How much would you pay to end the promotions?

5,866 Views | 36 Replies | Last: 11 yr ago by randythebear
Jeff82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's a simple question. By promotions, I mean all that stuff that keeps us from listening to the band during timeouts. Give it in a percentage. We would still sell naming rights to anything, as long as the donor doesn't need a separate pumping by the PA announcer.

Give it in a percentage above what you're paying now. This would make the games more fun, even if we lose.
SonOfCalVa
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Any idea what revenue comes in from the various promotions?
How much revenue is being lost due to the severe decline in "game day experience"?
FrankBear21
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The band has been sub-par for years. Keep the promotions.
bearsandgiants
How long do you want to ignore this user?
as annoying as i find them, too, i think most people would rather have double the promotions in exchange for free admission to the stadium. and neither outcome is likely.
FrankBear21
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Relax people, I'm kidding. The promos suck.
GB54
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd pay some to end promotions but more to make the games shorter. They are interminable particularly with a bad team.
Jeff82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't know how much revenue comes from the promotions, but one would have to assume it's not insubstantial, otherwise the athletic department wouldn't do them. My point is, what assurance can they have that if they stop the stuff hard-core fans are complaining about, those fans will make up the revenue loss. This also assumes that the team will not improve enough in the short-term to attract more interest from casual fans.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd be willing to pay 100 English pounds.

beelzebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Promotions are pretty minor compared to the 30 minutes of TV time outs during a game. Both however bring in $$$, so neither are going away any time soon.
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Does presenting a football to some Corporate guy every week generate revenue?
Do the stupid races on the Big board generate revenue?
Does telling us what a players favorite food is generate revenue?

All these cause the band not to play and are easy to fix. STOP THEM.
ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GB54;842328801 said:

I'd pay some to end promotions but more to make the games shorter. They are interminable particularly with a bad team.


I do wonder how much revenue is generated by a lot of these promotions. I can't remember any actual company names either, so does that mean they are even overpaying?

As for shorter games, TV money is $20+ million. They would be really expensive to shorten.
KevBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
beelzebear;842328814 said:

Promotions are pretty minor compared to the 30 minutes of TV time outs during a game. Both however bring in $$$, so neither are going away any time soon.


For me, the promotions are what makes the TV timeouts so unpalatable. I can sit through 2 minutes of the band playing and enjoying the ambient sights, sounds and smells of the stadium. What I can't easily sit through are in-stadium commercial breaks, which is what play-stoppages seem to have become. I already pay for the privilege of attending the game, I shouldn't also be subjected to a barrage of intrusive ads--especially since those ads restrict the band, which is an essential element of the game experience to me.

I want them to find a better balance with the audio ads. Perhaps play one only every other stoppage of play. But ultimately, you're probably right. Big time college athletic departments are whores, and Cal has proven itself to be no exception. I don't expect a roll back because they're not concerned with preserving an experience, only with marketing. If the end result of the ads is profitable, they'll stay (or even be increased).

I've been attending Cal football games since literally before I could remember. If you'd asked me ten years ago, I would have assumed I'd be a season ticket holder until I died. I'm no longer half so sure. It's not so plastic yet, but as the Cal football experience becomes more like an NFL experience, my enthusiasm for it will eventually no longer be great enough to sustain my attachment to it.
bear945
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KevBear;842328844 said:

For me, the promotions are what makes the TV timeouts so unpalatable. I can sit through 2 minutes of the band playing and enjoying the ambient sights, sounds and smells of the stadium. What I can't easily sit through are in-stadium commercial breaks, which is what play-stoppages seem to have become. I already pay for the privilege of attending the game, I shouldn't also be subjected to a barrage of intrusive ads--especially since those ads restrict the band, which is an essential element of the game experience to me.

I want them to find a better balance with the audio ads. Perhaps play one only every other stoppage of play. But ultimately, you're probably right. Big time college athletic departments are whores, and Cal has proven itself to be no exception. I don't expect a roll back because they're not concerned with preserving an experience, only with marketing. If the end result of the ads is profitable, they'll stay (or even be increased).

