Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.

As we have built and expanded our stadium in Louisville twice from 42,000 to 65,000 Tom Jurich has followed a simple axiom: The expensive seats pay for the cheap seats and you have to have both.

The idea is you use the expensive seats to build the stadium and the cheap seats to fill it. If the athletic department is doing their job you buy the cheap seats the 1st season and they move you into more expensive seats the next season. Somebody moves into your old seats and the process starts over until you don't have anymore seats and another expansion is needed.
CJ

Perhaps more to the point is this: Most teams will never sell more than 45,000 tickets - regardless of how many games they win or how cheap the tickets are - so the only way to increase revenue is to sell high-end seating.

To expand on what CardinalJim is saying, every expansion of our stadium has been based around Suites/Club Seating/Loge Seating. Our current expansion will be adding field level suites similar to AT&T Stadium. In the era of 80" Super HD TV's, these areas are designed to enhance the fan experience while also boosting revenue. The average fan may no be able to afford these areas at first, but as they advance in their careers, these options become more enticing.

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.

What's the argument? Well duh.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

(07-06-2016 06:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.

What's the argument? Well duh.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

are stadiums designed to be smaller because of the changing demographics of income inequality or is it because of engineering limits where the costs after X capacity is not worth the value of those additional seats.

We all know it's the former. This isn't something arguable. Declining attendance in all sports leagues and the availability of bazillion inch flat screens cheap and blazing fast WiFi in my house means I don't need to sit near sweaty people in 900 degree heat. Stadium projects are taking this isn't o account at all levels from ODU to Miami Dolphins.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

(07-06-2016 07:17 AM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 06:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.

What's the argument? Well duh.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

are stadiums designed to be smaller because of the changing demographics of income inequality or is it because of engineering limits where the costs after X capacity is not worth the value of those additional seats.

Neither really. By limiting the number of available seats, the stadium designer shifts the economic supply curve to the left, chaning the economic equilibrium, allowing the team to increase ticket prices. This may also prompt fans to buy tickets earlier to ensure that they are able to get tickets. Most major league professional teams have also gone to more dynamic pricing models where they charge more for better games, and less for less desirable games. Disney World was in the news earlier this year for doing the same with their ticket prices on higher demand dates.

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.

1. Not the most important. IMO, location and accessibility are the most important. It doesn't matter how many seats, what type of seas, or how much they cost if you don't have the infrastructure to support it.

2. 40 Yes. 30? The definition has changed over the years. Chair backs were once considered a luxury.

3. No. The ROI on stadiums/seating is is negative.

4. No. You have to have a mix. That mix is going to vary greatly by location. No one would build a stadium with 100% luxury seating. No one would build a stadium with 0% luxury seating.

5. Maybe. "Focus" is hard to define. It is an important consideration but not the only one.

You have made several points to support your argument but haven't said what your argument is. If you are arguing that luxury seating is an important part of stadium design/upgrades then yes. Any design that doesn't include them would be a failure. I just don't think it is the "most important."

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important. I would say the answer is yes, but to what degree differs from college to pro. In pro stadiums the answer is definitely yes with a big time focus. With college stadiums I don’t think it needs to be a major focus, but it does definitely need to be part of the project. It’s a great way to increase bottom line revenue significantly with only a marginal increase in cost.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago. I agree 100% on both the college and pro level. Very few college stadium renovations if any don’t include premium seating.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums. Again more on the pro level than college, but I tend to agree.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans. I don’t think they are mutually exclusive, you can definitely have both.

5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating. I think the majority of renovation and new stadium projects focus on increasing the quality of the fan experience for every fan, luxury seating is only a part of the total experience catering to a certain segment of fans.

There probably isn't enough focus on luxury seating in new stadiums, and there is still too much emphasis on a large number of seats.

The giant football stadium is an artifact of an earlier time when no games were televised. Large stadiums like the Rose Bowl and Michigan's Big House and dozens of others were built many years before U.S. homes had TV sets. Almost no one had TV at home until the 1950s, few people had color TV sets until the late 1960s, the first network TV season all in color was 1972-73, there were NCAA-imposed limits on televised CFB games until the 1980s when Oklahoma and Georgia won a lawsuit against the NCAA, ESPN was launched in 1979 and wasn't in most homes until the mid 1980s, and on and on. It's only been in the last 20 years or so that "P5" CFB teams have had 100% of their games on TV. Large football stadiums predate the ability to watch all the games at home, and now on HDTVs, by about 75 years.

Dozens of teams are still playing in very large stadiums built in and for a long-gone era, and the rest are playing in stadiums more recently built under this image of what we think an American football stadium should be like.

