Bricho
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2013
- 159
- 75
So basically it’s in MSG’s interest for you to sell something at a higher price than they sell it for? I think that’s the crux of your argument. Or are you also saying there’s a benefit to having a larger season subscriber base? I don’t see that as in their interest either. At the end of the day, you and I and a ton of other people, will still be Rangers fans willing to pony up money for tickets. It s*cks for you this year since you’re having to take less than face, but you weren’t complaining a few years ago when you were able to sell premium games at 2-3x what you paid. This environment has been great for me and a several others including your coworker who can now go to games at a more affordable price. And when the team turns it around, the tables will turn and you will get your premium again. In the long run, the market works.
There is no right for season subscribers to earn back the money they paid. And honestly if you think MSG is screwing you, there’s the very simple solution of not renewing.
A large season subscriber base, with a substantial majority of tickets sold, stabilizes the revenue stream. Ski resorts now follow this model, offering multi-mountain passes at a discount up front (compared to window rates and even advanced lift ticket rates) to smooth out the valleys, and ensure they're solvent in the event of a bad season (snow-wise.) They know more money is made once the skier is at the resort. Same for a sports team. If your season is sold out, you need not worry about selling single-game tickets to a last place team.
As you write, the success of the team on the ice will dictate the performance of the resale market, especially today since tickets are very expensive. When the Rangers contend again, no seller should be complaining.
I respect the argument you’re making regarding upfront money and having the definite revenue stream. I would however bring up the example of the Giants and their experience. Ten years ago when the Giants released their PSL plan there was a huge outcry of how that was going to drive regular fans away and how it would shrink the subscriber base. However, if you’re of a certain age as I am, you remember that it was basically impossible to score a seat to the Giants without knowing someone. That was because some families held literally dozens of seats in their name that were passed down generationally. I would say the end result, for both the Giants and their fans, has been overwhelmingly successful. Tickets, and season rights, are readily available at cost; the Giants always sell out; and as someone who’s gone to games in both eras, I like the newer regime as opposed to the somewhat scary environment previously.
It is unfortunate for season subscribers they may incur losses this year but like I said, the market always works in the end. Should their subscriber base drop and the are unable to sell tickets, prices will come down (probably not come down but rather stay constant) and they will have to offer bigger discounts to entice people to buy. Or maybe the rebuild is short term (shorter than the 98-05 drought) and the team competes and we’ll all pay sky high prices again.