Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36
  1. #21

    Join Date
    September 23, 2002
    Posts
    17,570
    Quote Originally Posted by PadrosWindup View Post
    Personally, I like what the Eagles are doing to installl WiFi that every fan can use and interact with. Be able to send and receive messages during the game will be a big part of attracting anyone under 35.
    This post needs more attention. We're not expanding Lane Stadium anytime soon (if ever, really), but things can be done to enhance the fan experience. Improved concessions and enhanced connectivity would both go a long way on that front. Hopefully the new AD will see it that way, too.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    February 13, 2012
    Posts
    1,186
    THere are enhancements and their is expansion. For fan bases. its hard to understand, but college athletics is a business. Therefore every capital project can't be support for perception but based on return of investments. The key is how much more revenue will be generated from capital project or is it just a break even prospective. Actual average seating expansion is REALLY not a real good return of investment. You only sell the seat for roughly 60 dollar a seat for six or seven games, and then you have to pay off the loan. Premium seating makes more revenue per seating. Also, I think VT needs to really think about concessions. We have concession stands that non-profits use to raise money. These stands include everything from cotton candy to cokes etc. It almost looks like a carnival rather than entertainment venue (like many of the NFL new arenas). VT could discover another revenue stream if they could relook and maybe offer the concession rights and then make revenue off the rights. There are also some infrastructure related enhancements that need to be done. This includes bathroom facilities, better cuing for concessions during peak times. etc.

    I do think VT facilities, while needed some modernization, hit the sweet point in regards to return of investment



    Quote Originally Posted by Gobbler-100 View Post
    This post needs more attention. We're not expanding Lane Stadium anytime soon (if ever, really), but things can be done to enhance the fan experience. Improved concessions and enhanced connectivity would both go a long way on that front. Hopefully the new AD will see it that way, too.

  3. #23
    PadrosWindup's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 16, 2003
    Posts
    5,013
    Agree, as both WIFI and concessions are part of fan experience. It's not just about wtching the game on the field.
    VT needs to get alumni to drive 3-5 hours, spend $400 for a 2 night hotel minimum to come watch the Hokies play in Lane stadium. Most of our ACC rivals are close enough to large fan base populations so that no hotel and 1/2 the drive time are needed.

    The athletic department needs to make the whole experience from tailgating in the morning, though time in the stadium and back to US460 as fan-friendly as possible. I truly don't believe that the Roanoke/NRV/Bristol corridor can provide the financial base needed to take the athletic department to higher on-field success, including NC's in various sports. To grow the finaincial base, VT needs to get people from NOVA/RIC/757 to ignore closer entertainment opportunities, open their wallets and drive to Lane stadium for football. The Commonwealth's changing demographics require the athletic department to focus their attention to the urban crescent.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercury View Post
    THere are enhancements and their is expansion. For fan bases. its hard to understand, but college athletics is a business. Therefore every capital project can't be support for perception but based on return of investments. The key is how much more revenue will be generated from capital project or is it just a break even prospective. Actual average seating expansion is REALLY not a real good return of investment. You only sell the seat for roughly 60 dollar a seat for six or seven games, and then you have to pay off the loan. Premium seating makes more revenue per seating. Also, I think VT needs to really think about concessions. We have concession stands that non-profits use to raise money. These stands include everything from cotton candy to cokes etc. It almost looks like a carnival rather than entertainment venue (like many of the NFL new arenas). VT could discover another revenue stream if they could relook and maybe offer the concession rights and then make revenue off the rights. There are also some infrastructure related enhancements that need to be done. This includes bathroom facilities, better cuing for concessions during peak times. etc.

    I do think VT facilities, while needed some modernization, hit the sweet point in regards to return of investment
    BCS level college football is a resource war, not a morality play.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by PadrosWindup View Post
    Agree, as both WIFI and concessions are part of fan experience. It's not just about wtching the game on the field.
    VT needs to get alumni to drive 3-5 hours, spend $400 for a 2 night hotel minimum to come watch the Hokies play in Lane stadium. Most of our ACC rivals are close enough to large fan base populations so that no hotel and 1/2 the drive time are needed.

    The athletic department needs to make the whole experience from tailgating in the morning, though time in the stadium and back to US460 as fan-friendly as possible. I truly don't believe that the Roanoke/NRV/Bristol corridor can provide the financial base needed to take the athletic department to higher on-field success, including NC's in various sports. To grow the finaincial base, VT needs to get people from NOVA/RIC/757 to ignore closer entertainment opportunities, open their wallets and drive to Lane stadium for football. The Commonwealth's changing demographics require the athletic department to focus their attention to the urban crescent.
    I hate to beat a dead horse but..... that opportunity was presented in the form of SEC membership. We passed. Now the consequences will be felt.

  5. #25
    Edgeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 05, 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    49,228
    Quote Originally Posted by MPHOKIE View Post
    I hate to beat a dead horse but..... that opportunity was presented in the form of SEC membership. We passed. Now the consequences will be felt.
    No it didn't. When we were dying to get out of the Big Least, the SEC wanted no part of VT. Posters keep writing how the SEC wants us bad, but talk is cheap. They had a perfect chance to add us, and they passed. That is a fact, not some unsubstantiated rumor.
    "You start a conversation you can't even finish it
    You're talkin' a lot, but you're not sayin' anything
    When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed
    Say something once, why say it again?"
    - David Byrne

  6. #26

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgeman View Post
    No it didn't. When we were dying to get out of the Big Least, the SEC wanted no part of VT. Posters keep writing how the SEC wants us bad, but talk is cheap. They had a perfect chance to add us, and they passed. That is a fact, not some unsubstantiated rumor.
    I don't recall any SEC expansion talk around 2003-2004. Which teams were added instead of VT at that time?

  7. #27
    Member tennesseevol's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 22, 2012
    Location
    Helenwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    98
    The SEC wasn't interested in adding anyone at that time. I truly believe you gave up a seat at the SEC table and slid it back for Missouri to sit upon.

    All you have to do is go to www.texags.com ....... the Aggie forum site....and read about what membership in the SEC has done for them. I'll tell you the sky is the limit for them now.

  8. #28
    Correct. However if we had been left behind in the BEFC, we would have gone to the SEC when aTm was invited. IMO

    Quote Originally Posted by MPHOKIE View Post
    I don't recall any SEC expansion talk around 2003-2004. Which teams were added instead of VT at that time?

  9. #29

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by tennesseevol View Post
    The SEC wasn't interested in adding anyone at that time. I truly believe you gave up a seat at the SEC table and slid it back for Missouri to sit upon.

    All you have to do is go to www.texags.com ....... the Aggie forum site....and read about what membership in the SEC has done for them. I'll tell you the sky is the limit for them now.
    I think you are 100 percent correct. It's a decision that I still can' fathom. But, hey, we get to play Clemson and Florida State twice every 13 years. Great league, no?

  10. #30

    Join Date
    October 07, 1999
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlee Hokie View Post
    Correct. However if we had been left behind in the BEFC, we would have gone to the SEC when aTm was invited. IMO
    Truly a cruel irony.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •