Don't know if this is really true.

oskidunker;603394 said:

---

Don't know if this is really true.

---

It is true, but as FiatSlug has pointed out, the logistics of having Cal on the same side as the temp bleachers wouldn't have been all that difficult.

They absolutely did for games at ATT since you were allowed to choose your specific seat. For the sections A-C in question... inventory was about 4500 seats... as of April CAL had sold only 40 or so of those seats. Read that again. 40 out of 4500. Cal then eliminated the per seat donation requirement (quietly). Yet another mistake. What they should have done RIGHT THEN is recognize they had made a mistake and then move the students, young alumni and band over to those seats. As FiatSlug and I have been saying, ATT was staggeringly mishandled. The worse marketing / pricing fiasco I have ever seen not only in sports, but in business in general. The only thing that would be worse was the introduction of New Coke.

bluezonebear;603404 said:

---

do people actually take into consideration where restrooms and concessions are located when buying tickets?

i can tell you, as someone who has attended games for 20 years, that has never entered the discussion among my group. it certainly didn't come up in our group when we decided not to renew season tickets this year. what did come up was:

1. price of season ticket
2. quality of cal team
3. quality of cal opponent

p.s. i can guarantee that a new memorial stadium will have no impact on my decision to pick up season tickets in 2012.

---

xultaif;602727 said:

---

Marketing 101. You price, market and sell those tickets BEFORE the season starts so you're not dependent on the whim of the team's record, weather, time of game, etc.

In May the athletic department knew those seats weren't selling. What they should have done is simply switch out the students and young alumni, put them there. The visiting fans would buy the seats that would now be vacated by students and young alumni.

---

I think you have been informed several times that you can't have the student section behind the visitor's bench.

Spazzy McGee;603446 said:

---

I think you have been informed several times that you can't have the student section behind the visitor's bench.

---

It's a straw man. Since you've read through the thread, I think it has been pointed out repeatedly that the CAL sideline could have been on that side. You know, just like it is at Memorial. Why this is so hard to grasp is beyond me.

xultaif;603450 said:

---

It's a straw man. Since you've read through the thread, I think it has been pointed out repeatedly that the CAL sideline could have been on that side. You know, just like it is at Memorial. Why this is so hard to grasp is beyond me.

---

Actually I didn't read through the thread at all... I clicked on pg 1 and like 3. I'm guessing that the sidelines were already set. Moreover, SS seats generate like zero money. Being able to sell those bleacher seats, period, to Cal or non-Cal fans is probably more important than the minimal home field advantage afforded by moving the SS to the sideline seats. Student section has been mostly tiny this year anyway, and empty student seats are even sadder than seats filled by visiting fans, imo.

They wanted revenue out of those seats. They didn't get it. Had the Donation required been less, I would have picked them instead of the corner of the end zone in level 3.I wrote off this year, knew I would not like ATT and decided to save some money.No one was motivated to pay MORE than they did at Memorial for a lesser experience.

The season tickets holders that live far away took a year off and didn't care about losing their priority.

The fans that live in the East Bay, near Cal did not care to travel and were not induced to do so.Deals were worse, not better.

Blue and Gold Zoners are still angry about the elimination of the Family Plans.

The Casual fan did not like the schedule.

Walk ups have been poor. People without a connection to Cal could care less about these games, especially after the Oregon Game.

Spazzy McGee;603457 said:

---

Actually I didn't read through the thread at all... I clicked on pg 1 and like 3.

---

That's odd... because had you just clicked on page 1 and like 3, you wouldn't have read anything about the sideline seats vis-a-vis the team. instead of restating the point, i'll let you go back and read the thread.

Spazzy McGee;603457 said:

---

I'm guessing that the sidelines were already set.

---

And who do you think sets them? CAL. So we could set them however we like.

Spazzy McGee;603457 said:

---

Being able to sell those bleacher seats, period, to Cal or non-Cal fans is probably more important than the minimal home field advantage afforded by moving the SS to the sideline seats.

---

For SC, the seats now vacated by the students would have sold out. The Utah fans at the game on saturday would have bought whatever the best seats were available.

xultaif;603474 said:

---

That's odd... because had you just clicked on page 1 and like 3, you wouldn't have read anything about the sideline seats vis-a-vis the team. instead of restating the point, i'll let you go back and read the thread.


