PSL Pricing/Seat Selection Discussion

[Royale with Cheese]

12 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

The PSL’s are the problem for most, so removing that comparable item necessarily removes the point of a comparison.

 

 

 

Posters really need to read and understand the context of a post or discussion before responding.

 

1) PSL’s = / = Ticket Fees.

 

2) No-one is arguing that this is not rare circumstance in sports. We all know billionaire owners made PSL’s common in sports. This discussion originated from saying that it is not common in general BUSINESS. An analogy was made to taxpayers not paying for the Taco Bell building, then paying to enter the building they paid for, then paying for the tacos themselves. That is what spawned the post you responded to.

 

PSL is a fee and we are talking specifically about additional fees to watch the game.  So yes, PSL is the major discussion of this but as my point still stands, you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand.  As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.  That just gets them in the door of the country club.

Does this membership fee include food, drinks, golf, tennis, swimming etc?  Nope, just gets you in the door to where you basically can hangout.

If you want to play golf, swim or other activities...another fee.  Guess what pays for the building?  The members.

 

My best friend and his wife do well and they're part of a country club and their set up is the same except their membership fees include the pool.

 

It happens in a much smaller setting than the NFL. 

Edited March 29 by Royale with Cheese

[MR8]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

PSL is a fee and we are talking specifically about additional fees to watch the game.  So yes, PSL is the major discussion of this but as my point still stands, you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand.  As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.  That just gets them in the door of the country club.

Does this membership fee include food, drinks, golf, tennis, swimming etc?  Nope, just gets you in the door to where you basically can hangout.

If you want to play golf, swim or other activities...another fee.  Guess what pays for the building?  The members.

 

My best friend and his wife do well and they're part of a country club and their set up is the same except their membership fees include the pool.

 

It happens in a much smaller setting than the NFL. 

 

Private membership in a club is kind of similar but also kind of different because you pay the initiation and then monthlies plus whatever else you do. Some clubs also have minimum spends per month.

 

I think PSLs are more comparable to timeshares, where you pay a large upfront fee (either lump sum or financed over time) for the right to then pay annually fees and maintenance on a property you never own, and in perpetuity you're stuck paying whatever they say.  You can use that property for a set amount of time based on what you paid, but in the end you're locked in and to use th timeshare you "bought", you must then also pay whatever they say. 

 

PSLs are that upfront fee for the right to then buy season tickets which the Bills can jack the price of whenever they want, and as a PSL owner, you're stuck paying it.  There technically is a market to sell your PSL and get out of the cycle, but much like timeshares it's not as easy and straightforward as it may sound.  

 

 

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand. 

 

That extra fee is why it’s not comparable to most other businesses (even in entertainment). The extra fee isn’t there for concerts, magician acts, car shows, etc etc etc.

 

That’s the entire point.

 

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The growth has no correlation to the PSL. The PSL’s do not contribute to growth because they directly subsidize the stadium rather than the P/L of the team. This is what the owner of the team should be paying.

 

Not to mention, the NFL has seen consistent growth for over 100 years and PSL’s are a relatively new part of the equation, and for less than half the teams the majority of that time. The vast majority of growth is attributable to media rights.

 

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.

 

Was this Country Club paid for by taxpayers? If so, name it. It should be publicly shamed.

[Einstein]

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The part that I’m hung up on is why are you trying so hard to differentiate a PSL from any other ticketing fee that you pay as a “right to buy the ticket?”

 

I’ve explained this already but I have a feeling that you’re just skimming my posts in haste to reply rather than reading and comprehending.

 

Put simply, 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.

 

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

That’s obviously way more common when you’re talking about standalone events like a concert or show. You’re paying someone for the right to buy that seat.

 

In the example you’re writing, you’re not paying a fee to the party that benefited from taxpayer dollars, and the party who is also benefiting from the sale of the ticket.

 

You’re paying a fee to Ticketmaster and that’s all they get. They don’t get the proceeds of the ticket and the taxpayer money as well. Just the fee.

 

As I said, you need all 3 parts:

 

1) Taxpayer funded 

2) AND PSL

3) AND Ticket cost

 

You can find examples of 1 or 2 of those parts; but finding all 3 is very difficult and results in only extreme outliers.

Not the norm.

 

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

I guess the other part that I’m hung up on is, “why do you have an issue with PSLs when the people using the product are the one’s electing to purchase?”

 

Ok now I know for a fact that you’re not actually reading what i’m writing and simply want to respond and argue rather than have a  gentlemanly debate.

 

I know this because in the post you responded to, I wrote: “I agree that people have the right to purchase them. That is not the debate here. The debate here is whether PSL’s are the “norm” in entertainment. They are not. If people want to purchase PSL’s, great. Go for it. But that’s not the conversation.”

