Ed was good enough to put up a ton of historical attendance details for every team in the league. The Revs data starts here and one additional post that follows this one below. https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/...ta-through-2012-season.1990445/#post-28201231
Wow, that's a good bit of data. What I wonder is how attendance has tracked to team performance for the Revs. I suspect the answer is surprisingly little.
Gereally, in the early years when the team was terrible, attendance was very good. Later, when the team was good and we went to several MLS Cup finals in a short timeframe, attendance was not very good. Obviously there are a lot of factors involved, but the idea that a winning team will boost attendance did not hold true for the Revs.
When the team started up, it was the new car effect. Everyone wanted to check it out. When the team actually got to be good, the Revs barely marketed the team ... so not many people knew they were good until they'd hear about it on the news during the playoffs.
Interesting to me(proponent of Sept-June schedule) that the autumn months had the highest average..Something I always felt was true, but never made the effort to check out. Especially when everyone says, we can't compete during nfl season! Thanks to Ed..wow, that's a ton of data!
Some of our best seasons have been due to late season runs and playoff performance. That's not the best formula for setting expectations for good performance. It has yet to be seen what an anticipated high performing team would do for attendance. I think with attendance, the anticipation of critical factors is more important than the actual factor. It holds true with weather and I believe it holds with performance. If there's a bad forecast leading up to the game, it doesn't matter if it turns out to be a beautiful day - decisions have already been made, for the most part. And, if in preseason, people think we are going to have a poor or mediocre team (or just don't know yet), I think that affects their planned ticket buying for much of the season. If, on the other hand, there was the anticipation of a quality team that would be among the team leaders from the start, ... we basically don't know because we have never really been in that position. I don't remember anyone saying anything about not being able to compete during the NFL season, but I've been pointing out for years how strong our fall attendance typically is. These numbers make the strong case that our biggest issue is spring attendance. And, it would be even worse if we didn't have the typical road-heavy early season schedule.
Everyone knew the '05 team was going to be good. The attendance that year, when taking away the special games, was blah. Of course the reason for that is that the Revs haven't ever marketed themselves as a place to be, except for families. When it's crappy out, the die-hards are basically the only ones there. Because the little bit of marketing money that is spent, is spent to bring in the family crowd that mostly will NOT come out for a rain/cold game.
You and Tom and a few others keep bringing up that marketing point. That's fine, but it's a theory. We don't know that marketing more or differently would make a significant difference. I suspect that the organization has done a lot more study on the effects of their marketing efforts and projections on potential marketing plans. I know a lot of people like to make the assumption that they are a bunch of fools and idiots, but I think that's rather unlikely. I think they did do more marketing in the past and it didn't have an appreciable affect and led to greater losses, so I think they've cut back and been much more cautious about their spending since. They have the resources to have quality people do marketing projections - if studies showed they could make more by spending more, why wouldn't they? I think the potential market is a lot harder to move than people think.
Let me ask you a serious question, if you have to sell a product that you couldn't care less about, and work in an organization that doesn't appear to punish failure, how hard would you try?
I suspect that the only time the "fools and idiots" in question use the words "soccer" and "marketing" in the same sentence is in the phrase Soccer United Marketing. In fact, I can envision scenarios such as... "Listening to all the entitled Revolution supporters pissing and moaning in their internet communities about the way we manage the team would be a pain in the ass if it weren't for cashing these checks from Soccer United Marketing, huh Pop?" "The who doing what where, Jonathan?" "The Revolution supporters pissing and moaning in their internet communities about the way we manage the team." "Still not following you, son." "Never mind, Pop. We just got another check from Soccer United Marketing. (blank stare from Bob) "SUM, Dad... it's a check from SUM." "SUM!!! Let me hold it, Jonathan!!! (breaking in to a wide grin) Ka-ching!!!"
Theory? Theory your way (current marketing) and other way (more marketing) Theory Theory, Theory, Theory It's been long established here that the Kremlin-like Kraft organization does not and will not release or leak enough information for us to ever do much better than speculation and theory. It just had to be quoted.
That's an interesting re-writing of history. The Revo were consistently one of the top teams during the Twellman/Ralston era. Products have to be marketed and sold.
Not completely true. The Revs were fairly open with the fan base in the early years. But when Fernando was the coach they made a major PR blunder that really burned them. When the Evil Midget pulled his "Man On A Horse" stunt at the Riders "Meet The Revs" meeting and it didn't come off the front office had egg on their faces and they subsequently became more tight lipped than the old KGB---and have stayed that way ever since and will likely stay that way unless/until they bring in a GM with a greater sense of the value of open communication with the fan base.
It's clear by this post, that you don't understand marketing. So, I'd just quit while you were behind.
If you don't think a good marketing campaign can lead to better crowds and thus a better team. I give you thru Boston Bruins. The owner is still terrible but they did a great job at marketing the team better and started to get sellouts before they became good and merchandise sales went up. And before you say a Stanley Cup win is the reason this was all done before that win.
That must have been after they fired the firm that came up with that terrible campaign: "It's called Bruins."
The Bruins did something the Revs have not: Recognized that there was a problem with their fanbase and took steps to improve that. Not to mention it actually being effective. I actually liked the "never date within the division" ad, where the bear beats up the guy for going out with a girl in a Habs jersey....
How can you ask such a loaded question and then call it "serious"? Or, more accurately, opinion. And, there's nothing wrong with opinion, as long as it's not masquerading as fact. The stuff you quoted doesn't pretend to be anything other than opinion. Okay, yes. There were a couple of seasons where we were probably expected to be good in preseason. Out of how many years in MLS? The reason I ignored it is because you preferred to nitpick over details while avoiding the main point. You'd rather play gotcha than discuss the issue. The B's had a huge, rabid fanbase that were dying to buy tickets. They may have stopped buying and gone on protest for a couple of years to protest the ugly end of the Sinden era (along with revolving-door coaches), but they were there ready to jump back in as soon as there was a sign things were going to change. It wasn't marketing, it was pushing Sinden out and hiring Chiarelli and familiar, respected faces like Don Sweeney and Neely to change things up. That was enough to convince fans who never really wanted to stay away anyway. I've been watching the B's for 35+ years, I'm pretty familiar with the timeline.
What exactly was loaded about the question? The head of marketing for the Revs has freely admitted that she hates soccer, and finds it boring. She's said that flat out to people, including Revs supporters. That just leaves the part of my question where I even said "an organization that doesn't appear to punish failure..." so that makes it loaded? Or you just can't really answer?