Sometimes the arguments here border on the absurd. One minute you want every radio station to all Tech all the time and other times only Tech grads should get good seats. You act like you have a waiting list for season tickets and 3-day tailgate parties when the rality is the 50-yard line will be empty or filled with the enemy.
Reseating=PATHETIC
- Thread starter law_bee
- Start date
I don't have a stake in this living in NC but I have to say DaveTech I can't figure out what your post is referring to. Clue me in on who is saying only grads should get good seats? I'll give them grief too. I am a grad but if you don't reward the $$ they soon dry up.
I don't know if the current system is the best it can be but it at least tries to reward the whole scope of fans. I can tell you it's more fair than say Duke basketball tickets, where you can keep your tickets of 30+ years if you keep the minimum donation coming in (my dad's predicament).
Hopefully everybody does come out of this with a fair result and we don't see the opposition in the best seats.
I don't know if the current system is the best it can be but it at least tries to reward the whole scope of fans. I can tell you it's more fair than say Duke basketball tickets, where you can keep your tickets of 30+ years if you keep the minimum donation coming in (my dad's predicament).
Hopefully everybody does come out of this with a fair result and we don't see the opposition in the best seats.
MsTechAnalysis
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2002
- Messages
- 1,816
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">I would suggest for those of us without the ability to give lots of money to the Tharpe Fund but have more then 10-15 consecutive years get more points in the process. I know money talks but it didn't do a lot of talking when we weren't winning and the stands we never filled!!
I have no problem with those who have the ability to give large sums to be rewarded. I also believe there's the other side to the coin. There are many like me who have been there many years but don't have the funds to move ahead of those who do in points. Why not put a better formula together for those folks, and THERE ARE a lot of us.
Law, I get where you're coming from and I think you're borrowing trouble (based on what I've been told by A-T staff). FYI, the Arthur Blank model would NOT work at Tech because it was designed for a for-profit corporation which can be a "loss leader" in the Blank empire for a few years if necessary. GTAA is a non-profit corporation which would not be "stewarding" its donors' $$$ very well if it used the Blank model.
Ms. Tech, you mention a better formula--that's exactly what I'd like to see, but no one's ever suggested one that, to me, is better overall than this one:
2 pts/consecutive year of FB season tix since '60
2 pts/consecutive year of BB season tix since '60
Alumnus Credit - 10 pts (one time only)
Letterwinner Credit - 10 pts per sport
1 pt/consecutive year A-T contrib since '74
1 pt/$100 cumulative unrestricted gift to A-T
.5 pt/$100 cumulative restricted gift to A-T
1 pt/consecutive year Roll Call gift since '47
1 pt/each $1,000+ gift to Roll Call since '47
This rewards folks in a lot of different categories. $200 cumulative earns you 2 A-T points; I daresay season tix went for a lot less than $200/year in the 70s and 80s, but they earn equivalent points, so they're demonstrating that loyalty means more than $$.
I know that no system can make everyone happy, but I think this one tries as hard as any I've ever seen.
Ms. Tech, you mention a better formula--that's exactly what I'd like to see, but no one's ever suggested one that, to me, is better overall than this one:
2 pts/consecutive year of FB season tix since '60
2 pts/consecutive year of BB season tix since '60
Alumnus Credit - 10 pts (one time only)
Letterwinner Credit - 10 pts per sport
1 pt/consecutive year A-T contrib since '74
1 pt/$100 cumulative unrestricted gift to A-T
.5 pt/$100 cumulative restricted gift to A-T
1 pt/consecutive year Roll Call gift since '47
1 pt/each $1,000+ gift to Roll Call since '47
This rewards folks in a lot of different categories. $200 cumulative earns you 2 A-T points; I daresay season tix went for a lot less than $200/year in the 70s and 80s, but they earn equivalent points, so they're demonstrating that loyalty means more than $$.
I know that no system can make everyone happy, but I think this one tries as hard as any I've ever seen.
MsTechAnalysis
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2002
- Messages
- 1,816
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Seeing that non-Tech grads make up more than 60% of season tix holders it was my thought that maybe those with a minimum 15+ years consecutive purchase could get you 3-5 extra points. Almost like an accrual system.
