+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) (/thread-895921.html)
FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Attackcoog - 03-10-2020 03:26 PM
At a Google innovation hub last week, administrative leaders from each of the Power Five conferences were invited to what amounted to a two-day think tank in Santa Monica, California. Google does it all the time, inviting experts from different walks of life just to … contemplate the world.
"It sounds nebulous, but it was one of the better professional days of my life," said Brad Wurthman, Virginia Tech senior associate athletic director. "Just being able to sit there and have them educate us on where the world is headed."
Part of that athletic world -- part of the Google experience last week -- is fan engagement. How to keep folks interested in the college product.
"To put it bluntly, it was a very smart person which followed another very smart person which followed a very smart person which followed another very smart person," Wurthman said. "We were all chuckling, 'We get it. You guys are geniuses.'"
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-must-innovate-as-fbs-attendance-dips-for-sixth-straight-year-to-lowest-since-1996/
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Yosef Himself - 03-10-2020 03:36 PM
To quote RKN from the Sun Belt board:
Quote: While there have been drops in attendance across most conferences, four have come out with increased attendance since the 2018 season. The Big 12 saw a 0.1% increase, the MAC a 0.5% increase, the AAC a 2% increase, and the Sun Belt a 5.5% increase.
Might want to look at why these four conferences experienced an uptick.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Renandpat - 03-10-2020 06:48 PM
They didn't need to travel to Google HQ for Occam's Razor: Schedule better or "brand name" opponents.
Reading the comments from VT's Brad Wurthman and South Carolina's Eric Nichols illustrate to a degree that neither of them spends time with the academic side of campus or even admissions very much. A lot of the data, they likely heard is currently being done within their university by someone in their business school, admissions, or even Institutional Research.
AJ Maestas, who is also in the Dodd story, is a frequent podcast guest of Jon Wilner of the Mercury News. Sadly, the audio quality of Wilner's podcasts is so poor, I really cannot recommend. They discussed attendance on the October 22, 2019, edition.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - dbackjon - 03-10-2020 06:58 PM
(03-10-2020 03:36 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: To quote RKN from the Sun Belt board:
Quote: While there have been drops in attendance across most conferences, four have come out with increased attendance since the 2018 season. The Big 12 saw a 0.1% increase, the MAC a 0.5% increase, the AAC a 2% increase, and the Sun Belt a 5.5% increase.
Might want to look at why these four conferences experienced an uptick.
Big 12 is almost entirely due to Kansas hiring a hopefully competent coach.
A small increase is probably not translatable - local conditions (prior crappy coach, better record) can have a big impact on a school's attendance.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - dbackjon - 03-10-2020 06:59 PM
A 2017 change in tax laws kept fans from claiming 80 percent of the purchase of their season tickets. That made it tougher to sell season tickets.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - dbackjon - 03-10-2020 07:04 PM
Another good example given:
South Carolina was an outlier. In a 4-8 season, it had the largest SEC attendance increase. Gamecocks fans continue to pack Williams-Brice Stadium win, lose or weather delay. The increase was the nation's 10th-largest in 2019 -- more than 4,300 per game. The reason: The home schedule was definitely better with Alabama, Florida and Clemson coming to town.
Quality Games to watch. Let's see what happens to South Carolina Attendance in 2020 with a schedule of Coastal, ECU, Wofford, and Missouri with best games being TAMU, Georgia and Tennessee
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - RutgersGuy - 03-10-2020 07:21 PM
(03-10-2020 03:36 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: To quote RKN from the Sun Belt board:
Quote: While there have been drops in attendance across most conferences, four have come out with increased attendance since the 2018 season. The Big 12 saw a 0.1% increase, the MAC a 0.5% increase, the AAC a 2% increase, and the Sun Belt a 5.5% increase.
Might want to look at why these four conferences experienced an uptick.
A lot of sunbelt schools are new to FBS. That would be my guess for the uptick.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Love and Honor - 03-10-2020 08:56 PM
Ma
(03-10-2020 03:36 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: To quote RKN from the Sun Belt board:
Quote: While there have been drops in attendance across most conferences, four have come out with increased attendance since the 2018 season. The Big 12 saw a 0.1% increase, the MAC a 0.5% increase, the AAC a 2% increase, and the Sun Belt a 5.5% increase.
Might want to look at why these four conferences experienced an uptick.
