|
Post by beavaristotle on Aug 21, 2016 15:30:44 GMT -8
letter to editor in albany demo herald stated that the south side of gill will be getting bigger padded seats next season. causing some people to be moved as they will be losing 10% of capacity on that side. has anyone heard anything about this ? seat assignments will be based on donations rather than allowing people to just renew, pay required donation and keep the seats they have had in the past. sounds like the little guy is getting kicked to the curb again (see north end of Reser)
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 21, 2016 16:21:53 GMT -8
letter to editor in albany demo herald stated that the west side of gill will be getting bigger padded seats next season. causing some people to be moved as they will be losing 10% of capacity on that side. has anyone heard anything about this ? seat assignments will be based on donations rather than allowing people to just renew, pay required donation and keep the seats they have had in the past. sounds like the little guy is getting kicked to the curb again (see north end of Reser) I have very little sympathy for "long time season ticket holders" who don't show up for games, leave their plum seats sitting empty and somehow expect to keep their court proximity due to tenure.
See the empty courtside seats below at this year's Civil War game.
|
|
|
Post by beaverale on Aug 23, 2016 10:04:51 GMT -8
letter to editor in albany demo herald stated that the west side of gill will be getting bigger padded seats next season. causing some people to be moved as they will be losing 10% of capacity on that side. has anyone heard anything about this ? seat assignments will be based on donations rather than allowing people to just renew, pay required donation and keep the seats they have had in the past. sounds like the little guy is getting kicked to the curb again (see north end of Reser) I have very little sympathy for "long time season ticket holders" who don't show up for games, leave their plum seats sitting empty and somehow expect to keep their court proximity due to tenure.
See the empty courtside seats below at this year's Civil War game.
I too think this is unfair. And not all of the empty seats are in the top row. I am in the top row and always have my seat filled. Most of the time it is the lower rows since you couldn't see the top row from the TV cameras anyway. As usual the athletic department does not think things through or doesn't care.
|
|
|
Post by orangeexpress on Aug 23, 2016 11:38:10 GMT -8
I welcome turning over grandfathered season ticket holders that have held the lower orange seats for a generation and never show up.
In fairness to the photo this year's home civil war was played on a Sunday during that ice event in the valley on New Year's weekend. My commute down from Portland that day was probably a questionable decision by some - but naturally well worth the trouble...
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Aug 23, 2016 12:28:25 GMT -8
I'm curious if some of you people that knock season ticket holders for not showing up are interested in buying those seats. Is there a big logjam of people clamoring to get in there? Yes, a lot of those people have been season ticket holders for decades. They've paid tens of thousands of dollars to Oregon State for the right to sit there over the years. The laws of nature mean that as we age, getting around becomes more difficult and health becomes an ever increasing concern. The benefit of getting old is that you've had plenty of time to earn money, and you get to spend more of that money on things you enjoy, rather than things you need. Imagine a 1947 alum, WWII vet, who is in his mid 90's and has been a season ticket holder for 50 years. Life isn't exactly easy for him, but he loves his Beavs, so he sends $7500 a year to Oregon State for a couple of seats in the third row behind the bench, because his vision isn't the best. Now, he can't make it to every game, but when he goes, sitting elsewhere isn't an option because he can't climb stairs that well and wouldn't be able to see great from further back. You're telling me that guy should lose his seats that he's been forking checks over for fifty years because his kids or grandkids are too busy to bring him to every game?
Now, if Oregon State wants to set up some sort of resale venue, where STHs can select games they won't come to in order to sell the tickets back to OSU for them to resell on a single game basis to other fans (or perhaps as SQUAD inventory), I'm fine with that. But I think it'd be horrible decision to move people who paid for the right to use the seat as they wish (give it to kids, sell it on StubHub, whatever).
