Cost of Al versus BC/Arena for NIT Games

[Macallan 18]

Just curious if anyone had any insights on whether Marquette is making or losing money playing these 3 NIT games in the Al versus the BC or Arena.

Marquette could sell more tickets for the BC/Arena, but there is the rental fee. Yes, there are still expenses for the Al, paying concessions and security, but no rental fee and sell outs for all 3 games.

[jsglow]

Marquette had to make a decision.  And they almost certainly based that decision on history when relatively small crowds (by BMO BC standards) showed up for NIT games.

I believe, but have not had this confirmed, that they have viewed this past week as a smashing success.  So there you have it.

[PBRme]

My guess if they breakeven at The AL that would be a smashing success.  At most they are pulling in $40-50K plus a little concession money.

Parking might be the biggest $$ on a net basis

[Marcus92]

I'd expect concessions at the Al is a revenue-generator, not a cost. I don't think you can say the same for games at the Bradley Center. The same likely goes for parking.

[warriorchick]

I'd expect concessions at the Al is a revenue-generator, not a cost. I don't think you can say the same for games at the Bradley Center. The same likely goes for parking.

Yep, Marquette is really making bank on all those sales of popcorn and Pepsi.

[Mr. Nielsen]

MU is not losing money playing games at the AL. Would have had to sell tickets at a much higher cost and pay rent to play at the BC.

Plus, image matters. Pack houses look better on national TV.

[PBRme]

I'd say it probably depends on if WOJO has a rider for bonus money for post season games,

[Marcus92]

Yep, Marquette is really making bank on all those sales of popcorn and Pepsi.

Never said MU was making a lot on concessions. Prices have been pretty reasonable (yesterday I paid $7.50 for the brat combo, including chips and a drink). But even that is still a significant markup. If the average spend is something like $4 to $5 per fan per game (soda/water for you, box of popcorn for your kid), you're talking somewhere in the neighborhood of $15,000 in revenue.

[Litehouse]

Plus, image matters. Pack houses look better on national TV.

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching the game.  Yes, it was packed, but it still looks like a big HS gym.  If someone watched MU on TV and thought that was our normal gym, I don't think they'd consider us a big time program.

[StillAWarrior]

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching the game.  Yes, it was packed, but it still looks like a big HS gym.  If someone watched MU on TV and thought that was our normal gym, I don't think they'd consider us a big time program.

If someone is so ignorant of college basketball that they're going to form their opinion of whether or not Marquette is a "big time program" based upon our facility, they're probably going to be more influenced by the fact that we're playing in the NIT.

As a fan watching on TV, I love the packed house and atmosphere. I really don't think Marquette should be making its decisions based upon whether or not a casual fan (i.e., an ignorant non-fan) thinks we're a "big time program."

[Rick Majerus’ Manager]

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching the game.  Yes, it was packed, but it still looks like a big HS gym.  If someone watched MU on TV and thought that was our normal gym, I don't think they'd consider us a big time program.

So Nova is a mid-major because they play several games a year in their 6500 seat on campus arena?  DittoSt. Johns when they play games in Queens.

I guess Duke is a second rate team because Cameron Indoor is nothing more than a large HS gym.

[MU82]

So Nova is a mid-major because they play several games a year in their 6500 seat on campus arena?  DittoSt. Johns when they play games in Queens.

I guess Duke is a second rate team because Cameron Indoor is nothing more than a large HS gym.

Yep yep.

[Litehouse]

I just don't get the romanticizing of an on-campus arena.  The AL is the same size as Matt Heldt's HS gym in Neenah.  We picked on UWM when they played at the Klotschke, which is the same size as the AL.

The other programs you mentioned don't have an option like we do.  The Pavilion at 6,500 is manageable for Villanova, but it's a 30 minute drive from campus to Wells Fargo.  Carnesecca Arena is 5,600, but it's a 45 min drive to the Garden.  And yes, I think it makes St. Johns look mid-majorish to play at Carnesecca.  Cameron Indoor is unique to college basketball, but it's still 9,300 people.

