Tech

By Stan Nolte

April 18, 2007 1:46 AM | Link to this

I thought it was fair and probably necesary….I have good football tickets and great Bball seats,so I preferred this plan to that of Dave Braine(He was going to sell seats to the highest bidder with no regard to how long you have had them)….The Radish looks after his loyal customers !

By destin

April 18, 2007 8:17 AM | Link to this

I think it’s a ‘fair deal’. It indicates we are a program moving in the right direction, but not one that can afford to gouge the fans. It takes money to make money, and in this case - it takes money to vie for a championship (i.e. facilities to attract recruits,money to pay and retain quality coaches,etc.). I’m so glad that the former administration’s philosophy of accepting mediocrity seems to be fading. Now, if we can just put together a defensive secondary, we might have a pretty good team this year. Why did the kid from Key West leave? I thought he was competing to start or be the top backup at CB.

By techgrad03

April 18, 2007 8:19 AM | Link to this

Upgraded my seat location and number of seats.

By Jeff

April 18, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Upgraded section (at least requested to do so); kept same number of seats.

By addicted

April 19, 2007 12:18 AM | Link to this

As a current Tech student, its great to see alumni place some faith in this great school and program, with more than just lip service! For far too long we have accepted less than the best, and I am glad that all are willing to contribute in the effort to take Tech to its rightful place, right at the top!

By Mike

April 19, 2007 4:07 AM | Link to this

I’m waiting it out. I don’t donate to the athletic program; I just buy season tickets, and I’m waiting until the no-seat-license seats become available. I don’t have a problem with the idea, other than worrying it might diminish the number of season-ticket holders and lead to more empty, premium seats. If it works, great; I’ll continue to cheer from the po-folks seats either way.

By bamabuzz73

April 19, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

I stayed in the same location, but may upgrade next year if enough of my bleacher buds want to go along and we can move together. As a Tech grad, I’m already a contributor to the AT Fund, Roll Call, etc…so no big change for me. I welcome more supporters of Tech athletics, and wonder why it took us so long do to what is standard in so many other programs.

By JP

April 19, 2007 10:37 AM | Link to this

I have been a football season ticket holder for about 9 years (2 tickets) and hoops for about 6 years (2 tickets). Football for me was a no brainer (no former AD pun intended). I am paying the $150 each and sticking around. Basketball was a little tougher decision because there is just more cost involved anyway but ultimately I want to hold my tickets for my lifetime and be able to take my children to games when they are old enough to go. So, I am in for basketball as well, $150 each for the Tech fund.

I am still not happy about the Tech Fund Tariff and blowing up the point system but it is out of my control. I would note that 4 of my other friends have been purchasing a total of 8 season football tickets every year for many years and next season that number will be reduced to 3 because of the Tech Fund.

I am ready for football to start and I think this could be a big year for us!!

By 4 time letter winner

April 21, 2007 8:36 AM | Link to this

After grad in 1970 I suffered through 15 years of mediocre football, but bought my season tickets anyway. I contributed to AT and Roll Call and always got terrible seats. When bowl game times finally came the Tech seats were the worst. With a change in the program in the 1980’s I decided to drop the season tickets. It really did not matter, since Tech had screwed up the point system and I was not getting credit for any of the points I had earned anyway. A few stadium expansions later (sitting in the N stands is like sitting on the moon) I pick up extra tickets when I feel like going to a game and usually sit in great seats. When the new Fund idea was put in place, I saw it as just anothe way to screw the alumni.

By DawgBite

April 23, 2007 7:26 AM | Link to this

Will you guys still go to the games disguised as empty seats?

By ramblin_wreck_ce

April 23, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this

I kept my two season tickets, but will now split the games with another Tech fan. I knew the day would come when this type of plan would be put in place. However, I just don’t think that there is enough interest to make this policy effective—it really only works when you sell out each game and the demand is greater than the supply. (Either that or individual game prices will be more than the season ticket holder price.)

I think you’ll see the end zone seats on the East and West sides as well as the end zone expansion with more White and Gold where there was no required donation.

Afterall, in the last “Good Word” I saw on Ramblinwreck.com, DRad wrote at length justifying the $20 service fee which accompanied the donation. In my mind, that’s not a good sign.

By J Liu

April 25, 2007 10:03 AM | Link to this

I am in favor of the Tech fund - I shelled out an extra 500 bucks for my seats this year, but Tech needs to be on par with what other big programs are doing.

Also, consider this. The other practice the Tech fund discourages (or mitigates) is the ability for one longtime contributor/season ticket holder to buy 10 or 15 extra season tickets (OK, more like 2 or 3) on behalf of their friends, who have probably given zero dollars to roll call and the A-T fund over the years. Technically, there is nothing wrong with this practice because you’re free to do with your tickets as you please, and many people give their tickets to friends occasionally anyway right? But consider the impact when you manify this practice among the thousands of people who buy season tickets. The result is that a lot of noncontributors to roll call and the A-T fund have the better seats that were meant for longtime contributors/season ticket holders. You can either search your feelings and know this to be true in the Jedi sense, or just use some logic that a five year old Vulcan can understand, but the bottom line is that Tech does not get as much money as it should and the people who have been struggling to get higher priority year in and year out must compete against people who haven’t contributed. The Tech fund recaptures this lost money and equalizes the playing field again, perhaps at the expense of a lot people. But I’d rather pay more money to have a system that is more equitable than to maintain one that is not.

So the Tech fund doesn’t disappoint me. What really aggravates me as an alumnus is when the institute inconveniences alumni and guests of the institute by nickel and diming them. For example, the institute recently extended paid parking hours at the Burge alumni parking deck beyond 6PM. Most of the people who park there after 6PM are alums that are visiting for campus functions (such as presidential scholar interviews), or guest speakers. These are people who volunteer their time to Tech and probably give to roll call anyway, and now they either have to pay an extra 3 bucks or get hit with a $35 parking ticket. Yeah, you’ve made a couple of extra bucks tonight, but the bad taste this leaves in the mouth of alums and guests outweights the nominal amount you’ve gained. This is the kind of nickel and diming that’s downright shameful.