PDA

View Full Version : Attendance, viewership down marginally for MLS



jloome
11-03-2008, 05:56 PM
...although if you consider some of the obstacles (Salt Lake's temp home, KC's temp home) it looks more like a flat line to me.


http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60481

The Kingpin
11-03-2008, 05:58 PM
Considering the Beckham factor... Shouldn't it be going up. He is the Ambassador of American Soccer!!!

JonO
11-03-2008, 06:16 PM
^^ Not really - it is his second year in the league. We all knew the "novelty" factor would wear off. To be honest, I am quite surprised by the Dallas and Colorado numbers... Those oare big drops. Anyone have any idea what's going on in those cities?

NF-FC
11-03-2008, 06:24 PM
^^ Not really - it is his second year in the league. We all knew the "novelty" factor would wear off. To be honest, I am quite surprised by the Dallas and Colorado numbers... Those oare big drops. Anyone have any idea what's going on in those cities?

Well, both teams don't actually play in the cities they represent and the stadiums aren't as shiny anymore.

Redcoe15
11-03-2008, 06:46 PM
We might see a bit of a spike with Seattle entering next season.

Toronto Ruffrider
11-04-2008, 12:22 AM
^^ Not really - it is his second year in the league. We all knew the "novelty" factor would wear off. To be honest, I am quite surprised by the Dallas and Colorado numbers... Those oare big drops. Anyone have any idea what's going on in those cities?

Taken from later in the article:

"A spokesperson for FC Dallas said the team reduced the number of complimentary tickets offered this season and televised all home games for the first time, which affected attendance."

Complimentary tickets still greatly affect attendance figures in MLS. The average attendance in MLS this season was 16,459, but I seriously hope that no one on this board is gullible enough to take this figure at face value. Dallas' attendance drop can largely be attributed to a reduction in freebies. For all we know, many MLS teams still give away tonnes of tickets - Columbus anyone? (http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/sports/stories/2008/07/17/crew17.ART_ART_07-17-08_C1_O2AP95Q.html?sid=101) - and that has resulted in less stagnant crowd figures.

jabbronies
11-04-2008, 12:55 AM
-0.10 is not good for us.

Considering we added a bunch of seats this year to the stadium, how the fuck are we dropping 0.10% if all the games were sold out??

CoachGT
11-04-2008, 07:55 AM
According to the MLS website, using the complete league stats, in 2007 TFC had 301,947 fans attend games in Toronto. In 2008, the number is 301,793. That is only 154 different. That alone could be accounted for by the one game where the CMNT played in Montreal (attendance vs Chivas 19,863) or the following week with Columbus (attendance at a low of 19,657). We had three games under 20k, the third being DC back in May at 19,971. A bit of a surprise is the Vancouver game, which only had 18,938.

The Kingpin
11-04-2008, 08:04 AM
^^ Not really - it is his second year in the league. We all knew the "novelty" factor would wear off. To be honest, I am quite surprised by the Dallas and Colorado numbers... Those oare big drops. Anyone have any idea what's going on in those cities?

Perfect! I was hoping someone would respond with this point. Though on the surface this does seem like a valid point, we must remember why the league invested a quarter of a billion dollars on one player. Beckham was brought in as a marketing ploy to help foster the soccer experience in America, now I do understand this takes time, but I'm certain they were looking for slow but consistent growth.

I'm not shy with respect to my opinions of Don Garber, Rudi may have a point that at one time he could be construed as successful, but Don Garber has proven that the job is now beyond him. Using an NASL tactic in conjunction with numerous other follies has made Don Garber an archaic figure. this league now needs a visionary, not an NFL cast-off who is trying to apply the same elements to soccer.

So back to Beckham. The whole point to signing him was to gradually increase exposure, all that has happened (and I do live in a country where I am exposed to foreign exposure of the MLS) and the league is being construed as a calamitous situation... The very few times it is mentioned at all. The Beckahm loan to AC Milan secured this. This loan was probably to recoup some of the losses from ticket sales... sales Beckham was supposed to increase.

