CPL 2023 Season Attendance

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

1 hour ago, jonovision said:

Announced attendance from Saturday:

York 822

Hamilton 3827

Valour 3374

All quite generously announced in actual terms judging from the Onesoccer streams given that implies that the sections visible when the camera pans over the crowd should be close to half full in the Valour's case and over half full in the Forge's case if the small mezzanine deck on the camera side is filled to a similar extent. I'd be surprised if York's actual crowd was much more than 200 but it's more difficult to tell on that one. Weather and/or NHL playoffs makes a lot of season ticket no shows for these games understandable though.

Edited April 23, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Kent]

3 hours ago, jonovision said:

Announced attendance from Saturday:

York 822

Hamilton 3827

Valour 3374

 

 

York below last year's average, Hamilton and Valour both above last season's average.

Personally I didn't go to the York game. I already got enough of a guilt trip from my family for going to 2 games this week. Would have been hard to justify a 3rd! Had things to do also.

[jonovision]

3 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

All quite generously announced in actual terms judging from the Onesoccer streams given that implies that the sections visible when the camera pans over the crowd should be close to half full in the Valour's case and over half full in the Forge's case if the small mezzanine deck on the camera side is filled to a similar extent. I'd be surprised if York's actual crowd was much more than 200 but it's more difficult to tell on that one. Weather and/or NHL playoffs makes a lot of season ticket no shows for these games understandable though.

I know of quite a few people who paid for tickets who stayed home to watch Jets in OT. With the extra tickets for STHs and weather/Jets, tough to gauge what this crowd means for Valour in 2023. But the product on the field was better than we're used to seeing, which hopefully keeps the fans coming back.

[Cheeta]

^ I'm the only one I know that used the "bonus" tickets for the home opener, and literally everyone who's part of my Footie Family have seasons.  Absolutely some took up the offer but I suspect the % that was utilized as quite low.  Doesn't matter, it's a good scheme and they should stick with it.

A LOT of mobiles had the Jet game on speaker during the 1st half of the match.  Kinda funny actually.

Never seen so many Valour scarves being worn in my life.  Excellent to see but yeah, it was kind of cool out yesterday.  Wore mine.   (Wee elf wore her RRR Argyle). 

[MrsC]

55 minutes ago, Cheeta said:

^ I'm the only one I know that used the "bonus" tickets for the home opener, and literally everyone who's part of my Footie Family have seasons.  Absolutely some took up the offer but I suspect the % that was utilized as quite low.  Doesn't matter, it's a good scheme and they should stick with it.

A LOT of mobiles had the Jet game on speaker during the 1st half of the match.  Kinda funny actually.

Never seen so many Valour scarves being worn in my life.  Excellent to see but yeah, it was kind of cool out yesterday.  Wore mine.   (Wee elf wore her RRR Argyle). 

I think you are right about the # of people using the free tickets being low. They sent those codes out weeks ago, and a lot of people I talked to forgot all about using them.

[narduch]

 

 

[-Hammer-]

On 4/17/2023 at 3:57 PM, Kingston said:

When the league was starting up, there were comments from different officials giving break even attendance numbers of anywhere from 5000 to 7000.

Having followed soccer in Canada and the US for decades, it's a pretty good rule of thumb that teams that draw below 5000 don't tend to last.  (At least not if they are in nation-travel type leagues.)

So it isn't a magic number but it's a pretty reasonable target.

The only times Pacific has drawn 5000 for a league game were their first ever (5100) and last night (technically more like 4800 but sold out).  So capping it at 5000 doesn't really limit them.  And if capping it gives a perception of ticket scarcity and they start to sell out regularly, I'm sure they'll be able to adjust.

This here is also in my eyes, why Pacific should not be in a rush, in any way to expand the facility. You aren't filling it as is, and the parking situation is pretty bad.

[Aird25]

21 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

This here is also in my eyes, why Pacific should not be in a rush, in any way to expand the facility. You aren't filling it as is, and the parking situation is pretty bad.

They'd definitely sell more tickets for a few games a year though (like the opener, or games against MLS or international competitions), and more people would have a decent view of the pitch. It would also make the stadium feel much more professional, which will likely increase overall attendance. There's already been a couple million invested in moving the pole, so why not invest a couple million more and maybe attract bigger events and increase attendance. Parking and transportation need to be improved as well though 

[johnyb]

20 hours ago, Cheeta said:

^ I'm the only one I know that used the "bonus" tickets for the home opener, and literally everyone who's part of my Footie Family have seasons.  Absolutely some took up the offer but I suspect the % that was utilized as quite low.  Doesn't matter, it's a good scheme and they should stick with it.

