CPL 2023 Season Attendance

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

..

Edited July 23, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Well at least you seem to have finally grasped that the announced tickets distributed number is not the "turnout".

Money received from sponsors can be in the form of group ticket sales that don't actually get used even though those tickets have been distributed, e.g. Walmart and the 600 tickets for "new Canadians" in Halifax with the difference of course being that it's a lot easier to find people in Halifax that actually want to go and watch the Wanderers.

Then you get into things like outright freebie tickets distributed to youth clubs. The interest in actually making use of something like that can completely drop away after the initial novelty factor of the first ever home opener and next few home games has worn off.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Tigers]

Also, the sky is blue, and grass is green. 

[CDNFootballer]

9 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Well at least you seem to have finally grasped that the announced tickets distributed number is not the "turnout".

Money received from sponsors can be in the form of group ticket sales that don't actually get used even though those tickets have been distributed, e.g. Walmart and the 600 tickets for "new Canadians" in Halifax with the difference of course being that it's a lot easier to find people in Halifax that actually want to go and watch the Wanderers.

Then you get into things like outright freebie tickets distributed to youth clubs. The interest in actually making use of something like that can completely drop away after the initial novelty factor of the first ever home opener and next few home games has worn off.

Nice try, but no, nothing to grasp as I already had a full understanding more than yourself of the way attendances work.

But maybe your talking to yourself in your echo chamber again and are directing the post at yourself as you seem to confuse tickets distributed with turnstile, like I've previously pointed out.

You may now carry on and continue with your rubbish posts and replies now as usual, but a tip - don't be scared to quote the person your directing a post at. If this post was meant to be directed to yourself, keep the tip in mind still anyway.

Edited July 23, 2023 by CDNFootballer

[jonovision]

3423 in attendance for Valour vs York.

[jonovision]

Week-to-week comparisons with 2022 to this point in season:

Forge, York and Halifax all have one 2023 result missing or incorrect. Forge also has an incorrect attendance figure for one of their 2022 matches on the league site which was not included.

Edit: re-uploaded image to fix error.

Edited July 25, 2023 by jonovision

[Kingston]

^  Obviously Halifax, Forge, and Ottawa are looking good while York is not.

Even though the absolute numbers are still too low, it's good to see meaningful improvements in Calgary and (surprisingly) Winnipeg.

I'm not sure what more Pacific can do to draw in fans.  Maybe that's just what the market is there?

Vancouver isn't terrible, but it's not good, either.  I was really hoping they'd kill it right out of the gate.

[Kent]

Another little table. This one is comparing the attendance numbers from CPL against the 1987-1992 CSL. All numbers grabbed from Wikipedia (except season 5 CPL, which I calculated based on my week to week spreadsheet stats).

Numbers for CPL consistently ahead of CSL, but not by jaw dropping amounts or anything. Steeper decline from year 1 to year "2" for CPL, but consistent growth so far after that, whereas CSL shrunk from season 2 to 3 and again from season 3 to 4.

[jonovision]

The number of teams in the league each year is also an interesting and possibly constructive comparison.

CPL: 7, 8, 8, 8, 8

CSL: 8, 9, 10, 11, 8, 6

[SpursFlu]

With big games to come and playoffs CPL could have 1 team average +6000, 2 teams average +5000 & 1 team average +4000

Not too shabby 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

If people are going to start discussing official CSL attendance stats from 1987-92 as if they actually mean something more than PR spin, we are well and truly through the looking glass at this point. 

[Aird25]

4 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

If people are going to start discussing official CSL attendance stats from 1987-92 as if they actually mean something more than PR spin, we are well and truly through the looking glass at this point. 

Not enough pregame screenshots?

[Kingston]

15 hours ago, Kent said:

Another little table. This one is comparing the attendance numbers from CPL against the 1987-1992 CSL. All numbers grabbed from Wikipedia (except season 5 CPL, which I calculated based on my week to week spreadsheet stats).

Numbers for CPL consistently ahead of CSL, but not by jaw dropping amounts or anything. Steeper decline from year 1 to year "2" for CPL, but consistent growth so far after that, whereas CSL shrunk from season 2 to 3 and again from season 3 to 4.

I'm guessing in year seven the CPL will blow the CSL away!

