LTAC membership changes in 2015 - C parking pass now at $500 level - sign of success?

[Cool Hand Clyde]

Is there really that much demand for parking passes?

For C-Lot, yes. And, A-Lot got full for several games this past season. A-Lot capacity is another pre-game gauge of attendance along with an RV count.

[RhythmDawg]

I don't think this is structured very well...

Too big of gap in the levels -

I think a lot of folks will opt into the lowest level of the benefits they want

$1,000 to $2,499 is a big gap

$2,500 to $4,999 is a BIG gap

$5,000 to $9,999 is WAY too big a gap

I just don't think a lot of thought was put into this

I agree. Need more levels with smaller gaps and more benefits...which then requires some free and/or all access stuff to become exclusive to membership levels, like the spring game and the signing day lunch for example. Perhaps the too much change too quickly could be an issue? Although your last sentence seems more likely.

[Dwayne From Minden]

B-lot too had two games where it was packed out...

Don't mind the tweaking so much (I'm one of those who think no passes should be given to anyone unless you are ponying up $1k, sans young alumni for 2 years at a minimum of $300)

Just think the levels could be structured better

[detltu]

Well this came out about a week too late for me. I just reinstated my LTAC membership for this year. Luckily I should still qualify for a C pass by June 30th. Does that mean everything I donate after June 30th will apply to the next year?

[Dwayne From Minden]

That's how I read it

[cscollis]

When I purchase my tickets next year, I will donate my B or C parking pass. Probably B. I don't need them since I have access to the apartments by the tac. Great having a kid going to tech. Too bad she will be a senior.

[PawDawg]

Well this came out about a week too late for me. I just reinstated my LTAC membership for this year. Luckily I should still qualify for a C pass by June 30th. Does that mean everything I donate after June 30th will apply to the next year?

Obviously we are trying to get more money shifted to the current fiscal year based on the new LTAC format and the season ticket deal. Why?

[Cool Hand Clyde]

Obviously we are trying to get more money shifted to the current fiscal year based on the new LTAC format and the season ticket deal. Why?

Because last year was a record setting year

[Dwayne From Minden]

Obviously we are trying to get more money shifted to the current fiscal year based on the new LTAC format and the season ticket deal. Why?

Athletics will be asked to absorb some of the coming budget cuts...

[PawDawg]

Because last year was a record setting year

Yes, with SEZ money lumped in it was.

Athletics will be asked to absorb some of the coming budget cuts...

I was afraid this might be part of the reason. So the general fund transfer could be reduced? How much do you expect?

[Dwayne From Minden]

It would be wise to expect a 15% to 25% reduction...

Not really a record setting year for LTAC when you remove the dedicated monies for the SEZ project since they can't be spent on athletic operating expenses

As a matter of fact - if an adjustment is made for the monies given for this purpose - it would not surprise me that LTAC is down by 10% to 15% from the previous year maybe more, since we know that season ticket sales and football ticket revenue was down from 2013

Reality Check's recap numbers on the LTAC givers back this up

[PawDawg]

25% could be $1.75 million. That will wake some folks up.

It will also be a proactive move than none of the other UL system schools will be willing or able to take.

Separation! (and no chance of reducing money games)

[ITdrummer]

Add D level parking to the current rugby field (make it D level and cash parking). Varsity should at least get D level parking.

Or make it an E lot for the Booster and varsity level.

[Cool Hand Clyde]

Not really a record setting year for LTAC when you remove the dedicated monies for the SEZ project since they can't be spent on athletic operating expenses

It was hyped as a record year. Not a good idea.

[Dawg06]

Thanks for posting that. I also think it is crappy not to recognize the "Booster" level members in the program. I thought TMac's mantra all year was "Any gift. Any size. Every year."

"Boosters" are only listed online and in the programs if your last name starts with Si-Z. If "Boosters" last names start with A-Si, then you get no recognition whatsoever.