imported_n/a1394647443 Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 Building a fan base is a tricking thing in this environment. There are clearly segmented markets. TO could probably draw only a small percentage of the average sports fan. They could also probably draw a small percentage of each of the Euro, Latin and UK crowd. Add to that soccer fans in general such as those here and it could work. It always bothers me to see the derision with which the "soccer mom" crowd is held within these forums. What if they do or do not understand the game? Who cares? They are helping to build the grassroots, start participants and create future fans by volunteering and seeing that kids get to games. Soccer owes a debt of gratitude to these people. Without them there are no high registration numbers. And if they become fans as well - bonus. Women are the great untapped sports market as evidenced by every soccer fans favourite sport - baseball. At the turn of the 20th century fans were predominately male. Popular growth of the game was aided by owners creating an environment that would make women more comfortable. Same goes toward the black fan base that grew exponentially with Jackie Robinson in the majors. Most of us here would go to games anyway but we are a small percentage. The fans have to come from somewhere and the need has to be created. And about those anti-soccer writers, they don't fear soccer. Why would they? They're not going to lose their job because they don't know anything about soccer. A good sports writer (ie Terry Jones) is a good sports writer. They can write about anything. And if anyone here truly believes soccer will become the preeminent sport in NA within our lifetime needs their head examined. That's not to say there won't or can't be significant growth. A guy like McClown is just an idiot no matter what sport he does. I give the guy credit, he knows what buttons to push and he knows the soccer crowd will respond, same as what the beast does. It's a crappy form of journalism but as long as his bosses can live with it it's ok. McClown is intelligent and could probably do a good job on soccer but he just chooses to take another path. (Didn't he do something with the Blizzard?) Hell, he was even criticizing his own bosses (Rogers) about the Jays so he's got some guts. It's also that what he says sometimes hits a little close to home and that hurts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 I think that most people don't necessarilly have anything against the soccer moms per say, but rather against the club pandering to the soccer families with stupid crap (the Lynx and their endless theme nights, the Impact and the appalling CCR sound effects - from Ace Ventura, Flinstones, etc.. These are the things that make a "serious" soccer fan stay away from the stadium or even, sometimes, not come back (it's happened here). We don't see this same ridiculous crap in the NHL, CFL or any other sports league. Other sport teams/leagues encourage parents to bring their kids with them (the old father-son hockey game bonding), whereas here it's usually the kids that bring their parents, which makes for a pretty bad fan experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Daniel I think that most people don't necessarilly have anything against the soccer moms per say, but rather against the club pandering to the soccer families with stupid crap (the Lynx and their endless theme nights, the Impact and the appalling CCR sound effects - from Ace Ventura, Flinstones, etc.. These are the things that make a "serious" soccer fan stay away from the stadium or even, sometimes, not come back (it's happened here). We don't see this same ridiculous crap in the NHL, CFL or any other sports league. .... When's the last time you were at an NHL game? I can only speak for Calgary but Flames home games are (make that WERE) full of more gimmicks than you can imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Posted April 25, 2005 Share Posted April 25, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Ed When's the last time you were at an NHL game? I can only speak for Calgary but Flames home games are (make that WERE) full of more gimmicks than you can imagine. Same experiences at Rider games, NBA (Grizzlies in Vancouver a few years back), and the Blades. There seemed fewer of these at the lone Whitecaps game I've seen recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Ed When's the last time you were at an NHL game? I can only speak for Calgary but Flames home games are (make that WERE) full of more gimmicks than you can imagine. Yeah, but the crowd is much older than at soccer games. I remember Leduc once got a red card and everyone got up and cheered. Because the mascot was throwing stuff into the stands. You don't see that kind of lack of attention from an older crowd. It's like at any given moment 30% of the people in attendance aren't watching the game, busy running around or doing other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 From Jim Hunt's column in todays Toronto Sun: ARGOS SHOULD MOVE The worst news of the week was that the Argos are thinking about bailing out on the new stadium at York University. Maybe the Rogers Centre is offering them a good deal. But even if it means free rent they should turn it down. The Argos always will be second-class citizens in the dome where the Blue Jays get the preferred dates. It's also not a great place for football with too many seats offering bad sight lines. Their fans want and deserve something better. The York plan would offer it. There would be 25,000 seats, lots of parking and places to hold tailgate parties. The Argos built up a lot of goodwill last season. I'd hate to see them blow it. http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Columnists/Hunt/2005/04/26/1013377.