Q) What’s worse than sitting in an arena watching an average-to-bad NHL team lose?
A) Paying out the nose to sit in an arena watching an average-to-bad NHL team lose?
The Colorado Avalanche had been drawing thin crowds since returning to action after the NHL lockout. Pepsi Center has been noticeable empty. It’s apparent on television and certainly inside the arena. As recently as last night media members on Twitter were commenting on the dismal turnout.
On the flip side, the Can will be jumping tonight when the Nuggets take on the Chicago Bulls. They’re actually an exciting team that’s winning. Still, it’s much less expensive for me to take my two kids to a Nuggets game than it is for an Avalanche game. Does that make any sense?
I understand that the NHL is more reliant on gate receipts than the NBA is because the league doesn’t have the same type of lucrative TV deals in place. Still, it would seem to me that, if the Avalanche made it more affordable to come watch some puck that more people would. More people means more concessions, doesn’t it?
When a crappy order of stale nacho chips with some fake cheese squirted over the top of it costs $8 and a Coke costs $4, don’t you want as many people in your building as possible?
The Avalanche need to lower ticket prices a lot. The range is currently about $75-$130 a seat (unless you want to sit with the pigeons). It would make sense to me if that range were more like $25 to $75. Those prices would attract more people, sell more overpriced concessions, items of the game, posters, etc. Better yet, the arena wouldn’t look sad and pathetic on TV, even if the Avalanche do.