And, I did say that I thought 71Bee's idea that as a grad you get 20 pts instead of 10 gives more emphasis to the grads.
I also said that those who give big bucks should be rewarded but those without money to do so, but are loyal to the school and team with their purchases and attendance should also be rewarded. Obviously, not to the degree of those with thousands of dollars but in addition to.
I said nothing about Tech grads not getting recogized for their purchases on consecutive years or should be given less, what I did say is that 60% of season tix holders were non-grads and make up a lot of people in the seats who should be considered in this process.
This is NOT about being a grad or non-grad, it's about what I felt could be a better formula for all of us in the seating processes who have been there, who care, who are loyal and can't give large amounts of money for better seating.
71, there are already ticket limits built into the A-T system. A-T members are eligible for PRIORITY tickets, i.e., tickets attached to stadium locations which correspond to the purchaser's point total, as follows:
up to 300 points = 4 priority tix
300-499 = 6 priority tix
500-999 = 8 priority tix
1000 or more = 12 priority tix
Ms. Tech, I think maybe you were offended by my questions; if so, sorry! Your suggestions could possibly unbalance the current point system which is, IMHO, as balanced as possible. If it's going to go out of balance, I guess I just wanted to know why that would be okay (in either direction).
Of course, if I were faced with losing my seats, my reply to that might be "Because I don't want to lose my seats!"
up to 300 points = 4 priority tix
300-499 = 6 priority tix
500-999 = 8 priority tix
1000 or more = 12 priority tix
Ms. Tech, I think maybe you were offended by my questions; if so, sorry! Your suggestions could possibly unbalance the current point system which is, IMHO, as balanced as possible. If it's going to go out of balance, I guess I just wanted to know why that would be okay (in either direction).
Of course, if I were faced with losing my seats, my reply to that might be "Because I don't want to lose my seats!"
MsTechAnalysis
Jolly Good Fellow
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2002
- Messages
- 1,816
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">No offense taken ... just making the point about what I meant - grads were not to be given less consideration.Originally posted by catjacket:
71, there are already ticket limits built into the A-T system. A-T members are eligible for PRIORITY tickets, i.e., tickets attached to stadium locations which correspond to the purchaser's point total, as follows:
up to 300 points = 4 priority tix
300-499 = 6 priority tix
500-999 = 8 priority tix
1000 or more = 12 priority tix
Ms. Tech, I think maybe you were offended by my questions; if so, sorry! Your suggestions could possibly unbalance the current point system which is, IMHO, as balanced as possible. If it's going to go out of balance, I guess I just wanted to know why that would be okay (in either direction).
Of course, if I were faced with losing my seats, my reply to that might be "Because I don't want to lose my seats!"
First of all, I will say I have the best seat in the house, literally. I have a very comfortable chair in my study from which I watch the games on TV.
Of course, I enjoyed the games more at the stadium when I attended and had season tickets in the past.
I have nothing to gain or lose in this debate, but have some observations and some questions.
Since the State does not fund the football team as it does the Institute itself, it appears to me that attendance at Georgia Tech has nothing to do with attendance at the football games.
The football game is an entertainment for those in attendance and a method of free education for the players.
Donors to the football program are the key to both having a team and a stadium. Certainly, these fans should be number one in reaping the rewards and getting the most points, regardless if they are grads or non-grads.
It seems logical that the $$$$ gets first priority for seating.
Next, you have sponsors (individual or company) who might buy big blocks of tickets on a yearly basis. A fan who buys a block of 50, 100, 500, or 1000 seats each year is also putting up big money to support the team and stadium. Again $$$$ is the key and these fans should be a high priority regardless of being grads or non-grads.
Next, you have fans who have bought season tickets for years. These people should be prioritized according to the quantitity of tickets bought each year, plus the period of years purchased.
These fans should be rewarded according to their cumulative $, $$, $$$, $$$$ invested in the program over the years. The seating for these people should be prioritized according to their investment over the years, regardless of whether they are grads or non-grads.
In my observation, I can see no reason to give the grad an advantage over the non-grad in seating arrangements for season tickets.
Of course, there should always be a student section provided for those attending the school for their tenure as a student. That is part of the school fun, attending the games.
