Revised Seat Equity Plan now Delayed until Next Year

[TDXRamsFan]

First off, let me apologize to anyone who read my posts earlier this month about what was told to me during my meeting with the AD staff. I posted what I was told.

Now I will add to what I said then- I implored them NOT to do a reseating this year. Many of the arguments I read here were things I, and others, mentioned to them as reasons not to do this. They explained their reasons, but I just don't get it.

For those who don't know me, let me tell you a bit:

We have had season tickets since 1985, after attending with a student on a student ID for two years before that.
We are Capital Campaign member, so 2 of our seats are safe, no matter what they do. We have two others that are subject to reseating.
I was on the original reseating committee.
We are mid-level donors, even though we don't have to be. We give more than what is required for CC members.
I did not get the e-mail this morning. I don't know why. That was one of the original purposes of my meeting with the members of the AD.

This reseating is not necessary. I was told the same stuff others were told, that this is some way they think donors at all levels will be able to upgrade their seats. They told me this was based on conversations with donors who were complaining about the last reseating. I'd love to know who these donors are.

Then it struck me- Just who, and at what donor levels, are these people they were talking to? One of the problems we talked about at length was the need for them to reach out to donors at ALL levels. I see that the responses people got today mentioned a couple groups where they claim they got advice from were the Athletics Advisory Board and the Ram Athletic Fund Board. I asked then, and I ask now- How representative are those two groups of the entire fan base? That, I fear, is the problem. If they are only talking to people who they select from the top donors, what do you expect those people to tell them?

If the problem is as they said, they have a lot of empty seats and a lot of people who want better seats, why not do this:

1. Ask those who what to upgrade to let them know they want to upgrade.
2. Rank this group by Ram Ranking.
3. If you want to upgrade, your current seats go into the unfilled pool.
3. Let people pick new seats from the pool of unfilled seats, in Ram Ranking order.
4. Everyone keeps their seats until the REGULAR re-seating comes due in 2024 (4 years from last).

I call this the You Pick'em Plan. You pick to keep your current seats or you pick new ones. This way the best seats get bought up and hopefully filled up.

One more thing I like to make clear. This is my understanding of the current tax laws. If there are any tax experts out there, feel free to correct me, if I'm wrong.

When VCU started to separate your donation into a seat fee ($250) and a charitable donation, it was because a change in the tax laws that excluded charitable donations that were connected to seating rights. Now that they have done away with the seat fee, and everything will be the same, and if seat location will be based on that donor level, you will lose the entire donation as a charitable donation. This is the reason they can't tie donations to seat locations (like in the little chart they did). My bet is a lot of those "big" donors would hate to lose that donation each year.

The email was in my spam folder as it was for a couple other posters.

 

[Ram14]

The email was in my spam folder as it was for a couple other posters.

It was also in my spam folder. As to taxes, I kinda remember that if there was a $ level required to purchase your seats then take that away from your donation total and the remainder is deductible. Example: Donation required $1000 and you give $2500 then you can claim $1500. There were no side benefits this year such as The Commonwealth Room or Founders Room so the entire donation part would be eligible outside of the fee. That's my off the cuff.

As to the reseating, I think there was a need, but also think the timing is not great. I look at the elimination of the fee as a positive thing and would rather freely give that same money to the fund rather than be forced.

 

[Hoos A Ram]

I was told this evening that the seating chart is just for guidance and that when it is your time to select seats you will be able to select any available seat regardless of which section it is in. If that ends up being the case then everyone will end up with similar or better seats. They want people to donate the amount shown on the seating chart to guarantee those seats, but apparently it will not be required if those seats are still available when it is your time to select seats. Hopefully that is how it will work out and this was just a massive communication failure. For a lot of ticket holders the damage has already been done though.

We're playing by the pirate code now? More guidelines than rules?

 

[VCU Finance 2008]

First off, let me apologize to anyone who read my posts earlier this month about what was told to me during my meeting with the AD staff. I posted what I was told.

Now I will add to what I said then- I implored them NOT to do a reseating this year. Many of the arguments I read here were things I, and others, mentioned to them as reasons not to do this. They explained their reasons, but I just don't get it.

For those who don't know me, let me tell you a bit:

We have had season tickets since 1985, after attending with a student on a student ID for two years before that.
We are Capital Campaign member, so 2 of our seats are safe, no matter what they do. We have two others that are subject to reseating.
I was on the original reseating committee.
We are mid-level donors, even though we don't have to be. We give more than what is required for CC members.
I did not get the e-mail this morning. I don't know why. That was one of the original purposes of my meeting with the members of the AD.

This reseating is not necessary. I was told the same stuff others were told, that this is some way they think donors at all levels will be able to upgrade their seats. They told me this was based on conversations with donors who were complaining about the last reseating. I'd love to know who these donors are.

Then it struck me- Just who, and at what donor levels, are these people they were talking to? One of the problems we talked about at length was the need for them to reach out to donors at ALL levels. I see that the responses people got today mentioned a couple groups where they claim they got advice from were the Athletics Advisory Board and the Ram Athletic Fund Board. I asked then, and I ask now- How representative are those two groups of the entire fan base? That, I fear, is the problem. If they are only talking to people who they select from the top donors, what do you expect those people to tell them?

