Attendance (cc: SectionQ)

[Sectionq]

Unfortunately, based on the conversations I have with people I believe you are right.

Even now that they’re winning, I’m finding more people are talking about them and the fact that they’re looking good so far which is great, but on the flip side, I’m finding that those conversations inevitably always steer toward the name change eventually. In my experience casual fans and Edmontonians that don’t follow the team super closely don’t understand the change and think it’s dumb.

Sadly, and this isn't meant to diminish Looner's opinion, changing the name really hit people personally. The majority of true fans can take losing. As much as we all wish your team is awesome every year, losing is going to happen. Now maybe not to the extend Edmonton lost for so long but most fans know there are going to be years where your team just isn't good enough, things don't go your way or whatever. But as soon as you severe that emotional tie like IMO the name did, people are not longer willing to tolerate things. I think that is what is happening. Winning I think will hopefully help newer fans come but I don't know if it will help the people who had deep ties to the Eskimos. They might come to the odd game but probably not as often as they used too. When the Eskimos used to have 20+ season ticket holders, over the years maybe some of them aren't able to go to them or money is tighter but I have a hard time believing that the majority of them couldn't buy again, they just don't want too because they don't have that tie to the team like the used too. The Oilers are stupid expensive and yet people go all the time. Concerts are stupid expensive but people go. There is money out there that isn't getting spent on the EE anymore. Like I said, when the current Pres who was a former player, his roots are Edmonton, he knows the community, knows the city, knows the history of the team and what that name meant and IMO is about as passionate and positive of a team exec as I have ever heard. When that guy talks, I want to run through a wall but when he publicly acknowledges how big of a thing it was, it's a THING rightly or wrongly.

[Sectionq]

For what it's worth, the term one an eskimo, always an eskimo is being uttered again. B.O.N.E. neverr really went away (though they briefly tried to make it Nasty Elks). And everyone in the building sings the fight song as it should be. Very few if any, follows the words on the jumbotron anymore.

That's awesome and I mean that. I am glad the fans and the players are kind of acknowledging this name is a mistake but it's not the team name right now so it doesn't mean as much as it should.

Out of curiosity, what how did they change the words of the song? I haven't been since the name change.

[bone]

I am not trying to diminish anyone that had tickets way up high for a long time but closing the upper deck was something that had to happen. It had to happen economically because they would be paying ushers to have to man upper sections with maybe a couple of rows of people in them. I saw the visuals, there were games when you'd see entire sections of the upper stands with 20 people in them. Keeping them open economically even for safety reasons for that few people made no sense.

That stadium is not a great venue to start with, it's way, way too big. A stadium of 30-35K max is what they need. When I used to go, even in lousy weather they'd get high 20's and when they were spread out over a 60000 seat stadium it looked empty. Then you cut that by 1/3 on a good day and you'd have entire upper sections with 10 people in there. I am sure they lost some fans when the upper deck was closed but they had the upper deck open for YEARS after the name change and the majority of those fans were long gone before they finally closed the upper deck for economic reasons.

You had seats at the 55 yard line row 71 so right in the middle. So what about people in row 80. I used to see some people sitting up there. They say yes to you but no to them? Let's say they only kept the upper sections around mid field. So what about the people in say section D2, that's around the 30. They keep say F2, G3, H2 and T2, U2, S2 that are on either side of mid field and the mid field but say sorry to all the rest because there are people who probably had tickets just as long as you did a few sections over. So you get to keep yours but they don't, where do you draw the line?

I get it and I'm somewhat over the loss (but would go back in a second if they re-opened). But I don't think we can undersell the fact that closing the upper deck actually dropped attendance about 17% which was the biggest single season drop they've experienced in the 21st Century. More than the Covid season and name change (10%) and this was after a nice 4% increase the prior year.

This major drop in attendance also led to other changes that impacted the game day experience in that the city then dropped all but a couple park and ride locations, reduced LRT services to every 15 minutes instead of 5. All the bar yellow buses started discontinuing their park and ride services. This in turn made getting out to the game a bit more of a hassle and in turn has impacted attendance as well.

