CelticsStrong
Other Discussions => Other / General Sports => Topic started by: Moranis on January 25, 2018, 04:37:25 PM
-
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22212592/atlanta-falcons-drop-prices-make-more-money-mercedes-benz-stadium-concessions
Goes to show if you price things better people will spend more since they don't feel they are getting ripped off.
-
Cool.
I know the prices at the TD Garden are ridiculous. Maybe they should give this a try, too.
-
I hope it becomes a trend.
I limit my concessions at the game. If I could grab a slice of pizza and a coke for $5? Yeah, I’d definitely be down for that.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
you could also argue that fans will eat and drink more at the game if the game is boring....
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
-
Kudos to the Falcons. I too hope this catches on.
If I could get 3 beers, chicken fingers, fries, and a snack or whatever for around $30, I’d do it every game.
With the way prices are here in NYC, you’ll be luck to get the three beers for $30. So I usually grab a beer or two there and eat before/after events.
Prices should come down. People are willing to spend, but they want value.
I’d definitely wind up spending more on beers if they were $4 each than I would $7+. Using me as an example, I’d prob get five beers for $20 vs two beers at $8 each. That’s 20% more money and probably does t cost them that much as the markup is still incredibly high (especially on tap beer).
I never really understood why alcohol/food at a game costs more than anywhere else. I get why it costs what it does in bars/restaurants, as that is their primary goods. Sporting events sell tickets. We have to pay to get in, everything else they get from us is a bonus. Then they wanna bend us over when we get there?
You know how many people would eat at the games if it was cheaper than a diner?
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
-
Kudos to the Falcons. I too hope this catches on.
If I could get 3 beers, chicken fingers, fries, and a snack or whatever for around $30, I’d do it every game.
With the way prices are here in NYC, you’ll be luck to get the three beers for $30. So I usually grab a beer or two there and eat before/after events.
Prices should come down. People are willing to spend, but they want value.
I’d definitely wind up spending more on beers if they were $4 each than I would $7+. Using me as an example, I’d prob get five beers for $20 vs two beers at $8 each. That’s 20% more money and probably does t cost them that much as the markup is still incredibly high (especially on tap beer).
I never really understood why alcohol/food at a game costs more than anywhere else. I get why it costs what it does in bars/restaurants, as that is their primary goods. Sporting events sell tickets. We have to pay to get in, everything else they get from us is a bonus. Then they wanna bend us over when we get there?
You know how many people would eat at the games if it was cheaper than a diner?
Without knowing how well you hold your liquor, this is part of the reason a lot of venues have high alcohol prices. Reducing consumption in the venue is a goal, as it decreases their security/fan management costs.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
Boris is trying to separate revenue (sales dollars) from profits. And he’s right to question. The article only talks about sales, and mentions little-to-nothing about profits or costs. It could be that the Falcons profited more, and it could be that their profits went down. It could also be that they expect this change to have cost profits this year but make up for it in future years (for example, by selling in-stadium advertising for more money because people are spending more time there).
All we know is that sales increased. It’s probable their margin (profit per sale) decreased. We don’t know if total profits increased, and ultimately businesses try to maximize profits, not sales.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
The self-service kiosks were for soft drinks, not the other stuff. Right?
As far as merch - you don't think making the Super Bowl in 2017 had just a little bit to do with that? I mean, the franchise value went up from $1.7bn in 2015 to $2.5bn in 2017 - was that because they cut the prices of their nachos?
But anyway like SL says, the article says nothing about profits, which was my main point. It annoys me because it's written so that many casual readers would probably confuse "sales" with "profits." They are two distinct things, and increasing revenue by cutting prices and selling a lot more can easily reduce profits, because costs will go up by a lot if the quantity sold goes up by a lot.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
The self-service kiosks were for soft drinks, not the other stuff. Right?
As far as merch - you don't think making the Super Bowl in 2017 had just a little bit to do with that? I mean, the franchise value went up from $1.7bn in 2015 to $2.5bn in 2017 - was that because they cut the prices of their nachos?
But anyway like SL says, the article says nothing about profits, which was my main point. It annoys me because it's written so that many casual readers would probably confuse "sales" with "profits." They are two distinct things, and increasing revenue by cutting prices and selling a lot more can easily reduce profits, because costs will go up by a lot if the quantity sold goes up by a lot.