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

Guess Kent could always try to find the APSL and CNSL stats because five out of six clubs from the ultimate CSL season (the London Lasers were basically the national U-23 squad because the owner bailed during preseason) kept going in 1993 including the Winnipeg Fury playing against what remained of the NSL in southern Ontario.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Canadian_National_Soccer_League_season

Doubt any attendance records were kept for the CNSL though and forget whether the CNSL kept the CSL's D1 sanctioning at that point through having the Rockets and Fury on board. Can remember that I was going to go to the Fury's game against London City but a major thunderstorm and a complete absence of cover for spectators at London's German Club changed my mind. 

Edited July 26, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[ray]

17 hours ago, Kent said:

Another little table. This one is comparing the attendance numbers from CPL against the 1987-1992 CSL. All numbers grabbed from Wikipedia (except season 5 CPL, which I calculated based on my week to week spreadsheet stats).

Numbers for CPL consistently ahead of CSL, but not by jaw dropping amounts or anything. Steeper decline from year 1 to year "2" for CPL, but consistent growth so far after that, whereas CSL shrunk from season 2 to 3 and again from season 3 to 4.

Comparisons between the CSL and CPL and not very useful but nonetheless interesting.

About thirty years passed between the debuts of the two leagues.  That's a long period, leaving time for considerable increases population and diversity in Canada urban centres, and soccer's boom in youth registration to translate into greater acceptance of the professional game.

Also notable is that the CSL enjoyed many national team members in its ranks.  Names like Bunbury, Catliff, Corazzin, Mitchel, Valentine, Dolan, Onstad, Peschesolido all played.  Whereas, the CPL is very much a development league with names the casual fan would not know.  Yet the CPL has greater attendance.  It shows how the changing times have allowed the new league to be viable.

Not to mention, the CPL has forged ahead while contending with 3 major markets housing MLS teams.  No small feat by any means.

Edited July 26, 2023 by ray

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

1 hour ago, ray said:

...That's a long period, leaving time for considerable increases population and diversity in Canada urban centres, ...

I know the preferred narrative on here is that things are inexorably heading in the right direction and it's only a matter of time before this translates into everything being absolutely wonderful but why thirty years on did FC Edmonton fail in much the same way the Brickmen did in the exact same location? That can't just be swept under the carpet and forgotten about.

It's more of a mixed bag on how the CanPL has done relative to the CSL. Hamilton, Ottawa, Calgary and Halifax are a definite step forward especially the latter obviously, but the GTA, Winnipeg and Edmonton not so much and Vancouver is a clear step back so far from what the 86ers were doing. Pacific vs Vistas the difference is maybe more with how deep pocketed the ownership is this time and how gung ho the last mayor of Langford was about the team than the interest level locally.

Main problem now as back then is that you need at least eight clubs doing really well on attendance for the whole thing to be stable and it's not at all easy to get all the ducks in a row on that.

[Stanley]

16 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

I know the preferred narrative on here is that things are inexorably heading in the right direction and it's only a matter of time before this translates into everything being absolutely wonderful but why thirty years on did FC Edmonton fail in much the same way the Brickmen did in the exact same location? That can't just be swept under the carpet and forgotten about.

It's more of a mixed bag on how the CanPL has done relative to the CSL. Hamilton, Ottawa, Calgary and Halifax are a definite step forward especially the latter obviously, but the GTA, Winnipeg and Edmonton not so much and Vancouver is a clear step back so far from what the 86ers were doing. Pacific vs Vistas the difference is maybe more with how deep pocketed the ownership is this time and how gung ho the last mayor of Langford was about the team than the interest level locally.

Main problem now as back then is that you need at least eight clubs doing really well on attendance for the whole thing to be stable and it's not at all easy to get all the ducks in a row on that.

Can't compare Vancouver FC vs 86ers.  Not even in the same city and different demographics.  Cant compare Vistas to Pacific, Pacific play in a decent stadium whereas Vistas played in a crap stadium (my opinion).  In fact CSL reeked of Sunday afternoon amateurism, everything from logos, kits to rundown parks acting as stadiums.  CPL in by far a more professional league.

[Kent]

8 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

If people are going to start discussing official CSL attendance stats from 1987-92 as if they actually mean something more than PR spin, we are well and truly through the looking glass at this point. 

Well you tell us that the CPL numbers are also PR spin, so consider this a comparison of how the owners are deciding to spin things these days compared to how they decided to spin things in the CSL days. Enjoy.

[SpursFlu]

The PR spin is pretty effective though. Did anyone see the front page of the Globe&Mail today? Giant headline:

"CPL ATTENDANCE UP 22%!!!"