Since it was stated above that 60% of those buying season tickets are not grads, it is evident that the non-grads are supporting the team more than the grads.
I have a feeling the non-grads held even a higher percentage years ago when it was difficult and expensive for people to attend college. Money is much more available today for the average student to attend college.
When Tech was in its hey-day with the Dodd teams, Tech was the only game in town and fans came from all over Georgia and surrounding States just to watch the Ramblin Wreck play football in Atlanta.
So, the odds are good that the non-tech grad held a higher percentage of season tickets during the earlier era.
The question: why should attendance at the school give anyone additional points for seating? It appears to me, points for seating should be provided in direct relation to the $$$$$$ contributed over the years by the season ticket holders.
Looking for some good and reasonable answers.
Of course, I enjoyed the games more at the stadium when I attended and had season tickets in the past.
I have nothing to gain or lose in this debate, but have some observations and some questions.
Since the State does not fund the football team as it does the Institute itself, it appears to me that attendance at Georgia Tech has nothing to do with attendance at the football games.
The football game is an entertainment for those in attendance and a method of free education for the players.
Donors to the football program are the key to both having a team and a stadium. Certainly, these fans should be number one in reaping the rewards and getting the most points, regardless if they are grads or non-grads.
It seems logical that the $$$$ gets first priority for seating.
Next, you have sponsors (individual or company) who might buy big blocks of tickets on a yearly basis. A fan who buys a block of 50, 100, 500, or 1000 seats each year is also putting up big money to support the team and stadium. Again $$$$ is the key and these fans should be a high priority regardless of being grads or non-grads.
Next, you have fans who have bought season tickets for years. These people should be prioritized according to the quantitity of tickets bought each year, plus the period of years purchased.
These fans should be rewarded according to their cumulative $, $$, $$$, $$$$ invested in the program over the years. The seating for these people should be prioritized according to their investment over the years, regardless of whether they are grads or non-grads.
In my observation, I can see no reason to give the grad an advantage over the non-grad in seating arrangements for season tickets.
Of course, there should always be a student section provided for those attending the school for their tenure as a student. That is part of the school fun, attending the games.
Since it was stated above that 60% of those buying season tickets are not grads, it is evident that the non-grads are supporting the team more than the grads.
I have a feeling the non-grads held even a higher percentage years ago when it was difficult and expensive for people to attend college. Money is much more available today for the average student to attend college.
When Tech was in its hey-day with the Dodd teams, Tech was the only game in town and fans came from all over Georgia and surrounding States just to watch the Ramblin Wreck play football in Atlanta.
So, the odds are good that the non-tech grad held a higher percentage of season tickets during the earlier era.
The question: why should attendance at the school give anyone additional points for seating? It appears to me, points for seating should be provided in direct relation to the $$$$$$ contributed over the years by the season ticket holders.
Looking for some good and reasonable answers.
Probably the biggest reason that they give grads a 10 point bump is to insure they get the alumni involved with the athletics.
Non-grads are probably more likely to come and go with the team depending on their performance and thus their cash flow would not nearly be as steady.
OTOH, alumni have a vested interest in the school and thus are likely to be more loyal in their support of the athletics as well. Also, Tech alumni typically do very well financially and they want to insure that they are tapping into that cash flow.
So, the assumption is that these donors will likely be more steady than non-alumni and provide more financial support on average than non-alumni.
Not saying I know any of that to be true but that would be my guess.
Non-grads are probably more likely to come and go with the team depending on their performance and thus their cash flow would not nearly be as steady.
OTOH, alumni have a vested interest in the school and thus are likely to be more loyal in their support of the athletics as well. Also, Tech alumni typically do very well financially and they want to insure that they are tapping into that cash flow.
So, the assumption is that these donors will likely be more steady than non-alumni and provide more financial support on average than non-alumni.
Not saying I know any of that to be true but that would be my guess.
calderman420
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 209
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">First, I'd like to say that 10 A-T points seems to be pretty insignificant in terms of seating priority. However, I believe that the alumni credit of 10 A-T points is fair. It recognizes what Tech alums have given to the institute in terms of academics and the $$$ contributed as tuition.
