collapse

* Stud of Colorado Game

Tyler Kolek

21 points, 5 rebounds,
11 assists, 1 steal,
40 minutes

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Big East 23-24 NCAA and NIT Results by PointWarrior
[Today at 12:08:31 AM]


Three Years Ago Today... by Newsdreams
[March 27, 2024, 11:34:10 PM]


Kam Jones 1st Round Mock - The Ringer by PGsHeroes32
[March 27, 2024, 10:40:15 PM]


Katz has MU in Final Four by MurphysTillClose
[March 27, 2024, 10:24:36 PM]


UNLEASH THE POWER OF SCOOP!!! by TallTitan34
[March 27, 2024, 10:20:50 PM]


Best MU team since 1977 by Galway Eagle
[March 27, 2024, 09:47:04 PM]


Chicago bars for Fri game by Hallmarq
[March 27, 2024, 09:09:04 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: NC State

Marquette
81
Marquette vs

NC State

Date/Time: Mar 29, 2024, 6:09 pm
TV: CBS
Schedule for 2023-24
Colorado
77

Author Topic: New facility questions  (Read 26150 times)

MUfan12

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5592
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #50 on: August 04, 2017, 11:05:56 AM »
Having trouble finding the new Bucks seating chart on my phone, but one thing that stood out was not just the higher price points, but multiple price points in the same section depending on how close you are. So rows A-F for example costing more than Q-Z.

Not only that, but they are also charging an aisle premium on some lower level seats. I think they were too aggressive with these increases, but I guess we'll see. Between the ticket deals and secondary market, Bucks prices were so depressed over the last decade that the jump seems even more drastic.

MU will have a modest increase, which is understandable given that the rent per game will be close to double. It will be interesting to see how they handle converting the low 400 section STHs, with the increased lower bowl capacity. It would not surprise me to see tiered pricing in those sections as well.

muwarrior69

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5128
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #51 on: August 04, 2017, 01:00:37 PM »
Talking to some Bucks STHs, the increases were sharper than many expected. This article discusses some of those increases, in the 45-63% range.

Having trouble finding the new Bucks seating chart on my phone, but one thing that stood out was not just the higher price points, but multiple price points in the same section depending on how close you are. So rows A-F for example costing more than Q-Z.

Not sure how MU will handle it, but if my current annual bill of around $1600 jumps to $2400 or more, that'll be a hard sell. And for newer STHs, part of the incentive is the chance to improve your sectional standing. That could definitely become cost prohibitive.

Is that 1600 for just one seat? Then you are paying more than the guy complaining paying 2700 for his seat. He is getting 41 games while you are only getting 16 games.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26358
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #52 on: August 04, 2017, 02:12:15 PM »
Is that 1600 for just one seat? Then you are paying more than the guy complaining paying 2700 for his seat. He is getting 41 games while you are only getting 16 games.

No, that's two seats. I think it's actually $1573 on the bill, but right in that neighborhood.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8799
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #53 on: August 04, 2017, 05:51:55 PM »
No, that's two seats. I think it's actually $1573 on the bill, but right in that neighborhood.
My two seats are over $2,700. Season ticket holder's in the preferred seating pay significantly more than that.

DegenerateDish

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2531
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #54 on: August 04, 2017, 06:59:25 PM »
The Bucks need MU as a tenant way more than MU needs to be a tenant there, it's not even close. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a Chicago snob, but who's filling in those 16 dates if it's not MU? The new arena is competing with United Center, Allstate, Wintrust, Sears Centre for events, in a smaller metropolitan area for concerts/events in the winter. I'm not shocked in the least that Bucks marketing is going hard after the northern suburb crowd. Everything is negotiable, but it'd be incredibly dumb for the Bucks not to get a deal done with MU.

mu_hilltopper

  • Warrior
  • Global Moderator
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7403
    • https://twitter.com/nihilist_arbys
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #55 on: August 04, 2017, 07:35:59 PM »
(As was said above .. the deal is done.)

