Arco Arena Doesn't sell out

B

Brinzotti

G-League
I know some others have posted this today's Sonics game thread, but I have some random thoughts on what not selling out really means to the Kings organization.

After 354 games, the current longest streak of sellouts in the NBA ended. However, when I was at a non-competitive game in the 05-06 season there were more than 2000 seats empty. To any season ticket holder, they already knew the streak was long over

17,317 is a number that I will always have fond memories because of the few occasions that I was part of it over the past years.

I think that the streak officially ending will make it harder for the Kings to get a new arena. One of the reasons for a new arena is more seats, however, not all the current seats are being filled.

Profitability issues (listed in sticky thread) are also no longer a problem since the team isn't selling out, which means lower the Kings organization is near profitability capacity. Either a higher quality product or the lowering of ticket prices is needed which wouldn't change the profitability too much. The fans are what makes the profitability and I think that the fan base is just too small in the Sacramento area compared to other cities.

Arco will sell out when elite teams come around, but assuming a new arena with 40,000 seats is built (I know it's high but there are larger basketball stadiums out there). If Arco isn't filling 15k seats then how many seats would they sell when an exciting match up comes into town?

The numbers I want to know are how many season ticket holders from last year who still hold season tickets this year.

Personally, I think winning is the best to get fans back into the arena. However, for somebody like myself, I might just be able to go to a few more games this season if they don't continue to sell out.

All of the other "Reasons why Arco Arena needs to be replaced" are still true. I just hope that the inability to sell out does not impede the progress being made in the New Arena talks.
 
No NBA arena can seat 40,000. Most arenas are at half that, with Detroit having the most at 22,000. The lack of luxury suites to sell to large corporations and broadcast rights are probably a bigger issue than seating for regular joes.

The team right now won't help, but I think the negative impact will be minor. The memory of the good days should still be relatively fresh.
 
LPKingsFan said:
Maybe lower ticket prices to reflect the quality of the product?
Click to expand...


Sure, but I don't think that actualy draws in that many more people when the product sucks. If you could drop them to $10 or some such, sure. You could get a wash of "why not?" type people. But for the prices that any NBA ticket is going to sell for, a non-competitive team just isn't going to draw well UNLESS, and here's the one proviso, its stocked ala Portland with the obvious future lineup of a damn good team.
 
So what if the sell-out streak is over? Its not the end of the world. Its sort of sad is all. The Kings have had a longer streak end before (when we sucked). Do you know how many NBA cities would love to have two sellout streaks in the top 10 in NBA history? Most teams around the league don't sell-out on a regular basis. The Warriors were lucky to fill even half their arena when they sucked. New Orleans crowds are generally low (Altho I think they could be a team that moves at some point, its so bad there).

The reason for a new arena is not for any big increase in seats.The Maloofs plans for a new arena have never included much of an increase in the number of seats. Last I heard they were saying around 18,000. They want to keep the intimacy and atmosphere of the current arena.

What they do want is more club seats and more and up-to-date luxury boxes, in line with other small market teams. They also want an arena that will be adequate for other events, especially the larger traveling shows. The food prep area is pathetically small, the marshalling area for shows is too small, the concourses are too narrow, two tiers have to exit through the ground level, the roof needs to be replaced, the ice rink is outdated and poor, etc. All these issues make it increasingly difficult to make money from other events. Arco even has wooden tiers and really cheap seats.

Arco was built on the cheap and it shows. The Palace of Auburn hills was built the same year, but at double the price of Arco. Because the Palace was better designed and built to begin with, they have been able to remodel and keep it up-to-date. Not an option with Arco. If you get a chance to go to an arena in another city, Arco looks even shabbier. I think the Maloofs have done an outstanding job maintaining Arco, but duct tape and twine only holds up so long.

Whether the Kings go or stay, if Sacramento wants an arena venue at all, Arco needs replacement. The city hired more than one consultant, who came up with the same answer. Arco is close to the end of its useful economic life.

Players salaries aren't going to drop. Well, theoretcially they could, but then your relegated to complete non-competitiveness. Not raising prices, and they haven't last year and this, is about as close to a drop in prices as we'll see, I think. By not raising prices or at least limiting them, other teams ticket prices will catch up or pass us. That's already happened a bit. Arco is not as expensive compared to other teams as it was 3-4 years ago.

