The obvious reason is that they haven't begun marketing themselves in earnest yet. It's foolish to think that this is all that the money and sports-marketing experience behind NYCFC can muster.
I think "the state of things currently" is largely irrelevant to what the landscape will look like as 2015 approaches in earnest. At this point, the critics are right...the club's current "marketing" efforts are essentially an anemic attempt to peddle MCFC stateside. But how any right-minded person can assume that a Yankees/MCFC partnership won't ramp things up exponentially once there is actually something to ramp up is beyond me.
I think you (intentionally?) miss his point. You might be aware that the Yankees have considerable financial resources and an extensive broadcasting and marketing infrastructure at their disposal. And they've been around a little while. If you really think that won't be brought to bear behind NYCFC once it actually exists, and that it won't go a long way towards swaying casual or unaffiliated NYC soccer fans, you're beyond naive.
He intentionally misses a lot of points. It's a symptom of Cosmos fanboy syndrome. They're legends in their own minds who believe they see all and know all. Just roll with it.
I just hope you guys draw each other in the Open Cup. Sure to be some entertaining threads if that happens...
Being as i live here and have been a major player in the area soccer scene since 2001, i am pretty confident i can speak for the majority of what i would describe as serious soccer fans. I dont dispute they will get people to games, i only state that the people they do get are going to be extremely casual followers and very new followers of the sport at best. There is legitimately ZERO organic support amongst the harder core element in this city for NYCFC aka Man City USA. Dont believe, fine, just wait and see.
Ah. So your complaint is that they're not proper or legitimate as opposed to ... nevermind. It has been my experience is that those that are worried about "hard core" and "serious" usually have no idea what they're really talking about. They're so stuck in their own internal fantasy world that they filter everything to point that they can't see straight. Obviously, that isn't universal, and perhaps it doesn't apply to you. But if 20-25,000 casual fans manage to turn out to every game, I'm sure the proper fans will enjoy making fun of them and the team itself won't give a rat's ass. The fact that I can't think of a professional soccer team within a hundred miles or so of the NYC area that would qualify as "organic" probably isn't relevant.
So casual soccer fans are insignificant since they aren't derived from living organisms? Okay, now I get it!
I would imagine that if the amount of "serious" soccer fans in NYC are proportional to other cities in the country (or higher given the international character of the city), then there has to be a significant (majority) number of "serious" fans who are not currently supporting a local team, considering the huge population of fans is under served (and hasn't been captured) by NYRB and the Cosmos low attendance (compared to what a 1st Division NYC team would expect to draw) doesn't really show that the "serious" fans are supporting them. Seems like the majority of "serious" fans are free agents without a local team right now.
If 20-25000 casual fans turn out to NYCFC games, it will be a huge disappointment. The hype and money surrounding this team demands greater expectations than "slightly better than Kansas City and Portland." I think you are misinterpreting the post you relied to as a complaint, rather than analysis of the situation on the ground. Considering MLS 2.0 marked a change in marketing toward trying to convert existing soccer fans rather than fans of other sports, it is worth investigating reasons why they have failed to do so in their biggest market. I immediately reject any idea that New Yorker soccer fans are inherently special in their fandom. That is not to say that they are not affected by what goes on around them that may not affect fans in other cities, Red Bull being chief among them. Just some attendance analysis, you can skip this: Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content) Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler 1996-2005 (Metrostars): 17669 2006-2009 (RB @ the Meadowlands): 15074 or 16022 w/0 2009 2006-pres. (RB as a whole): 16805 or 17706 w/o 2009 These numbers lead me to believe that the branding had a direct negative effect on overall attendance. In the same venue, the team performed significantly worse even after removing the outlier year, and the recent rise are directly attributable to a combination of the stadium move, a better record recently and the presence of more big-name players. In other words, it is improving despite the Red Bull name rather than because of it (and yes, there was always the possibility of Red Bull owning the team without renaming it, meaning having all the positives without any real negative). In short, team branding matters, to both casual fans and supporters. The Red Bull supporters section has undergone much more turnover than any other team. Hardly anyone in today's South Ward was a supporter pre-2006, I'd venture to say around 10 percent at best since many people have left the section over the years due to the brand at first and other shenanigans afterward. I'd also put the number of pre-RBA supporters at <50 percent as the supporters groups have expanded greatly since the stadium opened. What happened to all the fans that left Red Bull behind, both casual fans and supporters? They can only be either Cosmos fans or not following local game at all. If European soccer fans in NYC were not turned off already by MLS rules, the fact that their only professional local team is named after an energy drink surely turned a lot of them off, possibly for good. If that were not true, then these fans would be following NYCFC and they would have some sort of a supporters group. But we don't see that at all, and no reason to believe they are some silent majority. NYCFC has only a handful of fans at best right now. So what we can take from this is: (1) Having gone through the Red Bull thing, soccer fans in NYC are already harder to convert than before, meaning any brand that is too much Man City will have compounding negative effects. (2) Throwing money at a branding problem does not negate the problem, only mask it. (3) Supporters make up a large and reliable part of attendance, and serve as a foundation from which attendance can expand. NYCFC will not bode well in the bad years if they don't have any.
Yeah, given the amount of investment being put into this team, the fact that they will have replaced the Galaxy as the league's #1 glamor team in terms of marketing, a stadium within the 5 boroughs with a dedicated subway station, the practical lack of a capacity restriction, and a potentially larger ability to spend when they enter the league due to a new CBA and TV contracts, I would expect higher numbers than 20000 to show up at Yankee Stadium. I would put 25000 at the low end of acceptability. If they get 20000 given all these things, it will be due to some other reason than "well, this is US soccer."
Says who? NYCFC hasn't even started to seriously market their team, doesn't have a defined brand, just got a head coach, doesn't have a single player, etc, etc. It's a bit much to say that they are now the #1 glamor team in MLS when right now they are little more than a circle with NYCFC written in it.
If NYCFC doesn't sign Messi or Ronaldo, you'll know they're a joke on the good citizens of NYC. amirite?
This is only because you hate the team. They don't have a brand yet. Its just speculation that they'll be another Chivas type team. For the moment they seem to be doing everything right and I really doubt that we have another Chivas on our hands.
Yes, i agree...they've been doing a great job using NYCFC so far to promote nothing but Manchester City and their players, etc. If that's doing everything right, i don't want to know what doing it wrong is. Their brand is Manchester City FC, its the only reason they invetsed to be in NYC and MLS...to further the Man City brand in the ever expanding global soccer brand war.
Don't forget the Yankees are the fall back position if Man City doesn't gain any traction... Of course that won't win over any Mets' fans. But I'm sure there are plenty of unaffiliated, novice/potential soccer fan hipsters just waiting for a team to call their own.
Chivas also started pretty well, on the road they were a good draw in heavy Latino markets, I know here in Chicago we used to have the Chivas attendance bump. So nothing initially wrong if MancityNYCFC starts as a Chivas, the bad thing would be if they then hire Vergara to run the team.
I did not think winner of the "Most Lacking in Self-Awareness" BS post of the year award would be wrapped up by January 6th...
Specifically talking from a league marketing perspective, there were two reasons this team exists: the hope that they can drive TV ratings and get the league to be more relevant in its largest market. They will probably want to set goals better than "slightly above Portland." The league will probably do everything they can to assist in this, as they already have for years in trying to secure the team a stadium. This is the league's pet project and it's a big risk, so they probably are expecting a big reward as well (aside from $100 million, that is).