 

Put simply, I don’t care at all if people buy PSL’s. That was never the conversation.

 

You have consistently misunderstood the context of this conversation despite me telling you several times. This conversation was about whether this is the “norm” in other businesses (it’s not). The conversation was NEVER about whether I care if people buy PSL’s. 

[BADOLBILZ]

17 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

That extra fee is why it’s not comparable to most other businesses (even in entertainment). The extra fee isn’t there for concerts, magician acts, car shows, etc etc etc.

 

That’s the entire point.

 

 

The growth has no correlation to the PSL. The PSL’s do not contribute to growth because they directly subsidize the stadium rather than the P/L of the team. This is what the owner of the team should be paying.

 

Not to mention, the NFL has seen consistent growth for over 100 years and PSL’s are a relatively new part of the equation, and for less than half the teams the majority of that time. The vast majority of growth is attributable to media rights.

 

 

Was this Country Club paid for by taxpayers? If so, name it. It should be publicly shamed.

 

 

Aren't you raking in profits from your investment in Disney?   Disney also charges whatever the market will bear for their products........their profit margins are not based on what's fair.

 

I'm not trying to pick on you here.   I enjoy your posts typically but you have a very "new money" idea of how capitalism works.

 

There are going to be 40K+ people in that new stadium every week that contributed between $0 in taxes and the NYS share.......which is literally an ineffectual pittance in construction cost terms.    

 

The PSL matter is really just a stand alone price gouge.   Like paying an extra $200 per person or whatever it is to get in the "fast" lines on your Disney stay. 

[Kirby Jackson]

23 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

I’ve explained this already but I have a feeling that you’re just skimming my posts in haste to reply rather than reading and comprehending.

 

Put simply, 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.

 

 

In the example you’re writing, you’re not paying a fee to the party that benefited from taxpayer dollars, and the party who is also benefiting from the sale of the ticket.

 

You’re paying a fee to Ticketmaster and that’s all they get. They don’t get the proceeds of the ticket and the taxpayer money as well. Just the fee.

 

As I said, you need all 3 parts:

 

1) Taxpayer funded 

2) AND PSL

3) AND Ticket cost

 

You can find examples of 1 or 2 of those parts; but finding all 3 is very difficult and results in only extreme outliers.

Not the norm.

 

 

Ok now I know for a fact that you’re not actually reading what i’m writing and simply want to respond and argue rather than have a  gentlemanly debate.

 

I know this because in the post you responded to, I wrote: “I agree that people have the right to purchase them. That is not the debate here. The debate here is whether PSL’s are the “norm” in entertainment. They are not. If people want to purchase PSL’s, great. Go for it. But that’s not the conversation.”

 

Put simply, I don’t care at all if people buy PSL’s. That was never the conversation.

Just skimming this novel. Explain the $3 per ticket fee currently being charged in Nashville to offset the cost of the new stadium. Outrage or no because they aren’t calling it a PSL and it’s offsetting the government’s portion as opposed to the owner’s?

 

You’re trying WAY too hard to differentiate “fees” from “PSLs.” I know a little on the subject. I have a master’s in sports business and spent almost a decade working in pro sports on the business side. I’ve worked directly on arena lease agreements and funding deals. I understand the topic WAY better than most. You do not need to explain to me the finances of it 😂😂. 
 

There are MANY venues that are funded by the tax payers (at least at some level). They ALL charge for tickets. Any EXTRA fees associated with purchasing a ticket is akin to a PSL. That “right to buy a ticket fee” may just go to TM or Stubhub as opposed to the owner offsetting the cost. You’re trying too hard to be angry or knowledgeable. I’m not sure which you’re trying to prove but you really don’t understand it like you think you do.

 

With all of this outrage, I sure hope that you’re someone that is faced with a decision on their PSL spend. If this outrage is coming from someone not even impacted, that’s ridiculous. If you aren’t someone faced with a financial decision because of a PSL, you do not deserve an opinion on the topic. You can’t be outraged at how we choose to spend our money. What’s the max that you’re willing to pay for a PSL? Where are your tickets currently? I’ll give you a rough projection of what to expect. 

Edited March 29 by Kirby Jackson

[Royale with Cheese]

28 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

That extra fee is why it’s not comparable to most other businesses (even in entertainment). The extra fee isn’t there for concerts, magician acts, car shows, etc etc etc.

 

That’s the entire point.

 

 

The growth has no correlation to the PSL. The PSL’s do not contribute to growth because they directly subsidize the stadium rather than the P/L of the team. This is what the owner of the team should be paying.

