PSL Pricing/Seat Selection Discussion

[WotAGuy]

4 minutes ago, Aimee75 said:

I am seeing a number of people saying that this could be an out for The Bills, that if the seats don't sell, there is probably a clause that could get them out of Buffalo. Thoughts on this?

 

It's exhausting constantly worrying about this. 

Calling @Kirby Jackson

[Kirby Jackson]

2 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

Calling @Kirby Jackson

Yeah, it’s not. This isn’t some “trick” being played by the Pegulas. This is a process that MANY teams use to offset the private portion of the stadium financing. They pass it along to the consumers. The Bills will be here for a generation (at least).

 

They’ve started with the most expensive locations to discourage people from going back a tier. They don’t have a large buyer pool at the higher levels. They can’t have those people downgrading their spend or they won’t achieve their revenue objectives. They’re rolling it out in phases to maximize revenue and adjust pricing as needed.

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, Einstein said:

Im not arguing for or against PSL’s. Im not telling anyone not to buy them.

 

Im not sure how to say this more clearly…
 

Im simply arguing that PSL’s are not the “norm” in business. 

 

Why would you do all that arguing over semantics?

 

It IS the norm for big business to gouge customers for whatever the market will bear.

 

It IS also the norm for big business to exploit and manipulate government........in ways ranging from skillfully avoiding taxes to benefiting directly from their application and WELL beyond.

 

Your are far too concerned with the tactics when it's all the same strategy.  

 

If you are "not arguing against" PSL's..........why is the distinction of tactics so important to you?

[Rochesterfan]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Why would you do all that arguing over semantics?

 

It IS the norm for big business to gouge customers for whatever the market will bear.

 

It IS also the norm for big business to exploit and manipulate government........in ways ranging from skillfully avoiding taxes to benefiting directly from their application and WELL beyond.

 

Your are far too concerned with the tactics when it's all the same strategy.  

 

If you are "not arguing against" PSL's..........why is the distinction of tactics so important to you?

 

The argument is because he does not want to accept the facts that this is business as usual across many sectors.  That would reduce the fake outrage over nothing.

 

You can find examples across tons of business models - everyday things like Amazon, Costco, Sam’s Club, BJs, and places like Movie theaters, Barnes and Nobles, Gaming places and indoor kids bouncy centers.  
 

Most companies - especially large places like Amazon - build facilities in communities on the back of tax breaks, salary tax cuts, and funding from small business groups that all come from the taxpayer.  I mean look at all the hoops cut when Amazon even mentioned a Warehouse potentially getting built in NYS.  Everyone was throwing taxpayer money just for a shot - including gifting them huge amounts of property that was state and county owned.

 

Then the consumer - be it an Amazon subscriber or a Costco member - pays a fee typically yearly for the right to purchase items from these shops - with limited return or discounts.

 

There are gas stations that were built and received large payroll breaks - especially during Covid - to maintain employment levels and they have monthly and annual fees.  You still pay for gas, but get a 20 cent decrease compared to a non member.

 

There are tons of city/state owned Golf courses that were purchased with tax payer money, you still need a membership to guarantee tee times and you still need to pay for your round.

 

The model is all over - not just the NFL or European Football - they use different terms and in some cases slightly different tweaks, but it is not new nor exclusive to this situation.

 

The membership and pay model is common and most new construction be it a bar, a restaurant, a bookstore, a gas station, a football stadium, a event center - all get funding or reduced taxes, payroll breaks for a certain time, low cost or free loans from the city/state, etc.  the funding is not as open as the funding provided to the Bills, but there is money from the taxpayers involved in most builds.

 

There are plenty of reasons to be angry, but the misplaced anger and the anger over perceived slights is just so overwhelming in this thread.  The Bills could have done a better job, but at this point we know next to nothing and people are making up things to create anger.  @Kirby Jackson has talked and given insight from actually going through this process as an insider/employee and people try to argue minor semantics.  I will wait for my section to be called before I worry if my PSL is going to be $500, $1000, or  $10,000 or anyplace in between.  My outrage can wait until there is actually something to be upset about.  
 

 

 

 

Edited March 30 by Rochesterfan

[WotAGuy]

On 3/28/2024 at 3:54 PM, Einstein said:

 

Tax break = / = paying for the stadium.

The taxpayers are literally PAYING for the stadium. Then they're being charged to enter the stadium. Then being charged to sit in the seat.

 

Your analogy isn’t consistent with the stadium situation:
1) Taxpayers are only paying a portion of the stadium and in return there will be county sales and state income taxes collected from the games/teams that play there. So there is some return on the “investment”. I believe this is one way that the state and county justify the “investment “ in the stadium. 
 

