[News] Eisenberg: Even Math-Challenged Brains Can See What's Happening With Ticket Prices

[ByTheBay]

4 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Which the NFL prefers, because they make more money off of you when you stay at home and watch on TV.

I wonder if the ROI is really worth it for advertisers when so many fans dvr the games and fast forward through the commercials?

[rmcjacket23]

21 hours ago, whobilly said:

Revenue from tickets alone is approx. 10 million dollars for each home game. Add in concessions, merchandise, etc. According to you if 200,000 Ravens Fans are home watching on TV they generate 10 million dollars in revenue?

No, I'm saying they generated significantly more than that. We pretty much already know this to be true.

If we were to look back 3 years to 2014 alone, each individual teams share of national TV revenue was $226.4M, which equates to $14.15M of TV revenue alone per game average, regardless of home vs away. As more people watch, these numbers go up, obviously. And that was in 2014, meaning its only bigger now.

I don't have the details behind every single network deal, but Directv alone pays at least $1B a year to broadcast NFL games. The network deals with CBS and Fox I imagine are even bigger.

If you believe what Forbes says, in 2015, the Ravens did roughly $378M in total revenue. So in your analysis, you've accounted for merely $100M of that via ticket sales for home game. I can assure you that concession sales (which the Ravens don't get 100% of that money from) and in-stadium merchandise sales aren't totaling anything close to another $200M+ annually.

TV revenue is the biggest revenue source for every team, followed by total merchandise sales (which includes both in-stadium and online sales, which is by far the biggest piece of that pie), and then by ticket sales.

So the ideal customer for an NFL team is a guy who goes and buy's his jersey online, stays at home and watches the game on TV, and eats and drinks products by the NFL's biggest advertisers.

If NFL teams primary source of income was ticket sales, then why are a lot of the newer stadiums being built with less capacity? Why aren't we seeing 200,000 seat stadiums?

 

[rmcjacket23]

7 minutes ago, ByTheBay said:

I wonder if the ROI is really worth it for advertisers when so many fans dvr the games and fast forward through the commercials?

DVRing live sporting events isn't as popular as people think it is. You run the risk of knowing the outcome and events that took place before you even watch it.

 

[rmcjacket23]

1 hour ago, jravens1313 said:

That is some twisted logic... EG: At home the advertisers can run live TV commercials with an attempt to target the type of viewer who watches football. That ad Revenue is shared league wide. VS: A season ticket holder pays ~$80-200 per ticket. At the game they drink and eat ~$20-60 worth in concessions. Many also pay another $40-100 for parking. Please explain to me how someone who watches from home spends more money on the Baltimore Ravens than someone who attends a game at the stadium? 

Yes, but that ad revenue is gigantic. TV networks literally pay billions of dollars just for broadcast rights. 

Look at the numbers for 2014 for example. M&T has a capacity of just over 71,000. Average ticket prices for the year was just over $100. Doing the math, if they sold every seat at the average ticket price for every home game (10, including preseason), they'd do $71M in ticket revenue. Sounds great right?

Except we know, via the Packers public financial filing, that NFL teams EACH made $226.4M in TV revenue in 2014. 

Concessions are hard to predict obviously, but needless to say, not everybody spends money at games. The tailgate experience eliminates a lot of peoples needs for those products, and the Ravens don't get 100% of those revenues either.

Parking pass revenue for the Ravens exists only for PSL owners, as they are the one's they're selling the passes to. Significantly cheaper than the secondary market prices you are quoting. Keep in mind that the Ravens don't make a dime off secondary market prices, so when you're paying $100 for a parking pass on Stubhub, the broker is getting most of that, not the Ravens.

[An_Unkindness_Flock]

It seems there spending way too much time picking out the color of drapes than picking players.

[whobilly]

  2 hours ago, jravens1313 said:

That is some twisted logic... EG: At home the advertisers can run live TV commercials with an attempt to target the type of viewer who watches football. That ad Revenue is shared league wide. VS: A season ticket holder pays ~$80-200 per ticket. At the game they drink and eat ~$20-60 worth in concessions. Many also pay another $40-100 for parking. Please explain to me how someone who watches from home spends more money on the Baltimore Ravens than someone who attends a game at the stadium? 