Our concepts of what stadiums and arenas should be like are in need of major revisions if not complete reinvention.

While its true that luxury seats are important and so is the bottom line, I'm always grateful that A&M remembers who is the most important spectator in CFB: College Students

While some schools give only a small amount of seats to the students in the end zone or upper corners, A&M reserves 30K seats between the 20s (almost the entire East Side of the stadium) for the students.

(07-06-2016 09:33 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There probably isn't enough focus on luxury seating in new stadiums, and there is still too much emphasis on a large number of seats.

The giant football stadium is an artifact of an earlier time when no games were televised. Large stadiums like the Rose Bowl and Michigan's Big House and dozens of others were built many years before U.S. homes had TV sets. Almost no one had TV at home until the 1950s, few people had color TV sets until the late 1960s, the first network TV season all in color was 1972-73, there were NCAA-imposed limits on televised CFB games until the 1980s when Oklahoma and Georgia won a lawsuit against the NCAA, ESPN was launched in 1979 and wasn't in most homes until the mid 1980s, and on and on. It's only been in the last 20 years or so that "P5" CFB teams have had 100% of their games on TV. Large football stadiums predate the ability to watch all the games at home, and now on HDTVs, by about 75 years.

Dozens of teams are still playing in very large stadiums built in and for a long-gone era, and the rest are playing in stadiums more recently built under this image of what we think an American football stadium should be like.

Our concepts of what stadiums and arenas should be like are in need of major revisions if not complete reinvention.

I'd agree if all you were doing was watching a football game (like say a pro game)

But for a lot of people, especially those at football culture schools, its about the entire weekend experience. Its about visiting your old bar and eateries, walking the campus, participating in all the game day traditions and festivities and tailgating (several of which start Friday night) seeing old friends and experiencing the game and the atmosphere in person.


IOW, if your school only does a FB game, then yeah, TV and luxury man caves are gonna kill your attendance.

But if your school provides a unique and awesome gameday experience then having a big stadium is just fine.

Sporting KC of the MLS can answer this question the best for you.

(07-06-2016 01:01 AM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you agree or disagree with the following? if so how strongly? applies to ncaa/pro stadiums

1. That luxury seating is one of the most important components to modern day stadium design, if not the most important.
Important revenue generator for a stadium so I am sure it gets its place in the overall design process. I wouldn't go with the most important aspect.

2. That emphasis on luxury seating has grown considerably in stadium design than 10, 20, 30, or even 40 years ago.
YES. Again, the revenue generation aspect is needed.

3. That luxury seating is a major cash cow and is lucrative enough to change the mindset of how teams design their stadiums.
Not there yet. Their locations are usually not in a area that would greatly affect the overall stadium's shape.

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.
Depends on your view of the trend of watching games on tv, declining attendance, and other factors ...do you add a 10K expansion of regular seating versus a 2.5K luxury box addition/remodel that generates more revenue than the tickets you could sell in that 10K addition.
5. That the overwhelming majority of stadiums today focus on luxury seating.
It is a considered component to the overall design of any modern stadium just like the video board(s), seating capacity/arrangement....

I agree with all but this one:

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

The current philosophy in most new stadium design is specifically to maximize luxury seating, without diminishing the views of others, and still being able to maximize capacity (for what they want). So this one I don't agree with, because the new wave of stadium design is to not sacrifice those things while maximizing luxury seating. Look at the 49ers stadium as proof, where they stacked all of the luxury suites on one side, so the rest of the seats can be much closer to the field. That is also why Philips Arena and Ford Field were designed as they are, to protect the views of the common seats, while maximizing luxury seating.

(07-06-2016 09:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 09:33 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There probably isn't enough focus on luxury seating in new stadiums, and there is still too much emphasis on a large number of seats.

The giant football stadium is an artifact of an earlier time when no games were televised. Large stadiums like the Rose Bowl and Michigan's Big House and dozens of others were built many years before U.S. homes had TV sets. Almost no one had TV at home until the 1950s, few people had color TV sets until the late 1960s, the first network TV season all in color was 1972-73, there were NCAA-imposed limits on televised CFB games until the 1980s when Oklahoma and Georgia won a lawsuit against the NCAA, ESPN was launched in 1979 and wasn't in most homes until the mid 1980s, and on and on. It's only been in the last 20 years or so that "P5" CFB teams have had 100% of their games on TV. Large football stadiums predate the ability to watch all the games at home, and now on HDTVs, by about 75 years.

Dozens of teams are still playing in very large stadiums built in and for a long-gone era, and the rest are playing in stadiums more recently built under this image of what we think an American football stadium should be like.

Our concepts of what stadiums and arenas should be like are in need of major revisions if not complete reinvention.

I'd agree if all you were doing was watching a football game (like say a pro game)

But for a lot of people, especially those at football culture schools, its about the entire weekend experience. Its about visiting your old bar and eateries, walking the campus, participating in all the game day traditions and festivities and tailgating (several of which start Friday night) seeing old friends and experiencing the game and the atmosphere in person.


IOW, if your school only does a FB game, then yeah, TV and luxury man caves are gonna kill your attendance.

But if your school provides a unique and awesome gameday experience then having a big stadium is just fine.

1) The number of teams with the kind of culture you describe is far less than the number of teams that operate as if they had that kind of culture.

2) The every-game participants in that culture are largely (a) current students, and (b) people over 50. I'd be surprised if it's sustainable at its current level when today's students are over 50.

(07-06-2016 10:37 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  I agree with all but this one:

4. That luxury seating is so lucrative that stadium designers will emphasize it above all else, including sacrificing total capacity and sacrificing quality viewpoints for large numbers of fans.

The current philosophy in most new stadium design is specifically to maximize luxury seating, without diminishing the views of others, and still being able to maximize capacity (for what they want). So this one I don't agree with, because the new wave of stadium design is to not sacrifice those things while maximizing luxury seating. Look at the 49ers stadium as proof, where they stacked all of the luxury suites on one side, so the rest of the seats can be much closer to the field. That is also why Philips Arena and Ford Field were designed as they are, to protect the views of the common seats, while maximizing luxury seating.

I like the trend of placing the luxury seating on one side of the field. Prior to that innovation, a large number of stadiums and arenas were built with luxury seats occupying the entire middle ring of seating, raising the upper deck 20 or 30 feet or more, and creating a huge number of horrible nose bleed seats above and behind the ring of luxury seats. Most modern stadiums have that design rather than the Levi's Field-type design. The only good thing about it is that it creates some low priced seating that an average family can afford.

(07-06-2016 11:13 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 09:58 AM)10thMountain Wrote:  

(07-06-2016 09:33 AM)Wedge Wrote:  There probably isn't enough focus on luxury seating in new stadiums, and there is still too much emphasis on a large number of seats.

The giant football stadium is an artifact of an earlier time when no games were televised. Large stadiums like the Rose Bowl and Michigan's Big House and dozens of others were built many years before U.S. homes had TV sets. Almost no one had TV at home until the 1950s, few people had color TV sets until the late 1960s, the first network TV season all in color was 1972-73, there were NCAA-imposed limits on televised CFB games until the 1980s when Oklahoma and Georgia won a lawsuit against the NCAA, ESPN was launched in 1979 and wasn't in most homes until the mid 1980s, and on and on. It's only been in the last 20 years or so that "P5" CFB teams have had 100% of their games on TV. Large football stadiums predate the ability to watch all the games at home, and now on HDTVs, by about 75 years.

Dozens of teams are still playing in very large stadiums built in and for a long-gone era, and the rest are playing in stadiums more recently built under this image of what we think an American football stadium should be like.

Our concepts of what stadiums and arenas should be like are in need of major revisions if not complete reinvention.

I'd agree if all you were doing was watching a football game (like say a pro game)

But for a lot of people, especially those at football culture schools, its about the entire weekend experience. Its about visiting your old bar and eateries, walking the campus, participating in all the game day traditions and festivities and tailgating (several of which start Friday night) seeing old friends and experiencing the game and the atmosphere in person.


IOW, if your school only does a FB game, then yeah, TV and luxury man caves are gonna kill your attendance.

But if your school provides a unique and awesome gameday experience then having a big stadium is just fine.

1) The number of teams with the kind of culture you describe is far less than the number of teams that operate as if they had that kind of culture.

2) The every-game participants in that culture are largely (a) current students, and (b) people over 50. I'd be surprised if it's sustainable at its current level when today's students are over 50.

Wedge, I agree with number 1. But it's still a fun experience at non-football culture schools (like Cincinnati and Purdue).

Regarding #2, there's always been a lack of 25-45 year olds in the stands. Those are the people who are building their careers and raising their families. They have the least amount of free time and can't afford to spend as much time on frivolities such as football.

Once you're 50+ you're probably not competing as much for promotions at work and don't have toddlers at home any more.

The original push for new stadiums in the 90's in pro sports anyway, was something like owners didn't have to share luxury box money with the players (not sure if that was in MLB or the NFL, and i'm too lazy to look it up, but this fine print ruling came about 20+ years ago). Owners would threaten to leave if they didn't get new stadiums/arenas (with luxury boxes) to replace perfectly good existing ones. The later discussion about other benefits in this (interesting) thread is a result of the earlier luxury box rule.