just got mine, last month had hoped to move down several rows in ... but during the week have been fearing how much higher esp as I watched the rows fill in ... same row over a section. had allocated more of the IFund to football - wishing I had done the opposite and could have selected Mon/Tues
Men's Basketball Reseating
- Status
Illini2010-11
- Sugar Grove
It does not work this way. Seat selection is based upon donor tier and point ranking within that tier. What you are suggesting would not have made one iota of a difference. Your allocation to the IFund for football carries over to basketball by nature in terms of donor tier.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
User name does not check out.So I was completely wrong about the reseating. Previously, I made an I Fund contribution and was able to get two seats. Could not understand a business model that would allow one contribution and get 10 seats. But now an I Fund contribution is required per seat.
The I Fund contribution I made got me in line to pick…and when I picked it charged me for another I Fund payment.
Now I understand how the DIA business model is very profitable. I went up one level in I Fund but actually quadrupled my I Fund contribution…for seats higher up.
Oh well, it’s really good basketball.
Yes, basically right outside the doors to 242
I didn't really care about football. My old seats were in a non-priority area so I used none of my points, and managed to improve my seats slightly in section 124, and that left me with all of my priority seats for basketball. Didn't use much of them there either when I picked on Monday, as my priority was to stay in sections at least comparable to 242-244 and in first 6 rows, I ended up with same vantage point as my old tickets, 1 row lower, 1 seat further in, and those 2 tickets used up $300 of my $1000 I Fund donation.
That's not how it works, your Club level, determined by your IFund contribution establishes the pecking order, for example Oskee at $2500 picks before Champion at $1000, and your total priority points for all your years of tickets purchases and donations determine when you get to pick within your club level. The only thing your using some of your priority points on football affected was which seats in Assembly Hall you still had the points for, such as $150, $300, $500 or
That's not how it works, your Club level, determined by your IFund contribution establishes the pecking order, for example Oskee at $2500 picks before Champion at $1000, and your total priority points for all your years of tickets purchases and donations determine when you get to pick within your club level. The only thing your using some of your priority points on football affected was which seats in Assembly Hall you still had the points for, such as $150, $300, $500 or
Last edited:
Correct. The only affect would be that when his turn did come he wouldn't have those points used on football for the basketball. So he might have not have had enough left to get tickets in a section requiring $500 I Fund each, or $300, etc.
Are you thinking of still doing this? Have we heard if they are close to the end of the selection process?
I was waiting for the selection process to end. I thought I saw it was going to take a month. If anyone is still waiting for their selection date, please state when it is. If no one says they are still waiting, or someone knows the actual end date has passed, I'll put up the survey later this week.
My reason for delaying is not knowing how anonymous surveys work on this site. A non-anonymous survey shows how each person voted. Does an anonymous survey (a) show who voted but not how, or (b) not show who voted, including to the survey writer? If (a), then putting up the survey too early, gives information about donation amounts.
I wrote out some polls and discovered a few things. First, there is a limit on the number of answers to a poll, so I'd have to split it into multiple polls to get any useful sort of data. Second, when I looked at the polls (I wrote out 3), they were not answering the question of "How much is do you need to donate to get each type of seat." The donation ranges were too coarse.
@Dan : Are you okay with me creating one poll for each "category" of seat?
A poll would look like:
The best seat I could pick was a Lower 100 (light blue) seat. I donated toward each basketball seat:
20k+
15-19.9k+
10-14.9k+
9-9.9k
8-8.9k
7-7.9k
6-6.9k
5-5.9k
The range of donations asked about would vary based on the seat quality.
The 8 categories I'd use are:
Lower 100 (light blue)
Lower part of upper 100 (light green)
Lower 200 (pink) / Upper upper 100 (light green) [I'd take the first ~5 rows of lower pink seats over the upper light green]
Mid 200 sideline (red)
Higher 200 sideline (dark green)
Higher 200 baseline (dark green)
Upper 200 side/baseline (dark blue)
Upper 200 side/baseline (tan)
@Dan : Are you okay with me creating one poll for each "category" of seat?
A poll would look like:
The best seat I could pick was a Lower 100 (light blue) seat. I donated toward each basketball seat:
20k+
15-19.9k+
10-14.9k+
9-9.9k
8-8.9k
7-7.9k
6-6.9k
5-5.9k
The range of donations asked about would vary based on the seat quality.
The 8 categories I'd use are:
Lower 100 (light blue)
Lower part of upper 100 (light green)
Lower 200 (pink) / Upper upper 100 (light green) [I'd take the first ~5 rows of lower pink seats over the upper light green]
Mid 200 sideline (red)
Higher 200 sideline (dark green)
Higher 200 baseline (dark green)
Upper 200 side/baseline (dark blue)
Upper 200 side/baseline (tan)
I can get tickets today. I have had Football for 10 years. I am new to season tickets for Basketball.
Dan
Admin
Hi grue2, 1 poll is fine for this topic, anything more is a bit beyond the scope of this board. Sounds like you have detailed polling in mind which is probably beyond the function of polls here, perhaps an online service (I don't know, perhaps such as Google Forms or SurveyMonkey) where it can be created in greater detail & you could drop the link into this thread. Go Illini
So noted. I don't have access to the tools to do this, so I'll post the idea here and see if someone else wants to pick it up.
