Stadiums and Arenas of Canada part 2

[king10]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ IGF is not too big, it's just that its opening coincided with a period of prolonged bungling, mismanagement and lousy on-field performance. If the Bombers were even so much as a .500 team since their last GC appearance in 2011, IGF probably would have been sold out more often than not over the past few seasons.

I'd say that 33,500 permanent seats for IGF was spot-on.

I'll believe it when I see it. Edmonton and Calgary have had great teams and it hasn't correlated to attendance.

I'd love to be proven wrong. But until then I feel going from 29K to 33.5K was a mistake.

The whole supply and demand thing means the stadium should be sold out even when the team is doing garbage. If the capacity was "right sized" you wouldn't see 7 to 10 thousand empty seats even when the team was garbage.

IMO they should have gone with a 30K stadium. One with less endzone seating as generally those are the least desired spots.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by king10

I'll believe it when I see it. Edmonton and Calgary have had great teams and it hasn't correlated to attendance.

I'd love to be proven wrong. But until then I feel going from 29K to 33.5K was a mistake.

The whole supply and demand thing means the stadium should be sold out even when the team is doing garbage. If the capacity was "right sized" you wouldn't see 7 to 10 thousand empty seats even when the team was garbage.

IMO they should have gone with a 30K stadium. One with less endzone seating as generally those are the least desired spots.

This isn't Calgary or Edmonton which are filling up with non-football loving easterners. People here pay close attention and team performance definitely correlates with attendance in Winnipeg. A glance at the team's record and attendance charts will tell you that.

But to your point, 30,000 seats wouldn't materially change things with respect to supply and demand. You'd probably have to knock it down to about 25,000 seats to create a situation where demand consistently outstrips supply. But then you'd end up with a THF style venue and who the hell wants that?

[HomeInMyShoes]

^I can name a couple of municipalities that might want that.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

^I can name a couple of municipalities that might want that.

Fair enough, I stand corrected. Canadian cities without stadiums would probably like to have THF. But other than that...

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by esquire

Fair enough, I stand corrected. Canadian cities without stadiums would probably like to have THF. But other than that...

In fact, if something like THF would have been proposed here, no one would have supported it. It would be seen as grossly under-capacity and we'll below expectations. Also... We have more season ticket holders than THF has seats.

The problem with expansion after the fact is that it will have to be endzone, which never sells as well as sideline.

And as I said before, it's a different market here compared to other places. A feeling of "exclusivity" by deliberately building on the smaller side does not create more excitement here, it turns people off. The Riders brand is based on being a team owned by the people of the province for the people of the province.

If capacity had to be 33k, I would have been happier if instead of having the 2nd tier in the North endzone, these seats were on the sidelines.

[king10]

Originally Posted by esquire

This isn't Calgary or Edmonton which are filling up with non-football loving easterners. People here pay close attention and team performance definitely correlates with attendance in Winnipeg. A glance at the team's record and attendance charts will tell you that.

But to your point, 30,000 seats wouldn't materially change things with respect to supply and demand. You'd probably have to knock it down to about 25,000 seats to create a situation where demand consistently outstrips supply. But then you'd end up with a THF style venue and who the hell wants that?

That's fair. I hope to be proven wrong in the future.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by king10

That's fair. I hope to be proven wrong in the future.

I think once the team stabilizes, the fans will follow. The big risk to the Bombers is that the increased sports competition in town means it will be harder to recapture the fans that have turned away to other live events, mainly hockey now that there are two teams. Winnipeg is what, a little under 1/3 the Vancouver CMA size and except for Van having a MLS team, Winnipeg supports the same number of sports teams.

That said, IGF was designed and planned when the Bombers were by far the biggest sports attraction in town. I'll concede that if it was on the drawing board today, they probably would have scaled it down a little bit... maybe not to THF/TD Place capacity, but likely down to about 29 or 30 thousand. I could see one end zone not having seats, for example.

