Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 12-29-2021, 04:49 PM   #61
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny01 View Post
I want absolutely nothing to do with attending games u see these restrictions. I wouldn’t go if they gave me free tickets let alone paying full STH price to sit in a half empty rink wearing a mask the full time and driving from the burbs to do it

I will gladly sell my tickets to any CP member that would want to attend at my cost. Section 223 row 19
So you are (a) announcing you are not going and (b) trying to hand off tix for cost.

Not exactly a strong sales pitch.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2021, 07:20 PM   #62
ken0042
Playboy Mansion Poolboy
 
ken0042's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Default

Actually I think it’s a fair pitch. For myself- I would rather not have my tickets cancelled and will still go to games. So if the Flames have the option to just cancel the tickets of people who want to cancel- what is wrong with that?

As it stands, it sounds like we are all going to lose a certain percentage of games. If that number is close to the percentage who want to cancel- sounds like it’s a win-win.
ken0042 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ken0042 For This Useful Post:
Old 12-29-2021, 07:34 PM   #63
calgarywinning
First Line Centre
 
calgarywinning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Field near Field, AB
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042 View Post
Actually I think it’s a fair pitch. For myself- I would rather not have my tickets cancelled and will still go to games. So if the Flames have the option to just cancel the tickets of people who want to cancel- what is wrong with that?

As it stands, it sounds like we are all going to lose a certain percentage of games. If that number is close to the percentage who want to cancel- sounds like it’s a win-win.
This is a great solution. Before doing the capacity axe let people opt out. Letting those that are up to going attend under the current circumstances.

Also, I am happy the Flames took the time to send an email out about removing tickets from the account finally, however, this should have happened a little quicker.
calgarywinning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2021, 09:18 PM   #64
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042 View Post
Actually I think it’s a fair pitch. For myself- I would rather not have my tickets cancelled and will still go to games. So if the Flames have the option to just cancel the tickets of people who want to cancel- what is wrong with that?

As it stands, it sounds like we are all going to lose a certain percentage of games. If that number is close to the percentage who want to cancel- sounds like it’s a win-win.
My guess is they won't do this - not because it isn't a good idea, but because they'd be worried that more than half of the capacity would opt out and they'd be left with less than their 50% sold.

I also think they'll want to allocate capacity by price a bit - I'd expect less cancellations in higher $ value seats.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2021, 09:41 PM   #65
The Cobra
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bizaro86 View Post
My guess is they won't do this - not because it isn't a good idea, but because they'd be worried that more than half of the capacity would opt out and they'd be left with less than their 50% sold.

I also think they'll want to allocate capacity by price a bit - I'd expect less cancellations in higher $ value seats.

Except season ticket holders are getting priority to tickets, and they get a pretty big discount over single price tickets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The Cobra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2021, 09:50 PM   #66
Smartcar
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Exp:
Default

I'm really curious where the science supports 50% - I could understand mandating distance between groups, but as others have said, just saying 50% means the whole lower bowl and the lowest rows of the second level could be packed (for max $$) and still comply with the rules.
Smartcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2021, 10:04 PM   #67
bizaro86
Franchise Player
 
bizaro86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartcar View Post
I'm really curious where the science supports 50% - I could understand mandating distance between groups, but as others have said, just saying 50% means the whole lower bowl and the lowest rows of the second level could be packed (for max $$) and still comply with the rules.
It was me that said that, and I was joking. That would be a bad look, and would invite the government to tighten restrictions.

I think they will feel they have to give their best customers (STH) priority, and will give everyone as many as they can. But I'd expect the lower bowl to have a greater percentage of seats filled than the 3rd bowl (maybe 60% vs 40%, something like that) to help with revenue while not being overt about it.
bizaro86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2021, 08:14 AM   #68
Smartcar
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Exp:
Default

I was thinking that too so I looked up the CMOH order. It's 50% based on occupant load so they can't just load up the lower bowl. They could load up the lower rows of the second bowl though and all the STH in the PL would be fine. I think the % of STH in the lower bowl is much higher than 50%. So a STH in the lower bowl might get to go but may have to sit somewhere else. I wonder how that would go over and whether they would credit the difference. What a nightmare for the organization, no wonder they cancelled the games.
Smartcar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2021, 09:18 AM   #69
Vinny01
Franchise Player
 
Vinny01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CGY
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM View Post
So you are (a) announcing you are not going and (b) trying to hand off tix for cost.

Not exactly a strong sales pitch.
People know what they are getting into. I also do not expect anyone to actually take me up on the offer. More so venting about how brutal this is and so far doesn’t seem like we have options.
Vinny01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2021, 09:21 AM   #70
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny01 View Post
People know what they are getting into. I also do not expect anyone to actually take me up on the offer. More so venting about how brutal this is and so far doesn’t seem like we have options.
I was just kidding. I found it a little funny that you were essentially saying “who will fully reimburse me for this ticket I’m about to tear up”.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2021, 02:14 PM   #71
flamesrule_kipper34
Franchise Player
 
flamesrule_kipper34's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Calgary, AB
Exp:
Default

Ontario reducing capacity limits at indoor sports venues to 1,000 people
https://www.thescore.com/nhl/news/2263281


Wonder what will happen elsewhere now and how the NHL reacts to this given their Jan 10 reevaluation date for Canadian Home games.
flamesrule_kipper34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2021, 04:10 PM   #72
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

You could not pay me to attend an in-person sporting event at this point in time.
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GreenLantern2814 For This Useful Post:
Old 12-30-2021, 04:14 PM   #73
FunkMasterFlame
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814 View Post
You could not pay me to attend an in-person sporting event at this point in time.

Whereas I would go to a Flames game in a heartbeat if I could slam a few heroin beers and eat a few hot dogs. Funny how everybody has a different risk tolerance.
FunkMasterFlame is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to FunkMasterFlame For This Useful Post:
Old 01-01-2022, 11:20 PM   #74
GreenLantern2814
Franchise Player
 
GreenLantern2814's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkMasterFlame View Post
Whereas I would go to a Flames game in a heartbeat if I could slam a few heroin beers and eat a few hot dogs. Funny how everybody has a different risk tolerance.
Yeah, and if that were the reason my infant got COVID, it’d be a pretty tough gander in the mirror every morning.
GreenLantern2814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2022, 09:50 AM   #75
GioforPM
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
Exp:
Default

I went to the Flames game against the Canes. It wasn’t that comfortable being that close to people. Especially the “I’m eating/preparing to eat/thinking about eating” folks. However, the girl sitting next to me was masked the whole time, so that was cool.
GioforPM is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:56 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy