|
Post by atownbeaver on Mar 1, 2018 14:31:27 GMT -8
They get the same amount for annual seat donations and parking passes no matter how many home games we have. You can't say that by having another home game, we generate an additional $500K. We get the same amount for the year no matter how many home games we have. If you divide that amount by 6 games instead of 7, it is a higher amount per game but it is still the same total. If we changed the Oh St. game to a home game, we would not receive any additional revenue from annual parking and seat licenses. Your post figured in $500K for seat licensing if we have another home game and factored that into approaching a $1.7 mil figure.
You're wrong, my peeps are fine........and it is a significant money maker.
"No one argued it was not settled FOR money".........except for you and the other poster that said we could make nearly the same amount from a home game.
Enough said
You have a severe reading comprehension issue or just ignore statements to try and make a non-point! LOL "additional" It is basic 5th grade Math and logic... there has been ZERO discussion about extra money... A home game brings in revenue... more than an away game after the expenses. You realize that bowls are a but different in nature, but some bowl payouts barely pay the teams expenses after league sharing etc. and they are somewhat subsidized for travel/lodging/food for the team and have far greater payouts than $1.7 mil. Let's make it more toward 1st grade... revenue for games are fixed and variable... Total revenue from fixed sources (licenses, parking passes, TV, etc) divided by 7 (vs 6 home games) is still exceeding $500-600k without one ticket bought. An EXTRA home game will increase the variable revenue stream... extra game season tix costs go up, daily parking, concessions, merchandise, walk up ticket sales (by the way freebies are written off for the face value x the # of tix and are a help the fiscal bottom line), etc. So... the fixed revenue (although divided by 7 home games) + the additional 7th game variable revenues will exceed the equal or exceed the $1.7mil after the travel, food, lodging, rental, etc expenses. Again... it does make money... purpose of why teams like OSU do it was never an issue. But giving your fans a home game with a chance of winning and improving any post season chances while at the same time making your program as much or more than a body bag game is ALWAYS best. Oregon Reported a net loss of $677K going to the National Championship game, FWIW. Also, their net loss figures do not include $2.2 million in bonuses they paid to coaches for making the games.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 1, 2018 15:01:46 GMT -8
Our labor day weekend home openers only ever have 35K people at them because we are always playing Sac St or Portland St... snooze fest to the casual non die hard fan. Not true. Eastern Washington game in 2013 was 41,649. Sac State in 2011 was 41,581. There apparently are people who believe in "trends" and that what we have for attendance now is as good as it's ever going to get. When I said 40K plus I said it because I really think we can draw that, probably not this year, but if we can pull off 5 wins and a bunch of competitive games this season we very well could see an uptick in attendance in 2019. The big question is how TV affects future attendance. Some would think that the downturn in football attendance beginning in about 2008 and the appearance of 50inch plus televisions dropping below 2 grand at the same time is just a big coincidence, I'm not so sure. Now you can go to Costco and get a 70" diagonal screen for a grand, or you can pick up an HD projector that'll throw a 165" picture in a relatively dark room for a grand if you want. A couch can get pretty comfortable compared to bleachers, but being at a game of winning team puts the thrill back in being at the game. It'll be interesting to see if wins creates attendance here.
|
|
|
Post by nexus73 on Mar 1, 2018 15:44:51 GMT -8
When you suck, suck them in! There have been times for both UO and OSU where quality opponents cancelled out because our state's teams were doing too well. If there ever was a time to schedule body bag games, this is it. Figure we get wasted as expected the first two times. We were not going anywhere in any case. After that we get our chance to put the other team's body in the bag, especially if we schedule a first week weak opponent as a tuneup. LSU 22 OSU 21 would have gone our way if the PK had not had the worst yips of his life. I like to think once we climb up to a certain level of competitiveness, we can hold our own for a while against anyone, then see if the breaks go our way to spring the classic upset.
When we sign a series of contracts against Big Names, we can put in a sweet buyout the game clause so there'll be some money coming our way if the other side gets chicken about facing our Beavers! Right now we risk nothing as we're lousy. Later on when we're good and the other team is great, risk/reward still is in our favor. For an Ultimate Beaver Dream, we may have put our hat in the ring 5 or more years down the road for the Playoffs and having a major opponent would give us a chance to spring into one of the top four slots right off the bat.
