I'm willing to bet the university will be accomodating for folks needing assistance to their seats. There were plenty of handicapped spots at the top of the hill, and I'm sure after seeing how the first game or two goes, they might even implement a shuttle service for the elderly/disabled who aren't parked in those spots.

(08-30-2017 02:48 PM)BucDoctor Wrote:  If there are sellouts relying on handicapped parking outside of the designated lot is not acceptable, I believe it would be hard to navigate from a handicapped parking space near Warf Pickle to the stadium using a cane.

Actually it is acceptable. They said they are ADA compliant.

I would agree that ETSU has provided plenty of handicapped spaces inside the stadium. Anybody who thinks they've done anywhere near enough in terms of providing parking or assistance in getting from the parking lots to the stadium hasn't given it much thought.

And lest someone accuse me of flying off the deep end, you should know that for more than a month, I and others inquired diligently on behalf of a handicapped friend to the ticket office, the alumni office, the office of student affairs, BASA, the president of the university, and our new, incoming athletic director. We constantly received conflicting information and rode the referral merry-go-round, and to this day, I can't tell you who among those many people is the decision maker. Maybe they don't have one and that's the issue.

The first problem is lack of handicapped parking near the stadium. That "entire parking lot for handicap parking immediately next to the entrance of the stadium" was probably full after the first week of seat selection. There are far more handicapped spots in the stadium than there are spots in that lot. My friend selected his seats halfway through the draft, and he was told that lot was full long before he had a chance to select his parking spot. The only lots available to him were 21 and 22.

Okay, you want the other close-by lots for the big donors. We understand that. But, that directly results in a second problem: Many people are going to have difficulty getting from their parking lot to the stadium. For someone with difficulty walking, especially up or down hills, getting to the stadium from Lot 21 is problematic. From Lot 22? Forget about it.

So, it took us more than a month, but we finally got a definitive answer as to what the University is going to do to help: Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Well . . . okay . . . can we drive our friend up to the stadium entrance and drop him off? Only if we have the proper parking pass, a high-donor parking pass. With a Lot 21 pass, the closest we can get is to drop him off at the foot of the hill.

How hard would it be to run a shuttle up and down that hill? I guarantee the University will be golf-carting their special guests up, down, and all around the parking areas and up to the stadium. Too much trouble to run a shuttle for other people? Why not let those with handicapped credentials into those high-donor areas for a couple of minutes to be dropped off?

I can understand how those without hands-on experience with someone handicapped might not be bothered by this, but I am dumbfounded that the University, which ought to know better, can show such a lack of consideration. Come to think of it, the rest of you should know better, too.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not handicapped nor is any member of my family.

Well I admit not having firsthand info or experience on this issue, and Flippmd the response that you seemed to have gotten from the University is very troubling. I know that ETSU hired someone for the games at Science Hill to shuttle those with disabilities in golf carts. Its very odd to me that they wouldn't be doing that here also, but from what I understand there just wasn't much demand for this service.

This all just seems odd to me. To the casual observer, I've just never seen so much handicap accessible seating and such a large lot just a few feet away from the stadium dedicated to handicap. Do we really have twice the number of handicap people attending games compared to the size of that parking lot? Do you think that they allowed people into that handicap lot that do not truly have a handicap? Aren't you able to drive right up to the roundabout next to the stadium and drop someone off?

This is just the last thing I imagined would be coming up as an issue with the stadium.

I was told face-to-face and unequivocally that Axis Security would be handling lot access and no one would be allowed to travel on Jack Vest Drive beyond N. Dossett Drive without passes for Lots 38 or 39.

I never asked if they gave passes for Lot T to anyone who was not handicapped. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that some of that parking would have been set aside for Guests of the President or similar. And, even if that were true, it wouldn't bother me if they were providing some kind of shuttle service or drop-off allowance.

Nearly everyone told us this first game was going to be a learning experience and they would adjust from there. I'm sure that's true, and I think that's reasonable, even though this problem seems obvious enough to me that it should have been addressed before the first game.

My friend is an ETSU alumnus, a season-ticket holder, and a program donor. His home is more than three hours away, and he's looking forward to attending the first game in the new stadium. Going forward, I hope his alma mater will show him the same affection that he has shown for them.

At Freedom Hall, I know they allow anyone with a handicap tag or difficulty with walking to drive through right by the entrance to drop people off and then go park in designated lots. I know because we've done that when my parents have come to games. Seems they should at a minimum allow something similar if they don't offer a shuttle. Even just a drop off pass or such. Not doing that would be stupid and if you need additional folks to call the various offices on campus, I would be glad to give them my opinion.

If you have a handicap placard and someone in Lot T, or any for that matter, turns you away for wanting to drop someone off and leave, please video that because I would like to see it. I would be absolutely SHOCKED if that in fact happened.

