VOR, this makes absolutely no sense. If the budget is $20 million and you take away $10 million where are you going to come up with the other $10 million to continue operations? You'd have to increase fundraising, sponsorships or ticket prices or some combination thereof.
As for your gold section comment, the contribution on those went up from $50 to $75 for next year. And finally, not all season tickets require a per seat contribution. Only black, platinum, gold and silver requrie that.
Do us all a favor and argue the points rather than with the poster. As it is now, I could offer you $100 for nothing and you'd find a reason to argue with me on that.
It makes perfect sense, Alan. Regardless of whether the student fee was there or not the athletic department would set their prices at the level they felt would maximize revenue. If they aren't then they are idiots. The more revenue they generate the more they have to work with in their budget. They will always be trying to maximize all their revenue streams (sponsorships, donations, ticketing) because it brings more resources for the department. If you think they are doing otherwise, you are an idiot!
The $10M in student fees subsidy absolutely is necessary for the athletic department to function at the level it does. If they did not have it they would be crippled, but the idea that they would be able to magically generate that $10M to maintain the level they are at is absurd. Bottom line is that if the student fee were to go away the university would need to either decided to reallocate resources to continue to support the department or make the decision to drop football a level and possibly the entire athletic department as the sustainability of the department would be a huge questions.
Also, I am fully aware that all season tickets do not require seat donations. I never said they did. You want to know why they don't all have a seat donation? Because the market will not support it! If they threw a seat donation on every season ticket or increased the prices significantly they would lose a large number of season ticket holders and would ultimately lose revenue. However, in select sections (Gold and platinum) they are able to make a significant increase because they are confident that the loss of season ticket holders will be more than offset by the increase in revenue from the people that remain. They would not do it otherwise.
Believe it or not, I do not argue with the poster. I argue with the poster's points and 99% of the time I disagree with your points because they are driven by an agenda against the AD and are constructed to advance your agenda. Any chance you get to be negative you take it. This thread as an example, you started with the commentary on the percentage increase in price and an "Ouch!". You are just trying to stir the pot and paint the department as blood suckers in the hopes that you can get some others to grab the pitchforks with you and take a stand. You act like this is a huge deal when in reality it impacts four sections, a small percentage of season ticket holders, and most of which are willing to pay that premium for the outstanding seats and hospitality. If you don't think it is worth it, don't buy it! Get a season ticket in the gold section or the silver section. Don't run to your computer an try to stir the pot.