WotAGuy
-
Posts
4,850 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by WotAGuy
-
-
1 minute ago, nedboy7 said:
True. There really has to be some issue here we don’t really know yet. Or will know
@HappyDays related some info on the behind the scenes issues upthread.-
1
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:
Then there are those who think the PSLs are going to drop to $1000 to $2000 a seat at the low end. Face it the plebs will no longer be able to afford to go.
Maybe not as STHs, but they will be there. They find a way to travel all over the country to go to games, they will continue to go to games here too.-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:
Of course there is “ inequity”. That shouldn’t be a surprise. Seeing the reality for what it is - reality is not “ coping” or rationalizing or any other psychobabble that you want to throw in there. It’s simply having a brain and seeing things for what they are. The world isn’t perfect.
Agreed. I prefer acceptance of reality and planning to deal with reality than whining and complaining and feeling like I’m being persecuted.
I think some people in this thread saw what was coming and are not surprised and are accepting reality. That doesn’t mean we condone what is happening.
The people being blindsided are those that are reading about 50k PSLs and extrapolating that to the entire stadium - especially STHs in the best 100 level seats that weren’t “club” seats, but now apparently will be. Those people are understandably worried about their ability to continue to be STHs at the same seating arrangement. That will all be revealed shortly.
Then there are those that just want to slap their ***** around trying to garner attention and pretend to be a big boy/girl/other. 🤣
4 minutes ago, Einstein said:
Again, no one that I have seen is really "surprised". We are simply talking about the reality of the situation now that it is officially here (we have the official numbers for some sections).
While we do that, many posters are making it their job to defend, defend, defend the Bills. That's not simply discussing the reality. That's Rationalization with a dash of Stockholm. These posters have a compulsion to defend.
The fact you conflate explanations with defending proves the persecution complex going on here.-
2
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Dan Darragh said:
The return address on Andre's note was "Canton, OH"
Sorry, haven’t read through the entire thread yet. Did Andre have something to say about Diggs recently? -
Just now, The Wiz said:
Because most people don't know how the cap works.
Nor understand what a problem Diggs had become to team attitude and morale.-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, CirclnWagons said:
Anyone who thinks this was a good move for the organization, please contact me immediately to learn about the benefits of investing in time shares
Someone from Legends on line 1….. -
So I guess we can assume the Bills heard they are going to be on Hard Knocks this year and McDermottt didn’t want Diggs to embarrass him, so he told Beane to give him the boot.
If the cap hit is minimized, this is a huge win for the Bills. They need guys that are going to step up in the playoffs, and hopefully they will draft someone - anyone - that will do that other than Josh.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Einstein said:
That is a term I would use if I wanted to obfuscate data. But that’s an entirely different topic.
Obfuscate…..now we’re getting into your area of expertise!-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Einstein said:
I contradicted your hypothesis of the existence of two different customer types negating predictive potential. But it appears to have gone over your head.
Unless you mean that someone else also corrected you on that point 10 pages ago. If so, you probably should have heeded that posters advice.
Guess that’s a no. You would rather argue your obtuse, unrelated points than what the Bills true strategy is. Given your lack of knowledge about sports marketing, it’s ok. We forgive you.
Gimme a laugh emoji if you agree you’re wrong.
Damn, you deleted it. 😝
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, Einstein said:
That’s right Wot! Good job!
What you’re knocking on the door of is
price sensitivity and elasticity of demand. But it’s actually the other way around from how you are imagining. Lower income fans that often make up the less pricier areas of the stadium are generally more price-sensitive, meaning their demand for tickets is more elastic. This elasticity is due to their inability (and sometimes unwillingness) to purchase tickets with even a small increase in price, as the cost represents a larger portion of their discretionary spending.
This is exactly why the Bills are selling the club tickets first. They are obtaining a benchmark for sales with fans who have higher discretionary income and are likely adjusting their pricing for fans in other sections of the stadium based off of this data. When prices increase across the board, the demand among these fans might drop more sharply than among higher-income fans, who are less sensitive to price changes.
The way most businesses get around this is by increasing the amount of available quantity at lower prices, thereby offsetting any reduced demand (on a percentage basis). What is interesting about the Bills situation is that they have reduced quantity available for lower priced seats, as the club seats now take up a much larger portion of the stadium AND they already reduced the stadium by close to 10k seats.
