Do any of you know Maureen Casey ? RE. Black Lot

[Upstream]

Lol! Certainly was not thinking income tax purposes in my twenties but was thinking support the team. End zone seats? Lest we forget that for many years end zone seats were non existent or few and far between and why would you assume the cheapest seats? Furthermore from the end of the Anderson era, a lot of the Graber years, basically all of the Shea era and the first four years of Schiano, I literally ate hundreds of tickets. I was in fact supporting RU to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars over that time frame.

Don't know why you think that end-zone seats were unavailable for most of those years. They were certainly available. But OK, you bought the most expensive sideline seats to throw in the garbage.

So if you bought 5 extra season sideline tickets for the 22 years from Dick Anderson's first game through the end of 2005, you would have spent $2147 per seat, or $10,735 in total. Not really tens of thousands of dollars, but certainly ten thousand dollars. If you had donated it instead, you would have earned 10.7 priority points.

If you were arguing that you should get 10.7 priority points, that might be worth consideration. But you want 22 points (1 for each of 22 years) for each of those extra 5 tickets, for a total of 110 bonus points. And you think that's fair? How is that fair to the fan who actually donated the $10,735 and only gets 10.7 priority points? If Rutgers were to do that, the fan who understands how the system works would have a real right to be pissed. Why donate money when you are better off just buying tickets and throwing them in the garbage?

 

[Upstream]

And this year it's 44 points. So your now 26 points would be in each case 18 points shy of the blue lot. To get your 6 passes in the blue lot would cost you an additional $10,800.

Of course, if he donated $10,800 on a single account, rather than splitting it among multiple accounts, instead of barely qualifying for the Blue Lot, he would qualify for 2 passes in the Scarlet Lot right next to the stadium plus get all the perks that come with being at $10,000+ donor.

 

[RUJohnny99]

These loyalty games really piss me off. You want to reward the old timers for buying tickets when I didn't want them? Give them a hat & a red t shirt. Don't give them the good parking. And this comes from someone who has had two tickets since the 2003 season when purple was the far lot.

I was bumped from blue to purple last year because I was 2 points shy. So I kicked up my donation 20% only to get bumped down to black parking. So, what did I do? I stopped my automatic monthly contributions. I'm waiting until December to buy bowl tickets I'll never use just because Rutgers gives parking points away for 30 cents on the dollar. And this will inflate the point system again and force actual cash donors out into crappier & crappier lots.

When I realize that my points for donating each year means nothing compared to the points I get for having tickets for 12 years is the year I just give the 100 bucks to remain in R Club & pick up another 2 phantom points. Multiply that by the thousands parking in the outer lots & you've got a system where people just wait for the older crowd to die off so they can claim their spot for being loyal back in the Big East days. Not a very sound long term strategy.

 

[G- RUnit]

Upstream:

I am not sure which Rutgers Stadium you were are in but one end zone did not exist and the other endzone still had poison ivy in half the endzone. Throw in Giants Stadium too but guessing you may have overlooked that as well. Trust me closer to $15,000 and then add the last ten years and don't think approaching $30,000 is a stretch.

 

[Upstream]

Upstream:

I am not sure which Rutgers Stadium you were are in but one end zone did not exist and the other endzone still had poison ivy in half the endzone. Throw in Giants Stadium too but guessing you may have overlooked that as well. Trust me closer to $15,000 and then add the last ten years and don't think approaching $30,000 is a stretch.

I bought end zone tickets for the homecoming game every year from 1986 through 2005 (attending with a large group of alumni friends). In 2006, we got shut out. In 2007 I started buying season tickets.

The total costs I listed above are based on adding the actual annual prices for Rutgers Season Tickets.

Since 2006, 5 sideline seats would have cost you just over $15500, including this year's tickets. But there is no rational way you can consider that a donation. You got to get 5 people into the games, many of which were sold out.

 

[Upstream]

Interesting looking at the old ticket prices. It becomes very obvious why Mulcahy was so willing to tell Ritchie Rutgers to go pound salt in 2007. In the 10 years ending in 2006, Ritchie spent a total of less than $1300 on each of his 50 yard line seats, and he balked at making a donation to keep his seats and Scarlet parking. In the first 4 seasons starting in 2007, Mulcahy was able to sell Ritchie's seats to a different fan who spent the same amount in 4 years plus made annual donations.

 

[Jersey Boys]

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream, "Oppression"
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
They say, "The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light."
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

 

[Scarlet16E]

I have no issue with the concept of the priority points program, but there are some things that Rutgers could do better regarding them.

