2008-09 VARIABLE PRICING SCHEDULE

[stenbaro]

Sorry, but I don't understand this line of thinking ... let me ask you this ...

If they had called those 4 games "Gold" and the other 10 "Silver-plus," you would have the same thing ... if they eliminated 10 games from the highest category and created a lower priced category ... would you be mad that? because that's what they did. And in the process make it a better deal for their season ticket holders, whose prices for those games were already set whether they were designated gold or platinum or whatever ... they are taking care of their best customers, isn't that good business? The cap went up, they need to generate revenue somehow and the league changes the schedule and took away division games in favor of western conference games. Would you prefer they left it the way it was for the Leafs games and raise prices more across the board so you can pay more to see them play Nashville?

Let me ask you this..Why dont they put the best product on the ice that they can and charge one price like they have for the past 40 years like every other franchise in the world has..Its another way to charge you more..Its not gonna matter to me so I guess I shouldnt complain..I will not pay for a ticket to see them..I wont pay to support them till they put a playoff, scratch that, a Stanley Cup contending team on the Ice..

 

If the cap went up and the only way you can keep even is to charge more then charge more per ticket..Dont charge me more more because youre playing the Leafs or the Canadiens or The Flyers..

 

Heres a better idea..Charge more per ticket and put a playoff team on the ice that you can make money by selling playoff tickets..BUt dont sell me BS and thats what they are doing....

[BetweenThePipes00]

Let me ask you this..Why dont they put the best product on the ice that they can and charge one price like they have for the past 40 years like every other franchise in the world has..Its another way to charge you more..Its not gonna matter to me so I guess I shouldnt complain..I will not pay for a ticket to see them..I wont pay to support them till they put a playoff, scratch that, a Stanley Cup contending team on the Ice..

 

If the cap went up and the only way you can keep even is to charge more then charge more per ticket..Dont charge me more more because youre playing the Leafs or the Canadiens or The Flyers..

 

Heres a better idea..Charge more per ticket and put a playoff team on the ice that you can make money by selling playoff tickets..BUt dont sell me BS and thats what they are doing....

You are completely missing the big picture when you say they should just charge the same for all the games instead of more for the few ... the lowest price is not the base and then they are upcharging for all the others ... compared to what you suggest, the bronze and value games are LOWER prices ... so your suggestion would mean paying MORE for the crappy teams you would rather not see. It's far better for the average fan to charge a premium for a few games to keep the price of the majority of the games lower ... a $56 seat to a Boston or Ottawa bronze game, still a DIVISION GAME, is $115 for a gold game. If they eliminated the variable pricing, that seat would be much closer to the $115 than the $56, it would have to be. Let the few who can afford it pay the premium and everyone else benfits for more of the games. The Sabres are making it easier for the fans who can't afford an average NHL ticket to come to some games, and somehow this is a bad thing? And they are making their season-ticket packages a better value this way, making it a better deal for their best customers ... and again, they get ripped for it.

I get it, I know you are pissed they missed the playoffs and have not won a Cup, but it doesn't mean everything they do is a ripoff. Bitch about the on-ice product but you are complaining just for the sake of complaining when it comes to this deal.

[stenbaro]

You are completely missing the big picture when you say they should just charge the same for all the games instead of more for the few ... the lowest price is not the base and then they are upcharging for all the others ... compared to what you suggest, the bronze and value games are LOWER prices ... so your suggestion would mean paying MORE for the crappy teams you would rather not see. It's far better for the average fan to charge a premium for a few games to keep the price of the majority of the games lower ... a $56 seat to a Boston or Ottawa bronze game, still a DIVISION GAME, is $115 for a gold game. If they eliminated the variable pricing, that seat would be much closer to the $115 than the $56, it would have to be. Let the few who can afford it pay the premium and everyone else benfits for more of the games. The Sabres are making it easier for the fans who can't afford an average NHL ticket to come to some games, and somehow this is a bad thing? And they are making their season-ticket packages a better value this way, making it a better deal for their best customers ... and again, they get ripped for it.