Well you are both right, so tps to you both. I agree the way the ESPN article was written was confusing. Here is a much better article on it...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-25/atlanta-falcons-broke-the-rules-of-stadium-food-and-it-paid-off
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
Profits were down:
About 6,000 more fans per game entered the stadium earlier than they did in 2016, and in general, the venue sold as much food by the end of the first quarter of Falcons games as it did in full games in 2016. Fans also gave the Falcons the highest satisfaction rating in the NFL for food and beverages, up from No. 18 in 2016, and the highest rating for security satisfaction, in part the result of lines made shorter by all the early entries.
They also bought more food -- sales were up 53 percent -- and each fan spent, on average, 16 percent more on concessions. It wasn’t enough to offset the drop in prices, though. The team made less on concessions in 2017 than it did the year before, according Steve Cannon, chief executive officer of AMB Group, the company through which Blank owns the team.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-25/atlanta-falcons-broke-the-rules-of-stadium-food-and-it-paid-off
The team seems willing to trade short terms profits for the "halo effect" of a better fan experience, and thinks in the long-run it's profits will increase, too.
-
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
Completely agree with this. Why would other franchises ignore this concept if it increases their profits by 16%? We can cast the rest of sports ownership as greedy...fine. But how can they be greedy and reject a plan to increase profits at the same time?
I would actually argue the experiment was a failure. If I ran a restaurant business and slashed my prices by 50% and only saw 16% in increased sales...............
If anything, I would see this as an investment in fan loyalty to combat sagging attendance problems...but not something that will drive increased revenue (via concessions directly). Amazon followed a similar approach for years.
-
Agree with Roy's last point, especially with his quickly UGA football has catipulted to the top.
-
It's entirely possible that they lost money on this, to be clear.
I would imagine that most of these entities have done a full-blown analysis of what their profits would be at different prices, and chosen the ones they have for sensible reasons.
Edit: also, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison, given that you're looking at a team coming off a Super Bowl visit, which would generate increased demand for all kinds of things.
How so?
The article just says that sales revenue went up by 16%.
But, food and labor costs must have risen. If you cut the price of hot dogs in half, and your revenue goes up, you're selling more than twice as many hot dogs. So your food costs will at least double. (I imagine that the stadium is already getting the best volume discount possible).
And you need more workers to sell more hot dogs. (Note that the article says there are "65 percent more points of sale and 1,264 more beer taps" - someone needs to work at those.)
The article annoys me, a little bit, because it makes it sound like this is a clear winner, and other teams could learn something from the experience. But in my experience, the pricing departments of sports teams and their affiliates are incredibly savvy and getting more so all the time, and I'd be shocked if this was a surprise to any real experts in the industry.
And indeed the writer does slip in one instructive line: "the reaction by the rest of the sports world has, for the most part, has been to ignore it. Few teams have sought to replicate the model..."
no i think the staff costs went down because they were many more self service lines... also it adds in this "Merchandise sales were also up 88 percent." Seems like you are really reading what you want to read on this one. It flat out made more money with this model...
Profits were down:
About 6,000 more fans per game entered the stadium earlier than they did in 2016, and in general, the venue sold as much food by the end of the first quarter of Falcons games as it did in full games in 2016. Fans also gave the Falcons the highest satisfaction rating in the NFL for food and beverages, up from No. 18 in 2016, and the highest rating for security satisfaction, in part the result of lines made shorter by all the early entries.
They also bought more food -- sales were up 53 percent -- and each fan spent, on average, 16 percent more on concessions. It wasn’t enough to offset the drop in prices, though. The team made less on concessions in 2017 than it did the year before, according Steve Cannon, chief executive officer of AMB Group, the company through which Blank owns the team.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-25/atlanta-falcons-broke-the-rules-of-stadium-food-and-it-paid-off
The team seems willing to trade short terms profits for the "halo effect" of a better fan experience, and thinks in the long-run it's profits will increase, too.
were they down because they had more locations (and thus more staffing), or were they down only looking at the food cost. That is the problem with these things. They had a new stadium so there was a lot of new things going on so it isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison on anything.
-
The team seems willing to trade short terms profits for the "halo effect" of a better fan experience, and thinks in the long-run it's profits will increase, too.
