From what I can see of what you are saying, you are forgetting the most important factor of all, the economic recession (which we are still in). Launching the WUSA right in the middle of that (I believe the present recession began toward the end of 1999) was not the smartest move and the CyberRays attendnace may have further dug into the Quakes', but I don't see the CyberRays as a major factor there at all.
Actually the idea of including the counter-example (the other 6 all improving) was to disprove ths very theory. Obviously the economy had some effect (and probably more so in San Jose), but if that were really the cause why did every other team without a local WUSA team improve? After all it could be argued that every area suffered because of the downturn in the general economy. Basically I was trying to show that the economy is just noise (it is cited far too often as a problem, at least in my mind). Does anyone have evidence that a local WUSA club increased attendence and/or revenue for corresponding MLS club?
You've nearly launched yourself headlong toward the truth but you missed the major whipping boy here. Launching the CyberRays at the absolute depth of the canyon of the Earthquakes existence under the Kraft regime was the siphon that sent the Earthquakes attendance spiraling downward.
Spartacus, I almost always agree with your thoughts. This time, I'm not sure. My experience is that there wasn't a whole lot of cross over between the two teams. I could be wrong (I stopped going to the C'Rays after their first season) It seemed to me most of the people that were attending the C'Rays were there as (1) Families with female soccer players (The Role Model crowd) and (2) fans of either women's soccer or of women's sports in general. Was there a significant percentage of fans that were displaced Earthquakes fans, refugees of the Kraft regime?
i think the combination of poor Clash/Quakes performance from 1998-2000, marketing to the youth soccer community, and the mere presentation of a pro soccer alternative led to the significant movement of the family soccer crowd from the Earthquakes to the CyberRays. If any of those three conditions hadn't existed at just the right time, the C-Rays may not have impacted the Quakes as significantly as I think they have.
I can't deny that either. There is no one cause, no one factor making these events happen. It has to be a combination of a whole group of inauspicious events coming together and the Kraft regime is one of those. I'm sure that MLS fans did go over to WUSA and didn't come back, but that doesn't account for all of the drop.
You can't do that. It is certainly part of the problem. And many economists say that the Bay Area/Silicon Valley has been hit the worst of any other area in the country. Spartacus has cited the Kraft regime. Certainly their inflation of figures is going to make the subsequent year's drop even more precipitous. Then you have the downward spiral in expectations for MLS that started off on a heady peak in 1996 and did its little dive. Mike is talking about the lack of crossover. That is very true. Rather than approaching MLS as a friend to cooperate with, the WUSA, and many of its fans saw MLS as a competitor. You could also cite lack of TV coverage, my favorite saw about the belief of many people in today's society that "if it's not on TV it doesn't exist." There are undoubtedly a number of other factors that could be cited, but it isn't just one.
These are all valid points and I agree that they are likely contributing factors, but as in any experiment the idea is to focus on the positive things that actually had a benefit. I was trying to illustrate that I could not find an example of a local WUSA club benefiting the attendence levels of the MLS clubs in the same city. (Or said the other way, non-WUSA containing cities performed better than those containing WUSA teams in every single case.) So far no data has been brought forward in any of the threads I have looked at to refute this theory.
And now to play the other side.... These are significantly less useful because of the difficulty in quantifiying them. How do you quantify "downward spiral in expectations"? Did any one really track media/TV coverage consistantly across markets? What about "inflation of figures" by the Kraft regime? How do we know this? Is it documented somewhere? (I would be willing to bet on several occaisons this year we have higher attendence than the number officially published. Does that make up for this unknown inflation?) And how in the world do you measure "economies" that affect MLS? Just offering some critism/discussion.
I'm not sure about your analysis. NE, MetroStars, and DC all saw increases in attendance during the first year of WUSA. In NE, during all three years of WUSA, including this year's incomplete figures, the Revs have drawn more than they did in 2000. Their attendance can only be considered disappointing when compared to 1996-8 before the effects of Kraft fatigue began to take their toll. DC had its best attendance ever in 2001, though now their attendance is less than they have had in the past. It should be taken into account that DC has experience extended on-the-field futility that has been equalled nowhere but San Jose. The Metros might not even belong in this analysis, because the New Jersey market is often considered quite separate from the Long Island market, but they had a strong 2001 attendance, and 2002 was right in line with their all-time average, and this year is a bit less, but comparable to what they were getting in 1997-2000. Even in San Jose, it was claimed that the attendance drop between 2000 and 2001 attendance was almost if not entirely due to Lynne M.'s special math. Then attendance increased in 2002, and this year's attendance is ahead of last year's at an equivalent point in the season (another LA sellout will be needed to beat last year's final figure). I'm not sure I'm refuting you, it's just that there are so many factors that go into this business that anybody can find numbers and/or anecdotal evidence to support their opinions. The existence of the CyberRays was one factor in the marketplace that the Quakes have been operating in, and it can't have been totally irrelevant, but the relevance is difficult to quantify. The WUSA's folding doesn't change the fact that the Quakes' management has pretty much the same amount of hard work to do going into the future.