I get it, I know you are pissed they missed the playoffs and have not won a Cup, but it doesn't mean everything they do is a ripoff. Bitch about the on-ice product but you are complaining just for the sake of complaining when it comes to this deal.

Maybe :mellow: I still feel they should have one price..They are price gouging the best games..Anyway you put it it still costs you more to go see the Leafs and the better teams..If you want ot see a suckass team you can go cheap..They are still taking advantage of the better teams minus the leafs coming in here.. Here is my issue and I will try and state it as close to how I feel the best I can..

 

They cry about being a small market team and they cant spend to the cap..Yet they raise ticket prices becasue the cap went up..Yet they wont spend to the cap. If they had spent to the cap they woulda made the playoffs and the money they had made in the playoffs that they woulda made would have more than payed for it....Now they get rid of salary trade for a decent defenseman and they think that all is ok to raise the prices..You have got to be kidding me..This team is no better than the crap they put out last year and they are gonna charge more??? They spin the increase on the fans from the North coming down and they can take advantage of it..Ok..But dont think for a second they arent trying to take advantage of you Joe season ticket holder or Joe gonna buy a ticket to one game a month..This team wants you to believe the best they can be is mediocre to stay afloat and want to squeeze every penny out of anyone they can to profit..I wont do it..If you want to go right ahead..Maybe I am to pissed off to see the good part of it but I have been getting kicked in the balls by this team for over 2o years and its about time they stopped being a bunch of whiny little babies who say were sorry way too much and then charge more..They should be embarassed to raise prices after the crap from the past 2 years..Put up a team and I will pay, dont throw me a curve ball about prices, be good enough to charge me all the time not just when a better team comes in...

[carpandean]

Let me ask you this..Why dont they put the best product on the ice that they can and charge one price like they have for the past 40 years like every other franchise in the world has..Its another way to charge you more..Its not gonna matter to me so I guess I shouldnt complain..I will not pay for a ticket to see them..I wont pay to support them till they put a playoff, scratch that, a Stanley Cup contending team on the Ice..

Do you think that they can put a better product on the ice if they have less revenue? Assuming they've done proper analysis (with TG in charge, I guessing that they probably have), then by definition, a variable price will generate at least as much revenue (short proof: a single fixed price is an option under a variable system, so any other option chosen must have a higher expected revenue.) Therefore, at best, their decision to not spend closer to the cap doesn't depend on whether they use variable or fixed pricing and, at worst, would be even worse under fixed pricing. You may feel that they could spend more to put a better product on the ice, sell/charge more and go further into the playoffs (that's an argument for another thread), but the same would be true -- possibly worse -- under the fixed pricing system.

 

The problem with fixed pricing is that if you charge too much, you have empty seats on weekday games; charge too little and you've left revenue on the table for weekend games. Some cities have major corporations buying up tickets, so they are less affected by pricing changes. Here, those low price games give options to families that couldn't afford to go to a game were they to use a fixed pricing scheme. Personally, I don't think it is a bad idea at all.

[stenbaro]

Do you think that they can put a better product on the ice if they have less revenue? Assuming they've done proper analysis (with TG in charge, I guessing that they probably have), then by definition, a variable price will generate at least as much revenue (short proof: a single fixed price is an option under a variable system, so any other option chosen must have a higher expected revenue.) Therefore, at best, their decision to not spend closer to the cap doesn't depend on whether they use variable or fixed pricing and, at worst, would be even worse under fixed pricing. You may feel that they could spend more to put a better product on the ice, sell/charge more and go further into the playoffs (that's an argument for another thread), but the same would be true -- possibly worse -- under the fixed pricing system.