I get that it looked bad on TV but a decision that dropped attendance 17% should not be ignored, particularly when it became a final straw that made it more difficult for people to get out to the game. Unfortunately, just re-opening the upper deck won't reverese the trend like a change back to the old name would, but it shouldn't be discounted as something that hurt the team's bottom line.

[bone]

That's awesome and I mean that. I am glad the fans and the players are kind of acknowledging this name is a mistake but it's not the team name right now so it doesn't mean as much as it should.

Out of curiosity, what how did they change the words of the song? I haven't been since the name change.

Replace Eskimos with Edmonton through the first two lines and at the end they first changed it to "and the Edmonton Green and Gold", but changed it a couple season after to "and the Edmonton Elks... Let's Go!!"

[Sectionq]

Yeah, me and my wife had a brief chat with Brinkman's parents last week before the game and they were talking about the nice weather and expecting a nice crowd and when I mentioned the name thing still hangs over the team quite a bit for ticket sales their reactions seemed surprised which was surprising to me.

Brinkman is from Iowa City. If you see them again, ask them what their fav NFL team is. I googled it and the closest NFL team is the Bears so I am assuming that would be the team they probably cheer for. The Bears in Chicago started in 1922. Ask them what their opinion would if some team sponsor said they didn't like the name for whatever reason and team changed the Bears to the Blueberries. Would they be happy about that and would it change their feelings towards the team in anyway?

They could still keep the colors and even keep the letters for the logo because it's the same letter but any chant or song they have said for decades at games, gets change from "Go Bears Go" to "Go berries Go". Are they going to like and accept that? Probably not is my guess.

[bone]

Brinkman is from Iowa City. If you see them again, ask them what their fav NFL team is. I googled it and the closest NFL team is the Bears so I am assuming that would be the team they probably cheer for. The Bears in Chicago started in 1922. Ask them what their opinion would if some team sponsor said they didn't like the name for whatever reason and team changed the Bears to the Blueberries. Would they be happy about that and would it change their feelings towards the team in anyway?

They could still keep the colors and even keep the letters for the logo because it's the same letter but any chant or song they have said for decades at games, gets change from "Go Bears Go" to "Go berries Go". Are they going to like and accept that? Probably not is my guess.

I think the parent of a pro athlete will always feel a bit different as they've had to cheer for various team names throughout their lives. It wasn't like jaw-dropping shock, just more of a "oh, really?" kind of reaction so I suspect they get it, but just were surprised it would have as big an impact that it wouldn't be somewhat mitigated by a successful team.

They also seemed to acknowledge the Edmonton fans seem more engaged with the team than they experienced in his time in Toronto, but that could be pandering to the local fan. They seemed very nice. Doubt I'll see them again as it was just a Beer Gardens encounter before the game where we just asked to sit at the table they were at without knowing who they were.

[ben_the_eskimo]

Yeah, me and my wife had a brief chat with Brinkman's parents last week before the game and they were talking about the nice weather and expecting a nice crowd and when I mentioned the name thing still hangs over the team quite a bit for ticket sales their reactions seemed surprised which was surprising to me.

It’s unfortunate but the reality is that outside of a vocal minority group who had nothing to do with the team whatsoever, NOBODY wanted this change. You basically had two camps, those who strongly opposed it, and those who reluctantly chose to accept it, but the latter group were vastly outnumbered by the former. Nobody actively wanted it. So when you as a brand decide to try and force something down the throats of your paying customers that they have said in large numbers that they don’t want, this is the result you get unfortunately.

Now obviously the atrocious on field product up until now has played a huge role as well, but I don’t think the two things can necessarily be separated as neatly as some (not referring to anyone here specifically, just speaking generally) would like to believe, I think they’re deeply interconnected on a certain level.

