Sports Market Size Question

[PCSPounder]

Is an old stadium that has been repurposed a few times and technically over 100 years old. Was previously used by MiLB AAA Portland Beavers and USL Portland Timbers and NCAA Portland State Vikings. Now just used for MLS Timbers and NWSL Thorns as it became soccer specific and kicked the other teams to new venues or out of town

Per wiki: "In 2011, the stadium was renovated to provide Portland with a premier location to watch the Timbers play in Major League Soccer as well as fit the standards required by the league. The $36 million renovation modernized the stadium, added a high-tech video board and added new seating and amenities. "

This is from 1990, and probably the most famous baseball incident in what is now Providence Park. Pause the video, look at the stands. Mind you, it was still basketball season because the Blazers were in the championships that year. But that happened a lot… and four years later, those Beavers became the Salt Lake Buzz.

Which is probably answering more Kev’s comments about how Portland attends sports, but there’s also a broader point.

Until what was then Parker Stadium was expanded in Corvallis, Oregon State would play USC in Portland instead of in Corvallis.

The Beavers arrived in 1956 after Vaughn Street Park was all but condemned- that was an all-wood beauty, to some degree. They left after 1971. When MLB expanded later in the 70s, the PCL expanded to Portland and Vancouver, so the Beavers were back. The Beavers left after the 1993 season for Salt Lake. When the city decided on a new renovation (primarily replacing seats above the concourse behind home plate with luxury suites), an ownership group went shopping for a team, nearly bought Calgary’s team, and ended up buying the Albuquerque Dukes to move here in 2001. After 2010, those Beavers went to the Tucson weigh station before ending up in El Paso.

Portland State didn’t exist until the late 40s, and the football program was NAIA until the mid-60s. They rarely ever threatened sellouts in the stadium (sadly including when Mouse Davis coached Neil Lomax to breaking passing records and putting up a crap ton of points), but ironically, when they dropped to D-2 and Pokey Allen eventually became the coach, he took PSU to the playoffs several times and there was almost no gimmick too outrageous for him to draw attention and fans, especially as he fought one year to average 10,000 fans per game (when the capacity was 27,000). When PSU went back to 1-AA / FCS, apart from the occasional road crowds Montana would bring, crowds sort of reverted to the norm. They did co-exist for a few years with the MLS Timbers, but apparently the Timbers demanded they find another space for equipment storage… and crowds were getting smaller, so PSU kind of gradually played more games in Hillsboro before moving there full time just a few years ago.

 

[Djp]

I'm confused reading this article
link
I always figured the metropolitan population (MSA) for a region was pretty much the same as market size; of course meaning that while HH won't match what the population is, we should need see too many changes in position or gaps between markets.
Then I look at this and see:

1. LA has less than million fewer than NY
2. Chicago is only 500,000 above Philly yet Boston is 600,000 less than Philly.
3. Phoenix, Seattle, Tampa larger than Detroit
4. Miami below Orlando
5. Sacramento above Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Baltimore...huh?

Can somebody explain?

In the data you link to, some of the data overlaps.

For example there is a county in California along I-80 mid way between SF and sacramento that gets both tvmarkets stations this double counted. places between NYC and philadelphia get double markets.

I'm confused reading this article
link
I always figured the metropolitan population (MSA) for a region was pretty much the same as market size; of course meaning that while HH won't match what the population is, we should need see too many changes in position or gaps between markets.
Then I look at this and see:

1. LA has less than million fewer than NY
2. Chicago is only 500,000 above Philly yet Boston is 600,000 less than Philly.
3. Phoenix, Seattle, Tampa larger than Detroit
4. Miami below Orlando
5. Sacramento above Charlotte, Pittsburgh, Baltimore...huh?

Can somebody explain?

There are different things

Metropolitan areas/Metropolitan statistical areas are defined by Office of Management and Budget defined by counties

Metropolitan statistical area - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

in the list Riverside/Ontario area is separate from LA but these are in the same Neilson media market.

