Foosball.com Forums

Foosball Table Stats

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Foosball Table Stats
« on: February 10, 2013, 12:32:47 PM »
Some interesting data.

I just got the February issue of Play Meter.There was a small article about the Crystal Coast Foosball Challenge and Bonzini U.S.A. Also included was a "State of the Industry Report".

Foosball Tables
2008
Average weekly gross:
$23
Average # per operator:
7
Total # on location:
8,000
Total new purchases:
1,500


2009
Average weekly gross:
$20
Average # per operator:
6
Total # on location:
6,000
Total new purchases:
1,000

2010
Average weekly gross:
$16
Average # per operator:
3
Total # on location:
5,199
Total new purchases:
1,173

2011
Average weekly gross:
$15
Average # per operator:
4
Total # on location:
5,720
Total new purchases:
1,430

2012
Average weekly gross:
$13
Average # per operator:
7
Total # on location:
9,702
Total new purchases:
4,158

65% operate foosball table in 2011
63% operate foosball tables in 2012

Offline papafoos

  • *
  • 333
  • Good luck reaching me IM, I usually keep them off.
Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2013, 03:47:00 PM »
I suspect some of this is due to having fewer casual players.  Also, a lot of the tournament based players buy their own tables and therefore don't play in the commercial venues.  With fewer tournament players in the commercial venues, the casual players are less likely to inspired on a foosball table.  Of course, they could also be disenfranchised if we don't treat them right when we do play them.  Just something to keep in mind when you play someone who isn't tournament quality.

The most successful venues are probably "player-run" venues.  The players understand the value of maintenance while venues that don't have a grasp on maintenance don't have a clue as to why players won't play on their tables.

Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2013, 04:32:11 PM »
2012 saw a big uptick in number of tables, yet revenue per table was down. Wonder why?

In addition to what papafoos mentioned could the following have an effect?

1. Cost per game is too high? Lower price per game = more games and possibly more revenue so long as the price is not too low.
2. Maintenance. I played recently on a Bonzini table at a bar in Chapel Hill, NC that was in such poor shape it was no fun. One game and we were done.
3. Do the places that charge by the hour do better than the coin-op tables? Or worse?




Offline Tyler Foos

  • 274
  • JacksonvilleTableSoccer.com
Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2013, 05:03:55 PM »
Interesting numbers, big upturn in 2012. What does 63% and 65% operate tables mean? Percent of what?

Tyler

Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2013, 09:04:01 AM »
Papafoos

The treatment of first timers is of the utmost importance. I'm really proud of our players at our sanctioned events for there eagerness to help out. Playing at home with our friends is great, but does nothing but reduce exposure to the masses in a public setting.

Kevin
Where was the table in Chapel Hill?
Places that charge by the hour appear to do better than coin-op venues. Owners have more of a vested interest in keeping the table operable. Recreation Billiards in WS is a good example.

Tyler
63% of all game operators polled have foosball tables as part of their business pieces for lease.


Offline Tyler Foos

  • 274
  • JacksonvilleTableSoccer.com
Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2013, 09:25:04 AM »
Thanks Alan. That sounded way too high of a percent seeing as finding a foosball table in my neck of the woods would be closer to 2%. About 2/3 on average do have foos offered...I am surprised!

Take care...........................Tyler

Re: Foosball Table Stats
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2013, 10:30:19 AM »
Hi Alan,

The table was at Tylers in Carrboro. This was a few months ago so am not sure how the table is now. I'll probably head over there sometime this week if you'd like an up-to-date report.

Kevin