And MLS (certainly from the Quakes' point of view) returned the feeling (at least once the first shot was fired across the bow). SVS&E even did refer to the C-Rays as "the enemy" in my presence (knowing that I worked both sides of that fence...I was never sure whether it was tongue-in-cheek or not).
In stastics class we were taught on day 1. 1 point does not a trend make. In fact I can't get anywhere close to a 95% confidence limit for any of the anaylsis (I would need about 30 data points). But bearing in mind that the WUSA existence was all of 3 years, I tried to make the analysis over all 3 of those years. I noted the exceptions in my initial post, but either 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 3 (in case of San Jose) is a much more convincing case than just first year numbers.
I am not sure what you are talking about. Do you have a pointer to something that discusses or shows the attendence drop was fabricated?
Really?? Well than show me the numbers that a WUSA team helped build the attendence of a local MLS team over more than 1 year?
The drop wasn't fabricated; the peak was. More likely the true significant drop in San Jose attendance happened between 1998 and 1999, not 2000 and 2001, and was merely camoflauged by creative counting techniques as well as the extreme outlier of July 4, 1999 which accounted for more than 20% of 1999's official attendance. One piece of evidence is Don Garber's speech when he was here for the 2001 All-Star Game. He pointed out that paid attendance was up for the Quakes at that point. The official numbers at the time were severely down. http://www.mlsnet.com/content/01/mls0727sotl.html The Merc had some stories about how attendance was inflated. Admittedly Lynne's special math is part of the conventional wisdom and lore about the franchise that has been spread through word of mouth and not via officially documented reports, and I base my belief more on stuff I've heard from people who should know than on anything I can prove to you over the Internet.
This just came in from MLS Confidential: WUSA AFTERMATH: Despite declaring a truce that included double-headers and some cooperative ventures, the men's and women's pro leagues were always bound to go their separate ways. MLS officials weren't pleased several years ago when proponents of a women's league suddenly broke off discussions and took their own course. "It came as a complete shock to us at the time," said a source. "They at least could have informed us prior to their announcement but if that's how they want to do business, that's fine." According to another source, MLS executive vice president Mark Abbott devoted many hours to formulating and drawing up a business plan for a women's league. "He gave it to them, and they tore it up and wrote their own business plan," said the source. "We certainly don't have all the answers, but we tried to tell them what we'd learned about the market and they wouldn't listen."
Noah is dead on. What I have heard was that the numbers were inflated about 1500 per game. I believe some teams still do inflate numbers, and have heard that by real attendance we rank higher than our usual 9th or 10th. The league is aware and cuts us some slack. Great point also on the 1999 season. The WWC semifinal at Stanford doubleheader (73,000 or so) altered the numbers (what, about 15k stuck around for our game?)
So it wasn't curiosity that killed the cat, it was arrogance...The more I think about Spartacus' idea of another incarnation as WMLS, I'd love to see it work. But, until MLS is more firmly established (and WUSA-ers are able to swallow thier pride), I don't see it happening.
I don't either...the players (especially the "Founders") would never go for it...but think about it, ready-made teams, front office staff already in place, dual marketing, and (if practical with stadium availability), dual scheduling (for example, if Earthquakes and Revs play at Foxboro, CyberRays & Breakers play at San Jose same day). That scheduling is used in the WAC for mens and women's basketball and it's so easy to follow. Plus, you know that a market exists...what easier way to exploit it? Too bad the players will never allow it.
One more thought, not that I always agree with her, but Ann Killion (SJ Merc) had SOME good points on this lack of cooperation. She cited the fact that WUSA erred greatly in refusing MLS' offer to share their info. When someone who has already been there offers you help and you decide to go it alone, you takes your chances. All that's left is the last rites. It didn't have to be this way. In keeping with the true club atmosphere, some European teams have recognized the value of "extending thier brand" by having a women's team (along with their youuth teams). It's a shame that they couldn't have made it work here. Imagine billboards with Landon AND Brandi (Even one last year with Jeff getting his hair braided by a C'Ray....maybe not.) Anyway, the marketing possibilities were right there. What a shame...
What's sad is that they could have learned from the model of the ABL vs. the WNBA. ABL tried to stand on its own and rejected the idea of "using the gym when the boys are through with it." Even though they had the higher quality product than WNBA, ABL failed to achieve a substantial financial footing against the flashier, well-heeled NBA offshoot. Goodness, Anne Cribbs was right under their nose the whole time...why didn't they ask her advice?
I don't know what the Fab Five (a.k.a. the Founders) were thinking when they started out (I am going to read that Killion article, to see what she says). Julie Foudy may be a great soccer player and a real whiz at kicking guys through plate glass windows, but she seems to have needed some sound (and conservative) business advice. Another case of biting off more than what one can chew. Here's an article by Gary Peterson, one of the sports columnists for the Contra Costa Times. Some interesting perspectives: http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/sports/columnists/gary_peterson/6791378.htm