New England Revolution Stadium | 173 Alford Street | Boston-Everett

KCasiglio said:
If the Legacy start with the Breaker's highest average attendance (8,120) and grow by 6% each year, they will exceed 11,000 in average attendance in year 6. Definitely something to be noting, but this seems more like the Legacy's problem than the city's. If the city has no independent maintenance plan (or plans to lure a different tenant) after the Legacy's lease is up, then that would be a major problem.

Side note: The Free Jacks have been growing and are pushing up against the capacity of Veterans Stadium (capacity 5000) in Quincy. Potential future tenant if the Legacy outgrow the space.
Click to expand...

Interesting points:

1) "If the Legacy start with the Breaker's highest average attendance (8,120) and grow by 6% each year, they will exceed 11,000 in average attendance in year 6."
They can only "exceed 11,000" if they build new capacity onto it - the capacity of the renovated stadium is just under 11,000 - -are you saying they will expand the stadium??? I'm fully with you that the Legacy can definitely grow - that NWSL is a SUCCESSFULLY growing league - - but they are handcuffing themselves with this stadium

2) "Side note: The Free Jacks have been growing and are pushing up against the capacity of Veterans Stadium (capacity 5000) in Quincy. Potential future tenant if the Legacy outgrow the space."
I'm unfamiliar with the Free Jacks - but if the Legacy move out (which I believe they will if they want to be long-term competitive in the NWSL) - will the Free Jacks take on the financial responsibilities of the Legacy regarding the stadium?
 
Last edited:
Equilibria said:
Humans?

The better way to argue this point is to say that in the NWSL, the only team not playing in an MLS venue is the North Carolina Courage. The remainder could presumably have chosen smaller venues in their markets, but didn't.
Click to expand...

There are humans everywhere. Humans with discretionary income and big wallets on vacation, etc. are the reason why Vegas now has major league franchises all of a sudden and others have have lost them. Look, I am no fan of these casinos and that whole gambling culture- - just stating the economically obvious. Franklin Park (especially, given the economics of this particular stadium deal) as a major league professional sporting venue is a slow motion car crash.

But once again, we'll see it play out.
 
Last edited:
I feel like some of the growth projections here are pretty optimistic, but regardless...

I think the NWSL and the Legacy's owners are wise to not make the same mistake another sport made around 20 years ago. NASCAR demand was so high that track owners went on a building spree to the point that most Cup Series venues sat a minimum of 100,000 people - and those were permanent structures for one or two events per year. When interest tanked in the 2010s, suddenly venues were left overbuilt by tens of thousands of seats. Ticket prices are lower now than they were then and still most tracks have plenty of bare aluminum for Cup Series races. Looks great on TV, I can assure you.

The stadium being too small in a decade would be a great problem for both the league and the team. Cross that bridge when you get to it, though.
 
shmessy said:
LOL at someone confusing capacity with league average attendance.

1) Fenway's capacity (37,755) is 28.5+% over league average attendance.

2) 2024 Red Sox attendance was 12.3% OVER league average (even in a lackluster .500 year where they were 13 games out in the AL EAST)

2) MLB average attendance is growing 1% YOY vs NWSL which is growing 6% YOY.

But don't let the facts get in your way.

www.baseball-reference.com

2024 Major League Baseball Attendance & Team Age | Baseball-Reference.com

Check out the attendance and team age stats for all the Major League Baseball teams and players on Baseball-Reference.com
www.baseball-reference.com www.baseball-reference.com

Economics 101.