And who do you think sets them? CAL. So we could set them however we like.


For SC, the seats now vacated by the students would have sold out. The Utah fans at the game on saturday would have bought whatever the best seats were available.

---

Sorry, I'm not gonna read through 5 pages of your screaming.

When I say "set" I mean "decided."

For SC, the seats now vacated by the students would have sold at a much lower premium, because they're endzone seats. Thus less money for AD, thus bad.

I think you're trying to attack a problem that doesn't even really exist. So there are a bunch of opposing fans on the sideline. Who cares? The team has the rest of the Cal fanbase at it's back, and it's not like the stadium can even get so loud as to disrupt play anyway... If anyone should have a finger pointed at them, it's the non-attending Cal fanbase who won't even pay the single game prices for the sideline seats (which are now going to visiting fans).

xultaif;603441 said:

---

The only thing that would be worse was the introduction of New Coke.

---

whoa, cool your jets, uhhh, let me think ...

Spazzy McGee;603497 said:

---

Sorry, I'm not gonna read through 5 pages of your screaming.

---

classic... your disingenuity knows no bounds, on either site.

Spazzy McGee;603497 said:

---

When I say "set" I mean "decided."

---

and when I say cal marketing knew what was going on in april, that means they had time to "decide" on a different course of action. unless of course you think five months is too short a time to decide to switch sides of the field.

it's clear you don't honestly know what you're talking about here and are driven by some other motivation. so i'll just let it go.

philly1121;603223 said:

---

I hear what you're saying. However, it was never an option to put the students in the bleachers. It would have put them right behind the visiting team. Cal certainly wasn't going to be on that side of the field as its the sunny side. Also, and I'm not sure about this but were the bleacher seats reserved for season ticket holders? If so, season ticket holders seem to be giving/selling their tickets to the opposing team!

---

A couple points (as a season ticket holder in section C):

It's all hindsight, but I guarantee that at this point Tedford wishes his team were in the sun with a full and loud student section behind him rather than the library effect he currently has.

Season ticket holders are NOT giving/selling their tickets to the opposing team. What happened is that VERY VERY VERY few season ticket holders were dumb enough (as I was) to buy tickets in A-C. The prices were ridiculous, but I chose view over amenities, a decision apparently no other ticket holders chose. I chose like midway through the process and got primo tickets cause the section was completely empty! After the process finished up, the section was practically empty and they realized they had a problem. This was the key decision point, and they chose poorly. They refunded some of my money and tried to sell those tickets to Cal fans at a lower price point. Very few takers. Another decision point. Now they are desperate and they put them out to the general public, including on Groupon. You know who took them up on that? Opposing fans. Our core fans already had their tickets - usually WAY up high on the third base side, the bandwagon fans passed - due to team suckiness, not price. Who is left? Oh, those nice USC fans. Oooops. I now go to games surrounded by opposing fans (USC fans actually looked at me weird for being in the section), despite having paid like 5x what they paid (at least originally, now maybe 3x or so).

Absolutely the right decision when they realized they were in trouble would have been:
* Move all A & C ticket holders to B
* Move the student section to A & C
* Fill in B as best as possible - maybe young alumni or some other screwed group.

The end result would have been WAY more student participation, less unhappy Cal fans sitting in A/B/C, better TV, a louder stadium, and less stoked opposing fans. All this for probably little to no delta in income - IMHO the opposing fans sitting in A-C would have happily bought good tickets in other sections, they just WAY lucked out due to the ATO's mess up (look around the stadium, there are TONS of open seats in the view section in the endzone, the bleachers would make a good visitor section, etc.).

Oh well, hindsight is 20:20. Looking forward to lessons being learned for pricing - or at least damage control - next year in Memorial.

xultaif;603519 said:

---

classic... your disingenuity knows no bounds, on either site.

and when I say cal marketing knew what was going on in april, that means they had time to "decide" on a different course of action. unless of course you think five months is too short a time to decide to switch sides of the field.

it's clear you don't honestly know what you're talking about here and are driven by some other motivation. so i'll just let it go.

