NFL UK Forums - View Single Post - Bengals / Rams 6th October
View Single Post
  #9  
Old 10.04.2019, 11:37 AM
European Bob's Avatar
European Bob European Bob is offline
MVP
 
Join Date: 11.01.2012
Posts: 8,299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaldenavn View Post
As for the weather, I did say "perceived risk" quite deliberately! Back in the early days I had an argument with a journalist on a blog where he cited rain statistics as a reason against a London franchise. Nothing would sway him, not even pointing out historic weather that showed very few days with even drizzle at 6m on Sundays between September and December, nor my actual experience of living here. The perception is that rains almost constantly is not an uncommon one with Americans.
Well facts don't matter anymore. If there's one thing we've learned in the last 3 years, this is it. And yes, London actually has lower annual rainfall than Miami, New York, Rome and a lot of other places. We just don't get a lot of sunshine either. Lots of dry, cloudy days. Miami and Tampa have ridiculous rainfall in the early part of the season. Early afternoon storms is one reason the Bucs try to have as many 4:25pm kickoffs as possible early in the season.

Mind you, I think English fans get things wrong about weather in America too, so it's not all one-sided. I remember seeing someone on another thread talk about 'the cold' in Seattle, for example. Actually, in terms of real proper cold, you are more likely to get that in a December game in Tennessee than you are in Seattle. Places that can be 38 celsius in summer can be -6 celsius in winter. That's America. Seattle is pretty mild - in fact by far it is the NFL city with the weather most similar to what we get in London.


Quote:
But if you think they are not really considering a franchise, why do you think they are playing games that do, and always will, lose the league money? The profitability of the games and associated benefits are outweighed by the added costs of playing them. NFL owners are not people known for throwing away money for small benefits (development benefits from NFL Europe) let alone for nothing.

And the opening of a new stadium this year, into which the league invested for its own permanent dedicated NFL facilities, and a separate field, does not move a franchise closer?
Time will tell, I guess. By far the biggest driver though will be someone needing to get out of their existing US market.

I don't buy the loss-making point. There are 2 ways to look at this: (1) how much money did we make on the actual game, and (2) what are the consequences of doing that game for the long-term fanbase?

It's the latter that is key. The NFL London games got me back into the sport after a decade-long hiatus. Now, is the money they make on me limited to the price I pay for my ticket (call it £60) and what I buy on game day (usually nothing)? Or is it everything else too? I have bought jerseys, baseball caps, beanies. Not on game day, but usually online purchases at other times. I bought NFL gamepass - that's about £150 a year, isn't it? I forget. But it's an automatic purchase for me and has been for the last 8 or so seasons. I buy Sky Sports on an as/when basis usually just so I can watch the Steelers when they are on. I'm watching the shows and sucking up the adverts, which the NFL sells. I've been over to America multiple times to see games, spent money there both on the NFL (tickets, concessions) and in the wider economy - both NFL merchandise from local vendors (you get a lot more choice of Steelers gear in Pittsburgh, surprisingly!) and various other things from hotels to food to transport. I want more football. I will keep spending money on football above and beyond merely London game tickets.

That's the value of the London games. You are generating interest in the game, growing the fanbase, growing the exposure. It increases sales in other products, byproducts, advertising revenue etc etc. Without the IS games, I'm not sure the game here has the same profile. And lower profile means lower fan interest and lower spend.

I have to say, I would love to know where the spend goes on the games and how it stacks up to the revenues. I'm sure spend does outweigh revenue, I don't doubt it and I've heard it before in multiple places. But I wonder how much of it is unnecessary spend. Remember when the Jets brought everything bar the kitchen sink with them? Toilet roll etc. As if they were going camping or to the third world. I wonder if the whole operation is that needlessly micro-managed.

Last edited by European Bob; 10.04.2019 at 11:48 AM.
Reply With Quote