 

The problem with fixed pricing is that if you charge too much, you have empty seats on weekday games; charge too little and you've left revenue on the table for weekend games. Some cities have major corporations buying up tickets, so they are less affected by pricing changes. Here, those low price games give options to families that couldn't afford to go to a game were they to use a fixed pricing scheme. Personally, I don't think it is a bad idea at all.

So basically they know that noone wants to pay full price just to see their team....

 

I guess I can see the point then

[That Aud Smell]

i happened to hear j. white from the GR morning team offer this chestnut on the sabres' pricing and ticket policies this morning: he started off talking about how the franchise allows (perhaps unwisely) its season ticket holders (STHs) to realize the profits that exist between the per-ticket price that STH's pay and the box office price, especially for the new platinum games. fair enough, i thought. but he then went on, i think, to say something to the effect of how the franchise actually leaves money on the table by offering season ticket packages at reduced per-game prices, and that if the team wanted to generate a whole lot more money, all it'd have to do is sell no seasons and instead charge everyone box office price.

 

wha--?!

 

i have no beef with jeremy white, i really don't (rather, i think his on-air persona and angle are pretty good ones, by local sports talk radio standards). but his comments to the foregoing effect just go to prove that if you're compelled to talk without end for a living, you will say your fair share of inane things.

[carpandean]

So basically they know that noone wants to pay full price just to see their team....

What's "full price"? The price they charge for Gold or Platinum? The price that they would charge under fixed price system? Simply put, under the fixed price system, they would choose a price that maximize (Number of seats sold at that price)*(Price). No matter what the relative level of demand to watch their team is, the solution may (would likely) be higher than it would need to be in order for them to sell out current bronze-level games and less than what they could sell out current platinum and gold-level games. Believe or not, people aren't willing to pay as much to go to a weekday game than a weekend game or a divisional game than a western conference game. By charging more for those high demand games, they can charge less for those lower demand games.

[nobody]

There is also one less Leaf game this year due to the new schedule so the team has to make up for that loss of money. I have no issue with variable price - charge more for higer demand - it's a smart business move.

[stenbaro]

What's "full price"? The price they charge for Gold or Platinum? The price that they would charge under fixed price system? Simply put, under the fixed price system, they would choose a price that maximize (Number of seats sold at that price)*(Price). No matter what the relative level of demand to watch their team is, the solution may (would likely) be higher than it would need to be in order for them to sell out current bronze-level games and less than what they could sell out current platinum and gold-level games. Believe or not, people aren't willing to pay as much to go to a weekday game than a weekend game or a divisional game than a western conference game. By charging more for those high demand games, they can charge less for those lower demand games.

I understand they can charge less for the games they think they would have a hard time selling..But youre missing my point..If their team was strong enough they wouldnt have to worry about charging more for weekend games because there would be a higher demand to watch a better team all the time...Nobody wants to go watch two nonplayoff teams on a tuesday night..I get it..So how bout making youre team desirable enough where you dont have to worry about that..Dont tell me its not possible..It was proven 2 and 3 yrs ago and even a little last year save a few games...They know they made big mistakes and they are trying to get the most out of the worst in my opinion..Cant blame em..I would probably do the same thing..The difference being I wouldnt have allowed myself to get into the predicament they are in now...

[spndnchz]

They tack it on I think. Maybe 10%. So if I wanted to sell tickets for under $100 to grab someone's attention, I put in $90 and it shows up as $99.

 

The great thing is it is secure, no keeping track of anything or any fees, no shipping, and people are willing to spend more for a secure ticket than through Ebay it seems.

 

The first year they did it the scalping laws were strict so they would only let you get the legal limit which was +30% of face. Last year it was fair game. The only thing you can't do is list tickets for under box office price. Say you paid $30 for your Toronto game season ticket, and box office price is $85....you have to charge $85+ as to not take their business. The past 2 years that only came into play for a few games....and those are the ones I would go to.

 

If you change your mind, you can pull the seats at any time in 5 seconds. If the seats aren't sold by gameday, you have to keep them as I don't think they want people thinking the tickets didn't sell then show up at the arena to find out they sold on the way there.