---

I "know" that to fulfill your demands, Cal would have to completely change the entire ticket pricing structure and stadium configuration within a few months of the season's start, and I "know" that that is a huge deal, and I "know" that it would lead to minimal, if any, overall gain to the athletic department.

So yes, you would be advised to let it go.

"Oh well, hindsight is 20:20. Looking forward to lessons being learned for pricing - or at least damage control - next year in Memorial."

Do you really think ATO performance will miraculously improve? Or are you just smoking dope?

march2397;603560 said:

---

Do you really think ATO performance will miraculously improve? Or are you just smoking dope?

---

Can we assume that we're dealing with reasonably intelligent and semi-trained adults who are trying to do their job the best they can? And that they're capable of learning from mistakes? (I mean, even flatworms are trainable.)

JSC 76;603564 said:

---

Can we assume that we're dealing with reasonably intelligent and semi-trained adults who are trying to do their job the best they can? And that they're capable of learning from mistakes? (I mean, even flatworms are trainable.)

---

No. Seriously. Look at basketball attendance the last two years, one of which when we won our first conference title in 50 years. A grand total of one sellout over two years. One. Football this year is, sadly, a debacle.

According to Matt Turwilliger, it is being redone. Wouldn't it be funny if they RAISED the levels.:p

JSC 76;603564 said:

---

Can we assume that we're dealing with reasonably intelligent and semi-trained adults who are trying to do their job the best they can? And that they're capable of learning from mistakes? (I mean, even flatworms are trainable.)

---

Yes, we can.

Don't be swayed into thinking this is somehow anything less than the collective failure of our own fanbase.

HelloBowlesHall;603543 said:

---

A couple points (as a season ticket holder in section C):

It's all hindsight, but I guarantee that at this point Tedford wishes his team were in the sun with a full and loud student section behind him rather than the library effect he currently has.

Season ticket holders are NOT giving/selling their tickets to the opposing team. What happened is that VERY VERY VERY few season ticket holders were dumb enough (as I was) to buy tickets in A-C. The prices were ridiculous, but I chose view over amenities, a decision apparently no other ticket holders chose. I chose like midway through the process and got primo tickets cause the section was completely empty! After the process finished up, the section was practically empty and they realized they had a problem. This was the key decision point, and they chose poorly. They refunded some of my money and tried to sell those tickets to Cal fans at a lower price point. Very few takers. Another decision point. Now they are desperate and they put them out to the general public, including on Groupon. You know who took them up on that? Opposing fans. Our core fans already had their tickets - usually WAY up high on the third base side, the bandwagon fans passed - due to team suckiness, not price. Who is left? Oh, those nice USC fans. Oooops. I now go to games surrounded by opposing fans (USC fans actually looked at me weird for being in the section), despite having paid like 5x what they paid (at least originally, now maybe 3x or so).

Absolutely the right decision when they realized they were in trouble would have been:
* Move all A & C ticket holders to B
* Move the student section to A & C
* Fill in B as best as possible - maybe young alumni or some other screwed group.The end result would have been WAY more student participation, less unhappy Cal fans sitting in A/B/C, better TV, a louder stadium, and less stoked opposing fans. All this for probably little to no delta in income - IMHO the opposing fans sitting in A-C would have happily bought good tickets in other sections, they just WAY lucked out due to the ATO's mess up (look around the stadium, there are TONS of open seats in the view section in the endzone, the bleachers would make a good visitor section, etc.).

Oh well, hindsight is 20:20. Looking forward to lessons being learned for pricing - or at least damage control - next year in Memorial.

---

Why can't they do it now. Offer to exchange any student ticket for any unsold seats in the sections behind the team.

SanMateoBear;603215 said:

---

Don't know if they've killed the Cal Band, but they've killed the college game day experience. People consider me a dyed-in-the-wool Cal fan, but over the past several years I find that I have less and less motivation to go to the game in person. If I'm going to be blasted with ads throughout the game, not hear the band play, etc, its a better experience to watch on TV. This is not about the team stinking it up - I don't think I missed a home game during the Holmoe years even. Its about a crappy experience that costs a lot - yes I bought a walk up ticket for $85 (yes scalpers were cheaper, but I figure my $$ should go to Cal). I've talked to many people who say they've written to Sandy about the ever worsening game day experience, but none have ever received a reply.

