PSL Pricing/Seat Selection Discussion

[mrags]

33 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

This is not necessarily true. I had PSLs at a stadium in another city and only had the rights to the seats for football. The Pegulas can make other events part of the PSL package - or not. It is 100% up to them.

 

Functionally it doesn’t make much sense to tie PSL holders to their seats anyway. One issue is that some seats won’t even be used for concerts as they’d be behind the stage. Also additional seats would be added for an event like that and other seats would be in much better or worse locations than for football. It’s easier to just allow PSL owners to buy the seats they want before the general public. 

Well. In the Pegulas case it is true. I’m currently have clubs. I currently pay for a PSL. And I currently receive options to buy tickets to concerts prior to the general public. And yes you are correct, you don’t necessarily keep your seats in the clubs for events. You just have the option to purchase seats before anyone else.  

[Einstein]

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Bruh, I promise that you don’t want to do this. 😂😂😂

 

Ok, guess you weren’t done. Let’s see how many more emojis and memes I can squeeze out of you.

 

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

You’re hung up on the PSL part. It’s okay that you don’t understand how it works. It’s a fee, PAID BY THOSE PLANNING TO CONSUME THE PRODUCT, for the right to purchase tickets, to offset some of the costs, that the private party incurs. So to be clear, you’re upset that THE PEOPLE CONSUMING THE PRODUCT are paying a fee for the right to buy a ticket to consume that product? Don’t you pay a fee on every single ticket that you buy? Isn’t that fee the right to buy a ticket? 

 

You have a clear misunderstanding of my feelings in this debate and of the debate itself. In fact, you have misunderstood much of this conversation because you didn’t understand the context of the post you were replying to when you entered the conversation.

 

I fully understand how PSL’s work and I agree that people have the right to purchase them. That is not the debate here.

 

The debate here is whether PSL’s are the “norm” in entertainment.

 

They are not.

 

Which is why you can’t list the theatres, concerts, magician acts, etc that require them, in addition to being taxpayer funded. 

 

They are the norm in sports, most pressingly football and soccer (europe), but they are not the norm in entertainment. Or business. Which is what this conversation that you entered without understanding the context was about.

 

If people want to purchase PSL’s, great. Go for it. But that’s not the conversation.

 

I also yell at the taxpayer funded cloud too.

[Just Jack]

41 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

The Bills knew very on in the process that even in the worse years you'd still fill out a 63k capacity stadium for almost all the games.  It's one of the main reasons it's not 72k like we have now.  That and more room for luxury boxes.  The outdoor stadium decision still baffles me though.  This has pry been covered before but how hard would it be to eventually put a roof on it?

 

I know it was brought up long ago, and I think @SoCal Deek will correct me if I'm wrong, but my opinion was that if they were smart they would add structure now just in case they decide to add a roof later.  SoCal, I think, had a reason why they would not do that now, but I can't remember what it was. 

Edited March 29 by Just Jack

[mrags]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Lol, somebody come get your son. I can’t do this any longer…

[mrags]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Bruh, I promise that you don’t want to do this. 😂😂😂

 

There are a bazillion venues that are owned by the public. That’s the tax money part.

 

They all charge for tickets to events. You putting that on the list is hilarious. Like, “oh yeah, which of these venues CHAAARRRRRRGES for their tickets, smart guy?” 

 

You’re hung up on the PSL part. It’s okay that you don’t understand how it works. It’s a fee, PAID BY THOSE PLANNING TO CONSUME THE PRODUCT, for the right to purchase tickets, to offset some of the costs, that the private party incurs. So to be clear, you’re upset that THE PEOPLE CONSUMING THE PRODUCT are paying a fee for the right to buy a ticket to consume that product? Don’t you pay a fee on every single ticket that you buy? Isn’t that fee the right to buy a ticket? 
 

Lastly, why are you mad that those people that elect to buy tickets are charged a PSL? Shouldn’t you be more angry that tax money from people that may not care is being used to build this place? That feels like the cloud that you should be yelling at. 