TRUCK ADS® | Designated Market Map | A D M A P | 1 (800) TRUCKAD™

Clickable National Designated Market Map, also known as a media market area map.

www.truckads.com

the above link if you click on the map you can see counties in media markets. the counties in a TV market appear white in name. the black ones are in a different market. click on a black name and ypou shift to that market.
Understand there are going to be some difference because cable vs satellitte might have different tv markets assigned. You can live in rural SW Kanasas. One towns cable might give you wichita, one satelite company might give you Amarillo TV markets, another might give you Denver.


What is not included in the data above is Canadian viewerrs. Buffalo air media market covers all of metro Toronto and Hamilton but that data does not count in their data. If they counted toronto data that would be a top 10 market easily. US advertisers know this. Same with Seattle to Victoria/Vancouver/BC.

Also when looking at market size---understand western market are larger in sq miles than eastern one. Seattle stretches north to south 150 miles along I-5. Buffalo on the other hand going east-west along I-90 is blocked to the eat by Rochester even though all of Rochester would be 75 miles to the east and then 75 miles to the west would cover Hamilton and the $2M people living between hamilton and the Falls.

Time zone lines are generally drawn to avoid metro areas.

If they drew time zone lines where they should be they would split detroit, concinnati between central/east and split oklahoma city and Dallas/Ft Worth, Auston.San antonio areas.

the only split markets are along on the GA/AL line. there are some markets where a small portion of the population is inside a different time zone. with some areas they have unofficially switched like the SE corner of California inside the Yuma, AZ TV market stays on Yuma time. Libby, MYT which is part of the Spokane media market in the NW corner of montana might choose to stay on pacific time even though officially they are mountain time.

 

[Djp]

Part of the calculus has to be "Are they into soccer THAT MUCH, or is part of their Timbers support 'this is what we got'?"

The main reason we look at market sizes for pro sports expansion talk is because the more people you have, the less burden required to "support the team."

So many investors are are lining up to buy MLS franchises because MLS is a major league operation with minor league expenses. The salary cap is $5.2 million. Total. (Yeah, there's an exempt slot beyond that, but still... the 8th guy in the Trail Blazers makes $6.3 million!

MLS alone can't "tap out" a market. Portland definitely could handle one or two more teams. They could do NFL and NHL, or MLB and NHL, but probably not MLB and NFL, and not all three.

That is the big debate/ Who can support more than one team.

NBA/NHL vs MLB/MLS/NFL are generally viewed as opposite times of the year thus not in direct competition. the other issue is where do you build a stadium.

On the flip side San diego is an odd example with now only having a baseball team.

Yeah, I think that not selling your soul for a stadium that's essentially "single-use" in those sports makes sense; but also limits the Big Five possibilities to two sports playing in the same kind of venue in the same season (NBA/NHL) and thus needs the same owner controlling both, and MLS in the summer.

that was tried in the late 1960s build baseball/football and was disliked by fans.

The joint venture teams usually don't have a problem when the arena WAS old and very far behind new buildings.

Like the Dallas situation was easy to get the Mavericks and Stars to agree, because Reunion Arena was the last arena built without luxury suites. So while the Mavs were "giving up" revenue from the arena by going 50/50 with the Stars, they were gaining vast new revenue streams they didn't have before.


No team owner is gonna want to be a tenant of another team. That leads to chaos. Which is why the NHL isn't in Houston or Portland now.

you can have two different owners both use an arena the issue comes to who gets priority.

Yeah, but the multi-use was the old stadium that obviously wouldn't be acceptable for a pro team, right?

What I meant was that a city's investment in a big league sports team... Both NFL and MLB stadiums are huge footprints, making them indoors doubles the price, and scope of the project and there's just not a lot of events for which you'd use those facilities.

the issue on dome on stadium goes to what other events can you do there. political conventions, final fours, super bowl, other large conventions. those event revenue could then cover the costs of the roof

Whereas an NBA/NHL arena can be used by two major pro sports teams... and a whole lot more.

