys.

You were given free tickets b/c they were unwanted, thus deemed worthless.
The tickets given to charity or a friend are not necessairly unwanted, but rather unable to be used.
I think that is an important distinction.
Also, this is not a mass of free tickets floating around among the general public. It is a group of tickets that are used by friends of the purchasers or charity, and are thus not "free" tickets diluting the secondary market.
For all we know, the purchaser may be transferring the ticket to his friend electronically for $100. The university is simply making it easier for the fan to phyically move that ticket to his friend.
Those receiving the ticket through charity are likely never going to be part of the secondary buyers market. So the actual effect should, in theory, increase demand.... as there are fewer tickets being sold on the secondary market to the same number of potential buyers.. (<--- I learned that from Denslow's macro-economics class ;) )

[REM08]

You were given free tickets b/c they were unwanted, thus deemed worthless.
The tickets given to charity or a friend are not necessairly unwanted, but rather unable to be used.
I think that is an important distinction.
Also, this is not a mass of free tickets floating around among the general public. It is a group of tickets that are used by friends of the purchasers or charity, and are thus not "free" tickets diluting the secondary market.
For all we know, the purchaser may be transferring the ticket to his friend electronically for $100. The university is simply making it easier for the fan to phyically move that ticket to his friend.
Those receiving the ticket through charity are likely never going to be part of the secondary buyers market. So the actual effect should, in theory, increase demand.... as there are fewer tickets being sold on the secondary market to the same number of potential buyers.. (<--- I learned that from Denslow's macro-economics class ;) )

I agree its certainly not apples to apples. I do think I'm a little more likely than you to equate unsold/unwanted to unused, however (other than from a revenue perspective). Also, full disclosure, I'm lazy and unlike Tupac reported for himself, I did not read the article - am just responding based on posts. My example is only similar in that it allows people to attend a game for free. Hadn't thought about your economic lesson though, it makes sense.

[Ahab]

People may also be less likely to renew basketball season tickets if they're only using half or fewer of the tickets. However, they may be more satisfied with their purchase if they feel the tickets are going to a good cause. Also, anyone know if you could claim donated tickets as a charitable deduction?

[themistocles]

Tupac, you are off on this one.

This process will not cheapen anything.

You have become too trapped in your Economics and Capitalistic Theories.

100 tickets out of perhaps 10,000 will have no significant impact on anything. However, ti will give the opportunity for those who can't afford tickets (which are, by the way, amazingly expensive), to go to games they would wish to attend if they could afford them.


I might also note that the source of this idea, the University Athletic Association, is comprised 100% of AAU institutions, like the Ivy League and the Big 10. That is, however, an elite group of academic institutions who are not renowned for their athletic prowess, except in sports such as lacrosse and the like.

[RayUF07]

Yes, what if instead of giving those tickets to charity they opted to charge $25k for the ticket? Wouldn't that make it more scarce/prestigious?

An easy example is the 12-12-12 benefit. When tix were $25 not such a big deal to attend. Now the scalpers got their hands on them and jacked the price to $10k for the good seats it is much more of an event to be at. Perceived value. At $25 no one asked me about it now that the jacked prices made the paper friends are callin to see if I can hook them up.

To your second point...you took it a step too far. The question is are you more likely to attend if you bought the ticket or were given a free one? At a certain price I think it's obvious that what you have paid would have an impact on attending. Maybe if it's $5 for a ticket you could eat that loss. However if you paid $5,000 aren't you more likely to attend?

This is so off the mark, it's not even worth refuting. It'd be a waste of time.

[gatordavisl]

I think the issue has little to do with economics and more to do with filling seats and creating a raucous crowd atmosphere for the team.

[philnotfil]

You were given free tickets b/c they were unwanted, thus deemed worthless.
The tickets given to charity or a friend are not necessairly unwanted, but rather unable to be used.
I think that is an important distinction.

This is the important distinction that tupac is missing.

[GatorLurker]

I actually agree with Tupac on this one.

I have never had any difficulty giving away basketball tickets. I have never needed the UAA to do this service for me.

If I couldn't give them to friends ahead of the game I have been able to find parent/child pairs at Gate 1 that were overjoyed to get good seats for free.

If you can't give your tickets away it means that you ain't trying or they ain't worth having. The later is not correct.

[tupacbiff]

This is the important distinction that tupac is missing.

Sorry not missing it.

[tupacbiff]

This is so off the mark, it's not even worth refuting. It'd be a waste of time.

Thank you for conceding that you can't respond.

[tupacbiff]

Tupac, you are off on this one.

This process will not cheapen anything.

You have become too trapped in your Economics and Capitalistic Theories.

100 tickets out of perhaps 10,000 will have no significant impact on anything. However, ti will give the opportunity for those who can't afford tickets (which are, by the way, amazingly expensive), to go to games they would wish to attend if they could afford them.


I might also note that the source of this idea, the University Athletic Association, is comprised 100% of AAU institutions, like the Ivy League and the Big 10. That is, however, an elite group of academic institutions who are not renowned for their athletic prowess, except in sports such as lacrosse and the like.

What if I believe people who can't afford tickets shouldn't have tge ability to attend?

[akaGatorhoops]

If you can't give your tickets away it means that you ain't trying or they ain't worth having. The later is not correct.

There is a third possibility that you are discounting . . .

The ticket holder does not live in the area and does not have the luxury of walking up to the arena to hand off his/her tickets.

[akaGatorhoops]

What if I believe people who can't afford tickets shouldn't have tge ability to attend?

I guess my follow up question would be. . . do you believe people who can afford tickets should have the ability to use or disburse those tickets as they choose?

[tupacbiff]

I guess my follow up question would be. . . do you believe people who can afford tickets should have the ability to use or disburse those tickets as they choose?

Yes but don't think the Uaa should be the proponent behind it.

[gatorbogey]

I actually agree with Tupac on this one.

I have never had any difficulty giving away basketball tickets. I have never needed the UAA to do this service for me.

If I couldn't give them to friends ahead of the game I have been able to find parent/child pairs at Gate 1 that were overjoyed to get good seats for free.

If you can't give your tickets away it means that you ain't trying or they ain't worth having. The later is not correct.

since i'm in south florida, if i make it up to gate 1, i'm going to the game. for those fans not local to g'ville, i think this service is super! shouldn't be an empty seat in the lower bowl area.

[akaGatorhoops]

Yes but don't think the Uaa should be the proponent behind it.

I would be curious as to your thoughts on my economic theory. I admit, it likely has huge flaws, as I am hardly an economist... but my thought is this:

Those tickets forwarded to friend would have been provided to the friend regardless. The UAA is simply providing a vehicle to do so. And as stated, we have no idea if the friend is agreeing to buy the ticket or receiving it for free.

So, the only known "free tickets" are those donated to charity. I would argue that this actually would change the supply-demand component in favor of the ticket value. Here is why. . . those donated tickets are now off the market, and thus reducing supply. They were removed from the market without removing any secondary-market buyers, as it is logical to assume those receiving charity tix were likely not purchasers. So, the end result is less secondary market tickets available, for the same number of secondary buyers. Or, in economic terms, reduced supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would increase price/value.

If, instead of donated, those same tickets were to be sold on the secondary market... you would now have an increased number of tickets available for the same number of buyers. Or, in economic terms, increased supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would reduce price/value.

Thoughts?

[tupacbiff]

I would be curious as to your thoughts on my economic theory. I admit, it likely has huge flaws, as I am hardly an economist... but my thought is this:

Those tickets forwarded to friend would have been provided to the friend regardless. The UAA is simply providing a vehicle to do so. And as stated, we have no idea if the friend is agreeing to buy the ticket or receiving it for free.

So, the only known "free tickets" are those donated to charity. I would argue that this actually would change the supply-demand component in favor of the ticket value. Here is why. . . those donated tickets are now off the market, and thus reducing supply. They were removed from the market without removing any secondary-market buyers, as it is logical to assume those receiving charity tix were likely not purchasers. So, the end result is less secondary market tickets available, for the same number of secondary buyers. Or, in economic terms, reduced supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would increase price/value.

If, instead of donated, those same tickets were to be sold on the secondary market... you would now have an increased number of tickets available for the same number of buyers. Or, in economic terms, increased supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would reduce price/value.

Thoughts?

Interesting take. I think you make a few leaps in your thought process.

I guess I just don't think the Uaa should be spending time on this when they have so much better things to do. I also wonder how many worthwhile charities and the vetting process. What if thy gave them all to homeless people who didn't shower?

[RayUF07]

I would be curious as to your thoughts on my economic theory. I admit, it likely has huge flaws, as I am hardly an economist... but my thought is this:

Those tickets forwarded to friend would have been provided to the friend regardless. The UAA is simply providing a vehicle to do so. And as stated, we have no idea if the friend is agreeing to buy the ticket or receiving it for free.