[ben_the_eskimo]

All this being said we don’t truly know the ramifications of a winning team on our attendance yet because we’ve only had two games at home and one was a monsoon and the other a Thursday nighter against an eastern opponent with yet another bad early forecast.

If the team keeps winning I suspect we won’t truly start to see the impact on attendance for a few more weeks yet. So I don’t think it’s time to hit the panic button on that front.

[Sectionq]

It’s unfortunate but the reality is that outside of a vocal minority group who had nothing to do with the team whatsoever, NOBODY wanted this change. You basically had two camps, those who strongly opposed it, and those who reluctantly chose to accept it, but the latter group were vastly outnumbered by the former. Nobody actively wanted it. So when you as a brand decide to try and force something down the throats of your paying customers that they have said in large numbers that they don’t want, this is the result you get unfortunately.

Now obviously the atrocious on field product up until now has played a huge role as well, but I don’t think the two things can necessarily be separated as neatly as some (not referring to anyone here specifically, just speaking generally) would like to believe, I think they’re deeply interconnected on a certain level.

I couldn't agree more.

There is no way to truly know but IMO, if the team was still called the Eskimos but all the crap and losing that has happened over the years was still the same, the crowds during that time and now wouldn't have been as small. People seem to forget it wasn't always sunshine and rainbows when the board was there and they were the Eskimos. They did a lot of crappy things, had losing season, had big disconnects with the fan base for a lot of years and people just took it and still went. IMO, the reason was people were emotionally tied to the team and in their hearts couldn't turn their back on the team. Doesn't mean they were happy with how they were treated and how things were going. But once they changed the name, I think a lot of people saw that as the last straw.

[Looner]

I guess we will differ on the name change but I do think the name change is more of a thing than you make it out to be and IMO if the president says it was a crippling blow, I find it hard to dismiss that because, and this is not a shot at you at all, who Morris talks too is going to be way more far reaching and there would be way more than you could ever talk too. Your loyalty to the team is awesome but I am sure the people you talk too in comparison to who the Pres talks too, that circle is relatively small and focused. The people who you talk to are your circle of friend, neighbours, work people, who sits around you and who is around your tailgate area. I am sure it's a lot but I doubt it's as many as the Pres. I doubt you are talking to former ticket holders and former sponsors from other Cities in the province as an example.

IMO for many fans to want to follow a team through thick and thin, there is an emotional connection that happened probably when they were young. When they changed the name, for many fans, myself included, that emotion connection was severed. It was like the team died and a new one took it's place. That how I feel and I bet that's what many others feel. I still cheer for the Edmonton Football team but all my emotional attachment was to the Eskimos. All those years of sitting in freezing stands for Grey Cups around the Country, I was there cheering the Eskimos. Not the Elks. The Elks are just a team wearing the same colors as my team. Them winning some games this year makes me think about them more and makes me want to watch them more than the past but I don't have the emotional attachment when I watch them now that I did before. I don't know if I will ever have that attachment again to the team because I feel like my teams traditions and legacy was thrown away because of money. They caved to 1 sponsor who pulled the pin on them almost right after they changed the name. So it's not the same to me.
The Eskimos won all those Grey Cup.
Gizmo my all time fav player was an Eskimo, not an Elk.
The term Once and Eskimo, always an Eskimo is dead. There is no Eskimo anymore.
The term B.O.N.E. The Brotherhood of Nasty Eskimos doesn't exist anymore.
Even the damn Brian Hall song is different. It's cheering fight fight fight on Eskimos. Not Elks or whatever the hell they say now.

For many in the City, not ever going to a game because of the name change is maybe a touch harsh but I get it. I get the sentiment that it shouldn't matter what the name is and for those that it doesn't matter, you cheer for the City, in am seriousness, that's truly awesome but I think there are a lot of people out there that were deeply offended by them changing the name for the reasons they did and for many of them, they won't ever come back while it's called the Elks. I think it would make a difference for a lot of people. It shouldn't but I think it would. But it appears to be a mute point because they don't appear to be changing it. Going to the EE is better than nothing I guess.

