dfosterf
15 years ago
CBA Uncertainty causes Packers to raise ticket prices--PFT 


CBA uncertainty forces Packers to pump up ticket prices
Posted by Mike Florio on January 22, 2010 12:53 PM ET
The bad news for Packers fans is that they might be soon seeing their former quarterback qualify for the Super Bowl wearing the uniform of one of their arch rivals.

The good news is that, if he comes back for another season, they'll get to pay more money to boo him.

Yes, the Packers have announced that they're raising ticket prices.

The average increase is $9 per seat, with the jump ranging from $8 to $11. It's the team's first increase since 2007.

"The new pricing strengthens our ability to be competitive both on and off the field with teams in larger markets," team president Mark Murphy says in a letter to be sent to season-ticket holders. "With the future landscape regarding the Collective Bargaining Agreement unknown, teams will be even more competitive in terms of generating revenue. The increased revenue will allow us to focus financial resources on supporting a successful football team, our No. 1 goal."

In other words, with supplemental revenue sharing and the salary cap disappearing, teams will be under more pressure than ever to apply basic supply-demand concepts to their ticket prices. With the Packers being the only show in town and with the waiting period for season tickets still measured in decades, the Packers can charge a lot more than they're charging.

In an environment featuring far more competition among franchises for players (but isn't the NFL a single entity?), the message is clear -- raise more money or lose out on key players.




GBPG- Same subject, more detailed info about the pricing 


This is one of my "rant" subjects. I would have raised them a lot more. I want my team to have more flexibility from a financial perspective, and the nature of our ownership demands that they remain fiscally responsible. I feel like that aspect is so very underappreciated by many fans.

My rough analogy is this.

My many years as a hunter, I was always a strong advocate of raising license fees in order to help preserve the resource, and would purchase duck stamps, migratory bird stamps, etc. in order to "help the cause".
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
Think they are really just making up for not raising them last year.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
gbguy20
15 years ago
I'd really be shocked if people complain about this.

this is a 9$ increase over 2 years.

Anyone who is going to complain about spending 9 extra dollars to help their team probably has no place spending the money on the tickets period.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago

I'd really be shocked if people complain about this.

this is a 9$ increase over 2 years.

Anyone who is going to complain about spending 9 extra dollars to help their team probably has no place spending the money on the tickets period.

"gbguy20" wrote:



Sorry it is a whole lot more than just the $9. GB has raised the tickets prices numerous times in the past 15 years. (They try to do it every other year but they skipped last year due to the economy. I don't know about you but we have not rebounded from last year yet but the Packers certainly will.) link 

Basically they raise prices just because they and the other NFL teams can. I take it with a grain of salt that they need to remain competitive. GB is not noted for getting into bidding wars for players. They try to stay in the middle of the NFL when it comes to ticket pricing. But all that means is half the franchises raise prices one year. The rest the following year.

I checked some notes and in 1995 end zone tickets were $23. By 2005 that had increased to $54. An increase of 225% (22.5% a year. Each and every year.) That is a pretty hefty inflation increase even for the entertainment industry. Next year the tickets will be $67 each. A 278% increase or an avg of 18.6% each and every year.

In addition to Packer tickets, I buy, gas, meals, lodging, and often times souvenirs. It all adds up and then keeps adding up.

I really do not mind supporting the Packers. I do not mind rate increases but keep in mind that the REAL ticket price is 50% more for the "Gold Package" ticket holders as they are required to pay full price for a preseason game. ($402 for two regular season games and these are the cheap seats.) Many ticket-holders don't attend the preseason games since the starters play so little. I don't mind watching a preseason game. I like seeing the rookies and others trying to earn a slot on the team. A couple of years ago we were running late and missed the opening drive of the game. Rodgers threw a TD pass on the 1st play and the offensive starters then sat the rest of the game. We just laughed about it. What I do mind is having to pay full price for something that is less than "NFL quality".

I know dfoster wants to jack the prices up even more. He is entitled to his opinion. I just don't see GB using the extra revenue to run out and pick up a lot of high priced free agents. They will simply put the money in the bank and save it for a rainy day.


The Green Bay Packers released financial information that shows a $20.1 million profit for the fiscal year that ended March 31.



"Despite the tough economic conditions, team officials emphasized that it would have no impact on the franchise's football operations. 'We have placed no restriction on football in terms of what they need to be successful,' Murphy said. 'We are continuing to provide them all of the resources they need to sign players and be competitive on the field.'

At the same time, the team is sound financially, team officials said. The Packers' Preservation Fund, a piggy-bank of sorts for the franchise, remains at $127.5 million."



Regardless, the Packers' financial information doesn't do a lot to support the owners' claim that they're in any kind of desperate financial straits. If anything, it suggests that they're just not making quite as much money as they're all used to making.


link 

One of the reasons for the possible lockout is to get the prices for players salaries back in line. If that happens will they lower ticket prices? Not hardly.
UserPostedImage
dfosterf
15 years ago
Almost a quarter of a billion in gross revenue, and they netted


4 million. Link of my own, GD it---forgive me, lol 




Not 20.


The author skewed the figures in order to evoke some sort of anger, and he succeeded.

Wayne, you know I respect your concerns on this issue, as you do mine, but that Graziano guy (very conveniently for his thesis, btw)---left out the 16 mil lost in investments.

I DO put my money where my mouth is, btw--- I have an interest in 4 season tickets, and while I do not "pay" in the sense that it is from an inheritance, my inheritance goes down accordingly each year that the tickets get paid for, and I DONT EVEN GO...(well, VERY rarely) but am GLAD TO DO IT. feel another rant coming on, sorry, lol
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago
DF,
I know journalist slant stories. I am not upset by what is going on. I do think raising prices simply for the sake of raising them is wrong. Not GB but the league as a whole. This is a part of the posturing when they face the player's union.
I only skimmed the article you linked to. I always question when some one reports that they "lost" money in investments. Almost always that is just a paper transaction. Legal but not the whole story.

Move it away from football- If Bill Gates spent a "paltry" $100 million on investments and over 5 years they grew to be worth $200 million before the 2009 downturn and they are now worth $$184 million, it is reported that Gates "lost" $16 million in investments. he can no doubt deduct that on his taxes in some fashion. My contention is that he did not lose $16. Deduct it from your taxes and net worth. I am fine with that but if he only paid $100 and it is still worth $186 million he still in the black not red. Now if he bought at $100 on sold at $86 I will agree that he lost $16 million.

The same for GB. Until they sell their investments they have not lost anything. They are just erasing one number on a piece of paper and writing in a different number. It does not mean anything. (Tax attorney's and financial planners will disagree I know.)
UserPostedImage
gbguy20
15 years ago

I'd really be shocked if people complain about this.

this is a 9$ increase over 2 years.

Anyone who is going to complain about spending 9 extra dollars to help their team probably has no place spending the money on the tickets period.

"wpr" wrote:



Sorry it is a whole lot more than just the $9. GB has raised the tickets prices numerous times in the past 15 years. (They try to do it every other year but they skipped last year due to the economy. I don't know about you but we have not rebounded from last year yet but the Packers certainly will.) link 

Basically they raise prices just because they and the other NFL teams can. I take it with a grain of salt that they need to remain competitive. GB is not noted for getting into bidding wars for players. They try to stay in the middle of the NFL when it comes to ticket pricing. But all that means is half the franchises raise prices one year. The rest the following year.

I checked some notes and in 1995 end zone tickets were $23. By 2005 that had increased to $54. An increase of 225% (22.5% a year. Each and every year.) That is a pretty hefty inflation increase even for the entertainment industry. Next year the tickets will be $67 each. A 278% increase or an avg of 18.6% each and every year.