It may be propaganda but the sheeple are buying in to the big lie in a big way. It's called FOMO or social contagion. Now without a thought in their head Canadians are flocking to CPL stadiums on mass. Bravo to the brave few standing up against this evil distortion of the truth 

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

22 hours ago, Stanley said:

Can't compare Vancouver FC vs 86ers.  Not even in the same city and different demographics...

Think a comparison of how the two lower mainland BC teams are doing is on point and nobody would have an issue with making said comparison if it fitted the trend you want to be able to highlight.

What usually happens on threads like this are kneejerk emotional outpourings whenever somebody points out the cold hard reality that things are not going too well in several markets. Two of the initial ownership groups have walked away. If it was the USL that was involved then that's not a biggie because teams come and go all the time without threatening the overall stability of the league structure given how many large cities are available across the United States. It's a lot more problematic in a Canadian context when you deliberately choose to try to make it fly in Canada only.

The problem the CSL had back in the day was that the league absolutely did have to work in pretty much all of the first eight markets (Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Hamilton, GTA, Ottawa and Montreal) that were on board by year two for the league to be able to fly. Four out of eight were gone by the time the 1992 season rolled around. Swap Montreal for Halifax and bearing in mind that SixFive Sports never really wanted to be in Victoria in the first place, and this time you have one of those core markets already gone, the owners have bailed in another, and two more are looking far from healthy on attendance.

Sure it's more professional and better financed this time but the bar has also been set a lot higher in terms of the budgets the teams are trying to operate at with no sign so far that the economic model is going to be adjusted to something that might be easier to sustain if the choice is between easing up on the optics of the whole D1 thing or turning the lights out and walking away. Excuse me if that leaves me feeling a little bit like Yogi Berra...

Edited July 27, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Kingston]

2 hours ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

Think a comparison of how the two lower mainland BC teams are doing is on point and nobody would have an issue with making said comparison if it fitted the trend you want to be able to highlight.

What usually happens on threads like this are kneejerk emotional outpourings whenever somebody points out the cold hard reality that things are not going too well in several markets. Two of the initial ownership groups have walked away. If it was the USL that was involved then that's not a biggie because teams come and go all the time without threatening the overall stability of the league structure given how many large cities are available across the United States. It's a lot more problematic in a Canadian context when you deliberately choose to try to make it fly in Canada only.

The problem the CSL had back in the day was that the league absolutely did have to work in pretty much all of the first eight markets (Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Hamilton, GTA, Ottawa and Montreal) that were on board by year two for the league to be able to fly. Four out of eight were gone by the time the 1992 season rolled around. Swap Montreal for Halifax and bearing in mind that SixFive Sports never really wanted to be in Victoria in the first place, and this time you have one of those core markets already gone, the owners have bailed in another, and two more are looking far from healthy on attendance.

Sure it's more professional and better financed this time but the bar has also been set a lot higher in terms of the budgets the teams are trying to operate at with no sign so far that the economic model is going to be adjusted to something that might be easier to sustain if the choice is between easing up on the optics of the whole D1 thing or turning the lights out and walking away. Excuse me if that leaves me feeling a little bit like Yogi Berra...

You raise a number of valid points and it isn't like other posters here are unaware of them.

The pushback you receive is because you seem to approach all the attendance news from a glass-half-empty perspective.  Yes, I will also feel much better when we have six or eight teams drawing around 5000 or better instead of just three.  And York may likely die off.  None of that poses an immediate, existential threat to the league, however.  So as much as unfounded optimism isn't helpful, neither is exaggerated pessimism.

[longlugan]

6 hours ago, Kingston said:

You raise a number of valid points and it isn't like other posters here are unaware of them.

The pushback you receive is because you seem to approach all the attendance news from a glass-half-empty perspective.  Yes, I will also feel much better when we have six or eight teams drawing around 5000 or better instead of just three.  And York may likely die off.  None of that poses an immediate, existential threat to the league, however.  So as much as unfounded optimism isn't helpful, neither is exaggerated pessimism.

This will fall on deaf ears.

[Unnamed Trialist]

On 7/25/2023 at 11:54 PM, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

If people are going to start discussing official CSL attendance stats from 1987-92 as if they actually mean something more than PR spin, we are well and truly through the looking glass at this point. 

You eyeball stands from highlight reels, that has to be far less reliable but you seem to be fine with it, through the looking glass as it were.

