SEZ
- Thread starter rebecacy
- Start date
It's not a million a year. That is a potential projection. They must be doubling prices because the reality is they made 500k in a stadium that seats 10k more than JTS.
ISU probably stands to make 250-500k if this were allowed.
Go home with this defeatist attitude. EVERY substantial upgrade in seating ISU has done in our football history has been followed by a substantial uptick in attendance. It's part of ISU history. You can look it up. If a double decked SEZ Adds 12,000 seats to JTS, I expect attendance will go up by that much. Even if it doesn't go up that much every game, there are several games on the schedule every year where we could fill that new capacity and those alone would eventually pay for the upgrade. 12,000 new seats times $50 a pop as a conservative estimate (because most people spend more than $50 per game, including concessions and programs), times 2 games a year where we would always sell out (another conservative estimate) equals a $600,000 jump in revenue annually.
If you keep thinking small, you will always be small. I'd love to see a 75,000 seat or more stadium right now. Who cares if it looks empty on TV in certain games? The point is, you can't sell a seat if you don't have it to sell in the first place. I'd rather have the seat and not sell it than not have it and miss an opportunity to sell it.
That's still a lot of damn money that could do a lot of good.
You still haven't given a good reason for not selling beer.
So say its only 500k. That's still a good amount of money left on the table. Enough to pay for an increase for Hoiberg to something more market-appropriate after he makes the tourney... enough to help hold onto an assistant, etc.
If it made sense to do it, JP would do it. There are risks whether you want to admit that or not. The risks may be small, but they are there. Again, if it were a couple million a year, I'd be beating this drum. There are lots of other ways we could make an additional half million without resorting to beer sales.
Such as?
(Not including ticket/donation prices because that's not "outside the box")
Sorry, I thought this was a thread about the south end zone...
I love that picture so much and I really hope it happens almost identical to that.
You could so some sort of club/restaurant in the middle, and suites on each side of that.
Why does it need to be outside the box? I just said if that extra 250-500k is needed that badly there are other ways to achieve it. Ticket prices, donations, parking, concessions, etc are all in play.
If it is so risky, why do we do it for other events? Why do other colleges and all professional teams do it?
JP may be opposed to it, but those reasons could be far more intangible. It could be a pride issue (doesn't want to be the first original Big 12 member to "resort" to this measure) or something like that, but risk does not appear to be a reason.
If the risk outweighed the benefits, then no one would sell beer at sporting events anywhere.
That conclusion is only valid if the risk/benefit analysis is the same everywhere.
Whether right or wrong, there is a stereotype associated with college and binge drinking. Selling beer at JTS would play poorly in the public eye and god forbid something happened to a kid that was seen drinking at a game.
You don't have that stigma at professional sporting events. It is a completely different world than college athletics even though an argument could be made it's the "same thing".
Other places that serve at ISU are limited in the potential "customer" that is being served (suites, JT Club, Johnny's, etc).
Again...the finances just aren't that appealing to go there. There is potential bad PR. It's not like there are a ton of Universities going there. It's worth reviewing to see what the $$$ benefits are, but there are other ways to make $$$. Especially this limited amount of revenue we are talking about.
I just don't see how college are running a greater risk than pro teams.
There are already quite a few colleges doing it. Really, the only schools that don't are the ones in the 5 most powerful leagues. Many Big East and mid-major schools do it. How is our risk any higher? What is this risk?
If I saw something that showed the risk being significant, it would make more sense. I don't see where the risk is, and no one is really specifying the risk. They're just saying "its risky" and making the assumption.
What a circular argument. We cant have alcohol because of a 'stereotype', there's a stereotype because of people (like you have done in this thread) who trot out the ridiculousness that if we sell beer the whole crowd will be drunk out of their minds.
This seems incredibly presumptuous and speculative. On the other hand, beer sales have proven to be financially lucrative and we don't even have to leave the conference to see this.
I wouldn't want it to be identical. The upper deck of the end zone should wrap all the way around and not just be in the middle of it. Honestly how much more can just wrapping it around cost?
I wouldn't want it to be identical. The upper deck of the end zone should wrap all the way around and not just be in the middle of it. Honestly how much more can just wrapping it around cost?
I agree, it would be nice to close it in entirely. I also love the idea of moving the band to the south end zone.
Can anyone explain why the student section is where it is? Why wouldn't we put them behind the opposing team's bench?