Which again, is exactly why they doing clubs first. They’re going to use clubs as a benchmark to adjust the less pricier areas. Most club buyers can afford to purchase the seats. For them it comes down to willingness and opportunity cost. For less price seat buys, many of them may have the willingness, but without the ability.
What will undoubtedly happen next is that the Bills will leverage their media connections to push false scarcity.
Dude, you are just rephrasing points that others made 10 pages ago. Do you have an original thought to contribute or not?
Wait, that was you making these points 10 pages ago. Still irrelevant to the fact the Bills hired Legends to get rid of the fat, old fannies in the best seats and get the fannies in there that will spend big $$.
I mean, even you can figure that out, no?
Edit: guess not. We tried!
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Einstein said:
Exactly right.
You should learn about predictive modeling. You don’t have to guess or use a hunch. We have maths to give us the answer on what is predictive.
The 1.6% is predictive. At a 95% confidence interval.
But there are two entirely different populations of customers - one eats those tiny hot dogs on sticks, and the other drinks Genny Cream Ale and sets themselves on fire. It’s not apples and apples. One doesn’t predict the other.
What you fail to comprehend is the Bills want to lose the Cyglinski family with 8 seats on the 50 and replace them with casino people. Or Pepsi people. Or Draftkings people. Those families taking up prime $$ seats need to go and be replaced by revenue generators.
The only thing that can be predicted so far is that you will lock onto an obscure, irrelevant aspect of the discussion to draw people away from the fact you don’t know anything about this PSL business.
I guarantee the Legends people are reading all the whining and threats to opt out on Facebook and saying
“Good riddance! Now we can bring in revenue generators and make some $$ on our best assets.”
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Just to be clear, they don’t want to sell 100% of their available inventory to the public. There is a percentage (that we don’t know) of the premium tickets that the Bills will use as leverage to sell soft assets in the new stadium (ie signage, commercials, naming rights of clubs, etc).
….and if there’s anyone that knows about “soft assets”, it’s @Einstein-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Einstein said:
You missed it. The Bills *want* to not sell 100% of their season ticket allotment. They want to lose 1 out of every 4 customers.
That’s because having an undertaker in your club seats brings everyone down. Time for them to go and be replaced with Casino people. -
Just now, Einstein said:
Yes, I agree, there is definitely someone in this thread doing this…
-
2
-
-
25 minutes ago, Einstein said:
I think you misunderstood.
What the formula does is tell you what sample size you need for the sample to be predictive.
That's the entire point.
We need at least 203 account holders to be offered PSL's at a 90% confidence level, to have the sample be predictive. The Bills have shown over 400.
This is just absurd.
"Hear me out boss. Let's spend millions of dollars to hire salespeople who sell people on $40k PSL's, all day every day, and get this... we are going to WANT lots of people to say NO and waste our time/money".
They want 100% sales. Unless you have information that they are breaking disparate impact by selling the same seats for more money to corporate buyers (which they aren't).They likely dont. Which is why they are selling clubs first. They are using it as a benchmark.
You've mentioned this about half a dozen times. I fear that it doesn't give you the credibility that you think it does. Especially when you state that the sample size isn't large enough yet surpassed 95% confidence. How did you do this for a living but dont understand predictive portioning? Quite frankly I have about 50 of you below me on the org chart.Masters, Ph'd's, etc. No executives.
It’s PhD brainiac, and there no apostrophe. Apparently there are no English majors under you on the Chick-fil-A org chart.-
2
-
-
Just now, Einstein said:
You've mentioned this about half a dozen times. I have about 50 of you below me on the org chart.
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Einstein said:
"Failure" isnt the right way of looking at it. It's just the reality of the numbers. Neither good nor bad.
Nine hours ago you wrote:
Keep in mind, according to the Bills, 1 in 4 aren't renewing. That's pretty bad for most businesses to lose a quarter of your customers.
Are you feeling ok Einstein? After this edible, I was gonna have sex with my wife, but maybe I should stick around and help you out?2 minutes ago, Einstein said:
They pass 95% confidence level. How does that not tell us anything?