I've been attending Cal football games since literally before I could remember. If you'd asked me ten years ago, I would have assumed I'd be a season ticket holder until I died. I'm no longer half so sure. It's not so plastic yet, but as the Cal football experience becomes more like an NFL experience, my enthusiasm for it will eventually no longer be great enough to sustain my attachment to it.


This sums up my feelings as well. I will also note that as my attendance wanes so does my son's. So that possible future revenue stream will be left untapped potentially.
Davidson
How long do you want to ignore this user?
$0.00
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jeff82;842328802 said:

I don't know how much revenue comes from the promotions, but one would have to assume it's not insubstantial, otherwise the athletic department wouldn't do them. My point is, what assurance can they have that if they stop the stuff hard-core fans are complaining about, those fans will make up the revenue loss. This also assumes that the team will not improve enough in the short-term to attract more interest from casual fans.


You are asking the wrong question. Cal football is a product, not a charity. How many fans are staying home because the game experience sucks? That is the question. You don't get to raise ticket prices and make the gameday experience suck and then say, gee how much would you pay over the increased ticket prices to make the game day what it used to be.

My answer - I don't buy tickets now. If the gameday experience was what it used to be, I would buy tickets at the current ticket price.
beelzebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Honestly, the game day experience only sucks now because Cal isn't winning. Win and all the ancillary crap just doesn't matter. No one cares about 3 minute TV time out if we're stomping Oregon. Lose and people will focus on the negative, as seen here.

As always, winning cures most things.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KevBear;842328844 said:

For me, the promotions are what makes the TV timeouts so unpalatable. I can sit through 2 minutes of the band playing and enjoying the ambient sights, sounds and smells of the stadium. What I can't easily sit through are in-stadium commercial breaks, which is what play-stoppages seem to have become. I already pay for the privilege of attending the game, I shouldn't also be subjected to a barrage of intrusive ads--especially since those ads restrict the band, which is an essential element of the game experience to me.

I want them to find a better balance with the audio ads. Perhaps play one only every other stoppage of play. But ultimately, you're probably right. Big time college athletic departments are whores, and Cal has proven itself to be no exception. I don't expect a roll back because they're not concerned with preserving an experience, only with marketing. If the end result of the ads is profitable, they'll stay (or even be increased).

I've been attending Cal football games since literally before I could remember. If you'd asked me ten years ago, I would have assumed I'd be a season ticket holder until I died. I'm no longer half so sure. It's not so plastic yet, but as the Cal football experience becomes more like an NFL experience, my enthusiasm for it will eventually no longer be great enough to sustain my attachment to it.


I agree they will continue if it is profitable, however, I just wonder whether they have factored in the people who have left because they don't like the game experience anymore. I don't think they make that much money from most of the stupid promotions. It appears to me that they only look at the short term check instead of the longterm value.
Phantomfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jeff82;842328802 said:

I don't know how much revenue comes from the promotions, but one would have to assume it's not insubstantial, otherwise the athletic department wouldn't do them. My point is, what assurance can they have that if they stop the stuff hard-core fans are complaining about, those fans will make up the revenue loss. This also assumes that the team will not improve enough in the short-term to attract more interest from casual fans.


Way to avoid your own question to get the ball rolling.
Sonofoski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I gave up my Bear Backer donation and my season tickets (4) after 37 years due to the decline of the game day experience especially the piped in music and an annoying public? address announcer.
Jeff82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker;842328840 said:

Does presenting a football to some Corporate guy every week generate revenue?
Do the stupid races on the Big board generate revenue?
Does telling us what a players favorite food is generate revenue?

All these cause the band not to play and are easy to fix. STOP THEM.


The first is related to donations that are sponsored, the third is a promotion of the team that is also sponsored, I believe. Only the second has no corporate tie-in.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker;842328840 said:

Does presenting a football to some Corporate guy every week generate revenue?
Do the stupid races on the Big board generate revenue?
Does telling us what a players favorite food is generate revenue?

All these cause the band not to play and are easy to fix. STOP THEM.


Agreed. I would like to see a gameday atmosphere that combines our traditions with corporate promotions.