Sabres replay is good for the last minute and not having to ship stuff. They charge 10% on both sides, 10% to seller and tack on 10% to buyer. If you sold a $100 ticket you would list it for $110 bucks and the buyer would pay $121. Oe drawback is you don't get your cash. You either apply it to more seats, playoffs or next years tickets. I took a look at replay last year and didn't see as many sellers as StubHub or others. You are also limited to 10 games at a time. You can list up to 24 hours before gametime.

 

StubHub is better for reaching more sellers. It's 15% charge to seller and 10% + $15 or so shipping to buyer. I've used them in the past and its pretty easy to print out a prefilled fedex and send it. You get the money in a check or to paypal in seven days. They have some added features to show you what tix like yours have sold for and what tixs still are for sale. You can adjust your price daily yourself, or have it automatically scale down as the event gets closer. Same day sale available for another $15 to seller.

 

Ticketstub and listtickets.com are two others, both use the same servers just wrapped up differently. 10% fee to seller and 15% plus $15 or so shipping to buyer.

 

I took a look at prices, for the same Section 117, behind the penalty box, first row, (why not dream big) Regular one game price (if you could get them) would be $214. On the side sites they are between $177 and $325 per seat. With shipping and mark up.

[X. Benedict]

I understand they can charge less for the games they think they would have a hard time selling..But youre missing my point..If their team was strong enough they wouldnt have to worry about charging more for weekend games because there would be a higher demand to watch a better team all the time...Nobody wants to go watch two nonplayoff teams on a tuesday night..I get it..So how bout making youre team desirable enough where you dont have to worry about that..Dont tell me its not possible..It was proven 2 and 3 yrs ago and even a little last year save a few games...They know they made big mistakes and they are trying to get the most out of the worst in my opinion..Cant blame em..I would probably do the same thing..The difference being I wouldnt have allowed myself to get into the predicament they are in now...

 

So let me see if I have your opinion down. The Sabres aren't worth paying to see, but If they were worth paying to see, they should be worth the same amount for each game regardless of demand.

 

Is that right?

[carpandean]

I understand they can charge less for the games they think they would have a hard time selling..But youre missing my point..If their team was strong enough they wouldnt have to worry about charging more for weekend games because there would be a higher demand to watch a better team all the time...Nobody wants to go watch two nonplayoff teams on a tuesday night..I get it..So how bout making youre team desirable enough where you dont have to worry about that..Dont tell me its not possible..It was proven 2 and 3 yrs ago and even a little last year save a few games...They know they made big mistakes and they are trying to get the most out of the worst in my opinion..Cant blame em..I would probably do the same thing..The difference being I wouldnt have allowed myself to get into the predicament they are in now...

You're kinda missing the point, too. You could put the best team in the league out there and there will still be higher demand on weekends against divisional opponents than on weekdays verses western conference opponents (two extremes used for illustration purposes.) Even then, charging more for those high demand games and less for the lower demand games would make sense. Sure, with a better team they could sell out every game at the same or slightly higher prices than they do now, but then they would simply charge a little more for each. Theory still holds.

 

As I said, though, you can make at least as much and most likely more revenue with the variable price system, so they can put out at least as good of a team, if not better. Also, if you look at the numbers for next year, assuming they sign Pommer for $5M per (give or take), they will have about $42M in cap space committed to 7 forwards (not Timmy, Max or Ales), 5 defensemen (including Weber) and 2 goalies. Since that doesn't include a second-line center or Stafford (or another top-six right winger), the remaining 6 forwards and two defensemen could very easily push them much closer to the cap than it looks like they will be this year.

[shrader]

There is also one less Leaf game this year due to the new schedule so the team has to make up for that loss of money. I have no issue with variable price - charge more for higer demand - it's a smart business move.

 

A very good point. I never even thought about the new schedule bringing in a couple more less appealing opponents until you mentioned this.