I don't think we differ at all on the name change. I think a lot of people cancelled their seats because of it. I'm just not sure what percentage of those people you would get back if you changed it back. Morris is a smart guy, as you said, so if he says its not financially viable, I believe him.

I think winning is going to help bring people back more then changing the name would. That being said I would also be happy if they changed it back and still sing the fight song the way it was supposed to be

[Sectionq]

I don't think we differ at all on the name change. I think a lot of people cancelled their seats because of it. I'm just not sure what percentage of those people you would get back if you changed it back. Morris is a smart guy, as you said, so if he says its not financially viable, I believe him.

I think winning is going to help bring people back more then changing the name would. That being said I would also be happy if they changed it back and still sing the fight song the way it was supposed to be

I'd like to know what the number to change back would be because I kind of question that a little. The reason I question it is, according to him changing the name was extremely unpopular, is still extremely unpopular and is a reason a lot of fans refuse to come back and was crippling to the organization. That's pretty damning words IMO.

So what are we talking here for cost? Are we talking the team folds never to be heard from again? I doubt that. No offense to the Elks but we aren't talking a global company with 10's of 1000's of employees and hundreds of offices all over the world. It's a pretty localized company. Plus what would be the costs of an mostly empty stadium game after game, year after year vs changing the name back? I have to think in the first couple of season, the Thompson's are losing a hell of a lot of money so far. They are spending a lot of money on all kinds of needed things to try to fix the mess that the team was in and so far not getting much in the way of fan support. I really hope the stadium is packed on Friday because looks like the weather is supposed to be good. The team is at the top of the CFL, playing against the only team to have beat them. They are legit good. So if there isn't a big crowd there, in my opinion, that's pretty damning. If winning cures all, they are winning. I found the Thursday game kind of telling/concerning to me. Thursday night games suck for out of town people but for someone that live in Edmonton, shouldn't be too bad. Beautiful night, not too hot, not too cold. Elks were 3-1 playing against a crappy team they should beat so if you were worried of not seeing a win, that was about as much of a gimme of a win as it gets. It was Thursday night, not overly late game so even if you work on Friday, you aren't getting home late if you live in the Edmonton area. Can't blame the lake crowd because it was Thursday night. Oilers weren't playing. No NFL. What are people doing on a Thursday night they couldn't be bothered to go?

I assume they know what they are doing but if it was me, I would be looking into it because it's still a big time thing for a hell of a lot of people that I think holds a lot of people back no matter what. I think winning will help some for walk up crowds from time to time if the weather is amazing, there is nothing else competing, etc, etc but I am not sure they will consistently get big crowds and I am not sure they will get the uptick of season tickets they actually need to be successful so they have a consistent ticket base bought and paid for so even if there night isn't absolutely perfect, you have a good base sold. If they continue to just have the lower bowl open (which I think they should), I think they need to have that as at least 60% sold as season tickets. So high teens at least. They need guys like me, guys who have a history with the team, are in their 40's with disposable income to come back and drag their teen kids to games consistently. Not one offs once a year.

Maybe it's way more complicated than I think it is but it sure didn't seem too complicated to do it for the Elks. It just cost some money and a pain in the ass for a little bit and I would think it would be easier going back because you don't have to sell it to anyone. You aren't doing contests and polls and ad campaigns trying to figure out what name to pick then have to sell it to people. You aren't having to deal with pissed off people. It would be embraced extremely easily and you wouldn't have to sell the name to anyone. You are saying to your fan base, we know the organization screwed up big time. We weren't there to stop them. We can't change the past, all we can do is move forward and fix the wrongs because we hear you, we are listening finally and we need you back. Right now it's we know the organization screwed up, we hate what they did, we know what they did was wrong, we know you hate it and was a big factor in your leave but we aren't changing it so come back anyway. We are going to win, we promise but in the mean time, we are going to pretend it didn't happen by just having the EE instead of a stupid Elk on the helmet and all of our branding. We are going to have our announcer and sometimes play by play say Double EE even though the still say TOUCH DOWN ELKS! on the broadcast. Ignore that it says elks in the web address and just pretend you don't see Elks when the words for our beloved fight song comes up on the big screen and say Eskimos if you want.