As it's currently set up, the idea is to reward the following (in no particular order):
1. Longevity as a season ticket holder in revenue sports.
2. Volume of FB season ticket's purchased (based on current year).
3. Lifetime giving to the University.
4. Current Year giving to the R fund.

I think in general the program addresses all of these things. The problems start when volatility is added to the Point balances on a year-to-year basis. This is what causes fans to be bumped to different lots more often than they should be.
Some of this volatility is just because our entire athletic program is undergoing massive changes as we enter the B1G, and this is probably unavoidable. Some is caused when a well-off new season ticket holder makes a large one-time "catch-up" gift to the R Fund. Since you get 10.1 times the points for current year donations as for lifetime donations this can cause a single-year jump in someone's points (and they fall back the next year).

More concerning, and IMO the cause of a lot of volatility is the use of "bonus points" to reward things such as purchasing bowl tickets or early season ticket renewal. I understand that these are good things which the AD wants to encourage. But since these bonus points are for the current year only, they give lots of people a 1-year jump in point balances. I have 10 bonus points on my account this year. Others who have given more to the university through the years, but were not paying close attention to the bowl ticket donations or early renewal rewards have zero. Many people have moved up or down in parking lot assignments for just this year because of these bonus points and whether they were paying close attention to them.

Priority points should be about rewarding long-term behavior. Not one-time things. If bonus points for Bowl ticket purchases and early renewal are going to be done every year, then fine. Then that's the new normal, and everyone should participate who cares about their parking assignments. But if each year there are new or different things that bonus points are awarded for, then the AD is simply introducing volatility into the priority point program, which has the potential to make long-time supporters unhappy.

 

[G- RUnit]

I bought end zone tickets for the homecoming game every year from 1986 through 2005 (attending with a large group of alumni friends). In 2006, we got shut out. In 2007 I started buying season tickets.

The total costs I listed above are based on adding the actual annual prices for Rutgers Season Tickets.

Since 2006, 5 sideline seats would have cost you just over $15500, including this year's tickets. But there is no rational way you can consider that a donation. You got to get 5 people into the games, many of which were sold out.

I can assure you I have never held end zone tickets in my life. I can also assure you for much of that time frame Rutgers did not even have endzone seating in one endzone. Good for you on your endzone seating! The point which you do not appear to comprehend regarding loyality is that it is quite possible for a loyal fan to have spent close to $30,000.00 on RU football and the point system as it exists right now simply does not address it.

 

[G- RUnit]

Upstream: Yet if it weren't for Ritchie Rich, RU would in all likelihood be Tommy Temple or Connie UConn.

 

[RBS05]

Upstream: Yet if it weren't for Ritchie Rich, RU would in all likelihood be Tommy Temple or Connie UConn.

Ritchie Rich would have moved Rutgers out of the NYC DMA?

 

[G- RUnit]

Like Paulie Princeton, Arthur Army, Frankie Fordham, Howie Hofstra, Mary Monmouth, Lee Lehigh, Sonny SUNY?

 

[Upstream]

I can assure you I have never held end zone tickets in my life. I can also assure you for much of that time frame Rutgers did not even have endzone seating in one endzone. Good for you on your endzone seating! The point which you do not appear to comprehend regarding loyality is that it is quite possible for a loyal fan to have spent close to $30,000.00 on RU football and the point system as it exists right now simply does not address it.

Plenty of seats in the north endzone

And the current priority point system certainly provides a benefit to long-time ticket holders. If you have had season tickets since 1984, you get $3000 worth of priority points as a benefit. You want to be reimbursed for your tickets. You are asking for more priority points for buying tickets than you would have received had you actually made a donation. What you are asking for is unreasonable and unfair. It ain't going to happen. Get over it.

 

[Upstream]

I have no issue with the concept of the priority points program, but there are some things that Rutgers could do better regarding them.

As it's currently set up, the idea is to reward the following (in no particular order):
1. Longevity as a season ticket holder in revenue sports.
2. Volume of FB season ticket's purchased (based on current year).
3. Lifetime giving to the University.
4. Current Year giving to the R fund.

I think in general the program addresses all of these things. The problems start when volatility is added to the Point balances on a year-to-year basis. This is what causes fans to be bumped to different lots more often than they should be.
Some of this volatility is just because our entire athletic program is undergoing massive changes as we enter the B1G, and this is probably unavoidable. Some is caused when a well-off new season ticket holder makes a large one-time "catch-up" gift to the R Fund. Since you get 10.1 times the points for current year donations as for lifetime donations this can cause a single-year jump in someone's points (and they fall back the next year).