In addition to Packer tickets, I buy, gas, meals, lodging, and often times souvenirs. It all adds up and then keeps adding up.

I really do not mind supporting the Packers. I do not mind rate increases but keep in mind that the REAL ticket price is 50% more for the "Gold Package" ticket holders as they are required to pay full price for a preseason game. ($402 for two regular season games and these are the cheap seats.) Many ticket-holders don't attend the preseason games since the starters play so little. I don't mind watching a preseason game. I like seeing the rookies and others trying to earn a slot on the team. A couple of years ago we were running late and missed the opening drive of the game. Rodgers threw a TD pass on the 1st play and the offensive starters then sat the rest of the game. We just laughed about it. What I do mind is having to pay full price for something that is less than "NFL quality".

I know dfoster wants to jack the prices up even more. He is entitled to his opinion. I just don't see GB using the extra revenue to run out and pick up a lot of high priced free agents. They will simply put the money in the bank and save it for a rainy day.


The Green Bay Packers released financial information that shows a $20.1 million profit for the fiscal year that ended March 31.

"gbguy20" wrote:



"Despite the tough economic conditions, team officials emphasized that it would have no impact on the franchise's football operations. 'We have placed no restriction on football in terms of what they need to be successful,' Murphy said. 'We are continuing to provide them all of the resources they need to sign players and be competitive on the field.'

At the same time, the team is sound financially, team officials said. The Packers' Preservation Fund, a piggy-bank of sorts for the franchise, remains at $127.5 million."



Regardless, the Packers' financial information doesn't do a lot to support the owners' claim that they're in any kind of desperate financial straits. If anything, it suggests that they're just not making quite as much money as they're all used to making.


link 

One of the reasons for the possible lockout is to get the prices for players salaries back in line. If that happens will they lower ticket prices? Not hardly.



the article states that is an average of a $9 increase

which is where my comment is from
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
dfosterf
15 years ago

DF,
I know journalist slant stories. I am not upset by what is going on. I do think raising prices simply for the sake of raising them is wrong. Not GB but the league as a whole. This is a part of the posturing when they face the player's union.
I only skimmed the article you linked to. I always question when some one reports that they "lost" money in investments. Almost always that is just a paper transaction. Legal but not the whole story.

Move it away from football- If Bill Gates spent a "paltry" $100 million on investments and over 5 years they grew to be worth $200 million before the 2009 downturn and they are now worth $$184 million, it is reported that Gates "lost" $16 million in investments. he can no doubt deduct that on his taxes in some fashion. My contention is that he did not lose $16. Deduct it from your taxes and net worth. I am fine with that but if he only paid $100 and it is still worth $186 million he still in the black not red. Now if he bought at $100 on sold at $86 I will agree that he lost $16 million.

The same for GB. Until they sell their investments they have not lost anything. They are just erasing one number on a piece of paper and writing in a different number. It does not mean anything. (Tax attorney's and financial planners will disagree I know.)

"wpr" wrote:



You skimmed the report from the Green Bay Packers and quoted from that one guy and his interpretation. Not fair.

I addressed the "paper" nature of that loss, but I guess you didn't get that far.
RaiderPride
15 years ago
Everyone with season tickets can afford and extra $9 on average.

That means if they can afford $9 they can afford $18

Bump it up to an average of $18 and be really financially solid to make the moves to get back to back Superbowls.
""People Will Probably Never Remember What You Said, And May Never Remember What You Did. However, People Will Always Remember How You Made Them Feel."
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago



the article states that is an average of a $9 increase

which is where my comment is from

"gbguy20" wrote:



I know and if it was the first increase in 10 years that would be one thing. When they increase repeatedly it is another thing. When you say no one should complain I don't think that is fair. (It sounds like those who would complain are unpatriotic or something.)
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (1h) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (1h) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (4h) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (4h) : Only 4
wpr (4h) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (6h) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (7h) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move
dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.
dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife
Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.
dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?
Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
19-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

16-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.