Attendance decline (free fall?)

[crusaderjoe]

Lower attendance has nothing to do with online streaming.  If anything it would help fan base by allowing fans to follow the team on away games.  Our target market for fans will not be those who will are inclined to stream home games.  It all comes down to product, price and perceived value.

I do think Valpo basketball is a great product.  However it is marketed HORRIBLY.  A few signs on rt 30 doesn't cut it.  The university missed the boat on this years ago and it has gotten worse. 

Price is an issue.  Of the 15 homes games there are usually 3-4 cupcake games against non D1.  368.75 for chairback season tickets is steep in my eyes for the quality of opponents that come to play at the ARC.  Also, no way the side sections of the chairbacks should be priced the same as the middle 3 sections.  I think the lower lever bleachers season tickets are a good value but any guy over 6 foot and 185 lbs needs practically two seats to sit in that section.  Upper bleachers should be right at 5 bucks per game and 10 for quality opponents.   I'm still shocked about last years "premium" game against Oakland where an upper bleacher seat was 20 bucks each.  Whoever priced that, and hopefully is reading this, should be embarrassed by the turnout for that game.

Value - I"m not sure a family of 4 or 5 is willing to spend 80-100 bucks to go see a game here.  The ARC needs to be updated bad from the fan and player experience.  How many years have we discussed the poor audio in the ARC?  Need more promotions to get families in the seats. 

Finally someone gets it.  It only took 22 posts.

I agree completely with your remarks in general.  As for marketing, there was a time not that long ago when Loyola had more of its basketball games broadcast on Lakeshore Public Television than VU did.  And yet VU was NWI's hometown team?  When you have to compete for a subway alumni base that includes ND, IU and Purdue in your geographical area, and not to mention also compete with all of the high quality high school basketball in this area, you can't let things like this happen if you want to derive interest in your product.  This is particularly important for a school like VU in that its location is geographically awkward to begin with.  It is located in small town Indiana, yet it is part of the Chicagoland/NWI statistical area which is one of the largest in the country. 

You all know my thoughts on our venue.  Why would I want to pay X amount of dollars to watch a basketball game at Valpo when I could get better sight lines at Andrean High School?

And a big lulz to the idea that we drew 2k a game in the very early 90's, like in '91.  Back then, the curtain covered the Mezz most of the time.  You could hear pins drop in the gym during games.  When the curtain was raised, it was actually kind of a big deal.  Looking at the data put up in this thread, it actually frustrates me more that we didn't build on our Sweet 16 run as much as we should have to garner more interest in the program given where our program was in the very early 90's. But, you know how that goes.  A sister school like Butler is in the Big East but around here we're still trying to justify why filling 65% of our high school venue is such a great thing.

[valpopal]

The basketball team participated in the Popcorn Festival parade again on Saturday. At the suggestion of Bryce, this time they tossed small souvenir basketballs to many of the kids along the route. I think this kind of promotion, along with other targeting of families with young kids, can be an important focus for marketing. Big discounts for families or youth groups, even offering free tickets to kids under 10 accompanied by an adult, as well as other efforts to make games a family friendly environment are positive ways to add attendance. Funds lost from ticket giveaways can be offset by sales at concession or souvenir stands. Last year, the marketing folks also took a step in the right directions with the return of halftime entertainment for a few of the games. As has been observed on this forum a number of times, the diehard fan base is an older constituency with most attending games going back at least to the Sweet 16 team. Whatever can be done to develop a younger following in the community would be beneficial.

Below is a photo of Vashil waving to fans at the parade. A couple of pictures with other players at the parade, including first glimpses at some of the new players, can be found at the following link: https://www.flickr.com/photos/96208998@N05/sets/72157646887062889/

[Big D]

Lower attendance has nothing to do with online streaming.