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Considering the CFL is actually one of the top 10 average attendance leagues in the world... yeah, it's not a bad thing to be. Or were you only looking at the USA for comparison? The most sports-crazed market in the world; where cities can be black-mailed into routinely putting in hundreds of millions of dollars into stadiums every 20-25 years, and where the media/corporate American actually pumps the leagues up like none-other? Basically the issue that holds back any Canadian-only league. There's no way it can compete head to head with a league from by far the richest county in the world, that has 10x the population of Canada, and is probably twice as sports-minded overall.

What the hell are you going on about? I never said anything about the NFL. I made a comment about how the CFL's attendance is down.

33k Isn't too big for the riders at all in fact it's probably just about perfect. If they can sell out 37,000 seats, keep your demand high by only offering 33,000 which drives ticket prices and keeps your season ticket holders feeling lucky. In theory you make the same/more gate revenue with a smaller venue and you've created a situation where ticket scarcity actually protects your business model. Redblacks starting to build this culture at TD place...not quite there but starting

"In this business Your building has to fit your market, As soon as your supply outstrips your demand it's a slippery slope" -Mark Chipman 2009

Which bring me to my next point.

Would you rather have the Senators situation or the Jets? Similar market, Very different business model. Ottawa has 18,500 fans showing up to a 20,000 building. What ground do they have to stand on to raise ticket prices? Why would season ticket holders feel the urgency to hold on tightly to them? They could easily grab a walk up any given night? Sens are shedding seats from the CTT. And if they build another rink (IF) I bet It's 18,000 seats or less

Jet's have 15,294 fans Showing up to a 15,294 seat building game in and game out. 13,000 season ticket holders and 8000 ready to pounce if one frees up. 98% renewal rate. Guaranteed gate revenue and the ability to raise prices 2-3% at a time every year.

If you need more proof than look at the packers situation, lambeau seats 80K but the packers have a season ticket wait list of 115,000 people. That's hundreds of millions being left out on the table. why don't they build another 30-40k more seats at lambeau? It's definitely doable? Why don't they build a new 120k stadium? Because they can pull the same revenue from 80K, keep raising ticket prices and those 115k people frothing at the mouth will keep season ticket holders thinking twice about giving them up.

To me the riders are the packers of the CFL and they are very aware of that...and that my friend is why they don't build a 40K stadium it's just bad for business

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

What the hell are you going on about? I never said anything about the NFL. I made a comment about how the CFL's attendance is down.

33k Isn't too big for the riders at all in fact it's probably just about perfect. If they can sell out 37,000 seats, keep your demand high by only offering 33,000 which drives ticket prices and keeps your season ticket holders feeling lucky. In theory you make the same/more gate revenue with a smaller venue and you've created a situation where ticket scarcity actually protects your business model. Redblacks starting to build this culture at TD place...not quite there but starting

"In this business Your building has to fit your market, As soon as your supply outstrips your demand it's a slippery slope" -Mark Chipman 2009

Which bring me to my next point.

Would you rather have the Senators situation or the Jets? Similar market, Very different business model. Ottawa has 18,500 fans showing up to a 20,000 building. What ground do they have to stand on to raise ticket prices? Why would season ticket holders feel the urgency to hold on tightly to them? They could easily grab a walk up any given night? Sens are shedding seats from the CTT. And if they build another rink (IF) I bet It's 18,000 seats or less

Jet's have 15,294 fans Showing up to a 15,294 seat building game in and game out. 13,000 season ticket holders and 8000 ready to pounce if one frees up. 98% renewal rate. Guaranteed gate revenue and the ability to raise prices 2-3% at a time every year.

If you need more proof than look at the packers situation, lambeau seats 80K but the packers have a season ticket wait list of 115,000 people. That's hundreds of millions being left out on the table. why don't they build another 30-40k more seats at lambeau? It's definitely doable? Why don't they build a new 120k stadium? Because they can pull the same revenue from 80K, keep raising ticket prices and those 115k people frothing at the mouth will keep season ticket holders thinking twice about giving them up.

To me the riders are the packers of the CFL and they are very aware of that...and that my friend is why they don't build a 40K stadium it's just bad for business

I was talking about American leagues in general (which are amongst the top in the world). Even with the decrease in average (which I think was mentioned the other day that it's actually quite stable year over year). The year previous it came down because the Riders went from an average of 37k to having capacity capped at 33.5k or so again.