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 Two new articles in the Toronto Star today - one suggesting the Argo's would be better to bail on the team altogether than accept the Rogers offer, and another about the stadium itself, indicating we should hear from the Argos whether they are pulling out by today, that FIFA is unlikely to pull the plug on the U20 WYC if the stadium doesn't happen (which I am personally skeptical about), that the CSA believes they could do the stadium for $62 million if need be and that they apparently have other investors interested to make up the cash if the Argos bail. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 additional article in the star. ____ Stadium deal to be settled soon Argonauts will reveal decision on York this week CSA may look for other investors if football club bails RICK MATSUMOTO AND JIM BYERS SPORTS REPORTERS The Argonauts expect to reveal their stadium plans in the next 48-to-72 hours, according to co-owner David Cynamon. "I can't speak to you about a stadium one iota until it's all set," said Cynamon yesterday. "I apologize, but we're all sworn to just wait until we put out a formal announcement. "I'm hoping that'll be in the next couple of days. At that point we'll tell you the whole story." The original tale caused a considerable stir last week when the Star's Damien Cox reported that the Argos were considering a rent-free offer from the Rogers Centre to continue playing at the former SkyDome, rather than moving to proposed new digs at York University. Construction of a York stadium is particularly vital to the Canadian Soccer Association, which was awarded the 2007 under-20 championships with the understanding a facility seating a minimum of 20,000 would be built in Toronto. Losing the York venue, however, is unlikely to jeopardize the tournament. While Toronto is scheduled to be the hub, with four games including the championship match to be played here, games will also be played in eight other Canadian cities. FIFA, the world governing body for soccer which granted the tournament to Canada, is watching the situation in Toronto closely, spokesman John Schumacher said in an email. But he added his group "has not seen anything thus far that would indicate that a change in host (country) is something to even be considered." The CSA would be the biggest loser if the Argos pull out of the York deal because it would be denied the facility it covets at virtually no cost to them. If the deal fails, the university would likely revert to earlier plans to build a minimal-seat stadium to replace the current facility, scheduled to be demolished to make way for a subway station on the proposed extension of the Spadina line. With no available capital of its own, the CSA was counting on $35 million in government grants, $15 million from York and $20 million from the Argos to put up the $70 million stadium. If the Argos pull their share out of the project, the CSA cannot expect any financial help from FIFA. Schumacher said his group does not finance the building of stadiums. Kevan Pipe, the CSA's chief operating officer, said his group won't ask for more money from the government or York. Pipe did reveal he heard from other potential contributors over the weekend, but wouldn't divulge any names. So instead of just one company filling the potential void left by the Argos, it could be several. And Pipe said that instead of contributing cash, as the Argos had planned, new investors may take out a mortgage to help pay for the new facility. Pipe also said he thinks a 20,000-seat stadium could still be built for $62 million. That would mean finding another $12 million from new sources. Not everyone is sure it will work. "Without a major tenant I doubt they would be able to generate much private sector interest," said one high-ranking corporate source familiar with Toronto's sports industry. A Major League Soccer team might fit the bill, but Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment — which has talked about luring an MLS team to Toronto — has suggested it's only interested in occupying the stadium, not helping build it. Pipe said the money needs to be found by early summer so construction can begin in the early fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 Here's the other article Gian-luca mentioned from the Star. I find it interesting that it took a business reporter to get the actual facts straight, as opposed to all these articles I've seen written by non-soccer sports writers who keep screwing up the facts. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Apr. 26, 2005. 08:27 AM Argos owners should quit while they're ahead RICK WESTHEAD SPORTS BUSINESS Toronto Argonauts owners David Cynamon and Howard Sokolowski have stoked a maelstrom of speculation for admitting they are considering quashing an agreement to build a stadium at York University. Don't be surprised if their next move might be severing ties altogether with the Canadian Football League. If the Argos owners truly treat the team as an investment, that would be the smart move. As the Star's Damien Cox first reported last week, the Argos are weighing whether to scuttle their part in an agreement to build a new $70 million, 25,000-seat stadium at York University because of potential cost overruns. Under a memorandum of understanding between the football team, the Canadian Soccer Association and both the federal and provincial government, the Argos are scheduled to contribute $20 million to the project, with the school adding $15 million and taxpayers responsible for $35 million. Yet it has become clear that Cynamon and Sokolowski have misgivings about the stadium because the team would have been on the hook for any cost overruns, even though they won't be the stadium's outright