.. Yadda yadda, with the BC being demolished, Marquette is left with the Chaluparena, the Al, or fighting UWM for the Mecca.  Not a good bargaining position.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26358
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #56 on: August 05, 2017, 08:23:53 AM »
My two seats are over $2,700. Season ticket holder's in the preferred seating pay significantly more than that.

I'm not quibbling over the current prices, but would you be okay with that turning into $4,000?

Not sure what kind of hikes we'll see. My point was that if they are consistent with the Bucks, we'll probably see bigger jumps than we may expect as well as wider price variances even in the same section.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2017, 08:41:25 AM »
I'm not quibbling over the current prices, but would you be okay with that turning into $4,000?

Not sure what kind of hikes we'll see. My point was that if they are consistent with the Bucks, we'll probably see bigger jumps than we may expect as well as wider price variances even in the same section.

Brew, MU has to be very careful not to price themselves out of the market.  They have a limited audience.  They simply can't charge $75 or $100 a ticket for guys like you and me and expect any of us to be there.  We can all watch on TV for free.  But I do agree with you about segmenting the lower bowl by rows and think that's fine.  I personally think that those close to the action seats should go at a healthy premium.  I also strongly believe that MU's cheap seats are too much and have long advocated for the lowering of upper deck corner and endzone seats.

Dr. Blackheart

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 13003
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #58 on: August 05, 2017, 09:20:18 AM »
Key to our parking and concession revenue. How split? Right now, I believe MU gets zip in the BC which kept rents lower.

In the Bucks-owned arena, if it remains zip, and the Bucks take more on tickets, that will be tough long term for season ticket holders to absorb for a college product after the luster of the new arena wears off. It also puts a lot of pressure on Wojo to win and win big now.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8799
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #59 on: August 05, 2017, 09:35:18 AM »
I'm not quibbling over the current prices, but would you be okay with that turning into $4,000?

Not sure what kind of hikes we'll see. My point was that if they are consistent with the Bucks, we'll probably see bigger jumps than we may expect as well as wider price variances even in the same section.
With my reseating donation the tickets cost me more than $4,000. I fear that the hated point system will be changing with the new arena.

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #60 on: August 05, 2017, 09:47:05 AM »
It can justify some price increase with the new facility but if they increase too much they may accelerate the STH flight that's going on.

Whether they will acknowledge it or not, there is a considerable amount of angst/need for this season to be very successful

The STH flight probably is more due to the quality of team Marquette has put on the floor the past three years as well as the turmoil with coaching and conference.

If the next two years are as good as we think they will become (are you listening Joey Hauser?), I'm confident we will do fine no matter where we go. I would suggest, however, that the pricing issue is important. Milwaukee is NOT Chicago, New York or Los Angeles and the things teams in those markets can do, cannot be done in Milwaukee.

fjm

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3166
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #61 on: August 05, 2017, 09:48:53 AM »
The STH flight probably is more due to the quality of team Marquette has put on the floor the past three years as well as the turmoil with coaching and conference.

If the next two years are as good as we think they will become (are you listening Joey Hauser?), I'm confident we will do fine no matter where we go. I would suggest, however, that the pricing issue is important. Milwaukee is NOT Chicago, New York or Los Angeles and the things teams in those markets can do, cannot be done in Milwaukee.

STH is more about the teams play than the prices like you said.
If you have seen any of the tweets, MU was weeks ahead of renewals and almost a month ago had already topped 15-16 and 16-17 years renewals for STH. This year will be an up year.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #62 on: August 05, 2017, 10:08:01 AM »
The STH flight probably is more due to the quality of team Marquette has put on the floor the past three years as well as the turmoil with coaching and conference.

If the next two years are as good as we think they will become (are you listening Joey Hauser?), I'm confident we will do fine no matter where we go. I would suggest, however, that the pricing issue is important. Milwaukee is NOT Chicago, New York or Los Angeles and the things teams in those markets can do, cannot be done in Milwaukee.