If you are worried about the cost you say to all the fans and companies that say they won't come back to a game ever while they are called the Elks. To change it back costs a lot of money so we want to see you make a commitment to the team and put down a seasons deposit and tell them if the name is the only reason they won't come back which many claim is the reason, put your money where your mouth is and show it. You will learn real quick who has that as a serious reason and who just uses it as an excuse. IMO if you want to entice every single fan and company possible to come back, then you need to eliminate every possible reason not too and that one but all account is a major one. Just my 2 cents.

[Looner]

I'd like to know what the number to change back would be because I kind of question that a little. The reason I question it is, according to him changing the name was extremely unpopular, is still extremely unpopular and is a reason a lot of fans refuse to come back and was crippling to the organization. That's pretty damning words IMO.

So what are we talking here for cost? Are we talking the team folds never to be heard from again? I doubt that. No offense to the Elks but we aren't talking a global company with 10's of 1000's of employees and hundreds of offices all over the world. It's a pretty localized company. Plus what would be the costs of an mostly empty stadium game after game, year after year vs changing the name back? I have to think in the first couple of season, the Thompson's are losing a hell of a lot of money so far. They are spending a lot of money on all kinds of needed things to try to fix the mess that the team was in and so far not getting much in the way of fan support. I really hope the stadium is packed on Friday because looks like the weather is supposed to be good. The team is at the top of the CFL, playing against the only team to have beat them. They are legit good. So if there isn't a big crowd there, in my opinion, that's pretty damning. If winning cures all, they are winning. I found the Thursday game kind of telling/concerning to me. Thursday night games suck for out of town people but for someone that live in Edmonton, shouldn't be too bad. Beautiful night, not too hot, not too cold. Elks were 3-1 playing against a crappy team they should beat so if you were worried of not seeing a win, that was about as much of a gimme of a win as it gets. It was Thursday night, not overly late game so even if you work on Friday, you aren't getting home late if you live in the Edmonton area. Can't blame the lake crowd because it was Thursday night. Oilers weren't playing. No NFL. What are people doing on a Thursday night they couldn't be bothered to go?

I assume they know what they are doing but if it was me, I would be looking into it because it's still a big time thing for a hell of a lot of people that I think holds a lot of people back no matter what. I think winning will help some for walk up crowds from time to time if the weather is amazing, there is nothing else competing, etc, etc but I am not sure they will consistently get big crowds and I am not sure they will get the uptick of season tickets they actually need to be successful so they have a consistent ticket base bought and paid for so even if there night isn't absolutely perfect, you have a good base sold. If they continue to just have the lower bowl open (which I think they should), I think they need to have that as at least 60% sold as season tickets. So high teens at least. They need guys like me, guys who have a history with the team, are in their 40's with disposable income to come back and drag their teen kids to games consistently. Not one offs once a year.

Maybe it's way more complicated than I think it is but it sure didn't seem too complicated to do it for the Elks. It just cost some money and a pain in the ass for a little bit and I would think it would be easier going back because you don't have to sell it to anyone. You aren't doing contests and polls and ad campaigns trying to figure out what name to pick then have to sell it to people. You aren't having to deal with pissed off people. It would be embraced extremely easily and you wouldn't have to sell the name to anyone. You are saying to your fan base, we know the organization screwed up big time. We weren't there to stop them. We can't change the past, all we can do is move forward and fix the wrongs because we hear you, we are listening finally and we need you back. Right now it's we know the organization screwed up, we hate what they did, we know what they did was wrong, we know you hate it and was a big factor in your leave but we aren't changing it so come back anyway. We are going to win, we promise but in the mean time, we are going to pretend it didn't happen by just having the EE instead of a stupid Elk on the helmet and all of our branding. We are going to have our announcer and sometimes play by play say Double EE even though the still say TOUCH DOWN ELKS! on the broadcast. Ignore that it says elks in the web address and just pretend you don't see Elks when the words for our beloved fight song comes up on the big screen and say Eskimos if you want.

