Quote:
Originally Posted by slotdirt
Just doing the math in my head (and I realize I'm the only one who cares or is belaboring this point), but to lose $5 million on the infield from '08-'09 would mean that A., the attendance decline from one year to the next was entirely infield tickets, which it most likely was not, and B., each infield patron from 2008 would have had to spend approximately $84 a person on top of the $60 ticket price that wasn't spent in 2009.
Now, do some people that go to the infield spend some sort of money on something? Of course. But are the majority of those patrons the types to spend near $100 on betting or goods when they were allowed to bring as many cans of Mickey's they could carry? I would suggest not.
|
have you been in the infield for the Preakness? I could easily see the money lost in the 4-5 million range, and yes the attendance decline was probably 98.7% infield tickets, did you see the TV view? The infield was empty compared to being packed the years before. And they are not just drinking, but gambling away.