PSL's ?

[QUOTE]He will, if the board approves, spend the summer talking to potential donors and investigating fundraising possibilities, including selling Personal Seat Licenses to a new football stadium.[/QUOTE]

Maybe its been mentioned somewhere before…I don’t remember.

How much success would we have with PSLs?

My guess is most, or more, of the CFI people would buy them.

But how many would we really sell/

My concern is the concept of PSLs is past its time. It worked great for the Panthers, but that was what…15 years ago?

Why don’t we just “borrow” stadium money from the state, the same way unc-chapel hill did?

Why don't we just "borrow" stadium money from the state, the same way unc-chapel hill did?

yep…bonds and PSLs together

bonds could pay for the physical infrastructure

PSLs could provide revenue for start up costs

I’ll likely purchase PSL’s if I’ve gradauted

Annual donations work kind-of like non-fixed PSL’s. You donate a certain amount and then qualify for better seating, if you’re willing to pay the price for more expensive seats. PSL’s stratify seating too much for my taste, plus it looks better to throw everything in one pot then to have to come back and say we didn’t get good PSL #s but donations and sponsorships look good. Take a que from Duke, they have poor attendance but donations and sponsors still make the money look OK.

The stadium costs will be repaid through Luxury Box sales while normal seating prices will pay for upkeep. All other income sources go to team related expenses. That looks to be the model that teams like UCF use. I’m not a big fan of expanding TransAm Field past FCS level but if they can get 30,000 temporary seating in there with atleast 12 temporary luxury boxes it could allow us to warchest for a better “real” stadium a little later. I just doubt that area can hold 24,000 more temporary seats.

A coworker of mine wondered about this back in 2006 and emailed the chancellor about it. This was before a lot of research had been done, but at the time, the Chancellor claimed that PSL’s were not widely succesful on the collegiate level. I would be curious to know if he has found any evidence to change that opinion.

A quick telephone call to Ron Wellman at Wake Forest would give CHP an answer.

I didn’t go for the idea and was more than satisfied with my regular seats at Groves Stadium (errr, BB&T Field) without paying for these and the requirement of being in the Deacon Club. But if Phil says no, I’ll probably jump on in over there for the plan with the $$$ that was being sent to the University other than to the 49er CLub.

Link: [URL=http://www.wakeforestfacilities.com/priority.htm][B][U]Football Seat Rights Program[/U][/B][/URL], WakeForestSports.com

I have my doubts about PSLs because I think they would reduce the sustainability of your program IF he sees them as a one-time thing like the Panthers had. If you feel like you’ve already “paid for” your right to the best seats, you would not be as motivated to give every year. If the PSL cost is a startup cost of maybe $1,000 a seat plus a recurring fee – say $250 a year per seat on top of the ticket cost for the best seats, with some kind of amenity attached like a club area at the stadium. That would serve to help with up-front costs plus help guarantee the sustainabiity of the program and help you reduce the burden on students, which Dubois clearly wants to do. Maybe they’re not permanent, but a 10-year contract. That way people are not stuck forever but the funds get the program over the hump of what are sure to be some really bad teams.

PSL’s suck. I said it in another thread awhile back, but this is a quick way to kill something before it starts. For a family of four, they would now have to buy 4 PSL’s to keep the seats they have already earned through past donations to the 49er Club. I’m guessing that’s going to be $2000 at a minimum. If you don’t buy the PSL’s, you get crappy(ier) seats. This may lead to people not coming at all if you essentially force them to pay for something they do not want.

[QUOTE=Mike_Persinger;322780]I have my doubts about PSLs because I think they would reduce the sustainability of your program IF he sees them as a one-time thing like the Panthers had. If you feel like you’ve already “paid for” your right to the best seats, you would not be as motivated to give every year. If the PSL cost is a startup cost of maybe $1,000 a seat plus a recurring fee – say $250 a year per seat on top of the ticket cost for the best seats, with some kind of amenity attached like a club area at the stadium. That would serve to help with up-front costs plus help guarantee the sustainabiity of the program and help you reduce the burden on students, which Dubois clearly wants to do. Maybe they’re not permanent, but a 10-year contract. That way people are not stuck forever but the funds get the program over the hump of what are sure to be some really bad teams.[/QUOTE]

I agree that a PSL may make large future gifts harder to come by. Why would I give $5k in five years if I already have a PSL that gives me seats in a good section. However, PSL’s can be an investment as well. Panthers PSL’s now sell for alot more than they did when the team was started. The problem is when you start and NFL franchise, you are selling seats for people to watch their team play Dallas and Washington and Green Bay etc, whereas with a start-up college team, you would be paying for the rights to watch largely unknown teams play.

There will have to be a serious revamping of the points system as well if PSLs are sold. Are people going to give to the 49er Club just for football tickets, will current members increase their donations for “better” football seats, are some just basketball fans and won’t increase their donation further. Does that affect their seating in Halton? At Wake Forest, in order to buy a seat, you are required to contribute at a reasonable Deacon Club level. No donation in a particular year also risks losing the seat. So let’s say football tickets are $180 per seat (adult), a $5000 PSL donation (paid up front) plus a $1500 yearly 49er Club donation. You’re talking about $6500 up front for a family of 4 the first season of football.