If you are worried about the cost you say to all the fans and companies that say they won't come back to a game ever while they are called the Elks. To change it back costs a lot of money so we want to see you make a commitment to the team and put down a seasons deposit and tell them if the name is the only reason they won't come back which many claim is the reason, put your money where your mouth is and show it. You will learn real quick who has that as a serious reason and who just uses it as an excuse. IMO if you want to entice every single fan and company possible to come back, then you need to eliminate every possible reason not too and that one but all account is a major one. Just my 2 cents.

I think its going to take a lot more then winning 3 of 4 games to bring people back, we've been the laughing stock of the league for 5 years, which has given us a steady decline in bums in seats. Just cause I like to see what actual numbers look like instead of just feelings our year over year attendance is:

• 2017 (12-6) 32,435 average
• 2018 (9-9) 31,107
• 2019 (8-10) 29,340
• 2020 - no season

REBRAND

• 2021 (3-11) 26,210
• 2022 (4-14) 23,786
• 2023 (4-14) 24,774
• 2024 (7-11) 20,499
• 2025 (7-11) 19,050
• 2026 (4-1) 15,281. Bit of an astrex on this one as we've only had 2 games and one of them was a downpour.

Looks to me like we lost 3k season seats between COVID and the rebrand. Its been in steady decline since then but I think thats mostly due to record and losing faith in our ability to win. I'll be curious to see how the rest of the year goes and what next years numbers look like. From what I hear in cost 4 mil or so to rebrand, which would take a lot of season seats to recover that money.

[Sectionq]

I think its going to take a lot more then winning 3 of 4 games to bring people back, we've been the laughing stock of the league for 5 years, which has given us a steady decline in bums in seats. Just cause I like to see what actual numbers look like instead of just feelings our year over year attendance is:

• 2017 (12-6) 32,435 average
• 2018 (9-9) 31,107
• 2019 (8-10) 29,340
• 2020 - no season

REBRAND

• 2021 (3-11) 26,210
• 2022 (4-14) 23,786
• 2023 (4-14) 24,774
• 2024 (7-11) 20,499
• 2025 (7-11) 19,050
• 2026 (4-1) 15,281. Bit of an astrex on this one as we've only had 2 games and one of them was a downpour.

Looks to me like we lost 3k season seats between COVID and the rebrand. Its been in steady decline since then but I think thats mostly due to record and losing faith in our ability to win. I'll be curious to see how the rest of the year goes and what next years numbers look like. From what I hear in cost 4 mil or so to rebrand, which would take a lot of season seats to recover that money.

When we had our seats in 2018, our last year, I thought the season ticket base was in the high teens at least. I could be wrong on that number but I can remember being in the seats even on a Thursday with mediocre weather and the announced attendance would be well over 20 and it was a legit number based on butts in the seats and that team was pretty mediocre. I could be wrong on that seasons number but I thought it was pretty high. It was pretty regular the attendance was high 20's on an average night and on a really nice night with a big game, you'd get 35+ easily.
What is the base now, is it even 7K?

I watched the game on Thursday, what was the attendance on that unreal night, was it even 12? It sure looked very empty on TV. Google says the lower bowl capacity is 31,025. I assume that's with every seat filled and they tarp off most of the endzone below the score board. So does anyone know the actual available seats with the tarped off endzone? Regardless, it wasn't half full by the looks of it. Winning might cure all, I am not sure. But if I was them, I would be looking at eliminating every single obstacle that might stop someone from coming. But that's just me.