[jad1]

Maybe :mellow: I still feel they should have one price..They are price gouging the best games..Anyway you put it it still costs you more to go see the Leafs and the better teams..If you want ot see a suckass team you can go cheap..They are still taking advantage of the better teams minus the leafs coming in here.. Here is my issue and I will try and state it as close to how I feel the best I can..

 

Well, that's a double edged sword. If they evened out their prices, that would probably raise the prices in all seat locations for all the games. So the guy who can only afford to take his kids to a couple of games a year might be priced out of doing so. By offering tiered pricing, the same guy could take his kids to see a bronze game or two. Does that mean that he's stuck seeing a crappy team? Probably, but the first game I saw live was against the Cleveland Barons, and it didn't hurt my alligience to the team.

 

They cry about being a small market team and they cant spend to the cap..Yet they raise ticket prices becasue the cap went up..Yet they wont spend to the cap. If they had spent to the cap they woulda made the playoffs and the money they had made in the playoffs that they woulda made would have more than payed for it....

 

Maybe, but a couple of seasons ago they were way under the cap and were 3 injured defensemen away from winning the cup. The Leafs spend to the cap, but they aren't a playoff team.

 

Talent comes at all different prices. Basing your opinion on a team's chances solely on the their salary cap situation has proven to be a bit foolhardy.

 

Now they get rid of salary trade for a decent defenseman and they think that all is ok to raise the prices..You have got to be kidding me..This team is no better than the crap they put out last year and they are gonna charge more??? They spin the increase on the fans from the North coming down and they can take advantage of it..Ok..But dont think for a second they arent trying to take advantage of you Joe season ticket holder or Joe gonna buy a ticket to one game a month..

 

Well since "Joe season ticket holder" is not subject to the pricing program and gets a huge break on the pricing shows that the Sabres are doing a great job of taking care of their most loyal customers. Sabres management also deserves credit for refusing to gouge season ticket holders for playoff tickets over the last few seasons.

 

As for the guy who is looking to go to one game a month, it's extremely easy to avoid one of the five newly priced games for the season. If that guy wants to see a good rivalry game, pick a game against the Flyers rather than the Leafs. It's cheaper and from a competitive standpoint, the Leafs are a lousy rival anyway.

 

This team wants you to believe the best they can be is mediocre to stay afloat and want to squeeze every penny out of anyone they can to profit..I wont do it..If you want to go right ahead..Maybe I am to pissed off to see the good part of it but I have been getting kicked in the balls by this team for over 2o years and its about time they stopped being a bunch of whiny little babies who say were sorry way too much and then charge more..They should be embarassed to raise prices after the crap from the past 2 years..Put up a team and I will pay, dont throw me a curve ball about prices, be good enough to charge me all the time not just when a better team comes in...

 

Look, the Sabres are one of the most competitively priced teams in the league. They treat their season ticket holders well, and give the average fan excellent breaks on several games during the season. Just because you're pissed they missed the playoffs doesn't mean they aren't offering multiple fairly-priced points to their entire fanbase who enjoy NHL hockey.

[Eleven]

So basically they know that noone wants to pay full price just to see their team....

 

I guess I can see the point then

 

 

No one wants to pay full price to see the Columbus Blue Jackets on a Monday night. Try looking at it this way: The platinum games are full price. Everything else is a discount.

 

The team has a (hopefully shrinking) waiting list for season tickets; we're lucky prices weren't raised more.

[stenbaro]

You're kinda missing the point, too. You could put the best team in the league out there and there will still be higher demand on weekends against divisional opponents than on weekdays verses western conference opponents (two extremes used for illustration purposes.) Even then, charging more for those high demand games and less for the lower demand games would make sense. Sure, with a better team they could sell out every game at the same or slightly higher prices than they do now, but then they would simply charge a little more for each. Theory still holds.

