Attendance in BC and MTL.

The fans owe both those teams a lot after providing them with great teams over the last 15 years. Every team goes through a rough patch , these teams have not even completed a year and fans are staying away. Predictable, but both teams deserve better.

According to cfldb in 2014, BC average home attendance is above league average (24,000+). There is sufficient fan support, but the stadium is too large for the market. Montreal has a smaller stadium but has higher attendance (20,000+) than Toronto (17,000+) and Hamilton (6500+). Overall, CFL attendance is down across league except for Ottawa. For example, 2013 market leader Saskatchewan oddly has 18,000+ in home opener due to bad weather.

Over 30k were sold for the first Rider game (there are 26.7k season tickets to begin with), but yes, due to the weather, less than 20k were able to make it. The Riders still get the money for all 30k tickets though, so really, the team isn't hurting from it. Just makes the attendance stats look off compared to the rest of the games.

When was it that BC wasn't competitive in the past few season? I must have missed that.
11-7 last year...tied for 2nd in a tough west, but ended 3rd in tie-breaker
1st place in 2012
Won the cup in 2011 after taking 1st

Why do Riders report attendance as bums and seats rather than tickets sold like every other pro sports team that I know of in North America? It makes their numbers seem worse than they are compared to everybody else.

Why do you continually assume every other pro team does that?

This has been explained...multiple times

Lions attendance isn't suffering. They have been drawing 25k in summer and 30k in fall for years. Thats the market.
Vancouver is a spread out, bridge restricted area and its easier for people to watch the game on TSN and drive all the way into Vancouver. Unless you live on the skytrain route or live in Vancouver, you watch the game on the tube.
The lions are always one of the top teams in terms of TV ratings.

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out how your answer has anything to do with Kasps' post.

No it hasn’t. NOT ONCE! I’ve on previous times when I have asked this question sited and posted articles that explained why entire leagues MLB, NBA and NHL have league policies of reporting TICKETS SOLD not actual people at the game that day - and the NFL sent out a directive to its teams a few years ago to do the same - but it was not a mandatory directive like the other leagues.

If that wasn’t true - boy some of their teams have miraculous attendance because for all 41 home games teams some team who sell out every game reported the EXACT SAME attendance figure. You actually think those cities and teams never have a single ticket holder ever not make it to a game? REALLY?? Do you really think every single Winnipeg Jets game - announced attendance at 15,004 for every single game - 100% of capacity that never did one ticket goes unused? Same for all the other NBA and NHL teams that have 100% attendance.

I know for certain it is tickets distributed in Hamilton, Toronto and Montreal - not bums in seats. As far as I know Regina is the ONLY team reporting attendance that way and I’ve never been given a reason why when I asked. And clearly I guess nobody knows why they report attendance differently from I think EVERY other team in North American pro sports - making their numbers look worse by comparison to every other pro team going.

As the articles I previously sited the reason that every other team reports the higher ticket sold number is because that impacts positively what rates they get to charge for in stadium sponsor opportunities. So in a sense by running with a lower and different number from what other teams are using in a sense the Riders potentially could be hurting their bottom line.

From the LA Times

National League teams announced an actual turnstile count through 1992, MLB spokesman Rich Levin said. But the National League and American League have since consolidated business operations, and Major League Baseball defines attendance as "tickets sold," not "tickets used."

The NBA and NHL announce the number of tickets distributed, adding complimentary tickets – for players’ families, league officials, sponsors and such – to the number of tickets sold.

The NFL traditionally has permitted a team to announce whatever attendance figures it chose, including no-shows. However, the league distributed a memo this month encouraging teams to limit their announcement to tickets sold.

From Forbes on this attendance question and why everybody except apparently for the Riders over the last 20 years moved to reporting attendance as tickets distributed - not used. I just wonder what the Riders reasoning is to go against the flow.

[url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/05/25/how-sports-attendance-figures-speak-lies/]http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney ... peak-lies/[/url]
If you followed the business of sports, you’ll know that about 20 years ago, the move to count tickets sold, as opposed to turnstile clicks, became what is reported in the boxscores. The reason – wholly done for accounting purposes for the clubs – showed what matters to owners most: money.

In the age of legitimate ticket resale, more emphasis on corporate sales, blocks of premium seating, etc. how many people actually come to the game is not nearly as important as whether there are tickets sold.

