PDA

View Full Version : MLS Attendance 2011



kodiakTFC
10-25-2011, 10:53 AM
EOS Average Median
1996 17410 15093
1997 14606 12733
1998 14312 11871
1999 14282 12973
2000 13756 12690
2001 14961 13431
2002 15821 14108
2003 14900 13719
2004 15549 13223
2005 15112 12619
2006 15426 14113
2007 16767 15353
2008 16460 15188
2009 16037 14686
2010 16675 15332
2011 17869 17639


Team Attendance
Chicago 14273
Chivas USA 14830
Colorado 14838
Columbus 12185
DC United 15196
FC Dallas 12861
Houston 17694
Kansas City 17810
Los Angeles 23335
New England 13222
Philadelphia 18258
Portland 18827
Real Salt Lake 17594
Red Bull NY 19691
San Jose 11858
Seattle 38495
Toronto FC 20267
Vancouver 20412
Overall 17869

Toronto All-Time Graph
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j164/jcole042/TorontoFC.png

MLS All-Time Graph
http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j164/jcole042/MLS.png

Source & Additional Info @ http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1840161

ensco
10-25-2011, 11:11 AM
Background info on these numbers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Bunny
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth_fairy

Oldtimer
10-25-2011, 11:34 AM
This is the first year that MLS has exceeded year 1. Year 1 brought in a lot of curious people who left the following year because of (1) bizarre rules at the time like penalty shootouts for ties (2) the level of play was much lower than the old NASL (3) The "soccer mom" atmosphere promoted by the league at the time didn't fit most people's ideas of match atmosphere. (4) Some people came because of the US World Cup effect and turned out to not be so interested in the sport.

The fact that the league has overcome a lot of the old issues and attendance is at an all-time high, despite the recession, speaks of a good future ahead.

Sure there are problem attendance areas like with the Krew, but revenue sharing takes care of those, and there are no sub-10,000 type attendance figures to worry about and cause the league to bleed revenue.

ManUtd4ever
10-25-2011, 11:39 AM
Background info on these numbers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Bunny
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tooth_fairy

LOL, I'm sure the figures are based on the average paid attendance around the league.

Pookie
10-25-2011, 11:40 AM
For TFC, I'd be concerned over the TV ratings.

Gate business was fairly solid though still a couple thousand short of capacity.

The GolTV vs Rogers owned "Sportsnet World/Setanta" struggle results in our games getting buried with low quality broadcasts.

It is ridiculous that in Ontario, I can get a Whitecaps game in HD while my hometown Reds are broadcast in poor quality SD and I'm paying for both specialty channels over the course of a season.

Someone has to blink in this offseason to correct the TV ratings which will ultimately

zamperina
10-25-2011, 11:41 AM
Columbus has worse attendance than even Dallas...WOW!

DichioTFC
10-25-2011, 12:02 PM
Percent of stadiums filled, copied from the BS thread


Chicago Fire
Total Attendance = 242,657
Average Attendance = 14,274
% Change from 2010 (15,814) = -9.7%
% Capacity (20,00) = 71.4%

Chivas USA
Total Attendance = 252,102
Average Attendance = 14,830
% Change from 2010 (14,575) = +1.8%
% Capacity (27,000) = 54.9%

Colorado Rapids
Total Attendance = 252,248
Average Attendance = 14,838
% Change from 2010 (13,392) = +11.3%
% Capacity (18,086) = 82.0%

Columbus Crew
Total Attendance = 207,147
Average Attendance = 12,185
% Change from 2010 (14,642) = -16.8%
% Capacity (20,145) = 60.5%

DC United
Total Attendance = 258,072
Average Attendance = 15,181
% Change from 2010 (14,532) = +4.5%
% Capacity (22,000*) = 69.0%

*DCU capacity is set at 22,000 as a "standard" capacity for teams in non-soccer specific stadiums with large capacities, based partially on projected capacities for proposed stadiums in HOU/DC/NE

FC Dallas
Total Attendance = 218,636
Average Attendance = 12,861
% Change from 2010 (10,815) = +18.9%
% Capacity (21,193) = 60.7%

Houston Dynamo
Total Attendance = 300,796
Average Attendance = 17,694
% Change from 2010 (17,310) = +2.2%
% Capacity (22,000*) = 80.4%