I think a grid survey would be the most compact away to gather the data. People would select one intersection in the grid corresponding to the best seat they had an option of choosing (row) and the amount donated for basketball (column).
The down axis is the quality of seat. I'd suggest:
Lower 100 (light blue)
Lower part of upper 100 (light green)
Lower 200 (pink) / Upper upper 100 (light green) [I'd take the first ~5 rows of lower pink seats over the upper light green]
Mid 200 sideline (red)
Higher 200 sideline (dark green)
Higher 200 baseline (dark green)
Upper 200 side/baseline (dark blue)
Upper 200 side/baseline (tan)
The across axis is the amount donated for basketball. I'd suggest:
20k+
15k
10k
8k
6k
5k
4k
2.5k
2.4k
2k
1k
800
600
500
400
300
100
75
It seems like a lot of different ranges. I tried to select values that would let people know what it took to get each range of seat.
Silence...
If someone with a Google account is interested in doing this, I can walk them through the survey creation. Direct message me and we can set up a time to do it together. All you need is the account and the desire to help. I expect it will take ~30m (It takes 10m if you know how to do it.)
Illini2010-11
- Sugar Grove
As a person who has spent over a decade working in survey research, I would anticipate very low-quality results to come from this exercise (primarily because too much time has elapsed since many of us have selected our seats...anticipate that most will not remember exact areas where seats were still available). Not to mention that your sample size from IL will not necessarily be reflective of the season ticket holder/donor universe.
I will say that when I selected my seats, I was still able to get upper level center court seats that required a $300 donation per seat, which was more than I had allocated going into the process. That meant that seats were available in levels above my donation level. What I found is that a lot of better seats in the sections that did not require annual seat contributions were filling up fast. This meant that donors were actually technically going down a tier of seat for what they perceived to be better quality seats i.e., lower rows in what you have previously called "junk seats". My seats from last year were on the aisle in row 3 of a section that did not require an annual seat contribution -- my seats were long gone and the best I could do was move back a few rows. At that point, I found it better bang for the buck to pay more and sit further rows back but at center court (still think my old seats were better quality though when accounting for row number and price). Not sure how my experiences would exactly fit into your proposed survey model.
Given how far out we are now from when the bulk of seat selection was made, I think your best bet is a very short survey seeking out the satisfaction of the seat selection process and asking if you were able to sit in an area you wanted going into the process. You are likely to get more stable results staying more high level than something more granular like you are requesting, IMO.
I agree my proposal will not be high fidelity. I do think it will work. Here is why I think it will work better than a satisfaction survey.
One of the rules for surveys is that it should clearly answer the question of interest, including what actions, if any, should be taken. This group cared about "What do I need to pay to get a chance at seat X." I don't see "Are you satisfied with the process" answering this clearly. It may give a very, very hand wavy answer if one assumes that satisfaction equates to people getting the seats they wanted for their donation. It doesn't tell people if they could have paid less, or if they could have gotten substantially better seats if they had paid just a bit more. It doesn't distinguish "I liked the process" (smoothly run) from "I could associate cost to seats."
My intuition (a risk) is that people on this forum care enough about the seats that they will remember their choices as it was an important event for them. It would give a rough correlation between donation paid and availability of seats.
Does this sound reasonable? Do you have an alternate survey that will try to answer the price/seat question?
Tangent:
I too have done formal survey work as trying to get useful input to the engineers. We found that satisfaction score surveys were of very limited value to engineering. A low satisfaction score meant there were issues. What issues? Who knows. If the satisfaction was high, there was pretty much no correlation between whether there were issues or not. For training, we found that satisfaction mapped to they enjoyed the class (content/format/teacher), not whether they actually learned, or if it was a subject of importance to their job. The only value was in identifying poor teachers compared to the others teaching the same material, or A/B testing the teaching of the same content in two different formats.
Illini2010-11
- Sugar Grove
My apologies, I could not remember exactly the question you were trying to answer with the survey and looped it together with seeing people complaining about not getting the seats they wanted.
Looking at the question correctly now, the short answer...no. I do not think there is a survey that could be given to this forum that would provide an adequate n that would be able to answer the question you pose. Only the DIA would have the full data to answer that question. However, if you were able to secure enough respondents that were representative of the season ticket universe, then, theoretically an approach similar to yours would be sound. My concern is that the response pool of only this thread would be too limited to be of use (an example being only 400 respondents to the simple Team Grade poll when the season ended...the pool would be much smaller here), coupled in with the elapsed time.
I guess if this were still something that was worth pursuing, I think having a poll to see the number of people that would be willing to fill out the survey would be the first step, and an anonymous way of seeing the count broken down by donation tier. If you are unable to get a sufficient number willing to take the survey, then I would think it is futile to put in the effort to spend time creating the survey.
My thoughts:
1) I can help someone set up the survey I proposed above in 30m. Doing a pre-survey to see if it is worth doing a survey. Seems overkill for that.
2) I don't think we need that many data points. We are looking for rough edges. The right 8-10 data points would answer the question. 100 data points scattered across the range should get fairly good approximations.
3) I agree that the DIA is the only one with the real data. They maximize profits by keeping the numbers hidden.
4) The grid format I chose above was an attempt to make it a single question survey that was easy to understand. If you have a better form, I'm all ears. I tried and threw out several other survey forms. They were all harder on the survey taker (more error prone) and gave no more information.
- Status