Only a handful of actual passes were given for that lot because the others were for handicapped guests. And my understanding is, you don't have to have a pass, but only a placard.

I agree that we should have adequate handicapped access, and I haven't been convinced we don't yet.

(08-30-2017 07:42 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 01:08 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  And these people aren't what I'd call "poor" - they just can't stand the concept of gouging for parking. And I strongly agree. Further, I bet there's many more that feel the same way, but just aren't voicing their opinions on this forum.

There is free and cheap parking both available. So it's not the "concept of gouging" you disagree with, its that you want the best parking for free. It doesn't even work like that at the bigger high schools.

No, respectfully, you're mis-characterizing their (and my) position. I (and they) would want "reasonable" parking for free, or nearly so. It's an insult. It's like those commercials on TV that give you a price on something, and then say, "just add $5.95 for shipping and handling". It's an artificial add-on.
Just charge me what you think it's worth. Don't con me into thinking it's one price, when it's really something else.

You certainly are free to think differently about it (duh), but that's something I won't be convinced is right. I could elaborate further, and even give a more eloquent and nuanced argument (I think), but I don't believe it would matter. I think it's just another thing that grows out of my idealism. We'll just differ on this.

(08-30-2017 10:52 AM)BucDoctor Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 07:42 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-30-2017 01:08 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  And these people aren't what I'd call "poor" - they just can't stand the concept of gouging for parking. And I strongly agree. Further, I bet there's many more that feel the same way, but just aren't voicing their opinions on this forum.

There is free and cheap parking both available. So it's not the "concept of gouging" you disagree with, its that you want the best parking for free. It doesn't even work like that at the bigger high schools.

The elephant in the room may be that there appears to be FAR to few handicapped parking spaces available near the stadium. A handicapped parking space in the Warf Pickle lot is not really of value for use as a handicapped space for the stadium.

I attend games with someone who is handicapped. We plan to pick them up at Kroger's, drop them off at the stadium, then go park ourselves. Does that really say ETSU values the handicapped/limited ability fan?

Boy could I elaborate on this, too. I happen to know quite a few long-time fans who had a hard enough time getting access to the Dome for games, and I know at least one couple (not connected to the others I've mentioned), who I believe aren't even going to try at the stadium, as the wife is almost disabled, walking-wise. I don't know how hard they tried to get handicapped parking, but apparently they would have had to have gotten handicapped parking tags from St. of TN (I think). And they have managed without those because she no longer drives. Anyway, enough about that.

(08-31-2017 12:26 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  No, respectfully, you're mis-characterizing their (and my) position. I (and they) would want "reasonable" parking for free, or nearly so. It's an insult. It's like those commercials on TV that give you a price on something, and then say, "just add $5.95 for shipping and handling". It's an artificial add-on.
Just charge me what you think it's worth. Don't con me into thinking it's one price, when it's really something else.

They ARE charging you what they think it's worth.

You are right that it's an add-on but it is supposed to be an add-on. Why would they include parking in the cost of season tickets? Not everyone needs a parking pass.

In my neck of the woods, I see people pull into handicapped parking spaces, bounce out of the vehicle, and walk away in a very normal stride. I see this far too often. My wife's cousin used to have to ask these types to move their vehicles so she could have access to the parking space for a real need, her chair bound child. It is probably not an easy situation to manage so that individuals with real need are served. On the costs issue -- the university obviously needs $$$$ to run a successful athletic program.

(08-31-2017 07:33 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 12:26 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  It's like those commercials on TV that give you a price on something, and then say, "just add $5.95 for shipping and handling". It's an artificial add-on.
Just charge me what you think it's worth. Don't con me into thinking it's one price, when it's really something else.

They ARE charging you what they think it's worth.

You are right that it's an add-on but it is supposed to be an add-on. Why would they include parking in the cost of season tickets? Not everyone needs a parking pass.

No, they're not charging me what it's worth (for the tickets, for the sake of this discussion). They're charging somewhat less because they know they're going to tack on the parking. There's no way the "value" of a parking space for a few hours 5-6 times a year is 'worth' that price, for a parking lot that's already built, and will be amortized over who knows how long. Why not charge that same price for parking in the same place on a Wednesday afternoon in April?

To me, it's (almost) the same scenario as how they gouged on the tickets to the UT basketball game. It's charging whatever they think "the market will bear". (So-called) "flex pricing". If the value of that parking space was really what they're charging, then they'd charge that same amount day in and day out. And I know many here won't agree with that, as it's an idealistic viewpoint, but that's the fact of the matter. They're adding an additional 'fee' just because of a special event nearby. That's a "whole 'nuther ballgame" than charging for the event itself. It's also exactly analogous to motels and hotels charging more when there's a Bristol race. It's just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

(08-31-2017 11:00 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  No, they're not charging me what it's worth (for the tickets, for the sake of this discussion). They're charging somewhat less because they know they're going to tack on the parking. There's no way the "value" of a parking space for a few hours 5-6 times a year is 'worth' that price, for a parking lot that's already built, and will be amortized over who knows how long. Why not charge that same price for parking in the same place on a Wednesday afternoon in April?

To me, it's (almost) the same scenario as how they gouged on the tickets to the UT basketball game. It's charging whatever they think "the market will bear". (So-called) "flex pricing". If the value of that parking space was really what they're charging, then they'd charge that same amount day in and day out. And I know many here won't agree with that, as it's an idealistic viewpoint, but that's the fact of the matter. They're adding an additional 'fee' just because of a special event nearby. That's a "whole 'nuther ballgame" than charging for the event itself. It's also exactly analogous to motels and hotels charging more when there's a Bristol race. It's just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Economics is the easiest thing in the world to understand, but the hardest thing to accept...

(08-31-2017 11:14 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:00 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  No, they're not charging me what it's worth (for the tickets, for the sake of this discussion). They're charging somewhat less because they know they're going to tack on the parking. There's no way the "value" of a parking space for a few hours 5-6 times a year is 'worth' that price, for a parking lot that's already built, and will be amortized over who knows how long. Why not charge that same price for parking in the same place on a Wednesday afternoon in April?

To me, it's (almost) the same scenario as how they gouged on the tickets to the UT basketball game. It's charging whatever they think "the market will bear". (So-called) "flex pricing". If the value of that parking space was really what they're charging, then they'd charge that same amount day in and day out. And I know many here won't agree with that, as it's an idealistic viewpoint, but that's the fact of the matter. They're adding an additional 'fee' just because of a special event nearby. That's a "whole 'nuther ballgame" than charging for the event itself. It's also exactly analogous to motels and hotels charging more when there's a Bristol race. It's just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Economics is the easiest thing in the world to understand, but the hardest thing to accept...

That's not "economics", that's "opportunism", also known as "gouging". That said, economics is not *the* easiest thing in the world to understand. To properly understand it in nuanced detail, one needs to have multiple calculus-based graduate-level courses in said discipline - as I have. *That* said, of course you're going for price elasticity - which I admit is a real thing. But when you charge more for "special events" (as opposed to more general 'market forces' over a gradual time frame), whether it's for a race in Bristol, parking at ETSU, water in flooded Houston, or whatever, it's price gouging. I suppose one could say that price gouging is a "special case" of price elasticity, but that's stretching the definition for one thing; for another, and this is the critical difference......it's based on opportunism, and taking advantage of a *specific* event.

So you're ok with somebody charging $10 for a gallon of water in Houston right now?

(08-31-2017 11:23 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  That's not "economics", that's "opportunism", also known as "gouging".

A parking pass for the season was $40, about $7 per game. If you don't have a pass it's $10 a game. That is NOT "gouging". ETSU has to pay people to direct traffic, clean up the lots after the games, security in the lots, port-o-johns, etc. I would say that is a pretty good deal.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. And that's fine.

"A parking pass for the season was $40, about $7 per game."

Really? My parking pass was $30. $5 per game. Lot 21.

(08-31-2017 02:47 PM)Bucc18 Wrote:  "A parking pass for the season was $40, about $7 per game."

Really? My parking pass was $30. $5 per game. Lot 21.

That may be right. I can't remember exactly how much it was.

(08-31-2017 11:23 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:14 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:00 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  No, they're not charging me what it's worth (for the tickets, for the sake of this discussion). They're charging somewhat less because they know they're going to tack on the parking. There's no way the "value" of a parking space for a few hours 5-6 times a year is 'worth' that price, for a parking lot that's already built, and will be amortized over who knows how long. Why not charge that same price for parking in the same place on a Wednesday afternoon in April?

To me, it's (almost) the same scenario as how they gouged on the tickets to the UT basketball game. It's charging whatever they think "the market will bear". (So-called) "flex pricing". If the value of that parking space was really what they're charging, then they'd charge that same amount day in and day out. And I know many here won't agree with that, as it's an idealistic viewpoint, but that's the fact of the matter. They're adding an additional 'fee' just because of a special event nearby. That's a "whole 'nuther ballgame" than charging for the event itself. It's also exactly analogous to motels and hotels charging more when there's a Bristol race. It's just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Economics is the easiest thing in the world to understand, but the hardest thing to accept...