Having seen the other side of the argument, I will concede there is some reasonableness to that position. We however are a special case that can afford to take a beating now and make major gains on the field later while collecting a fat chunk of change no matter how it goes. If you knew that you would get a bloody nose and a million dollars at the closest casino, would you go there? If you knew there was a chance you could bloody the other guy's nose as well, then what?
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 1, 2018 15:50:22 GMT -8
They get the same amount for annual seat donations and parking passes no matter how many home games we have. You can't say that by having another home game, we generate an additional $500K. We get the same amount for the year no matter how many home games we have. If you divide that amount by 6 games instead of 7, it is a higher amount per game but it is still the same total. If we changed the Oh St. game to a home game, we would not receive any additional revenue from annual parking and seat licenses. Your post figured in $500K for seat licensing if we have another home game and factored that into approaching a $1.7 mil figure.
You're wrong, my peeps are fine........and it is a significant money maker.
"No one argued it was not settled FOR money".........except for you and the other poster that said we could make nearly the same amount from a home game.
Enough said
You have a severe reading comprehension issue or just ignore statements to try and make a non-point! LOL "additional" It is basic 5th grade Math and logic... there has been ZERO discussion about extra money... A home game brings in revenue... more than an away game after the expenses. You realize that bowls are a but different in nature, but some bowl payouts barely pay the teams expenses after league sharing etc. and they are somewhat subsidized for travel/lodging/food for the team and have far greater payouts than $1.7 mil. Let's make it more toward 1st grade... revenue for games are fixed and variable... Total revenue from fixed sources (licenses, parking passes, TV, etc) divided by 7 (vs 6 home games) is still exceeding $500-600k without one ticket bought. An EXTRA home game will increase the variable revenue stream... extra game season tix costs go up, daily parking, concessions, merchandise, walk up ticket sales (by the way freebies are written off for the face value x the # of tix and are a help the fiscal bottom line), etc. So... the fixed revenue (although divided by 7 home games) + the additional 7th game variable revenues will exceed the equal or exceed the $1.7mil after the travel, food, lodging, rental, etc expenses.
Again... it does make money... purpose of why teams like OSU do it was never an issue. But giving your fans a home game with a chance of winning and improving any post season chances while at the same time making your program as much or more than a body bag game is ALWAYS best. You don't get to count the fixed revenue towards the $1.7mil, because you get that "fixed money" whether the game is played at home or not. You should only be judging the variable revenue towards that figure for a home game and it is no where near $1.7mil.
If you going to look at it that way, you should take the fixed revenue, divide it by the number of all games (home & away) and add that per game amount to the $1.7Mil we are being paid to go to Oh. st. The $1.7Mil being paid from Oh. St. is only variable revenue.
And don't even try to compare it to a bowl game. The schools spend way more on travel expenses, taking boosters, etc. on a bowl game then they do for a single OOC game. They also travel down there for a week or more, which is considerably longer than an OOC away game. Since the teams have to share anything that is left over, they typically spend all the money they get for an average bowl game (and sometimes more).
Again....this would not be done if it didn't make more money than a typical OOC home game.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 1, 2018 16:36:37 GMT -8
I just Googled Oregon state football home game revenue out of curiosity and found some numbers concerning the attendance drop.
If I read it right, in 2013 OSU had football TICKET REVENUE (not donations, parking, concession or other revenues associated with home games) of 10.9 million on 6 games. That's 1.8 million a home game on average and that was 5 years ago.
I'm not sure how 2018 ticket prices are compared to those of 2013, but OSU needs to build some success and get the stadium filled back to those levels. Home games can bring in just as much or more than big "paycheck" games if butts are in the seats.