I got into an argument with someone on the FB group yesterday. (God I hope you’re here, because you're an idiot) he was complaining at first that he would be priced out of seats. I asked what section he sits in and he complained that had nothing to do with it. So I probed a little more. He wouldn’t tell me his seats. Then all the sudden he goes on a rant about how the stadium is being built mostly with tax payer money and we shouldn’t have to pay PSLs. He still wouldn’t tell me what section he was in. So I did a little Facebook stalking. And this kid didn’t even live here. He had no base whatsoever to complain about tax payer dollars. And I know plenty of people that travel quite a ways to come to games. But I doubt this kid was coming from Colorado every other weekend during the season to come to games. Which tells me he did not have season tickets, because if he’s got money to travel from Colorado 8 times a year he’s not worried about being priced out of games. He’s just butthurt that for the game or 2 a year that he comes to, he’s going to have to pay for even higher secondary prices. 
 

[Jrb1979]

3 hours ago, QCity said:

 

Where are you getting this information?

It's was on the Fans of Buffalo Facebook page. Here is the post. 

 

Controversy in Orchard Park! 

 

Pricing for the new stadium to be built is starting to leak out of the public. Seat licensing PER SEAT may cost you upwards of $20,000-$50,000. Don’t forget to have to purchase the actual game tickets which are increasing by at least 30%-45%. The Bills are certainly flexing their muscles as the biggest show in town but unfortunately to the dismay of Bills Mafia season ticket holders from what we’ve seen! What are your thoughts on these numbers Buffalo?

 

Edit: These prices are for season ticket holders who are currently located in the Pepsi Club at Highmark. Upper and Lower Level PSL pricing has not been released yet but we are hearing anywhere from $6K-$15K per PSL!

[ExiledInIllinois]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

The Bills knew very on in the process that even in the worse years you'd still fill out a 63k capacity stadium for almost all the games.  It's one of the main reasons it's not 72k like we have now.  That and more room for luxury boxes.  The outdoor stadium decision still baffles me though.  This has pry been covered before but how hard would it be to eventually put a roof on it?

Remember when Rich was 80,002.

49 minutes ago, Punching Bag said:

 

Chargers and Rams share a stadium.  PSLs for Chargers are not applicable to Rams games and vise versa.

One of the two stadium money makers,  true cash cowd in League along with MetLife in New Jersey.

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, Punching Bag said:

 

Chargers and Rams share a stadium.  PSLs for Chargers are not applicable to Rams games and vise versa.

 

What a scam.

[BobbyC81]

On 3/24/2024 at 7:31 AM, stuvian said:

Greed and gambling will eventually be this and other league's undoing. The Ohtani story is going to blow up in ways we haven't foreseen. 

 

Why would a working family prioritize a PSL over their kids education when the UFL offers something similar? 

You also have the NILs, while it wasn’t right for schools to solely benefit from players, ruining college sports.  

[Kirby Jackson]

9 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Ok, guess you weren’t done. Let’s see how many more emojis and memes I can squeeze out of you.

 

 

You have a clear misunderstanding of my feelings in this debate and of the debate itself. In fact, you have misunderstood much of this conversation because you didn’t understand the context of the post you were replying to when you entered the conversation.

 

I fully understand how PSL’s work and I agree that people have the right to purchase them. That is not the debate here.

 

The debate here is whether PSL’s are the “norm” in entertainment.

 

They are not.

 

Which is why you can’t list the theatres, concerts, magician acts, etc that require them, in addition to being taxpayer funded. 

 

They are the norm in sports, most pressingly football and soccer (europe), but they are not the norm in entertainment. Or business. Which is what this conversation that you entered without understanding the context was about.

 

If people want to purchase PSL’s, great. Go for it. But that’s not the conversation.

 

I also yell at the taxpayer funded cloud too.