*HOU capacity is set at 22,000 as a "standard" capacity for teams in non-soccer specific stadiums with large capacities, based partially on projected capacities for proposed stadiums in HOU/DC/NE

Los Angeles Galaxy
Total Attendance = 396,693
Average Attendance = 23,335
% Change from 2010 (21,437) = +8.6%
% Capacity (27,000) = 86.4%

New England Revolution
Total Attendance = 224,770
Average Attendance = 13,222
% Change from 2010 (12,987) = +1.8%
% Capacity (22,000*) = 60.1%

*NER capacity is set at 22,000 as a "standard" capacity for teams in non-soccer specific stadiums with large capacities, based partially on projected capacities for proposed stadiums in Houston/DC/NE

Philadelphia Union
Total Attendance = 310,395
Average Attendance = 18,259
% Change from 2010 (19,254*) = -5.2%
% Capacity (18,500) = 98.7%

*Philadelphia's 2010 attendance average included two games at the Linc

Portland Timbers
Total Attendance = 320,051
Average Attendance = 18,827
% Change from 2010 (10,727*) = +75.5%
% Capacity (18,827**) = 100.0%

*Timber's 2010 attendance average from USSF-D2
**Capacity is averaged from 15 games at 18,627 and 2 at 20,323

Real Salt Lake
Total Attendance = 299,099
Average Attendance = 17,594
% Change from 2010 (17,095) = +2.9%
% Capacity (20,008) = 87.9%

Red Bull New York
Total Attendance = 334,740
Average Attendance = 19,691
% Change from 2010 (18,441) = +6.8%
% Capacity (25,189) = 78.2%

San Jose Earthquakes
Total Attendance = 201,587
Average Attendance = 11,858
% Change from 2010 (9,659) = +22.8%
% Capacity (12,847*) = 98.6%

*SJE's capacity includes one game at Stanford Stadium with a capacity of 50,000

Seattle Sounders FC
Total Attendance = 654,385 (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif)
Average Attendance = 38,493
% Change from 2010 (36,173) = +6.4%
% Capacity (39,029*) = 98.6%

*SSFC's capacity includes two games of full CenturyLink Field capacity of 64,000

Sporting Kansas City
Total Attendance = 302,776
Average Attendance = 17,810
% Change from 2010 (10,287*) = +73.1%
% Capacity (18,467**) = 96.4%

Toronto FC
Total Attendance = 344,535
Average Attendance = 20,267
% Change from 2010 (20,453) = -0.9%
% Capacity (21,800) = 93.0%

Vancouver Whitecaps FC
Total Attendance = 347,011
Average Attendance = 20,412
% Change from 2010 (5,149*) = +296.4%
% Capacity (21,500) = 94.9%

*Whitecaps's 2010 attendance average from USSF-D2

MLS TOTAL
Total Attendance = 5,467,880
Average Attendance = 17,869
Median Attendance = 17,639
% Change from 2010 (16,675) = +7.2%
# of games <MED-33% (11,765): 56 (18.3%)
# of games >MED+33% (23,530): 36 (11.8%)

PopePouri
10-25-2011, 12:19 PM
Good news for the league. I don't care how they gather their numbers but as long as attendance is rising, it makes me happy.

prizby
10-25-2011, 12:29 PM
Columbus has worse attendance than even Dallas...WOW!

both are owned by the same owner

james
10-25-2011, 12:34 PM
Columbus has worse attendance than even Dallas...WOW!

well columbus attendence went way down this year while Dallas went way up. Id still say Columbus looks better on TV then Dallas, they got a good and loud vocal suppoerters group. Dallas just looks like shit on TV!

james
10-25-2011, 12:36 PM
Seattles attendence is inpressive when you see them drawing more then teams like Leeds united, Everton and West Ham.

Greatest Ripoff
10-25-2011, 01:57 PM
Seattles attendence is inpressive when you see them drawing more then teams like Leeds united, Everton and West Ham.

Seattle's average is higher than the capacity of both Elland Rod and the Boleyn Ground. So it is impossible for them to draw more than Seattle.

nfitz
10-25-2011, 08:14 PM
Way to go Kansas City!

TorCanSoc
10-25-2011, 08:23 PM
Good on Seattle.(38,495) Beating most of the EPL teams.


