Indy Indians chasing bigger crowds, more money

July 15, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Indians are red hot again this year. Not only is the team leading its division with a 61-38 record, but it is also chasing a fifth straight year with an attendance gain.

Through the AAA minor league team’s first 49 home games, the team has drawn 388,245 ticket-buying fans through the Victory Field turnstiles. The Indians are slightly behind last year’s 49-game mark of 393,985.

The Indians drew 595,043 for 70 regular-season home games last year, averaging 8,501 fans per game. Two post-season home games pushed total attendance up to 605,575 , which was fifth among 176 Minor League Baseball teams. Last year’s attendance was the team’s second-highest total since 2001.

With a six-game home stand the last week in July, which includes Friday, Saturday and Sunday games, plus weekend games on four of five weekends in August, the Indians still have a solid shot at topping last year’s attendance. The Indians’ likely playoff appearance gives the team an excellent chance of being among the Minor League Baseball attendance leaders again this year.

Attendance has been on a steady rise the past four seasons, hitting 549,552 in 2009; 569,969 in 2010; and 580,082 in 2011.

Ticket sales increased from $4.3 million in 2011 to more than $4.6 million in 2012. Ticket sales are a key indicator of the franchise’s overall financial health, since they directly affect parking, concession, souvenir and other ancillary revenue streams.

The Indians, a farm club of the Pittsburgh Pirates, saw profit grow to $1.57 million on operating revenue of $11 million in 2012, compared with profit of $1.06 million on revenue of $10 million in 2011.

The Indians’ record home attendance was 658,250 in 1999. Victory Field opened July 11, 1996.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

ADVERTISEMENT