Quote:
Originally Posted by Zassk
But any rational analysis of the franchise value or sponsorship deals shows that the Whitecaps are on a different level from the Lions.
|
Well, let's examine just how "rational" your analysis is. Remember, we were talking about
popularity (or
fan base).
Therefore, the rationality of your analysis depends upon the hypothesis that if Team A has a higher franchise value than Team B, then Team A is more
popular than Team B.
So let's put this hypothesis to the test:
1) Surely you do not dispute that if Team A has higher attendance and higher TV ratings than Team B, then Team A is more popular than Team B. For it would be absurd to say that a team which is attended by less people and watched by less people is more popular than a team which is attended by more people and watched by more people.
2) Thus, if your hypothesis is true, then it
cannot be the case that a team with a lower franchise value can have higher attendance and higher TV ratings than a team with a higher franchise value.
3) Therefore, if it
is the case that a team with a lower franchise value can have higher attendance and higher TV ratings than a team with a higher franchise value, then by necessity your hypothesis is
not true.
Now, for no particular reason, let's take FC Dallas, which, as of 2008, had a purported franchise value of more than
$39 million:
In 2008, FC Dallas had an average attendance of
13,000.
During the 2010 MLS Cup (which was the biggest, most widely-televised game it has ever played in), FC dallas drew an audience of
750,000 viewers.
Now, let's compare the above with the BC Lions, a team whose franchise value is a miniscule fraction of FC Dallas':
In 2008, the BC Lions had an average attendance of
35,000.
During the 2010 Western Division Semi-Final, the BC Lions drew an average audience of
2 million and a peak audience of
3.3 million. BC Lions regular season games drew an average audience of
1 million viewers. [The CFL championship game, in stark contrast to the MLS Cup, usually attracts an average audience of more than
6 million and a peak audience of more than
14 million (more than 43% of Canada's population).]
As you can see, the BC Lions have massively higher attendance
and massively higher TV ratings than FC Dallas, despite the latter having a vastly greater franchise value than the former. And this is pretty much the case when you compare the BC Lions with all the MLS franchises.
Therefore, it
is the case that a team with a lower franchise value can have higher attendance and higher TV ratings than a team with a higher franchise value. In other words, it is the case that a team with a lower franchise value can be more popular (or have a larger fan base) than a team with a higher franchise value.
Therefore, by logical necessity, your hypothesis
cannot be true.
And therefore, your analysis is
not rational.
Q.E.D.
Of course, none of this would come as a surprise to anyone with a modicum of knowledge of franchise economics and what really determines a franchise's "value" or franchise fees.
Prev
Linear Mode