Sacramento is a small market team and probably has the least corporate presence of all NBA cities. Makes for less sources of revenue other than tickets, parking and other arena events. Also, no arena survives on NBA games alone. A new arena would make it easier to attract other and more events.

MSE has made some adjustments. Probably one of the better ones is that this year you can buy "season tickets" in blocks. You don't have to buy the whole 41 homes games, you can buy blocks of games that are less than that. They are obviously pouring more money into advertising and really trying to reach out to the public.
 
Packt, It would be possible to build that big of a stadium, I under the impression when I started writing this thread that the number of seats was a really big issue, after reading more and more, I feel of it less so, but I think that more seats would be nice for people like myself that can't go to very many games.

Quote from answers.yahoo.com
"The first 50,000 plus NCAA regular season game was in the Game of the Century on January 20, 1968 in the Astrodome as 52, 629 attended..."

Kingzrool, there was a thread a year ago (I think it was before the "New Arena" thread appeared) that state Arco wasn't filling up in the past 2 seasons. Someone mentioned that before a game last season there were thousands of ticketmaster tickets left the day of the game. I personally state that Arco wasn't filling up when I was last there for a game.

I just thought that without the sellout streak it would be harder to get a new arena. I still think this is true, but there are probably other factors like small market that have a greater impact hindering the development of a new arena. Maybe I should drive to Oracle Arena in Oakland so that I can compare Arco to something else.
 
It's pretty clear that if they put a competitive product on the court they will sell out. It's been pretty bleak the last couple of years and the only thing that helped us not start the complete and total slide two years ago was the Bonzi/Artest tandem in the second half that brought us to the playoffs.

The decrease in performance can rest solely on the shoulders of one Geoff Petrie and his inability to put a competitive team on the floor....do that again and the fans will be back.
 
Brinzotti said:
Packt, It would be possible to build that big of a stadium, I under the impression when I started writing this thread that the number of seats was a really big issue, after reading more and more, I feel of it less so, but I think that more seats would be nice for people like myself that can't go to very many games.
Click to expand...
The Maloofs have been very consistent about not wanting a lot more seats. Downtown, one of the big killer parts of the deal, was the number of parking spaces that MSE wuld get revenue from, becasue it's a big source of revenue.

There have been empty seats, but not necessarily, because of unsold tickets. A lot of season ticket holders were not going to a lot of the games and, unlike prior years, they had a hard time selling to anyone else.

A "sell-out" is based on the team selling some percentage of total available seats. I read a description once, but I'd have to look for it. They are required to hold some seats open for last minute sales.

Right now, there are plenty of available seats right up to game time. That's when its a good thing to not have 4,000 or 5,000 more empty seats in a bigger arena. ;)

What's sad to me, when I watch some games, is the number of empty seats for teams that are good, if not great. At least when the Kings were good, fans filled the seats.
 
Bricklayer said:
Sure, but I don't think that actualy draws in that many more people when the product sucks. If you could drop them to $10 or some such, sure. You could get a wash of "why not?" type people. But for the prices that any NBA ticket is going to sell for, a non-competitive team just isn't going to draw well UNLESS, and here's the one proviso, its stocked ala Portland with the obvious future lineup of a damn good team.
Click to expand...

Well, having the 6th highest average ticket prices for one of the worst teams in the league just doesn't add up well in my book.
 
LPKingsFan said:
Well, having the 6th highest average ticket prices for one of the worst teams in the league just doesn't add up well in my book.
Click to expand...
Well it happens to EVERY team in the league, the lakers sucked for 12 years before they won again in 2000. We wont be bad forever and as long as the team plays hard like they did last night, i will be at the games every chance i get.
 
I don't think a new arena would have many more seats. It would have a lot more luxury boxes, and better quality one's, concourses that are bigger with more attraction, and better locker rooms.

Oh, and it won't be falling apart either.
 
Speaking of locker rooms, I wish I could find the picture of the visitor's locker room at Arco. It is truly abysmal.
 
VF21 said:
Speaking of locker rooms, I wish I could find the picture of the visitor's locker room at Arco. It is truly abysmal.
Click to expand...

Yep. Cheap pieces of veneered pressboard partitions with cheap metal rods in between the partitions, and hard plastic chairs found in most schools.

Although I don't really want the visiting team comfortable, so I don't mind it too much.
 
You remember the picture I'm thinking of? I actually think the chair shown had a bent or broken leg. And I know the Kings have been accused of turning off the heat in cold weather.