Average
1 Manchester United 75,109
2 Arsenal 60,025
3 Newcastle United 47,717
4 Manchester City 45,880
5 Liverpool 42,820
6 Chelsea 41,435
7 Sunderland 40,011
8 Aston Villa 37,193
9 Everton 36,038
10 Tottenham Hotspur 35,703
11 West Ham United 33,426
12 Wolverhampton Wanderers 27,695
13 Stoke City 26,858
14 Birmingham 25,461
15 Fulham 25,042
16 Blackburn Rovers 24,999
17 West Bromwich Albion 24,682
18 Bolton Wanderers 22,869
19 Wigan Athletic 16,812
20 Blackpool 15,779

james
10-26-2011, 01:19 AM
Seattle's average is higher than the capacity of both Elland Rod and the Boleyn Ground. So it is impossible for them to draw more than Seattle.


ok Everton ya they sell out....leeds stadium is only about 3/4 full on averahe and West Ham average attendence about 2,ooo under the tottal capacity. So yes they sell out some and come close to selling out others, anyways was just saying Seattles attendence is inpresive compared to other teams in England whether those teams sell out there stadiums or not, there drawing big numbers.

TFCREDNWHITE
10-26-2011, 01:43 AM
I don't believe that seattle's average is 38k...maybe paid...but what's really there in flesh is more like
27k according to my buddy who lives in seattle.

Roogsy
10-26-2011, 02:16 AM
Under 13k in average attendance for Dallas, only filling out 60% of their stadium?

I am not disposed to judge a person's choice of job, but I am left to scratch my head at why Cesar Velasco would want to take on marketing responsibilities for that disappointing franchise.

Dub Narcotic
10-26-2011, 05:44 AM
Houston's new stadium and Montreal joining next year should help even more. It's disappointing that more of the original teams aren't really increasing their numbers. What a huge mistake that Chicago stadium was.

ensco
10-26-2011, 05:58 AM
Re the integrity in these numbers...

I don't believe that there are thousands of no shows anywhere in MLS except for Toronto (and even then we only really had the phenomenom last year and this year).

I've now been to games at 5 MLS stadiums, and the announced attendance figure is inevitably a farce. I was at the Home Depot Center 2 weeks ago, LA-Chivas, announced attendance 27,000 (ie a sellout). Fannies in the seats more like 16,000-18,000.

The whole thing is out of hand, and could someday invite investigation by the authorities for fraud, as the representations around attendance are part of the marketing of a team. It's false and misleading advertising.

I'm not sure spending energy analyzing these numbers, even trends year to year, is at all useful, given how badly the data is corrupted.

mowe
10-26-2011, 06:47 AM
It's no secret that every stadium attendance figure for any sport is always tickets sold. What is unknown is how many people actually show up, as the teams never release that information.

prizby
10-26-2011, 09:00 AM
Under 13k in average attendance for Dallas, only filling out 60% of their stadium?

I am not disposed to judge a person's choice of job, but I am left to scratch my head at why Cesar Velasco would want to take on marketing responsibilities for that disappointing franchise.

maybe cuz it was closer to home (Mexico) (thats where he's from right?)

jabbronies
10-26-2011, 09:10 AM
Under 13k in average attendance for Dallas, only filling out 60% of their stadium?

I am not disposed to judge a person's choice of job, but I am left to scratch my head at why Cesar Velasco would want to take on marketing responsibilities for that disappointing franchise.

Closer to Family, Better Weather, one of the richest States in the US of A so he's probably getting paid, going to a team that doesn't know anything about soccer makes him look good.... lots of reasons.

ensco
10-26-2011, 01:50 PM
It's no secret that every stadium attendance figure for any sport is always tickets sold. What is unknown is how many people actually show up, as the teams never release that information.

I think this has become an urban myth.

Imho it's just a question of degree now - some leagues are worse than others. It's disappointing to me how far down this path MLS has gone, it's brutal, and immoral.

Canary10
10-26-2011, 02:31 PM
At the end of the day you have to pick a definition and stay with it. Paid attendance makes sense from a lot of perspectives (financial espcially). Doesn't make as much sense as a gauge on the "hotness" of a team in its market though.

__wowza
10-26-2011, 02:39 PM
At the end of the day you have to pick a definition and stay with it. Paid attendance makes sense from a lot of perspectives (financial espcially). Doesn't make as much sense as a gauge on the "hotness" of a team in its market though.

plus, which is easier:

gathering the number of tickets sold pre-game and adding on any walkups (less than 1k for sure?

or

counting every single ticket at the gate?