We have a world-class facility 6 blocks from campus and conveniently located for fans.  I thought the BC was one of the best facilities in college basketball, and the new arena is going to be even better.  I just don't get why people want to give that up to play in the AL.  We're a small catholic school, and the pro/college hybrid environment is something that helps set us apart in the college basketball world.

[jsglow]

I just don't get the romanticizing of an on-campus arena.  The AL is the same size as Matt Heldt's HS gym in Neenah.  We picked on UWM when they played at the Klotschke, which is the same size as the AL.

The other programs you mentioned don't have an option like we do.  The Pavilion at 6,500 is manageable for Villanova, but it's a 30 minute drive from campus to Wells Fargo.  Carnesecca Arena is 5,600, but it's a 45 min drive to the Garden.  And yes, I think it makes St. Johns look mid-majorish to play at Carnesecca.  Cameron Indoor is unique to college basketball, but it's still 9,300 people.

We have a world-class facility 6 blocks from campus and conveniently located for fans.  I thought the BC was one of the best facilities in college basketball, and the new arena is going to be even better.  I just don't get why people want to give that up to play in the AL.  We're a small catholic school, and the pro/college hybrid environment is something that helps set us apart in the college basketball world.

Because too many think with their hearts and not their heads.  #nobrainer

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

I am quite certain MU made nithing on parking and concessions at tge Bradley.  They paid rent n got ticket revenue.  Thats it.  Understand in no way does this mean i am in favor if pkaying games at tge Al sans maybe 1 a year.
I think people will be drastically surprised with the new arena.
The problem i have had with the bradley center since 1988 is tgat it is a hirrible arena.  Architects got it wrong.  Sans 1-2 games a year it provided little to no home court advantage.  I firmly belive the new arena will provide mu with that tru college atmosphere that we have lacked since leaving tge mecca.  Hopefully its worth 1-2 games a year.  MUs home record has not been as good as it shoukd have been and i blame some of that on the crap arena we pkayed in.  Total stab but im guessing the New arena is wirth 4 more points a game than the fin bradley dump.  Really looking forward to walking into an electric arena versus that mausoleum

[Pakuni]

I just don't get the romanticizing of an on-campus arena.  The AL is the same size as Matt Heldt's HS gym in Neenah.  We picked on UWM when they played at the Klotschke, which is the same size as the AL.

The other programs you mentioned don't have an option like we do.  The Pavilion at 6,500 is manageable for Villanova, but it's a 30 minute drive from campus to Wells Fargo.  Carnesecca Arena is 5,600, but it's a 45 min drive to the Garden.  And yes, I think it makes St. Johns look mid-majorish to play at Carnesecca.  Cameron Indoor is unique to college basketball, but it's still 9,300 people.

We have a world-class facility 6 blocks from campus and conveniently located for fans.  I thought the BC was one of the best facilities in college basketball, and the new arena is going to be even better.  I just don't get why people want to give that up to play in the AL.  We're a small catholic school, and the pro/college hybrid environment is something that helps set us apart in the college basketball world.

This is all true, but I don't think many (any?) people here are advocating for a full schedule at the Al. But it's a cool thing to do when the opportunity presents itself, perhaps one buy game a year or something. It would at least bring some interest to what's usually a bad game with bad attendance.

[PaintTouches]

Working on getting some hard figures, but all ticket, TV, Radio and Internet revenue for the NIT gets collected by the NIT LLC. They then take a cut and distribute to each team based on games played.

The NIT LLC explicitly says it will not pay for rent of an arena, so MU would have been on the hook for it. Rent at the BC is/was 29k, plus 2$ of every ticket sold. So 3 games with 8k each would have run MU $135k ($87K directly) simply in rent. And again, the NIT gets the rest of the ticket revenue, not MU.

A 2009 article I found said a school that made it to NY would get $25-50k. I'm sure that's gone up with new TV contracts. 

All that said, I think it was a no-brainer to play (and continue playing) these games at the Al.     

[StillAWarrior]

I just don't get the romanticizing of an on-campus arena. 

