By Robbie Butler
My EC3219 - Economics of Sport module started last week. Having introduced the group to Rottenberg, Neale and Quirk, we also touched on issues such as competitive balance, uncertainty of outcome and salary caps. Today attention turns to the demand for sport; specifically ticket sales.
The Republic of Ireland's recent UEFA European Championship qualifier gives us a nice little example to consider. Prior to home games against Gibraltar (June) and the Netherlands (September) the Football Association of Ireland announced that tickets would be sold for both games as a package. This is largely due to the fact the Gibraltar are not a big attraction and demand for this game would probably be lifted by the predicted demand to watch the Netherlands in Dublin.
While ticket prices do vary across age and seat categories, adult tickets for both games started at €100. Therefore, if we assume that everyone was able to purchase at this minimum price, the cost per game was €50, with the stadium capacity 51,000 or 102,000 over the two games. Total Revenue was therefore maximised at €10.2 million. In reality of course, this was much higher.
So what happened? In total 91,963 fans attended across both games. There were 42,156 people at the Gibraltar game in June and 49,807 people at the Netherlands. That's €9.96 million in total revenue assuming all tickets were sold using this dual package approach.
Did the strategy work? Most likely yes. Some 7,651 people paid for a ticket for the Gibraltar game and never showed up. That's €382,550 in extra ticket sales.
There are possibly others that simply went along because they had a ticket. The last time Gibraltar were in Dublin was June 2019. The total attendance was 31,281. Assuming identical demand and ticket prices, that's an extra 10,875 tickets sold or more than €500,000 in extra revenue. In total, the decision could have yielded a minimum of nearly €900,000 of additional revenue.
There may have been some lost sales on the Dutch game. Just over 1,000 extra attendees could have went to the Aviva Stadium. Of course, these tickets may have been sold, but assuming they were not about €60,000 may have been lost, as some people were not prepared to pay for both games together.
As a football supporter, I did not agree with this strategy. I chose not to attend even though I wanted to originally go to the Gibraltar game. This approach is more suited to people that live closer to Dublin, were the cost of attending (both in money and time) is smaller.
For those living further from Dublin, a trip to the Aviva often requires a lunchtime start, traffic navigation, parking costs and a return home in the early hours of the following day. This approach maximize the income of the Association but not the welfare of some fans. Those setting the strategy certainly understand the economics of the sport and consumer surplus but, as someone said to me many years ago about a match referee, "They might know the rules, but do they know the game?"
My EC3219 - Economics of Sport module started last week. Having introduced the group to Rottenberg, Neale and Quirk, we also touched on issues such as competitive balance, uncertainty of outcome and salary caps. Today attention turns to the demand for sport; specifically ticket sales.
The Republic of Ireland's recent UEFA European Championship qualifier gives us a nice little example to consider. Prior to home games against Gibraltar (June) and the Netherlands (September) the Football Association of Ireland announced that tickets would be sold for both games as a package. This is largely due to the fact the Gibraltar are not a big attraction and demand for this game would probably be lifted by the predicted demand to watch the Netherlands in Dublin.
While ticket prices do vary across age and seat categories, adult tickets for both games started at €100. Therefore, if we assume that everyone was able to purchase at this minimum price, the cost per game was €50, with the stadium capacity 51,000 or 102,000 over the two games. Total Revenue was therefore maximised at €10.2 million. In reality of course, this was much higher.
So what happened? In total 91,963 fans attended across both games. There were 42,156 people at the Gibraltar game in June and 49,807 people at the Netherlands. That's €9.96 million in total revenue assuming all tickets were sold using this dual package approach.
Did the strategy work? Most likely yes. Some 7,651 people paid for a ticket for the Gibraltar game and never showed up. That's €382,550 in extra ticket sales.
There are possibly others that simply went along because they had a ticket. The last time Gibraltar were in Dublin was June 2019. The total attendance was 31,281. Assuming identical demand and ticket prices, that's an extra 10,875 tickets sold or more than €500,000 in extra revenue. In total, the decision could have yielded a minimum of nearly €900,000 of additional revenue.
There may have been some lost sales on the Dutch game. Just over 1,000 extra attendees could have went to the Aviva Stadium. Of course, these tickets may have been sold, but assuming they were not about €60,000 may have been lost, as some people were not prepared to pay for both games together.
As a football supporter, I did not agree with this strategy. I chose not to attend even though I wanted to originally go to the Gibraltar game. This approach is more suited to people that live closer to Dublin, were the cost of attending (both in money and time) is smaller.
For those living further from Dublin, a trip to the Aviva often requires a lunchtime start, traffic navigation, parking costs and a return home in the early hours of the following day. This approach maximize the income of the Association but not the welfare of some fans. Those setting the strategy certainly understand the economics of the sport and consumer surplus but, as someone said to me many years ago about a match referee, "They might know the rules, but do they know the game?"
RSS Feed