---

As "randythebear" wrote, "Exactly right!"

To take this back to the original post, I don't know for whom it is a "disgrace": Certainly not for the fans, I don't think, because I consider myself a loyal Cal fan, but the type of loyalty that manifests itself in a sense of duty to attend every game and never leave early... I lost that type of loyalty with the advent of four-dollar bottles of water and NONSTOP promotions blaring throughout the game, crap like that.

Is the Athletic Department (specifically Marketing) disgraced? Yeah, I guess, but they seem to be slowly heading in the right direction with the new facilities.

Should the Cal Football "community", in general, be digraced by the type of turnouts we're having at ATT? No, it is what it is. Some huge mistakes were made this year, but next year we're back home. Now let's see how things are managed next year when ESP falls short and the market for neighboring tiers of seats isn't much higher than it was last year.

"Disgrace" is way too strong a word for this.

march2397;603560 said:

---

"Oh well, hindsight is 20:20. Looking forward to lessons being learned for pricing - or at least damage control - next year in Memorial."

Do you really think ATO performance will miraculously improve? Or are you just smoking dope?

---

Umm....ok....don't think that was necessary. My wording probably should have been "hoping that lessions will be learned..." without the implication that they will have been.

But to answer your question, such as it is - I don't know. CMS is quite different than AT&T for a number of reasons.

1. They have more experience with the configuration and people have more built-in expectations/experience.
2. They'll have more seats to play with (at least than AT&T), so maybe they will not have the same pricing pressures to "make up" for the smaller venue.
3. People have emotional attachment to CMS and the Berkeley gameday experience, so presumably they will come regardless of record - at least more so than this year, so demand should be higher I would guess.
4. This had to be a scarring year for the ATO, pretty much the whole situation is farged up and you'd have to be blind to not see it. Considering the tone of the selling of the sideline bleachers and then falling all the way to Groupon, I think they are pretty cognizant of the issue. Of course recognition != solution.
5. Sections are priced vertically down the whole stadium section, so the equation will change somewhat. Rather than having empty view sections and bleachers, if they mess up the pricing next year then you'll see empty whole sections between the ESP section and the corners, that basically the endzones and corners will be full.
6. New stadium, you'll get some bandwagon/casual fans just on that basis alone.

Are they going to run it like they did this year, with a selection process? Will the donation levels be sane? Will inertia keep people paying the donation to keep "their" seats, or will we see people make the rational decision at the time of their selection "oh, I can live with the corner view for that much price difference"?

To be honest, I wouldn't be overly surprised if they flatten the donation levels quite a bit to at least fill from the center out...

68great;603590 said:

---

Why can't they do it now. Offer to exchange any student ticket for any unsold seats in the sections behind the team.

---

I'd be down for this, and I'll be there is a lot of unsold inventory for the ... poor ... games we have left on the schedule. There is some benefit in spirit and volume to keeping a whole and contiguous student section, but I'm willing to roll the dice at this point.

Spazzy McGee;603587 said:

---

Yes, we can.

Don't be swayed into thinking this is somehow anything less than the collective failure of our own fanbase.

---

Hold the phone.

The fanbase is what it is, and it's a known commodity. If the task is to sell x number of tickets to a a potential audience of y people, who have a known number of factors influencing their decision whether or not to buy -- that's a marketing problem. I'm sure there is a strategy involving pricing, promotion and the game day experience that will put the butts in the seats.

68great;603590 said:

---

Why can't they do it now. Offer to exchange any student ticket for any unsold seats in the sections behind the team.

---

Students cannot sit behind the opposing bench by Pac 12 rule.

bar20;602518 said:

---

I would blame it on seanon ticket sales. Cal raised the prices greatly thinkng because there were fewer seats at AT&T that all games would be a selout. Well a lot of people got pissed off because they raised the prices on a 5-7 team. I think they announce the the tickets sold and not the butts in the seats. Blame it on greed by the athletic department on a mediocre team.

---

No way thats the number of butts in the seats.

Giants sold out 81 games for a team that was the worst offensive team I can remember (or saw enough to gauge).

81.

Spazzy McGee;603587 said:

---

Yes, we can.

Don't be swayed into thinking this is somehow anything less than the collective failure of our own fanbase.