Oldtimer
10-26-2011, 02:43 PM
I think this has become an urban myth.

Imho it's just a question of degree now - some leagues are worse than others. It's disappointing to me how far down this path MLS has gone, it's brutal, and immoral.

MLB is quite open that they record ticket sales, not bums in seats.

Stouffville_RPB
10-26-2011, 03:11 PM
What I find interesting is that DichioTFC's post only 4 clubs dropped in attendance this season and one of them was us. (Chicago, Columbus, Philly and TFC)

I know it was a small drop (only 200 or so) but a drop none the less. That means less jerseys sold at games, less vendor revenue and more importantly the losing the chance for repeat customers. That is something that will get FO's attention.

habstfc
10-26-2011, 03:12 PM
If you notice toronto is fourth overall in league attendance. If it's paid or actual bodies who really cares. If a ticket is paid for, then that indicates a demand whether that ticket is used or not. Toronto still has impressive numbers considering the lack of success and still shows that season seat numbers will still be high despite what some think.

habstfc
10-26-2011, 03:14 PM
What I find interesting is that DichioTFC's post only 4 clubs dropped in attendance this season and one of them was us. (Chicago, Columbus, Philly and TFC)

I know it was a small drop (only 200 or so) but a drop none the less. That means less jerseys sold at games, less vendor revenue and more importantly the losing the chance for repeat customers. That is something that will get FO's attention.

Toronto drew the same amount on average as in year one when the "hotness" of the ticket was at it's peak. I don't think anyone is going to panick at 200 less people from the year before.

Pookie
10-26-2011, 03:28 PM
I don't think the drop gets their attention.

That said, I'd wager there are two elements being looked at.

1. The number of folks that buy a ticket but don't show up. That implies that they either:

a) don't care anymore,
b) couldn't find a secondary buyer/gifter who cares either or
c) both.

This number is into the 1,000's

2. The fact that they expanded and expected to fill the stadium. Business plans were built around a "membership" concept and the new seats being used to allow red listers to see a game. Those folks would help create scarcity for season tickets. While attendance is over 20,000, that is over 2,000 short of capacity.

habstfc
10-26-2011, 03:39 PM
I don't think the drop gets their attention.

That said, I'd wager there are two elements being looked at.

1. The number of folks that buy a ticket but don't show up. That implies that they either:

a) don't care anymore,
b) couldn't find a secondary buyer/gifter who cares either or
c) both.

This number is into the 1,000's

2. The fact that they expanded and expected to fill the stadium. Business plans were built around a "membership" concept and the new seats being used to allow red listers to see a game. Those folks would help create scarcity for season tickets. While attendance is over 20,000, that is over 2,000 short of capacity.

That is true but tfc averaged about 100 more this year than in year one and with the price of tickets much higher now I think there is a huge love-in for this team still.

Gazza_55
10-27-2011, 12:29 AM
What I find interesting is that DichioTFC's post only 4 clubs dropped in attendance this season and one of them was us. (Chicago, Columbus, Philly and TFC)

I know it was a small drop (only 200 or so) but a drop none the less. That means less jerseys sold at games, less vendor revenue and more importantly the losing the chance for repeat customers. That is something that will get FO's attention.

And Philly was a function of their stadium. Last year they played the first 2 home matches at the Linc.

james
10-27-2011, 02:11 AM
Teams are just counting how many tickets they sold/gave away. Toronto i believe for the most part are giving the stats they have on tickets sold. but people showing up is a different story, majority of people being season ticket holders, majority of them probably miss a game here and there as its hard to attend every single game.Horrible performance on field leads many people thinking, hmmm should i go see TFC lose again like when i was at the mid week game 3 days ago,or should i go with my friends to the cottage this weekend? Or people going to parties, weddings, vactions, shit weather, all these are reasons people dont show up every week. Happens to people i know. It happens to enough people to make it a few thousand every game not showing up.

menefreghista
10-27-2011, 05:41 AM
The funny thing is, according to this article from back in April, TFC FO lists attendance as the actual number of people that attend the game:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/soccer/story/2011/04/18/sp-mls-tfc-attendance.html

But anyone with eyes knows that's bullshit. There weren't 21,000 at BMO Field last Saturday.