Supporting ticket prices isn't a good idea in Saskatchewan; it does not make us feel "lucky" to have our tickets go up just to keep up with the Jones's, as happened this year... The main reason we heard was "to keep up with the rest of the league". There wasn't hard blowback, but this reason wasn't one that goes over well here.

The other issue... we support the Riders in many more ways than ticket revenue. In terms of dependence on ticket sales, the Riders are at the bottom of the pack. They bring in over 40 million in revenue, 15 mill of which is tickets (working from memory and approximations). The fact that ticket revenue is higher than some teams bring in overall (it generally takes 15 mill to run a team and Toronto - and Hamilton until recently - were losing money on that basis), isn't a good look for raising prices.

As I said previously, the Riders brand is based on the "owners" to get too much into the "rich man's" ticket game... luxury event... exclusivity... etc... would do far more damage to the brand than help it.

This is where the idea of the value of the team comes in... It's an interesting topic to talk about for comparison's sake, but the thought that some private owner could buy the team for that price and have the same success is somewhat laughable. The support is predicated on the fact that all money spent on the Riders either supports the team or is filtered back into the province (the Huskies, Rams, Hilltops, Thunder, and High School programs all over).

Normal laws of economy/business (supply-demand, scarcity of product driving demand/prices, etc) don't apply to the Riders as they do to other teams. And I often find that people not from here have trouble adjusting their thinking to the different dynamic present.


Yes, they will do well with 33k, but just for the appeal to the masses/future growth, I wish that they were at 35k instead. Some lower end tickets available would help far more in terms of growth and further market saturation than fewer tickets with higher prices would help the profit margin (which is irrelevant in the sense that the Riders are "not for profit"). I think some polls had the Riders at 65% interest in Saskatchewan... that's outsized for even hockey markets.

Regarding the Jets comparison... the NHL is known to be an upper-crust type establishment now... not all that many can afford season tickets, and this has been the case for a very long time... not so for the CFL or Riders. The issue with trying to turn the CFL into this type of league is that the players don't make millions like in the NHL.


But anyway... we are quibbling over a 6% difference in seating capacity. It's great that this is even a possibility considering where the current Mosaic Stadium is (quality-wise).

[Oilkountry]

lol The riders aren't the exception of all sports in North America when it comes to supply and demand, sorry to burst your bubble. You're talking like the riders have no borders...a limitless fan base. As Great as the riders fans are, The passion for that team comes nowhere close to some NFL/European Soccer teams. And if they aren't exempt from Creating Demand Nobody is. Like I said before, They built it big enough to expand the place permanently if need be but I'm sure the business experts in Regina have figured out that 33K will meet the needs of both the demand for tickets and the riders business plan. As for pricing people out of the building. Sometime sooner than later the CFL is going to have to establish itself as a credible league. which means bringing in more revenue.

New Stadiums mean a more premium experience I don't understand why this Shouldn't reflect on ticket prices? I invision a 10M salary cap for a CFL team one day. Where QB's will make a million a year and take a Starting job in the CFL over a 3rd or 2nd string Job in the NFL for 2-3 Million. Sometime soon the League is going to take that step from a bush league to a credible league. More money for a TV contract. More premium seats. More sponsors. They were on the right track. Anyway back to my point I would rather pay $40 in a new stadium and watch a better product on the field than $20 in molson watching a terrible team play terrible football. Eventually the CFL is gonna have to take that step. Higher ticket prices/Higher salaries. It will justify itself in the end. We need to be able to attract better talent you're not gonna do that at 80K Canadian per year. The CFL needs to stop being looked at as a stepping stone rather than a destination. You wave 160K-200k in someone's face I guarantee they start looking at the CFL as a full time job. Where 60k-80k just feels like a job and the NFL remains the dream. The current CBA is holding the CFL back. And so are the "family friendly ticket prices" But how do the Als or the Stamps or the Esks, ask for high ticket prices in those venues? How does the CFL ask high ticket prices or high television deals when they are dressing such inferior talent. Why do sponsors wanna pay the big bucks if Nobody's watching? So if high ticket prices are a start for growth in the league I'm all for it. especially in the caddy of CFL stadiums being built in regina