For the record, my response above relates to the stated topic of the thread:  playing at the Al for these NIT games.  As much as I'd love it if MU had a suitable on-campus facility (i.e., well north of 10k seats), I can't see that as a financially viable/responsible decision for the BOT.  I do love seeing them filling the Al for these NIT games that would likely be sparsely attended at the Bradley Center.

[Marcus92]

The Bradley Center could also rock for big games. Not just Marquette-Wisconsin either. MU-Cincy comes to mind, a fantastic rivalry at its peak with regular sellout crowds that could make the rafters shake. UConn and Louisville were also huge draws.

Haven't seen a true sellout in a while, even for the Villanova game (announced attendance just over 17,000 this year, but still a great crowd). If we get back to winning consistently, that should help. I see potential future rivalries in the making with Xavier, Creighton and Butler (hate losing to those guys). It also should help that the new Bucks arena is slightly smaller than the BC (17,500 capacity versus 18,500+).

[Litehouse]

Working on getting some hard figures, but all ticket, TV, Radio and Internet revenue for the NIT gets collected by the NIT LLC. They then take a cut and distribute to each team based on games played.

The NIT LLC explicitly says it will not pay for rent of an arena, so MU would have been on the hook for it. Rent at the BC is/was 29k, plus 2$ of every ticket sold. So 3 games with 8k each would have run MU $135k ($87K directly) simply in rent. And again, the NIT gets the rest of the ticket revenue, not MU.

A 2009 article I found said a school that made it to NY would get $25-50k. I'm sure that's gone up with new TV contracts. 

All that said, I think it was a no-brainer to play (and continue playing) these games at the Al.   

This is great info.  I agree, playing these games at the AL is the best option and a unique opportunity for the fans.  I didn't make it to the 2 previous games, but I'm hoping to go tomorrow if I can get tickets.  I just don't think a packed house of 3,700 looks all that impressive on TV.

[GGGG]

I was thinking about that yesterday while watching the game.  Yes, it was packed, but it still looks like a big HS gym.  If someone watched MU on TV and thought that was our normal gym, I don't think they'd consider us a big time program.

If it makes you feel better, no one outside of the fanbases of the two teams was watching that game.

And I don't think it left anyone with as bad an impression as you state.

[jsglow]

Working on getting some hard figures, but all ticket, TV, Radio and Internet revenue for the NIT gets collected by the NIT LLC. They then take a cut and distribute to each team based on games played.

The NIT LLC explicitly says it will not pay for rent of an arena, so MU would have been on the hook for it. Rent at the BC is/was 29k, plus 2$ of every ticket sold. So 3 games with 8k each would have run MU $135k ($87K directly) simply in rent. And again, the NIT gets the rest of the ticket revenue, not MU.

A 2009 article I found said a school that made it to NY would get $25-50k. I'm sure that's gone up with new TV contracts. 

All that said, I think it was a no-brainer to play (and continue playing) these games at the Al.   

Thanks.  Good stuff.  So at the BMO BC the NIT would have cost MU money while at the AL we end up making money.  Done.  Next on the agenda?   

[Herman Cain]

I am quite certain MU made nithing on parking and concessions at tge Bradley.  They paid rent n got ticket revenue.  Thats it.  Understand in no way does this mean i am in favor if pkaying games at tge Al sans maybe 1 a year.
I think people will be drastically surprised with the new arena.
The problem i have had with the bradley center since 1988 is tgat it is a hirrible arena.  Architects got it wrong.  Sans 1-2 games a year it provided little to no home court advantage.  I firmly belive the new arena will provide mu with that tru college atmosphere that we have lacked since leaving tge mecca.  Hopefully its worth 1-2 games a year.  MUs home record has not been as good as it shoukd have been and i blame some of that on the crap arena we pkayed in.  Total stab but im guessing the New arena is wirth 4 more points a game than the fin bradley dump.  Really looking forward to walking into an electric arena versus that mausoleum

These are very good points your making.

[GOO]

Well, playing in an NBA arena right near campus makes the most sense... until it doesn't financially.  To build our own, would be a bit silly, if he Bucks make it financially attractive for Marquette. 

I don't know about the details of the negotiations, but it seems they did not go too well for Marquette.  Maybe that is just because Marquette's expectations were not in line with reality or maybe the Bucks really did stick it to MU. 