For example, during a break, the announcer says "And now, the Cal Band will play Big C, sponsored by Bank of the West. Please look to the jumbotron for the words and sing along." On the screen would be a big logo for Bank of the West while the words to Big C scroll along. Oh, and the Cal band would be amplified playing over the loud speakers too.
CalGB94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker;842328840 said:

Does presenting a football to some Corporate guy every week generate revenue?
Do the stupid races on the Big board generate revenue?
Does telling us what a players favorite food is generate revenue?

All these cause the band not to play and are easy to fix. STOP THEM.


Well said.

I can tolerate the advertisements, it's revenue we obviously need. But we're subjected to an on-field presentation every freaking time out during every game until every sports team and debate team or whatever has been introduced. If they want all the non-rev sports introduced, have them all come out on the field at halftime during the first game and get it over with.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I also find the in-game promotions annoying although I appreciate the Company's who chose to support Cal football (Bank of the West, etc.). To answer Jeff's question, about two years ago I had a conversation with Development about what it would take to get rid of these - just for a single game - with the idea that the band would play to fill the void.

I can't remember the exact figure, but it was huge - something like $20k+ per 30second spot. And of course, you'd have the additional issue of IMG and the sponsors not liking being replaced and the need to keep them on board for the rest of the games, unless you were going to pay to replace them for the entire season (and beyond). Just wasn't realistic for a small number of donors to pull off, particularly since it wouldn't actually add a dime to Cal's coffers.
BearlyLegal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Becoming bigger fan of soccer football as you get 45 minutes plus without commercials or breaks.
Game day experience at college or pro American football just too commercial.
Lately have been taping so I can speed through.
Life is just too short to waste hours on useless marketing crap.
JSC 76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear;842328898 said:



I can't remember the exact figure, but it was huge - something like $20k+ per 30second spot.


So, in other words, 50 cents per fan per spot. To whom do I make out the check?
ColoradoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sebastabear;842328898 said:



I can't remember the exact figure, but it was huge - something like $20k+ per 30second spot. And of course, you'd have the additional issue of IMG and the sponsors not liking being replaced and the need to keep them on board for the rest of the games, unless you were going to pay to replace them for the entire season (and beyond). Just wasn't realistic for a small number of donors to pull off, particularly since it wouldn't actually add a dime to Cal's coffers.


Very interesting numbers...

I read that the typical broadcast has 4 TV stoppages per quarter of 2:30 minutes each. So in a full game, that's 40 min of stoppage for TV. I don't think Cal isn't selling five 30 second slots every TV break - I don't know though. Maybe someone can count this fall? But say if they did sell even two $20k slots per TV break (and did some other type of stuff to fill the rest of the time)... that's $400k per game (x6-7 games). Not as inconsequential as I would have thought.

The other weird thought I have is that if these slots cost $20k each, how much lost revenue do we have from every time a player says he is afraid of spiders on the minitron, or every time a different team is trotted out on the field?
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JSC 76;842328900 said:

So, in other words, 50 cents per fan per spot. To whom do I make out the check?


Yeah, I wish it worked like that.
CaliforniaEternal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
beelzebear;842328855 said:

Honestly, the game day experience only sucks now because Cal isn't winning. Win and all the ancillary crap just doesn't matter. No one cares about 3 minute TV time out if we're stomping Oregon. Lose and people will focus on the negative, as seen here.

As always, winning cures most things.


Actually, when the team is losing big is exactly the situation that people pay closer attention to the gameday experience. When you have season tickets knowing the team won't be competitive, you want to remind yourself of why you enjoy attending Cal games in the first place. The constant barrage of advertising, the imbecilic announcer, and any music not being played by the band ruin the atmosphere.

Also, they didn't bother to install wifi even though it was 2012 when the stadium reopened. At least let me sit there and zone out when the team is unbearable to watch. The non-football reasons pushed me over the top in not renewing my season tickets for next year. I'll be able to pick up tickets for next to nothing on stubhub and enjoy sitting in different sections for the games I want to attend. I know there has been yet another net decrease in season ticket sales and it won't come as a surprise to anyone.

Rant over. :beer:
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus;842328894 said:

Agreed. I would like to see a gameday atmosphere that combines our traditions with corporate promotions.

