Jeff Ream Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 At least that is changing for the better. those that can. those still unemployed or trying to recover from unemployment aren't doing so well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 those that can. those still unemployed or trying to recover from unemployment aren't doing so well. Of course not, but the article talks about the overall savings numbers, which are going in the right direction...on the whole. Still a long way to go to reach the levels of the 70's and before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvertrombone Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Wow. I'm amazed at how GREAT DCI was ON the field from 91 to 96 yet how totally crap the attendance was at Finals. 93 is not on the list but was in the Orlando territory of 13,000 or so. 11 to 15, IIRC. With those 5 years its pretty incredible to me that the activity even survived those great on-field years. This sort of thread intrigues me...MBA geek that I am. Good thread...I'll have to come back and engage in more analysis since number crunching is sort of my profession...later, when time permits. This is the sort of thread the activity needs to see more of...good, solid conversation based on outside economic factors affecting attendance. Kudos, all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted October 9, 2010 Author Share Posted October 9, 2010 those that can. those still unemployed or trying to recover from unemployment aren't doing so well. I agree with this, surely. But I also think those still unemployed are going to think twice about accepting so much debt because of the pain they're feeling now. Ultimately, that's very healthy for them (IMO) and certainly healthy for the economy. Certainly, it was the "evil corporations" that provided the easy credit, but corporations provide what their customers want (usually with little consideration of whether it's 'good' for them or not) and if consumers use less credit the corporations will be not so creative in offering ways to get credit. Further, those same corporations get stuck with the bill when failures occur, so the corporations learned a hard lesson as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted October 9, 2010 Author Share Posted October 9, 2010 Wow. I'm amazed at how GREAT DCI was ON the field from 91 to 96 yet how totally crap the attendance was at Finals. 93 is not on the list but was in the Orlando territory of 13,000 or so. 11 to 15, IIRC. With those 5 years its pretty incredible to me that the activity even survived those great on-field years.This sort of thread intrigues me...MBA geek that I am. Good thread...I'll have to come back and engage in more analysis since number crunching is sort of my profession...later, when time permits. This is the sort of thread the activity needs to see more of...good, solid conversation based on outside economic factors affecting attendance. Kudos, all! Admission to my Geek Club is free. Come on in! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Certainly, it was the "evil corporations" that provided the easy credit, but corporations provide what their customers want (usually with little consideration of whether it's 'good' for them or not) and if consumers use less credit the corporations will be not so creative in offering ways to get credit.Further, those same corporations get stuck with the bill when failures occur, so the corporations learned a hard lesson as well. Not sure why we're going there. But since we're there.....those "big" whatevers, corporations, oil companies, pharmaceuticals, etc., that politicians like to rail against, also employ a whole lot of us. I'll leave it at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted October 9, 2010 Author Share Posted October 9, 2010 (edited) EDIT: Scroll down to see the chart of attendance... Some observations not completely beaten to death and worthy of discussion/speculation: From '95 to '96 GDP increased, yet attendance fell 28%. Was Orlando THAT bad? Too hot? Too expensive? Not enough non-DC activities? Bad stadium venue? What caused it? And if the answer is so definitive, why was '03 Orlando attendance so much better? Why the 14% disparity between Buffalo '95 and Buffalo '01? Obviously it's not location, location, location. GDP is lower. Is that it? 9/11? Electronics? Madison attendance is amazingly consistent. Why? Great venue but not as good since pressbox renovations. Nothing else to do. Hard to get to. Not enough hotel rooms. The "hotbed" of DC activity. By these numbers, finals should never leave Madison and the 10 year deal should have been signed there. The red trendline of attendance is definitively moving up over these years. Isn't that proof that A&E and "show design" hasn't negatively affected attendance? In fact, is the argument more sound that A&E and "show design" have contributed to increasing attendance? 1.) Drawing a line that connects all of the bottom (bad) attendance numbers, and one connecting all the top (good) attendance numbers creates a trough that suggests Bloomington will be announced between about 22,500 and 25,000. 2.) The greatest peak-to-trough attendance decline was 33%, from '95 Buffalo to '98 Orlando 3.) If that decline is repeated from Pasadena to Bloomington '08 or Indy '09 or '10, then one of those years' attendance will be announced at about 16,280. That would still be 22% higher attendance than the worst attendance (Orlando '98), still signifying GROWTH of attendance. The variability of peak-to-trough swings is clearly declining. Drawing connecting lines across the highs, and under the lows, reveals a "rising pennant" pattern. Classic technical analysis suggests attendance is about to "break out" upwards and set new high attendance, or "break down" and set lower attendance. Which will it be? As long as attendance stays above the "worst" (Orlando '98) the rising trend will stay intact, suggesting recovery from the decline is more probable than not. (I included the graph again for easy reference. If it's not necessary to include it in your reply please consider deleting it to make the thread easier to read.) And remember that attendance in my "Geek" club is free, so anyone can join! Edited October 9, 2010 by garfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david.t Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Why was Orlando so unpopular? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FHdork Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 Someone mentioned Charlotte as a great venue - I agree! But they said no football.... whoops - http://www.panthers.com/stadium/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bari Posted October 9, 2010 Share Posted October 9, 2010 (edited) I do not know what it was like to be a fan in Orlando or Miami... But as a MM... Miami was hell! You were on the field for about 5 minutes before you were completely sweated from head to toe (Granted I come from the land of no humidity) We watched things like Palmetto bugs eat large slices of ham and then had to sleep on the gym floors! Accidentally wandered into the wrong neighborhood near the stadium (Orange Bowl) ETC... Things like this made Miami an aweful place to go to DCI for me anyway. I know you are talking about Orlando but I bet it had many of the same problems... Edited October 9, 2010 by Big Bad Bari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.