So essentially they are just making a number up.

I'm with ensco on this, its impossible to analyze attendance numbers because we don't have the real numbers.

PopePouri
10-27-2011, 06:50 AM
I don't believe that seattle's average is 38k...maybe paid...but what's really there in flesh is more like
27k according to my buddy who lives in seattle.

Which obviously speaks to the apathy in Seattle,

rocker
10-27-2011, 12:31 PM
It's impossible to know attendance accurately just from using your eyes. That's a notorious mistake made by people who estimate crowds of people in protests.

And anyways, even if 21000 were not at BMO on Saturday, it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. If your eyes think there were 17000, that's fine. It's a revenue sharing league, so the difference doesn't matter. If you're getting 10000 in this league, your team still survives. It's not worthy of the obsession that people have with specific attendances.

menefreghista
10-27-2011, 12:35 PM
It's impossible to know attendance accurately just from using your eyes. That's a notorious mistake made by people who estimate crowds of people in protests.

And while that may be the case, there weren't over 21,000 at last Saturday's match.

rocker
10-27-2011, 12:43 PM
And while that may be the case, there weren't over 21,000 at last Saturday's match.

You're making a statement of fact that cannot be proven.

Better to say "I question whether there were over 21,000 at last Saturday's match, but I cannot be sure."

Someone could equally say: "I think there were 21,000 who passed through the gates at some point from 11:30am to the end of the match." But that can't be proven either. You're never going to have 21,000 sitting in their seats at any one time or all 21,000 people attending all 90 minutes (sadly).

Even in year 1, people questioned the attendance numbers of TFC. I remember people on Big Soccer saying there weren't 20000 there... "Look at the picture on TV at the 20th minute -- look at all of those empty seats in the east stand."

The fact is, according to the only numbers we have (team/league numbers) TFC has greater attendance than most other MLS teams. That's despite being one of the shittiest performing teams in the league. If Columbus had our 5-year league failure, I suspect (making a prediction here!) that they might have less than 10000 a game all season. Seattle's attendance success is probably driven, I guess, by success in the standings. If they had 5 years of suckage, I wonder if they'd be increasing.

Toronto_Bhoy
10-27-2011, 01:18 PM
The issue I have is, both TFC and MLS know EXACTLY how many people were at the game but refuse to offer the "real" numbers.

Why? Because their below the "announced/public" numbers.

It's not good for business to sell 21,000 ticket and only have X show up. No-shows are a barometer of customer apathy. 70 or 80 people in my section paid $60 each but felt it wasn't worth the money to show up? That barometer sets the rate for advertising, sponsorship and media coverage. It also justifies ticket pricing.

And don't blame Saturday's weather, no-shows were a regular occurrence during the season, far more than any other.

Even the most harden section of TFC support, the South End was well short of capacity. No question the team's performance has contributed but I fear the real sell out days may be behind us…time and team quality will tell…

Detroit_TFC
10-27-2011, 01:26 PM
The crowd at BMO always has ants in their pants. Those of you in the supporters section may not notice that, but out there with the masses, those fuckers don't sit still for 10 minutes.

Not unreasonable to estimate a few hundred people milling around under the stands at any point. On Saturday, well into the 2nd half the east concourse was packed.

pdogg
10-27-2011, 01:56 PM
The crowd at BMO always has ants in their pants. Those of you in the supporters section may not notice that, but out there with the masses, those fuckers don't sit still for 10 minutes.

Not unreasonable to estimate a few hundred people milling around under the stands at any point. On Saturday, well into the 2nd half the east concourse was packed.

Absolutely. I have an aisle seat and anyone going to or from their seat from the rows above me obstructs my view. People are coming and going all game and I miss a good 1/2 of the play not directly in front of me.

PopePouri
10-27-2011, 02:03 PM
Absolutely. I have an aisle seat and anyone going to or from their seat from the rows above me obstructs my view. People are coming and going all game and I miss a good 1/2 of the play not directly in front of me.

North American sports culture I think.


That and beer.

james
10-27-2011, 03:31 PM
they could say there was 21,000 in the stadium....but few hundred stayed in the beer garden area, few hundred people at any given time were not in there seats getting drinks, food, exc. And at any time a few hundred people/thousand left came late or left early or both, always making the stadium look not full.

