Thread: NFL sets new attendance record

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/football/nfl/03/25/attendance.record.ap/

Twenty-two million and change
NFL breaks paid attendance mark for 5th straight year
Posted: Sunday March 25, 2007 6:40PM; Updated: Sunday March 25, 2007 6:40PM




PHOENIX (AP) -- The NFL set a paid attendance record for the fifth straight season, surpassing 22 million for the first time.

Total attendance was 22,199,712, up more than 400,000 fans from the 2005 season. That includes playoff games; the regular-season numbers for 2006 were 17,340,879, another record.

The 12 postseason games produced sales of 775,551, including 74,512 for the Super Bowl in Miami won by the Indianapolis Colts.

For the seventh consecutive season, the Redskins had the top attendance. Of course, FedEx Field seats 91,704, by far the biggest stadium in the NFL. Washington drew 708,952, followed by the New York Giants (628,925), Kansas City (624,171) and the New York Jets (618,563).

=Z=

Even if every single seat was sold during the regular season, the Vikes could only have a max of 512,000.
More than 100,000 less than the top attendance stadiums.
At an average of $75 per ticket, that puts the dome $38 million behind in sales from the get go.
And most of that goes to the sports commission, not the Vikings.

Gee, why do we need a new stadium again?

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Even if every single seat was sold during the regular season, the Vikes could only have a max of 512,000.
More than 100,000 less than the top attendance stadiums.
At an average of $75 per ticket, that puts the dome $38 million behind in sales from the get go.
And most of that goes to the sports commission, not the Vikings.

Gee, why do we need a new stadium again?

Aren't ticket revenues shared?

=Z=

"Zeus" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Even if every single seat was sold during the regular season, the Vikes could only have a max of 512,000.
More than 100,000 less than the top attendance stadiums.
At an average of $75 per ticket, that puts the dome $38 million behind in sales from the get go.
And most of that goes to the sports commission, not the Vikings.

Gee, why do we need a new stadium again?

Aren't ticket revenues shared?

=Z=

:-[ Oooooh yeah.
I forgot (hey, it's monday!)

Under the NFL’s revenue sharing rules, all money generated by a stadium, except for ticket sales, is kept by the home team – this includes parking, concessions, luxury box rent and club seat fees. The most profitable teams are the ones with the best stadium deals.

The Vikes still suffer with the smaller stadium, but that is probably more because of the crappy lease than anything else.

Am I wrong or isn't the new stadium planned to have the same seating capacity as the current one?

Maybe what they should do is to renovate the dome to have only about 1500 seats,all of which would be great seats and assure a sellout,and then make the rest of the levels of the dome into luxury boxes that they don't have to share with the league.

Do they have a specific definition of what a luxury box has to be? (besides luxurious)

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Even if every single seat was sold during the regular season, the Vikes could only have a max of 512,000.
More than 100,000 less than the top attendance stadiums.
At an average of $75 per ticket, that puts the dome $38 million behind in sales from the get go.
And most of that goes to the sports commission, not the Vikings.

Gee, why do we need a new stadium again?

Aren't ticket revenues shared?

=Z=

:-[ Oooooh yeah.
I forgot (hey, it's monday!)

Under the NFL’s revenue sharing rules, all money generated by a stadium, except for ticket sales, is kept by the home team – this includes parking, concessions, luxury box rent and club seat fees. The most profitable teams are the ones with the best stadium deals.

The Vikes still suffer with the smaller stadium, but that is probably more because of the crappy lease than anything else.

Your point is still incredibly valid.
The Vikings have the lowest of the non-ticket-revenue from the Dome (due to the horrible lease) and do suffer because of it.


That's why, IMHO, a renovation of the Dome with a new lease IS a viable option.
Better lease, upgraded facility (especially the toilets which got Prophumen's feet wet) and more parking for tail-gating and I'd be happy as pie.

=Z=

"Zeus" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"NodakPaul" wrote:

Even if every single seat was sold during the regular season, the Vikes could only have a max of 512,000.
More than 100,000 less than the top attendance stadiums.
At an average of $75 per ticket, that puts the dome $38 million behind in sales from the get go.
And most of that goes to the sports commission, not the Vikings.

Gee, why do we need a new stadium again?

Aren't ticket revenues shared?

=Z=

:-[ Oooooh yeah.
I forgot (hey, it's monday!)

Under the NFL’s revenue sharing rules, all money generated by a stadium, except for ticket sales, is kept by the home team – this includes parking, concessions, luxury box rent and club seat fees. The most profitable teams are the ones with the best stadium deals.

The Vikes still suffer with the smaller stadium, but that is probably more because of the crappy lease than anything else.

Your point is still incredibly valid.
The Vikings have the lowest of the non-ticket-revenue from the Dome (due to the horrible lease) and do suffer because of it.


That's why, IMHO, a renovation of the Dome with a new lease IS a viable option.
Better lease, upgraded facility (especially the toilets which got Prophumen's feet wet) and more parking for tail-gating and I'd be happy as pie.

=Z=

I'm thinking about suing because of that.
I had to walk to far to get outside.