For example, during a break, the announcer says "And now, the Cal Band will play Big C, sponsored by Bank of the West. Please look to the jumbotron for the words and sing along." On the screen would be a big logo for Bank of the West while the words to Big C scroll along. Oh, and the Cal band would be amplified playing over the loud speakers too.


When you go to a Giants game, they have a very specific identity. It is all about SF. They play off SF, the park and Giants history. In watching Giants games with my kids there have been things that prompted the kids to ask and for me to tell them about who players like Mays and Bonds were, or to tell them about the history of the Giants/Dodgers rivalry, etc.

The A's have great deals for families and play up the small market blue (actuallly green) collar identity. It's very Oakland, and they do a lot to keep the fan in touch with A's history. The promotions play off of that. As with the Giants, the things the A's do have prompted stories about Reggie Jackson and Rickey Henderson. Kids really connect with that stuff.

When you go to Cal games it is very Anytown, USA. The promotions get in the way of everything Cal about a Cal game.

They don't need to eliminate the promotions. They've always had promotions. They need to reduce them to bring them back in line, stop interfering with the traditions and make the promotions about Cal.

The A's need the money just as much as Cal does, and they don't do wall to wall promotions and their promotions connect with the team, the city and the history. I enjoy A's games. They are actually, dare I say, a FUN experience. (and yes, I know their attendance isn't great, but that isn't because of the experience they provide).
SanMateoBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sonofoski;842328875 said:

I gave up my Bear Backer donation and my season tickets (4) after 37 years due to the decline of the game day experience especially the piped in music and an annoying public? address announcer.


So did I. Similar situation - season tix and Bear Backer since the 80's... Its much more enjoyable via TV now, as you can mute it during the commercials.
NVGolfingBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JSC 76;842328900 said:

So, in other words, 50 cents per fan per spot. To whom do I make out the check?

Let's assume there are 10 spots we want to remove. $0.50 x 10 =$5.00.

Where do I send the check?
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear;842328852 said:

You are asking the wrong question. Cal football is a product, not a charity. How many fans are staying home because the game experience sucks? That is the question. You don't get to raise ticket prices and make the gameday experience suck and then say, gee how much would you pay over the increased ticket prices to make the game day what it used to be.

My answer - I don't buy tickets now. If the gameday experience was what it used to be, I would buy tickets at the current ticket price.

Exactly. It's like a restaurant saying, "How much would you pay to keep us from making you throw up?"
KevBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear;842328858 said:

I agree they will continue if it is profitable, however, I just wonder whether they have factored in the people who have left because they don't like the game experience anymore. I don't think they make that much money from most of the stupid promotions. It appears to me that they only look at the short term check instead of the longterm value.


My intuition tells me Cal marketing is a short-run oriented shop. I don't think they've carefully considered the long-term implications of the changes they've wrought to the experience from a cost/benefit standpoint. I don't entirely blame them for this omission--it's a hard consideration to make analytically. But I agree, they may be shooting themselves in the foot here for not a lot of money.
Sebastabear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My sense here is that with the relentless drumbeat of criticism over athletics financing (the moves by the academic senate, the focus on the annual funding deficit, the criticism of the stadium financing plan, etc) Sandy felt like she couldn't say no to a single dollar anyone offered her. This is what led to the repeated (and eventually successful) efforts to move a game to Santa Clara, the shortsighted efforts to tamp down assistant salaries in football and yes, the relentless and all consuming in game promotions.

I think a lot of these criticisms were hogwash (as WIAF has pointed out the "annual subsidy" for athletics is largely created by the ridiculous way the UC accounts for these expenses). If I fault Sandy for anything it was not pushing back harder against these critiques and fighting against some of the penny wise but pound foolish actions we wound up taking to cater to the nattering nabobs of negativism.

I hope the new AD takes a long hard look at these in game promotions and decides for him or herself whether the benefits outweigh the costs.
KevBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear945;842328847 said:

This sums up my feelings as well. I will also note that as my attendance wanes so does my son's. So that possible future revenue stream will be left untapped potentially.


Nice avatar. That's a great episode.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.