If the problem is as they said, they have a lot of empty seats and a lot of people who want better seats, why not do this:

1. Ask those who what to upgrade to let them know they want to upgrade.
2. Rank this group by Ram Ranking.
3. If you want to upgrade, your current seats go into the unfilled pool.
3. Let people pick new seats from the pool of unfilled seats, in Ram Ranking order.
4. Everyone keeps their seats until the REGULAR re-seating comes due in 2024 (4 years from last).

I call this the You Pick'em Plan. You pick to keep your current seats or you pick new ones. This way the best seats get bought up and hopefully filled up.

One more thing I like to make clear. This is my understanding of the current tax laws. If there are any tax experts out there, feel free to correct me, if I'm wrong.

When VCU started to separate your donation into a seat fee ($250) and a charitable donation, it was because a change in the tax laws that excluded charitable donations that were connected to seating rights. Now that they have done away with the seat fee, and everything will be the same, and if seat location will be based on that donor level, you will lose the entire donation as a charitable donation. This is the reason they can't tie donations to seat locations (like in the little chart they did). My bet is a lot of those "big" donors would hate to lose that donation each year.

I believe the tax laws and a portion of the donation being deductible is still a work in progress. I was told that they received guidance from the University and have found a workaround for that and that a portion will be deductible. I don't know what that could be though.

 

[fmrick]

The email was in my spam folder as it was for a couple other posters.

I'm smart enough to know to check my spam file. Al Gore and I invented the internet.

 

[VCU Finance 2008]

Not a business major but demand decreasing with supply increasing but price also increasing doesn’t make much sense.

This AD had it pretty simple coming in. Everything was great, set, and handed right on over. All you have to do is maintain and we were headed to the moon. Shaka leaving he couldn’t help but man don’t mess with what made this place so special.

I was a business major and I can confirm that that is not the way it was explained in my $200 textbook either. It feels like they are trying to squeeze donors but have no leverage to do so. People see the empty seats and they know what is available on the secondary market.

 

[VCU Finance 2008]

He never got the culture and is replacing the voracious fan base with a donor base of new money and corporate sponsorship.

The problem (for them) is that they're not replacing those fans with new money or corporate sponsorship. Corporate interest is declining as well along with casual and diehard fans.

 

[fmrick]

I believe the tax laws and a portion of the donation being deductible is still a work in progress. I was told that they received guidance from the University and have found a workaround for that and that a portion will be deductible. I don't know what that could be though.

As long as they will come to the IRS with me stand by their advice.

My point is, IF THEY USE THE CHART, then anyone giving at each level will be required to subtract that amount from their deduction. So, if a donor gives $3,000, and get seats in the $2,500-4,999, they would have to subtract the minimum amount for that level from the charitable donation, $3,000-$2,500=$500. And someone giving at $10,000 would stand to lose a big cut of that donation.

 

[VCU Finance 2008]

As long as they will come to the IRS with me stand by their advice.

That they will not do. Every new plan they come up with regarding the tax deductions says to consult your tax professional. Schools all over the country have tried to figure out loopholes to get around the new tax laws, but to this point I am not sure that any of them have come up with anything that would be 100% legit. It will be interesting to hear what they have come up with this time. I am not so sure that I would want to test those waters though.

 

[duncanlamb]

Rao and Ed are doing their best impression of Dan snyder of "how to f#ck up a sports brand".

 

[theyaintwantit]

Rao and Ed are doing their best impression of Dan snyder of "how to f#ck up a sports brand".

Rao and Ed should NEVER be mentioned in the same sentence as Dan Snyder.

I question some of the decisions by both our President and AD, but they definitely enjoy winning and we have multiple winning athletic programs. Dan Snyder does not care about winning.

 

[VCU74]

Rao and Ed should NEVER be mentioned in the same sentence as Dan Snyder.

I question some of the decisions by both our President and AD, but they definitely enjoy winning and we have multiple winning athletic programs. Dan Snyder does not care about winning.

Holy h3!!, so much this.

 

[MattRock]

I can’t believe it has almost been 24 hours and no one has been able to get a straight answer on if at your current donor level you can select seats in a higher donor level at selection time.

 

[xjohnx]

This is from the second reseating. I'm sure the last brochure had similar/identical language but it's filed away at home, so in the meantime I'll just leave this here.

We still maintaining fairness, or nah?

 

[AlienAiden]

I can’t believe it has almost been 24 hours and no one has been able to get a straight answer on if at your current donor level you can select seats in a higher donor level at selection time.

Or simply have an opportunity to keep the same seats. There cannot be enough donors in each level to warrant this reseating. I would like to know how many donors per level for the last two seasons . Is that secret information?

This is from the second reseating. I'm sure the last brochure had similar/identical language but it's filed away at home, so in the meantime I'll just leave this here.

We still maintaining fairness, or nah?