A LOT of mobiles had the Jet game on speaker during the 1st half of the match.  Kinda funny actually.

Never seen so many Valour scarves being worn in my life.  Excellent to see but yeah, it was kind of cool out yesterday.  Wore mine.   (Wee elf wore her RRR Argyle). 

Wasn't able to use mine. Most of my Soccer watching friends either already have tickets (that they weren't using either) or have no interest while the Jets are still alive. It's a shame the game wasn't postponed.

[-Hammer-]

19 minutes ago, Aird25 said:

They'd definitely sell more tickets for a few games a year though (like the opener, or games against MLS or international competitions), and more people would have a decent view of the pitch. It would also make the stadium feel much more professional, which will likely increase overall attendance. There's already been a couple million invested in moving the pole, so why not invest a couple million more and maybe attract bigger events and increase attendance. Parking and transportation need to be improved as well though 

To the first, that's not always a good thing. You may sell well a few games, but your overall sales may decrease, particularly if fan currently feel that they are being over charged, given the empty seats. If you aren't selling out as is, how are you expecting to consistently fill those new seats? It's the single biggest problem all of the CFL stadium suffer from.

To the second, it really won't though, there are actual investments that will beyond increasing the capacity to improve the professional feel of the stadium we agree on. Things like, paving the parking lot, increasing available parking/better public transit to games and improving the concourse/merch/concession availability.

[JamboAl]

26 minutes ago, johnyb said:

Wasn't able to use mine. Most of my Soccer watching friends either already have tickets (that they weren't using either) or have no interest while the Jets are still alive. It's a shame the game wasn't postponed.

I think the problem with postponing games like this on short notice is that travel and accommodations were probably pre booked a while ago and expensive to change; likely not worth the slight uptick in attendance.  But I get that playoff hockey will be the priority for most sports fans.

[jonovision]

5 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

I think the problem with postponing games like this on short notice is that travel and accommodations were probably pre booked a while ago and expensive to change; likely not worth the slight uptick in attendance.  But I get that playoff hockey will be the priority for most sports fans.

Well, in the case of the Jets it looks like the playoffs will be over before the weekend, so good news on that front.

[Aird25]

49 minutes ago, -Hammer- said:

To the first, that's not always a good thing. You may sell well a few games, but your overall sales may decrease, particularly if fan currently feel that they are being over charged, given the empty seats. If you aren't selling out as is, how are you expecting to consistently fill those new seats? It's the single biggest problem all of the CFL stadium suffer from.

To the second, it really won't though, there are actual investments that will beyond increasing the capacity to improve the professional feel of the stadium we agree on. Things like, paving the parking lot, increasing available parking/better public transit to games and improving the concourse/merch/concession availability.

I disagree. I think closing in the stadium would do wonders for the game day experience. I think they could probably lower ticket prices, but more importantly I think they should lower food an beer prices. It's ridiculous as is. Most important for attendance seems to be weather and scheduling though. Stacking these games to start the season always hurts us.

Paving the parking lots would be great as well though. They were mud puddles on Thursday. Don't Forge, Ottawa, and Valour all have decent attendance, relatively speaking?

[Kent]

After the week 1 year over year comparison, I was curious what it was like for week 2.

So it's slightly up across the board this past week. Works out to about a 6.5% increase from 2022.

[jonovision]

54 minutes ago, Kent said:

After the week 1 year over year comparison, I was curious what it was like for week 2.

So it's slightly up across the board this past week. Works out to about a 6.5% increase from 2022.

Kind of a tough comparison to make with different teams hosting, but I do think we'll see a general upward trend this year. Hopefully a large one, but any increase is positive. 

In a few weeks we'll be able to compare home date #1 and #2 for each team and I think that will be telling

[BearcatSA]

23 hours ago, Aird25 said:

I disagree. I think closing in the stadium would do wonders for the game day experience. I think they could probably lower ticket prices, but more importantly I think they should lower food an beer prices. It's ridiculous as is. Most important for attendance seems to be weather and scheduling though. Stacking these games to start the season always hurts us.