2) Some consumers are choosing to pay a PSL that will be used to finance the rest of the construction cost as part of their “investment” in attending the games. And contrary to your analogy, a PSL will not get you through the door.  Only a game ticket will get you through the door. The PSL and ticket cost are effectively one cost because you cannot own one without the other.  
 

So your three-part example does not exist in the NFL or anywhere that I can think of. Basically taxpayers fund part of the venue construction for a financial return and your PSL/ticket combo get you in the door to watch the show. 
 

This is very similar to the example I provided previously where the state and county paid to build the amphitheater in Syracuse and your ticket/Ticketmaster fee combo get you in the door to watch the show. 
 

You keep dismissing everyone’s examples while reciting your example which does not reflect the reality of the stadium situation. 

[papazoid]

WBEN has learned from highly informed sources that the early season ticket retention rate thus far is in the 75% range.

 

Poloncarz believe the Bills are testing the PSL market with the higher end seating and expects they will adjust the costs for the remaining PSL's, based on that outcome. The county executive believes the costs should be known for all up front.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/saying-it-s-all-about-money-poloncarz-launches-blistering-attack-on-buffalo-bills-psl-process/ar-BB1kMaIv?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=f275bddc381840e6be2f359f3d788277&ei=10

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Why would you do all that arguing over semantics?

 

If you are "not arguing against" PSL's..........why is the distinction of tactics so important to you?

 

It’s not important for me at all.

 

I made a factual statement, Kirby wrongly classified my statement as false, I defended it.

 

Thats the entirety. 

 

Businesses may attempt to gouge as much as they can in each sector, but the vast majority of businesses were not given over $800 million dollars by those same taxpayers they are gouging. That is rare. It has happened, but it’s the far outlier ran than the rule. I’ve said it before, but for any comparison to be valid, it must contain ALL three items.

 

1) Taxpayers paid for the business/product/venue to be created.

 

2) AND the business/product/venue then gouges those same taxpayers with a large fee before they can utilize or enjoy the business they just built for them.

 

3) AND they then charge the actual price/fee for what is consumed.

 

Fulfilling all 3 of those is rare for any business. It happens in sports, on a percentage basis, far more often than any other sector.

 

Thats not semantics. Its a fundamental difference.

 

[Einstein]

53 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

Your analogy isn’t consistent with the stadium situation:
1) Taxpayers are only paying a portion of the stadium and in return there will be county sales and state income taxes collected from the games/teams that play there. So there is some return on the “investment”. I believe this is one way that the state and county justify the “investment “ in the stadium. 
 

2) Some consumers are choosing to pay a PSL that will be used to finance the rest of the construction cost as part of their “investment” in attending the games. And contrary to your analogy, a PSL will not get you through the door.  Only a game ticket will get you through the door. The PSL and ticket cost are effectively one cost because you cannot own one without the other.  
 

So your three-part example does not exist in the NFL or anywhere that I can think of. Basically taxpayers fund part of the venue construction for a financial return and your PSL/ticket combo get you in the door to watch the show. 

 

@BADOLBILZ, now THIS post above is semantics.

 

Correcting a (clearly figurative) depiction of the situation with minor or insignificant sentence changes. Writing things such as “a PSL will not get you through the door.  Only a game ticket will get you through the door” … lol. I think everyone outside of WOT understand I was speaking figuratively when saying ‘through the door’.

 

Semantics vs fundamental difference.

 

53 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

This is very similar to the example I provided previously where the state and county paid to build the amphitheater in Syracuse and your ticket/Ticketmaster fee combo get you in the door to watch the show. 
 

You keep dismissing everyone’s examples while reciting your example which does not reflect the reality of the stadium situation. 

 

The Ticket Fee comparison doesn’t work. I explained this before so i’ll just copy/paste.

 

PSL’s and Ticket Fees are completely different. There is a reason why Ticketmaster and Stubhub don’t label their ticket fees as PSL’s.

 

1) PSL’s originate from the organization producing the product (Buffalo Bills, for example). The originating organization receives all 3 parts of the equation (taxpayer money, PSL, and ticket cost).

 

Ticket fees originate from a completely separate entity (a third party) that uses stub fees as their business model and this model does not benefit the originating organization. They ONLY receive the fee, not the taxpayer money or the ticket cost.

2) Taxpayers did not subsidize the building of Ticketmaster and Stubhub. Therefore there is no “double taxation” so to speak.

 

3) PSLs come with perceived value. Conversely, ticket service fees offer no such value proposition; they are akin to a delivery charge, which increases the cost of the product without enhancing its value.

 

They simply aren’t the same at all. Though they’re both crappy.

Edited March 30 by Einstein

[Punching Bag]

https://www.wkbw.com/sports/buffalo-bills/im-just-disappointed-erie-county-executive-on-rumored-psl-prices-at-new-buffalo-bills-stadium

 

Speaking at a press conference on Friday, Poloncarz was asked about the rumored PSL prices and said it is very upsetting that the Bills would not release what the PSL prices were for all seats.