owner. The Argos were the only stakeholder yet to put up its money, prompting the school to give the football team a deadline of last Friday to produce the cash, a source said. Enter Rogers Communications Corp. The communications giant, which owns the Rogers Centre and its primary tenant, the Blue Jays, seems to have come to the rescue by reportedly offering the Argos the chance to play at the recently renamed and revamped downtown stadium rent free. Yet if Cynamon and Sokolowski decide to walk away from a new stadium, their best financial play may be to abandon the team outright. The duo purchased the Argonauts out of bankruptcy protection in November 2003 for about $5 million in a deal that included a token exchange of cash "so that the argument could be made that they still were worth a transaction fee," a source said. In their lone year as owners, Cynamon and Sokolowski, alongside team president Keith Pelley, boosted season-ticket sales to 7,000, tripled the club's corporate sponsorship revenue and hiked average game attendance to 22,000 from 14,000. Capping a better-than-expected season, the Argos also won the Grey Cup. For the team's first-year owners, it doesn't get any better than that and barring a move to a new stadium, the value of the franchise has likely peaked, at least in the near future. Sure, remaining at the Rogers Centre would help the Argos save hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in operating expenses, but it would also have an effect on the football team's ability to generate revenue. With the Blue Jays' sponsorships emblazoned though the stadium, the Argos, as is the case now, would enjoy little leverage in negotiating with prospective corporate backers when their contracts expire. When the Argos try to sell a sponsorship to a brewer, for instance, the beer company will come to the table with a below-market offer because the Rogers Centre is already plastered with Labatt signs and posters as they already sponsor the Blue Jays. "There's no doubt that it would be harder for the Argos to develop their ancillary revenue if they stay at Rogers Centre," a CFL source said. "Their revenue line going forward would be more troubled, with more asterisks. They'd certainly have an earnings issue and a valuation issue." So, from a business standpoint, why wouldn't Cynamon and Sokolowski look to flip the team now? The Argos might have spent some time in the media spotlight for the wrong reasons over the past year — a similar stadium deal with the University of Toronto also soured in recent months — but for the most part Cynamon and Sokolowski have brought financial certainty to one of the CFL's lynchpin franchises. It's unfortunate for the league and its fans, but for Cynamon and Sokolowski the smart move financially would be to seek a buyer for the Argos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youllneverwalkalone Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Gordon Same experiences at Rider games, NBA (Grizzlies in Vancouver a few years back), and the Blades. There seemed fewer of these at the lone Whitecaps game I've seen recently. On Sunday there were pixies on stilts at Swangard. What's up with that??? Creepy.... There was also a Walmart-esque blues band that played through the national anthem. I'd like to see the focus group that came up with these ideas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 All this talk of building SSS in Montreal and Toronto leaves me wondering. I wonder how many stadiums were built specifically for World Cup 94 in the states or for any U-20 WC ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 All this talk of building SSS in Montreal and Toronto leaves me wondering. I wonder how many stadiums were built specifically for World Cup 94 in the states or for any U-20 WC ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HamiltonSteelers Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by fctoronto Lets take the protest in support of the new stadium and future for Toronto Soccer. Just say the time and place and I'll be there. May 15 @ Centennial Stadium. Toronto v. Montreal. Expect to see you there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HamiltonSteelers Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by fctoronto Lets take the protest in support of the new stadium and future for Toronto Soccer. Just say the time and place and I'll be there. May 15 @ Centennial Stadium. Toronto v. Montreal. Expect to see you there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Kelly I wonder how many stadiums were built specifically for World Cup 94 in the states ? None. No stadiums were built specifically for the WC in 94. Th big difference has to be climate. Grass surfaces are more conducive to the climate in the many parts of the US. Unlike Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Kelly I wonder how many stadiums were built specifically for World Cup 94 in the states ? None. No stadiums were built specifically for the WC in 94. Th big difference has to be climate. Grass surfaces are more conducive to the climate in the many parts of the US. Unlike Canada Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HamiltonSteelers Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Daniel I think that most people don't necessarilly have anything against the soccer moms per say, but rather against the club pandering to the soccer families with stupid crap (the Lynx and their endless theme nights, the Impact and the appalling CCR sound effects - from Ace Ventura, Flinstones, etc.. These are the things that make a "serious" soccer fan stay away from the stadium or even, sometimes, not come back (it's happened here). We don't see this same ridiculous crap in the NHL, CFL or any other sports league. Other sport teams/leagues encourage parents to