Paving the parking lots would be great as well though. They were mud puddles on Thursday. Don't Forge, Ottawa, and Valour all have decent attendance, relatively speaking?

Concession prices aren't going down.

The consumer income available for summer time recreation is a very competitive NA market in these current economic times, and summer pro sports are not the only option for those consumers.  I believe that this needs to be factored into any discussion about attendance.

[Tigers]

On 4/23/2023 at 12:57 PM, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

All quite generously announced in actual terms judging from the Onesoccer streams given that implies that the sections visible when the camera pans over the crowd should be close to half full in the Valour's case and over half full in the Forge's case if the small mezzanine deck on the camera side is filled to a similar extent. I'd be surprised if York's actual crowd was much more than 200 but it's more difficult to tell on that one. Weather and/or NHL playoffs makes a lot of season ticket no shows for these games understandable though.

What's the point of posting this every week?

 

We get it,  you doubt the numbers. That doesn't change week to week so you don't need to update us.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

On internet discussions forums you don't get to dictate what other people post. You don't need to read the posts if you don't like them.

[Tigers]

3 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

On internet discussions forums you don't get to dictate what other people post. You don't need to read the posts if you don't like them.

I didn't dictate, I asked a question.  "You don't need to" is not in the imperative, it's just a statement. 

 

Attendances are announced by teams or other sources. They change game to game, people speculate on weather, performance, marketing etc, based on those numbers. Again, every game is different so it makes sense why there would be ongoing discussion. 

Yet every week, you make a post that amounts to "looks like less on TV" . That *never* changes.

Are you afraid we'll forget?

Do you think one day a team representative will drop in, read it, and go "Great Scott, they're onto us! Change tactics!"?

Is it just a way to get two cents in without having any insight? 

Is it just to stir others up? That seems as valid as any reason. 

Are you a Russian saboteur sent to undermine our society by casting doubt upon our greatest soccer league?

 

Idk, lots of people are weird and sometimes you just wanna figure out what's making them tick.

[Kingston]

17 hours ago, BearcatSA said:

The consumer income available for summer time recreation is a very competitive NA market in these current economic times, and summer pro sports are not the only option for those consumers.  I believe that this needs to be factored into any discussion about attendance.

Competition with other options is a factor in the final attendance but what ultimately matters is the final attendance number and the ticket sale revenue it represents.  Being able to explain why York only drew 800 or why team X isn't at a financially sustainable attendance doesn't change the number.

[jonovision]

Something I whipped up. Lots of peaks and valleys based on weeks when Halifax had games vs weeks where Edmonton and/or York was hosting, but pretty clear trend over the course of the season. These first few weeks are the doldrums (week 15 was a week with only 2 matches, one of which in Edmonton; week 25 was 3 matches including Edm and York).

A team-by-team trend would also be illustrative but who has time for that?

Edited April 26, 2023 by jonovision

[An Observer]

47 minutes ago, jonovision said:

Something I whipped up. Lots of peaks and valleys based on weeks when Halifax had games vs weeks where Edmonton and/or York was hosting, but pretty clear trend over the course of the season. These first few weeks are the doldrums (week 15 was a week with only 2 matches, one of which in Edmonton; week 25 was 3 matches including Edm and York).

A team-by-team trend would also be illustrative but who has time for that?

Out of curoisity, how did you calculate the trend line? 

[jonovision]

22 minutes ago, An Observer said:

Out of curoisity, how did you calculate the trend line? 

In Excel you can right-click on any data point in the graph there is an "Add Trendline" option and you can specify linear fit, exponential fit, logarithmic, etc. All options other than "rolling average" produced more or less the same line for this chart. I'm not sure of the statistical rigor of these, but seems to fit.

Edited April 26, 2023 by jonovision

[Tigers]

Edit, NVM I re-read your explanation 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Tigers

[Kent]

2 hours ago, jonovision said:

Something I whipped up. Lots of peaks and valleys based on weeks when Halifax had games vs weeks where Edmonton and/or York was hosting, but pretty clear trend over the course of the season. These first few weeks are the doldrums (week 15 was a week with only 2 matches, one of which in Edmonton; week 25 was 3 matches including Edm and York).

A team-by-team trend would also be illustrative but who has time for that?

If you want some more homework, it would be pretty cool to track another line for the 2023 weekly averages too and update us in this thread. I'm sure lots of people would find that interesting.