I had read/heard (no inside info) that the Bucks were offering a one year deal or some sort of short term deal to begin negotiations.  Probably just a bargaining chip to give in on to "concede" some other point to Marquette.

When doesn't it make sense to play in the new arena, when the Bucks make is financially a no brainer to build your own, or don't enter into early negotiations on an extension for the current deal (7 years?)... we will need to start planning for the new arena now, and start negotiating in 4 years on the extension. If it doesn't go well at all, we will have a new arena.  Maybe the Admirals can be a tenant.

Anyone with inside info on how the negotiations really went that can share some details here?

[jsglow]

The initial proposal was 3 years.  MU wanted 15 as I recall.

[PaintTouches]

If it makes you feel better, no one outside of the fanbases of the two teams was watching that game.

Unrelated, but the MU/Harvard game got 369k viewers, MU's 2nd best cable game of the season, behind 400k against Wichita State. That still says more about FS1 than anything else, but a lot of people that don't normally watch Marquette were watching, and that was directly against the NCAA First Four games.

[Bocephys]

Unrelated, but the MU/Harvard game got 369k viewers, MU's 2nd best cable game of the season, behind 400k against Wichita State. That still says more about FS1 than anything else, but a lot of people that don't normally watch Marquette were watching, and that was directly against the NCAA First Four games.

Wojo's first postseason victory over an NCAA tournament team!

[Mr. Nielsen]

Yes, more people watched the NIT, than people release they do. Sunday numbers will be low going up versus CBS coverage of Syracuse/Michigan State and Tiger on NBC. Tuesday will be a nice showcase for Penn State/MU.

[79Warrior]

If it makes you feel better, no one outside of the fanbases of the two teams was watching that game.

And I don't think it left anyone with as bad an impression as you state.

Yep. What's better, 10,000 empty seats at the Bradley Center or a full Al? The NIT is not a money maker, so MU is wise to play where the rent is free.

[Benny B]

Working on getting some hard figures, but all ticket, TV, Radio and Internet revenue for the NIT gets collected by the NIT LLC. They then take a cut and distribute to each team based on games played.

The NIT LLC explicitly says it will not pay for rent of an arena, so MU would have been on the hook for it. Rent at the BC is/was 29k, plus 2$ of every ticket sold. So 3 games with 8k each would have run MU $135k ($87K directly) simply in rent. And again, the NIT gets the rest of the ticket revenue, not MU.

A 2009 article I found said a school that made it to NY would get $25-50k. I'm sure that's gone up with new TV contracts. 

All that said, I think it was a no-brainer to play (and continue playing) these games at the Al.   

AG's pretty much nailed it.... the last time I did a tourney share calculation was around the time of the C7 split, and as I recall, the NIT shares were worth about $15-19k at the time (although they are paid out in one drop, not over six years like NCAA shares).  You get 1 share for each game you play in during regionals, and you get 2 shares for making it to NY, whether you play in the championship game or not.

So beat PSU on Tuesday, and it's about $100,000 in MU's pocket.  If MU was certain it was going to get to NYC, then that would have financially justified renting the BC for the regional games... of course, hindsight is 20-20 because if you don't, then you lose money on rent.  Not sure anyone here would have taken that risk with their own money, so it makes sense that MU didn't take the risk either.

The Al was the best option for the NIT games, period.  Hopefully, we'll not be having this debate again for a very long time, if ever.

[Herman Cain]

AG's pretty much nailed it.... the last time I did a tourney share calculation was around the time of the C7 split, and as I recall, the NIT shares were worth about $15-19k at the time (although they are paid out in one drop, not over six years like NCAA shares).  You get 1 share for each game you play in during regionals, and you get 2 shares for making it to NY, whether you play in the championship game or not.

So beat PSU on Tuesday, and it's about $100,000 in MU's pocket.  If MU was certain it was going to get to NYC, then that would have financially justified renting the BC for the regional games... of course, hindsight is 20-20 because if you don't, then you lose money on rent.  Not sure anyone here would have taken that risk with their own money, so it makes sense that MU didn't take the risk either.

