I noticed you didn't quote me. I wonder if it's because what you wrote is nowhere near what I said. I said the benefit should either be extended to each ticket holder, or the season ticket holder should have the choose of refusal. In other words (that makes sense), The account holder would get 8 hats - 1 for each ticket - and distribute 7 to the other ticket holders or the other 7 people would indicate to the account holder their ambivalence toward the reward and he would only request a number less than the due allotment.
Agree with this 100 percent. That would be the best scenario. But the account holder getting something is way better than the account holder getting nothing. My biggest dispute with you is about "who" a season ticket holder is. I contend you aren't one, because the school has no idea who you are (in the context of tickets anyway).
Not really picking up what you're putting down. Are you suggesting that any of the account holders who act as point person for their group eat the cost of the donation per ticket out of the kindness of his heart? Or are you suggesting that the donation is only compelled on the account? Those are the only two scenarios in which your post makes the remotest bit of sense (I have no knowledge of the high-roller at Gampel deal, as I am neither a high roller, nor Gampel season ticket holder). If it's the former, I want to meet those people so I can butter them up and get $100 off the cost of my weekend entertainment for 6-7 Autumn Saturdays. The latter scenario hasn't existed since UConn began playing at Rentschler. A donation has always been required on each ticket purchased. The account holder we go through isn't even a UConn Alum and probably couldn't care much less about being recognized as a donor.
When you get to the wealthier ticket holders? In my experience that's exactly how it is. When you get to real money, someone isn't going to say "I'm going to buy tickets, but you need to give me $500/ticket" - the wealthy donor is going to give $5/$10/$15K to the AD anyway, and the ticket donation only serves to reduce his pledge. BTW I buy 6 - my sister pays for 2, and 2 go empty most games. I don't ask anything for them from anyone that uses them generally, and in the off chance I do, I don't ask for the pro-rata portion of the seat donation.
And donations AREN'T required for all seats at Rentschler.
"All Club, Chairback and Preferred season ticket orders require an annual seat donation (per seat)."
There are lots of seats (in a stadium where there are no bad seats) where donations aren't required. So you could all sit together and save $100/seat - you could also probably each buy your own season ticket in a non-preferred area and sit together anyway, and each accrue your own account holder benefits.
And THIS is the only point I'm really making. The system is how the system is.
If you want to sit with your friends? Sit with your friends.
If you want account holder benefits? Buy tickets under your own name.
I'm all about the account holder getting benefits for every seat that he/she buys, but that isn't the way the world works. Today is better than yesterday, and I'm hoping tomorrow is better than today. So as long as it isn't getting worse, I'm not going to complain.