But, when you read the boxscore or hear that a game is sold out, think again. Remember it’s all about the money these days, and what the public sees as attendance figure and the actual number of butts in the seats are assuredly two different things. Don’t ever confuse the two.

mehh...whatever

It's been explained....but have fun

Can you direct me to where it was explained - because I'm actually very curious to hear the Riders reasoning for doing it differently than everybody else because in some ways it actually reflects badly on them and the league. Any casual observer looking at their attendance numbers would think the defending Grey Cup champions sold fewer than 20,000 tickets for those games.

As i said...you keep saying they are doing it differently...that is an opinion you are stuck on...so be it. It was explained a couple times, as was how sellouts work, and peeps chose to turn a blind eye to that, so I can only assume they will again, and so no, I will not waste my time looking it up for reference.

LOL! You won't site an explanation because there isn't one and I KNOW that.

The FACT that almost every other pro team in North America reports attendance as tickets distributed - not used - as per their league policies - isn't in doubt. I have no idea why you think it is. It isn't my 'opinion' - it is fact. The 120+ pro sports teams in the NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB report their attendance that way. CFL teams in Hamilton, Toronto and Montreal report their attendance that way. I just assumed every CFL team did too which is why it really surprised me to see Regina not doing it - so I wonder why?

Just because you incorrectly once posted that attendance in most other leagues was actually people in the stands - doesn't mean that was right or that something was 'explained'. You were wrong on that - and I've provided all the links to prove that.

But frankly I don't care that you were wrong - or that you seem incapable of simply saying 'I guess I was mistaken' - I'm just curious to know if there is there a reason Regina report their attendance that way. Is it a local statute or bylaw that forces them to use the actual attendance number. Did fans insist it be reported that way? I'm guessing if there is reason nobody reading these boards seems to know why - because nobody has tried to offer an explanation as to why they do it differently.

And yes depop they do it differently and that is not just an 'opinion'. :roll:

ok, well, that's your opinion, and that is fine. You can have your "FACTS" all you want. Good on you...stick with em...don't stick with em...your call. It has been explained, I read that explanation, and I found it enlightening. There were a couple very good posts explaining it which had some links, but it wasn't from me. I have no need to dig into threads from the past to cite the explanation...if you care so much, dig em up...or don't...again, your call. Think what you want...that's fine.

Well since I have the 'FACTS' I'll stick with them. Opinions on the other hand are different from having the facts - so opinions sometimes I stick with them, sometimes I don't.

In my opinion I find it strange - the fact - that Riders report their attendance in a different manner than practically everybody else and I don't think they should.

In my opinion - I think they and the league would be better served by having them report the attendance numbers the way other teams and other leagues report theirs. Considering that people - including potential team or league wide sponsors or even just casual fans often look at attendance numbers as a way to gauge the health of a team or a league - it seems strange to me to report the lower number. A number that would reflect negatively on the team and league for many who see those low numbers - and don't know that it is not the same as all the other attendance numbers they would be comparing it to.

I think they should report attendance like every other team - and then if separately they want to report on no-shows and a fans actually at the game number - go for it. But doing it differently the way they do just doesn't make a lot of business sense to me.

Right on, sounds like in your mind you have it all figured out. Good for you.

Me as well , never said they were bad in the past , I stated , they have treated their fans to great teams . They have gotten off to a slow start and will be in tough in the west this year . 24 k is not good enough for BC !

BC more than any other team except Toronto is getting killed by HD TV and not being able to black out its games (traffic in this area is a nightmare at the best of times), and unless you've lived here it's hard to wrap ones' head around all of the recreational alternatives here during a hot summer. That "opening" in the BCP roof is having less of an effect than the club had hoped. Lions' attendance picks up quite dramatically after Labour Day (assuming the team is competitive).

So don't confuse 24K for a 1-4 East opponent during the summer with "lack of interest." Games involving the BC Lions have been the most watched on TSN for 5 of 6 weeks, according to BBM ratings.

24,000 is good enough for BC because team can survive on attendance close to historical average. Also ticket prices are higher than other CFL teams so there is enough revenue. When BC Place first opened years ago, attendance was in 40-50,000 range but that is unsustainable in the long term. Over time, interest in novelty wears off and attendance eventually returns to normal.