I also think that 10 is the correct number for me. 5 years of going to games as a student times 2 points per consecutive year. Although the student tickets were free, I'm recognized for my superior fan-ocity. And it was really cool when my buddy had the Wreck at his wedding.
Lionel Hutz
Varsity Lurker
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2001
- Messages
- 63
Regarding AT points,
This is a pet peeve of mine, but why doesn't the bookstore offer more Tech merchandise!!!!!
Then, why not offer 1 AT point for every $100 or so spent on Tech merchandise from the bookstore. The people who spend money on Tech stuff are happy because they get good merchandise and AT points and the school sells more merchandise and the product (Tech athletics) gets more publicity (More shirts, sweatshirts, bumnper stickers, flags, etc.)
This would also be a way for some Tech fans to get more points than the UGA fan who buys season tickets every year just to get the UGA game. Because that UGA fan is not going to buy Tech merchandise.
Just an idea to get better merchandise and reward those who support Tech athletics.
Another idea might be to have a Tech credit card that you could use to build up AT points, similar to Skymiles.
I will go back to sleep now.
This is a pet peeve of mine, but why doesn't the bookstore offer more Tech merchandise!!!!!
Then, why not offer 1 AT point for every $100 or so spent on Tech merchandise from the bookstore. The people who spend money on Tech stuff are happy because they get good merchandise and AT points and the school sells more merchandise and the product (Tech athletics) gets more publicity (More shirts, sweatshirts, bumnper stickers, flags, etc.)
This would also be a way for some Tech fans to get more points than the UGA fan who buys season tickets every year just to get the UGA game. Because that UGA fan is not going to buy Tech merchandise.
Just an idea to get better merchandise and reward those who support Tech athletics.
Another idea might be to have a Tech credit card that you could use to build up AT points, similar to Skymiles.
I will go back to sleep now.
GTPilot, by the way, I have been watching your posts on the board, and I find them to be well thought out.
Hit me back with an answer to this. If the alumni are most likely to come and go with the performance of the team, why, as MsTechAnalysis has posted, are 60% of the season tickets purchased by non-grads?
MsTechAnalysis, can you get this data for past years for both the good and bad eras.
I wonder how other schools stack up in season ticket purchases comparing alumni and non-alumni?
Curious!
Calderman, hit me back with some answers. I thought the students paid the tuition and the school provided the academics. What has the alumni provided for the school in the way of contributions to the academics?
Also, how has the tuition helped the football team moneywise? I realize a small part of the tuition is for admittance to the games for the students, but at reduced prices compared to what alumni and fans pay. Also, beside the tuitions paid to the school, isn't some of the funding for students education paid to the institution through taxes, grants, Hope Scholarships, etc.?
Rebuttals requested to clarify earlier answers.
Thanks
Hit me back with an answer to this. If the alumni are most likely to come and go with the performance of the team, why, as MsTechAnalysis has posted, are 60% of the season tickets purchased by non-grads?
MsTechAnalysis, can you get this data for past years for both the good and bad eras.
I wonder how other schools stack up in season ticket purchases comparing alumni and non-alumni?
Curious!
Calderman, hit me back with some answers. I thought the students paid the tuition and the school provided the academics. What has the alumni provided for the school in the way of contributions to the academics?
Also, how has the tuition helped the football team moneywise? I realize a small part of the tuition is for admittance to the games for the students, but at reduced prices compared to what alumni and fans pay. Also, beside the tuitions paid to the school, isn't some of the funding for students education paid to the institution through taxes, grants, Hope Scholarships, etc.?
Rebuttals requested to clarify earlier answers.
Thanks
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Catjacket,Originally posted by catjacket:
71, there are already ticket limits built into the A-T system. A-T members are eligible for PRIORITY tickets, i.e., tickets attached to stadium locations which correspond to the purchaser's point total, as follows:
up to 300 points = 4 priority tix
300-499 = 6 priority tix
500-999 = 8 priority tix
1000 or more = 12 priority tix
Ms. Tech, I think maybe you were offended by my questions; if so, sorry! Your suggestions could possibly unbalance the current point system which is, IMHO, as balanced as possible. If it's going to go out of balance, I guess I just wanted to know why that would be okay (in either direction).