CoachGT
11-04-2008, 08:14 AM
Bear in mind that a chunk of the Galaxy's revenue for recouping Beck's costs comes from friendlies. They have been commanding big bucks when they've played elsewhere in the world. I'm not sure that MLS attendance alone picks up much of his cost. Add to that the jersey marketing - in every stadium, and every sporting goods store on all of the road trips I've been to this year, it has been far easier to get a Becks jersey than a local team jersey, including in San Jose! And the SJ fans have a real complex about LA!

Oldtimer
11-04-2008, 08:33 AM
I'm not shy with respect to my opinions of Don Garber, Rudi may have a point that at one time he could be construed as successful, but Don Garber has proven that the job is now beyond him. Using an NASL tactic in conjunction with numerous other follies has made Don Garber an archaic figure. this league now needs a visionary, not an NFL cast-off who is trying to apply the same elements to soccer.



Garber was not an "NFL cast-off." He was an important figure as the head of NFL Europe, and highly successful. We were very fortunate to get him at the helm at the league's darkest hours. He, along with two billionaires, saved the league. Your "revisionism" is totally out of line.

Garber got rid of the NASL-style "Americanised" rules that had polluted the game in North America in favour of international rules. What's not to like about that?

You could reasonably argue that now it is the time to move from cautious growth, and pass the torch on to someone with a "grander scheme," but you have to argue these points a little more reasonably.

Personally, while I don't like the heavy-handedness of the league FO, and I don't like all of his decisions, I prefer the idea of cautious growth to a NASL-style blowout.

JonO
11-04-2008, 09:07 AM
Perfect! I was hoping someone would respond with this point. Though on the surface this does seem like a valid point, we must remember why the league invested a quarter of a billion dollars on one player. Beckham was brought in as a marketing ploy to help foster the soccer experience in America, now I do understand this takes time, but I'm certain they were looking for slow but consistent growth.
And I think two years is not enough time to properly determine his effect. I think it was predictable that there would be a drop from 1st to 2nd year.

The idea was to attract peope with the hype in the first year, which they did. Realistically, it could not be expected that ALL of the people attracted by the hype would stick around, but hopefully a majority would. To me, this is the slight drop in attendance from year 1 to 2.

If attendance can hold steady or increase next year, then I think the move will have been a success. If not, then it's going to be a problem.

GuelphStorm2007
11-04-2008, 09:14 AM
I wonder if the econimic down turn they are experincing in the States factors in the drop in Attendance. In Colorado and Dallas. Even Washington had a drop of 5% also.

The Kingpin
11-04-2008, 09:17 AM
And I think two years is not enough time to properly determine his effect. I think it was predictable that there would be a drop from 1st to 2nd year.

The idea was to attract peope with the hype in the first year, which they did. Realistically, it could not be expected that ALL of the people attracted by the hype would stick around, but hopefully a majority would. To me, this is the slight drop in attendance from year 1 to 2.

If attendance can hold steady or increase next year, then I think the move will have been a success. If not, then it's going to be a problem.

I Address this point here: So back to Beckham. The whole point to signing him was to gradually increase exposure, all that has happened (and I do live in a country where I am exposed to foreign exposure of the MLS) is the league is being construed as a calamitous situation... The very few times it is mentioned at all. The Beckahm loan to AC Milan secured this. This loan was probably to recoup some of the losses from ticket sales... sales Beckham was supposed to increase.

He was hired to expand the public consciousness, not for a short term blip on the radar. As a side note, I have nothing against Beckham what so ever, I think he's a top flight professional. I just this that this in conjunction with the "DP" or "Beckahm" rule leads us backward towards the NASL.