As I said, though, you can make at least as much and most likely more revenue with the variable price system, so they can put out at least as good of a team, if not better. Also, if you look at the numbers for next year, assuming they sign Pommer for $5M per (give or take), they will have about $42M in cap space committed to 7 forwards (not Timmy, Max or Ales), 5 defensemen (including Weber) and 2 goalies. Since that doesn't include a second-line center or Stafford (or another top-six right winger), the remaining 6 forwards and two defensemen could very easily push them much closer to the cap than it looks like they will be this year.

Wouldnt you rather pay for the better team? Or would you rather have a mediocre team and choose the games you can afford to go to? Hey theres something to be said for being able to goto any game you want..The last year of the Rigas administration I went to 30 home games free..The 5 years prior i had 3 seasons in 110 row 11 seats 11-13 paid out the rear and didnt have near as much fun when I went for free (because it was thier dollar not mine)..But I would still have rather had to pay more per ticket and watcha Stanley Cup Contender than go for free and watch pathetic hockey..Extremes I know but serves the same..

 

Bad management is still why they are where they are..Do you think if they still had Drury,Brierre Grier Mckee that we would be dealing with variable pricing? I doubt it..They wouldve had a whole lot more success and charged ya more for the whole ball of wax which I wouldnt care..I would pony up for that..I have no problem paying more for a great team.BUt to charge me more for a mediocre team playing decent teams on a weekend is funny at best..

[nobody]

Variable pricing is based on the opponent - not the Sabres. Pay more for playing against top teams on prime nights because there is more demand for those tickets. Take games that are on bad sales nights against poor teams and reduce the cost of the ticket to optimize the total sales for that game. Better to sell 16k@$31 = $500k then to sell 8k@$50 = $400k.

[shrader]

It happens in every market you can think of. Cheerios cost more than the generic cereal Tops sells. Premium gas costs more than regular unleaded. Why should the Sabres price every game the same and risk tickets not selling? Like Eleven said, if they made all tickets the same price, the higher prices would be the ones they would eventually settle on. If that's what you want then so be it. You may be willing to pay those prices for any game, but the majority of the market probably wouldn't. Are they supposed to factor in only you and ignore more than half of their ticket base?

[nucci]

Wouldnt you rather pay for the better team? Or would you rather have a mediocre team and choose the games you can afford to go to? Hey theres something to be said for being able to goto any game you want..The last year of the Rigas administration I went to 30 home games free..The 5 years prior i had 3 seasons in 110 row 11 seats 11-13 paid out the rear and didnt have near as much fun when I went for free (because it was thier dollar not mine)..But I would still have rather had to pay more per ticket and watcha Stanley Cup Contender than go for free and watch pathetic hockey..Extremes I know but serves the same..

 

Bad management is still why they are where they are..Do you think if they still had Drury,Brierre Grier Mckee that we would be dealing with variable pricing? I doubt it..They wouldve had a whole lot more success and charged ya more for the whole ball of wax which I wouldnt care..I would pony up for that..I have no problem paying more for a great team.BUt to charge me more for a mediocre team playing decent teams on a weekend is funny at best..

You constantly use the word I. What about everyone else in the city who would like to take their kids to game? Don't YOU think it is easier for them to go to a game that is less expensive than not go at all? Or is it always about you?

[spndnchz]

Let me ask you this..Why dont they put the best product on the ice that they can and charge one price like they have for the past 40 years like every other franchise in the world has..Its another way to charge you more..Its not gonna matter to me so I guess I shouldnt complain..I will not pay for a ticket to see them..I wont pay to support them till they put a playoff, scratch that, a Stanley Cup contending team on the Ice..

 

If the cap went up and the only way you can keep even is to charge more then charge more per ticket..Dont charge me more more because youre playing the Leafs or the Canadiens or The Flyers..

 

Heres a better idea..Charge more per ticket and put a playoff team on the ice that you can make money by selling playoff tickets..BUt dont sell me BS and thats what they are doing....