I couldn't disagree more.  It is one of the biggest reasons I argue that the HL should make the HLN a pay site.  The HLN discourages fans from attending games in person by making the broadcasts free and convenient.   Season tickets at most schools cost hundreds of dollars per seat, plus the cost of parking at many of our venues, travel expense, and money you are going to spend at the concession stands.  Many fans of opposing teams no longer travel to HL venues because we offer them a free broadcast of the games.  If it was 10 years ago I would be preparing to make about 15 road trips for this season to watch my team play.  I used to travel to all HL away games and many of our OOC games that were appealing to me.  I rarely travel to more than 2-3 games at other HL venues a year anymore because it just isn't worth all of the travel and costs when I can just stay home and watch my team play on the road on TV.  Last year, my team played 5-6 OOC games where they offered their games online for a fee.  I paid between $5.99 and $9.99 a piece to see my team play those games and never batted an eyelash doing so.  It was much more inexpensive than traveling to those away games.   It's a joke we allow fans of other teams to watch HL broadcasts without getting any compensation for it.  We make it way too easy for opponent's fans to stay home, but it can even be tempting to our own fans.  Parents with young kids and seniors in particular don't want to deal with the travel, parking, walking up and down all of those stairs in our arenas in the dead of winter when they can easily watch our games at home.  We lose twice when we broadcast games for free.  We lose the revenue from having that fan attend the game in person and we also lose the revenue we could have made by charging him to watch the game online.  There aren't many businesses out there that give away their product for free. 

[a3uge]

Lower attendance has nothing to do with online streaming.

I couldn't disagree more.  It is one of the biggest reasons I argue that the HL should make the HLN a pay site.  The HLN discourages fans from attending games in person by making the broadcasts free and convenient.   Season tickets at most schools cost hundreds of dollars per seat, plus the cost of parking at many of our venues, travel expense, and money you are going to spend at the concession stands.  Many fans of opposing teams no longer travel to HL venues because we offer them a free broadcast of the games.  If it was 10 years ago I would be preparing to make about 15 road trips for this season to watch my team play.  I used to travel to all HL away games and many of our OOC games that were appealing to me.  I rarely travel to more than 2-3 games at other HL venues a year anymore because it just isn't worth all of the travel and costs when I can just stay home and watch my team play on the road on TV.  Last year, my team played 5-6 OOC games where they offered their games online for a fee.  I paid between $5.99 and $9.99 a piece to see my team play those games and never batted an eyelash doing so.  It was much more inexpensive than traveling to those away games.   It's a joke we allow fans of other teams to watch HL broadcasts without getting any compensation for it.  We make it way too easy for opponent's fans to stay home, but it can even be tempting to our own fans.  Parents with young kids and seniors in particular don't want to deal with the travel, parking, walking up and down all of those stairs in our arenas in the dead of winter when they can easily watch our games at home.  We lose twice when we broadcast games for free.  We lose the revenue from having that fan attend the game in person and we also lose the revenue we could have made by charging him to watch the game online.  There aren't many businesses out there that give away their product for free.

Thinking that there's hundreds of people that are now staying home from every game now that there's online streaming is irrational. I doubt there were hundreds of fans that previously traveled 4+ hours for games that are now watching from their laptops. Maybe 1, 2 fans per team fit this criteria? I bet the HL Net streams have under a hundred viewers per game. Super fans that travel and watch streams are a small fraction of attendees. Again, fans that care enough to watch some obscure online stream on their laptops are probably the ones going to the most games. Fans that watch away games on a laptop are probably more likely to be into the team and attend home games than fans that maybe check out on ESPN how the team did every once in awhile.

Also the statement "There aren't many businesses out there that give away their product for free" is kind of silly. The internet is full of streams and videos from non subscription-based sites.

[valpotx]

As I have said before, I would gladly pay a few $ to watch Valpo sports on a yearly subscription.  They just need to get the capability to do so on the baseball field, but even without that, I have no issues signing up.  Like Big D, I have paid $6 to watch some of our games on crappier networks

[wh]

Not that I've put a lot of thought into this, but is there anything to lose by making the HLN a pay site?  I would like to think that true followers of the 9 programs (especially alumni, family and friends of players, etc. living outside the area) would gladly pay a nominal fee for the privilege of watching live broadcasts.  For those who would say, 'if I have to pay, I won't watch,' so what?  It's like asking your adult child living in your basement to help pay a little toward the rent and food, and they reply, 'if you make me pay something, I'm gonna move out.'  Good luck to you, son. 