(I won't even begin to get into the relative difference in spectator $$$$$ spending between a 25,000 seat stadium next to a $2.6 billion casino/hotel in NE with a soon-to-be riverfront restaurant/entertainment district compared to Franklin FREAKING Park. - - that lopsided economic comparison is a tko). The Legacy won't last 7 years in that venue. They will either move out of Boston or beg the Revs to tenant in Everett. This spectre is exactly why Wu is doing all she can to stop or get a ransom out of the Krafts for the Everett Stadium. She knows she cannot let it happen without major extractions.
Click to expand...
Hah hah, I knew you would respond exactly in this way. Don't miss the point in your efforts to be edgy and confrontational. Could the Red Sox fill more seats with a larger venue? Yes. Could Legacy FC fill more seats with a larger venue? Perhaps. But seating capacity does not equate to revenue and is therefore not always the primary goal (hence the success of Fenway Park). Regardless, a new team in a saturated sports market, will likely at best hit the median, rather than the mean. And the median for NWSL teams in 2024 is 9,447, so well within the capacity of a renovated White Stadium.

Math is hard... :rolleyes:
 
I also think we're also missing the real question here which is: "would it actually be really detrimental to the city if they did leave"? Almost all of the money in the lease agreement is upfront. Their annual rent is $400,000 (+3% annually). Such a small amount compared to what they've already put forward on the stadium. Is the city going to be in crisis or have to abandon the stadium if it misses out on $2million?

www.boston.gov

White Stadium Lease Agreement With Boston Unity Soccer Partners Announced

Mayor Michelle Wu today announced the City of Boston has executed a Lease Agreement and BPS Stadium Usage Agreement with Boston Unity Soccer Partners, paving the way for the largest investment into BPS Athletics and White Stadium since it opened in 1949. This renovation and ongoing lease...
www.boston.gov www.boston.gov

shmessy said:
will the Free Jacks take on the financial responsibilities of the Legacy regarding the stadium?
Click to expand...
Well...yeah one would presume if they signed a lease they'd be paying rent.
 
shmessy said:
There are humans everywhere. Humans with discretionary income and big wallets on vacation, etc. are the reason why Vegas now has major league franchises all of a sudden and others have have lost them. Look, I am no fan of these casinos and that whole gambling culture- - just stating the economically obvious.
Click to expand...

Vegas has those franchises because the billionaire douchebags who own those teams know that other billionaire douchebags will value their team a couple billion higher because they're located there. Valuations are very often irrational, and I personally believe that the market in Vegas, which is the 40th largest TV market in the US and ranks among such metropoli as Greenville-Spartanburg, West Palm Beach, Grand Rapids, Birmingham, and Harrisburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_North_America_by_media_market), won't end up justifying all of these teams being there.

Again, my opinion, but if you're starting a new sports franchise, you're wiser to bet on building loyalty as a beloved community asset than on the assumption that out-of-towners hitting a casino will decide to spend an extra two hours across the street on a whim. The Connecticut Sun, with a similar pitch, drew a steady 7,000+ on average until the Caitlin Clark hype. The Revs have a different pitch (ha) since they have an established fan base, supporters groups who are used to trekking to games in the suburbs, and a longstanding hunger for a stadium of their own.

And I agree with you that gambling has already robbed professional sports of much of its honor and appeal and is coming to take the rest, which is why I'd encourage Legacy FC as they try the opposite approach.
 
Equilibria said:
Vegas has those franchises because the billionaire douchebags who own those teams know that other billionaire douchebags will value their team a couple billion higher because they're located there. Valuations are very often irrational, and I personally believe that the market in Vegas, which is the 40th largest TV market in the US and ranks among such metropoli as Greenville-Spartanburg, West Palm Beach, Grand Rapids, Birmingham, and Harrisburg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_television_stations_in_North_America_by_media_market), won't end up justifying all of these teams being there.

Again, my opinion, but if you're starting a new sports franchise, you're wiser to bet on building loyalty as a beloved community asset than on the assumption that out-of-towners hitting a casino will decide to spend an extra two hours across the street on a whim. The Connecticut Sun, with a similar pitch, drew a steady 7,000+ on average until the Caitlin Clark hype. The Revs have a different pitch (ha) since they have an established fan base, supporters groups who are used to trekking to games in the suburbs, and a longstanding hunger for a stadium of their own.