The Kingpin
11-04-2008, 09:32 AM
Garber was not an "NFL cast-off." He was an important figure as the head of NFL Europe, and highly successful. We were very fortunate to get him at the helm at the league's darkest hours. He, along with two billionaires, saved the league. Your "revisionism" is totally out of line.

Garber got rid of the NASL-style "Americanised" rules that had polluted the game in North America in favour of international rules. What's not to like about that?

You could reasonably argue that now it is the time to move from cautious growth, and pass the torch on to someone with a "grander scheme," but you have to argue these points a little more reasonably.

Personally, while I don't like the heavy-handedness of the league FO, and I don't like all of his decisions, I prefer the idea of cautious growth to a NASL-style blowout.

Though I hear your point (please see my points about the NASL in my last post) I don't think you are seeing mine. This man has the wrong vision for the long term, and he always has. This is a quote from Don Garber in 2001 (I've extracted the part about the US winning the World Cup and the fact they are a Soccer powerhouse):

...Now he needs fans, after attendance dropped four straight years from a promising 17,406 to 13,756 last season. He thinks mistakes were made in not reaching youth leagues and ethnic pockets.

''We've lost a generation,'' Garber said, referring to the failure of the North American Soccer League. ''We have to get to our hard-core fans.

''The Hispanic fans know the sport,'' Garber said. ''They may say they want players from their home country, but they will respond to good players and good teams. We are an American league, but we want a few foreign stars who want to be here.''...

It is a visionary like this that we don't need. We need someone who truly gets the game without the hardened NFL mindset. NFL Europe was not a success because it was trying to sell American culture to Europe (See Disney as alt. example). He has proven himself to be culturally ignorant in some respect. And I will avoid simple issues such as officiating, etc.

Quotes like this scare me as well:

"After this glimpse of soccer at its very best, Garber did not rush to enlist. But in 1999, the owners of M.L.S. contacted him. There are not that many commissioner jobs around..."

let me just say that I'm skeptical. I know he has done some positive things, I just think his time is up and we now need a visionary vs. and NFL trained atomaton. Just and always will be my opinion... :noidea:

Beach_Red
11-04-2008, 09:48 AM
NFL Europe was not a success because it was trying to sell American culture to Europe (See Disney as alt. example).

It works both ways - it would be very tough to sell European soccer to the US.

The NFL is the best example of a sports league moving from regional interest to the main stage, which it did in the 60's and 70's, overtaking baseball.

The NBA is also a good example. In 1980 when the USA won the gold medal in hockey, most NHL teams were valued more than NBA teams and there was more expansion interest in the NHL. The NBA was coming along slowly.

Now, the NBA has surpassed the NHL. So, if you're going to try and build a new league in the USA you're going to look to the NFL and the NBA - it would be even tougher to bring European-style league here than it would be to sell Disney in Europe; at least Disney (and most other Hollywood) movies make tons of money in Europe.

But certainly the DP idea is wrong and it would be better to increase the cap. MLS is at a turning point but "vision" is too vague. What's needed is someone ruthless enough to say that the league has moved into a more expensive nieghbourhood and the teams that can't afford to have to leave to make way for one who can.

JonO
11-04-2008, 10:14 AM
I Address this point here: So back to Beckham. The whole point to signing him was to gradually increase exposure, all that has happened (and I do live in a country where I am exposed to foreign exposure of the MLS) is the league is being construed as a calamitous situation... The very few times it is mentioned at all. The Beckahm loan to AC Milan secured this. This loan was probably to recoup some of the losses from ticket sales... sales Beckham was supposed to increase.

He was hired to expand the public consciousness, not for a short term blip on the radar. As a side note, I have nothing against Beckham what so ever, I think he's a top flight professional. I just this that this in conjunction with the "DP" or "Beckahm" rule leads us backward towards the NASL.
Meh.. you obfuscate and dismiss my argument. I don't think the point to signing him was to gradually increase exposue. In my humble non-marketing technical mind, this was a one time bump to exposure. The trick was to maintain interest after the bump. Perhaps we can agree to disagree on this...

ccopela
11-04-2008, 10:18 AM
I wonder if the econimic down turn they are experincing in the States factors in the drop in Attendance. In Colorado and Dallas. Even Washington had a drop of 5% also.

