Things are going poorly this season but this statement is a bit over the top IMO. For fun, here are some other low attendances from recent previous seasons in the first 29 games 2004: 8129, 7784, 6755, 7522 2003: 7825, 8317, 7180, 8442 2002: 8565, 8188, 6317, 9444 2001: 4420, 8096, 8309, 9321 2000: 6327, 5250, 6256, 7380 Andy
It's great to have a hobby, especially if it's something you're enthusiastic about. Keep up the good work! You're awesome, man.
Dissapointing, but one bad season (who knows? it may just be a bad month) doesn't decide MLS' fate. Not even close.
Great work by Kenn on updating much of the attendance analysis. Crusio, he was able to answer our question about how much doubleheaders mean to MLS attendance. From the 1996-2004 there have been 49 DH's which have made up a total of 4.4% of MLS attendance. In reality the number is even smaller than that because there would have at least been a normal size audiance if there was not a double header. Here is all the great data Kenn has collected http://kenn.com/soccer/mls/doubleheaders.html Andy
Looking at the median, things probably peaked at 2003 and are trending downwards but I will give KC credit for moving up into the respectable range the last few years. Unfortunately respectable among the current #'s might not be good enough.
Looking at this from the outside, say from the viewpoint of a potential investor, this is what I see: a team that has been increasing attendance in recent years, and drawing 12-13k, very close to the league average, with the team up for sale and the current ownership offering almost no support in the way of marketing and advertising. (Even the Yankees advertise.) From the viewpoint of an outsider, I'd say there's some potential here as opposed to a market that's completely untested. Can we agree on that?
sure, but I wouldn't be surprised that # drop to the 9-11k range for most games this year I think the models I've seen require around 15k to make a SSS work. I think that can be done in KC but I'm not 100% sure. I'll be more than pleased if KC finds quality local ownership and builds a SSS. On the other hand I'm not too sure KC would be missed. But good luck. I want KC to succeed but I also think the SA deal is too good to pass up and MLS isn't ready for another round of expansion in 2006 (too many rookies and 2nd-3rd year players are starting right now and it's starting to show up in the quality of some of the games IMO).
Tonight my alarm is official going off and no one is going to get any sleep around me because it is loud and isnt going to stop. There were only 2 games tonight with good attendance (LA & Salt Lake). 2 out of 6 games. the other 4 were absolutely horrible. I mean another season of this and we wont be worring about expansion, we will be worring about weather there will even be a league at all. This is really really scarry. The attendance for teams that are playing well like NE. What is up with the NE fans. Where are they. Not at the stadium that is for sure. Please oh please move KC to SA. The fans in KC dont deserve an mls team and that was proven tonight. I didnt want KC to move until I watched that game on espn2. Now I am officially praying that they get moved.
ok, found the real attendance (in the recap, not the boxscore) 10,259 Better than I think we expected.
If you are talking about the Colorado game they might have sold 10k tickets but there is no way in the world there was 10k in the stadium. Maybe 6k, but that is pushing it. Also, I dont know where they got the 12k figure for the KC game. Wrong answer. I really dont think there was even 7k in the stands.
I was at the game tonight in Colorado and that figure is pretty much what was there. 1/2 of the people left at half. It looked like the end of the game the way people were pouring out of the stadium. Down 2-0 with wet cold weather kinda put an end to it for a lot of families. There weren't many people sitting in the first 10 rows or so but it was pretty close to what I've seen for the previous 3 games. Most people stayed for the 1st 1/2.
First off, KC had higher attendance today than your Columbus, which is troubling. Second, it's tickets sold, not the actual amount of fans in the stadium. Third, the league has billionaires backing it and three stadiums with at least two more on the way. There's no reason to worry.
Fourth, It might only matter to the owners how many tickets sold, but for the sports fans flipping throught the channels and coming across a soccer game on espn2 that has 7k in the stands, it matters how many butts are in the seats.
Ok you guys can say what you want. All you have to do is watch the Real game, watch the KC game, watch the Colorado game. 16k at the Real game, 12k at the kc game, 10k at the colorado game. If the last 2 of those stats is correct then the first cant be. If there was 12 and 10k at the KC and Colorado game then there was 80k at the Salt Lake game, Because there were 8 times the butts in the seats at the Salt Lake game the either of the other two.
NE, FCD, and the real LA all look like real soccer teams, IMO, and I think DC would have done better in the CCC with Ryan Nelson, but I agree that 2006 is too soon to add more teams. But if it's a now or never situation in SA, then now is the preferred choice. Better if KC finds a local investor AND we get a sweetheart deal in SA, provided that there is some sort of hope for a SSS in KC on the horizon. I'm not so concerned about Columbus yet. If the Hunt's are losing interest, then that is a franchise with its own stadium, and when New Yorsey stops sucking all the profit out of the league (which, hopefully, will happen by 2007 with the Harrison SuburbStars) that will be an attractive situation for a new investor. If they aren't losing interest, then they will get involved with reviving their fortunes there before the bottom drops out. Dallas, Denver, and Chicago all will be better soon. LA is fine, pseudo LA is tolerable, and league attendance would be even worse without their away draw, DC has a loyal core, Salt Lake looks good. SJ and NE fans, what the flock? MLS wants a reason to stay in NorCal and you have a competitive team, even without Landon's abs, so get your arsenals in the stadium. Without Onstad's annual howler, you would have won today, too. NE, yes the Krafts want dates for their stadium, but with cheap tickets and an awesome team, your still not even giving them enough revenue to pay the light bill. And weather is not an excuse up there. When it started pouring, everyone who bothered to show up was prepared with a slicker, because that's what New Englanders do. Move to Hartford or someplace where somebody will give a dam*n. Weather, schmeather. Overall, it's a bit dreary at the moment, but no need for doom and gloom. We have an irreversible momentum to carry us through 2007, by which time we will have both higher attendance and a bigger chunk of revenue.
Did you sit in the stands or did you watch on TV? There is a huge differance. There were at least 9,000 butts in the seats at Colorado during the first half. I'll bet my life savings on it. The people were'nt sitting all bunched together near the midfield. the top 10 rows under the overhang were packed. It's nice how a stadium with a capacity of 45k with 1/2 the seats covered up looks full with 16k in it that is the whole idea of the SSS.
Give it up; you're boring us. This is the reason for having smaller SSS: people are closer together. OK? It looks like there are fewer people there when they play in an 80,000 stadium. Make sense? Can we move on?
we don't really know the terms as far as I can tell. Kraft owns Gillette (though there's debt out there) and it's a new stadium. It's not ideal but I think it's all we got for that large market/region. Arrowhead is owned by the county. I think it's run by the Chiefs but I don't think they're cutting the Wizards any breaks. Arrowhead cost $43 million in 1972. Gillette cost $325 million and opened in 2002. I want the Revs out of Gillette, but apprently Kraft doesn't care. He's a local owner and if he's willing to shoulder that operating loss (that he might write off on taxes for all we know) then maybe it won't cost much to other MLS teams (especially if they relax single-entity like some are rumoring). Hunt apparently isn't willing to take those losses at Arrowhead. But back to your original question. I need more info. But the Chiefs probably pay something to the county. Kraft built his stadium on his own.
You have some issues man. If you have an IQ of 70 or higher you cant watch the SLC game and then watcht the KC game and tell me there were only 4k less at the KC game. I dont care what the capacities of the stadiums are. Give it up man.