I understood the PSL argument from the start. The part that I’m hung up on is why are you trying so hard to differentiate a PSL from any other ticketing fee that you pay as a “right to buy the ticket?” That’s obviously way more common when you’re talking about standalone events like a concert or show. You’re paying someone for the right to buy that seat. It’s the same thing. It just lines someone’s pockets as opposed to funding a portion of stadiums (although sometimes it does fund a portion of the stadium).

 

I guess the other part that I’m hung up on is, “why do you have an issue with PSLs when the people using the product are the one’s electing to purchase?”  I have 2 club seats and plan to continue in a similar capacity. It is my choice whether or not to continue. Do I want to pay a crazy amount for the right to buy two seats? Of course not!! I understand though, if I’m going to be using the stadium, it’s reasonable to expect me to contribute more than someone not using it. 
 

I get that you don’t want to pay your PSL. None of us do. There will be PSLs that are probably as low as $1000. If someone can’t afford that, with 10 years to finance, they probably shouldn’t be buying season tickets. That’s $10 a month(ish). Fortunately, we all have the choice to pay it or not. If we want to keep our tickets, that’s what it’s costs now.

Edited March 29 by Kirby Jackson

[plenzmd1]

5 hours ago, mrags said:

I got into an argument with someone on the FB group yesterday. (God I hope you’re here, because you're an idiot) he was complaining at first that he would be priced out of seats. I asked what section he sits in and he complained that had nothing to do with it. So I probed a little more. He wouldn’t tell me his seats. Then all the sudden he goes on a rant about how the stadium is being built mostly with tax payer money and we shouldn’t have to pay PSLs. He still wouldn’t tell me what section he was in. So I did a little Facebook stalking. And this kid didn’t even live here. He had no base whatsoever to complain about tax payer dollars. And I know plenty of people that travel quite a ways to come to games. But I doubt this kid was coming from Colorado every other weekend during the season to come to games. Which tells me he did not have season tickets, because if he’s got money to travel from Colorado 8 times a year he’s not worried about being priced out of games. He’s just butthurt that for the game or 2 a year that he comes to, he’s going to have to pay for even higher secondary prices. 
 

Hmm, I split 4 tickets with another guy, and he lives in Boulder. Makes just about every game. (Denver to Buffal direct!) but ain’t no way anyone calling that old bastard “ kid”!!!!

[PBF81]

This entire process is beyond fascinating.

 

Curious to see how it all shakes out.  

 

 

[PromoTheRobot]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I understood the PSL argument from the start. The part that I’m hung up on is why are you trying so hard to differentiate a PSL from any other ticketing fee that you pay as a “right to buy the ticket?” That’s obviously way more common when you’re talking about standalone events like a concert or show. You’re paying someone for the right to buy that seat. It’s the same thing. It just lines someone’s pockets as opposed to funding a portion of stadiums (although sometimes it does fund a portion of the stadium).

 

I guess the other part that I’m hung up on is, “why do you have an issue with PSLs when the people using the product are the one’s electing to purchase?”  have 2 club seats and plan to continue in a similar capacity. It is my choice whether or not to continue. Do I want to pay a crazy amount for the right to buy two seats? Of course not!! I understand though, if I’m going to be using the stadium, it’s reasonable to expect me to contribute more than someone not using it. 
 

I get that you don’t want to pay your PSL. None of us do. There will be PSLs that are probably as low as $1000. If someone can’t afford that, with 10 years to finance, they probably shouldn’t be buying season tickets. That’s $10 a month(ish). Fortunately, we all have the choice to pay it or not. If we want to keep our tickets, that’s what it’s costs now.

 

I knew this is what the Bills were heading for years ago and started putting away some money in anticipation. Now if the actual cost of those PSLs go beyond that amount I'm not sure what I'll do.

[mrags]

1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said:

Hmm, I split 4 tickets with another guy, and he lives in Boulder. Makes just about every game. (Denver to Buffal direct!) but ain’t no way anyone calling that old bastard “ kid”!!!!