 

• The county executive also said has talked to Governor Kathy Hochul about it and she is also concerned.
• "We should know now what are the costs associated with every PSL that's going to be sold. From any that are $500 a PSL to the ones you heard about in the club seats, which are very expensive. And they were refusing to do that. The county doesn't have a role in the PSL agreement, we don't. I'm just disappointed that it's gotten to this point. I let the Bills representatives and Legends know that."

 

Poloncarz also said during the press conference "It's the modern NFL where it's all about money."

 

 

[WotAGuy]

11 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

@BADOLBILZ, now THIS post above is semantics.

 

Correcting a (clearly figurative) depiction of the situation with minor or insignificant sentence changes. Writing things such as “a PSL will not get you through the door.  Only a game ticket will get you through the door” … lol. I think everyone outside of WOT understand I was speaking figuratively when saying ‘through the door’.

 

Semantics vs fundamental difference.

 

 

The Ticket Fee comparison doesn’t work. I explained this before so i’ll just copy/paste.

 

PSL’s and Ticket Fees are completely different. There is a reason why Ticketmaster and Stubhub don’t label their ticket fees as PSL’s.

 

1) PSL’s originate from the organization producing the product (Buffalo Bills, for example). The originating organization receives all 3 parts of the equation (taxpayer money, PSL, and ticket cost).

 

Ticket fees originate from a completely separate entity (a third party) that uses stub fees as their business model and this model does not benefit the originating organization. They ONLY receive the fee, not the taxpayer money or the ticket cost.

2) Taxpayers did not subsidize the building of Ticketmaster and Stubhub. Therefore there is no “double taxation” so to speak.

 

3) PSLs come with perceived value. Conversely, ticket service fees offer no such value proposition; they are akin to a delivery charge, which increases the cost of the product without enhancing its value.

 

They simply aren’t the same at all. Though they’re both crappy.

Nice deflection. You conveniently left out the part about your example not matching the reality of the Bills’ stadium/ticket/PSL scenario.  Your Taco Bell example is just as full of holes, no matter how much you change it now. 🤣

Edited March 30 by WotAGuy

[Einstein]

9 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

Nice deflection.

 

What deflection? I directly refuted what you wrote.

 

9 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

 

You conveniently left out the part about your example not matching the reality of the Bills’ stadium/ticket/PSL scenario.m. 🤣

 

How is the reality different?

Do you mean your comments on how fans are only paying for 70% of the stadium instead of 100%? Or do you mean your comment on how some fans see PSL’s as an investment.

 

 

[WotAGuy]

2 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

What deflection? I directly refuted what you wrote.

 

 

How is the reality different?

Do you mean your comments on how fans are only paying for 70% of the stadium instead of 100%? Or do you mean your comment on how some fans see PSL’s as an investment.

 

 

Your original Taco Bell example that started this whole discussion is not consistent with the reality of the Bills’ PSL and ticket process.  Your example has a step that does not occur in the Bills’ situation.  So you were wrong from the start, despite changing your wording now to make it sound like “that’s what I meant”.  
 

Maybe if you posted a link to that article Yahoo written about you we could see where your “about faces” originate from. By the way, I also have had articles written about me; you’ll find them in the police blotter of some well-established, highly circulated newspapers. 😆

Edited March 30 by WotAGuy

[WotAGuy]

2 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

It’s not important for me at all.

 

I made a factual statement, Kirby wrongly classified my statement as false, I defended it.

 

Thats the entirety. 

 

Businesses may attempt to gouge as much as they can in each sector, but the vast majority of businesses were not given over $800 million dollars by those same taxpayers they are gouging. That is rare. It has happened, but it’s the far outlier ran than the rule. I’ve said it before, but for any comparison to be valid, it must contain ALL three items.

 

1) Taxpayers paid for the business/product/venue to be created.

 

2) AND the business/product/venue then gouges those same taxpayers with a large fee before they can utilize or enjoy the business they just built for them.

 

3) AND they then charge the actual price/fee for what is consumed.

 

Fulfilling all 3 of those is rare for any business. It happens in sports, on a percentage basis, far more often than any other sector.

 

Thats not semantics. Its a fundamental difference.

 

How are the Bills gouging the taxpayers?  

Taxpayers have no obligation or need to purchase a PSL. It’s a voluntary choice to pay for entertainment.

 

The only taxpayers being offered the opportunity to purchase PSLs are apparently buying them up at a fairly high rate.  And that’s just a very small percentage of the relatively few taxpayers that will have an opportunity to purchase a PSL. PSLs are only being offered to current customers. And the large percentage of those customers haven’t even been told what their PSL will cost, so how can it be “gouging”?