That's not "economics", that's "opportunism", also known as "gouging". That said, economics is not *the* easiest thing in the world to understand. To properly understand it in nuanced detail, one needs to have multiple calculus-based graduate-level courses in said discipline - as I have. *That* said, of course you're going for price elasticity - which I admit is a real thing. But when you charge more for "special events" (as opposed to more general 'market forces' over a gradual time frame), whether it's for a race in Bristol, parking at ETSU, water in flooded Houston, or whatever, it's price gouging. I suppose one could say that price gouging is a "special case" of price elasticity, but that's stretching the definition for one thing; for another, and this is the critical difference......it's based on opportunism, and taking advantage of a *specific* event.

So you're ok with somebody charging $10 for a gallon of water in Houston right now?

This is so silly. On Wednesday afternoon, ETSU doesn't have to contract with AXIS to control access to that parking lot. Tomorrow they will. Thus it needs to cost you to park there. Those guys cost money. So does all the other stuff you'll enjoy for a low price.

People whine about the most ridiculous things. Go pay $1340 a year for nosebleed seats at Neyland and $20 to park a mile away. It's time to get behind these Bucs and stop griping.

And we're seriously going to equate charging for parking at a football game to price gouging for life-needed water during a humanitarian crisis????

(09-01-2017 08:31 AM)prosec34 Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:23 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:14 AM)brock20 Wrote:  

(08-31-2017 11:00 AM)posterformerlyknownasthedoctor Wrote:  No, they're not charging me what it's worth (for the tickets, for the sake of this discussion). They're charging somewhat less because they know they're going to tack on the parking. There's no way the "value" of a parking space for a few hours 5-6 times a year is 'worth' that price, for a parking lot that's already built, and will be amortized over who knows how long. Why not charge that same price for parking in the same place on a Wednesday afternoon in April?

To me, it's (almost) the same scenario as how they gouged on the tickets to the UT basketball game. It's charging whatever they think "the market will bear". (So-called) "flex pricing". If the value of that parking space was really what they're charging, then they'd charge that same amount day in and day out. And I know many here won't agree with that, as it's an idealistic viewpoint, but that's the fact of the matter. They're adding an additional 'fee' just because of a special event nearby. That's a "whole 'nuther ballgame" than charging for the event itself. It's also exactly analogous to motels and hotels charging more when there's a Bristol race. It's just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Economics is the easiest thing in the world to understand, but the hardest thing to accept...

That's not "economics", that's "opportunism", also known as "gouging". That said, economics is not *the* easiest thing in the world to understand. To properly understand it in nuanced detail, one needs to have multiple calculus-based graduate-level courses in said discipline - as I have. *That* said, of course you're going for price elasticity - which I admit is a real thing. But when you charge more for "special events" (as opposed to more general 'market forces' over a gradual time frame), whether it's for a race in Bristol, parking at ETSU, water in flooded Houston, or whatever, it's price gouging. I suppose one could say that price gouging is a "special case" of price elasticity, but that's stretching the definition for one thing; for another, and this is the critical difference......it's based on opportunism, and taking advantage of a *specific* event.

So you're ok with somebody charging $10 for a gallon of water in Houston right now?

This is so silly. On Wednesday afternoon, ETSU doesn't have to contract with AXIS to control access to that parking lot. Tomorrow they will. Thus it needs to cost you to park there. Those guys cost money. So does all the other stuff you'll enjoy for a low price.

People whine about the most ridiculous things. Go pay $1340 a year for nosebleed seats at Neyland and $20 to park a mile away. It's time to get behind these Bucs and stop griping.

And we're seriously going to equate charging for parking at a football game to price gouging for life-needed water during a humanitarian crisis????

1a. They don't *have* to be contracting with Axis. (I'm not bashing Lee Morrow, but I've had a couple of unpleasant run-ins with his employees, which fortunately he was able to rectify.) But this is not the place to have that discussion. (Well, actually, maybe it is, but it would be a gigantic tangent in the wrong place.)

1b. Even if they do go that route, that shouldn't affect the cost of parking. Again, I know that's an idealistic stance, but imo, it's the correct one, morally-speaking. Axis doesn't set that policy; ETSU/Scott Carter does.

2. Once again, what somebody/anybody else does is TOTALLY irrelevant. Same argument as gouging on the UT basketball ticket prices. Just because someone else does something, doesn't make it right. And you should know that. Very much a red herring there.

3. Yes, we are going to equate gouging for water in Houston with gouging for parking. The *motivation* behind each is identical, or nearly so, even if the consequences aren't the same. It's TAKING ADVANTAGE of a special situation - to the detriment of others.

4. I *AM* behind the Bucs. For quite possibly longer than you've been alive. There's nothing wrong with trying to make something better, or more equitable, or more fair, or more morally correct - and yet still supporting it's overall goals and aims. If people didn't try to make stuff better, we couldn't make much progress with human rights, progress of civilization in general, etc., etc.

OK, I'm done with this. This dead horse is now just a flattened pulp. Again, no disrespect to you, and you're certainly entitled to believe like you do, so we'll just never agree on this. So be it.