---

Yes, I can buy the notion that adults do learn from their mistakes. I can also buy the notion that adults can be stubborn. Even well-trained, intelligent adults.

I do not buy the idea that Cal's fanbase is somehow responsible for the failure to fill AT&T Park.

First, Cal's fanbase is not monolithic: it does not behave as if it has one collective will when it comes to purchasing season tickets. The Cal fanbase is remarkable diverse and represents many different economic circumstances influencing their purchasing decisions.

Second, economic conditions in the Bay Area did not indicate that there would be large amounts of disposable income available for discretionary spending. That often happens when unemployment runs into the high single digits. In other words, the budgets of many Cal season ticket holders were squeezed and more than a few could be priced out if there were insufficient seats at reasonable price points.

Third, not only were a higher percentage of seats carrying a donation at AT&T vs Cal Memorial, but a higher raw number of seats also carried a donation at AT&T vs. Cal Memorial. In other words, the sales plan for AT&T clearly envisioned being able to demand significantly more money due to a scarcity of seats at AT&T (only 62.6% of Cal Memorial's 2010 capacity; 71.8% of Cal Memorial's 2012 capacity.

Cal's fanbase was not at fault here. The sales plan ignored the current economic conditions and the price points at which season ticket holders had become accustomed to buying Cal season tickets. Just because Cal would carry significantly greater operating costs in playing a home season away from home (specifically, rent for AT&T Park) does not justify gouging (or attempting to gouge) the fan base.

I got lucky: I was able to buy season tickets at a price point I could afford in no small part because of the priority points I accumulated over the previous two decades. If I had been forced to wait another week or ten days to buy seats, I probably would have been priced out or dropped season tickets altogether because the remaining choices would have been so poor as to not merit the expense.

Being a fan does not mean that you should go to the poorhouse to fulfill that role.

Put a winning product on the field and the people will come. If we lose against UCLA..you think 35K will be bad..see how many come out for Oregon st or WSU!! Winning convincingly against UCLA (even against the lowly Bruins) will make it 2 in a row and will excite people again!

Quote:

---

FiatSlug;603371 said:

---

I'm sorry, but this is just garbage. The best option would have been to put the students in the bleachers. As I've said repeatedly in many threads, the pricing structure for 2011 Cal football season tickets was botched, top to bottom.

---

I'm not a season ticket holder, but I would be an idiot if I thought, based on the comments on this and other threads, that the season ticket process was correctly done. It seems like it was clearly not a very good, thought out process.

Quote:

---

Part of that botched job was the placement of the students in Sections 136-141 and reserving Sections A-C for donor seating.

---

No argument there. Put them in the bleachers and move the Cal sideline to the bleacher side. I wonder if Tedford wanted the shade or if someone was completely opposed to having it on that side?

Quote:

---

This is a mistake of epic proportions for the simple reason that access to basic amenities (read: restrooms and food/drink concessions) is remote, a longer trek than any other ballpark location. It is not unlike Cal Memorial's Student Section.

---

Never been to ATT so wouldn't know. But its a fairly new stadium so there's got to be something close by, no?

Quote:

---

There is no logistical reason why the Cal sideline could not have been in front of Sections A-C. The reason stated for why the Students were moved was doubletalk; put bluntly, it was a bull$#it reason for a bull$#it move.

---

Again, was someone or Administration opposed to having the Cal sideline on the East side? Additionally, it seems to me that since there were more seats on the West side, the theory was likely that alumni would buy on the "Cal side" and not the bleacher side, where the seating is limited.

Quote:

---

All very good points. Which also makes the season ticket pricing debacle that much more painful. There was an opportunity to sell out AT&T on a season ticket basis and the opportunity was lost in an effort to maximize revenue by leveraging a scarcity of seats. A sold out (or nearly sold out) AT&T Park for five home games has got to be worth more in 2012 season ticket sales than any additional ticket revenue realized from overpriced seats.

---

Well, let's look at this from the off-season standpoint. Riley gone, new QB, good receivers, plenty of optimism. AT&T Park in the City - what's not to love. Fans will come in droves. It seemed like a no-brainer. But the reality of it is that, the stadium isn't good for football, the team dropped ugly losses against ORegon and USC and the ATO poisoned the waters by alienating season ticket holders. What does that all add up to: a half empty stadium.