The Al was the best option for the NIT games, period.  Hopefully, we'll not be having this debate again for a very long time, if ever.

All in it if we make it to the Garden it is probably a break even proposition, given all the costs involved. The Benefit is we would have 4 or 5 games in front of a decent broadcast audience.

[Coleman]

AG's pretty much nailed it.... the last time I did a tourney share calculation was around the time of the C7 split, and as I recall, the NIT shares were worth about $15-19k at the time (although they are paid out in one drop, not over six years like NCAA shares).  You get 1 share for each game you play in during regionals, and you get 2 shares for making it to NY, whether you play in the championship game or not.

So beat PSU on Tuesday, and it's about $100,000 in MU's pocket.  If MU was certain it was going to get to NYC, then that would have financially justified renting the BC for the regional games... of course, hindsight is 20-20 because if you don't, then you lose money on rent.  Not sure anyone here would have taken that risk with their own money, so it makes sense that MU didn't take the risk either.

The Al was the best option for the NIT games, period.  Hopefully, we'll not be having this debate again for a very long time, if ever.

Do the shares go right to MU, or are they distributed to all members of the conference like NCAA tournament shares?

[barfolomew]

So beat PSU on Tuesday, and it's about $100,000 in MU's pocket.

That should be plenty for a top tier PG grad transfer.

[MU82]

The Al was the best option for the NIT games, period.  Hopefully, we'll not be having this debate again for a very long time, if ever.

Agree with the first sentence.

Agree x1,000,000,000 with the second sentence!

[Benny B]

Do the shares go right to MU, or are they distributed to all members of the conference like NCAA tournament shares?

One time payment, directly to the University's coffers no later than August following the tournament, IIRC.

[MUBigDance]

Well, playing in an NBA arena right near campus makes the most sense... until it doesn't financially.  To build our own, would be a bit silly, if he Bucks make it financially attractive for Marquette. 

I don't know about the details of the negotiations, but it seems they did not go too well for Marquette.  Maybe that is just because Marquette's expectations were not in line with reality or maybe the Bucks really did stick it to MU. 

I had read/heard (no inside info) that the Bucks were offering a one year deal or some sort of short term deal to begin negotiations.  Probably just a bargaining chip to give in on to "concede" some other point to Marquette.

When doesn't it make sense to play in the new arena, when the Bucks make is financially a no brainer to build your own, or don't enter into early negotiations on an extension for the current deal (7 years?)... we will need to start planning for the new arena now, and start negotiating in 4 years on the extension. If it doesn't go well at all, we will have a new arena.  Maybe the Admirals can be a tenant.

Anyone with inside info on how the negotiations really went that can share some details here?

I don't sense any loyalty on behalf of the Bucks toward Marquette basketball. Do they really care about Marquette's business? genuine question, not rhetorical. I really wonder what they think of college basketball at their place...maybe they would rather have concerts and pop-culture stuff more. I've got to believe its a bottom-line thing for the out-of-towners.

That being said...we will be there next year and it will be a nice venue.

[GOO]

One time payment, directly to the University's coffers no later than August following the tournament, IIRC.

Downpayment on the new arena, no doubt 

#startthefund

[Benny B]

Downpayment on the new arena, no doubt 

#startthefund

The fund has already been started.... just waiting on those Powerball investments to pay off and the Benny B Memorial Thunderdome will be born.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Downpayment on the new arena, no doubt 

#startthefund

 Maybe CoachTomCrean will finally deliver his hundo that he promised.

[Coleman]

One time payment, directly to the University's coffers no later than August following the tournament, IIRC.

Not that I doubt you (I don't), but does that mean that we get paid more for making the NIT than a team that makes the NCAA tournament? Because aren't tournament payments distributed to the entire conference equally?

[brewcity77]

Not that I doubt you (I don't), but does that mean that we get paid more for making the NIT than a team that makes the NCAA tournament? Because aren't tournament payments distributed to the entire conference equally?

