-----Original Message-----
From: Satow, Clay <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, March 02, 2001 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: tickets and ticket aplication for next year



>If I weredesigning the process, one difference would be that I would
exclude
>the last three years, and go back farther than five years.  I'd exclude
2000
>and 2001 because they were oversold.  Many of the people who got tickets
>were themselves lottery winners and to give them an advantage in the next
>lottery seems unfair to me (or to put it differently, to put the losers in
>the first lotteries in a disadvantageous position in the next lottery seems
>unfair).  1999 was an aberration because of location.  I'd guess many "old
>timers" simply couldn't afford to go to California.  Now you can argue that
>if they were really that devoted, they would have raised the funds, but
that
>smacks to me of "classism."

From the NCAA's perspective, this may be something of the idea.  What
rewarding those who were in Anaheim would do is that it builds goodwill with
those who are going to show up the next time they do something stupid.  This
is a marketing strategy designed to reward the loyal customers with better
access to tickets for tournaments that will sell out, while providing the
NCAA with some insurance in the case of tournaments that won't.

J. Michael Neal