There's just tons of events that can go into an arena that size the other 200 days of the year; and the footprint is a quarter of the size so it can fit into a better location for city planning and is a whole lot cheaper.

An NBA/NHL building is easily the best blend of "cost efficiency/versatile usage" for a city to commit to.

many smaller venues can do the same thing so what is the added price. a large convention cent can do that too. it becomes a thing of the added features. universities have smaller arenas.

If you build the baseball and football stadiums next to each other it does add efficiencies with shopping districts and parking

 

[Kirk Van Houten]

This could be usuful in this thread

 

[KevFu]

This is from 1990, and probably the most famous baseball incident in what is now Providence Park. Pause the video, look at the stands. Mind you, it was still basketball season because the Blazers were in the championships that year. But that happened a lot… and four years later, those Beavers became the Salt Lake Buzz.

Which is probably answering more Kev’s comments about how Portland attends sports, but there’s also a broader point.

I firmly believe that talking about a market like "the market doesn't care about sports" or "the market is this that or the other" is foolhardy. Everything is circumstance.

Minor league success usually DOES show you what a market could be like for big league sports, but a LACK of minor league success doesn't show you what the market would be like for major league sports at all.

Affiliated Minor League baseball has had historically bad attendance in Portland because of how affiliated Minor League baseball has treated Portland (and treats almost all the cities in that class of markets. They don't CARE if a city is one of the next 10-20 biggest cities that will probably be on expansion lists. The biggest cities without MLB can (and do) lose their teams at any time).

The Portland Mavericks proved that baseball can be successful in Portland. They were the last independent team in the minor leagues. They did great. (There's an outstanding documentary on it: The Battered Bastards of Baseball.) Once the Mavericks were a success and playing in front of good crowds who were having a ton of fun... affiliated baseball exercised their right to put a higher league team there and shoved the Mavericks owners out. And the new owners basically ruined what the Mavericks built.

Why are fans going to buy in when they've lost their team FOUR TIMES?

 

[aqib]

I firmly believe that talking about a market like "the market doesn't care about sports" or "the market is this that or the other" is foolhardy. Everything is circumstance.

Minor league success usually DOES show you what a market could be like for big league sports, but a LACK of minor league success doesn't show you what the market would be like for major league sports at all.

I don't necessarily agree. The Lake Erie/Cleveland Monsters draw pretty well but that's because tickets are cheap and they do a lot of promos. It's basically the equivalent of going to a movie as far as expense goes. However there isn't enough money in the market to support an NHL team on top of the other 3 teams. People who are buying $10 tickets on "dollar dog night" won't be buying $50 NHL tickets.

 

[KevFu]

I don't necessarily agree. The Lake Erie/Cleveland Monsters draw pretty well but that's because tickets are cheap and they do a lot of promos. It's basically the equivalent of going to a movie as far as expense goes. However there isn't enough money in the market to support an NHL team on top of the other 3 teams. People who are buying $10 tickets on "dollar dog night" won't be buying $50 NHL tickets.

I mean, I agree on your assessment of "Cleveland can't handle another team**" but I don't think that's the same thing.

I was referring to saying things like "they don't care about sports in ______ because the minor league team draws only X number of fans." Saturation of sports teams to dollars is a very real principle. X number of people can only provide so many dollars to franchises via tickets and merch.

Like, let's say that INSTEAD of building Rocket Mortgage Fieldhouse (opened in 1994), the Cavs moved to Columbus; and THEN Cleveland built the new arena for a late 90s NHL expansion team. That team is probably fine: Somewhere between the actual Jackets now and Pittsburgh (which has MLB, NFL and NHL but no NBA or MLS).

The reason they can't handle another team (** BTW, I'm excluding MLS from this because MLS expenses are tiny compared to NBA/NHL) isn't because of "the Market" itself, but the saturation of teams already in the market that prevent you from going there.

