Please refer to attachment for my data table if you need to. I noticed that RBNY, Revolution, and United have NFL sized capacities. My question is, do MLS teams use the bottom bowl of the respective stadia they play in to realistically reflect their game-to-game draw? It would seem foolish to not do it that way. I understand gate receipts are one thing, and as tenants, they must fork over a fee for the use of the entire facility. But what of their record keeping as it relates to attendance figures and how MLS recognizes a teams' attendance performance? Your expertise and opinions are appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Yes. I don't know of anyone who really does "percentage of capacity" comparisons. Because of things just like this. If you go by the downsized capacity, sure, great. But it's not consistent from week to week even in the same stadium. If the Revs open up the upper deck for a Beckham game, it skews their capacity. Again, not that anybody really tracks that right now. When all stadiums in MLS are (relatively) fixed capacity, it might be an issue.
kenntomasch - I understand that there have been times where a team has cordoned off a section or an entire mezanine level for a game here and there. But if I'm running a team and we play in a stadium that holds 60,000 with (for arguments sake) 35,000 in the lower bowl and 25,000 on top, I'd be inclined to declare that I play in a stadium with a 35K capacity for soccer. Still a high number - unless the team are the Sounders - but the point is to declare a capacity so as to monitor my teams attendance performance as I do on my document. I thought perhaps someone knew of adjusted seating capacities for those teams that play in stadiums that don't fill to capacity on a regular basis. Thanks for your opinion.
Well, yeah. That's usually what they do. When MLS launched, most of the teams played in football stadiums with really large capacities, but they listed them with "downsized" capacities (or "MLS capacities"). Here they were: Columbus (Ohio Stadium) = 25,134 New England (Foxboro Stadium) = 22,385 MetroStars (Giants Stadium) = 25,576 Tampa Bay (Tampa Stadium) = 16,000 DC United (RFK Stadium) = 23,865 Colorado (Mile High Stadium) = 17,500 Dallas (Cotton Bowl) = 25,425 Kansas City (Arrowhead Stadium) = 30,554 Los Angeles (Rose Bowl) = 26,000 San Jose (Spartan Stadium) = 19,166 Every one of those stadiums had a larger capacity than what was listed. In many cases (the Rose Bowl, especially), they would tarp off the unused sections. They still do that at Gillette. So...yeah, they have done this and, in some cases, still do. What's your point? Document to whom? Who's reading it? What difference does it make? Feel free to use whatever number you like. The problem is that it's not always static. Stadiums have a listed "capacity," but if it's a deliberately downsized capacity and they go beyond that (for a Beckham game or something), you have to adjust for it if you plan to do "percent of capacity." If that's what you're doing. In which case....why?
kenntomasch - I do it for my own curiosity. I want to monitor MLS attendance because I need a diversion from all the financial tables I study in the course of a day. The "document" is similar to the attachment in that the data you see in it is but a small portion. As you have provided me with three adjusted stadium capacities that I can work with (RBNY, Revs, United) you have helped a lot. Thanks. DoctorD - I posted it here a) because I'm a Union fan, and b) because I thought everyone here was able to help. I'm sure if it was misplaced, or of serious concern to the moderator, I would have heard about it.
But one of those stadiums no longer exists. I only gave you those 1996 numbers to illustrate that you weren't the first person to think of this. I don't believe United lists an "MLS capacity" of RFK anymore. New England apparently does (or did in 2007, the most recent guide I put my hands on quickly). I don't know if RBNY does anymore. But the teams that do still do it still routinely go above those capacities if necessary (like for a Beckham game), so it messes up your calculations. And there are minute differences from year to year even in the same stadium, so calculations across time are difficult. In short, knock yourself out. Just know that you're only going to get a certain level of accuracy in the numbers, and a lower level of efficacy.
One other thing to point out is that the Revs aren't really a tenant. They are more like a teenaged child living with their parents. Their parents are the Kraft family, the same parents as the Patriots. So, even if they lose money (and we believe they are near a break even point) they are in no danger of expiring because they play in an NFL stadium. They may suffer from it, but it wouldn't kill the team.
Here's the Revs seating chart: You should, however, note that the "whole" stadium will be open for the upcoming tripleheader (Revs/Wizards, USA/Haiti, and Grenada/Honduras), as well as the game against Los Angeles in August. Also, for what it's worth, the first game at Gillette (well, CMGI Field ) was a Revs game with a "sellout crowd" of 22,006.
Am I looking at this correctly? - The revs really don't sell seats on a whole side of the stadium (Sections 121-140)? How did I never know that? That's just wierd.
Yep. Looks something like this: (that's from '05...they apparently now sell at least a section or two that's tarpped off in that photo)
Becuase the TV cameras are always on the side with the tarps and they only show the other side. This gives the illusion that the lower bowl is full on TV. You concentrate everyone on one side so it looks full and never show the empty side. Brilliant! Actually, attendance seems to be on the uptick this year (recesson notwithstanding, go figure). The crowd is beginning to wrap around the endzones. It's encouraging. I think by mid summer we will hit our high water mark of 18/20 K (exception LA Galaxy game 35k), before it receeds again when the weather begins to chill and the kiddos are back in class.