And I agree with you that gambling has already robbed professional sports of much of its honor and appeal and is coming to take the rest, which is why I'd encourage Legacy FC as they try the opposite approach.
Click to expand...

As a human who loved what sports used to be - I fully agree with you. However, in 2025, big league professional sports franchise are not “sporting clubs”, they are hospitality/entertainment corporations. I don’t like it either, but it is what it is.

The Legacy and Franklin Park may be a nice Quixotic act, but it is one that will fail as such.
 
HenryAlan said:
Hah hah, I knew you would respond exactly in this way. Don't miss the point in your efforts to be edgy and confrontational. Could the Red Sox fill more seats with a larger venue? Yes. Could Legacy FC fill more seats with a larger venue? Perhaps. But seating capacity does not equate to revenue and is therefore not always the primary goal (hence the success of Fenway Park). Regardless, a new team in a saturated sports market, will likely at best hit the median, rather than the mean. And the median for NWSL teams in 2024 is 9,447, so well within the capacity of a renovated White Stadium.

Math is hard... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Another fun fact, Henry - -Post #2,013 introduced “edgy and confrontational” into the discussion. ;)
 
shmessy said:
……a $2.6 billion highly profitable and rapidly growing/expanding "gaming venue".

What's around Franklin Park????
Click to expand...

The target demographic - the educated upper middle class in and around Boston - generally finds gambling and the “glamour” associated with it laughable and revolting. It may be an economic engine of sorts but it’s one of pitiful desperation more than anything else.
 
kmp1284 said:
The target demographic - the educated upper middle class in and around Boston - generally finds gambling and the “glamour” associated with it laughable and revolting. It may be an economic engine of sorts but it’s one of pitiful desperation more than anything else.
Click to expand...

Amen. I would be one of those. Unfortunately, economically, we are tilting at windmills on that. It is what it is.
 
So it's bad if they don't have enough fans, and it's also bad if they have too many fans????

Ticket revenue is far from the most important metric for gauging a team's success and none of the teams are making a profit. "Every NWSL club is losing money at a record clip -- between $5 million and $10 million, per team owners." In terms of revenue, "the [Kansas City] Current lead the way at $36.3 million." However, the Current ranked 6th in attendance (so closer to middle of the pack in a 14-team league). They are the only team that has built their own stadium to date, and have consistently sold it out at 11,500 seats. Important to note that they were averaging 5-7k in the two previous years when they were sharing with the local MLS team.

The owners see these teams as an investment asset that they will be able to sell at some point in the future for a lot more due to increased marketability (merch, sponsorships, TV deals) and cultural relevance, not ticket revenue. To that end, it is much better to sell out a smaller stadium where you are the sole professional tenant and can build a unique brand than to have a bunch of empty seats and limited branding in the shadow of the bigger men's team, which is also growing rapidly.

It's a very similar situation for the Revs. They want to build their own stadium for similar reasons. It makes sense for their marketability and operations in the long run to be in a smaller stadium than Gillette.

One more example to think about. AFC Bournemouth in the Premier League (the top league for soccer in the world where the average attendance is currently 40,000) plays in a 11,500-seat stadium where they have been massively successful for the past 10 years. Now they are looking to expand it to 20,000, still half the size of the league average. Stadium expansion and capacity aren't everything.
 
Scott said:
Interestingly (or not), the Revs propose to build a stadium that is smaller than average attendance at Foxboro
Click to expand...

Great point - - and it underlines what KIND of attendance they are looking for next to that $2.6 billion casino. Kraft is looking at the franchise the way 21st century franchises are targeted - - as Hospitality/Tourism/Entertainment. Again, I mourn the change. There was something so great about ballgames, where everyone sat outside and breathed the same air and the roar of a crowd altogether was a civic expression. Now there are different “event day experiences” based on class/economics - - architecturally for us here, notice the difference in amounts of GLASS windows inside ballparks/stadiums of 30+ years ago vs today. The number of VIP hospitality tents, etc.