Yes, but that ad revenue is gigantic. TV networks literally pay billions of dollars just for broadcast rights. 

Look at the numbers for 2014 for example. M&T has a capacity of just over 71,000. Average ticket prices for the year was just over $100. Doing the math, if they sold every seat at the average ticket price for every home game (10, including preseason), they'd do $71M in ticket revenue. Sounds great right?

Except we know, via the Packers public financial filing, that NFL teams EACH made $226.4M in TV revenue in 2014. 

Concessions are hard to predict obviously, but needless to say, not everybody spends money at games. The tailgate experience eliminates a lot of peoples needs for those products, and the Ravens don't get 100% of those revenues either.

Parking pass revenue for the Ravens exists only for PSL owners, as they are the one's they're selling the passes to. Significantly cheaper than the secondary market prices you are quoting. Keep in mind that the Ravens don't make a dime off secondary market prices, so when you're paying $100 for a parking pass on Stubhub, the broker is getting most of that, not the Ravens.

1. The NFL is a smart money making machine. If your explanation is correct then why would the NFL even have fan attendance. They should tell all fans to now stay home because they make more money. The teams do make money in the secondary market on tickets but ONLY if the tickets are sold through the NFL Ticket Exchange. I guess no matter how we slice and dice it the money is crazy compared to other sports. Gate attendance, NFL Properties/merchandise, TV money drives the entire machine.

[rmcjacket23]

If you look at just the 2015 financial data that the Packers provide (since they're the only team required to publicly release financials), they had $408.7M in total revenue, with $222.6M of that coming from "national revenue sources", so basically TV revenue sharing from the league and possibly any national merchandise or licensing agreements.

So that's 55% of total revenue coming from a national stream, meaning it has nothing to do with how many people attend games.

I would also point out that the Packers also saw a big attendance spike that year, as well as significant revenue increases from stadium experience renovations they did, namely adding an atrium with several merchandise shops and restaurants.

[whobilly]

  18 hours ago, Adreme said:

You know they were 1 play and about 1 yard off winning the division right?  How much closer to being a playoff team can you be than that.

So so sick of hearing this. No they were 1 win closer to reaching the playoffs. No one can logically say they would have beaten the Bengles. No one can honestly think that CIN would not have come to play if it meant ruining our season. And no one can honestly say, after how hot/cold Joe Flacco and the ravens have been over the past 10 years that they could not have collapsed in cincy. I would have hoped we would have won but so many fans have said this and it couldn't be more wrong. 

Agree. Ravens were a mediocre team. Good teams find a way to win the game in Pittsburgh. Mediocre teams find a way to lose them. CASE CLOSED.

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, whobilly said:

1. The NFL is a smart money making machine. If your explanation is correct then why would the NFL even have fan attendance. They should tell all fans to now stay home because they make more money. The teams do make money in the secondary market on tickets but ONLY if the tickets are sold through the NFL Ticket Exchange. I guess no matter how we slice and dice it the money is crazy compared to other sports. Gate attendance, NFL Properties/merchandise, TV money drives the entire machine.

Well they're still profitable off the fans attending games. The point is that NFL teams are shifting towards making attending games more expensive so that they can make it more profitable. More suites, less seats. They will have Corporations and quality businesses buying suites each year that they can sell for exponentially more than a $100 upper deck ticket.

Keep in mind also that, for the most part, the cost of a seat to the Ravens is the same no matter where the seat is. The seat in the fifth row behind the Ravens bench costs the same amount to operate (for the most part) as the top row seat in the upper deck. However, one ticket can be sold for a significantly higher price, also known as variable pricing.

If NFL teams sold every ticket for the same price, then yes, there would be no purpose in selling those seats at all. But higher priced seats due to the location/view of the seat yields a higher profit margin, and that's why teams do that.

Ultimately, teams know that they can fill their stadium for the most part because of the demand of the product.

[rmcjacket23]

57 minutes ago, ByTheBay said:

So so sick of hearing this. No they were 1 win closer to reaching the playoffs. No one can logically say they would have beaten the Bengles. No one can honestly think that CIN would not have come to play if it meant ruining our season. And no one can honestly say, after how hot/cold Joe Flacco and the ravens have been over the past 10 years that they could not have collapsed in cincy. I would have hoped we would have won but so many fans have said this and it couldn't be more wrong. 

Well the truth is we can't possible know. Logically you would expect us to have had more urgency and desire to play well, given our postseason being on the line at that point. 

Cincinnati would be playing for just as much, but we would be playing for significantly more. No idea whether we would have won or lost, but it would be hard to argue that we could have looked as bad or worse. Motivation was a big problem for us that last week, and that wouldn't have been a problem had we beaten Pittsburgh.

[Nightman]

At least my Dad in Rockville won't complaint about tax money going to a stadium in Baltimore, he'll never go to.  I've educated him, it was lottery money, if you don't play the games, you don't fund it.   Next time I'll ask him in writing how his tax money funded it.

[throwback2000]

  7 hours ago, throwback2000 said:

Not so.Just ask the fans in Jacksonville about that. They are a hop-skip-jump away from being teamless. By the way, another reason Tagliabue was passed over for HOF!

Umm no. Jacksonville isn't close to moving. Do you have any sort of source or evidence that this is actually happening?

And in regards to what I said about the NFL blackouts, its fact. Its not up for debate.

Thank you Mr NFL Insider Schefter. He just settled with his " breaking news", and inside info as you well know. Check your facts!

[Adreme]

19 hours ago, jravens1313 said:

We lost to Cincinnati in Week 17. AKA we still lost the division regardless of that game. We are not a playoff team.

That was a let down game and EVERYONE who saw it knew that.  SSS was the only one really playing hard out there and thats because it was his last game. Had that game had actual meaning everyone knows it goes far differently.

[rmcjacket23]

35 minutes ago, throwback2000 said:

Thank you Mr NFL Insider Schefter. He just settled with his " breaking news", and inside info as you well know. Check your facts!

So you don't have a source and were just speculating? Thanks for confirming.

At least I provide factual basis for what I say...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/03/28/nfl-continues-suspension-of-blackout-rule/

[rmcjacket23]

2 hours ago, Nightman said:

At least my Dad in Rockville won't complaint about tax money going to a stadium in Baltimore, he'll never go to.  I've educated him, it was lottery money, if you don't play the games, you don't fund it.   Next time I'll ask him in writing how his tax money funded it.

The overwhelming majority of "public funding" that comes from NFL stadium financing doesn't affect the overall majority of the population. Much of it comes from hotel taxes, parking taxes, surcharges on tickets, etc. 

There's an ignorant, false narrative that the public spreads where they think they see like state-wide tax increases on everybody to fund a stadium. That doesn't happen very often.

Most of the "public funding" comes from effective "use taxes", meaning if you don't use the service or good being taxed, you don't pay taxes on it. 

[Crusader]

  5 hours ago, Nightman said:

At least my Dad in Rockville won't complaint about tax money going to a stadium in Baltimore, he'll never go to.  I've educated him, it was lottery money, if you don't play the games, you don't fund it.   Next time I'll ask him in writing how his tax money funded it.

The overwhelming majority of "public funding" that comes from NFL stadium financing doesn't affect the overall majority of the population. Much of it comes from hotel taxes, parking taxes, surcharges on tickets, etc. 

There's an ignorant, false narrative that the public spreads where they think they see like state-wide tax increases on everybody to fund a stadium. That doesn't happen very often.

Most of the "public funding" comes from effective "use taxes", meaning if you don't use the service or good being taxed, you don't pay taxes on it. 

203 million from the public taxes. https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

[Nightman]

20 hours ago, Crusader said:

203 million from the public taxes. https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

And PSLs, which the Redskins will defintatly have in Snyder's new playpen.  Although the Ravens hold back a few thousand for single game sale.

[Nightman]

23 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

The overwhelming majority of "public funding" that comes from NFL stadium financing doesn't affect the overall majority of the population. Much of it comes from hotel taxes, parking taxes, surcharges on tickets, etc. 

