Concession Stand Prices

[pacopete4]

ESPN: Hot dog! Falcons drop prices, make more money

 

@darrenrovell5h5 hours ago

JUST IN: Despite dropping cost of food by 50% in Mercedes-Benz Stadium, Atlanta Falcons & United fans spent 16% more per game. Fascinating data point that more teams will look at, great news for other fans.

 

Concession Prices

 

If you go to the link it has a picture of the prices of food.

 

Here are some of them:

-$2 coke with refills

-$2 hotdog

-$3 pizza slice

-$3 nachos

-$5 bud light beer

-$5 burger

-$6 chicken strips w/ fries

 

 

Hopefully, more teams will see this report and figure out that if they put reasonable prices on things, they would sell, even more, making fans even happier. Johnsonville... do you see this? Charge $3 for a brat and you'll sell even more.

[Outlander]

I would like a baseball team to try that out where there are 81 home games. An 8 game football season sample might be too small. I might buy a $3 pizza at first but then realize $3 is still too much for a pizza slice so would overall revenue be down or up with a baseball team.

[wallus]

I would like a baseball team to try that out where there are 81 home games. An 8 game football season sample might be too small. I might buy a $3 pizza at first but then realize $3 is still too much for a pizza slice so would overall revenue be down or up with a baseball team.

 

Other than making it yourself, where else are you going to find a slice of pizza less than $3?

[DocLuna7]

I wonder if we can find the numbers the stands take in for the discount hot dog days vs normal games. Would be interesting to see

[Roderick]

I would be willing to bet that this would also add a half a tick to the attendance (and the revenue streams associated with). Enough over the season, to actually put in your cost/benefit calculation on whether it is worth it.

 

I assume the team also has to figure if they will have enough labor to man the stands that will be selling that much more product and it will probably take the cleanup crew after the game that much longer to clean up.

 

I actually think it may work better for baseball than football. Football is only 8 games, so people probably are willing to spend that much more as it is only an occasional expense. Whereas if you are going to 40 baseball games a year, now you don't have to worry about lunch/supper for the family, as it is actually economical to feed them at the ballpark....

[wallus]

I think it would be wise to give season ticket holders a discount on concessions. For me, I will only go to one or two a games a season so I don't mind spending a few bucks.

[MrTPlush]

So they made 2x the product(spend more on supplies/inventory etc.) to increase sales 16%. Is that actually that good? Do they have more attendance in there new stadium making the numbers misleading? Would this increase ticket sales in a MLB stadium(since football will sell out regardless). Also it was a new stadium and they went in early to see it and may have led to extra food sales that won’t happen in future years.

 

That number alone is meaningless without more details.

[FVBrewerFan]

I could see the Brewers trying something like this for Mon-Wed games to help drive-up attendance. Half price concessions/parking would be a pretty good promotion to run during the middle of the week, especially in April, May.

[PlayerHader]

So they made 2x the product(spend more on supplies/inventory etc.) to increase sales 16%. Is that actually that good? Do they have more attendance in there new stadium making the numbers misleading? Would this increase ticket sales in a MLB stadium(since football will sell out regardless). Also it was a new stadium and they went in early to see it and may have led to extra food sales that won’t happen in future years.

 

That number alone is meaningless without more details.

 

The article says they "made more money." I would say that refers to profit, and not just revenue.

[gypcasino]

I think it would be wise to give season ticket holders a discount on concessions. For me, I will only go to one or two a games a season so I don't mind spending a few bucks.

 

The Brewers do this. 25% off during 25 select games throughout the year.

[tmwiese55]

I read the article and it's phrased at "spent 16% more". To me that means total sales and is not indicative of profit. I'd guess they made less profit than before. Also, they had 65% more points of sale, or places to buy stuff so that helps too. However, as the article points out it leads to better fan experience and happiness overall so hopefully teams take notice all over and start bringing prices down a bit.

[paul253]

I can get a jumbo hot dog AND a refillable soda at Costco for $1.50. I get it pretty much every time I go. I’m just saying.

 

I’m sick of sports teams squeezing every last penny out of it fans. It’s about time a team did something nice like this. Hopefully it spreads, even if it’s for weekday only games.

[rickh150]

I smell misleading information....

[tmwiese55]

And at MP they should still keep the ridiculous markup on beer to try and moderate consumption. There's probably a middle ground here that would be the actual sweet spot. They cut their prices basically 50%, say other teams add just $1 above what ATL is doing to each thing the cost would still be generally in line with anywhere else you go out to get food/drink but still way less than fans have been accustomed to so sales go up and the team rebounds some lost profit.

[wallus]

I am pretty sure Miller Park is cheaper than most MLB stadiums.