The HL probably made a mistake by not charging from the get-go.  True fans would have gladly paid a nominal fee for first time access to live broadcasts and been grateful for the privilege. Now that they're used to "free," it's a whole different psychology.

[Big D]

Thinking that there's hundreds of people that are now staying home from every game now that there's online streaming is irrational. I doubt there were hundreds of fans that previously traveled 4+ hours for games that are now watching from their laptops. Maybe 1, 2 fans per team fit this criteria?

You are a fool if you honestly believe 1-2 fans fit that criteria.  I used to travel regularly to all WSU away games and became good friends with other fans that also made those road trips regularly.  Wright State used to arrange 2-3 bus loads of fans for our 2 game road trip to Chicago or into Wisconsin.  We rarely have to charter more than 1 bus now.  Before the HLN, UWM used to bring a couple of buses loaded with fans to their game at the Nutter Center.  Now we get a few carloads.  That is just HL fans.  You also have to consider that most HL teams schedule several of their OOC games vs other local D1 teams that also have local alumni.  Their fans are closer to our arenas than most fans of HL opponents and they have stopped attending games too.  You don't think being able to watch the game for free at home has something to do with that?  The number of traveling fans we have lost may not be in the hundreds, but it is a heck of a lot more than 1-2.  Even if the number is a little more than 100.  Multiple that by the number of home games you play each year by the average cost of your tickets.  That is enough money to buy a game vs a D1 team each year instead of a NAIA/D2 team.   Add in the loss of revenue of your own fan base that comes to watch the games online instead of in person and we are probably leaving enough money on the table to completely eliminate playing NAIA/D2 teams.

I bet the HL Net streams have under a hundred viewers per game.

I don't know what the league wide numbers are, but I do know what Wright State's numbers were for last year.  The average home game streamed to a little over 3000 IP addresses.   WSU had 16 home games last year.  If all of those fans would have paid $5 per broadcast to watch the HLN, we could have added $240,000 in revenue.  Even if only 1/3 of those viewers were willing to pay to see the broadcast, we still would be bringing in $80,000.  Once again, that is enough revenue to help each team pay for better buy games.  It is revenue we could be using on recruiting.  It is money we could be using for advertising.  If nothing else is could be revenue the HL has to cover the cost of running the HLN.  The HL spends a quarter of a million a year to run the HLN. 

[EddieCabot]

If nothing else is could be revenue the HL has to cover the cost of running the HLN.  The HL spends a quarter of a million a year to run the HLN.

I seem to recall that the HL was funding this from their share of the NCAA tournament payouts.  Any decrease in those payouts could force the HL to look at the idea that Big D presented.

[FWalum]

Thinking that there's hundreds of people that are now staying home from every game now that there's online streaming is irrational. I doubt there were hundreds of fans that previously traveled 4+ hours for games that are now watching from their laptops. Maybe 1, 2 fans per team fit this criteria?

You are a fool if you honestly believe 1-2 fans fit that criteria.  I used to travel regularly to all WSU away games and became good friends with other fans that also made those road trips regularly.  Wright State used to arrange 2-3 bus loads of fans for our 2 game road trip to Chicago or into Wisconsin.  We rarely have to charter more than 1 bus now.  Before the HLN, UWM used to bring a couple of buses loaded with fans to their game at the Nutter Center.  Now we get a few carloads.  That is just HL fans.  You also have to consider that most HL teams schedule several of their OOC games vs other local D1 teams that also have local alumni.  Their fans are closer to our arenas than most fans of HL opponents and they have stopped attending games too.  You don't think being able to watch the game for free at home has something to do with that?  The number of traveling fans we have lost may not be in the hundreds, but it is a heck of a lot more than 1-2.  Even if the number is a little more than 100.  Multiple that by the number of home games you play each year by the average cost of your tickets.  That is enough money to buy a game vs a D1 team each year instead of a NAIA/D2 team.   Add in the loss of revenue of your own fan base that comes to watch the games online instead of in person and we are probably leaving enough money on the table to completely eliminate playing NAIA/D2 teams.

I bet the HL Net streams have under a hundred viewers per game.