Sample size? Bah! -
1 minute ago, Einstein said:
"Failure" isnt the right way of looking at it. It's just the reality of the numbers. Neither good nor bad.
The 60k isnt used in the equation at all so doesnt mattter. I just cut the end of my sentence off. It was meant to say 60,000 tickets at 2.5 ticket per account holder
It’s always “I meant to say”.
The refrain of the wrong.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Einstein said:
Right.
So let's figure out how many the Bills need to attempt to sell to before we have a predictive value. Meaning, how many people before we know the % of sales is a good predictor of future outcomes.
- Let's say we want a confidence level of 90% and a Z-score of 1.65 (technically 1.645).
- Let's assume 60,000 season ticket holders
- A 5% margin of error.
- We know 75% of those shown the new ticket pricing have agreed to buy, so we have p = 0.75 and q= 1 − p (so 0.25)
So we have:
The answer is 203.
With a 90% confidence level and a 5% margin of error, the Bills need to offer PSL's to at least 203 account holders.
We know they have presented to 1.6% of account holders. If each account holder averages 2.5 tickets, that means they have presented to 403 account holders. Which is significantly more than they need to see predictive value.
in other words, the 75% sale figure is predictive.
There are not 60,000 season ticket holders if they each hold 2.5 seats. Ipsofatso your analysis is flawed from the start.
Let’s look at it with a different Z value:
Einstein = not smart.
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, papazoid said:
Only 1.6% of season-ticket account holders (all of whom have premium club-seat locations at the current stadium) have been invited to the Stadium Experience in Amherst
Among the people who have been invited, 96% have visited the Stadium Experience or scheduled a visit, and 75% of the account holders who have visited have signed PSL agreements for club seats.
(of the 25% who didn't agree to new club level seats immediately on first offer....i bet more than half of them get seats in a less expensive area on their second chance meeting. so that initial 75% will likely go to 85-90%)
The 25% represents those that didn’t accept the first offer. I wonder if that does or does not include people like @Mr Info, who declined to purchase the day of his presentation but ended up buying some time after?Also, with the survey, I would think the Bills had an idea what the decline rate would be, since the sharp increase in cost would scare off a fair number of non-corporate and small corporate STHs for the new clubs.
Like Kirby alluded to, it could be the Bills have new corporate clients lined up to take the declined seats. I could see some companies thinking the new stadium and upgraded amenities make it more attractive to bring in new clients, as opposed to your undertakers, etc.
So, to take the 25% and run with it like it’s a sign of failure (looking at you @Einstein) may be missing the mark.
-
2
-
2
-
-
Just now, Einstein said:
Maths upset you?
Very much so. When I joined in 2004, SDS told me very specifically “THERE WILL BE NO MATH”.
-
1
-
-
-
8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
When there are no primary seats available (again demand) there is ONLY secondary demand. We can judge demand by primary (waiting list), secondary (high priced tickets on the secondary market), and the Bills on the road (travel as well as any fan base). I’m not sure what you’re trying to dispute? The demand for the Bills is through the roof and ALL metrics support that. When you have a waiting list, you couldn’t have more primary demand. People are forced to the secondary market to consume the product. They value it enough to pay inflated prices. You’re grasping at straws to jam through the narrative that you’re trying to create. Right now, people aren’t picking Miami or season tickets. They are either doing both or picking Miami BECAUSE they can’t get season tickets. The demand is enormous.
Long-winded answer with math equations incoming in 3, 2, 1…..
-
3
-
-
59 minutes ago, Mango said:
You sold 6/8 games and Terry didn’t come after you for a resellers license?
And gouging the taxpayers who paid to have the stadium built in 1973 by doubling the ticket price. Einstein probably has an equation to prove this is an affront to Bills fans everywhere. If the tickets were even sold to Bills fans.
Outrageous I tell ya!
-
2
-
PSL Pricing/Seat Selection Discussion
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I’m sorry if I hurt your feelings. Honestly.
You seemed to be rather like Spock in being very logical and dispassionate, except you would throw out a crack about the org chart and condescending statistical nonsense, so I figured you were up for some ribbing.
If anything I said was hurtful, I apologize. Apparently I took it too far and I’m sorry about that.
I do like you Einstein. You bring a fun element to the board and its posters like you that make this a fun place to waste time.
I appreciate you.