 

Not to mention, the NFL has seen consistent growth for over 100 years and PSL’s are a relatively new part of the equation, and for less than half the teams the majority of that time. The vast majority of growth is attributable to media rights.

 

 

Was this Country Club paid for by taxpayers? If so, name it. It should be publicly shamed.

 

The entire point is sports entertainment operates differently and the NFL is the most in demand so they will have an extra fee which is the PSL.

If the PSL was losing money or hurting their revenue, they wouldn't do it.  

 

Okay Johnny Drama...they should be publicly shamed lol?  

"Did you hear these mega millionaires have to pay extra fees with their memberships and have to buy more to get more after??"

"Are they forcing them to have these memberships?"

"No, it's up to them if they want to live there or not.  You don't have to live there, you can just sign up too but it costs more."

The public outcry would be close to the Boston Massacre.

 

The club is paid for by the members.  It's a private club inside a gated community and the people who live inside pay for it along with other members.  Through membership fees, revenue from the restaurant and bar and the additional memberships to use other amenities.  But if you don't live there, you can still have a membership but not sure what the qualifications are.  So in your extra scenario, it plays out 100% to your Taco Bell comparison.

Quoted by you:

"Taco Bell building, then paying to enter the building they paid for, then paying for the tacos themselves"

 

 

[Westside]

19 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Aren't you raking in profits from your investment in Disney?   Disney also charges whatever the market will bear for their products........their profit margins are not based on what's fair.

 

I'm not trying to pick on you here.   I enjoy your posts typically but you have a very "new money" idea of how capitalism works.

 

There are going to be 40K+ people in that new stadium every week that contributed between $0 in taxes and the NYS share.......which is literally an ineffectual pittance in construction cost terms.    

 

The PSL matter is really just a stand alone price gouge.   Like paying an extra $200 per person or whatever it is to get in the "fast" lines on your Disney stay. 

But you’re not forced to buy the fast lane package. The record breaking tv deals the nfl is raking in and then have the nerve to “sell” psl to season ticket holders is nothing more than pure greed. If you want to dish out thousands of dollars to watch a football game, GOD bless you, that’s your right and I would defend that. But to defend this corporate greed is unreal. 
This is in no way intended for you Badobillz. Just thinking out loud, lol.

[Just Jack]

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

 

Quote

Why is there an annual required seat-related ‘Cuse Athletics Fund membership on Football Season Tickets?
Seat-related ‘Cuse Athletics Fund memberships are essential to supporting the student-athlete experience at Syracuse University. This portion of your season ticket is used provide the resources needed for our teams to recruit, train and compete both in competition and in the classroom and is used to directly support all 20 programs and 600+ student-athletes. This portion also qualifies you as a ‘Cuse Athletics Fund member and applies toward your ‘CAF Annual Giving Level, which identifies your eligibility for different annual benefits and is used in donor rank to allocate tickets, parking and hospitality.

 

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.  

Edited March 29 by Just Jack

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, Westside said:

But you’re not forced to buy the fast lane package. The record breaking tv deals the nfl is raking in and then have the nerve to “sell” psl to season ticket holders is nothing more than pure greed. If you want to dish out thousands of dollars to watch a football game, GOD bless you, that’s your right and I would defend that. But to defend this corporate greed is unreal. 
This is in no way intended for you Badobillz. Just thinking out loud, lol.

You aren’t forced to buy the PSL either. If you want to guarantee the same seat for each game, or shortest wait time for rides, you have the option to purchase it. You can always buy tickets on the secondary market and pay whatever they’re priced without buying a PSL. 

Just now, 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

 

 

Yep, universities have been doing this for years. Think about all of the public universities doing the same thing.

[Westside]

Just now, Kirby Jackson said:

You aren’t forced to buy the PSL either. If you want to guarantee the same seat for each game, or shortest wait time for rides, you have the option to purchase it. You can always buy tickets on the secondary market and pay whatever they’re priced without buying a PSL. 

I agree. I’m happy you’re able to afford the fees and keep your seats. I think that’s great. 
I still stand by my comments about the greed of the nfl. 

[Jrb1979]

@Rochesterfan @GottaRun, you guys think the PSL is going to be a lot lower than that for the cheap seats? 

[Augie]

5 hours ago, Westside said:

I agree. I’m happy you’re able to afford the fees and keep your seats. I think that’s great. 
I still stand by my comments about the greed of the nfl. 

 

The cost to the STH does not really bother me very much, since you have an option not to pay. The NFL is a business, and like Disney it does not surprise me when they look for new ways to generate more revenue. I find it sad that some people will be priced out, but I don’t think “greed” is the correct term for what’s happening there. If I own Disney stock, and they are not trying to increase profits I’m going to be upset. That is why they exist. They will push the envelope and charge as much as the market allows.  