More concerning, and IMO the cause of a lot of volatility is the use of "bonus points" to reward things such as purchasing bowl tickets or early season ticket renewal. I understand that these are good things which the AD wants to encourage. But since these bonus points are for the current year only, they give lots of people a 1-year jump in point balances. I have 10 bonus points on my account this year. Others who have given more to the university through the years, but were not paying close attention to the bowl ticket donations or early renewal rewards have zero. Many people have moved up or down in parking lot assignments for just this year because of these bonus points and whether they were paying close attention to them.

Priority points should be about rewarding long-term behavior. Not one-time things. If bonus points for Bowl ticket purchases and early renewal are going to be done every year, then fine. Then that's the new normal, and everyone should participate who cares about their parking assignments. But if each year there are new or different things that bonus points are awarded for, then the AD is simply introducing volatility into the priority point program, which has the potential to make long-time supporters unhappy.

I agree that the bonus points for things like buying bowl tickets and renewing early create considerable volatility in priority point rankings. I understand Rutgers giving points for people doing things that are of value to Rutgers. It is a cheap way for Rutgers to influence behavior. But the points awarded should be proportional to the value created for Rutgers, so that the level of reward is appropriate.

$100 worth of priority points for buying a $35 bowl ticket does not seem reasonable. 0.35 or 0.40 points is reasonable.

$500 worth of priority points for renewing season tickets early does not seem reasonable, and it creates too much volatility, especially in the outer lots where 5 points makes a big difference.

When Rutgers decides to value actions and priority points, they need to make sure they have assigned the correct valuation and that they are influencing the behavior they want to influence.

Too many fans erroneously believe that the purpose of priority points is to reward you for things you did in the past. The real purpose is to influence what you do in the future.

Rutgers wants to influence you to donate money, or renew your season tickets, so they give you priority points for that. The reason they are starting to give priority points for consecutive years donating is because they recognized that people stopped renewing tickets (for reasons like young children, illness, relocation) and then stopped donating also. Rutgers wants to influence them to continue making annual donations, so they give priority points for that.

But priority points only influence the correct behavior if they are valued properly. If Rutgers prefers that I renew early rather than increase my donation by $500, then 5 priority points for that behavior is appropriate. But I'm fairly certain that Rutgers would have been much happier if everyone who renewed early had increased their donations by $500 instead, so that means the valuation for the early renewal behavior was incorrect.

 

[G- RUnit]

Plenty of seats in the north endzone

And the current priority point system certainly provides a benefit to long-time ticket holders. If you have had season tickets since 1984, you get $3000 worth of priority points as a benefit. You want to be reimbursed for your tickets. You are asking for more priority points for buying tickets than you would have received had you actually made a donation. What you are asking for is unreasonable and unfair. It ain't going to happen. Get over it.

Define plenty lol! Actually I just think that it is inequitable that a person who has multiple tickets and by multiple I mean more than a half dozen gets the same amount of points per year for consecutive giving as a person who has one single ticket. Don't think that is unreasonable or unfair at all. Get over yourself. Beauty of fan forums!

 

[Upstream]

Define plenty lol! Actually I just think that it is inequitable that a person who has multiple tickets and by multiple I mean more than a half dozen gets the same amount of points per year for consecutive giving as a person who has one single ticket. Don't think that is unreasonable or unfair at all. Get over yourself. Beauty of fan forums!

The only difference is, the way I think is equitable is the way the Rutgers priority point system actually works. It is also the way priority point systems at most other schools work. I don't think there is a single school in the country that does what you suggest. If what you suggest were really fair and equitable, I would expect to find many schools that do it that way.

 

[trentonrufan]

I have been a season ticket holder for 24 years. As things got better I had to pony up more money every year to keep my 35 yard line seats. I remember the amount of season ticket holders -pre 2005 -was less than 10,000. Donations were small each year. I may be wrong by 1,000 or so. But there were not a ton of season ticket holders pre 2006 season. Many times I was able to move to the 50 yard line with empty seats all around me.

I understand her frustration. It would be nice if those of us that were there in the 90's got a little extra boost in points toward better parking (walks get harder), but we are BIG time now and it is what it is...

 

[G- RUnit]

I agree that the bonus points for things like buying bowl tickets and renewing early create considerable volatility in priority point rankings. I understand Rutgers giving points for people doing things that are of value to Rutgers. It is a cheap way for Rutgers to influence behavior. But the points awarded should be proportional to the value created for Rutgers, so that the level of reward is appropriate.

$100 worth of priority points for buying a $35 bowl ticket does not seem reasonable. 0.35 or 0.40 points is reasonable.

$500 worth of priority points for renewing season tickets early does not seem reasonable, and it creates too much volatility, especially in the outer lots where 5 points makes a big difference.

