What? Why should I have to overcome fixable inconveniences? You just don't get it. There are a myriad of reasons why the attendance has shrunk 40% in eight years. The concessions at both the XL and Gampel may not be a "deal breaker" but they are a contributing factor that is easily fixed, just as easily as lower parking rates, more friendly and helpful security, seats with backs, and lower ticket prices.
You seem to be of the belief that if attendance is what it is, and the bottom line won't increase by making the games a more pleasant experience, let it be.
I am sorry that I am not making myself clear. I am not saying attendance is what it is. I am saying that attendance could definitely be improved, but that these inconveniences are not the problem. Sure, it would be nice to fix those things, but fixing them will not improve attendance. That's not what makes people make the choice to go to a game or stay home. The concessions and seat backs were the same when every night was a sell out. The only difference is that now they are an excuse.
I am saying that a smart, focused and consistent marketing effort over time will increase attendance because people will see value and develop a desire to go see the game in person. That is what fills seats. If people perceive that seeing a UConn women's game live is an enjoyable, worthwhile, cool, got-to-have experience, they will go. That desire overcomes these inconveniences.
Case in point? Ticket prices (one of your "fixable" factors) were cut in half this year, yet the attendance slide continues.
Here's another way to look at it ... the millions of Connecticut residents who have never attended a UConn game don't know about the seats or the pretzel prices, the parking or the security people. They never cared enough about attending a game to find out. Every successful business needs to actively recruit new customers. That is what will fill seats.