I don't know what the league wide numbers are, but I do know what Wright State's numbers were for last year.  The average home game streamed to a little over 3000 IP addresses.   WSU had 16 home games last year.  If all of those fans would have paid $5 per broadcast to watch the HLN, we could have added $240,000 in revenue.  Even if only 1/3 of those viewers were willing to pay to see the broadcast, we still would be bringing in $80,000.  Once again, that is enough revenue to help each team pay for better buy games.  It is revenue we could be using on recruiting.  It is money we could be using for advertising.  If nothing else is could be revenue the HL has to cover the cost of running the HLN.  The HL spends a quarter of a million a year to run the HLN. 

The needs and priorities of the marketing and business plans concerning the HLN and conference are much more complicated then what you have outlined above.  Here are just a few additional considerations.

• HLN already receives ad revenue from corporate sponsors. Making the HLN fee based would GREATLY reduce viewership. This is a known fact.
• HLN is one of the best Mid Major Media outlets in the country.  We are the envy of most other Mid Major Networks.  If it is not working the conference will make a change.
• At this level the conference and universities are more interested in exposure rather than the limited revenue it would generate if fee based.  Great for exposure to out of area alumni.  Creating connections and interest is what it is all about.

these are but a few of the things I believe are considered when evaluating the HLN.

The proliferation of online entertainment opportunities has affected everything from local television, newspapers, restaurants and minor league teams.  I seriously doubt that the HLN has any major affect on home game attendance, if anything I feel the ease of accessibility has increased awareness of our teams among alumni and friends.  Giving back to alumni, friends and parents something that in the past has only be available to the BIG universities has more impact and is of higher value to our institutions than I think you take into consideration.

[a3uge]

Thinking that there's hundreds of people that are now staying home from every game now that there's online streaming is irrational. I doubt there were hundreds of fans that previously traveled 4+ hours for games that are now watching from their laptops. Maybe 1, 2 fans per team fit this criteria?

You are a fool if you honestly believe 1-2 fans fit that criteria.  I used to travel regularly to all WSU away games and became good friends with other fans that also made those road trips regularly.  Wright State used to arrange 2-3 bus loads of fans for our 2 game road trip to Chicago or into Wisconsin.  We rarely have to charter more than 1 bus now.  Before the HLN, UWM used to bring a couple of buses loaded with fans to their game at the Nutter Center.  Now we get a few carloads.  That is just HL fans.  You also have to consider that most HL teams schedule several of their OOC games vs other local D1 teams that also have local alumni.  Their fans are closer to our arenas than most fans of HL opponents and they have stopped attending games too.  You don't think being able to watch the game for free at home has something to do with that?  The number of traveling fans we have lost may not be in the hundreds, but it is a heck of a lot more than 1-2.  Even if the number is a little more than 100.  Multiple that by the number of home games you play each year by the average cost of your tickets.  That is enough money to buy a game vs a D1 team each year instead of a NAIA/D2 team.   Add in the loss of revenue of your own fan base that comes to watch the games online instead of in person and we are probably leaving enough money on the table to completely eliminate playing NAIA/D2 teams.

I bet the HL Net streams have under a hundred viewers per game.

I don't know what the league wide numbers are, but I do know what Wright State's numbers were for last year.  The average home game streamed to a little over 3000 IP addresses.   WSU had 16 home games last year.  If all of those fans would have paid $5 per broadcast to watch the HLN, we could have added $240,000 in revenue.  Even if only 1/3 of those viewers were willing to pay to see the broadcast, we still would be bringing in $80,000.  Once again, that is enough revenue to help each team pay for better buy games.  It is revenue we could be using on recruiting.  It is money we could be using for advertising.  If nothing else is could be revenue the HL has to cover the cost of running the HLN.  The HL spends a quarter of a million a year to run the HLN.

You think the Horizon League network would generate $720k to $2.16 million per year if they made it subscription based? If the HL could make millions on this, I'm sure the streams would be paid already. Even if this 3000 viewers per game number is accurate, I find it highly unlikely that a subscription turnover would be 1/3. 1/3 of people getting something for free would pay $80 now? Keep in mind the number of ESPN3 streams offered per year as well. Also, what, the home team collects 100% of the streaming profits each game? Wouldn't the away team's fans comprise most of the viewers? The Horizon would kindly run the service and not take a cut of the subscriptions? And the current ads on the HL net amount to $0? I'm not against the league switching to a subscription service, but to imply that each team would make at least $80,000 in pure profit on live streaming is ridiculous. If they switch to a subscription model, the money would go towards the cost of running the stream, the Horizon League, and then finally to each team, split evenly.