So, the only known "free tickets" are those donated to charity. I would argue that this actually would change the supply-demand component in favor of the ticket value. Here is why. . . those donated tickets are now off the market, and thus reducing supply. They were removed from the market without removing any secondary-market buyers, as it is logical to assume those receiving charity tix were likely not purchasers. So, the end result is less secondary market tickets available, for the same number of secondary buyers. Or, in economic terms, reduced supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would increase price/value.

If, instead of donated, those same tickets were to be sold on the secondary market... you would now have an increased number of tickets available for the same number of buyers. Or, in economic terms, increased supply and static demand. That, by economic principles, would reduce price/value.

Thoughts?

He just doesn't get it, there really is no reason to keep feeding the troll. He's trolling here, hard, and is only taking his stance for the sake of arguing. Don't take the bait.

I'll answer you, since you do seem capable of understanding simple economics...the ONLY way his theory makes sense is, if there were say, 10,000 tickets unsold, and the school said "show up 20 minutes before the game and the first 10,000 get a free ticket." THEN, it would cheapen the product and reduce sales.

Providing a forum where people who have already PURCHASED a ticket can donate or otherwise distribute it however they please, will not cheapen the product. It will, however, provide someone who cannot attend a game, whether last minute or for other unforeseen circumstances an avenue to still have a butt in the seat to enjoy the game. There will still be the same secondary market available; after all, anyone who wants to make a buck is still going to try and sell the ticket, and anyone who wants to go is going to do what they can to purchase one.

[akaGatorhoops]

LOL! As Mike Hill said in an interview with me. . . Tupac never disappoints.
Unwashed homeless. . .this is going downhill fast.

[RayUF07]

LOL! As Mike Hill said in an interview with me. . . Tupac never disappoints.
Unwashed homeless. . .this is going downhill fast.

Exactly. That's why I wouldn't even give him a rebuttal. He's a joke, it's an act. I wasn't going to help feed that.

[MJGator8104]

My husband and I have bought football tickets for thirty years. When we lived in the state of Florida, we attended every game. When we lived in Tennessee, we did our best to attend at least two home games and the Kentucky or Vandy away games. Now that we're in Vegas, we're lucky to be able to attend one game.

Point is, we always do our best to have (Gator) fannies in our seats and this system makes it much easier and more likely we can make it happen. Same principle for the bball tickets and it's really a great system.

[philnotfil]

Interesting take. I think you make a few leaps in your thought process.

I guess I just don't think the Uaa should be spending time on this when they have so much better things to do. I also wonder how many worthwhile charities and the vetting process. What if thy gave them all to homeless people who didn't shower?

They have better things to do than to figure out how to get paid for tickets into the hands of people who will actually attend the games?

[grant1]

I did rea the article and understand it. Despite what you say they are giving away the tickets be it in the secondary market.

Giving something away for free cheapens the product. Yes sometimes it makes sense when launching a new product to get the word out.

However in terms of a sporting event it hurts tge secondary market and the perceive value of the event. Why not come up with an idea to rancorous he the ticket buyer to attend rather than provide a system to give the ticket away?

Many game times are controlled by TV schedules and you are not going to get as many out-of-town season ticket holders to a mid-week 8 or 9 PM game. Instead of these empty seats, this program covers that.

The program is not about revenue, but getting butts in the seats; it has absolutely nothing about cheapening the product.

[your_perfect_enemy]

I think the best thing they could do to boost attendance and revenue is sell alchohol. I know it's an SEC rule and I absolutely think it's good for football but I think it would be fine in every other sport. It would probably boost attendance 5-10% in every sport and they could make a killing selling bottles of crappy bud light for 400% the cost.

[Ahab]

No dice at on campus facilities.

[Brewski]

No dice at on campus facilities.

They could make exceptions for the boxes or even the club if they wanted like football. May have to amend some bylaws though.

[GatorLurker]

No dice at on campus facilities.

Orange and Brew is on campus.

Haven't been there in years, so perhaps the "brew" is now tea or coffee.

[Brewski]

Yep, Orange and Brew still has beer.

[Ahab]

I think the NCAA has a rule against alcohol at on campus athletic events.

[Brewski]

I think the NCAA has a rule against alcohol at on campus athletic events.

It's a SEC rule, not NCAA...at least in football. But there are loopholes. You can find booze in the sky boxes during any UF football game.

Go watch a Cinci football game. They sell beer in the main concourses.