[FVBrewerFan]

Finally actually read the article. Headline is wrong, if they increased sales by 16% that's not "making more money." Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, but they're definitely making less money on concessions.

[pacopete4]

Despite a 50 percent decrease in prices for food and nonalcoholic drinks compared to prices in the Georgia Dome, the amount spent per fan increased by 16 percent, Blank’s sports company, AMB Sports and Entertainment, said on Thursday.

 

Meaning that the fan spent more money than they ever have before = they are making more money.

[tmwiese55]

IDK, the phrasing of making more money implies profit it to me so it's misleading. But the later phrasing in the article of "spent 16% more" does not indicate more profit to me, just more cashflow. Maybe there will be a follow up with more clarification.

[Outlander]

It also depends on the cost of the items because the cost isn't less for the team but they are selling more of it. If sales were $100 before and cost was 20, maybe sales are $116 now with cost of 50. So even though overall revenue could go up, the profit can still be lower.

[PlayerHader]

Finally actually read the article. Headline is wrong, if they increased sales by 16% that's not "making more money." Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, but they're definitely making less money on concessions.

 

"Not only did the team make more money by lowering the prices" This was a direct quote from the article. It literally says that the team is making more money. I think Darren Rovell is probably financially aware enough to differentiate between revenue and profit.

[young guns]

Despite a 50 percent decrease in prices for food and nonalcoholic drinks compared to prices in the Georgia Dome, the amount spent per fan increased by 16 percent, Blank’s sports company, AMB Sports and Entertainment, said on Thursday.

 

Meaning that the fan spent more money than they ever have before = they are making more money.

That still just means sales were up 16%. It is a little misleading, but may not be wrong that they made more. More info is needed. A comparison to next year would be interesting. They also said they got 6k more fans entering 2 hours before the game than normal which they attribute to the lower food costs, but could be attributed to the new stadium effect and also increase food sales which might not be sustainable in subsequent years. And they said merchandise sales were up 88%, which they didn't directly relate to the lower concession prices, but implied when they said trickle down, and that could be attributed to being fresh off a super bowl appearance plus new stadium and drawing in more of the casual fan wanting to buy new gear.

 

All in all, this year as a whole was probably more profitable, but more data is needed.

[FVBrewerFan]

Finally actually read the article. Headline is wrong, if they increased sales by 16% that's not "making more money." Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, but they're definitely making less money on concessions.

 

"Not only did the team make more money by lowering the prices" This was a direct quote from the article. It literally says that the team is making more money. I think Darren Rovell is probably financially aware enough to differentiate between revenue and profit.

 

Not necessarily, I have no idea who he is. But 16% increase in sales means they made more revenue, not more profit. I mean, that's basic. And if they only had a 16% increase in sales while slashing prices, there's no way profits were higher.

[tmwiese55]

Finally actually read the article. Headline is wrong, if they increased sales by 16% that's not "making more money." Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, but they're definitely making less money on concessions.

 

"Not only did the team make more money by lowering the prices" This was a direct quote from the article. It literally says that the team is making more money. I think Darren Rovell is probably financially aware enough to differentiate between revenue and profit.

 

It's not clear. The phrase "making more money" could be used either way. The later phrase of "spent 16% more" seems pretty clear though and contradictory to the other end. IDK for sure, I think they should clarify. I think it was a poorly written article that left it vague. Maybe there is a local ATL article out there with more details.

[FVBrewerFan]

Finally actually read the article. Headline is wrong, if they increased sales by 16% that's not "making more money." Doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea, but they're definitely making less money on concessions.

 

"Not only did the team make more money by lowering the prices" This was a direct quote from the article. It literally says that the team is making more money. I think Darren Rovell is probably financially aware enough to differentiate between revenue and profit.

 

It's not clear. The phrase "making more money" could be used either way. The later phrase of "spent 16% more" seems pretty clear though and contradictory to the other end. IDK for sure, I think they should clarify. I think it was a poorly written article that left it vague. Maybe there is a local ATL article out there with more details.

 

 

Yea, bottom line is this wouldn't make sense for the Brewers to do for 81 games. Weekend games in the summer, Cubs series, etc. they don't need to cut prices. But if they do it for games in the middle of the week- especially in April, May I do think it would attract more fans. Concessions may be a loss leader, but still worth it to bring in a few thousand more fans for those games.

 

Unless they just wanted to be "nice" and cut costs in half for all concessions all the time, that would be cool too.

[paul253]

I think it’s too difficult to tell if they made more money from this or not. Cheaper concessions could very well lead to more people coming to the game or people spending more on other other at the stadium like merchandise.

 

What is not too difficult to tell is fan satisfaction skyrocketed. As I said it’s nice to see a franchise doing something that doesn’t involve squeezing every last penny out of its fan base.