I'm sure that had something to do with it. I'm also sure that with increased gas prices the stadiums that are far away from the city: Dallas, Colorado, etc without good public transit will have harder times attracting people to their stadiums.

bee dubya
11-04-2008, 11:46 AM
I think the real effect that Beckham will have on soccer in North America won't truly be felt for another 10 years. Watch what happens to the level of play in North America over that time. I think we'll see more and more kids choosing to try to play soccer professionally when before they might not have considered it an option.

Damien
11-04-2008, 11:55 AM
-0.10 is not good for us.

Considering we added a bunch of seats this year to the stadium, how the fuck are we dropping 0.10% if all the games were sold out??

I don't think the #'s are tickets sold, it's actual attendence. If you look at the # of games we played when it was cold and rainy this year, multiplied by the # of STH's who didnt show up those games, then it probably makes a lil more sense.

Hitcho
11-04-2008, 11:56 AM
In my humble non-marketing technical mind...

Hah! I think you should start all your client letters with this line JonO. Superb! :p

Hitcho
11-04-2008, 12:08 PM
I think the real effect that Beckham will have on soccer in North America won't truly be felt for another 10 years. Watch what happens to the level of play in North America over that time. I think we'll see more and more kids choosing to try to play soccer professionally when before they might not have considered it an option.

I think "sawker" in Namerica will steadily grow as a sport among kids over the next decade or two and, as those kids grow up, attendance figures for MLS will likely increase since more people in each generation, once they become adults with money to spend, will be more likely to go for MLS tickets than NHL/NBA/NFL etc tickets relative to the generation before them (I'm not saying MLS sales will overtake other sports, I'm saying the gap between MLS and other sports will close a bit).

Beckham (and others like him who will probably follow) will likely have an impact on this, but I'm not sure how much. I think the game is growing among kids and that will result in an increased national exposure further down the line, and so the trend will continue.

Also, there's the ease of access to the game, especially in hard economic times. You don't even need a football - you just need one of your mates to have one. Hence more kids can play footie than hockey, baseball and even basketball (which requires a court/net as opposed to a patch of ground with jumpers for goalposts).

jaahuuu
11-04-2008, 12:32 PM
According to the MLS website, using the complete league stats, in 2007 TFC had 301,947 fans attend games in Toronto. In 2008, the number is 301,793. That is only 154 different. That alone could be accounted for by the one game where the CMNT played in Montreal (attendance vs Chivas 19,863) or the following week with Columbus (attendance at a low of 19,657). We had three games under 20k, the third being DC back in May at 19,971. A bit of a surprise is the Vancouver game, which only had 18,938.
I can't find the numbers online, but didn't the team put extra seats in for the games in summer 2007 against LA and Chicago, in the north end? That alone could account for a 154 person drop.

Toronto_Bhoy
11-04-2008, 01:00 PM
Perfect! I was hoping someone would respond with this point. Though on the surface this does seem like a valid point, we must remember why the league invested a quarter of a billion dollars on one player. Beckham was brought in as a marketing ploy to help foster the soccer experience in America, now I do understand this takes time, but I'm certain they were looking for slow but consistent growth.


The league invested nowhere near "a quarter billion dollars"!

If memory serves Kingpin, you come from a marketing background…you should know better. This contract has become a "marketing case study" for professional player contracts and is extremely well documented.

Many corporate forces were at work to construct Golden Balls' move to America and much had little to do with football. People like Motorola and Gillette are not half as concerned with the American footy fan as they are with tying their can to Becks, the global brand…the footballer is an add on for them.

As far as a "ploy to foster the soccer experience"…it's only part of the story.