Of course, if I were faced with losing my seats, my reply to that might be "Because I don't want to lose my seats!"
I'm familiar with this allotment. Believe it is still too many tickets at the upper end. Maybe a max of 8.
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Ahsoisee,Originally posted by ahsoisee:
GTPilot, by the way, I have been watching your posts on the board, and I find them to be well thought out.
Hit me back with an answer to this. If the alumni are most likely to come and go with the performance of the team, why, as MsTechAnalysis has posted, are 60% of the season tickets purchased by non-grads?
MsTechAnalysis, can you get this data for past years for both the good and bad eras.
I wonder how other schools stack up in season ticket purchases comparing alumni and non-alumni?
Curious!
Calderman, hit me back with some answers. I thought the students paid the tuition and the school provided the academics. What has the alumni provided for the school in the way of contributions to the academics?
Also, how has the tuition helped the football team moneywise? I realize a small part of the tuition is for admittance to the games for the students, but at reduced prices compared to what alumni and fans pay. Also, beside the tuitions paid to the school, isn't some of the funding for students education paid to the institution through taxes, grants, Hope Scholarships, etc.?
Rebuttals requested to clarify earlier answers.
Thanks
If you don't mind meet butting in here. As a tech grad in 1971 (as you may have guessed). My career took me to places where I was lucky to even hear the score of a Tech game. No way I could return to see one at Grant Field. It was 1996 before I moved back to the Atlanta area. I suspect that is why the attendance of grads is not higher than 60%. Using NCJacket as an example, an avid fan who would have an 8 to 9 hour drive from Wilmington, NC just to make a game in person.
Now back to the corp. givers vs. avid fans (graduates and non-graduates). Seems to me you have to strike a difficult balance. Too much emphasis towards the avid fan, $$$ not as high. Too much emphasis towards the corp. giver, seats filled with red and they tend to go away when the team has a few down years; fair weather fans.
71, no problem, the questions are open to all who would like to reply. I am just trying to get both sides to rattle around in my pea-brain to understand if or if not an alumni merits the extra points.
If your supposition is correct, then many of the colleges would have the same situation, with more non-grad fans buying the biggest percentages of season tickets.
If this is the case, there should be an advantage in offering more incentives to the local fans for priority seating than the alumni, since they are the ones supporting the team more.
However, I would guess that specialty schools like Georgia Tech would be apt to have more out-of-State students than the State Universities.
It would be interesting to know the percentages by various colleges and universities regarding the breakdown of season ticket holders when comparing alumni and non-alumni.
It becomes rather amusing regarding some of the uppity posters I ran into on the Hive. Not trying to run the Hive down, it just happens I have not seen the situation posted on Stingtalk.
Some of the posters on the Hive have tried to belittle the non-alumni fans calling them sidewalk fans and not true fans because they did not attend Tech. Now, it appears the alumni fans are in the minority and the true base of fans are non-alumni.
If you have any other thoughts regarding points in comparing the fans, please post them.
If your supposition is correct, then many of the colleges would have the same situation, with more non-grad fans buying the biggest percentages of season tickets.
If this is the case, there should be an advantage in offering more incentives to the local fans for priority seating than the alumni, since they are the ones supporting the team more.
However, I would guess that specialty schools like Georgia Tech would be apt to have more out-of-State students than the State Universities.
It would be interesting to know the percentages by various colleges and universities regarding the breakdown of season ticket holders when comparing alumni and non-alumni.
It becomes rather amusing regarding some of the uppity posters I ran into on the Hive. Not trying to run the Hive down, it just happens I have not seen the situation posted on Stingtalk.
Some of the posters on the Hive have tried to belittle the non-alumni fans calling them sidewalk fans and not true fans because they did not attend Tech. Now, it appears the alumni fans are in the minority and the true base of fans are non-alumni.
If you have any other thoughts regarding points in comparing the fans, please post them.
I'm not sure what other schools non-alumni to alumni ratio is but it probably is usually weighted towards non-alumni for major schools.
In regards to Tech, I think it involves a numbers game. There aren't a ton of alumni to fill the stadium to begin with and that number is actually worse when you consider the fact that (due to the academics at Tech) our alumni likely have a higher percentage of those not interested in sports then many other schoools.