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

lol The riders aren't the exception of all sports in North America when it comes to supply and demand, sorry to burst your bubble. You're talking like the riders have no borders...a limitless fan base. As Great as the riders fans are, The passion for that team comes nowhere close to some NFL/European Soccer teams. And if they aren't exempt from Creating Demand Nobody is. Like I said before, They built it big enough to expand the place permanently if need be but I'm sure the business experts in Regina have figured out that 33K will meet the needs of both the demand for tickets and the riders business plan. As for pricing people out of the building. Sometime sooner than later the CFL is going to have to establish itself as a credible league. which means bringing in more revenue.

New Stadiums mean a more premium experience I don't understand why this Shouldn't reflect on ticket prices? I invision a 10M salary cap for a CFL team one day. Where QB's will make a million a year and take a Starting job in the CFL over a 3rd or 2nd string Job in the NFL for 2-3 Million. Sometime soon the League is going to take that step from a bush league to a credible league. More money for a TV contract. More premium seats. More sponsors. They were on the right track. Anyway back to my point I would rather pay $40 in a new stadium and watch a better product on the field than $20 in molson watching a terrible team play terrible football. Eventually the CFL is gonna have to take that step. Higher ticket prices/Higher salaries. It will justify itself in the end. We need to be able to attract better talent you're not gonna do that at 80K Canadian per year. The CFL needs to stop being looked at as a stepping stone rather than a destination. You wave 160K-200k in someone's face I guarantee they start looking at the CFL as a full time job. Where 60k-80k just feels like a job and the NFL remains the dream. The current CBA is holding the CFL back. And so are the "family friendly ticket prices" But how do the Als or the Stamps or the Esks, ask for high ticket prices in those venues? How does the CFL ask high ticket prices or high television deals when they are dressing such inferior talent. Why do sponsors wanna pay the big bucks if Nobody's watching? So if high ticket prices are a start for growth in the league I'm all for it. especially in the caddy of CFL stadiums being built in regina

God this turned waaaaaay too long... for my full answer, unhide it. I'm passionate about this topic because I don't want to see the CFL follow the path of its last "Golden Age" (i.e. the near constant death situation of the 80s-90s), and I think abandoning the "everyday" fan in favour of an exclusive feel could take it there.

I'm not saying expand indefinitely, 33k is near the cusp of where they should be, I agree, but it isn't a "build for the future"; it isn't a strategy of ascendancy at all. Future growth, if they expand, will now have to be endzone, which never sells as well as sideline (which are coincidentally, much easier to sell at "luxury" prices).

Yes, new stadiums are a premium experience, but the Riders as an organization are only putting in $25 million of the $278 million price, and it's not an "owner" funding it either, but the fans previous support that is held over. The rest is covered by the fans directly (ticket fees to be remitted to the city to cover a $100 million loan from the province), $80 million comes from a provincial grant, and the remainder is covered by the city through taxation. To turn it into a premium experience only available to the rich isn't a good idea considering all of us collectively heavily funded the stadium.

And I sincerely think that they risk current fans (and the next generation) if they increase tickets too much; it will indeed turn fans off. We aren't a rich province; we don't have a metro of 1 million plus, or a city of such size relatively nearby (Milwaukee with Green Bay). If you look around on gameday, it's a VERY young crowd, check out the difference in attendance when cold/crappy weather rolls in; people don't generally bring younger kids to those games and the attendance bears that out.

Other leagues are also already the rich "can only watch on TV" leagues. The CFL will never be this kind of league because Canada just doesn't have that kind of monetary/population/corporate base.

