HuskiesFan1014
Let your Candle shine brightly!
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,598
- Reaction Score
- 8,248
Yup. He said Asians and Indians. Thanks for the shadeUm, Indians are Asians, too.
Yup. He said Asians and Indians. Thanks for the shadeUm, Indians are Asians, too.
You're missing the point. There's nothing scary about people deciding not to accumulate things, and instead choosing to experience things. I wouldn't call that scary, I'd call it encouraging.I am not thinking of Garbage Pail Kids cards. I am thinking of actual savings.
Not everyone collects junk, either.
If you're for dystopia, enjoy.You're missing the point. There's nothing scary about people deciding not to accumulate things, and instead choosing to experience things. I wouldn't call that scary, I'd call it encouraging.
He said Asian-Indians. You're welcome.Yup. He said Asians and Indians. Thanks for the shade
From what I've observed, not selling the frat environment is a bigger problem than selling it. They have made too much of an effort to accomodate people beyond the targeted demographic (students), and as a result they've undermined the appeal of attending live events at all. How many stadiums now have luxury boxes or member areas where you can insulate yourself from the rest of the crowd? They've taken something that was attractive due in large part to discomfort and re-created your living room...and then they wonder why people aren't coming to the games.
The lack of diversity is a symptom of backwards thinking, and it's always been overly simplistic to think that minorities aren't coming to games because they don't identify with a party atmosphere or frat culture. They reject the bad parts about those things, sure, but the real reason they don't attend - as someone else mentioned - is because they don't think it's socially convenient to do so. It's not an aversion to fun, it's an aversion to exclusion. In other words, any marketing department that asks what they can do to get minorities to attend games is bound to miss the underlying issue, which is that everyone wants to have as much fun as the person that's having the most fun. You don't accomplish that by then making it less fun for everybody.
Older people are not immune to having a good time either. That doesn't mean they're going to act like 20-year-olds, but it means they'd probably prefer a more controlled version of whatever the students are experiencing. To the extent that the short-term corporate solution to these problems is always to pull back on what they think people can handle is counteracted, and then some, by depleting your customer base long-term. Not only are you puncturing the spirits of your most vocal fans, but you're also costing yourself the most valuable recruiting tool a business can have.
By no means do I want to rev a crowd up to the point that it's impeding the enjoyment of those who want to observe peacefully, but making the overall experience less desirable as a way to attract new people is almost certainly a losing philosophy. Better to communicate the appeals of inclusivity to your core base than make a zero sum game out of something where the high tide raises all boats.
What the actual .... are you talking about?If you're for dystopia, enjoy.
No one said those who have wealth don't experience things. As a matter of fact, they are likely to be able to afford to experience more.
Possessions does not equal collectibles. Holy cow.What the actual .... are you talking about?
This has nothing to do with wealth. People buying less stuff and traveling more is a good thing. What exactly do you find scary about that?
........
No more from me on this topic.
This is so true. I’m in my early 20s. Besides students there aren’t any young people buying single game or season tickets. It’s a huge problem.
Really? Even if I offered each of them $250? (for entertainment purposes only)I couldn’t get my friends to go to a UConn football game if I paid them. Literally.
Really? Even if I offered each of them $250? (for entertainment purposes only)
Investments are not materials. The comment was that people aren't as materialistic as they used to be. The point I made was that there's nothing scary about choosing to travel instead of acquiring materials...things...not investments...nobody said anything about investments. You're literally making this crap up as you go along to avoid defending an idiotic post instead of just acknowledging that there's nothing "scary" about choosing to travel instead of buying more stuff that will sit in your house. This has nothing to do with investing. Please do tap out because once again you're making yourself look the fool.Possessions does not equal collectibles. Holy cow.
Ever hear of investing? People make money on possessions. It's called capitalism. Earns them money to travel more. God Almighty.
As of 2016, 15% of Americans have $10k or more saved. I guess it's better to blow money travelling.
No more from me on this topic.