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Mar 1, 2018 16:37:55 GMT -8
People from Europe or Asia who follow track and field aren't coming to OSU football games, so I don't care what they like. Football is king in the USA. Football is figuratively and quite literally a dying sport. Both attendance and ratings are down both in the NFL and NCAA. I get the feeling that football is coming up to a fiscal cliff very soon. You proposed committing more resources to a sport that is trending downward. I am saying that that is foolish. I like football, but it seems like football's zenith was several years ago at this point. BDC did not spend money on the program, when it could have made a difference. At this point, dumping money into the sport without the football team markedly improving is throwing good money after bad. Oregon State should work to diversify its sports programs, fund more teams and invest in those teams. Baseball has been "dying" like that for about 30 years, and yet, MLB revenues are at their highest levels ever. NFL revenues keep growing as well. If football does "die" as you suggest, it isn't going to be replaced by some "other" sport. If football dies, it will be because people have stopped supporting spectator sports in general.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Mar 1, 2018 16:50:50 GMT -8
Football is figuratively and quite literally a dying sport. Both attendance and ratings are down both in the NFL and NCAA. I get the feeling that football is coming up to a fiscal cliff very soon. You proposed committing more resources to a sport that is trending downward. I am saying that that is foolish. I like football, but it seems like football's zenith was several years ago at this point. BDC did not spend money on the program, when it could have made a difference. At this point, dumping money into the sport without the football team markedly improving is throwing good money after bad. Oregon State should work to diversify its sports programs, fund more teams and invest in those teams. Baseball has been "dying" like that for about 30 years, and yet, MLB revenues are at their highest levels ever. NFL revenues keep growing as well. If football does "die" as you suggest, it isn't going to be replaced by some "other" sport. If football dies, it will be because people have stopped supporting spectator sports in general. Football could get litigated to death at the college level is the big fear. If lawsuits start happening pretty soon we'll be watching linemen wearing those big padded sumo suits and it'll be flag football with penalties for anything beyond incidental contact. If they domed Reser it could make a pretty big music or convention venue, maybe a water park since the stairs are already built.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 1, 2018 16:52:21 GMT -8
I just Googled Oregon state football home game revenue out of curiosity and found some numbers concerning the attendance drop. If I read it right, in 2013 OSU had football TICKET REVENUE (not donations, parking, concession or other revenues associated with home games) of 10.9 million on 6 games. That's 1.8 million a home game on average and that was 5 years ago. I'm not sure how 2018 ticket prices are compared to those of 2013, but OSU needs to build some success and get the stadium filled back to those levels. Home games can bring in just as much or more than big "paycheck" games if butts are in the seats. I believe season tix were $290 or $330 then... $390/tic now??? I also think some seat license areas have increased. From what I read is that attendance drop has about equaled ticket revenue increase due to pricing??? Forbes had the 2011-2012 season/2013 pre-season Top 25...expenses and revenues and we were +9mil/6 games... BUT the figures are from Dept of Ed #s and are typically very suspect as to what is considered expenses vs what the school itself does.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 1, 2018 19:41:52 GMT -8
I just Googled Oregon state football home game revenue out of curiosity and found some numbers concerning the attendance drop. If I read it right, in 2013 OSU had football TICKET REVENUE (not donations, parking, concession or other revenues associated with home games) of 10.9 million on 6 games. That's 1.8 million a home game on average and that was 5 years ago. I'm not sure how 2018 ticket prices are compared to those of 2013, but OSU needs to build some success and get the stadium filled back to those levels. Home games can bring in just as much or more than big "paycheck" games if butts are in the seats. I believe season tix were $290 or $330 then... $390/tic now??? I also think some seat license areas have increased. From what I read is that attendance drop has about equaled ticket revenue increase due to pricing??? Forbes had the 2011-2012 season/2013 pre-season Top 25...expenses and revenues and we were +9mil/6 games... BUT the figures are from Dept of Ed #s and are typically very suspect as to what is considered expenses vs what the school itself does. Seat license fees have actually decreased since then. They had to lower the fees for the club level since they overbuilt it and they lowered some other areas on the new side due to low demand. Also, their experiment with the new end zone failed as they tried to charge $800 per seat for people that wanted to sit in the end zone and drink. They didn’t even sell 1/4 of these seats as season tickets
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 1, 2018 19:45:38 GMT -8
I believe season tix were $290 or $330 then... $390/tic now??? I also think some seat license areas have increased. From what I read is that attendance drop has about equaled ticket revenue increase due to pricing??? Forbes had the 2011-2012 season/2013 pre-season Top 25...expenses and revenues and we were +9mil/6 games... BUT the figures are from Dept of Ed #s and are typically very suspect as to what is considered expenses vs what the school itself does. Seat license fees have actually decreased since then. They had to lower the fees for the club level since they overbuilt it and they lowered some other areas on the new side due to low demand. Except for the dumb arse idea of the Terrace!!!