Your argument is lacking. What BS? More people want to see leafs and canadiens and b-rod. Let'm pay so I can see games on the cheap. You go out to a sporting event, buy beer, food, park, for under $70. You can spend that just buying a decent dinner and wine and you don't get to scream your ass off.

 

One of the main reasons the ticket prices went up is they had to so they could continue to get the revenue sharing.

 

Games are different prices because of exactly what you said

>>>>>How bout letting me decide if I want to pay 10 dollars for a Naked hot chick to pour my beer or 4 dollars for some fat 65 yr oldwart infested lady?? <<<<<

 

I can't see how you can relate a ticket price to winning a cup. Leafs tickets are expensive because of supply and demand and they still suck a$$.

[inkman]

You constantly use the word I. What about everyone else in the city who would like to take their kids to game? Don't YOU think it is easier for them to go to a game that is less expensive than not go at all? Or is it always about you?

Your argument is lacking. What BS? More people want to see leafs and canadiens and b-rod. Let'm pay so I can see games on the cheap. You go out to a sporting event, buy beer, food, park, for under $70. You can spend that just buying a decent dinner and wine and you don't get to scream your ass off.

 

One of the main reasons the ticket prices went up is they had to so they could continue to get the revenue sharing.

 

Games are different prices because of exactly what you said

 

I can't see how you can relate a ticket price to winning a cup. Leafs tickets are expensive because of supply and demand and they still suck a$$.

 

pwned

[carpandean]

Wouldnt you rather pay for the better team? Or would you rather have a mediocre team and choose the games you can afford to go to? Hey theres something to be said for being able to goto any game you want..The last year of the Rigas administration I went to 30 home games free..The 5 years prior i had 3 seasons in 110 row 11 seats 11-13 paid out the rear and didnt have near as much fun when I went for free (because it was thier dollar not mine)..But I would still have rather had to pay more per ticket and watcha Stanley Cup Contender than go for free and watch pathetic hockey..Extremes I know but serves the same..

 

Bad management is still why they are where they are..Do you think if they still had Drury,Brierre Grier Mckee that we would be dealing with variable pricing? I doubt it..They wouldve had a whole lot more success and charged ya more for the whole ball of wax which I wouldnt care..I would pony up for that..I have no problem paying more for a great team.BUt to charge me more for a mediocre team playing decent teams on a weekend is funny at best..

Still missing my point. They are separate issues. Whether or not you pay more and possibly (though, obviously not necessarily) put a better team on the ice, variable pricing is still smarter. It gives you a way to increase revenues and, at the same time, allows fans that would otherwise not be able to afford a game the opportunity to see one, even if it is on a weekday verses a WC team. If you feel they need to pay for a better team, fine, but that's even harder to do under a fixed price scheme, you would lock some fans out from seeing games and you would be giving Toronto/Montreal fans cheaper seats in our house.

[BetweenThePipes00]

The Sabres are not the only team that does this. Pittsburgh has been doing it going back when they sucked, it was just based on the night of the week and not on certain teams. More teams SHOULD do it ... if Nashville offered Bronze and Value games, they would not be playing to 10,000 people on weeknights.

 

Sten, if you are not not paying to go to the games because you do not think they are worthy, isn't that like someone who doesn't drink complaining about the price of beer? That's why I said it is complaining for the sake of complaining.

Good thing all the fans of the 26 or so teams who aren't going to contend for the Cup don't think like you, the league would fold before Christmas.

[stenbaro]

You constantly use the word I. What about everyone else in the city who would like to take their kids to game? Don't YOU think it is easier for them to go to a game that is less expensive than not go at all? Or is it always about you?

I cant speak for you can I???Its my opinion..You have yours..Maybe you like the variable pricing..If so good for you..You have your reasons..I am not belittling you for your opinion I was merely defending my own..

[stenbaro]

pwned

How was the Foo FIghters last night?