TorontoPat
10-27-2011, 04:25 PM
The empty seats near my wife and daughter weren't used for the entire game. I guess some fans never go to their seats for the entire game. lol

ensco
10-27-2011, 05:39 PM
Really? The beer garden? People popping up and down?

We know exactly what a sellout actually looks like, we used to have them, back when the beer garden was way more attractive, and a much bigger factor. This ain't it.

A couple of hundred people in the beer garden is not why there were 5,000 or more empty seats last Saturday. Neither is no shows (though I don't doubt there were some).

pdogg
10-27-2011, 06:17 PM
Pre-expansion, the largest gate was 20,902 in 2009 and the average was 20,344 (same year). Interestingly enough, capacity was only 20,200 at the time.

In 2010 they decided to add an extra ~1300 seats but apparently capacity is now 23,000. If the average attendance is 20,267 that means there are 2800 empty seats plus x amount of wanderers. Just say 500-600 people were in the washrooms, buying beer, smoking, whatever, that would put us almost at 3500 people. That's around 15% of the stadium empty or 3x the area of the north stand. That is going to make it look emptier than what it actyally is. Like someone said before, it's tough to do estimations just by eye.

I'm not sure what the obsession with the actual attendance numbers really matters though. Does it really affect anything if it's gate or sales? To everyone but those counting the money, does it matter? If the place *looks* full, it's full. If it *looks* empty, it's empty... No number that they announce is going to change that and no one will ever be happy with whatever they do announce

Kaz
10-27-2011, 06:30 PM
Ok a few things.

One there are 16000 season ticket holders there about still. If there was an announced attendance of 21000 that means 5 thousand other seats were sold, be it at the gate or else where.

Season ticket holders often buy the tickets knowing full well they can't go to every game.

If you have 80% of your season ticket holders out to a game then you have 3,200 seats empty at any given time. Add another 4 or 5 hundred out of their seats at any given time for what ever reason. (arrive late, leave early, bathroom, food, beer garden, etc) and you can see where the issue is.

Announcing 21006 to a game is fine because 16,000 of them are season ticket holders.

BMO can apparently hold 23000 now. If announced attendance was 21,600 that is 1500 empty seats. if 500 more are out of there seats at any given moment. and even 5% of ticket holders no show you still see about 15 percent of the seats being empty.

If you are use to seeing that with a 21,000 seat capacity as in past years, then not surprisingly that will look to your eyes as there only being 17,000-18000.

As they announced a game at 16,313 this year, And there are 16,000 season ticket holders.... I have a hard time believing they only use tickets sold. As partial season packages should account for another 2000 seats (guessing) or at least more then 313 seats.

james
10-27-2011, 09:38 PM
If you notice toronto is fourth overall in league attendance. If it's paid or actual bodies who really cares. If a ticket is paid for, then that indicates a demand whether that ticket is used or not. Toronto still has impressive numbers considering the lack of success and still shows that season seat numbers will still be high despite what some think.

ya i must say i dont think any MLS team could have sold as many tickets as TFC have at such a high price with the worst on field performance over 5 years.

habstfc
10-27-2011, 09:56 PM
One there are 16000 season ticket holders there about still. If there was an announced attendance of 21000 that means 5 thousand other seats were sold, be it at the gate or else where.

Season ticket holders often buy the tickets knowing full well they can't go to every game.

If you have 80% of your season ticket holders out to a game then you have 3,200 seats empty at any given time. Add another 4 or 5 hundred out of their seats at any given time for what ever reason. (arrive late, leave early, bathroom, food, beer garden, etc) and you can see where the issue is.

BMO can apparently hold 23000 now. If announced attendance was 21,600 that is 1500 empty seats. if 500 more are out of there seats at any given moment. and even 5% of ticket holders no show you still see about 15 percent of the seats being empty.

If you are use to seeing that with a 21,000 seat capacity as in past years, then not surprisingly that will look to your eyes as there only being 17,000-18000.

As they announced a game at 16,313 this year, And there are 16,000 season ticket holders.... I have a hard time believing they only use tickets sold. As partial season packages should account for another 2000 seats (guessing) or at least more then 313 seats.

BMO seats 21,800. They can squeeze in more if people that have the boxes purchase more tickets to any aprticular game.