Also, its asinine to suggest that UWM fans aren't going to games now because of online streaming. Don't you think their previous attendance marks have anything to do with them making it to the Sweet 16? Attendance has to do with team success. Butler's attendance didn't go down after the HL Net came online. UWGBs attendance was the highest since the 90s. Laptop streaming isn't swaying attendance numbers by hundreds of people per game. Again, there's not hundreds of people per game making a conscious decision to take out their laptop and watch the game from home because they suddenly have this convenience vs traveling to the arena and buying a $15 ticket like in the old days. If you completely cut the streaming service, I doubt you'd find a significant increase in attendance. This is absolutely undetectable, however, because there's a variety of factors that determine attendance, but in every sport, the main predictor of high attendance is team success.

[Big D]

You think the Horizon League network would generate $720k to $2.16 million per year if they made it subscription based?

No I don't.  I do think it would make enough money to cover the cost of operating it and I think it would discourage fans from staying home to watch games.  If there was no other benefit at all, I think that would make it worthwhile to do.  But there is at least one other benefit.  Making the HLN a paysite would make the HL look like we value our product.  Try to watch a internet broadcast of an A-10,  MVC or MAC game next year.  You have to pay to watch their broadcast online because they know there is value to their product.   The HL doesn't get that.

Also, its asinine to suggest that UWM fans aren't going to games now because of online streaming. Don't you think their previous attendance marks have anything to do with them making it to the Sweet 16? Attendance has to do with team success. Butler's attendance didn't go down after the HL Net came online. UWGBs attendance was the highest since the 90s.

It's not asinine at all to suggest that UWM fans aren't traveling to Dayton because of online streaming.  It's a fact.  Like I have stated in my past post.  I have been traveling to WSU away games for decades.  I know many of the fans of other HL teams pretty well.  I have even let a few of them crash at my house when their team was in town over the years.   UWM didn't just stop having passionate fans because their team has had a few down years.   They still have several thousand loyal fans that follow their team closely.  I have asked many of those fans over the years why they don't travel as much to away games and the HLN is ALWAYS the answer. 

In regards to Butler and UWGB's attendance numbers, what is your point?  That successful teams don't have attendance problems.  Did you read the first post in this thread?  Your own team has won 2 conf. championships and a conf. tournament championship in the last 5 years and your attendance is down.  Wright State is coming off of the best 8 year stretch in school history and attendance is down.  There are many things that factor into why attendance numbers are down and offering the games for free online is one of them.  Ignoring that is asinine.

[LaPorteAveApostle]

It's not asinine at all to suggest that UWM fans aren't traveling to Dayton because of online streaming.  It's a fact.

I have a hard time imagining anything important enough to get me to Dayton.

Like not even a court date.

[bbtds]

It's not asinine at all to suggest that UWM fans aren't traveling to Dayton because of online streaming.  It's a fact.

I have a hard time imagining anything important enough to get me to Dayton.

Like not even a court date.

Dayton ain't so bad. I used to go there a lot when Valpo played there but I think I got in the habit of watching the games on the internet. There certainly are a bunch of factors that go into my decision making but the HLN broadcasts are definitely a large part of why I don't go on as many road trips.

[wh]

The proliferation of online entertainment opportunities has affected everything from local television, newspapers, restaurants and minor league teams.  I seriously doubt that the HLN has any major affect on home game attendance, if anything I feel the ease of accessibility has increased awareness of our teams among alumni and friends.  Giving back to alumni, friends and parents something that in the past has only be available to the BIG universities has more impact and is of higher value to our institutions than I think you take into consideration.

On average, less than 13% of college alumni give anything to their alma mater.  I don't think we need to be too concerned about using the HLN as a way of "giving back to alumni."