Sure the MLS gets global name recognition with David but again only because it dovetails with other greater "tangible" corporate objectives that aren't even football related…football is the vehicle. The USA having a good run in South Africa will do far more for Soccer America than ten Beckham's ever could.

The beauty of this deal is everyone benefits…with maybe the exception of the LA Galaxy…who are still shit and playoffless with Golden Balls in their lineup.


Beckham In America: Sponsors Contribute To $250M Deal
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/108608

Anatomy of a blockbuster
The story behind the Beckham deal and the economics
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/grant_wahl/01/17/beckham.qa/index.html

Hitcho
11-04-2008, 01:08 PM
I wouldn't read too much into these numbers. They show the average match attendance throughout the league over the course of the season, and the average has clearly been dragged down by one or two shocking sets of figures. If you take out those two, the average will show a healthy increase I expect. So across MLS as a whole, the situation is pretty good I'd say.

As for TFC's drop, there must have been a pretty significant curiosity/new team factor for our first season, and if that wearing off only leaves us with a drop of 100 people per game but still over 20,000 I'm not worried by it at all. That drop could be entirely down to scalpers having acquired extra seats at the relocation event and not being able to sell them all on every week, for example.

I still think if BMO Field is increased to 25,000 capacity we'd sell it out pretty much every week, especially if we're now looking seriously at getting in a DP who hasn't come to retire (which is what Carver says he demanded). As an aside, with the Beckham buzz wearing off even just a tiny bit at LA that would probably leave us as the highest average gate in the league. Sweet.

jloome
11-04-2008, 08:05 PM
I wouldn't read too much into these numbers. They show the average match attendance throughout the league over the course of the season, and the average has clearly been dragged down by one or two shocking sets of figures. If you take out those two, the average will show a healthy increase I expect. So across MLS as a whole, the situation is pretty good I'd say.

As for TFC's drop, there must have been a pretty significant curiosity/new team factor for our first season, and if that wearing off only leaves us with a drop of 100 people per game but still over 20,000 I'm not worried by it at all. That drop could be entirely down to scalpers having acquired extra seats at the relocation event and not being able to sell them all on every week, for example.

I still think if BMO Field is increased to 25,000 capacity we'd sell it out pretty much every week, especially if we're now looking seriously at getting in a DP who hasn't come to retire (which is what Carver says he demanded). As an aside, with the Beckham buzz wearing off even just a tiny bit at LA that would probably leave us as the highest average gate in the league. Sweet.

Not to burst the bubble dude, but the league has been caught routinely inflating attendance figures by as much as 3,500 per game (as per the dispatch story this summer, earlier reporting by the Washington Post's Steve Goff); in fact, it admits its numbers are based on all tickets distributed, not the number actually used.

The league doesn't release actual turnstile numbers.

Toronto Ruffrider
11-05-2008, 01:13 AM
Not to burst the bubble dude, but the league has been caught routinely inflating attendance figures by as much as 3,500 per game (as per the dispatch story this summer, earlier reporting by the Washington Post's Steve Goff); in fact, it admits its numbers are based on all tickets distributed, not the number actually used.

The league doesn't release actual turnstile numbers.

Quite right, jloome. In fact, if you subtract the away game figures for the LA Galaxy's games - the "Beckham Effect" as it were - the reported average attendance in MLS is basically the same as it was when the Washington Post reported the phenomenon of attendance inflating three years ago. With attendance figures changing so little over time, who's to say that a bunch of MLS teams aren't still giving away thousands of tickets per match?

StandUpIfYouHateChelsea
11-05-2008, 03:20 AM
merge threads???

Eastend
11-05-2008, 08:15 AM
OK, since there is sooooo much attention being given to the attendance of MLS matches I thought I'd look into the attendance at NHL games.....or, Canada's game. Now, although I do like hockey (Go HABS Go!) I do find these numbers peculiar as I don't see these as being better then MLS figures given that the NHL has been around for 100 years.....with only 1 team being over 20k...Montreal!

MLS:http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60481

MLS average = 16,459 for 2008


NHL: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2008

NHL average = 17,308 for 2008


There is only a 849 difference......interesting.

Hitcho
11-05-2008, 10:05 AM
Not to burst the bubble dude, but the league has been caught routinely inflating attendance figures by as much as 3,500 per game (as per the dispatch story this summer, earlier reporting by the Washington Post's Steve Goff); in fact, it admits its numbers are based on all tickets distributed, not the number actually used.

The league doesn't release actual turnstile numbers.

Fair comment, and that's an important consideration too. (As an aside, I'd like to see the turnstiles numbers for TFC, I reckon they'd still be pretty respectable for most games, although not all).

Still, my point about the growth of the game at youth level is still a valid one. Saw-ker won;t be taking voer Namerica anytime soon (or ever, frankly) but I still think the interest and exposure levels will increase steadily over the next deace or two. Whether that impacts on MSL attendance remains to be seen though.

I just hope the yanks never win the World Cup! :p

Beach_Red
11-05-2008, 11:02 AM
MLS:http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60481

MLS average = 16,459 for 2008


NHL: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2008

NHL average = 17,308 for 2008


There is only a 849 difference......interesting.

And plenty of give-away tickets at NHL games in many US cities.

Pretty soon soccer will be one of the "Top Four" team sports in the US, and someday the Americans really will have a realstic shot at the World Cup. It'll be great for soccer in North America, but....

bee dubya
11-05-2008, 11:51 AM
OK, since there is sooooo much attention being given to the attendance of MLS matches I thought I'd look into the attendance at NHL games.....or, Canada's game. Now, although I do like hockey (Go HABS Go!) I do find these numbers peculiar as I don't see these as being better then MLS figures given that the NHL has been around for 100 years.....with only 1 team being over 20k...Montreal!

MLS:http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/60481

MLS average = 16,459 for 2008


NHL: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/attendance?year=2008

NHL average = 17,308 for 2008





There is only a 849 difference......interesting.

Not sure it's anywhere near a fair comparison. Hockey arenas are generally much smaller than soccer stadiums and the NHL plays way more games per year, probably 25 extra home games compared to the MLS schedule. The NHL numbers are actually pretty decent. Better than I thought they would be actually.

Toronto_Bhoy
11-05-2008, 12:50 PM
I agree with those who feel the attendance numbers aren't that important at this stage of the MLS's development. If you look at attendance around the world I think many would be shocked at the averages.

The EPL averages around 37,000 but maybe a better comparison is the Championship (CCC) which averages 17,500…only a thousand more than here. Look at leagues like Serie A…18473!

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/attendance?league=eng.2&cc=5901

Here's league averages from Wiki

League Average Attendance
Bundesliga 37644
Premier League 35991
La Liga 28838
Ligue 1 21817
J. League 1 19081
Eredivisie 18763
Serie A 18473
Football League Championship 18221
Campeonato Brasileiro Série A 17461
Primera División Argentina 17363
Major League Soccer 16770
A-League 15363
Bundesliga 2 15253
Chinese Super League 15119
Scottish Premier League 14915
Turkish Premier Super League 14058
Russian Premier League 13114
K-League 12227
Iran Pro League 11554
Portuguese Liga 10636
Jupiler League 10533
Norwegian Premier League 10438
Allsvenskan 10258

Here's a good story from Big Soccer comparing stadium sizes.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=709490

CoachGT
11-05-2008, 01:06 PM
Seems that we've been down this part of the road before:

http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=5458

Eastend
11-05-2008, 02:23 PM
Seems that we've been down this part of the road before:

http://www.redpatchboys.ca/forums/showthread.php?t=5458

but that was last offseason....we need to rehash.....it's a long winter.