[bone]

I think its going to take a lot more then winning 3 of 4 games to bring people back, we've been the laughing stock of the league for 5 years, which has given us a steady decline in bums in seats. Just cause I like to see what actual numbers look like instead of just feelings our year over year attendance is:

• 2017 (12-6) 32,435 average
• 2018 (9-9) 31,107
• 2019 (8-10) 29,340
• 2020 - no season

REBRAND

• 2021 (3-11) 26,210
• 2022 (4-14) 23,786
• 2023 (4-14) 24,774
• 2024 (7-11) 20,499
• 2025 (7-11) 19,050
• 2026 (4-1) 15,281. Bit of an astrex on this one as we've only had 2 games and one of them was a downpour.

Looks to me like we lost 3k season seats between COVID and the rebrand. Its been in steady decline since then but I think thats mostly due to record and losing faith in our ability to win. I'll be curious to see how the rest of the year goes and what next years numbers look like. From what I hear in cost 4 mil or so to rebrand, which would take a lot of season seats to recover that money.

Those same stats were what I was referring to when saying the attendance had a bigger drop the season they closed the upper deck than changing the name.

For the attendance last game, I wouldn't undersell the Thursday impact as Thursday's generally tend to sell less for some reason. I don't understand why, but they do. I was hoping for 20K last Thursday and that it would lead to 22-23K this Friday, but after last week, I think 20K is the best we can hope for.

I agree, this isn't a few game winning streak and everything is rosy again. It's going to be a slow build. Though on the positive side if they can keep this going, that Saturday 5PM game vs. Saskatchewan on a long weekend, possibly for sole possession of first place for either team, that should be a nice uptick for the overall attendance. If that goes well, then the Labour Day rematch is only a few games away, so there'd still be hope to catch and pass last year's attendance.

[Looner]

When we had our seats in 2018, our last year, I thought the season ticket base was in the high teens at least. I could be wrong on that number but I can remember being in the seats even on a Thursday with mediocre weather and the announced attendance would be well over 20 and it was a legit number based on butts in the seats and that team was pretty mediocre. I could be wrong on that seasons number but I thought it was pretty high. It was pretty regular the attendance was high 20's on an average night and on a really nice night with a big game, you'd get 35+ easily.
What is the base now, is it even 7K?

I watched the game on Thursday, what was the attendance on that unreal night, was it even 12? It sure looked very empty on TV. Google says the lower bowl capacity is 31,025. I assume that's with every seat filled and they tarp off most of the endzone below the score board. So does anyone know the actual available seats with the tarped off endzone? Regardless, it wasn't half full by the looks of it. Winning might cure all, I am not sure. But if I was them, I would be looking at eliminating every single obstacle that might stop someone from coming. But that's just me.

season seats matter for sure but I think the overall number of bums in seats is more important. I understand the need to eliminate all obstacles but at what cost? Lets say the re-rebrand cost 2 million dollars, how long would it take to recover that? Chris Morris recently stated that the rebrand costed around 4.5 million.

https://canadianbusiness.com/ideas/c...ce=chatgpt.com


The board was in a bind. If they kept their name, they risked losing some of their sponsors, which accounted for roughly $6 million in yearly revenue. If they rebranded, they risked alienating their fans—some of whom had threatened to boycott if the team changed their name—and losing their single biggest revenue stream: more than $8 million in annual ticket sales. But irate fans rarely follow through on such threats. In 2014, Michael Lewis, the author of Moneyball and The Big Short, studied several American colleges that changed their team names because they were considered offensive. He found that revenue remained stable in the year following the rebrand and then increased in subsequent years. “Threats of the boycott are empty,” he wrote in The New York Times. Refusing to shed a problematic name, he added, “borders on managerial malpractice.”
The old Edmonton mascot, Punter (left), stands with the new mascot, Spike the Elk, at a game in September.
In late July of 2020, Edmonton’s football team announced they would rebrand. By then, the board had discussed the issue at every meeting for four years straight, says Richards, and it was time to move on. To them, it seemed like the right thing to do, both morally and financially. “It got to the point where it made sense to put this behind us and not have our stakeholders deal with this,” says Richards. “It had become a big, big distraction.”