When Rutgers decides to value actions and priority points, they need to make sure they have assigned the correct valuation and that they are influencing the behavior they want to influence.

Too many fans erroneously believe that the purpose of priority points is to reward you for things you did in the past. The real purpose is to influence what you do in the future.

Rutgers wants to influence you to donate money, or renew your season tickets, so they give you priority points for that. The reason they are starting to give priority points for consecutive years donating is because they recognized that people stopped renewing tickets (for reasons like young children, illness, relocation) and then stopped donating also. Rutgers wants to influence them to continue making annual donations, so they give priority points for that.

But priority points only influence the correct behavior if they are valued properly. If Rutgers prefers that I renew early rather than increase my donation by $500, then 5 priority points for that behavior is appropriate. But I'm fairly certain that Rutgers would have been much happier if everyone who renewed early had increased their donations by $500 instead, so that means the valuation for the early renewal behavior was incorrect.

Of course the system is designed to raise as much revenue as possible wth the added purpose of rewarding past loyalty and not alienating your fan base!

The only difference is, the way I think is equitable is the way the Rutgers priority point system actually works. It is also the way priority point systems at most other schools work. I don't think there is a single school in the country that does what you suggest. If what you suggest were really fair and equitable.

I have been a season ticket holder for 24 years. As things got better I had to pony up more money every year to keep my 35 yard line seats. I remember the amount of season ticket holders -pre 2005 -was less than 10,000. Donations were small each year. I may be wrong by 1,000 or so. But there were not a ton of season ticket holders pre 2006 season. Many times I was able to move to the 50 yard line with empty seats all around me.

I understand her frustration. It would be nice if those of us that were there in the 90's got a little extra boost in points toward better parking (walks get harder), but we are BIG time now and it is what it is...

I have no clue what other schools do, nor do I care as other schools certainly do not have RU's unique history. I am not ready to fall into the is what it is trap. Why not make the system better if you can. I understand her frustration as well. That's what fan forums are for! I think telling loyal fans to contribute more and then downgrading them to lesser parking is penny wise and pound foolish and only alienates loyal alumni. There has to be a better way.

 

[Upstream]

I have been a season ticket holder for 24 years. [...]

It would be nice if those of us that were there in the 90's got a little extra boost in points toward better parking

But you do get a boost. You get $2400 worth of bonus priority points toward your parking.

 

[Ole Cabbagehead]

Upstream: Yet if it weren't for Ritchie Rich, RU would in all likelihood be Tommy Temple or Connie UConn.

No offense, but this is such a silly argument. If the customers who bought sandwiches at the very first subway didn't exist, Subway would've never become the nation's premier chain for sandwiches and Rutgers gossip. Does that mean the customers of the first store should get free bag-o-chips for life? The simple fact of the matter is that if you donated and bought season tickets, you got credit. If you just bought tickets to see games (at a whopping $5-$30 for most of the years of Rutgers history), you got what you paid for - which was a seat at a college football game.

No one should have bought those seats because they thought the school would take care of them in the future. You bought them because you wanted to see a game. I cant relate, because its just backwards thinking to me. You bought tickets, you went to the games. Now you should be entitled something else?

What about the people who are paying now? If someone relatively new is in Scarlet, they have made a big commitment to the school. If they are staying in that lot for multiple years, they are giving a substantial amount each year to get the points up that high. Should people willing to commit $10,000 or more today be pushed aside for people who paid $20/game to watch bad football in the 90's?

 

[c_husk]

My buddy and I have been season ticket holders together for almost 40 years. We have donated some years, some not. In the last 5 seasons we have been moved from Green, to Yellow, to now Blue. We hated Blue so much we sold most of our Blue last 2 seasons, and this year we didn't even bother putting in for parking, we simply now park in a private yard a few house down from the Greek Church. Only $20, we can walk to our friend's tailgate in the Scarlet lot in literally 5-10 minutes, and usually a quick out.

Another option for Maureen Casey is Johnson Park, nice lot, right across entrance from stadium, and decent tailgating scene. That lot I think is $35.

The only problem with parking at Greek Church at this point in time is she ponied up the money for RAC parking and then received parking spot. If she knew that upfront what parking lot she would be in then maybe she would have paid for Greek Church. It seems RU Athletics does the parking backwards buy having her pay upfront for a lot she may not have wanted. I believe parking should be like seats, you know what you are paying for when you write the check.

 

[Upstream]

Why not make the system better if you can.

I have no objection to changing the system to improve it.