Anecdotally from myself, I expect this to be true. I would go to more Celtics games at their current ticket prices if I knew I could count on myself to not blow another $20-50 on concessions. Or at least if I was spending another $20, I'm getting my money's worth. I also wouldn't feel it a necessity to make sure I eat a meal before the game if I could expect reasonable prices in the arena.
-
The team seems willing to trade short terms profits for the "halo effect" of a better fan experience, and thinks in the long-run it's profits will increase, too.
Anecdotally from myself, I expect this to be true. I would go to more Celtics games at their current ticket prices if I knew I could count on myself to not blow another $20-50 on concessions. Or at least if I was spending another $20, I'm getting my money's worth. I also wouldn't feel it a necessity to make sure I eat a meal before the game if I could expect reasonable prices in the arena.
Right or if you go once a year and expect to spend 50 bucks at the arena, if before it was all food, now it might be half on food and the rest on a shirt or hat or something, which lasts past the game (and also has great margins). You might be more inclined to take your kids, who you know are going to want to eat, if you can get them a reasonable price for a pretzel or hot dog or whatever. And kids always want other things like shirts, which parents buys. Plus a team wants kids to have fond memories of going to games so they become lifelong fans and take their kids some day.
I would be curious to see how the numbers really shake out and not just vague statements (which I know is all we would get).
-
From the article. Kind surprising but kinda not.
Despite not being open for many of the stadium's major events, including seven of the eight regular-season Falcons home games, the stadium's Chick-fil-A stand sold the third-most items of any stand in the structure.
-
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22212592/atlanta-falcons-drop-prices-make-more-money-mercedes-benz-stadium-concessions
Goes to show if you price things better people will spend more since they don't feel they are getting ripped off.
exactly
12 dollar for a HOT DOG? I may buy one
5 dollars for a hot dog? Give me three or four
plus if you order more/bulk = higher discounts
Doesn't always workout but Falcons owner is onto something...maybe other teams will follow
-
for 12 day dollars I can bring hotdogs for everybody ten seats either side of me.
One that kills me is the 2 cents worth of popcorn for 10 dollars.
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
No, but some families have budgets. Maybe instead of skipping food all together, you get $25 out of a family of three. Or, a family with a $100 budget buys food and souvenirs, instead of being forced to choose.
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
No, but some families have budgets. Maybe instead of skipping food all together, you get $25 out of a family of three. Or, a family with a $100 budget buys food and souvenirs, instead of being forced to choose.
I'm planning on going to a game in February and we've already talked about where we might go to eat before the game. The prospect of eating at the arena (aside from a beer and maybe a snack) is out of the question after the amount of money we spent on tickets and how high the prices are for food. If the prices were comparable to a regular restaurant in the area, it would be easier to just eat at the arena, instead we'll be spending elsewhere.
-
for 12 day dollars I can bring hotdogs for everybody ten seats either side of me.
One that kills me is the 2 cents worth of popcorn for 10 dollars.
and the popcorn is stale as ****
can i have butter?? sure its 2 more dollars
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
No, but some families have budgets. Maybe instead of skipping food all together, you get $25 out of a family of three. Or, a family with a $100 budget buys food and souvenirs, instead of being forced to choose.
I'm planning on going to a game in February and we've already talked about where we might go to eat before the game. The prospect of eating at the arena (aside from a beer and maybe a snack) is out of the question after the amount of money we spent on tickets and how high the prices are for food. If the prices were comparable to a regular restaurant in the area, it would be easier to just eat at the arena, instead we'll be spending elsewhere.
You've got a ton of options. What cheap and fast? Try the food court in North Station. The pizza place there is pretty creative.
If you want to eat in the area, most of the places right around the garden are bar food.
If you don't mind a few minutes walk, Government Center and the Financial District is 5-10 minutes. Tons of options (including Quincy Market, the only place more overpriced than the Garden).
Other stuff...
Once tried to bring in my own bottle of water and was turned away by security. So the next game, I just brought in an empty bottle and filled it in a sink. Why? Because they charge $5 for it at the concession stands.
I think a lot of the savings on the costs comes from having items priced in dollars, eliminating the need for change, and the self-service soda. I pay for everything with a credit card, so I was surprised to see how many people use cash at the concession stands. There's a lot of wasted time while the cashiers count out $.85. And I don't know what percentage of sales soda makes up, but it's a long(er) operation to fill one of those.
Oh, one last thing: the option to add a tip at concessions when I pay with a credit card? Talk about ridiculous...