That is at the discretion of the conference. Many conference share all revenues equally. It's worked for the Big East, though in some leagues, most notably the WCC, it has created issues because it's always Gonzaga earning shares and they are sick of sharing with other schools that contribute nothing to the coffers.

[Benny B]

Not that I doubt you (I don't), but does that mean that we get paid more for making the NIT than a team that makes the NCAA tournament? Because aren't tournament payments distributed to the entire conference equally?

NCAA tournament shares are upwards of $275,000 this year, and every game appearance earns you one share for the next six years.  So assuming a modest rate of inflation ($300,000 in year six), a single NCAA game this year translates into a little over $1.7M to the conference.

It's unclear how the Big East distributes those funds... it used to be that the schools kept half of the shares they earned and the other half went to the conference, but even if it was divided equally ten ways, if MU was a one-and-done in the NCAA this year, worse case is they would have taken home ~$170,000 over the next six years for the privilege of flaming out.

The main difference between the NIT and NCAA is that the latter is a six-year annuity whereas the NIT is a one-time payment.

[Coleman]

NCAA tournament shares are upwards of $275,000 this year, and every game appearance earns you one share for the next six years.  So assuming a modest rate of inflation ($300,000 in year six), a single NCAA game this year translates into a little over $1.7M to the conference.

It's unclear how the Big East distributes those funds... it used to be that the schools kept half of the shares they earned and the other half went to the conference, but even if it was divided equally ten ways, if MU was a one-and-done in the NCAA this year, worse case is they would have taken home ~$170,000 over the next six years for the privilege of flaming out.

The main difference between the NIT and NCAA is that the latter is a six-year annuity whereas the NIT is a one-time payment.

Right. That all makes sense. But I guess my point was...ASSUMING that the Big East distributes NCAA shares, in their entirety, to all members of the conference (I realize this is an assumption), a team making the NIT that keeeps all of their earnings would stand to make more $$ that way.

I like the idea of splitting it, the team keeping half, the conference keeping half.

[Benny B]

Right. That all makes sense. But I guess my point was...ASSUMING that the Big East distributes NCAA shares, in their entirety, to all members of the conference (I realize this is an assumption), a team making the NIT that keeeps all of their earnings would stand to make more $$ that way.

I like the idea of splitting it, the team keeping half, the conference keeping half.

A one-and-done for Marquette in the NCAA this year would still have been more than twice what they stand to make by advancing to MSG tonight.

NIT maximum: $100,000
NCAA one game: $2.7 million  (divided equally among 10 schools)

[StillAWarrior]

A one-and-done for Marquette in the NCAA this year would still have been more than twice what they stand to make by advancing to MSG tonight.

NIT maximum: $100,000
NCAA one game: $2.7 million  (divided equally among 10 schools)

You didn't account for a quarter million in popcorn profits?

[Coleman]

A one-and-done for Marquette in the NCAA this year would still have been more than twice what they stand to make by advancing to MSG tonight.

NIT maximum: $100,000
NCAA one game: $2.7 million  (divided equally among 10 schools)

Gotcha. Makes sense.

[MU82]

Do we have to share any NIT proceeds with the rest of the conference?

[Coleman]

Do we have to share any NIT proceeds with the rest of the conference?

No.

[Floorslapper]

Unrelated, but the MU/Harvard game got 369k viewers, MU's 2nd best cable game of the season, behind 400k against Wichita State. That still says more about FS1 than anything else, but a lot of people that don't normally watch Marquette were watching, and that was directly against the NCAA First Four games.

Would suspect the viewership for the MU Harvard game was greatly buoyed by Harvard fans who rarely get to see their team on national television.

[Coleman]

Would suspect the viewership for the MU Harvard game was greatly buoyed by Harvard fans who rarely get to see their team on national television.

That and being on ESPN2. Way more casual sports viewers who just turn on the Duece and watch whatever is on vs. FS1.

[Brian0230]

Being able to buy beer at the game is a pretty sweet advantage of the BC (and new arena) vs on campus venues. 

[🏀]

Being able to buy beer at the game is a pretty sweet advantage of the BC (and new arena) vs on campus venues. 

ALCOHOL CAN AND IS SERVED AT ON CAMPUS VENUES.