 

What DOES bother me a LOT is when the NFL compromises the integrity of the game in the quest for more money. The Bills playing a “home game” in front of all the Jax fans in London that have been carefully cultivated since 2013 bothers me. Home field matters, that’s why you fight all season to have it in the playoffs. They have created an un-level playing field for the sake of more revenue. That is inexcusable. (Don’t even get me started on the “jet lag experiment” or the crap field.) The Jags should never be the road team in London, their second home. 

 

Things like two Christmas Day games, on a WEDNESDAY, is going to present issues regarding physical recovery and preparation in the weeks surrounding those games as well as on Christmas Day. This isn’t Covid where they are just trying to keep things going. This was a conscious decision, all in the name of money. 

 

 

.

If they don’t care about the integrity of the game, I guess I care a little less about the game too. 

Edited March 29 by Augie

[Westside]

Just now, Augie said:

 

The cost to the STH does not really bother me very much, since you have an option not to pay. The NFL is a business, and like Disney it does not surprise me when they look for new ways to generate more revenue. I find it sad that some people will be priced out, but I don’t think “greed” is the correct term for what’s happening there. If I own Disney stock, and they are not trying to increase profits I’m going to be upset. That is why they exist. They will push the envelope and charge as much as the market allows.  

 

What DOES bother me a LOT is when the NFL compromises the integrity of the game in the quest for more money. The Bills playing a “home game” in front of all the Jax fans in London that have been carefully cultivated since 2013 bothers me. Home field matters, that’s why you fight all season to have it in the playoffs. They have created un-level playing field for the sake of more revenue. That is inexcusable. (Don’t even get me started on the “jet lag experiment” or the crap field.) The Jags should never be the road team in London, their second home. 

 

Things like two Christmas Day games, on a WEDNESDAY, is going to present issues regarding physical recovery and preparation in the weeks surrounding those games as well as on Christmas Day. This isn’t Covid where they are just trying to keep things going. This was a conscious decision, all in the name of money. 

 

If they don’t care about the integrity of the game, I guess I care a little less about the game too. 

I agree. That’s exactly why my passion for the game has waned.

[Augie]

Just now, Westside said:

I agree. That’s exactly why my passion for the game has waned.

 

Add in all the streaming services they want to force you to have, and they are losing me to some degree. It’s not even about the money to me, it’s the way they have gone about it.  I’m still a Bills fan, but I’m caring less and less for the NFL every year. 

 

It’s a bit like college basketball to me. I don’t mind players having freedom to transfer via the portal or get paid for NIL. That seems fair enough to me. Unfortunately, the resulting product is something I care significantly less about. 

[Kirby Jackson]

Just now, Westside said:

I agree. I’m happy you’re able to afford the fees and keep your seats. I think that’s great. 
I still stand by my comments about the greed of the nfl. 

No one wants to pay these fees. Pegula could obviously pay that portion without jamming up regular people. It’s simple economics though. It’s supply and demand. It is not a good financial decision for me. That money would be better served elsewhere. I can only speak for me, but I value the games enough to make the sacrifice. It’s the way of the world now.

[SWATeam]

35 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

No one wants to pay these fees. Pegula could obviously pay that portion without jamming up regular people. It’s simple economics though. It’s supply and demand. It is not a good financial decision for me. That money would be better served elsewhere. I can only speak for me, but I value the games enough to make the sacrifice. It’s the way of the world now.

Well that's a stupid perspective.

 

Better wringing your hands in the face of reality.

[RiotAct]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

The PSL matter is really just a stand alone price gouge.   Like paying an extra $200 per person or whatever it is to get in the "fast" lines on your Disney stay. 

$15 - $39 per person per day, but you have to know advanced calculus to use the system effectively

 

[BADOLBILZ]

11 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

$15 - $39 per person per day, but you have to know advanced calculus to use the system effectively

 

 

 

NYSE:DIS

up $1.38 today

[Kirby Jackson]

45 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

Well that's a stupid perspective.

 

Said differently,”the money could be spent adding value to my home. I need to resurface the driveway and pool area.” Those same dollars will pay for my 2 PSLs. I’m not taking away from any necessities or strong “wants.” I’m electing to purchase these PSLs and waiting on the driveway. These are the types of decisions that many of us will make. People aren’t deciding between food and PSLs but they may be deciding between a vacation and PSLs. They are going to take up a portion of discretionary income that none of us have ever committed. 
 

Edited March 29 by Kirby Jackson