A seat donation is part of the season ticket package what are you talking about it has nothing to do with ad hoc donations. As noted the lower bowl around mid court go for $800 a season. The donation goes down as the seats get worse obviously, but it's non zero. That's a big part of this picture that is ignored.
You're now switching the argument and moving goalposts. Nobody is arguing that they take home is less at the civic center than Gampel. My position is that the school isn't public with the full picture and that being in Hartford has other benefits that serve to benefit UConn.
I’ve been entirely consistent, but you’ve meandered a bit moving from unquantified political considerations to unquantified economic considerations to unquantified savings earnings to the University.
It may be a typo, but you said no one is arguing that they take home less at the Civic Center than it Gampel. I am, that’s exactly the issue.
I haven’t said that seat donations are irrelevant, I just don’t have the numbers. Without them, I can’t comment on the meaningfully. That hasn’t stopped you referencing them vaguely, and that’s fine, but there’s no way for me to account for them one way or the other. As I’ve offered to repeatedly, if you can actually get that info, I’ll work it into my calculations and whatever they say, they say. But right now, it’s all speculative.
I’m pretty confident the school is relatively transparent with this information. You would just have to do a deep dive through the financials if you really that interested in it.
Oh, there’s not a doubt in my mind that there are some, currently unquantifiable, intangible benefits to playing in Hartford. There is also no doubt in my mind that there are some, currently unquantifiable, benefits, to playing in Storrs. Weighing the pros and cons of them is a practical impossibility until the unquantifiable becomes quantified. The fact that you “believe” that the value of being in Hartford outweighs, the value of playing in Storrs is all well and good, but just not particularly meaningful to this conversation.
All that said, somehow you’re locked in to the notion that the university must pay a premium to rent the XL Center. That is not etched in stone. There’s not a reason in the world why a quasi public entity should be price gouging the University and nothing that you’ve said is a valid argument for why it should.
At this point, it’s kind of pointless for you to reply back to say “But but but there are numbers that I don’t know that I’m sure would make a difference if I knew them but I don’t, but if I did, they would help support the meandering point I’m trying to make.” But if you want to feel free. I won’t respond because it’s readily apparent that this back-and-forth is going nowhere.