[Ozzie_the_parrot]

On 7/27/2023 at 6:35 PM, Kingston said:

You raise a number of valid points and it isn't like other posters here are unaware of them.

The pushback you receive is because you seem to approach all the attendance news from a glass-half-empty perspective...

I couldn't care less if some people on here lack the social skills to be able to deal with my posts in an adult manner. That's their problem not mine. Should have been obvious a long time ago that I'm not going to self-censor in response to their juvenile antics and that I'm not losing any sleep over it.

It's frankly ludicrous to suggest that I have a glass-half-empty perspective when I have consistently posted about how the league needs to find a way to emulate what has happened in Halifax in mid-sized markets because that has been a genuine success story and about how the economic model could be modified so the league would have a better shot at being sustainable with the interest level that they have been able to attract. It's obvious by now though that's not what the likes of Dean Shillington, Bob Young and Wade Miller are likely to do, because if they were going to it would have happened by now. They have doubled down on the relatively high budget approach, so it's either going to fly or they are likely going to follow the Faths and Baldassarras if/when it becomes clear to a couple more of the people answering the cash calls that it's not.

The biggest problem facing CanPL currently isn't necessarily York so much but what an underforming Vancouver FC in box office terms and the federal government audit of the CSA does to the confidence these guys have that there are ever going to be any $10 million expansion fees heading their way in exchange for a slice of the CSB action and a wave of business for SixFive Sports' modular stadium scheme. They clearly hired Noonan to try to tap into his experience on emulating what MLS did after ditching the Mutiny and Fusion so it wouldn't surprise me if folding York has already been factored in as a painful but likely necessary course of action. A Quebec club somewhere like Laval emulating a successful Vancouver market disruption with a modular stadium sourced from SixFive Sports would have been the ace up their sleeve on that to keep numbers at eight. The problem is that people in lower mainland BC have been slow to embrace the dark side...

Edited July 28, 2023 by Ozzie_the_parrot

[Kingston]

46 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

I couldn't care less if some people on here lack the social skills to be able to deal with my posts in an adult manner. That's their problem not mine. Should have been obvious a long time ago that I'm not going to self-censor in response to their juvenile antics and that I'm not losing any sleep over it.

I will always be an advocate of civil discourse.

46 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

It's frankly ludicrous to suggest that I have a glass-half-empty perspective

You do seem to dwell on negative attendance news and question positive numbers.  You also frequently advocate policies, like the bus league model for the CPL, that would mean throwing in the towel on what you call the "relatively high budget approach" that we have now.  These are objectively pessimistic stances.

51 minutes ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

 I have consistently posted about how the league needs to find a way to emulate what has happened in Halifax in mid-sized markets because that has been a genuine success story and about how the economic model could be modified so the league would have a better shot at being sustainable with the interest level that they have been able to attract.

Everyone would like to see more Halifaxes and would have preferred for Vancouver to be Halifax west.  However, it doesn't follow that the league needs to go bus model because of current attendances for two reasons.

First, because attendances are improving in many markets.  We actually have three sustainable teams now instead of just Halifax.  So there's no immediate need to bail out on the current strategy.

Second, because there's no guarantee that going bus league would actually improve the league's finances.  Yes, it would reduce travel costs but those are probably about $250 000 per team per year (even without any travel sponsors).  Salaries (staff and players) are $1.5 million and game day costs are basically fixed.  So dropping to a bus league and saving $150 000 on travel isn't going to do it.  But reducing the actual costs of salaries any further would make the CPL a glorified L1.  There's no reason to think fans wouldn't reduce ticket revenues by far more than any savings in that model and actually leave the league worse off than before.

I'm open to hearing your arguments otherwise.

1 hour ago, Ozzie_the_parrot said:

It's obvious by now though that's not what the likes of Dean Shillington, Bob Young and Wade Miller are likely to do, because if they were going to it would have happened by now. They have doubled down on the relatively high budget approach, so it's either going to fly or they are likely going to follow the Faths and Baldassarras if/when it becomes clear to a couple more of the people answering the cash calls that it's not.

The biggest problem facing CanPL currently isn't necessarily York so much but what an underforming Vancouver FC in box office terms and the federal government audit of the CSA does to the confidence these guys have that there are ever going to be any $10 million expansion fees heading their way 

You are correct - it is either going to fly or it isn't.  And the outcome of Vancouver, and the next one or two expansion teams, will have a lot more to say about that then York.  But I think the current approach gives us the best chance at a national level league.