If CHP goes this route, it will fail.

[QUOTE=HP49er;322850]

If CHP goes this route, it will fail.[/QUOTE]

So, keeping score here:

– PSLs = fail
– Fundraising with no promises = fail
– Dubois seeking donors = fail
– Less than $300 student fee increase = fail
– Lack of one huge benefactor = fail
– Leap and hope for the best, because if you build it they will come = succeed?

So, keeping score here:

– PSLs = fail
– [B][U]Fundraising with no promises = fail[/U][/B]
– [B][U]Dubois seeking donors = fail[/U][/B]
– Less than $300 student fee increase = fail
– Lack of one huge benefactor = fail
– Leap and hope for the best, because if you build it they will come = succeed?

Fundraising will not fail aslong as he puts a hat on suggesting he is for it. I agree at some point we will have to ante up but to say “if you reach this amount we might start” is not going to bring money. Get a solid stance, promote that number, and market it, but to put maybe’s on numbers will not make anyone feel like they are getting into a good investment or one worth their time.

Has he sought donors? The feasibility study was announced, the school has not made any type of announcement as to whether they are “All in” for football so why should anyone open their wallet to do the same, again, if it is a maybe. Mac made his recommendation but nobody in the admin. seems excited at all (or are not allowed to show it) about the prospect of football so of course it is going to reflect negatively on donations.

If he said… if donations reach X amount we will proceed with football, if donations reach Y amount we might, and if we do not reach either then no football, I think more donations would come and possible donors/corporations would come out of the shadows. If the leadership at our institution cannot push it how can anyone expect an outside source to do the same when they wouldn’t have the final say.

If there’s a campaign, I’m sure he would do it with a solid “go” number. It would make no sense to do it any other way, for the reasons you cite. I know it’s not popular on here, but I think he’s going about all this in exactly the right way so far. It’s fair to expect that to continue.

Re: fund raising.

You have X number of dollars to spend on any venture. Do you give to:

[list type=decimal]
[]The passionate, motivated leader with a mission and vision aimed at achieving success.
[
]The disinterested, uninspired owner who isn’t so much concerned with potential success as he/she isn’t even sure if it is a venture they want to get involved in.
[/LIST]

Why would anyone give a dime to leader #2? We are all emotionally involved so we don’t count. But why would any business leader or potential large donor hand over large sums of money to a cause the leader isn’t sold on. Businesses invest in vision, not going through the motions- Passion > Pessimism.

Phil leading any fund raising campaign is doomed- the guy has been nothing but a black cloud over the process. I want someone who actually believes in football at Charlotte asking for money, not a guy who is doing it because he has to.

If there's a campaign, I'm sure he would do it with a solid "go" number. It would make no sense to do it any other way, for the reasons you cite. I know it's not popular on here, but I think he's going about all this in exactly the right way so far. It's fair to expect that to continue.

I’d be perfectly okay with this too, aslong as the number is within reason. He can’t set the bar too absurdly, if anything he should set it a little under what would be acceptable. It’s not as much about the amount of money as it is about the dedication of donors and them showing up.

Re: fund raising.

You have X number of dollars to spend on any venture. Do you give to:
[list type=decimal]
[]The passionate, motivated leader with a mission and vision aimed at achieving success.
[
]The disinterested, uninspired owner who isn’t so much concerned with potential success as he/she isn’t even sure if it is a venture they want to get involved in.[/LIST]
Why would anyone give a dime to leader #2? We are all emotionally involved so we don’t count. But why would any business leader or potential large donor hand over large sums of money to a cause the leader isn’t sold on. Businesses invest in vision, not going through the motions- Passion > Pessimism.

Phil leading any fund raising campaign is doomed- the guy has been nothing but a black cloud over the process. I want someone who actually believes in football at Charlotte asking for money, not a guy who is doing it because he has to.

Ding Ding Ding.

Why is this so hard to understand. No one is going to give money to a project when the leader of the project isnt fully behind it in the first place.

[QUOTE=CharSFNiners;322898]I’d be perfectly okay with this too, aslong as the number is within reason. He can’t set the bar too absurdly, if anything he should set it a little under what would be acceptable. It’s not as much about the amount of money as it is about the dedication of donors and them showing up.[/QUOTE]

What are the non-absurd numbers?

X dollars for infrastructure/startup
X season ticket deposits

I’d hate to be the one to tell a big doner that already gives thousands of dollars every year, he has to double his donation to get good seats at the football games. I don’t see it.

What are the non-absurd numbers?

X dollars for infrastructure/startup
X season ticket deposits

I don’t know… the degree on my wall is not a business degree. He’d have to present some numbers and present the facts as to why this is the number we’d need to see, and not for the final total but a simple breakdown of each cost, to show us what needs to go into it, the more understanding people have of an endevor the more whole heartedly they’re likely to give. If it’s legit and there isn’t stuff being stashed away to bloat the number, then I’d think it’s reasonable.

This would be a breakdown of startup costs. An estimated season ticket sale would be very reasonable as well.