They are already finding that the Grey Cup ticket prices have reached the edge of that supply-demand tipping point, and they aren't even outrageous yet (in comparison to other leagues). How high do you think regular season tickets can go? That $40 number? That's already where the current cheapest adult ticket for the Riders is; next year they are rising again. The CFL will never be on par (or even close) to NFL salaries. The NHL gets feverish support from corporate Canada, the media, and its markets, and it is still the poor kid compared to the 3 major US leagues. Considering the largest of those is a sport that's very close to the CFL, the gap in pay and "dream" status will never be closed. The massive game-changer media deal for the NHL was in the order of $500 million a year... the NFL's deals? Upwards of $7 billion a year in total. Ticket sales/prices are irrelevant. The really rich leagues don't support player salaries on ticket prices; it's almost completely disconnected from them in fact. It's the sponsorship and media revenue that makes the difference or rich billionaire owners who treat sports teams as their adult toys (often the case in Europe).

And yes... I do think the Riders are somewhat unique in how connected they are to the community. Green Bay would be, as you said, a somewhat comparable example (though Edmonton and Winnipeg definitely have similarities of course, too), but with Green Bay, there is a rather large city nearby and a Statewide population of nearly 6 million. There is a much larger base, with a larger section of the population that can afford luxury prices (which have been accepted as a normal growth over decades). It's also a part of the very different USA sportsworld where corporate and media support is expected and hyped to frenzied levels.


Come to think of it... BC is actually kind of an interesting comparison to the cut supply to try and increase demand/prices strategy. They did that this year. Cutting off the whole upper area of sideline seats and ticket prices are fairly high in the lower bowl. They thought it would help rejuvinate the market and create a more exciting atmosphere. A lot of those people did not move down into the lower bowl, they threw up their hands and said screw it. This hasn't created an increased idea of exclusivity and luxury, or a heightened interest on TV either. Yes, there are other moving parts, BC isn't doing as well as they have in the past, Braley might be on his last legs as a CFL owner, etc... but this example is showing that it hasn't helped the situation at all, and in fact might have contributed to the downward slide of the Lions in their market (we also get some of this impression from BC forumers who don't go to as many games as they used to). Average attendance is down nearly 7k in this market with only 2 games left to turn things around, by the way.

It's a dangerous game to play in a decently healthy or very healthy market. That's what I'm mostly trying to say here. We won't agree, and that's fine. We just have different ideas of what growing the future means. The CFL's growth has been as its best over the last few years when they have made an effort to connect with everyday fans (when the Grey Cup was an event the average person could attend, etc). As it has become more exclusive, demand has gone down, and so have viewership figures and general interest. Again, yes, there are other moving parts of course... but it's starting to feel like when a company starts abandoning the strategies that brought them growth and strength in the first place (the CFL's last golden age was followed by a near disasterous fall from grace).

[FrankieFlowerpot]

the old girl was rocking last night

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

New Stadiums mean a more premium experience I don't understand why this Shouldn't reflect on ticket prices? I invision a 10M salary cap for a CFL team one day. Where QB's will make a million a year and take a Starting job in the CFL over a 3rd or 2nd string Job in the NFL for 2-3 Million. Sometime soon the League is going to take that step from a bush league to a credible league.

The CFL actually did pay enough to convince some American players to go to Canada instead of the NFL... that was right up until the mid 90s when the CFL got serious about a salary cap and NFL salaries really began rising to the next level. One such example (of many) is Billy Joe Tolliver, who opted to be the starting QB for the Shreveport Pirates back in 1995 for about the same amount of money that he made as a backup for the Atlanta Falcons (about $325K).

These days, the scenario for someone like Tolliver would be a $200K payday in the CFL, while Sean Renfree has a cap hit of $596K backing up in Atlanta. So it's not even close, you'd basically make way more in the NFL in every circumstance EXCEPT if you are an established CFL star faced with the option of being on a NFL practice roster... then the CFL is more lucrative. But there probably aren't more than a dozen players in that boat.

The point is though, did people treat the CFL as a more credible league when salaries were more closely aligned with the NFL? I don't think so... it had more or less the same image then that it does now. You could literally quintuple the CFL salary cap and people would still look at it the same way they do now, as a bit of a poor cousin to the NFL.

(That said, I do think salaries should go up as a matter of fairness... when you have teams taking in tens of millions in revenue but paying out less than $5 million in salaries including what I'd consider to be less than a living wage for rookies and PR players, I think an increase is in order...but not for the purpose of trying to change the CFL's image.)

