Sure. It's a huge TV success. Now.Originally Posted by ginkster88
I feel like the NHL are the nice little local hardware store who discovered a great new neighbourhood the bizarrely had no competition (ie daytime Jan 1 in TV land), and now that they are succeeding, Home Depot is opening up a 10x bigger store across the street.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
These are very valid points.
Our positions aren't mutually exclusive, but you are right, there is non hockey upside.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
I heard Howard Bloom talking on the radio today and he mentioned two of the outdoor games this year are not even sold out yet. It's one thing to sell one big event, it's another to sell a series of outdoor games. Once people have done it and seen it the novelty will wear off for a large group of fans.
I'm with you on the Winter Classic. That one game may still be a big sell in the future but I don't think multiple games for many years in the same market will be a long term money maker. Time will tell but it's not something I'd put a massive tax dollar output bet on to re-tool a stadium and I wouldn't want any level of government backing it. If MLSE wants to fork out all the cash themselves that's their call.
Sid Seixero mentioned the RPB on the PTS round table today...lol
Sid is so typically Portuguese negative.
I agree with most of what you said but not so much on the above premise.
When TFC was in the thick of the one and only major CCL run and weren't playing a team with Beckham on it, they couldn't draw squat. In fact, the semis against Santos Laguna drew just over 18,000. The final leg against Vancouver for that Canadian Championship drew 14,000.
I believe Toronto has a couple of different fans. There are hard core soccer supporters that will be at every game, rain or shine, win or lose. There are "event" fans that will come out, once, for games like Real Madrid but aren't going to pay $150 a pop, continually, to see TFC. Those are the ones that come out for your Beckhams or Henry's but really couldn't tell you who Camilo or Magee are and honestly don't care. If there is no hype around the event, they will go to some other event.
I believe that a 40,000 seat stadium would essentially mean that there are approximately 20,000 seats available for every game. Now, MLSE would likely close down a section to try to ensure ticket scarcity to combat that and protect the value of a season's seat but in my view, a winning team won't make a ton of difference to the attendance on a regular basis. And they certainly won't achieve 40,000.
Last edited by Pookie; 01-03-2014 at 08:56 PM.
Ideally the build a stadium "extention" that can also handle a mass event seat increase.
Is that possible?
Didn't hear what was said?
Sure. I think that the permanent seats would be in the neighbourhood of 25-30k. You could then add temporary seats for events like the Grey Cup or a winter hockey game.
The 30k limit is risky though for TFC, IMO. With current attendance and no wait list, it would be just over half full. Optics aside, that would mean plenty of unused tickets and the risk is real in devaluing season seats.
I don't think LA drew over 25,000 for their Beckham teams.
That no Argos at BMO would make the Red patch Boys happy.
More seats = cheaper tickets = more fans coming to games. 30K (permanent seats) is doable especially if we have a good soccer team or at least sign major international player.
Selling soccer in this city isn't that hard as long it's done right.
If anything, it's CFL/Argos you got to worry about. Despite being last year's champ, they struggle selling games.
P.S. Rogers Centre game against Galaxy did well because tickets were cheap. Beckham affect didn't play that big of a role (looking at crowds in that game, it was almost hard to find any Beckham fanboy in sea of red).
Lol. Thanks.
Yeah I can agree to that. We do have some people that probably wouldn't be against it. I guess it's a give and take. If it gives us a roof and even more seating and doesn't effect sightlines and closeness to the field or grass being taken out it might be worth it to some people.
I completely disagree. You are basically saying that a winning team won't draw better than they are drawing the last seven years of losing football. All these years of losing have turned lots of fans off but a winning team would fill BMO up again I have no doubts. They averaged over 19k this past season, Imagine if we had a decent team. Would they sell 40,000 tics to every game probably not, but I think a few games a year could pull that number in with the right date or opponent.
Two reasons they ain't filling up 40k, or even 25k.
1) their game day ticket price is completely out of touch with the market
2) the fans that gave up and walked away, if they come back, will want the same game day experience they had before. for a lot of them, they'll never get it. their seats are gone, only sitting sections are available, and see point 1.
^ to add to that, it is about disposable income. A winning team doesn't automatically put more money in the pockets of people who are already spending it on other things.