bring their kids with them (the old father-son hockey game bonding), whereas here it's usually the kids that bring their parents, which makes for a pretty bad fan experience. Sadly, this has been the trend in minor league sports marketing over the last 10-15 years. It's not the sport but the event. You go to an Arena Football game, but you 'experience' the evening. The drawback is that you risk alienating the 'true fans' of the game by pandering to the little kids. Somewhere a long time ago, somebody determined that if you have a goofy nickname for a club *cough*Mighty Ducks*cough* and an even more rediculous mascot that somehow these things will draw people in. It does work, but only on a game-to-game basis. In Hamilton, the DJ is a moron. The guy plays bad modern music and outdated retro crap AS SOON AS THE BALL GOES OUT OF PLAY. Nothing like a 20 second clip of a Duran Duran classic to get the crowd on their feet. We've mentioned this to the Thunder staff but he (the DJ) apparently does not want to listen to either fans or players, which is tragic. But this is the stigma of minor league pro sports. The marketing demonstrates so little faith in the product that it has to be watered down with cheap stunts and assinine gimmicks. I would take a Syracuse FC or Rochester Lancers far more serious than a Syracuse Salty Dogs or a Rochester Raging Rhinos, but these people have figured that I'll go anyways since I like soccer, and they will compromise their position by adding a demeaning monicker to sucker in the soccer moms and their children because of the silly mascot. Trust me, I hate all of this more than you know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 Until such time as the hardcore soccer fans outnumber the soccer mom crew and regularly buy season's tickets as well, the business managers of these franchises will continue to cater to their majority market and quite rightly so too, much as it might offend the true afficionados. These professional albeit minor league franchises are business operations first and foremost so of necessity they must pay attention to the bottom line month by month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Until such time as the hardcore soccer fans outnumber the soccer mom crew and regularly buy season's tickets as well, the business managers of these franchises will continue to cater to their majority market and quite rightly so too, much as it might offend the true afficionados. These professional albeit minor league franchises are business operations first and foremost so of necessity they must pay attention to the bottom line month by month. Well, the way they're going, they won't let that happen. Right now, the Impact, for example, needs to attract those kids game-in and game-out, with a different regional association each game. The true supporters are there no matter what (which explains why the best atmospheres in 2002-2003 came in the playoffs when there were no advance sales). As of now, on top of cancelling their flexpass program (3 games for 20$), the Impact has decided it would not sell season tickets in GA (only in reserved seating, for 10$ more than it would cost for those seats game-to-game!!!!!!!!!) because they don't want to be lacking space for any large scocer group sale. This means that the "ordinary" fans get the shaft, unable to secure their ticket in advance without service charges short of picking them up at the Impact's office in the boondocks. However, the club is happy to have the one-off fans, who come one (MAYBE two if the parents decide so) games a year. This is the kind of crap I'm talking about. We've expressly been told by the club "you guys are NOT our market" and that they won't make an effort to keep that older, regular fan on board for as many games as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 Hey, I know nothing about the Impact's ticket sales policy, my comments were intended to be general, not specific to any one club. They apply to the Impact anyway it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gian-Luca Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Free kick None. No stadiums were built specifically for the WC in 94. Th big difference has to be climate. Grass surfaces are more conducive to the climate in the many parts of the US. Unlike Canada Although a ton were built for South Korea & Japan in 2002. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard Hey, I know nothing about the Impact's ticket sales policy, my comments were intended to be general, not specific to any one club. They apply to the Impact anyway it seems. What I'm saying is that it's more than simple circumstance in perfect situations. The clubs skew it in a certain way that helps out the kids and hurts the older regulars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 26, 2005 Share Posted April 26, 2005 If the hardcore regulars outnumbered the kiddies and bought season's tickets I think you'd see a change in marketing strategy. Unfortunately that is not reality so the clubs do what the have to to put bums in seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJT Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 I fail to see why there can't be a better balance between the two. Geez, this thread is all over the place. I'm confused. What are we talking about again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted April 27, 2005 Share Posted April 27, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DJT I fail to see why there can't be a better balance between the two. Geez, this thread is all over the place. I'm confused. What are we talking about again? Trouble is one person's balance is another person's bias. Can't please all the people all the time and it all comes down to money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.