Bingo.

muwarrior69

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5128
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #63 on: August 05, 2017, 10:21:24 AM »
So which teams in the Big East besides MU play ALL their games in a NBA arena? What is DePaul, Butler, Creighton asking for STHs compared to us. Would it be cheaper in the long run to have a facility like Depaul on Campus?

TAMU, Knower of Ball

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 22055
  • Meat Eater certified
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #64 on: August 05, 2017, 10:49:46 AM »
So which teams in the Big East besides MU play ALL their games in a NBA arena? What is DePaul, Butler, Creighton asking for STHs compared to us. Would it be cheaper in the long run to have a facility like Depaul on Campus?

I believe only Marquette, Georgetown, and Memphis play all of their games in an NBA arena in all of college basketball.
TAMU

I do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.


warriorchick

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8066
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #65 on: August 05, 2017, 10:56:18 AM »
So which teams in the Big East besides MU play ALL their games in a NBA arena? What is DePaul, Butler, Creighton asking for STHs compared to us. Would it be cheaper in the long run to have a facility like Depaul on Campus?

No.
Have some patience, FFS.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #66 on: August 05, 2017, 10:57:56 AM »
So which teams in the Big East besides MU play ALL their games in a NBA arena? What is DePaul, Butler, Creighton asking for STHs compared to us. Would it be cheaper in the long run to have a facility like Depaul on Campus?

The problem you have warrior69 is that no other school in the BEast has an NBA arena within easy walking distance to campus.  There is never going to be a circumstance where the economics of the situation will support it.  This has been ground covered repeatedly over the years and it has always been true.  MU actually did a fabulous job when it designed the Al, a perfect facility for Women's BB and volleyball with outstanding training facilities for all sports.

By way of comparison, Wild Hall is checking in at $108 million.  That's for 890 beds to be used every single day during the school year for the next 30-40 years.  It took huge effort to raise those funds including borrowing, on something where the existing bed space it is replacing trailed our competition badly.  Marquette is simply not dropping that same coin into a sports arena that would be used 18 times a year when it has the NBA's newest facility at it's disposal, now as tenant #2 (up from #3) in the soon to be retired facility.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #67 on: August 05, 2017, 11:11:56 AM »
Here's what some folks need to realize.  It's simply fortuitous that Marquette is situated where it is with easy access to a state of the art facility.  Few other big time private schools have that built in advantage.  It is fair to speculate that such an inherent economic advantage relative to our competition is and was a top 2-3 factor in why Marquette basketball has seem historic success. Dollars directly into the program replacing dollars into brick and mortar, one for one.  It's a symbiotic relationship that we sometimes take for granted because in all of our lifetimes it has always been true.

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 26358
  • Warning-This poster may trigger thin skinned users
    • Cracked Sidewalks
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #68 on: August 05, 2017, 12:02:05 PM »
Brew, MU has to be very careful not to price themselves out of the market.  They have a limited audience.  They simply can't charge $75 or $100 a ticket for guys like you and me and expect any of us to be there.  We can all watch on TV for free.  But I do agree with you about segmenting the lower bowl by rows and think that's fine.  I personally think that those close to the action seats should go at a healthy premium.  I also strongly believe that MU's cheap seats are too much and have long advocated for the lowering of upper deck corner and endzone seats.

I agree that they have to be careful with how they price this. That said, this negotiation becomes tricky because it's dependent on what the Bucks charge for rent. Marquette will have to recoup those fees, and if it's 150% higher, they'll have to make that up somehow.