 

Why do you conflate “gouging the taxpayers” with the Bills offering existing customers to remain customers at a similar or better amenity level in an entirely new and improved venue? In fact, many of the Bills’ existing customers who will be offered PSLs aren’t even NYS taxpayers, being from Canada and other states. 
 

With regard to your item 2 above, I think it shows growth and maturity on your part to concur that PSLs are a fee, just as Ticketmaster charges a fee.  We are finding common ground.  
 

 

Edited March 30 by WotAGuy
More reasons to dismiss this guy

[Punching Bag]

16 minutes ago, WotAGuy said:

How are the Bills gouging the taxpayers?  

Taxpayers have no obligation or need to purchase a PSL. It’s a voluntary choice to pay for entertainment.

 

The only taxpayers being offered the opportunity to purchase PSLs are apparently buying them up at a fairly high rate.  And that’s just a very small percentage of the relatively few taxpayers that will have an opportunity to purchase a PSL. PSLs are only being offered to current customers. And the large percentage of those customers haven’t even been told what their PSL will cost, so how can it be “gouging”?

 

Why do you conflate “gouging the taxpayers” with the Bills offering existing customers to remain customers at a similar or better amenity level in an entirely new and improved venue? In fact, many of the Bills’ existing customers who will be offered PSLs aren’t even NYS taxpayers, being from Canada and other states. 
 

 

 

Taxpapers are not only ones buying PSLs.  They have been selling some to partners including ticket agencies.

Agencies out of state and did not contribute taxes to building of stadium so the profit rate is higher..

[WotAGuy]

Just now, Punching Bag said:

 

Taxpapers are not only ones buying PSLs.  They have been selling some to partners including ticket agencies.

And as we have read from @Mr Info some PSL purchasers are not NYS residents and are not taxpayers. 
 

Also, it’s not the most well-written or current article on the topic, but it is noteworthy that this construction project is benefitting the local job market and economy. Pegula isn’t the only one seeing benefits of the taxpayers’ “investment”. 
 

https://ublawsportsforum.com/2022/11/18/bills-stadium-project-labor-agreement-burden-or-benefit/amp/?fbclid=IwAR1-6aCTpcXY7ZIWFvnDpXYrcb2EkdKdDuJMxWOeRFRWd0YVkevmFiUZF4k_aem_ATbY3oelUT8FPLOSahB9uONzBhaKuEnCFL4StN6zgA_lyQWrIO9WASey-kknWGKD4z0

[The All-Pro-Knox Gallery]

Terry’s villain arc is almost complete

[plenzmd1]

16 hours ago, Just Jack said:

Syracuse University season tickets do not have a PSL, they have a "donation" to their 'Cuse Athletics Fund.  You want seasons, you have to make a donation.  

 

Syracuse Football Season Tickets

 

 

The amount you donate instead of seniority comes into play with their benefits.  Someone that does the minimum donation for years/decades, can lose out to someone that just got seasons and made a big donation.  

My first job out of college in 86 went to a Cuse BB game with a coworker and his dad. My first big time college sporting event. 10 rows up, mid court. I could not believe they were only $10 as printed on the ticket. That’s when I got an education on how tickets worked in college LOL. So been at least 40 years, prolly 100 it’s a pay to play system in college athletics! 

15 hours ago, Augie said:

 

  I’m still a Bills fan, but I’m caring less and less for the NFL every year. 

 

 

I mean this sincerely, we just getting old and getting tired of 50 years of disappointment. Last 3 years have been especially hard on the disappointment meter. In a sense , was easier during the drought years when a single victory brought joy into our lives lol. Hard now when only a Super Bowl means they met expectations. 

7 hours ago, Aimee75 said:

I am seeing a number of people saying that this could be an out for The Bills, that if the seats don't sell, there is probably a clause that could get them out of Buffalo. Thoughts on this?

 

It's exhausting constantly worrying about this. 

Don’t, that is pure BS. 

[nucci]

in conclusion, PSLs suck for the fans but the Bills will sell out the stadium regardless.

[SoMAn]

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I’m not reading through 93 pages hoping to see the answer….

If a the PSL is purchased and financed over a 10 year period, and the buyer defaults, dies, changes their mind, etc.

Is that PSL re-sold at original cost or is it sold for the balance owed? 
If the PSL is paid in full, but the owner elects not to renew season tickets, what then? Does the PSL owner still retain ‘ownership’ of those seats but the Bills can sell tickets for them?  Can owners of PSLs sell them privately or do they have to go back to the Bills? 
TIA

Edited March 30 by SoMAn

[ExiledInIllinois]

Why can't they just charge PSLs to non-New York taxpayers?