 

[aqib]

I mean, I agree on your assessment of "Cleveland can't handle another team**" but I don't think that's the same thing.

I was referring to saying things like "they don't care about sports in ______ because the minor league team draws only X number of fans." Saturation of sports teams to dollars is a very real principle. X number of people can only provide so many dollars to franchises via tickets and merch.

Like, let's say that INSTEAD of building Rocket Mortgage Fieldhouse (opened in 1994), the Cavs moved to Columbus; and THEN Cleveland built the new arena for a late 90s NHL expansion team. That team is probably fine: Somewhere between the actual Jackets now and Pittsburgh (which has MLB, NFL and NHL but no NBA or MLS).

The reason they can't handle another team (** BTW, I'm excluding MLS from this because MLS expenses are tiny compared to NBA/NHL) isn't because of "the Market" itself, but the saturation of teams already in the market that prevent you from going there.

What I am saying is that someone might go to a minor league game because it's $10-20 and a $1 for a hot dog because it's something to do that's cheap but they aren't actually hockey fans and so they won't pay $50-60 for an NHL ticket.
On the flip side there are people who won't bother with a minor team that would go to NHL games. Sticking with the Cleveland example there were many of us who drove to Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Columbus for NHL games but didn't care about the Monsters.

 

[BKIslandersFan]

It’s Soccer City USA. Full stop.

There’s a problem right now… ownership. Only reason the sellout streak didn’t resume post-pandemic.

Thing is, Portland is anything but tapped out. All the issues meant a one-year downturn in property values, but those are already rebounding. If anything, it’s getting richer around here, and that presents its own problems.

HOWEVER, Portland doesn’t sell its soul for sports venues. We’re not big on handouts. That will always temper the possibilities here.

They really did a nice job converting old minor league ballpark in to functioning MLS stadium.

They need to keep it around. Make it sort of Fenway of MLS.

 

[Salsero1]

What I am saying is that someone might go to a minor league game because it's $10-20 and a $1 for a hot dog because it's something to do that's cheap but they aren't actually hockey fans and so they won't pay $50-60 for an NHL ticket.
On the flip side there are people who won't bother with a minor team that would go to NHL games. Sticking with the Cleveland example there were many of us who drove to Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Columbus for NHL games but didn't care about the Monsters.

That's a weird barometer. I'm sure there are AHL STM's or regular attendees who wouldn't make the jump if a NHL team moved into their market. Are they not hockey fans?

I gave up my Canes ticket package that I've had for 7 years for a variety of reasons, but still follow the team closely, am I not a hockey fan (I'm in NC and not a cold wasteland, so I can probably predict your answer)?

 

[PCSPounder]

They really did a nice job converting old minor league ballpark in to functioning MLS stadium.

They need to keep it around. Make it sort of Fenway of MLS.

One of the points I would have made if I wanted to turn that already long post into a novel is that the stadium was built as half an athletic stadium for which a baseball configuration was later wedged in. Anyone who’s been in 223 (the away section) at Timbers games ought to imagine how they would have liked to watch baseball from there when the infield was at the opposite end.

The stadium turns 100 in 2.5 years.

 

[aqib]

That's a weird barometer. I'm sure there are AHL STM's or regular attendees who wouldn't make the jump if a NHL team moved into their market. Are they not hockey fans?

I gave up my Canes ticket package that I've had for 7 years for a variety of reasons, but still follow the team closely, am I not a hockey fan (I'm in NC and not a cold wasteland, so I can probably predict your answer)?

I am not talking about STMs. Just saying that people (particularly families) go to minor league sporting events because its a relatively cheap night out even if they aren't a fan of the sport itself. So that won't always translate to attendance if a major league team comes to town because its no longer a cheap night out. Its nothing to take personally.