And bilsu, the price is really irrelevant. The question is how many STHs are willing to pay 150% of current prices? Or 140%? Or whatever it costs. I think 10-20% increases will be relatively easy to sell, but much more than that may price many out of the market, as glow mentioned.
This space reserved for a 2024 National Championship celebration banner.

muwarrior69

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5128
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #69 on: August 05, 2017, 12:34:49 PM »
The problem you have warrior69 is that no other school in the BEast has an NBA arena within easy walking distance to campus.  There is never going to be a circumstance where the economics of the situation will support it.  This has been ground covered repeatedly over the years and it has always been true.  MU actually did a fabulous job when it designed the Al, a perfect facility for Women's BB and volleyball with outstanding training facilities for all sports.

By way of comparison, Wild Hall is checking in at $108 million.  That's for 890 beds to be used every single day during the school year for the next 30-40 years.  It took huge effort to raise those funds including borrowing, on something where the existing bed space it is replacing trailed our competition badly.  Marquette is simply not dropping that same coin into a sports arena that would be used 18 times a year when it has the NBA's newest facility at it's disposal, now as tenant #2 (up from #3) in the soon to be retired facility.

....but some here are saying if STH see increases of 50% or more they just might stay home and watch on FS1. I have no idea of the economics involved here but STH prices just might have to increase that much just to pay the rent. The new owners of the Bucks as many have stated are just interested in their ROI and not so much invested in the Milwaukee community at large including MU. Please tell me I'm wrong.

79Warrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4080
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #70 on: August 05, 2017, 12:51:44 PM »
The Bucks need MU as a tenant way more than MU needs to be a tenant there, it's not even close. I don't know how to say this without sounding like a Chicago snob, but who's filling in those 16 dates if it's not MU? The new arena is competing with United Center, Allstate, Wintrust, Sears Centre for events, in a smaller metropolitan area for concerts/events in the winter. I'm not shocked in the least that Bucks marketing is going hard after the northern suburb crowd. Everything is negotiable, but it'd be incredibly dumb for the Bucks not to get a deal done with MU.

Really? Who has the upper hand? Just where would MU play IF they could not reach a deal? Seems to me MU needs a home and the Bucks know it. MU would have a huge problem if a deal is not reached.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #71 on: August 05, 2017, 12:54:06 PM »
....but some here are saying if STH see increases of 50% or more they just might stay home and watch on FS1. I have no idea of the economics involved here but STH prices just might have to increase that much just to pay the rent. The new owners of the Bucks as many have stated are just interested in their ROI and not so much invested in the Milwaukee community at large including MU. Please tell me I'm wrong.

Well, as an economist I can help you.  The rent for 18 days can be about whatever compared to the cost associated with owning an appropriate 12,000+ seat facility for 365.  It only gets worse if you rent the new arena for 5 or so 'big' conference games now spreading the cost of 13 over that mythical campus arena.

Look, I have little doubt that the university has been disappointed with the Bucks in the negotiation.  Mike is all about 'betterment of the overall community' and I believe that some venture capital guys from NYC see limited value in that.  They aren't Herb Kohl.  That's simply the new reality.

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6585
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #72 on: August 05, 2017, 12:54:39 PM »
MU actually did a fabulous job when it designed the Al, a perfect facility for Women's BB and volleyball with outstanding training facilities for all sports.

MU is a very good job with the Al. I would have like to have seen a sunken floor level to get the capacity from 3700 to around 6. At that capacity, men's bball could have used an on campus arena for select dates each year.

jsglow

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7378
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #73 on: August 05, 2017, 12:57:15 PM »
MU is a very good job with the Al. I would have like to have seen a sunken floor level to get the capacity from 3700 to around 6. At that capacity, men's bball could have used an on campus arena for select dates each year.

No we couldn't.  We have 10,000+ season ticket holders.  What, you get a letter saying STAY HOME?

We R Final Four

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 6585
Re: New facility questions
« Reply #74 on: August 05, 2017, 12:58:27 PM »
Really? Who has the upper hand? Just where would MU play IF they could not reach a deal? Seems to me MU needs a home and the Bucks know it. MU would have a huge problem if a deal is not reached.
Yeah, I thought I was the only one who didn't follow this logic.

The Bucks need us way more than we need them.....and it's not even close?