Your other points are very valid. I myself ate tickets to a few games I couldn't attend beacause of vacation etc. and others I gave to RPB members.

menefreghista
10-27-2011, 10:49 PM
Really? The beer garden? People popping up and down?

We know exactly what a sellout actually looks like, we used to have them, back when the beer garden was way more attractive, and a much bigger factor. This ain't it.

A couple of hundred people in the beer garden is not why there were 5,000 or more empty seats last Saturday. Neither is no shows (though I don't doubt there were some).

[TFC FO Apologist]

You're making a statement of fact that cannot be proven.

[/TFC FO Apologist]

ensco
10-28-2011, 07:20 AM
[TFC FO Apologist]

You're making a statement of fact that cannot be proven.

[/TFC FO Apologist]

I don't know why, maybe it's not representative, but there sure are a lot of people on here trying out for MLS FO marketing department jobs or something.

This bugs me. It matters because what the MLS FOs do is deceitful. It's not right to create the illusion of scarcity through outright lying. I want this league to be better than that.

menefreghista
10-28-2011, 07:29 AM
I don't know why, maybe it's not representative, but there sure are a lot of people on here trying out for MLS FO marketing department jobs or something.

This bugs me. It matters because what the MLS FOs do is deceitful. It's not right to create the illusion of scarcity through outright lying. I want this league to be better than that.

I agree with you.

I think its laughable that anyone can think there were 21,600 people at BMO last Saturday.

Sorry, if I don't have 'facts' to prove that. But I have the experience of attending matches since day one of the stadium. And I know from many factors that that 21,600 against NE last Saturday was a lot less packed than 20,000 in season one. The beer garden, washroom breaks and getting food don't account for that. Not even close.

ManUtd4ever
10-28-2011, 07:56 AM
It matters because what the MLS FOs do is deceitful. It's not right to create the illusion of scarcity through outright lying. I want this league to be better than that.

It's a practice that is commonplace among most organizations in professional sports in general. I don't necessarily agree with it, but let's not pretend that MLS FOs created the concept.

pdogg
10-28-2011, 08:12 AM
I don't know why, maybe it's not representative, but there sure are a lot of people on here trying out for MLS FO marketing department jobs or something.

This bugs me. It matters because what the MLS FOs do is deceitful. It's not right to create the illusion of scarcity through outright lying. I want this league to be better than that.

Of course, anyone who takes a view opposite yours either works for the company or is trying to get a job there.

What people are saying is that it is very hard to judge attendance numbers just based on a cursory view of the stands at any given time. That's all. We have no way of proving whether the numbers announced are real or not. And at the end of the day, it doesn't even matter. I don't know anyone who is basing their decision to buy tickets based on the attendance numbers. Do you think they care whether there was 18000 or 23000 at the last game?

ensco
10-28-2011, 08:23 AM
It's a practice that is commonplace among most organizations in professional sports in general. I don't necessarily agree with it, but let's not pretend that MLS FOs created the concept.

It's a problem in society. The claims on the labels of 100s of products at the grocery store is another example.

Every sport does it. But MLS is the worst.

ensco
10-28-2011, 08:26 AM
I don't know anyone who is basing their decision to buy tickets based on the attendance numbers. Do you think they care whether there was 18000 or 23000 at the last game?

I can't share the data with you, sorry, but I actually know this from my professional life, plus it's obvious (to me anyway) even without the data: the perception of scarcity of the ticket has the single biggest impact on season ticket renewals. By far.

pdogg
10-28-2011, 10:33 AM
I can't share the data with you, sorry, but I actually know this from my professional life, plus it's obvious (to me anyway) even without the data: the perception of scarcity of the ticket has the single biggest impact on season ticket renewals. By far.

I must be in the minority as my decision was based on my enjoyment of watching against the price point available to me. Maybe that's why I'm not able to properly judge the attendance, I've been looking down at the field rather than up in the stands :D I do know there are about 25 guys running around the field at any given time!

Ultra & Proud
10-28-2011, 10:35 AM
Still the MLS average attendance is higher than the NBA and NHL at the moment ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures ).

And those attendance numbers are fake also. No way do the Carolina Hurricanes average over 16,000 a game. I think every sport skews the numbers a bit but having MLS as the fourth highest attended sport in North America is something positive.

