I was EXTREMELY surprised at these numbers: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/5528646.html Feb. 9, 2008, 11:38PM UNOFFICIAL SCORER NBA turnstile count heading wrong way By ZACHARY LEVINE Copyright 2008 Houston Chronicle It has taken the NBA three months to reverse three years' worth of attendance gains, and there's more to blame than just the situation in New Orleans. After three consecutive seasons of record highs for average attendance, the league faces the prospect — if not this year, then soon at this rate — of dropping to fourth among the four major professional sports leagues. NBA attendance peaked last year at an average of 17,757, and through the close of games Friday night, the 2007-08 figure was sitting at 17,091. As former The Price Is Right host Bob Barker would say, "a difference of ... " 666. Pretty good for the Showcase, not as good for the Association. Accordingly, an 800-fan-per-game lead over the NHL has plummeted to 42 as the NHL has kept averages steady and introduced the successful outdoor game to spin the turnstiles. Here are three other things to know about NBA attendance: • The biggest changes are at the bottom. The number of teams averaging full capacity actually has increased in the NBA; where pro basketball is losing ground to the NHL is with teams at the bottom. Last season, four NHL teams fell below 14,000 per game including three below 13,000. This year, the list bottoms out with the Islanders at 13,289 and nobody else under 14,000. It's been the opposite in the NBA, in which there were no teams under 14,000 last season. Sixty percent of the way through the season, six teams are below that number this year — Sacramento, Seattle, Philadelphia, Memphis, New Orleans and Indiana. • NBA fans demand more results on the playing surface than NHL fans. That's the positive spin from the NBA's perspective. The negative spin would be that its fans are less loyal. The no-spin version would be that NBA attendance is more related to winning percentage than NHL attendance. Using full-season totals from last year, for each additional win an NBA team earned, attendance went up 125 per game. Of the top 10 teams in attendance, only the Knicks (No. 8) had a losing record. Of the bottom 13 in attendance, only the Rockets (No. 21) had a winning record. For each additional victory an NHL team earned, measured as 1.77 points (2 points for a win minus 0.23 for an average loss), attendance went up 78 per game. The NHL had nearly as strong a correlation between degrees latitude and attendance as it did between points and attendance. • Competition hurts some NBA teams. Of the six teams at the bottom of the NBA pecking order, three play in some of the best college basketball markets in America — an issue the NHL doesn't have to deal with in nearly the same magnitude. The Pacers average a league-worst 12,179 at an arena within 90 minutes of Indiana University (16,699 per game) and of West Lafayette, Ind., where Purdue draws more than 11,000 per game. The 76ers compete with five Division I schools within the city limits of Philadelphia and also with suburban Villanova, which sells out every game at a 6,500-seat on-campus facility and averaged 19,928 in its first two games at the Wachovia Center. And then there are the Memphis Grizzlies, who share a building with the No. 1 Tigers and come up 4,000 short at the turnstiles. And the way they're going this year, maybe that's not the only way they would lose to their co-tenants.
I don't know if this is true or not, but I've heard a lot of speculation in the past that NHL teams give away a large amount of tickets for free. So, yes, they have a lot of asses in the seats, but not necessarily many are paying.
i don't think any league goes on butts in the seat to judge attendance anymore. i believe they're all based on paid attendance.
Hockey translates to television worse than any other sport. It's great live, but I can barely watch it on TV. I'd rather watch minor league hockey live than the NHL on television.
The attendance at Pacers games has zero to do with how close IU and Purdue are to Indianapolis. Never has and never will. Clueless comment. Memphis is interesting, having an undefeated, championship level college squad paired with the worst team in the NBA. Wonder what the score would be if the Tigers played the Grizz?
I bet that both teams would score 120+. The Memphis Tigers press all the time, which never works in the NBA, and would afford a bunch of break opportunities for Conley, et al. But the Memphis Grizzlies can't stop anyone, the College All Stars they share an arena with included.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/attendance 94% full at Rockets games I think all the problems with the Indiana players off the court is the main reason they are not drawing
Remember last year when I said the Stars had a better attendance than the Rockets? Thus far it's holding true for this year as well. As for the Versus comment, we all know how airing the Finals on ABC faired! Besides, who doesn't have cable these days? I don't care where the games are shown. Fans of the game will watch the game regardless. I remember Wilbon was complaining last year he couldn't find the NHL All-Star game. I was surprised because I thought everyone knew it was on Versus. Hell, just go to nhl.com if you aren't sure. Obviously he isn't fan and doesn't care enough. I have no problem with that. All I'm saying is, no need to make fun of a sport just because you don't care for it. There's definitely an established fan base. It's kind of like when you watch ESPN highlights of a basketball game which aired on TNT and they hide the TNT logo. Yeah, like an NBA fan doesn't know games are shown on TNT?
cavs vs spurs have very little potential. lakers/suns/mavericks/gs/ vs dertoit/orlando/cavs would be a better sell how many hockey games are there a season?
4 of the last 5 years have had ratings under 10. If that trend continues, the NBA Finals will find themselves on TNT or another cable network instead of a major network.