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-list-college/articles/2013/09/26/10-colleges-where-most-alumni-give-back

[a3uge]

You think the Horizon League network would generate $720k to $2.16 million per year if they made it subscription based?

No I don't.  I do think it would make enough money to cover the cost of operating it and I think it would discourage fans from staying home to watch games.  If there was no other benefit at all, I think that would make it worthwhile to do.  But there is at least one other benefit.  Making the HLN a paysite would make the HL look like we value our product.  Try to watch a internet broadcast of an A-10,  MVC or MAC game next year.  You have to pay to watch their broadcast online because they know there is value to their product.   The HL doesn't get that.

Also, its asinine to suggest that UWM fans aren't going to games now because of online streaming. Don't you think their previous attendance marks have anything to do with them making it to the Sweet 16? Attendance has to do with team success. Butler's attendance didn't go down after the HL Net came online. UWGBs attendance was the highest since the 90s.

It's not asinine at all to suggest that UWM fans aren't traveling to Dayton because of online streaming.  It's a fact.  Like I have stated in my past post.  I have been traveling to WSU away games for decades.  I know many of the fans of other HL teams pretty well.  I have even let a few of them crash at my house when their team was in town over the years.   UWM didn't just stop having passionate fans because their team has had a few down years.   They still have several thousand loyal fans that follow their team closely.  I have asked many of those fans over the years why they don't travel as much to away games and the HLN is ALWAYS the answer. 

In regards to Butler and UWGB's attendance numbers, what is your point?  That successful teams don't have attendance problems.  Did you read the first post in this thread?  Your own team has won 2 conf. championships and a conf. tournament championship in the last 5 years and your attendance is down.  Wright State is coming off of the best 8 year stretch in school history and attendance is down.  There are many things that factor into why attendance numbers are down and offering the games for free online is one of them.  Ignoring that is asinine.

UWM has attendance issues in their own stadium and their games have been televised locally for many years before HL net was around. So there goes that theory.

[wh]

From an article entitled "Fewer Americans Go to the Movies:"

A report from the Motion Picture Association of America released Tuesday said that domestic movie box-office sales rose to $10.9 billion last year, from $10.8 billion in 2012.

But the increase was the result of higher ticket prices, not attendance.  Indeed, the number of tickets sold slipped yet again, this time 1.5% to 1.34 billion from 1.36 billion.

That extends a longstanding trend: The number of tickets sold fell nearly 11% between 2004 and 2013, according to the report, while box office revenue increased 17%.

With home-entertainment options improving all the time— whether streamed movies and television, video games, or mobile apps—and studios releasing fewer movies, people are less likely to head to their local multiplex.

Would someone care to explain how people staying home to watch streamed movies instead of going to the movie theater is any different than people staying home to watch streamed basketball games instead of going to the game?  For God's sake, please don't answer!

This isn't rocket science, folks.

[LaPorteAveApostle]

I think it's different; the equivalent in sports would be waiting a few months to watch the same game at your house!

At any rate, an annual complaint on this board is the amount of students not attending games; I have a hard time imagining students are staying away because they want to watch in their dorm on the laptop.

I think Paul (or whoever it was above) had it right--the large part of the discrepancy can be chalked up to simply who's counting heads in the department.

Americans don't "do stuff" like they used to (see: Bowling Alone).  It's not VU's or the HL's fault.

[crusaderjoe]

I think Paul (or whoever it was above) had it right--the large part of the discrepancy can be chalked up to simply who's counting heads in the department.

Can't agree with this.  Regardless of who is counting the numbers, attendance has both qualitative and quantitative attributes, IMO.  In other words, as a fan I don't have to know that 2300 people saw a game the other night. I don't have to know whether that number is accurate or how that number was determined.  All I need to know is that I can recognize a garbage athletic venue when I see one.

[wh]

I think it's different; the equivalent in sports would be waiting a few months to watch the same game at your house!

At any rate, an annual complaint on this board is the amount of students not attending games; I have a hard time imagining students are staying away because they want to watch in their dorm on the laptop.

I think Paul (or whoever it was above) had it right--the large part of the discrepancy can be chalked up to simply who's counting heads in the department.

