UncleEarl

quote:

---

You can't argue someone's ticket rights should not be revoked for missing "just a few games" and then turn around and say it's not enough to allow them to keep their ticket rights if they only attend one game.

---

That wasn't my position. My position is that your proposed system is a futile attempt to remedy the problem. Regardless of whether the standard is one missed game (which is easy to satisfy), five missed games (which is going to create a lot of the medical condition and work situation appeals you proposed), or something in the middle (which runs into both problems), it's not going to work. When someone purchases something with their money, they do what they want with it. Regardless of how many other people are on a wait list to purchase the same thing. Regardless of any system designed to control their behavior. You may catch a few people, but it won't justify the measures you employed to catch them.

Also, I was pointing out that any system put in place along these lines will be fraught with unforeseen consequences. Some of which are likely to make people angry. Which will drive the demand for LSU tickets, and thus the price the AD can charge, down.

Finally, without spelling it out, I was trying to make a point about being free to do what you please with the things you pay for. Why should some bureaucracy of ticket overseers be employed to control fans' behavior? Or even just a single student worker be employed to do the same? It's not going to work. Give your fans the product they're demanding (things like better non-con match ups at home, on screen updates from other games during commercial breaks, Wi-Fi access, and other things the market is demanding), and people will show up. Humans are much more responsive to incentives than regulations.

quote:

---

i have had times where I couldn't get rid of mine for free as well.LSU would have to allow you to go online and void your tickets so that they could try to sell them to make this whole thing work.

---

Now look at how complex all this is getting. You're trying to regulate human nature. It's pointless. If you want butts in the seats, respond to market forces. Give people enough entertainment to overcome competing entertainment options.

quote:

---

I wouldn't mind seeing a policy if a ticket holder's tickets go unused for the entire season, or perhaps only one game is used during the season, the license is revoked unless the holder can offer a valid explanation, such as serious but temporary illness or a temporary work assignment out of the country.

---

Do you have any idea what it would cost to enforce such a policy? To say nothing of the complexities involved in writing the regulations for this type of program. And the gamesmanship it will encourage in those trying to avoid losing their tickets.

For example, if I'm diagnosed with something requiring months worth of treatment, do I have to provide the Athletics Departments with proof of my illness to avoid the the penalty? Or do I have to spend my time finding someone to fill my seats for the required amount of time? Do I have to prove I tried to find someone to take the seats during my treatment period? Is this the best way to spend my time while being treated for a serious illness?

What if my boss isn't requiring me to work, but I need the overtime pay to make ends meet for my family? Does that fit into your work exception? Do I have to provide financial statements showing I needed to get the overtime pay to cover my kids' tuition?

Is there going to be a panel of judges who decide whether my excuse for missing the necessary number of games is good enough to avoid the penalty? Can I appeal their decision? Can I bring an attorney to represent me?

Who is going to write all these regulations? Are the current season ticket holders going to elect a ticket congress to decide how many games I must attend, which excuses are valid, who to appoint to the arbitration panel?

My point is this: any system designed to enforce the type of policy being advocated in this thread is going to lead to ludicrous results. It's going to be expensive to implement, unfair in certain situations not contemplated by those who promulgate it, and lead to more problems that are going to bring more idiots to this board complaining.

I suppose the idea of making game attendance mandatory sounds nice the week after a poor showing at the stadium, but none of you have thought this trough. What you're advocating is way over the top.