Until attendance is measured in a single, unified manner (which will only happen if the NCAA ends the technical requirements, even if they aren't enforced) the formal numbers really don't mean much imo other than providing direction.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Wedge - 03-10-2020 09:06 PM
This is Chicken Little stuff. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Pfft. The sky is not falling, though maybe a columnist wouldn't get as many clicks if he said that.
Dud doesn't mention that most P5 teams are making far more money in ticket revenue today than in 1996, because the price increases outweigh any drop in attendance by quite a bit.
The average ticket is 2-3 times what the same seat cost in 1996. On top of that, all of the good seats, and often even not-so-good seats, carry a "mandatory donation" per season ticket to the athletic department. Even if a team's 2019 attendance was only 80% of 1996 -- and it's probably not that much of a drop for anyone -- I know math is hard for sportswriters, but even they can see the 2019 revenue would be far greater.
Example with a 20% drop in ticket sales with 2.5 times the average price per ticket in 2019 compared to 1996: A team sold 70,000 tickets per game in 1996, at an average of $30/ticket. That generates $2.1 million per game in ticket revenue.
In this example, a 20% drop in ticket sales would mean 56,000 tickets per game sold in 2019, at 2.5 times the price, for an average of $75/ticket. That is $4.2 million per game in ticket revenue, exactly twice the amount of the per-game revenue in the 1996 example, even if 20% of the seats were unsold.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Kit-Cat - 03-10-2020 10:01 PM
(03-10-2020 03:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: At a Google innovation hub last week, administrative leaders from each of the Power Five conferences were invited to what amounted to a two-day think tank in Santa Monica, California. Google does it all the time, inviting experts from different walks of life just to … contemplate the world.
"It sounds nebulous, but it was one of the better professional days of my life," said Brad Wurthman, Virginia Tech senior associate athletic director. "Just being able to sit there and have them educate us on where the world is headed."
Part of that athletic world -- part of the Google experience last week -- is fan engagement. How to keep folks interested in the college product.
"To put it bluntly, it was a very smart person which followed another very smart person which followed a very smart person which followed another very smart person," Wurthman said. "We were all chuckling, 'We get it. You guys are geniuses.'"
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/college-football-must-innovate-as-fbs-attendance-dips-for-sixth-straight-year-to-lowest-since-1996/
One thing not mentioned in the analysis is how all the FCS to FBS transition schools have brought down the average attendance for the whole subdivision.
Its clear some of the "P" are in big trouble though.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - CitrusUCF - 03-11-2020 05:52 AM
It’s almost like a playoff system that makes the season irrelevant for all but 10-15 teams doesn’t help encourage attendance.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Gamecock - 03-11-2020 10:08 AM
(03-10-2020 07:04 PM)dbackjon Wrote: Another good example given:
South Carolina was an outlier. In a 4-8 season, it had the largest SEC attendance increase. Gamecocks fans continue to pack Williams-Brice Stadium win, lose or weather delay. The increase was the nation's 10th-largest in 2019 -- more than 4,300 per game. The reason: The home schedule was definitely better with Alabama, Florida and Clemson coming to town.
Quality Games to watch. Let's see what happens to South Carolina Attendance in 2020 with a schedule of Coastal, ECU, Wofford, and Missouri with best games being TAMU, Georgia and Tennessee
Yup
Another big reason was because the 2018 schedule was horrible. Our three OOC home games were Coastal in 100 degree weather at noon, UT- Chattanooga in November, and a makeup game on CCG weekend against Akron in front of about 15k fans. Not to mention several games had rain and poor weather. It was about a perfect storm for bad attendance so naturally 2019 was going to be an increase.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Gamecock - 03-11-2020 10:10 AM
(03-10-2020 09:06 PM)Wedge Wrote: This is Chicken Little stuff. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Pfft. The sky is not falling, though maybe a columnist wouldn't get as many clicks if he said that.
Dud doesn't mention that most P5 teams are making far more money in ticket revenue today than in 1996, because the price increases outweigh any drop in attendance by quite a bit.
The average ticket is 2-3 times what the same seat cost in 1996. On top of that, all of the good seats, and often even not-so-good seats, carry a "mandatory donation" per season ticket to the athletic department. Even if a team's 2019 attendance was only 80% of 1996 -- and it's probably not that much of a drop for anyone -- I know math is hard for sportswriters, but even they can see the 2019 revenue would be far greater.
Example with a 20% drop in ticket sales with 2.5 times the average price per ticket in 2019 compared to 1996: A team sold 70,000 tickets per game in 1996, at an average of $30/ticket. That generates $2.1 million per game in ticket revenue.