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by Nathan

Come to think of it... BC is actually kind of an interesting comparison to the cut supply to try and increase demand/prices strategy. They did that this year. Cutting off the whole upper area of sideline seats and ticket prices are fairly high in the lower bowl. They thought it would help rejuvinate the market and create a more exciting atmosphere. A lot of those people did not move down into the lower bowl, they threw up their hands and said screw it. This hasn't created an increased idea of exclusivity and luxury, or a heightened interest on TV either. Yes, there are other moving parts, BC isn't doing as well as they have in the past, Braley might be on his last legs as a CFL owner, etc... but this example is showing that it hasn't helped the situation at all, and in fact might have contributed to the downward slide of the Lions in their market (we also get some of this impression from BC forumers who don't go to as many games as they used to). Average attendance is down nearly 7k in this market with only 2 games left to turn things around, by the way.

It's a dangerous game to play in a decently healthy or very healthy market. That's what I'm mostly trying to say here. We won't agree, and that's fine. We just have different ideas of what growing the future means. The CFL's growth has been as its best over the last few years when they have made an effort to connect with everyday fans (when the Grey Cup was an event the average person could attend, etc). As it has become more exclusive, demand has gone down, and so have viewership figures and general interest. Again, yes, there are other moving parts of course... but it's starting to feel like when a company starts abandoning the strategies that brought them growth and strength in the first place (the CFL's last golden age was followed by a near disasterous fall from grace).

[/spoiler]

The lions weren't bringing in enough fans this season to fill the lower bowl. the closed off the upper section to save a stadium staff by only running 1 concourse and not having to convert from whitecaps to Lions bowl configuration. Not so much to create scarcity.

You're sort of contradicting yourself. You're saying that the league's growth doesn't depend on seat sales. However you're also saying the riders are holding themselves back by not offering more seats?

My question to you is this....If the riders can save on building costs and have 33K quality premium seats available and make the same gat revenue as a 35-36k Venue why would they build the bigger one? What do they stand to gain?

you're absolutely right we don't see eye to eye on the issue, Nothing wrong with that. The CFL in my eyes is standing still while every other league is sprinting. The league needs to be more aggressive on growing the game. You have 2 given markets in Canada to expand too and a possible 4th Ontario team?. Get on it Then you take your established 12 team CFL and you expand south. 16-18 Teams at 10M cap per year. Follow the MLS route with US expansion. Offer more games..instead of the by week maybe each team has to play twice in a week. You will see the credibility of this league grow immensely.

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by esquire

The CFL actually did pay enough to convince some American players to go to Canada instead of the NFL... that was right up until the mid 90s when the CFL got serious about a salary cap and NFL salaries really began rising to the next level. One such example (of many) is Billy Joe Tolliver, who opted to be the starting QB for the Shreveport Pirates back in 1995 for about the same amount of money that he made as a backup for the Atlanta Falcons (about $325K).

These days, the scenario for someone like Tolliver would be a $200K payday in the CFL, while Sean Renfree has a cap hit of $596K backing up in Atlanta. So it's not even close, you'd basically make way more in the NFL in every circumstance EXCEPT if you are an established CFL star faced with the option of being on a NFL practice roster... then the CFL is more lucrative. But there probably aren't more than a dozen players in that boat.

The point is though, did people treat the CFL as a more credible league when salaries were more closely aligned with the NFL? I don't think so... it had more or less the same image then that it does now. You could literally quintuple the CFL salary cap and people would still look at it the same way they do now, as a bit of a poor cousin to the NFL.

(That said, I do think salaries should go up as a matter of fairness... when you have teams taking in tens of millions in revenue but paying out less than $5 million in salaries including what I'd consider to be less than a living wage for rookies and PR players, I think an increase is in order...but not for the purpose of trying to change the CFL's image.)