Americans don't "do stuff" like they used to (see: Bowling Alone).  It's not VU's or the HL's fault.

Hopefully, the athletic department doesn't share your fatalist view. To use a poker analogy, there are too many hands that should have been played better (e.g., marketing) and too many aces being thrown away (e.g., ARC upgrade) to simply accept that "it is what it is."

   

[FWalum]

The proliferation of online entertainment opportunities has affected everything from local television, newspapers, restaurants and minor league teams.  I seriously doubt that the HLN has any major affect on home game attendance, if anything I feel the ease of accessibility has increased awareness of our teams among alumni and friends.  Giving back to alumni, friends and parents something that in the past has only be available to the BIG universities has more impact and is of higher value to our institutions than I think you take into consideration.

On average, less than 13% of college alumni give anything to their alma mater.  I don't think we need to be too concerned about using the HLN as a way of "giving back to alumni."


http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-list-college/articles/2013/09/26/10-colleges-where-most-alumni-give-back

I am not sure what you are really trying to say with that article.  Have you been involved in non-profit development?  If you have and you are making that statement then your experience in development is a whole lot different than mine.  Making people associated with a group or organization feel like they aren't just being asked for money all of the time is a big concern for non-profits. The perception that they are getting some value from their association with the entity is one of the key factors.  Giving back, whether it be in the form of academic reputation, personal relationships, athletic accomplishments or name recognition is very important to development as I believe your list shows.  Is the HLN a HUGE factor... probably not, but it sure doesn't hurt to give interested alumni, for which it is not practical to attend, a way to stay connected to the team and university.

[FWalum]

From an article entitled "Fewer Americans Go to the Movies:"

A report from the Motion Picture Association of America released Tuesday said that domestic movie box-office sales rose to $10.9 billion last year, from $10.8 billion in 2012.

But the increase was the result of higher ticket prices, not attendance.  Indeed, the number of tickets sold slipped yet again, this time 1.5% to 1.34 billion from 1.36 billion.

That extends a longstanding trend: The number of tickets sold fell nearly 11% between 2004 and 2013, according to the report, while box office revenue increased 17%.

With home-entertainment options improving all the time— whether streamed movies and television, video games, or mobile apps—and studios releasing fewer movies, people are less likely to head to their local multiplex.

Would someone care to explain how people staying home to watch streamed movies instead of going to the movie theater is any different than people staying home to watch streamed basketball games instead of going to the game?  For God's sake, please don't answer!

This isn't rocket science, folks.

I don't have to answer because you did it yourself.  With home-entertainment options improving all the time— whether streamed movies and television, video games, or mobile apps

There is not a one to one correlation between streaming movies and reduced movie theater attendance.  You have to include ALL of the other options that affect attendance.  Eliminating JUST streaming movies from the equation will not suddenly increase movie theater attendance by 11%.  It might help movie theaters as much as it helps basketball game attendance.    The same would go for eliminating or making HLN fee based.  This may not be rocket science but it is certainly more complicated than you and Big D seem to think.

[wh]

Putting the complexities aside (since I don't understand them anyway as Ft. Wayne points out  ), let me "simply" say that the HLN will be a pay-per-view site within 2 years.

[bbtds]

Hopefully they will keep it fairly cheap.

I've gotten in the habit of watching games on the computer but if pinch comes to shove I'll have to stay home and watch the replays later. I certainly can't do all the road games anymore. I saw many parents at the road games I attended but not a lot of VU fans who traveled with the team. There were always Valpo alums but many didn't actually follow the team. Many would start asking you questions about the team when you demonstrated that you followed the team more closely.

[LaPorteAveApostle]

If you guys are right, then so was the late Bill Wirtz.

Ask a Blackhawks fan whether making free TV available helped or hurt interest.

/argument

[wh]

As mentioned in another thread, Green Bay has season ticket packages starting at $98.  The least expensive season ticket package Valpo offers is appx. $150 for lower level bleacher seats.  I would like to see a bargain offering similar to Green Bay's to see if it spurs additional interest.  $98 packages could be limited to the top half of the upper level bleachers.  If adequately promoted, something fresh like this could help spur attendance. The "same old same old" needs an energy boost.