In this example, a 20% drop in ticket sales would mean 56,000 tickets per game sold in 2019, at 2.5 times the price, for an average of $75/ticket. That is $4.2 million per game in ticket revenue, exactly twice the amount of the per-game revenue in the 1996 example, even if 20% of the seats were unsold.
The big key, I think, is finding a way to price every seat more accurately. Those upper deck nosebleed tickets should probably still be $30 with a tiny donation but you increase the cost of the "prime seats". Of course teams are still making a ton of money but you still want to get "butts in seats" to improve the experience.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - esayem - 03-11-2020 10:20 AM
There are more teams—which are essentially FCS level—and they drag the attendance average down.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - TrueBlueDrew - 03-11-2020 10:35 AM
(03-10-2020 03:36 PM)Yosef Himself Wrote: To quote RKN from the Sun Belt board:
Quote: While there have been drops in attendance across most conferences, four have come out with increased attendance since the 2018 season. The Big 12 saw a 0.1% increase, the MAC a 0.5% increase, the AAC a 2% increase, and the Sun Belt a 5.5% increase.
Might want to look at why these four conferences experienced an uptick.
Sun Belt is benefiting from an improved product across almost all teams. There was really no where to go but up for a lot of our teams, especially the recent start up programs.
Another benefit is being close enough to conference mates to travel to their stadiums. I'm going to 3 away games this year on top of our 6 home games, all within an easy drive. That does wonders for fan familiarity and engagement throughout the season, so you don't see nearly the drop off in interest towards the end of the season.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - TrueBlueDrew - 03-11-2020 10:36 AM
(03-11-2020 10:20 AM)esayem Wrote: There are more teams—which are essentially FCS level—and they drag the attendance average down.
Which Power 5 teams would you say are essentially FCS level?
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - 46566 - 03-11-2020 11:02 AM
Could it be a TV issue? Most fanfictions f not all P5 games are going to be on TV. The games are going to be on ESPN or another major network and a conference network. The Sun Belt,MAC and AAC only few games a week if any are on tv. Let's be honest also any OOC games are watched to see who the AAC gets the NY6 bid. If a Mac and Sun Belt team gets a OOC win it could bump up coverage like how App state was last year.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - Wedge - 03-11-2020 11:17 AM
(03-11-2020 10:10 AM)Gamecock Wrote:(03-10-2020 09:06 PM)Wedge Wrote: This is Chicken Little stuff. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" Pfft. The sky is not falling, though maybe a columnist wouldn't get as many clicks if he said that.
Dud doesn't mention that most P5 teams are making far more money in ticket revenue today than in 1996, because the price increases outweigh any drop in attendance by quite a bit.
The average ticket is 2-3 times what the same seat cost in 1996. On top of that, all of the good seats, and often even not-so-good seats, carry a "mandatory donation" per season ticket to the athletic department. Even if a team's 2019 attendance was only 80% of 1996 -- and it's probably not that much of a drop for anyone -- I know math is hard for sportswriters, but even they can see the 2019 revenue would be far greater.
Example with a 20% drop in ticket sales with 2.5 times the average price per ticket in 2019 compared to 1996: A team sold 70,000 tickets per game in 1996, at an average of $30/ticket. That generates $2.1 million per game in ticket revenue.
In this example, a 20% drop in ticket sales would mean 56,000 tickets per game sold in 2019, at 2.5 times the price, for an average of $75/ticket. That is $4.2 million per game in ticket revenue, exactly twice the amount of the per-game revenue in the 1996 example, even if 20% of the seats were unsold.
The big key, I think, is finding a way to price every seat more accurately. Those upper deck nosebleed tickets should probably still be $30 with a tiny donation but you increase the cost of the "prime seats". Of course teams are still making a ton of money but you still want to get "butts in seats" to improve the experience.
I suspect the reason that teams don't drop the price on their "worst seats" is that they think it wouldn't be enough to fill every seat. In theory if you drop the $40-50 seats to $30 and sell them all, you would make just as much money and have a full house, but if you drop the price to $30 and still sell the same number of those seats, then you're just decreasing revenue.
Also, for CFB fans who live a few hours away from the stadium, dropping the ticket price by $20 doesn't reduce the cost of travel or of hotels that increase their prices on home game weekends.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - quo vadis - 03-11-2020 11:51 AM
Quote:Also, for CFB fans who live a few hours away from the stadium, dropping the ticket price by $20 doesn't reduce the cost of travel or of hotels that increase their prices on home game weekends.
