(03-21-2023 12:15 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  Depending on how much the average spending per fan is, another 1,000 in the seats could mean $30,000 or more in gross revenue per game. (I used $30 per fan just for the heck of it.) Problem is, ADs and marketing people haven't figured that out, or how to do it. Or they're just enjoying their paychecks.

At $15/seat, $25,000 in extra marketing costs ($5/ticket sold in extra marketing costs at +1,000/game), that's $50,000 extra for five home games.

One buy game pays a million dollars, so that is 5% of the revenue of one buy game.

And of course, if the marketing doesn't work, that is -$25,000.

Usually not on a cell phone. Can say long-term commitment has never been an issue for us and can not speak for UConn. My gut says their view is not as flexible as us since they were P5 for a time and have a big ego. Don't know how to get the dollars to work, assuming ESPN would give a par adjustment to the contract. Potential for more with them losing the PAC12. I think us giving up a million should be a good starting point as we r football only and a few MAC basketball home games a piece for women and men. Not sure what home games are worth. STRONGLY feel the bb games have to be a balance between the top 4 teams and random teams. It's the only way to help the top 4 teams with seeding in the NCAA and Nit.

Sent from my SM-G990U using CSNbbs mobile app

(03-23-2023 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-21-2023 12:15 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  Depending on how much the average spending per fan is, another 1,000 in the seats could mean $30,000 or more in gross revenue per game. (I used $30 per fan just for the heck of it.) Problem is, ADs and marketing people haven't figured that out, or how to do it. Or they're just enjoying their paychecks.

At $15/seat, $25,000 in extra marketing costs ($5/ticket sold in extra marketing costs at +1,000/game), that's $50,000 extra for five home games.

One buy game pays a million dollars, so that is 5% of the revenue of one buy game.

And of course, if the marketing doesn't work, that is -$25,000.

That's terrific! Except my post was in reference to the previous one about getting more attendance from scheduled home games (including 4 MACs), not comparing revenue from home games vs buy games. I also referred to "gross revenue," since additional marketing, vendor share %s, etc. are difficult to calculate for averages over 12 programs.

(03-23-2023 07:17 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  

(03-23-2023 07:27 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-21-2023 12:15 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  Depending on how much the average spending per fan is, another 1,000 in the seats could mean $30,000 or more in gross revenue per game. (I used $30 per fan just for the heck of it.) Problem is, ADs and marketing people haven't figured that out, or how to do it. Or they're just enjoying their paychecks.

At $15/seat, $25,000 in extra marketing costs ($5/ticket sold in extra marketing costs at +1,000/game), that's $50,000 extra for five home games.

One buy game pays a million dollars, so that is 5% of the revenue of one buy game.

And of course, if the marketing doesn't work, that is -$25,000.

That's terrific! Except my post was in reference to the previous one about getting more attendance from scheduled home games (including 4 MACs), not comparing revenue from home games vs buy games.

So your post was in reference to the previous one, but not in reference to what it was saying?

(03-21-2023 11:37 AM)cmufanatic Wrote:  Does 9k vs 15k matter that much. Attendance is pathetic across the conference. It's all about the espn deal [and] pay day games. A few k in the seats means little anymore

"The previous one" was specifically arguing that the ESPN contract and the buy game revenues are more important to AD budgets in the MAC than the gate.

Quote: I also referred to "gross revenue," since additional marketing, vendor share %s, etc. are difficult to calculate for averages over 12 programs.

To be sure, gross revenue is easier to talk about, but it's net revenues that matter. That is like looking for your keys under the streetlight because the place where you dropped them is too dark to see clearly.

There are no experts around here, so I see no reason to compete for points.

My opinion was not agreeing with the previous but contrasting with it, i.e., that building local attendance has some value, and that ADs seem not to consider that as important as it should be (IMO). I thought that was pretty simple.

I'm done here.

(03-24-2023 12:50 AM)pvk75 Wrote:  There are no experts around here, so I see no reason to compete for points.

So don't. There was no urgency to dismissing my comment as irrelevant when I chimed in agreeing with the person you were disputing.

Quote: My opinion was not agreeing with the previous but contrasting with it, i.e., that building local attendance has some value, and that ADs seem not to consider that as important as it should be (IMO).

Then when I argue that it's not necessarily so straightforward to build local attendance, and argue that in terms of the bottom line, the person you were disputing got it right, dismissing it as irrelevant to what you were saying doesn't seem to hold water.

Quote: I thought that was pretty simple.

Exactly my point. Treating it as simpler than it really is doesn't actually simplify the challenge that AD's face.