Perhaps the biggest reason I don't think 40k is realistic is that would mean that TFC, the team who is rarely hyped on any sports network, enjoys sparse print and radio coverage would be the biggest Toronto sports draw. Ahead of the Raptors, Argos and Blue Jays.
I just can't see it.
Hey,if you signed the petition today, thank you! This is a project I have started, but have not had a chance to finish. I know it something that is very passionate for many TFC supporters. Unfortunately I have had other commitments come up and have not gotten back to this. If you did sign the petition, you should receive the confirmation email this evening. Please click the link and add your name.
I hope to have the site 100% ready by the end of the weekend. Thanks again to everyone who has already checked it out. I will continue to post Argos to BMO news there over the next while. Let's not lose the one thing we have left right now, that makes the game day experience.
http://www.noargosatbmo.ca/content.
Cheers,
Chris
I think a winning TFC could still be Seattle and sell 35-40K tickets to 5 of their games, on the right night, against the right teams
... IF ....
TFC does what Seattle does and sells 25K of their inventory for $20-25 per ticket.
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
It's out of touch because of the teams losing ways, nothing else. Most people wouldn't have a problem with ticket prices if we had a half decent team. Toronto is the best soccer market in all of MLS in my opinion with plenty of people willing to spend money, but not on a completely shitty team. Winning will solve that.
5 games perhaps, assuming there are big name DPs on the visiting teams.... and it isn't cold outside.
Just don't think the local market exists to support 40k fans on an ongoing basis.
A good draw for TFC on the TV rating front is 100,000. Whereas the Jays average 500-600k viewers, have cheap tickets, have a ton of local media coverage and only hit 40k numbers for a few games a year. And before anyone suggests winning correlates to that, the 2006 team that finished 2nd in the AL had lower attendance by over 200,000 (annual) than the 2013 7th place version did.
Seems to suggest that interest in TFC, just isn't as high so it would be a stretch to think they could convert casual fans into consistent paying customers.
I would go so far as saying I don't think we have any casual fans that watch games on TV. They show up to BMO for home games every now and again. Outside of that I can't see a lot of casual fans that actually watch every game. Especially casual fans that could be turned into SSH to bring up attendance.
TV ratings really don't matter for this league, and won't for years. That is an element of the Beckham experiment that failed.
It's why i disagree with the Defoe signing as I marketing move (don't think it's smart in any way, really).
“What the world needs is more geniuses with humility; there are so few of us left.”
I really like the love but this isn't the thread to debate that.
This is still going to be a gate driven league for a long while. Only when gates become sellouts and forcing people to watch from home will the ratings ever rise.
There will be blips when the Beckhams, Henry's ect come over but there not sustainable.
If the MLS basis the success and survival of this league on TV ratings then might as well fold up shop now, TV ratings success not happening now or anytime soon. This league is about being there not watching on TV for the majority of people that go to games, only the diehards like myself watch on TV and will watch games of other teams that don't include mine. The general soccer fan in North America mainly watches the big leagues in Europe and the big international tournaments, The World Cup and the Euro, watching the MLS on TV on a regular basis not happening with the general soccer lovers in North America, I wish it was different but it's not and like I said this is not changing anytime soon unfortunately.
I agree with the TV ratings not being strong for the MLS. That's why I think the prospect of converting fans to paying customers will be immensely challenging.
When TFC started, their own market research indicated they expected a fan base of approx 14,000 on average. Now, in the early years they exceeded that expectation but didn't have any TV audience. Over time, the wait list has dried up completely and ratings haven't grown. Meaning that many came, saw, and went to something else. 18,000 -20,000 would be a strong number this year, even with Defoe or some other big name. Like Enscoe suggests, I think Defoe will have marginal impact (if any) on attendance as there just doesn't seem to be a big casual market showing an interest in TFC.
I'd look at stadium expansion from the other side of the coin. The theory that says the Argos would become the prime tenant at BMO.
The Argos enjoy the 2nd largest TV audience in southern Ontario, next to the Leafs. MLSE's owners are in the TV/content business. The Argos draw more than TFC (on average). They had no trouble averaging 30,000 per game a short few years ago. Put them into a new stadium that their fans have been clamouring for and you can quickly see where the priorities could be. Not to mention the fact that MLSE would own the Argos outright (presumably) and not have to share ownership... and thus revenue... outside of TV deals... with any league.