There ain’t no way he’s complaining about being priced out if he’s got the money to travel all season long. Maybe complain about the increase in prices. But “priced out” I doubt it. 
 

and yeah, he was probably 30 years old at best.

[BobbyC81]

On 3/24/2024 at 2:30 PM, muppy said:

clearly the economic strata of people who watch and are entertained by the NFL is massive and crosses all social economic boundaries

 

for reasons many already stated, I think this is a NFL billionaires money grab to profit off of our absolute LOYALTY as Bills fans. The deep pocketed ones can

 

pay these PSL's and not really blink. And yes the Most expensive fees are for the very Best seats. I get all that.

 

so we paupers will scrimp for our bucket list one time appearance inside the new crib by making that choice.  I will do it. In a heart beat.

 

But asking people to buy a "License" for the "privilege" of being inside the stadium for season tickets?

 

I may be old school and cheap but to me that ain't right. at all. It's a pretty slickster move if you ask me.

And you can thank the late Al Davis for it.  The Raiders started this PSL crap when they moved back to Oakland from LA.

 

Then his son, Mr Bowl Haircut, leaves again to Vegas.

[mrags]

27 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

I knew this is what the Bills were heading for years ago and started putting away some money in anticipation. Now if the actual cost of those PSLs go beyond that amount I'm not sure what I'll do.

That’s about where I am. I just started saving for them last year really but already planning to have between 12-15k for seats by the time the stadium is built. I know I’ll have to make a decision before that, but the fact is I’ll have a pool to take from in the time being. Not sure if I’ll finance or pay it all up front. It’ll depend on the costs. I just moved my clubs closer to midfield so I’ll likely get a call a little quicker than I would have. It’s really going to depend on the cost. I want to renew in the new stadium but if I’m going to be all in for over 15k I’ll have to really think about it. 

[Royale with Cheese]

12 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

The PSL’s are the problem for most, so removing that comparable item necessarily removes the point of a comparison.

 

 

 

Posters really need to read and understand the context of a post or discussion before responding.

 

1) PSL’s = / = Ticket Fees.

 

2) No-one is arguing that this is not rare circumstance in sports. We all know billionaire owners made PSL’s common in sports. This discussion originated from saying that it is not common in general BUSINESS. An analogy was made to taxpayers not paying for the Taco Bell building, then paying to enter the building they paid for, then paying for the tacos themselves. That is what spawned the post you responded to.

 

PSL is a fee and we are talking specifically about additional fees to watch the game.  So yes, PSL is the major discussion of this but as my point still stands, you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand.  As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.  That just gets them in the door of the country club.

Does this membership fee include food, drinks, golf, tennis, swimming etc?  Nope, just gets you in the door to where you basically can hangout.

If you want to play golf, swim or other activities...another fee.  Guess what pays for the building?  The members.

 

My best friend and his wife do well and they're part of a country club and their set up is the same except their membership fees include the pool.

 

It happens in a much smaller setting than the NFL. 

Edited March 29 by Royale with Cheese

[MR8]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

PSL is a fee and we are talking specifically about additional fees to watch the game.  So yes, PSL is the major discussion of this but as my point still stands, you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand.  As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.  That just gets them in the door of the country club.

Does this membership fee include food, drinks, golf, tennis, swimming etc?  Nope, just gets you in the door to where you basically can hangout.

If you want to play golf, swim or other activities...another fee.  Guess what pays for the building?  The members.

 

My best friend and his wife do well and they're part of a country club and their set up is the same except their membership fees include the pool.

 

It happens in a much smaller setting than the NFL. 

 

Private membership in a club is kind of similar but also kind of different because you pay the initiation and then monthlies plus whatever else you do. Some clubs also have minimum spends per month.

 

I think PSLs are more comparable to timeshares, where you pay a large upfront fee (either lump sum or financed over time) for the right to then pay annually fees and maintenance on a property you never own, and in perpetuity you're stuck paying whatever they say.  You can use that property for a set amount of time based on what you paid, but in the end you're locked in and to use th timeshare you "bought", you must then also pay whatever they say. 

 

PSLs are that upfront fee for the right to then buy season tickets which the Bills can jack the price of whenever they want, and as a PSL owner, you're stuck paying it.  There technically is a market to sell your PSL and get out of the cycle, but much like timeshares it's not as easy and straightforward as it may sound.  

 

 

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

you pay fees for entertainment, there is just an extra one for football because of it's demand. 

 

That extra fee is why it’s not comparable to most other businesses (even in entertainment). The extra fee isn’t there for concerts, magician acts, car shows, etc etc etc.

 

That’s the entire point.

 

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

As someone who apparently runs a business, in this scenario, the business owners who have implemented these plans have seen growth....how is that not a successful business model?  

 

The growth has no correlation to the PSL. The PSL’s do not contribute to growth because they directly subsidize the stadium rather than the P/L of the team. This is what the owner of the team should be paying.

 

Not to mention, the NFL has seen consistent growth for over 100 years and PSL’s are a relatively new part of the equation, and for less than half the teams the majority of that time. The vast majority of growth is attributable to media rights.

 

1 hour ago, Royale with Cheese said:

The really high end country club across the street from me, members first have to pay an initiation fee which is a lot.  Then they have annual membership fees every year after that.

 

Was this Country Club paid for by taxpayers? If so, name it. It should be publicly shamed.

[Einstein]

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

The part that I’m hung up on is why are you trying so hard to differentiate a PSL from any other ticketing fee that you pay as a “right to buy the ticket?”

 

I’ve explained this already but I have a feeling that you’re just skimming my posts in haste to reply rather than reading and comprehending.

 

Put simply, PSL’s and Ticket Fees are completely different. There is a reason why Ticketmaster and Stubhub don’t label their ticket fees as PSL’s.

 

1) PSL’s originate from the organization producing the product (Buffalo Bills, for example). The originating organization receives all 3 parts of the equation (taxpayer money, PSL, and ticket cost).

 

Ticket fees originate from a completely separate entity (a third party) that uses stub fees as their business model and this model does not benefit the originating organization. They ONLY receive the fee, not the taxpayer money or the ticket cost.

2) Taxpayers did not subsidize the building of Ticketmaster and Stubhub. Therefore there is no “double taxation” so to speak.

 

3) PSLs come with perceived value. Conversely, ticket service fees offer no such value proposition; they are akin to a delivery charge, which increases the cost of the product without enhancing its value.

 

They simply aren’t the same at all. Though they’re both crappy.

 

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

That’s obviously way more common when you’re talking about standalone events like a concert or show. You’re paying someone for the right to buy that seat.

 

In the example you’re writing, you’re not paying a fee to the party that benefited from taxpayer dollars, and the party who is also benefiting from the sale of the ticket.

 

You’re paying a fee to Ticketmaster and that’s all they get. They don’t get the proceeds of the ticket and the taxpayer money as well. Just the fee.

 

As I said, you need all 3 parts:

 

1) Taxpayer funded 

2) AND PSL

3) AND Ticket cost

 

You can find examples of 1 or 2 of those parts; but finding all 3 is very difficult and results in only extreme outliers.

Not the norm.

 

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

 

I guess the other part that I’m hung up on is, “why do you have an issue with PSLs when the people using the product are the one’s electing to purchase?”

 

Ok now I know for a fact that you’re not actually reading what i’m writing and simply want to respond and argue rather than have a  gentlemanly debate.

 

I know this because in the post you responded to, I wrote: “I agree that people have the right to purchase them. That is not the debate here. The debate here is whether PSL’s are the “norm” in entertainment. They are not. If people want to purchase PSL’s, great. Go for it. But that’s not the conversation.”

 

Put simply, I don’t care at all if people buy PSL’s. That was never the conversation.

 

You have consistently misunderstood the context of this conversation despite me telling you several times. This conversation was about whether this is the “norm” in other businesses (it’s not). The conversation was NEVER about whether I care if people buy PSL’s.