As for upgrading the seating....change is inevitable. At some point, those seats were going to have to be replaced. I'm not super tall, but big enough that on the occasions I've been lucky enough to sit down there, my knees are pressed into the back of the seat in front of me. My guess is that this is going to affect people far less than they think. The biggest donors are probably already in the best seats and aren't going to suddenly want to move to a different seat. There's probably some people with aisle seats that will get squeezed into the middle, and maybe a handful that will no longer have seats on the lower level due to the reduction in seats that will have to move upstairs, and for those people I would hope there would be some sort of "sorry we had to move you, here's a 20% discount on your donation for the next season" or some other compensatory perk.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 23, 2016 17:58:02 GMT -8
I'm curious if some of you people that knock season ticket holders for not showing up are interested in buying those seats. Is there a big logjam of people clamoring to get in there? Yes, a lot of those people have been season ticket holders for decades. They've paid tens of thousands of dollars to Oregon State for the right to sit there over the years. The laws of nature mean that as we age, getting around becomes more difficult and health becomes an ever increasing concern. The benefit of getting old is that you've had plenty of time to earn money, and you get to spend more of that money on things you enjoy, rather than things you need. Imagine a 1947 alum, WWII vet, who is in his mid 90's and has been a season ticket holder for 50 years. Life isn't exactly easy for him, but he loves his Beavs, so he sends $7500 a year to Oregon State for a couple of seats in the third row behind the bench, because his vision isn't the best. Now, he can't make it to every game, but when he goes, sitting elsewhere isn't an option because he can't climb stairs that well and wouldn't be able to see great from further back. You're telling me that guy should lose his seats that he's been forking checks over for fifty years because his kids or grandkids are too busy to bring him to every game? Now, if Oregon State wants to set up some sort of resale venue, where STHs can select games they won't come to in order to sell the tickets back to OSU for them to resell on a single game basis to other fans (or perhaps as SQUAD inventory), I'm fine with that. But I think it'd be horrible decision to move people who paid for the right to use the seat as they wish (give it to kids, sell it on StubHub, whatever). As for upgrading the seating....change is inevitable. At some point, those seats were going to have to be replaced. I'm not super tall, but big enough that on the occasions I've been lucky enough to sit down there, my knees are pressed into the back of the seat in front of me. My guess is that this is going to affect people far less than they think. The biggest donors are probably already in the best seats and aren't going to suddenly want to move to a different seat. There's probably some people with aisle seats that will get squeezed into the middle, and maybe a handful that will no longer have seats on the lower level due to the reduction in seats that will have to move upstairs, and for those people I would hope there would be some sort of "sorry we had to move you, here's a 20% discount on your donation for the next season" or some other compensatory perk. The market will tend to sort this out. Hey, if somebody wants to pay the freight for top seats he can buy them and if he wants to let them sit empty for whatever reason that's his call. But by and large the more people pay, the more motivated they will be to attend regularly. And those motivated fans should be able to get/buy better/closer seats regardless of tenure than less motivated fans. That's just the market at work. Basic supply and demand.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Aug 23, 2016 23:21:07 GMT -8
This is sort of a "who cares" topic. Those who want to see hoops will see hoops. The best seats in Gill are actually above the walk way. If I don't use my seats it's my $ and how it looks on TV is truly irrelevant.
But, I'll disagree on the motivation portion of the post above. Paying more had very little to do with motivation to attend. It means the buyer most likely has more discretionary income. Hence, probably has more discretion on whether to use the tix.
The more people pay tends to mean they have money to burn. Ever see the guy/family with multiple expensive cars that sit? The 2nd home at the beach that's not a shack but in the $500k+ range that is empty 11 months of the year.
A lot of those empty seats belong to long time season ticket holders/families and in some cases it's just another one of their "toys". But, again... if I want to see a game I'll get a seat. Those people are not hindering anyone. And their money is in the coffers. The AD doesn't give a rats arse about the view on the TV screen.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Aug 24, 2016 6:20:45 GMT -8
The AD doesn't give a rats arse about the view on the TV screen. Clearly they do, or they wouldn't be switching the TV cameras to the other side to show the student section.
|
|
|
Post by beaverbeliever on Aug 24, 2016 8:22:03 GMT -8
I'm sure it is an inconvenience to anyone having to be moved - but improving the seating does sound like a positive. I have to imagine there are still enough quality seats for them to be moved to acceptable location.
|
|
|
Post by beaverale on Aug 24, 2016 10:47:55 GMT -8
I'm sure it is an inconvenience to anyone having to be moved - but improving the seating does sound like a positive. I have to imagine there are still enough quality seats for them to be moved to acceptable location.
If they made everyone re-bid again for the seats I can see how that would be more equitable. The problem is, those in the best seats closest to the court are already taken and will most likely be renewed. So where does that put the displaced fans? You go from the lower bowl to above all of the people who already have the best seats in the upper. Makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Aug 24, 2016 11:03:08 GMT -8
I'm sure it is an inconvenience to anyone having to be moved - but improving the seating does sound like a positive. I have to imagine there are still enough quality seats for them to be moved to acceptable location.
If they made every re-bid again for the seats I can see how that would be more equitable. The problem is, those in the best seats closest to the court are already taken and will most likely be renewed. So where does that put the displaced fans? You go from the lower bowl to above all of the people who already have the best seats in the upper. Makes no sense.
Maybe they should do like football and make that entire court level sideline behind the scorer's table and team benches a beer and wine terrace?
Just kidding.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Aug 24, 2016 11:57:47 GMT -8
This is going to be an issue for the people that get displaced. Unless they've got some good compensation for moving them, I think this will give quite a few of those people an excuse to stop coming to games.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Aug 24, 2016 19:22:07 GMT -8
The AD doesn't give a rats arse about the view on the TV screen. Clearly they do, or they wouldn't be switching the TV cameras to the other side to show the student section. They made the change to show students section... more enthusiastic... camera placement now can pickup broadcast team without hand held. It had ZERO to do with empty seats. The "dam" can be spotty for certain games.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Aug 24, 2016 21:10:25 GMT -8
Clearly they do, or they wouldn't be switching the TV cameras to the other side to show the student section. They made the change to show students section... more enthusiastic... camera placement now can pickup broadcast team without hand held. It had ZERO to do with empty seats. The "dam" can be spotty for certain games. You kind of agreed with me while disagreeing with me. They want to show a more enthusiastic crowd on TV, so they must care that what's being shown now isn't the best. I will agree with you that the empty seats is mostly an issue in the early season games, which is primarily when the students are in dead week/finals/gone on xmas break.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Aug 24, 2016 22:18:08 GMT -8
Circle all you want... the premise was it was switched because of empty "orange" seats... which is not the case. There will now be empty cushioned "black" seats. The change was a TV "ask" school agreeing.
|
|