I'd also be interested to see what the historical numbers have been in regards to donor retention. However, I still believe that alumni are going to continue to donate to the fund and (provided they aren't transferred to far away) attend the games better than non-alumni.
A lot of this is based off of my own experiences with non-alumni from multiple schools and my support of University of Washington (I'm from Seattle). Who knows maybe my crowd is the exception rather than the rule. Non-alumni can pick up a new school rather than stick with Tech for a number of reasons (Tech performing badly, like the coach from another school better, etc.)
How about this analogy? Alumni are like family and non-alumni are like friends. No matter what family does you are likely to forgive them more often and stick with them, rather than turning your back on them. Friends come and go and while there are always a few real close friends your not likely to judge them on the same scale as family.
Hopefully that explains my theory better.
In regards to Tech, I think it involves a numbers game. There aren't a ton of alumni to fill the stadium to begin with and that number is actually worse when you consider the fact that (due to the academics at Tech) our alumni likely have a higher percentage of those not interested in sports then many other schoools.
I'd also be interested to see what the historical numbers have been in regards to donor retention. However, I still believe that alumni are going to continue to donate to the fund and (provided they aren't transferred to far away) attend the games better than non-alumni.
A lot of this is based off of my own experiences with non-alumni from multiple schools and my support of University of Washington (I'm from Seattle). Who knows maybe my crowd is the exception rather than the rule. Non-alumni can pick up a new school rather than stick with Tech for a number of reasons (Tech performing badly, like the coach from another school better, etc.)
How about this analogy? Alumni are like family and non-alumni are like friends. No matter what family does you are likely to forgive them more often and stick with them, rather than turning your back on them. Friends come and go and while there are always a few real close friends your not likely to judge them on the same scale as family.
Hopefully that explains my theory better.
GTPilot, you may be right, but I can only use my own experience to look at the situation.
I am not an alumni, but started following GT football when Dodd became head coach at Tech in the late 40s. I guess the early success hooked me and I became an avid fan.
I have followed them through some very good times and some very bad times. When things were really bad, I tried to concentrate on another team, but could not do so. I still would watch the games and just get mad at the results.
I have friends from back in the same era who were Tech fans, but did not attend there. Not one of them has ever given up on Tech. All have remained loyal to this day as a Tech fan.
I am not sure a fan can easily go from one team to another just because his team is doing badly, even if that person did not attend the school.
Let's say you adopted a son when he was a baby. You shortly had your own son through the natural route. Both grow up and the adopted son starts misbehaving badly. Do you disown him and not love him anymore? I don't think so, and I think the same holds true for adopted teams.
Now there are secondary teams that I have liked and dropped over the years. I liked Alabama as my third best team while Bear Bryant was the coach. I don't care anything about them since he is gone.
My focus for my third team shifted to Florida while Steve Spurrier was there. Now that he is gone from Florida, I have no interest in them. I guess in those instances, I was connected to the coaches themselves.
So, from my personal experience and that of my long time Tech friends, I don't see any change in loyalty over the years, even though we were not Tech grads nor attendees at Tech.
Still, thanks for the input. I am still reading all the posts and accumulating all the ideas.
I am not an alumni, but started following GT football when Dodd became head coach at Tech in the late 40s. I guess the early success hooked me and I became an avid fan.
I have followed them through some very good times and some very bad times. When things were really bad, I tried to concentrate on another team, but could not do so. I still would watch the games and just get mad at the results.
I have friends from back in the same era who were Tech fans, but did not attend there. Not one of them has ever given up on Tech. All have remained loyal to this day as a Tech fan.
I am not sure a fan can easily go from one team to another just because his team is doing badly, even if that person did not attend the school.
Let's say you adopted a son when he was a baby. You shortly had your own son through the natural route. Both grow up and the adopted son starts misbehaving badly. Do you disown him and not love him anymore? I don't think so, and I think the same holds true for adopted teams.
Now there are secondary teams that I have liked and dropped over the years. I liked Alabama as my third best team while Bear Bryant was the coach. I don't care anything about them since he is gone.
My focus for my third team shifted to Florida while Steve Spurrier was there. Now that he is gone from Florida, I have no interest in them. I guess in those instances, I was connected to the coaches themselves.
So, from my personal experience and that of my long time Tech friends, I don't see any change in loyalty over the years, even though we were not Tech grads nor attendees at Tech.
Still, thanks for the input. I am still reading all the posts and accumulating all the ideas.
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
Ahsoisee,
Here is a scenario that might explain it.
Fred Free-Shoes is a graduate of FSU. He manages a nice little Atlanta company with clients around the Southeast.
Although, he has no interest in Tech football a few of his employees are Tech grads.
Fred decides it might be nice to get some tickets to entertain clients and reward employees. So Fred tells his Tech employees to buy season tickets and he will reimburse them for the tickets and match their contributions for good tickets. To get things off right, he makes a big match and big reimbursement.
After a few years goes by, Fred’s company has 12 really good seats. These seats are seldom occupied by the same people though. When Tech plays UGA, the seats are full of UGA clients and employees, when FSU is in town Fred takes his family.
You see where this is heading. Lot’s of bucks go to GTAA, seats are filled but seldom with Tech fans.
I understand these dollars cannot be ignored but I don’t consider these folks Tech family or Tech friends.
Solution? Not sure what it is but I don’t think its right or good in the long run for Tech football.
True fans, family and friends will be there; thru the bad and lean years, making their annual contributions buying the same number of tickets and cheering their hearts out at every game.
Fred and his company will still buy tickets, until things get really bad, but the seats will often go empty.
Gee this sounds like our basketball program……
Here is a scenario that might explain it.
Fred Free-Shoes is a graduate of FSU. He manages a nice little Atlanta company with clients around the Southeast.
Although, he has no interest in Tech football a few of his employees are Tech grads.
Fred decides it might be nice to get some tickets to entertain clients and reward employees. So Fred tells his Tech employees to buy season tickets and he will reimburse them for the tickets and match their contributions for good tickets. To get things off right, he makes a big match and big reimbursement.
After a few years goes by, Fred’s company has 12 really good seats. These seats are seldom occupied by the same people though. When Tech plays UGA, the seats are full of UGA clients and employees, when FSU is in town Fred takes his family.
You see where this is heading. Lot’s of bucks go to GTAA, seats are filled but seldom with Tech fans.
I understand these dollars cannot be ignored but I don’t consider these folks Tech family or Tech friends.
Solution? Not sure what it is but I don’t think its right or good in the long run for Tech football.
True fans, family and friends will be there; thru the bad and lean years, making their annual contributions buying the same number of tickets and cheering their hearts out at every game.
Fred and his company will still buy tickets, until things get really bad, but the seats will often go empty.
Gee this sounds like our basketball program……
There is merit to your example. I think the one ingredient that is missing is winning big. Back during the days when Tech won consistently, the stadium was always sold out.
Sometimes, Dodd could not even get tickets for those calling him.
In those periods of time, it made little difference about the blocks of seats bought by the companies. However, when things are bad, you are probably right, those kinds of tickets most likely go unused.
In fact, a CEO might not want to send one of his clients to see the local team get beat and expose him to a lot of negativity from the surrounding fans.
Sometimes, Dodd could not even get tickets for those calling him.
In those periods of time, it made little difference about the blocks of seats bought by the companies. However, when things are bad, you are probably right, those kinds of tickets most likely go unused.
In fact, a CEO might not want to send one of his clients to see the local team get beat and expose him to a lot of negativity from the surrounding fans.
71YellowJacket
Damn Good Rat
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2002
- Messages
- 1,262
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">Ahsoisee,Originally posted by ahsoisee:
There is merit to your example. I think the one ingredient that is missing is winning big. Back during the days when Tech won consistently, the stadium was always sold out.
Sometimes, Dodd could not even get tickets for those calling him.
In those periods of time, it made little difference about the blocks of seats bought by the companies. However, when things are bad, you are probably right, those kinds of tickets most likely go unused.
In fact, a CEO might not want to send one of his clients to see the local team get beat and expose him to a lot of negativity from the surrounding fans.
Not just getting the seat filled. This is the biggest reason why there are so many Ugag and FSU fans in our seats every other year.
Geez, I think the tomahawk group is even worse than the woofers....