 

[KevFu]

What I am saying is that someone might go to a minor league game because it's $10-20 and a $1 for a hot dog because it's something to do that's cheap but they aren't actually hockey fans and so they won't pay $50-60 for an NHL ticket.
On the flip side there are people who won't bother with a minor team that would go to NHL games. Sticking with the Cleveland example there were many of us who drove to Detroit, Pittsburgh, and Columbus for NHL games but didn't care about the Monsters.

I am not talking about STMs. Just saying that people (particularly families) go to minor league sporting events because its a relatively cheap night out even if they aren't a fan of the sport itself. So that won't always translate to attendance if a major league team comes to town because its no longer a cheap night out. Its nothing to take personally.

I think we're in agreement, even though it sounds like arguing, hahaha.

Yeah, there are people who go to minor league events because the fun to cost ratio is good for their budgets and major league prices would ruin the cost-efficiency.

But there's also just not a lot of die-hard fans of minor league sports compared to die-hards of major league sports, and a lot of people in a market will get into the first major team in a market because "this is what we have." We have tons of examples of that.

Good minor league numbers usually means the market could/would support a major league team, but it's obviously dependent on market saturation. (For example, Buffalo baseball probably has A LOT more people in the "this is the cheaper option for Buffalo sports" and asking the fans of Buffalo to support NFL, NHL and MLB would be a huge financial stretch and not be a good choice for MLB).

But bad minor league numbers do NOT automatically mean the market wouldn't support a major league team. Our society is conditioned to not care as much about the minors; and there's really not many examples of a places that got major teams based on success of minor teams, and the market was like "Nah, no thanks, we were happy with minor league sports." The closest I could think of would be baseball in Florida; where the customers got spring training for prices even cheaper than minor league baseball.

But even then, Tampa ranking among the MLB's lowest in attendance with a franchise average over 17,000 is still DOUBLE the minor league baseball attendance leader (7,990).

 

[aqib]

But bad minor league numbers do NOT automatically mean the market wouldn't support a major league team. Our society is conditioned to not care as much about the minors; and there's really not many examples of a places that got major teams based on success of minor teams, and the market was like "Nah, no thanks, we were happy with minor league sports." The closest I could think of would be baseball in Florida; where the customers got spring training for prices even cheaper than minor league baseball.

But even then, Tampa ranking among the MLB's lowest in attendance with a franchise average over 17,000 is still DOUBLE the minor league baseball attendance leader (7,990).

Honestly I think everyone underestimated the effect of Spring Training in Florida. In addition to the transplants having their pre-existing loyalties, many people became fans of teams that spring train in their area. That's before you factor in spring training being during the best time to be sitting outside for hours.

I do wonder how the Giants would have fared in Tampa since there would have been some NY Giants fans still alive at the time down there.

 

[KevFu]

Honestly I think everyone underestimated the effect of Spring Training in Florida. In addition to the transplants having their pre-existing loyalties, many people became fans of teams that spring train in their area. That's before you factor in spring training being during the best time to be sitting outside for hours.

I do wonder how the Giants would have fared in Tampa since there would have been some NY Giants fans still alive at the time down there.

See, we totally agree. A huge part of our judgement of expansion teams is that their attendance is lower then established teams; but it takes generations for that market to go from being split loyalties to predominantly local.

And the advent of technology has drastically changed the dynamic. People over 50 are waaaaaay more likely to change teams if they move, because if you watch the local team on TV, you get a new team now. And the more you watch, the more you pull for them.

People under 50 had out-of-market packages available. If you were one of the people who were GOING TO WATCH a sport, now your choice is new team for cable price, or old team for $150 more.

And people under 35 just expect to be able to watch whatever they want online, so switching teams isn't in their mindset. You need time for the new generations to root for the local team and the fans who never adopted the expansion team to fade away.

The DBacks went with ugly uniforms that only a 14-year old would like. On purpose, to win the 14-year olds fandom, since their DADS were already rooting for someone else.