Not to get too far into the weeds, but you always have a choice.
People opposed to the subsidy can move, or do their shopping in a different county.
Also, that's just not how subsidies work, it's not realistic to expect them to sell concessions for less than the market will bear, just because they took public money. Amazon didn't pay a dime in federal tax last year, effectively a massive public subsidy. That doesn't mean they are going to give Prime away free to everyone.
We're definitely in the weeds now.
But don't you also have a choice to give feedback? Why is that choice pointless to you, but telling someone to find an alternative activity, or even move or shop away from Hennepin County, is valid? Especially when the choice to give feedback is not mutually exclusive from choosing not to buy either.
Businesses get customer feedback all the time. And that feedback is not necessarily invalid simply because the service is "nonessential" or the feedback suggests a price lower than the current price. Heck, that feedback could actually be considered part of the equation for determining the market price -- I imagine setting optimal prices for concessions and tickets is rather complex. "Voting with your wallet" is important, but often unclear if it could be caused by a multitude of factors (concession prices, ticket prices, team quality, accessibility, weather, etc.).
Especially for a business with a *direct* public subsidy (not just tax breaks), I think it's also fair to expect they'd consider public feedback, even if it runs contrary to maximizing profits.
At some point, I'd agree with you -- asking for free Amazon Prime is definitely pointless. But is it pointless to ask for $2 hot dogs or sodas during events at a publicly owned facility? It's possible that feedback was even a factor in this new concessions pricing too. (Although I suspect the larger factor was testing this new kiosk ordering system.)
Edited by spycake, 15 March 2019 - 12:04 PM.