Perhaps, but still, Wedge has a good point. The prices of tickets are a lot higher these days, and the past 15+ years there has been much more of an emphasis on milking more $$$ per seat then putting mass numbers of bodies in the stands.
Of course ideally everyone wants both, but the attendance situation, in terms of revenue, is way better for most big schools now than 25 years ago, making talk of "worst attendance since 1996" and the like pretty silly.
RE: FBS Looks At Options to Combat Attendance Woes (Lowest Attendance Since 1996) - JRsec - 03-11-2020 12:52 PM
(03-11-2020 11:51 AM)quo vadis Wrote:Quote:Also, for CFB fans who live a few hours away from the stadium, dropping the ticket price by $20 doesn't reduce the cost of travel or of hotels that increase their prices on home game weekends.
Perhaps, but still, Wedge has a good point. The prices of tickets are a lot higher these days, and the past 15+ years there has been much more of an emphasis on milking more $$$ per seat then putting mass numbers of bodies in the stands.
Of course ideally everyone wants both, but the attendance situation, in terms of revenue, is way better for most big schools now than 25 years ago, making talk of "worst attendance since 1996" and the like pretty silly.
As someone who attended for almost 5 decades I can say this. The cost of a season ticket book when I first bought one was $42. That was $7 a ticket for 6 games and we only played 10. The last season books we bought were $550 bucks be season ticket for 7 tickets out of 12 game season and you have to donate another $800-$1200 for the right to buy that 1 pair of season ticket books so the total cost depending on whether you are in the end zone or upper Deck is $1900 to $2300. If you want lower level sideline tickets or under-hang scholarship tickets its much more.
When we bought the first tickets the games were about 45 minutes shorter, the only half time entertainment was provided by the 2 bands. Hot Dogs were 50 cents and a coke in a plastic stadium cup was $1 in a paper cup it was 50 cents and the program was $1 to 2 depending upon the venue. All of the signage at the games were University specific except maybe Coca-Cola helped with the scoreboard. You could talk with those seated around you anytime there wasn't action going on and it was a pleasant social outing on Saturday afternoon and maybe there was 40 to 50 thousand at the game.
By the time we quit buying season books the crowd inside the stadium was 80,000 plus, there was no silent time between plays or quarters due to piped in and obnoxiously loud bumper music. You couldn't talk to the people around you anymore because they couldn't hear you. There was another 20 to 30 thousand outside the stadium putting up tape to mark their tailgate areas and drinking (now they will sell it in the stadium), and there's literally no place to park so you have to park away from town and bus in to the game. You can't bring your own stadium cushion in so you have to rent one for $5, hot dogs are $3, drinks in a plastic cup are $5, a program is $5, and you are fleeced at every turn.
So now, even though I can walk to my seats from my home, my wife and I enjoy the HD TV, the clean bathroom, better food, and can have friends over if we want company and conversation and we don't have to put up with being fleeced, zig zagging to the stadium to avoid some a holes tailgate spot, frustrated by the ruder crowds than we experienced for most of our lives, and getting fleeced for a stadium cushion and a coke.
They will never get us back. My greatest sorrow was when they did the same to the baseball venue. I really miss those sunny afternoon games. But they ruined that experience the same way and I can't focus beyond the net that now extends from the Homeplate area all the way to the foul poles. Screw lawyers and their damned liability! May they rot in hell!
But the coup de gras to our ticket buying days happened when one of my wife's best friends lost her Mom who was a professor and had faculty seats to the games. The ticket office saw her death notice in the paper and called the family home the day of the funeral to speak to the daughter to tell her how much she would have to donate extra if she wanted her Mom's tickets. She told them where to stick the tickets and a few other choice words.
Which gets to the main point Quo. The relationships between alumni and their schools is almost a familial one. When you start treating your family like a carny barker treats the crowd you are fouling up the one the asset the school has always been able to depend upon, your love and loyalty. But when they treat you like dirt and fleece you for an extra $5 bucks so you have a stadium cushion, when for decades you could bring your own, that's what we call a big Go to Hell moment and it ruptures your relationship to the school, it replaces love with disgust, and kills any sense of loyalty you had. And all of these schools that have turned over their ticket sales to these corporations like IMG and others have hurt themselves far more than they will realize until the football lovers are gone and the TV money recedes, and they go hat in hand to alumni which will either have been recent graduates who felt raped by the cost of the education relative to what they can earn in the workforce, or to the older ones whose last memory was one of how their beloved school fleeced them and callously called on the day of their Mom's funeral to squeeze another nickel out of tickets.
You don't recover from that!