Lucas Pasiliao, Uniprom Chief Operating Officer who manages the Big Dome, said he surrendered 80 percent of the tickets to Far Eastern University (FEU), host school of this season’s University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP). He added that the UAAP Board set the ticket prices – P200 for patron (1,234 seats), P150 for lower box (958), P100 for upper box A (2,727), P50 for upper box B (3,000), and P30 for general admission (5,000).
Araneta management kept 20 percent of the tickets for sale. Also included in Araneta’s allocation were the "courtside" seats–the blocks behind both baskets, adding up to about 230 patron and 160 lower box seats. For using the Big Dome’s facilities, the UAAP paid a flat fee of P200,000 plus 10 percent of gross.
Pasiliao said Araneta began selling its 20 percent allocation the day after Game 2 of the Finals. Tickets were sold at a limit of four to each customer. They were sold out in a day.
To accommodate more fans, Pasiliao said Araneta sold standing-room-only tickets on the day of Game 3 – 800 upper box A tickets (P100 each) and 1,000 upper box B tickets (P50 each). They were sold on a one-ticket-one-customer basis.
Excluding the courtside seats and Araneta’s 20 percent allocation, FEU took in 800 patron, 640 lower box, 2,180 upper box A, 2,400 upper box B, and 4,000 general admission tickets.
La Salle Alumni Association president Lito Tanjuatco said FEU’s allocation for the Green Archers was 250 patron, 210 lower box, 750 upper box A, 1,000 upper box B, and 1,200 general admission tickets. Assuming Ateneo had an identical allocation, FEU was left with 300 patron, 220 lower box, 680 upper box A, 400 upper box B, and 1,600 general admission tickets.
Assuming FEU took out 50 each from what was left of the patron, lower box, and upper box A tickets for officials of other UAAP schools, media and friends (keeping the upper box B and general admission allocations intact), it would have still held on to 250 patron, 170 lower box, 630 upper box A, 400 upper box B, and 1,600 general admission tickets. How were they disposed of? That’s the P2.16 Million questions.
A scalper confided to a customer that he bought 20 patron tickets from an FEU "insider" for P1,300 each. The same tickets were gobbled up in the black market for P2,500 to P3,000 – netting the scalper at least P1,200 a shot.
Lower box tickets also went for P2,500 to P3,000. Upper box A tickets were sold by scalper for P800 each – from a face value of P100. Upper box B tickets went for P300 and general admission, from P200 to P300. The black market figures were confirmed by Pasiliao.
"Maybe, the UAAP should’ve priced the tickets higher," said Pasiliao. Despite the astronomical black market prices, the tickets were sold out.
But if those who controlled the distribution of tickets had less than noble intentions, they obviously preferred a lower face value to maximize what they could pocket from selling to scalpers.
I computed what could’ve been the total take of scalpers–including middlemen–from the sale of 250 patron (P3,000 each), 170 lower box (P2,500 each), 680 upper box A (P800 each), 400 upper box B (P300 each), and 1,600 general admission tickets (P200 each) and I came up with P2.16 Million.
If there was hanky-panky in the disposal of the tickets from the host school’s end, it would be safe to estimate that "insiders" raked in about P1 Million and the scalpers on the streets, the balance of P1.16 Million.
Scalping is, of course, illegal. But you and I know that tickets for last Tuesday’s game were hawked openly in streetcorners and outside the campuses of La Salle, Ateneo and FEU.
The paying public was unfairly prejudiced by this blatant violation of the law. Scalpers took advantage of a sellers’ market and the buyers absorbed the cost of corruption.
Who were the culprits? The host school that controlled the distribution of 80 percent of the tickets? The scalpers who exploited the situation? The buyers who allowed themselves to be hoodwinked by mulcters?
Surely, something must be done to stop wanton scalping. As host school, FEU must be made to account for what happened last Tuesday. Did school authorities turn a blind eye to "insiders" who dealt with scalpers?
Tanjuatco said it’s high time the UAAP Board reviews the practice of designating a "host school" because "mutual trust and comfort levels have eroded over time." He suggested the appointment of an independent Commissioner whose responsibilities will include the professional conduct of the tournament, the assignment of game venues, the preparation of the schedules, and the just allocation of tickets.
"We should do away with the host school tradition because if not, some of us may end up always feeling short-changed," said Tanjuatco.
Postscript. Reacting to yesterday’s column, reader and University of the Philippines’ Maroons fan Hadji Cortez Jalotjot of Los Baños, Laguna, wrote: "Regarding (Mark) Cardona, why should the UAAP apologize to him? It is just right that we investigate what seems to be anomalous happening in the league. Clear him if there’s not enough evidence but punish him if found guilty. But the real problem is not Cardona himself but the manner La Salle is building up a good team. Can’t they find a good player here in the Philippines? They are a very good example of a collegiate team proliferating Fil-Ams. There’s no problem recruiting a couple of Fil-Ams but let’s just limit it to a certain number per team and give the local the chance to play. The Fil-Ams can easily come to the country and play ball but our local players cannot do the same in their own country. I am not discriminating (against) the Fil-Ams as they have the same rights and privileges as homegrown talents but will they stick it out (here) when the country plunges into some sort of recession or if the peace and order situation worsens? Let’s give the locals more chances to play ball. Let’s leave the Fil-Ams in the pros or the PBL." Jalotjot’s e-mail address is hcj@searca.org.