• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Any Benefits to Deacon Club Points & Rank?

DemonDeac98

New member
Joined
Oct 6, 2011
Messages
15
Reaction score
3
Given that seating priority is now based upon current year giving level, are there any benefits to Deacon Club points and rank? This is very disappointing to anyone who gave to capital projects for double points rather than increase their giving level. There are people giving to projects, continuing to pay higher prices for chairback seats with football seat rights, and attending all the games in the same window with people who gave the bare minimum and attended zero games.

It seems better for one to adopt a bandwagon approach where you give the minimum and increase your current giving level during the good seasons rather than give consistently with larger sums for projects, when someone dies, etc. From my perspective, it disincentivizes people from stretching their total lifetime giving and creates a more choppy revenue stream for the school.

You would like to be loyal to Wake and purchase tickets through the school (even at a premium) to increase our attractiveness to bowl committees, but that loyalty should be rewarded.
 
I’ve had the same question, and haven’t seen my rank in several years, so not sure it is relevant anymore.

I will say that supposedly Belk Bowl tickets had some priority based on rank, but I ( and I recollect a few others on the Board) received pretty bad seats for someone with a rank in the 1000 range.
 
I quit worrying about building points years ago when they changed the system - and thus have given much, much less than I would have under the old system. I hope it worked out for them...
 
They got away from the "what have you done for us as a whole" model, and shifted to the "what are you doing for us right now" model.
 
I’ve never paid attention to this, but it makes sense to me to recognize both current and cumulative giving.
 
They got away from the "what have you done for us as a whole" model, and shifted to the "what are you doing for us right now" model.

Indeed they did. I made it a point not to get bent out of shape about it because all I really care about is supporting the athletes but it really irks me that they went away from the system presented to members years ago.
 
It's probably a matter of what was easiest to program into their ticketing system. Current giving levels unlock a number of different benefits related to football ticketing so they probably just grabbed that data field (current giving level) and used it to set the ACC CG on sale times. Breaking it down into dollars:


ACC Championship Game On-Sale Times based on Current Year Donation Level:

Saturday 7PM - Deacon Club Donors $35,000 and up
Sunday 10AM - Deacon Club Donors $27,500 - $34,999
Sunday 1PM - Deacon Club Donors $8,000 - $27,400
Monday 10AM - Deacon Club Donors $2,000 - $7,999
Monday 1PM - Deacon Club Donors $125 - $1,999
Tuesday 8:30AM - Football season Ticketholders (non-donors) + Wake Faculty/Staff
Tuesday 12:00PM - Wake Forest friends & family
Tuesday 3PM - General Public

If it was easy to add an OR to each one of these on sale times (for example today at 1PM should have been open to current Deacon Club Donors $125 to $1000 OR Deacon Club Donors with at least $5,000 in lifetime donations or something like that). The logistics of setting the system up that way probably make it non-feasible. If they were on the ball they could send a separate invite to former deacon club members at varying priority point totals with a purchase invitation.

Overall the Deacon Club seems critical to supporting a strong athletics program so I don't mind not getting huge "benefits" that are of monetary value to me.... the benefit to me is seeing success and getting enjoyment from following our teams.
 
I’ve had the same question, and haven’t seen my rank in several years, so not sure it is relevant anymore.

I will say that supposedly Belk Bowl tickets had some priority based on rank, but I ( and I recollect a few others on the Board) received pretty bad seats for someone with a rank in the 1000 range.

You are right about that. My rank is probably in the 600-700 range and our seats sucked. The clowns in ticket office were letting huge blocks of tickets to be bought under one person's rank which was a terrible policy. At least this time, they are limiting folks to 10 or 12 tickets.
 
I still like the idea of rewarding "long suffering" fans at some level for long time compensation for just being a long time follower. (but if I was say 2015 grad who was able to give 10K at once) I might view that differently.
 
They got away from the "what have you done for us as a whole" model, and shifted to the "what are you doing for us right now" model.

New AD. New rules.
 
I probably would not have been so upset, if my Deacon Club rep had not encouraged me to give more (by way of a capital project), while decreasing my donor level.
 
You are right about that. My rank is probably in the 600-700 range and our seats sucked. The clowns in ticket office were letting huge blocks of tickets to be bought under one person's rank which was a terrible policy. At least this time, they are limiting folks to 10 or 12 tickets.

There were plenty of available seats in Club Level in the WF section for the Belk Bowl against A&M.
 
When you accept that the Deacon Club exists to generate revenue for the Athletic Department and it generates member value to that end, then its easier to not overreact to policy changes. You enjoy having coaches like Clawson and Forbes? That’s your member value. Do what you can to help pay those bills and enjoy the ride.
 
I still like the idea of rewarding "long suffering" fans at some level for long time compensation for just being a long time follower. (but if I was say 2015 grad who was able to give 10K at once) I might view that differently.

I honestly think we have a good balance. Even if it doesn’t seem like it. We’re a pretty folksy department that knows most of our older donors on a personal level. That could change under Currie, but I doubt it.

Wake’s in a fairly unique situation in that our systemic changes from a regional religious school to a national elite opened up relationships with new high capacity donors. Good to have an on ramp for big dollar contributions from new parents of students that can afford our sticker price.
 
Yeah, as long as they make a general yearly gift and not a big dollar contribution to a capital project.

I want Wake to maximize revenue and that is why I question this approach. If the big donors squawk, perhaps we will see a different assignment process for our bowl game.
 
Yeah, as long as they make a general yearly gift and not a big dollar contribution to a capital project.

I want Wake to maximize revenue and that is why I question this approach. If the big donors squawk, perhaps we will see a different assignment process for our bowl game.

I think our big donors are probably feeling ok with the process. We’ve invested $100M in football facilities in the Clawson era. I think the powers that be have their eyes on maximizing revenue.
 
The changes were made due to IRS changes, nothing at all prompted by previous/current Athletic Directors. Wake actually sent out a pretty lengthy letter a few years ago to Donors explaining why they had to make this change. Basically, if they would have kept the same reward system, these contributions would no longer have been deemed a charitable gift and thus would no longer be tax deductible under new IRS rules. I could only imagine the consequences of giving levels if these contributions wouldn't have been tax deductible/charitable.

I"m sure we have an accountant on the boards that can explain it better, but from my understanding, all colleges were forced to change from that type of model.
 
There were plenty of available seats in Club Level in the WF section for the Belk Bowl against A&M.

Yes, but not all club level seats are the same. And I felt like I got shafted by the policy of letting 50-100 people buy blocks under one DC member's rank.
 
Back
Top