From a business perspective, how could you not chase the Argos and expand BMO for them?
Not a good example since Blue Jays play about 80 home games and a lot of those games on weekday. However, if you look at Blue Jays' Saturday home game attendance, they usually draw over 30K. But that being said, Blue Jays is more family friendly compare to TFC. So we can't really use Blue Jays as an example to compare with TFC. Two different sports with two different customer base.
Despite Argos great TV ratings, they're still losing money and they don't have much upside to make a lot of money. This is why Rogers or MLSE never bought them in the past.
It's pretty clear that MLSE is trying to government money and in return they'll "save" Argos. If there's no government money, then Argos aren't coming to BMO field.
Yes, this is true. And add to it a new stadium for the Ti-Cats, new team in Ottawa and serious looks at Quebec City and the CFL will likely continue to deliver solid TV ratings for Bell for years to come. So the business case for MLSE is obvious.
So, what's the best way for TFC to get what it needs in this scenario? If a deal is going to be made, how can we make sure it's the best possible deal for TFC?
CFL TV money isn't that great (better than before, but not great) while sponsorship money isn't huge either. CFL like MLS needs to rely on gate revenue to order to make money.
Argos are still losing money and struggling to get people coming to their games despite being a very good team.
It's the Canadian content that Bell needs for their networks. The CFL is many hours of good rated Canadian content. Networks usually run Canadian content at a loss so the CFL is very important, especially now that they won't have hockey.
I think you need to focus on business minded arguments to ownership, that includes MLSE but also includes the MLS and other influencers like the CSA.
If you accept the premise that the Argos are coming, you define what success looks like under that scenario.
1. Grass stays. For everyone's business interests it is a better scenario. TFC has no depth so will most likely always be looking to big names as band aids. Star players don't play on turf (for the most part). MLS wants soccer specific stadiums and grass is a key component of that. The CSA has the power to award WCQ games to any stadium it wants. If grass is a pre-requisite MLSE would lose out on rental dates if it went to turf.
2. Roof comes. More fans might come out for both the Argos and TFC if they knew they were sheltered somewhat. Important to MLS as well as it shares in gate revenue. MLS also wins in that the design brings BMO in line with more recent Soccer Specific Stadiums, a key strategic direction for the league.
3. South end expands upwards. Everyone, fans included, want "atmosphere" back. It's good for TV. It's good for walk up ticket sales. It's about the only thing TFC ever sold itself on. Portland is the model now. Build it like theirs and ensure that SGs have a major part in the planning and implementation of how a "unified" (as best as possible) south end would operate and be promoted. Structurally, it would also help with the elements coming off the lake.
4. Other issues. Scheduling. Earn agreement that for the most part, TFC plays Friday/Saturday and Argos on Saturdays/Sundays. A non chewed surface is more critical to soccer. Also, Argos' schedule goes from June to November. Maybe they hit the road during TFC's season ending home stretch (September/October) where games could "matter more" and TFC hits the road during their big draws (home openers or labour day games). They then have nearly exclusive use of the stadium to close out their season in November. MLSE can hype those "games that matter" as much as it wants.
I'm sure there are other must haves but for me, those would be what I would focus on.
The business case for the Argos coming is clearly attractive to MLSE. Likewise though, the business case for the above is there. Just have to ensure that an unified message... whatever that ends up being... gets delivered to all of the stakeholders.
But Argos moving to BMO field or folding shouldn't affect their content especially since CFL is expanding all over Canada. If anything, you would think Bell would buy Argos themselves if they cared so much about Argos. Even though CFL has great TV ratings, it doesn't demand a huge Ad revenue (this is how networks make their money) since most of their TV viewers aren't in 18-35 single male category. Canadian content argument is overrated since TSN already has plenty of Canadian content.
Secondly, Bell can't force Rogers and Larry T to move Argos to BMO field even though other cities in 905 region have shown interest of partnering up with Argos and building football oriented stadium. If Bell is so concern about state of Argos, then they could buy Argos themselves and partner up with one of 905 cities to build a home for Argos.
Lastly, MLSE is using Argos to get government money so they don't have to pay everything to rebuild BMO field for TFC and Maple Leafs.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote