Averaging 18,000 Attendance

shrink · Post #1 » by **shrink** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 4:19 pm

http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

It's nice to see the wolves putting an entertaining product on the floor, and that people are responding. I think these numbers will have a couple of effects with Glen Taylor:

a. Kevin Love is likely to get a max extension before the deadline. Taylor may have been resistant to offer an early, expensive extension, but if ticket sales are doing well, he has to be optimistic.

b. Ricky Rubio is completely off the table. Rubio helps the team win, but he also helps sell tickets.

c. Taylor may pump money into the team. I think Taylor has been fair, even going over the lux, when he feels he has a winning team. The Wolves aren't there yet, but they are showing signs -- signs the fans are responding too. Ticket sales will prevent giant losses like last year, and I think this could mean mroe investment in payroll.

[RCG] · Post #2 » by **[RCG]** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 4:28 pm

Agree with you. Love will get the max if he keeps playing like he has. Ricky will be off the table for as long as we can control his rights. Hopefully Taylor, Kahn and Adelman will all be in on the personnel decision-making process.

Saltine · Post #3 » by **Saltine** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 5:04 pm

No way they don't keep Love, he seems much happier this season, I'm sure it's just about the numbers now...

cpfsf · Post #4 » by **cpfsf** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 5:19 pm

I'm not entirely opposed to trading Williams. There are plenty of teams that need him more than Minnesota, but finding a team willing to offer the assets we need is the tricky part. I'm not saying trade him for the sake of trading him, but there are players who can do a better job now of drawing in fans and more importantly wins.

champalift · Post #5 » by **champalift** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 5:33 pm

This could be a little homer-hopeful, but I wonder if there is any shot Love doesn't take the max? There was an interview early in the preseason/training camp (too lazy to look right now) where he said something basically along the lines of money not being the most important thing when it comes to where he plays. If he takes a couple mill less per season that could be a savy vet addition. Maybe when it all boils down to it the powers that be (Love's agent) will ensure nothing less than max. Regardless, if Love wants max money, you have to give it to him IMO.

Tirion · Post #6 » by **Tirion** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 6:18 pm

d. Rubio attracts middle-aged female demographic. Like a lot.

breatnach · Post #7 » by **breatnach** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 6:55 pm

Unless there is some link I am missing between income and attendance, I don't think this really changes anything for Taylor.

Assumption: 5000 more spectators per game at let's say 20$ a head is equal to $4.1m in a regular season. So we're essentially able to pay our backup PG from that money (IF the higher attendance stays throughout the season, which I doubt - IMO people are just basketball starved and want to see Ricky early on).
I doubt any increase in spectators (no matter how many) will promt Taylor to open his coffers and go into the lux.

On a side note, I'd be interested to know what % of a teams income stems from attendance. I'm guessing both TV contracts and merchandise are both way higher than ticket sales. If I had to guess I'd say it accounts for 10-20% max of a teams annual income. (Prolly more like 1-2% for teams like Miami or LA who are very marketable even outside of their respective states / country)

Tirion · Post #8 » by **Tirion** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 6:57 pm

People would want to see Ricky on TV. Not only in US too. And buy his jersey.

bri · Post #9 » by **bri** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 6:57 pm

breatnach wrote:Unless there is some link I am missing between income and attendance, I don't think this really changes anything for Taylor.

Assumption: 5000 more spectators per game at let's say 20$ a head is equal to $4.1m in a regular season. So we're essentially able to pay our backup PG from that money (IF the higher attendance stays throughout the season, which I doubt - IMO people are just basketball starved and want to see Ricky early on).
I doubt any increase in spectators (no matter how many) will promt Taylor to open his coffers and go into the lux.

On a side note, I'd be interested to know what % of a teams income stems from attendance. I'm guessing both TV contracts and merchandise are both way higher than ticket sales. If I had to guess I'd say it accounts for 10-20% max of a teams annual income. (Prolly more like 1-2% for teams like Miami or LA who are very marketable even outside of their respective states / country)

I'd assume each head brings in more than 20 in revenue. Since ticket would probably be about that in average value, then you have to account for concessions and souvenirs people buy. Also not sure if he owns the parking ramps there or not.

breatnach · Post #10 » by **breatnach** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 7:11 pm

bri wrote:
I'd assume each head brings in more than 20 in revenue. Since ticket would probably be about that in average value, then you have to account for concessions and souvenirs people buy. Also not sure if he owns the parking ramps there or not.