:p
 
Hmmm...not selling out is one thing, actually having the lowest opening day attendance in the league is another:

http://kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23480



I am actually a little curious how immune/isolated Geoff is from all this. The fanbase is clearly in major distress, and since the ticket prices have not movesd in three years, the issue is obviously the product on the floor.
 
I think what we're seeing is the natural reaction to the product the fans saw the end of LAST season. People didn't renew their season tickets; people were in no hurry to grab tickets for opening night this year as they feared more of the same.

I don't know about anyone else, of course, but I'm already making plans to attend MORE games than I had originally intended to do for the simple reason the product I saw Tuesday night was worth making the trip to see. The way the team came out in the third quarter, obviously NOT under the influence of kool-aid, was a welcome change as was the way Reggie Theus did everything but get out there himself to urge his team on. Also integral was the camraderie of Mike Bibby and Beno Udrih, who were talking with their teammates at every opportunity. I didn't see Spencer, but that doesn't mean he wasn't there.

This is a team in transition. We all knew the organization would have to acknowledge the end of the streak at some point.

Even with 3,000 fewer fans in attendance, Arco Thunder was obvious by the 4th quarter. And it was refreshing to again get goosebumps simply by being a part of it. THAT part of attending a Kings game had been missing for quite a while.

If the Kings continue to put forth the effort, the fans will be there - win or lose. We were before and I'm confident that players like Martin, Garcia, Salmons and the rejuvenated Brad Miller, if they continue to play all out, will get the seats filled again.

And if we don't start another "sellout streak" for a while, that's not gonna kill the franchise. Look at some of the other teams, who even when contending for a playoff berth couldn't fill their arenas, and I believe it becomes pretty apparent it could be much worse.
 
LPKingsFan said:
Well, having the 6th highest average ticket prices for one of the worst teams in the league just doesn't add up well in my book.
Click to expand...
Well before MSE stopped raising ticket prices 3 seasons ago, Sacramento was 3rd. If they can hold the line or increase less than the rest of the league, we'll keep dropping.
 
I think we all knew there would be some empty seats this year. It did look different, but (I think it was Martin and Miller) two players said the noise level wasn't any different from Tuesday night and a "sell-out" last year. It will not have any effect on our having season tickets. I read this morning that Houston was excited about having the next 15 games sold-out after many seasons of so-so attendance. Obviously when your team is playing well you have better attendance and that will happen again in Sacramento when the team is better. Frankly, I don't miss fairweather fans at all and I am glad the people that bought King's tickets just to sell them to make money are mostly gone. It takes away the opportunity of the real fan to buy season tickets.

And Brick: no matter what you think of Petrie--I think we all know that he is not immune or isolated from what is going on. I am not going to defend Petrie--he doesn't need defending. Annie
 
BudWright said:
And Brick: no matter what you think of Petrie--I think we all know that he is not immune or isolated from what is going on. I am not going to defend Petrie--he doesn't need defending. Annie
Click to expand...

No actually I do not know that at all.

1) is he accountable? Its only recently that the bulk of the fanbase has finally admitted that he may be. And its still far from clear he is to the men in charge. Sometimes GMs, even very crappy GMs, get in so thick with ownership that they can suck forever without any consequences. See Kevin McHale, Elgin Baylor, or Wes Unseld (formerly) for examples. Where does Geoff stand? Is there ever any heat?

2) does he care? Or more specifically does it alter his thinking in any way? And there are arguments either way whether it should or not. But when you have made the moves that now has you (after 1 game obviously) last in attendance, you'd damn well better feel it in the pit of your stomach even if you aren't going to do anything about it. Geoff is such a bureaucrat though that that is far from clear. It may well fall outside of what he considers his purview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mike0476
Business Trip #2: Kings at Clippers on 3/9
Replies
0
Views
706
Mike0476
Mike0476
Y
ESPN ranks Kings' Golden 1 Center as best arena in NBA
Replies
0
Views
184
Yahoo! Sports - NBA - Sacramento Kings News
Y
Mike0476
Business Trip: Kings at Clippers 2/25
Replies
0
Views
934
Mike0476
Mike0476
S
Bold Lineup Change the Sacramento Kings Need to Make
Replies
7
Views
405
ShastaKingsFan
ShastaKingsFan
King Baller
This is why we love the Kings
Replies
9
Views
942
MizzouKing
MizzouKing
Back
Top