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 1, 2018 19:47:06 GMT -8
Seat license fees have actually decreased since then. They had to lower the fees for the club level since they overbuilt it and they lowered some other areas on the new side due to low demand. Except for the dumb arse idea of the Terrace!!! Holy sh1t! We agree on something! I was editing as you posted This may be the end of the world
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Mar 1, 2018 20:22:17 GMT -8
Except for the dumb arse idea of the Terrace!!! Holy sh1t! We agree on something! I was editing as you posted This may be the end of the world OR... the beginning of an entire new one!!!?
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 1, 2018 22:59:51 GMT -8
Football is figuratively and quite literally a dying sport. Both attendance and ratings are down both in the NFL and NCAA. I get the feeling that football is coming up to a fiscal cliff very soon. You proposed committing more resources to a sport that is trending downward. I am saying that that is foolish. I like football, but it seems like football's zenith was several years ago at this point. BDC did not spend money on the program, when it could have made a difference. At this point, dumping money into the sport without the football team markedly improving is throwing good money after bad. Oregon State should work to diversify its sports programs, fund more teams and invest in those teams. basic data would indicate that, but I am not sure it is cut and dry. Attendance at NFL games fell nearly 500K this year. but with average attendance over 17 million, it represents a about a 3% dip. The impact is highly regional. TV ratings were down 9.7 percent in 2017... but there is a pretty big flaw in that number. Nielsen ratings do not capture online viewing. both Amazon Prime and Yahoo broadcasted games. Nielsen does not capture Red Zone viewers. Alternative viewing is not captured. Despite NFL ratings slides, 20 of the top 30 watched programs for networks were football games. Supporting the notion that alternative viewing is a larger piece of the puzzle is the fact that overall TV viewership is down. Every major broadcaster lost viewers in 2017, even when ignoring NFL impact. It isn't just NFL games being watched less. it is traditional TV being watched less. we won't know for a few more weeks, when the NFL fiscal year closes, but the bottom line numbers will come out soon. Revenue for the NFL continues to rise year over year. last year was a 10% year over year increase. Licensing and Merchandise continue to see explosive growth. the licensing payment EA make to the NFLPA for Madden jumped 24% last year. I do not think there is simple clear cut evidence football is dying. I do not deny that there is likely a bubble that is forming, I am just not so sure how imminent it is, nor how disastrous it will be. Brain injury is something that will be addressed in the every single year. We will see more and more players miss more and more time. We will see more and more penalties for aggressive hits. Will it harm the product on the field? Or will fans be accommodating to increased safety? Who knows. All I know is, I don't think evidence supports Footballs imminent demise. The impact is highly regional? C'mon now. 24 of the 32 teams experience attendance dips last year. The NFL's attendance was the lowest since 2011. It's highly regional in that all of the regions were affected? Nielsen does not capture Red Zone viewing, but Red Zone existed in 2016, exactly the same as it existed in 2017. Did Red Zone viewership dramatically increase from 2016 to 2017? Nielsen does not capture Amazon Prime viewership. And Amazon Prime replaced Twitter. Streaming was about a 40th of television viewership this year. Streaming grew 17%, an increase of about 60,000 viewers per game, about a 20th of a point. You are trying to obfuscate the point, but viewership is clearly down. TV ratings were down 9.7% and that was after a 8% year-over drop the year before. More than a sixth of the total NFL audience has evaporated in less than two years. Unless both the one- and two-year trend lines change, the NFL completely disappears in a decade. NBA and MLB ratings are up. Why are the NFL's ratings going down? The EA-NFLPA licensing goes to players, not to the league. Also, NCAA football attendance and TV viewership was down year over. There is a lot of inertia right now holding the status quo together. However, it will be curious what happens when the NFL collective bargaining agreement expires in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by RenoBeaver on Mar 2, 2018 7:30:26 GMT -8
This was a depressing read thru. Shoot me if E-sports becomes eligible for college scholarships
Go Beavs?
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Mar 2, 2018 7:45:59 GMT -8
This was a depressing read thru. Shoot me if E-sports becomes eligible for college scholarships Go Beavs? BANG BANG. UC-Irvine and Utah already offer scholarships. eae.utah.edu/esports/
|
|