Casual fans and alienated season ticket holders will wait till Memorial opens up again. Die-hards will go to the games but also have complaints about the game day experience. Students may go but if its during the day, they will need UV 500 sunglasses and sunscreen to actually see the game. Oh and the Cal Band might play one or two songs - if you can hear them.

Spazzy McGee;603605 said:

---

Students cannot sit behind the opposing bench by Pac 12 rule.

---

It's as simple as that, Spazzy.

biely medved;603607 said:

---

No way thats the number of butts in the seats.

Giants sold out 81 games for a team that was the worst offensive team I can remember (or saw enough to gauge).

81.

---

Winning a World Series will do that for you.

FiatSlug;603618 said:

---

Yes, I can buy the notion that adults do learn from their mistakes. I can also buy the notion that adults can be stubborn. Even well-trained, intelligent adults.

I do not buy the idea that Cal's fanbase is somehow responsible for the failure to fill AT&T Park.

First, Cal's fanbase is not monolithic: it does not behave as if it has one collective will when it comes to purchasing season tickets. The Cal fanbase is remarkable diverse and represents many different economic circumstances influencing their purchasing decisions.

Second, economic conditions in the Bay Area did not indicate that there would be large amounts of disposable income available for discretionary spending. That often happens when unemployment runs into the high single digits. In other words, the budgets of many Cal season ticket holders were squeezed and more than a few could be priced out if there were insufficient seats at reasonable price points.

Third, not only were a higher percentage of seats carrying a donation at AT&T vs Cal Memorial, but a higher raw number of seats also carried a donation at AT&T vs. Cal Memorial. In other words, the sales plan for AT&T clearly envisioned being able to demand significantly more money due to a scarcity of seats at AT&T (only 62.6% of Cal Memorial's 2010 capacity; 71.8% of Cal Memorial's 2012 capacity.

Cal's fanbase was not at fault here. The sales plan ignored the current economic conditions and the price points at which season ticket holders had become accustomed to buying Cal season tickets. Just because Cal would carry significantly greater operating costs in playing a home season away from home (specifically, rent for AT&T Park) does not justify gouging (or attempting to gouge) the fan base.

I got lucky: I was able to buy season tickets at a price point I could afford in no small part because of the priority points I accumulated over the previous two decades. If I had been forced to wait another week or ten days to buy seats, I probably would have been priced out or dropped season tickets altogether because the remaining choices would have been so poor as to not merit the expense.

Being a fan does not mean that you should go to the poorhouse to fulfill that role.

---

I'm sorry, you're not convincing me. I do not believe 20k people were really and truly priced out.

Spazzy McGee;603587 said:

---

Don't be swayed into thinking this is somehow anything less than the collective failure of our own fanbase.

---

Let me guess. You were on the marketing team for the HP TouchPad. Clearly a collective failure of a customer base that should have lined up days in advance to purchase for $500, like they did for the iPad. There must be no such thing as a marketing strategy failure - just stupid customers who don't know what's good for them.

Spazzy McGee;603634 said:

---

I'm sorry, you're not convincing me. I do not believe 20k people were really and truly priced out.

---

FWIW I agree with both you and FS... the marketing job and communication, bleacher stuff was a clusterphuck from the start...HOWEVER, with that said, I do think the fan base this year was more apathetic than I expected. Wonder why schools in the SEC and Big12 say no one goes to the games....of course that is hyperbole but my God, if Cal was important to many, they'd have found a way to be there....

Spazzy McGee;603634 said:

---

I'm sorry, you're not convincing me. I do not believe 20k people were really and truly priced out.

---

Serious questions:

Where do you come up with 20K people?

And what percentage of those 20K would you expect to be season ticket holders?

What data would you want to see that would cause you to re-evaluate your position?

Cal_Fan2;603649 said:

---

if Cal was important to many, they'd have found a way to be there....

---

Thank you, my thoughts exactly.

I'm 26, I don't make a ton, and I *have had season tix since graduating. I think I paid about $100 more this year than when I first graduated, but realistically $100 isn't going to kill me. I don't think it'd kill a lot of Cal grads, and certainly not 20k people.

I just really fucking wanted to go to games.