Mike
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
No, but some families have budgets. Maybe instead of skipping food all together, you get $25 out of a family of three. Or, a family with a $100 budget buys food and souvenirs, instead of being forced to choose.
I'm planning on going to a game in February and we've already talked about where we might go to eat before the game. The prospect of eating at the arena (aside from a beer and maybe a snack) is out of the question after the amount of money we spent on tickets and how high the prices are for food. If the prices were comparable to a regular restaurant in the area, it would be easier to just eat at the arena, instead we'll be spending elsewhere.
I agree with this, Moranis and Roy in that I think this will work for the teams. I can speak to the fact that when the new 49ers stadium opened I went to one preseason game to see the stadium . At the time it was the most expensive stadium for concessions of any stadium (this is my memory of what I read at the time). Bud lights were about 11.50 and it was 12 bucks for a sandwich. Even bottles of water were about 6 bucks (which from a public health perspective really bothers me for a stadium that has half the seats baking in the sun) Especially with the 49ers being a bad team the last few years it has never been worth it for me to go down there because of the concessions. They lose money from me and my friends on this, and i know we are not a super unique kind of sports fan. Especially when a team is not must see for their being a good team, making the experience pleasant with reasonable food and drink options is going to make attending a game a lot more interesting for me. I really hope other teams follow suit on this. I would certainly attend more games if they do.
-
I think when you go to a sporting event you're not doing it because the beer and hot dogs are competitively priced.
My lazyboy is already paid for, I have executive rights to not one but 2 bathrooms and all the cheap beer I can get from Coscos. Yet I still go to games because it's more fun to scream at the refs with 15K other Greenbleeders. The $9 beer and $8 pizza slice doesn't stop me from enjoying the game with my 15k friends. I can't imagine how long those lines would be for food and bathroom if they cut prices to be reasonable.
No, but some families have budgets. Maybe instead of skipping food all together, you get $25 out of a family of three. Or, a family with a $100 budget buys food and souvenirs, instead of being forced to choose.
I'm planning on going to a game in February and we've already talked about where we might go to eat before the game. The prospect of eating at the arena (aside from a beer and maybe a snack) is out of the question after the amount of money we spent on tickets and how high the prices are for food. If the prices were comparable to a regular restaurant in the area, it would be easier to just eat at the arena, instead we'll be spending elsewhere.
You've got a ton of options. What cheap and fast? Try the food court in North Station. The pizza place there is pretty creative.
If you want to eat in the area, most of the places right around the garden are bar food.
If you don't mind a few minutes walk, Government Center and the Financial District is 5-10 minutes. Tons of options (including Quincy Market, the only place more overpriced than the Garden).
Other stuff...
Once tried to bring in my own bottle of water and was turned away by security. So the next game, I just brought in an empty bottle and filled it in a sink. Why? Because they charge $5 for it at the concession stands.
I think a lot of the savings on the costs comes from having items priced in dollars, eliminating the need for change, and the self-service soda. I pay for everything with a credit card, so I was surprised to see how many people use cash at the concession stands. There's a lot of wasted time while the cashiers count out $.85. And I don't know what percentage of sales soda makes up, but it's a long(er) operation to fill one of those.
Oh, one last thing: the option to add a tip at concessions when I pay with a credit card? Talk about ridiculous...
Mike
I haven't been in a couple of years, but I like The Fours. Good atmosphere, decent food.
-
This is a cool story and great to see. I know for me, the total on the bill matters less than the actual slap in the face it feels like overall to walk through a door and see prices jump so much. It just feels insulting and like they think you are dumb, at least to my weird mind how I look at things. That keeps me from spending. If it was lesser like this I would totally spend more.
Usually for me, when I go to the Celtics, I only buy beers because that's enough. I eat before. I would eat there if it was reasonable for example, and in the end probably spend more.
-
This is a cool story and great to see. I know for me, the total on the bill matters less than the actual slap in the face it feels like overall to walk through a door and see prices jump so much. It just feels insulting and like they think you are dumb, at least to my weird mind how I look at things. That keeps me from spending. If it was lesser like this I would totally spend more.
Usually for me, when I go to the Celtics, I only buy beers because that's enough. I eat before. I would eat there if it was reasonable for example, and in the end probably spend more.
You are not unique in this. Lots of people that could afford it, don't do it out of principle.