Oldtimer
10-28-2011, 10:50 AM
I don't know why, maybe it's not representative, but there sure are a lot of people on here trying out for MLS FO marketing department jobs or something.



[mod mode]

Don't attack the people ensco, they are entitled to their opinion. Attack the argument,

[/mod mode]

habstfc
10-28-2011, 12:08 PM
I can't share the data with you, sorry, but I actually know this from my professional life, plus it's obvious (to me anyway) even without the data: the perception of scarcity of the ticket has the single biggest impact on season ticket renewals. By far.

I think what drives season ticket numbers is the love of the team and the sport to people and the ability to pay for those tickets, nothing else. I don't think there are too many people who buy because they think they won't be able to attend games unless they buy season seats, if they can't afford them they won't buy, period.

Oldtimer
10-28-2011, 12:38 PM
I can't share the data with you, sorry, but I actually know this from my professional life, plus it's obvious (to me anyway) even without the data: the perception of scarcity of the ticket has the single biggest impact on season ticket renewals. By far.


I think what drives season ticket numbers is the love of the team and the sport to people and the ability to pay for those tickets, nothing else. I don't think there are too many people who buy because they think they won't be able to attend games unless they buy season seats, if they can't afford them they won't buy, period.

It's both. Scarcity can drive season ticket sales if people perceive that that they can't see the team/sport they love without them. Unless they are scalpers, they don't care that they are scarce unless they love the sport/team (scalpers will buy anything if it is scarce and they can make a buck).

Even without scarcity, some people will buy season tickets because they want the discount and they see most of the games, or their company will use the tickets for most games. There are Blue Jay season ticket holders, despite there being a lot of empty seats at the Rogers Centre.

TorontoPat
10-28-2011, 02:38 PM
I'll side with scarcity of tickets would sway people into buying season seats. If you absolutely knew for sure you can attend the game and sit in the area you like, there really isn't much reason to buy season seats. The only reasons for buying season's I can think of is you get it all over at once, rather than buying every week. You get a small discount, Oh and you get a scarf.

ensco
10-28-2011, 03:07 PM
[mod mode]

Don't attack the people ensco, they are entitled to their opinion. Attack the argument,

[/mod mode]

OK. Point taken. You are right.

People can believe this, or not, it's a free world, but I am telling you: behind closed doors of many sports teams' FOs, there is a frantic, daily search for tactics (some of which are not very ethical) to create the illusion of scarcity because, in the aggregate, that's how the SSH buying/renewing group behaves. (Talking about the SSH group as a whole, not everyone in it, I hear you loud and clear pdogg!)

LesH
10-28-2011, 04:30 PM
North American sports culture I think.


That and beer.


You hit the nail on the head!

james
10-29-2011, 06:06 PM
Still the MLS average attendance is higher than the NBA and NHL at the moment ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sports_attendance_figures ).

And those attendance numbers are fake also. No way do the Carolina Hurricanes average over 16,000 a game. I think every sport skews the numbers a bit but having MLS as the fourth highest attended sport in North America is something positive.

ya but when you look at the NHL and NBA they play about 42 home games, compared to MLS what 17 home games?? so there overall numbers still much higher. But you could also look at the NFL and say despite having 70-80,000 fans a game they only play 8 home games, which overall is alot less fans then NHL and NBA get in a season. But add in sponsors, tv deals, viewership and all that it really all comes down to how much money does each sport make. And MLS in no way makes the money the other leagues do.

habstfc
10-29-2011, 09:09 PM
ya but when you look at the NHL and NBA they play about 42 home games, compared to MLS what 17 home games?? so there overall numbers still much higher. But you could also look at the NFL and say despite having 70-80,000 fans a game they only play 8 home games, which overall is alot less fans then NHL and NBA get in a season. But add in sponsors, tv deals, viewership and all that it really all comes down to how much money does each sport make. And MLS in no way mainge the money the other leagues do.

Also mls has the cheapest tickets compared to nhl, nba, nfl etc.

nfitz
10-30-2011, 09:42 AM
Also mls has the cheapest tickets compared to nhl, nba, nfl etc.Something to keep in mind ... had a ticket to last night's Leafs game from a client (first time that's happened in 15 years ...) I know the Leafs are expensive, but nothing drives that home like looking at the ticket and realising that this was nearly half the cost for my season for TFC ... and it wasn't even Gold.