Here's another explanation from David Aldridge Ticket prices explain fan apathy By David Aldridge Special to ESPN.com Let me be clear. Tickets for NBA games cost too much. Way too much. Too much for regular families to go regularly. Too much for fan bases to be sustainable. Too much for anyone other than the very rich -- which impacts the intensity levels of crowds around the league. I got hooked on the NBA because my father -- not every night, but enough times -- was able to scrape together a few bucks to take me to see the Bullets. (Trust me. They used to be good.) I fell in love with the red, white and blue of Washington's home jerseys; the orange and blue of the Knicks' road unis. I got attached to the noise of the fans and the way the PA guy would flow "EEEEEEEEEE" when Elvin Hayes hit a turnaround. I got an autograph from Elgin Baylor, who was doing color for CBS. I remember all of this because most of the time, I was sitting in the first row of the upper bowl. A perfectly fine seat for $14. I wasn't at the top of the building, where it seems another game is being played. I was -- at least it seemed like it to my pre-teenage mind -- in the middle of the action. Unfortunately, when you look around the league's arenas nowadays, the primary place where you see kids is in section 420 or 540. Seriously. Look around. See how many kids are in the lower bowls these days. Or is it people in power suits, on cell phones? Or, more accurately, do you see empty seats where the people in power suits are supposed to be, but aren't, because the seats are a writeoff in the first place? A dozen years ago, people began noticing the shift. When the Pistons moved from the Silverdome to the Palace, John Salley noted "we used to play in front of the auto workers. Now we play in front of the auto executives." The average ticket in the NBA now costs $51.02, according to the Team Marketing Report, which monitors the business of sports leagues. Add charges for food, drinks and parking, and that cost rises to $72.53 per person. Unless you're treating yourself alone to a game, you're probably going to pull two C-notes from your pocket if you throw in a program or a t-shirt for a nephew or niece. Who do you know that can do this a dozen times a year? Ten times a year? Five? Two? The Bulls, who are 1-9 at the time I write this (after winning 13 and 17 games over the previous two seasons), still charge an average of $52.84 per ticket. That, incredibly, only puts them in the middle of the pack. "It's a curious issue," deputy commissioner Russ Granik says. "The higher-priced tickets are not the problem. People want those tickets. Those tickets get sold out at just about every arena." True. The Knicks can charge whatever they want for courtside seats, and Spike, Woody and Co. will pony up. The Lakers can gouge their highest-paying customers blind, and Jack and Dyan will still be there every night. And I don't think that's unreasonable. An owner has the right to get whatever he or she can for his or her choicest seats. The cold reality is that the league's teams have to pay for the spasm of new buildings that have gone up over the last decade. Twenty of the league's 29 teams are either already playing in arenas less than a decade old or will be in a new building by 2004. Two more, Golden State and Seattle, are basically playing in new buildings -- their old arenas were gutted and renovated. And the Knicks play in a refurbished Madison Square Garden. All those fancy digs cost serious coin. And $22 million per team from television isn't enough. Here is what the league says. Since the end of the lockout, it has mandated each team to have at least 500 tickets for sale at $10 per seat. Some teams provide more. Some teams, like the Sonics, have actually cut ticket prices this season. Some teams are offering multiple-game, reduced-priced plans in the lower bowls. And anyway, most of the league's fans, it maintains, watch the games on television and never set foot in league arenas. "I really think families can go to our games," Granik said. "In some cases, it costs as much as, if not less, than going to the movies. So people can go to our games. But they're not the prime seats." But that's the key. What makes the NBA different from the other pro sports leagues is that visceral experience. You can see the players' faces. You hear their emotions. The contact, if not physical, is nonetheless palpable. The further away you are from the action, the less intense the feeling. (To those of you who point out that we in the media usually have choice seats on the floor that the vast majority of our employers don't pay for, I say you have a valid point. Still, airline tickets, hotel rooms and rental cars to those cities aren't free.) And at any rate, the experience needs to be reinforced. Once or twice a childhood doesn't get it done. Look, I'm not saying high ticket prices alone explain what even the most ardent NBA fan must acknowledge is a serious slump of fan interest. The league has to find that compelling star, or stars, that appeals not only to the hip-hop generation, but to the larger community. Jordan had it. Magic had it. Bird had it. Kobe might have it. That's what will ultimately get people interested again. But what people? And at what price?
I also agree that it is good article and 100% on the mark. I went to the Lakers v. Rockets game on opening night and my girlfriend had to drop over $400 (birthday present) for JUST 2 TICKETS! I ended up buying some nachos and a pepsi and that came out to like $13. That is just ridiculous! $400 for just 2 tickets?? And even with the Clippers, when I went last year, the first game came out over $250 for 2 tickets and the second game came out to about the same price. Now imagine a family trying to go to the game and get some good seats. If they were to sit in the number seats (which come after seats A-M @ Staples), they would still be dropping for close to $300-$350 for just 4 tickets! Change the ticket prices!!!!
I don't think NBA tix are that expensive at all. Its super easy to get Rockets or Astros seats and not that expensive. When i lived in dallas, Stars tickets were way more expensive than those for the Mavs. The NFL is much higher priced.