You earlier said that people who bought tickets pre-2006 often thought as their extra ticket purchases as donations, as they weren't used to gain admission to the stadium. And I earlier said that it is worth consideration to treat those purchases as a donation in the priority point system. As I calculated (based on the actual season ticket prices), 5 season tickets for the 22 years from 1984 through 2005 would have cost $10.7K and thus be worth 10.7 priority points. That's reasonable.

But you aren't asking for 10.7 priority points. You are asking for 110 priority points, more than ten times what the "donation" is worth. That isn't reasonable. That is outrageous.

 

[G- RUnit]

I still think a ticket holder who has held six tickets for 30 years and a season ticket holder who holds a single ticket for 30 years both getting the same amount of consecutive points per year is insane. I have no idea what other schools do or if they have priority points. I noted if that's the case then those early years should be considered somewhat tongue in cheek as a donation as you literally could not give tickets away. I never begrudged spending the money as it went to RU. I just think there has to be a better way to balance rewarding loyalty and raising funds.

 

[RBS05]

I still think a ticket holder who has held six tickets for 30 years and a season ticket holder who holds a single ticket for 30 years both getting the same amount of consecutive points per year is insane. I have no idea what other schools do or if they have priority points. I noted if that's the case then those early years should be considered somewhat tongue in cheek as a donation as you literally could not give tickets away. I never begrudged spending the money as it went to RU. I just think there has to be a better way to balance rewarding loyalty and raising funds.

So if you bought those six tickets 30 years ago for you and five of your friends, who reimbursed you the money, why do you feel that shows more loyalty than me with my 30 year season ticket, and my friend who had a single ticket, and our four other friends who all had a ticket for 30 years?

 

[Upstream]

I still think a ticket holder who has held six tickets for 30 years and a season ticket holder who holds a single ticket for 30 years both getting the same amount of consecutive points per year is insane. I have no idea what other schools do or if they have priority points. I noted if that's the case then those early years should be considered somewhat tongue in cheek as a donation as you literally could not give tickets away. I never begrudged spending the money as it went to RU. I just think there has to be a better way to balance rewarding loyalty and raising funds.

The purpose of priority points isn't to reward loyalty. It is to influence future behavior.

The purpose of giving you points for consecutive years of renewing tickets is to influence you to continue to renew your tickets. The purpose of giving you points for donations is to influence you to continue to give donations.

If Rutgers were to do what you suggest, it would be counterproductive because it would too greatly devalue the points given for donations. It would be worth much more to just buy unneeded tickets and throw them in the garbage rather than donate the money to Rutgers. This would actually be a double whammy for Rutgers because donating fans would just buy tickets rather than donate, and Rutgers would no longer have those seats to sell to new fans who may also donate. Plus this would reward people who hoard their season tickets into consolidated tickets accounts that earn so many priority points due to number of tickets, that there is no incentive for making future donations. That is the last thing that Rutgers wants.

So Rutgers isn't going to do what you suggest, because it would influence the wrong behavior.

 

[G- RUnit]

So if you bought those six tickets 30 years ago for you and five of your friends, who reimbursed you the money, why do you feel that shows more loyalty than me with my 30 year season ticket, and my friend who had a single ticket, and our four other friends who all had a ticket for 30 years?

You and your five friends would each have 30 consecutive priority points. So you and your friends would have a cumulative 180 points. Last year that would get you just about to six blue lot parking passes.

The same single purchaser, the head of a family of six, buying those same six tickets, gets a mere 30 priority points per consecutive years.

Call me outrageous if you must, but will never convince me otherwise...

 

[G- RUnit]

The purpose of priority points isn't to reward loyalty. It is to influence future behavior.

The purpose of giving you points for consecutive years of renewing tickets is to influence you to continue to renew your tickets. The purpose of giving you points for donations is to influence you to continue to give donations.

If Rutgers were to do what you suggest, it would be counterproductive because it would too greatly devalue the points given for donations. It would be worth much more to just buy unneeded tickets and throw them in the garbage rather than donate the money to Rutgers. This would actually be a double whammy for Rutgers because donating fans would just buy tickets rather than donate, and Rutgers would no longer have those seats to sell to new fans who may also donate. Plus this would reward people who hoard their season tickets into consolidated tickets accounts that earn so many priority points due to number of tickets, that there is no incentive for making future donations. That is the last thing that Rutgers wants.

So Rutgers isn't going to do what you suggest, because it would influence the wrong behavior.

Purpose is also to reward loyalty and not tick off loyal fans and alumni. God forbid if football fortunes turn sour for a year or two. Might want those loyal fans who brought you here through thick and thin. RU would be thrilled with more season tickets sold. No double whammy there!