There's an ignorant, false narrative that the public spreads where they think they see like state-wide tax increases on everybody to fund a stadium. That doesn't happen very often.

Most of the "public funding" comes from effective "use taxes", meaning if you don't use the service or good being taxed, you don't pay taxes on it. 

Georgia cut the education budget to fund the new Mercedes Benz stadium.

And in San Digeo, they had a hotel tax budget that failed, the taxpayers said "Drop Dead" and the Chargers moved back to LA where they won't even fill the StubHub Center next year.

 

[rmcjacket23]

On 2/5/2017 at 9:17 PM, Crusader said:

203 million from the public taxes. https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

LOL, nice try. Appears you didn't even bother to read your own reference...

State Revenue bonds are not taxes.

State Lottery funds are not taxes.

Stadium Authority revenues are not taxes.

So basically, if you don't buy lottery tickets (which you shouldn't, because you're a sucker and a fool if you do) and you don't attend games, then you're not paying practically anything for the stadium.

[rmcjacket23]

15 hours ago, Nightman said:

And PSLs, which the Redskins will defintatly have in Snyder's new playpen.  Although the Ravens hold back a few thousand for single game sale.

Which of course is a voluntary purchase. The only person that decides whether you buy a PSL or not is you. 

That's called a Use tax. Its about a fair of a tax as has ever existed. You pay a tax on something that you actually use. If you don't use it, guess what? You don't pay a tax on it.

I'm not even sure how a logical person could complain about that.

[rmcjacket23]

15 hours ago, Nightman said:

Georgia cut the education budget to fund the new Mercedes Benz stadium.

And in San Digeo, they had a hotel tax budget that failed, the taxpayers said "Drop Dead" and the Chargers moved back to LA where they won't even fill the StubHub Center next year.

 

1. OK, and? That's just moving taxpayer money around. If you wanted to spend your time complaining about where your taxpayer money is actually going, you'll find a lot bigger outrages than a football stadium. Do some research on where your federal or state tax dollars go. 

2. Yes, a hotel tax. You know who doesn't pay a hotel tax? People that don't stay in hotels. Again, very definition of a USE tax, which is completely fair in every sense of the word.

[Derrel]

"Since starting from scratch in 1996, they’ve become a Baltimore institution". Not really, they started with the a Browns team that was already in place and had some draft picks that they turned into important players.

[FloridalovesRavens]

"Since starting from scratch in 1996, they’ve become a Baltimore institution". Not really, they started with the a Browns team that was already in place and had some draft picks that they turned into important players.

Yes really. They are the Ravens not the Browns. A whole different ball game. Wouldn't you say?

[FloridalovesRavens]

  On 2/4/2017 at 6:12 PM, Adreme said:

  On 2/4/2017 at 3:21 PM, RaRaRavens said:

Wow, this organization is really going all in. With all the questionable coaching moves and decisions, the mediocre performance that is slowly becoming a new norm for the Ravens, and now the increase in prices, I can really see our team tanking down real nice, if we won't have couple of 12-4 seasons and deep playoff runs in the next couple of seasons. Unfortunately, we are a looong way from being a playoff team. Can't see too much sunshine on the horizon any which way you look at it.

You know they were 1 play and about 1 yard off winning the division right?  How much closer to being a playoff team can you be than that.

We lost to Cincinnati in Week 17. AKA we still lost the division regardless of that game. We are not a playoff team.

So many fans wanted us to lose to get a better draft pick. The Ravens gave them what they wanted. Hope they're happy and can stop complaining about the loss.

[trevorsteadman]

1 minute ago, FloridalovesRavens said:

So many fans wanted us to lose to get a better draft pick. The Ravens gave them what they wanted. Hope they're happy and can stop complaining about the loss.

The Bengals game was worthless. It was better for the Ravens to go up a few spots for the draft. I was advocating for them to lose. I think it would've been a lot different if the Ravens held Antonio Brown out of the endzone. Whether or not they would've went far in the playoffs is unseen. But I do think they would've been better than the Steelers.... Steelers are not built to last in the playoffs and their offense is not nearly as good as it should be when having a top 3 receiver and probably the best running back in the league.