The Revs will make a killing next to the Encore on that waterfront that will be further developed into a bustling entertainment/restaurant/hotel center. The Legacy in Franklin Park? Happy accounting.
 
shmessy said:
Great point - - and it underlines what KIND of attendance they are looking for next to that $2.6 billion casino. Kraft is looking at the franchise the way 21st century franchises are targeted - - as Hospitality/Tourism/Entertainment. Again, I mourn the change. There was something so great about ballgames, where everyone sat outside and breathed the same air and the roar of a crowd altogether was a civic expression. Now there are different “event day experiences” based on class/economics - - architecturally for us here, notice the difference in amounts of GLASS windows inside ballparks/stadiums of 30+ years ago vs today. The number of VIP hospitality tents, etc.

The Revs will make a killing next to the Encore on that waterfront that will be further developed into a bustling entertainment/restaurant/hotel center. The Legacy in Franklin Park? Happy accounting.
Click to expand...
Reading thru all your posts. I do not agree that simply accepting the "way things are" and "it is what it is" with respect to the utter hypercapitalistic shittification of sports teams into the same vapid, commodified hospitality-entertainment-media reality show that's infected our whole country is an acceptable course. Yes, it is what is happening and no we should not lie down on the pavement and accept it. We should never have allowed that casino and there is no need to trashify Boston and its environs any further. And opposing the rot that is destroying America inside and outside of major sports franchises is not the same as demanding wise investments and deals by our city. I haven't followed the Franklin Park stuff closely enough lately to be informed of latest developments, but I think there is a huge world of space between realistic and ambitious city projects that don't fit the mold of corporate Kraft garbage, and white elephant boondoggles. We certainly should not be striving for the former, but we should be wary of the latter.
 
My personal conspiracy theory is that Kraft is going to uncouple the Revs from the Pats and sell the soccer team. It seems odd that he would build a stadium that is already too small, but has expansion built in. Why wouldn't he just build it all now?
 
Scott said:
My personal conspiracy theory is that Kraft is going to uncouple the Revs from the Pats and sell the soccer team. It seems odd that he would build a stadium that is already too small, but has expansion built in. Why wouldn't he just build it all now?
Click to expand...
Kraft may see business opportunities in Everett apart from selling tickets to Revs games, e.g. a new version of Patriots Place.
 
Well, that would be great because that is what he is good at, but I hope he does sell it because 30 yrs of on-field mediocracy is quite enough
 
Scott said:
Well, that would be great because that is what he is good at, but I hope he does sell it because 30 yrs of on-field mediocracy is quite enough
Click to expand...
If the Krafts had been truly invested, the Revs could have become a hometown version of Atlanta United or the Sounders, and not an afterthought.
 
FK4 said:
Reading thru all your posts. I do not agree that simply accepting the "way things are" and "it is what it is" with respect to the utter hypercapitalistic shittification of sports teams into the same vapid, commodified hospitality-entertainment-media reality show that's infected our whole country is an acceptable course. Yes, it is what is happening and no we should not lie down on the pavement and accept it. We should never have allowed that casino and there is no need to trashify Boston and its environs any further. And opposing the rot that is destroying America inside and outside of major sports franchises is not the same as demanding wise investments and deals by our city. I haven't followed the Franklin Park stuff closely enough lately to be informed of latest developments, but I think there is a huge world of space between realistic and ambitious city projects that don't fit the mold of corporate Kraft garbage, and white elephant boondoggles. We certainly should not be striving for the former, but we should be wary of the latter.
Click to expand...

I fully look forward to any and all concrete suggestions to how we can get back to pure professional sporting events untouched by the US tax code (that shrimp and champagne in the hospitality tent/corporate suite is tax deductible as a business entertainment expense) economic realities of 2025. Until then, it is merely shaking fists at the clouds.

But I’m all ears for reality based suggestions. I would love to find an actual solution. To me, the path is through the tax code, not yelling at Kraft, etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top