The MLS is looked at as a poor cousin to any European soccer league. That doesn't mean It's not a growing brand? I'm not saying the CFL should try and bump heads with the NFL or try and compare itself to it. But I do believe it needs to do alot more to establish itself as a place to play pro football. It just needs to attract a higher level of talent by offering more money. A better brand of football will bring in more fans. I think if a starting QB in this league was making 700K-1M a season you would see more elite talent in Canada. Knowing full well they Could make more in the NFL might not be enough. I can only imagine playing a starting role would be Convincing. But it all starts with More new stadiums and Higher salaries. You think the guy making 60K per year feels like a pro athlete? Ha! I make 72K a year and sometimes I feel underpaid.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

A better brand of football will bring in more fans. I think if a starting QB in this league was making 700K-1M a season you would see more elite talent in Canada. Knowing full well they Could make more in the NFL might not be enough. I can only imagine playing a starting role would be Convincing. But it all starts with More new stadiums and Higher salaries. You think the guy making 60K per year feels like a pro athlete? Ha! I make 72K a year and sometimes I feel underpaid.

The problem is that the CFL could never pay enough to prevent players from going the NFL route so there is no point in really factoring that into cap decisions.

What the CFL should do with respect to pay increases is pay enough to encourage promising young talent to stick around and develop. It is not unusual for players to pack it in after their first contract... not surprising if you're earning like 60K... not necessarily a bad salary for a single guy but not a lot when you have to set up a household and find accommodations in a high-cost Canadian city. There's not much left over, especially once you convert to USDs.

It would be nice to see the cap go up from 5 to 8 million over the course of the next CBA. Then you'd see a little more roster stability among rookies and vets alike.

[blueandgoldguy]

Pretty hard for the CFL to grow the game when there are no prospective owners or cities/provinces willing to shell out the $150 million it would cost to build a stadium and pay for an expansion team.

We won't see a doubling of the salary cap anytime soon. The CFL extended their 5-year TV agreement with TSN another 3 years in the off-season so that deal will run until 2021. I doubt the extension included a significant bump in TV revenues.

IMO, the coaches and management are the real beneficiaries of the rise in CFL revenues the past 10 years. Their salaries appear to increased dramatically from the 80s and 90s compared to now while the players have seen small and incremental increases.

[esquire]

A meagre 15000 seats @ a modest average price of $40 x 10 games = $6,000,000 revenue before even a dime of TV money or other revenues is contemplated. Every team other than Toronto is well beyond that figure, which tells you that even a basketcase team like the Argos must be taking in at least $10,000,000 a season.

Surely there must be room to raise the cap to $8,000,000 without ruining the league's finances? I mean, prairie teams are probably taking in north of $30 million a season, the Riders probably over $40 million again... surely there must be some wiggle room for incremental salary increases?

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by esquire

A meagre 15000 seats @ a modest average price of $40 x 10 games = $6,000,000 revenue before even a dime of TV money or other revenues is contemplated. Every team other than Toronto is well beyond that figure, which tells you that even a basketcase team like the Argos must be taking in at least $10,000,000 a season.

Surely there must be room to raise the cap to $8,000,000 without ruining the league's finances? I mean, prairie teams are probably taking in north of $30 million a season, the Riders probably over $40 million again... surely there must be some wiggle room for incremental salary increases?

Not much. 2014, the Roughriders had operating revenue of $42.4million and a profit of $2.2million. That's with pretty much record attendance and unbelievable merchandise sales. Roughrider tickets are not overly expensive. Looking around you can get decent, but not the best tickets for $69 and lousy end zone seats for $29. While the end zone seats are expensive by CFL standards, are best seats are an absolute steal in comparison to other cities. The appetite of fans in Saskatchewan for more expensive seats in the newer stadium is going to be an economic test. If the economy is not robust and/or the team is playing lousy come the second and third year it could get ugly in Saskatchewan as far as fan turnout is concerned.

We have great fans, but to think there's no price ceiling on tickets is foolhardy because there is.

In 2013, the Roughriders had a profit of $1.1M without including the Grey Cup which gave a staggering profit of $9.2M or something.

2013 and 2014 being banner years for the Roughriders leads me to believe the cap limit increase is much smaller than the two or three million you are speculating.

[esquire]

^ So what on earth are the Riders spending all their money on if players cost a shade over $4 million, they bring in over $40 million but only have a $2 million profit?