Fair assumption, thats the missing link I mentioned. What do you reckon each visitor pays during his stay at TC (ticket, consessions, merchandise etc)? $50? $75? $100?

I still think while a full arena is nice and gives the home team good energy, thr income is neglegible in the big picture and will not warrant the owner to go deep into the lux.

shrink · Post #11 » by **shrink** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 7:15 pm

I thought you might like this article, from 2009

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/12031628

While the Wolves were near the bottom in attendance for 2008, their ticket yield was not that bad, at least better than $63/game. A lot of that has to do with market size and MIN/St Paul is around 15th in the US. We still have problems, but if the wolves provide a winner, Minnesotans go to games, and they are willing to spend money on tickets.

Krapinsky · Post #12 » by **Krapinsky** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 7:17 pm

Let's not jump the gun. It's been three games and one of those games was the home opener. Last night's game was only 15,115, which is probably more of an indicator where attendance will be this year than 18,000.

breatnach · Post #13 » by **breatnach** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 7:51 pm

shrink wrote:I thought you might like this article, from 2009

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/12031628

While the Wolves were near the bottom in attendance for 2008, their ticket yield was not that bad, at least better than $63/game. A lot of that has to do with market size and MIN/St Paul is around 15th in the US. We still have problems, but if the wolves provide a winner, Minnesotans go to games, and they are willing to spend money on tickets.

Thanks, very interesting link!

Did I understand that correctly that only 64% of people purchasing Wolves tickets actually show up? People must have too much money..

Foye · Post #14 » by **Foye** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 7:58 pm

Krapinsky wrote:Let's not jump the gun. It's been three games and one of those games was the home opener. Last night's game was only 15,115, which is probably more of an indicator where attendance will be this year than 18,000.

New Years eve. A lot of guys probably woke up too late to go to the game from their intoxication. :lol:

breatnach · Post #15 » by **breatnach** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 8:03 pm

Foye wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:Let's not jump the gun. It's been three games and one of those games was the home opener. Last night's game was only 15,115, which is probably more of an indicator where attendance will be this year than 18,000.

New Years eve. A lot of guys probably woke up too late to go to the game from their intoxication.

Thats the advantage of living 8 hours time difference away. Plenty of time to sober up

cpfsf · Post #16 » by **cpfsf** » Mon Jan 2, 2012 8:13 pm

We really needed that win against Dallas. 0-4 doesn't scream team of the future.

B Calrissian · Post #17 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Jan 3, 2012 5:47 am

14,514 tonight

funkatron101 · Post #18 » by **funkatron101** » Tue Jan 3, 2012 5:59 am

B Calrissian wrote:14,514 tonight

I was disappointed by the turnout, given the previous games, but we made it as loud as we could.

B Calrissian · Post #19 » by **B Calrissian** » Tue Jan 3, 2012 6:09 am

funkatron101 wrote:
B Calrissian wrote:14,514 tonight

I was disappointed by the turnout, given the previous games, but we made it as loud as we could.

The Rubio chants in 4th(I think) sounded really loud. They also showed a group of fans in costumes. People seem to be really getting into it this year.

jade_hippo · Post #20 » by **jade_hippo** » Tue Jan 3, 2012 6:22 am

breatnach wrote:
shrink wrote:I thought you might like this article, from 2009

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/12031628

While the Wolves were near the bottom in attendance for 2008, their ticket yield was not that bad, at least better than $63/game. A lot of that has to do with market size and MIN/St Paul is around 15th in the US. We still have problems, but if the wolves provide a winner, Minnesotans go to games, and they are willing to spend money on tickets.

Thanks, very interesting link!

Did I understand that correctly that only 64% of people purchasing Wolves tickets actually show up? People must have too much money..

that Laker actual attendance is deceptive. Go to a game. You'll notice the arena is half full at the opening tip. Their fans are notorious for not showing up till later in the game, I think its a celebrity/highclass thing. NYC is like this to a degree, but not nearly like the Lakers... the Clippers, for sharing an arena with the Lakers, seem to have polar opposite fanbase with the diehard working class.