Attendance since 2007

Does selling an extra 2,000 of the $12 season ticket packages really mean that much? We do a decent enough job with club seats, suites, and sponsorships. One sponsorship more than makes up for 2,000 unsold cheap season tickets.

Plus it seems to me that the Hornets don't "fluff" their attendance numbers as much as most NBA teams (Raptors, Hawks, Bucks, Bobcats, Nets) - all of these arenas seem to be emptier than ours on the reg.

quote:

---

they were in the bottom half of the league.

---

They are a small market. They will likely always be in the bottom half of the league when they aren't contenders. That's why they have to be set up like the Saints where government inducements help make up for the small market. The Saints are a bottom 3 market but middle of the pack or higher for revenue. Hornets should be the same way after all the new lease/CBA/New Cable Deal/I'm In campaign/etc.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Hornets had an extra $20 - $30 million per year in revenue vs. 2010 once all the new stuff kicks in. And on top of all that new revenue there is the removal of the expense of Shinn's debt which cost the team about $10 million per year. The business side of things looks as rosy as ever from what I can see.

quote:

---

Okay thanks.

---

You're welcome

yeah, now go back and sort it by % filled, and you will see a different story

The Arena is also smaller than most in the NBA, the number is better every year if you look at %.

It's never going to be up to par but keep getting in the playoffs and contending and I could care less I'm happy!

If the Hornets sold out every game their attendance would still be significantly lower than teams like Dallas that hold almost 20,000.

quote:

---

yeah, now go back and sort it by % filled, and you will see a different story

---

This is a very weak argument. You don't sell percentages. You sell tickets. Until you reach capacity, limited supply is not going to increase revenue.

The only thing attendance shows is support for the team. Y'all are always making these financial/business assumptions about the Hornets and NBA teams and they're simply inaccurate. NBA franchises (and overwhelmingly most sports franchises in general) are not profitable enterprises, they're just not. I have seen multiple pro sports franchises (in all 4 major sports) financials through work, so I'm not speaking out of my arse here. I would imagine most people here would expect the Spurs (and the Rockets) are more profitable or simply better businesses because they operate in larger markets and have been relatively successful, particularly with the Spurs. I can personally attest to you that the Spurs financial condition is as bad, if not worse, than the Hornets, and that's for a team operating in a much larger market that has won multiple championships in the last decade. I say this all the time and it bears repeating all the time: people don't own sports franchises because they make money off of their operations, they own them because they're rich and they want to own a sports team (see: Dodgers sale and new owner comments). The only financial gain on a sports franchise is its exit value, because there's always another millionaire willing to pay up to own an expensive toy.