Archive for December, 2011
Community Database: Household Income and Ticket Buying
Posted by: | CommentsErika Sung is an ASU doctoral student in community resources and development where she focuses on non-profit management. Her analysis of the Arizona Arts & Cultural Census/Community Database is underwritten by a grant from the Lodestar Foundation.
———————–
In the previous blog, we looked at the basic demographic patron profile, age and sex. Today, we examine the household income of arts and cultural patrons in Arizona. Income can directly impact arts and culture patronage, with an expectation that active patrons are more likely drawn from higher income levels. Today, we will examine whether higher income households attend more arts and cultural events in Arizona.
First, let’s look at how the proportion of ticket-buying households varies by income in Arizona, drawing on the Community Database. According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the median household income in Arizona is $48,711. This means that half of Arizona households make less than $48,711, and half make more.
Now consider the graph below, which shows how ticket sales break across these two (approximately) equally-sized groups. It indicates that higher income households are a large majority (81.7%) of arts and cultural events attenders.
However, looking now at the income distribution (below table), the result suggests that we must not overlook lower income households. Clearly, most of the action is in the higher-income categories. Households in the $70,000 to $79,999 annual income range account for 16.9% of ticket buyers. Households with incomes ranging from $125,000 to $150,000 are the next largest group, accounting for 15.4% of attendance. These two groups alone represent one third of ticket buyers.
However, even though it seems to look like a small proportion when you are looking at the distribution, nearly one in eight ticket-buying households (11.9%) fall in the annual income range between $30,000 and $49,999.
Distribution of Ticket-buying Households by Levels of Income
Of course, income is not the only factor that influences ticket buying. We have to consider other factors as well, such as genre, ticket price, and the disposition of arts and culture consumers. However, even so, I am happy to see that attending arts and cultural events is not just for the rich families. If you have previously overlooked the potential of lower to mid income households as a valuable consumer, it is time to devote attention to them from now on.
It is also important to recognize that this analysis represents an overview of the TOTAL Community Database – which itself is a growing & on-going work in progress. In addition, organizations that are participating in the Community Database have the independent (and confidential to them) ability to specifically analyze the income profile of their own unique audiences.
Community Database: “Demographic Characteristics”
Posted by: | CommentsErika Sung is an ASU doctoral student in community resources and development where she focuses on non-profit management. Her analysis of the Arizona Arts & Cultural Census/Community Database is underwritten by a grant from the Lodestar Foundation.
———————–
In the previous blog, we examined geographic characteristics of Arizona’s arts & cultural patrons. Today, we will examine overall demographic characteristics, especially age and gender. Needless to say, understanding the demographics of a region can be an efficient and effective marketing tool to attract audiences.
First, we will take a look at the age distribution of ticket buying households in AZ (as tracked by the nearly 700,000 households represented in the Community Database.) Not surprisingly, a middle-aged population (the highest rate is range of age 52-53) is the driving force in sales. However, one thing good to observe is the STRENGTH of participation of populations leading UP to the peak at age 52-53. (Isn’t it it interesting to note that the ”downward slide” of participation by older audiences is steeper than the upward climb of younger populations?) For example, the range of age 52-53 households accounts for 5.8% by all buyers, while the range of age 34-35 represents 3.0% but is still greater than the power of the population over over age 66.
Now, the below graph is grouped by same generations. Generally, the age 45-64 group (baby boomers born 1946-1964) accounted for 44% of the total. The next younger population (age 25-44) indicates the next largest buyer proportion (40%) of the total. Does that mean that as generations progress over time that arts & cultural participation stands as a major function of achieving “middle-age”? The jury is still out on that question – and we will be using the community database to answer that question over time.
Next, let’s consider overall gender difference. The Community Database reports that women show slightly more active attendance to arts and culture event than men. Let’s look at the below graph. Women represent 52.2%, which is about 4% higher than men. Personally, I’m not surprised by this. Whenever I attend arts and cultural events, there seem to be more women than men in attendance. But whether this is a quantitative or qualitative difference – as measured by the Community Database – remains to be explored.
However, here are some interesting points. Even though the average attendance of women is higher than men’s, according to the below graph, the actual gap between men and women in the group of under the age 44 is less than 1%. Further, arts and cultural attendance of the age between 65-74 shows equal proportions (6% each) as well; rather, in the group of age plus 75, men (4.2%) show more frequent buying action rather than women (3.9%). Therefore, focusing simply on women without a consideration of consumer’s age is no more magic formula to boost arts and cultural consumption.
Utilizing the classification of age, it is now possible for arts & cultural organizations to understand important and nuanced facts about their audience – and employ those insights in growing future audiences. Remember: every insight that we are writing about here regarding the totality of the Community Database is also easily and freely available to each organization participating in the Community Database to use to confidentially evaluate their own audiences.
# # #
Relevance must never be a rhetorical question.
Posted by: | CommentsThat Arizona’s arts & cultural organizations are suffering an extreme financial drought is unquestionable.
The stark realities of withdrawn corporate sponsorships, shrinking government allocations, downgraded philanthropic support, diminished earnings and weakened audience participation/philanthropy is testing the intestinal fortitude of leaders, staff and stakeholders alike – and challenging (as far as I can tell) organizations of every size, genre and maturity.
While reporting on the latest organization (Arizona Jewish Theatre Company) to go public with its challenges, the Arizona Republic’s Kerry Lengel asks a critically important question – and it deserves YOUR immediate answer.
He writes:
“For years, advocates have been trying to make the case that supporting the arts is about more than just feel-good altruism or even “quality of life” enhancement for the Valley. Rather, it is an economic driver in its own right, they have argued, with studies to back them up. My question is, with governments slashing arts funding and corporate donors focusing on social welfare, have those advocates officially lost that debate?”
What do YOU think? My observation is that people who work, lead, contribute to and volunteer for Arizona’s arts & cultural organizations are passionate, tenacious and highly creative. Despite dire challenges, I’ve never met an pessimist among us.
Now is a good time to say so publicly. (And if you can, write a personal check to support whatever organization in town you enjoy, respect and/or appreciate most.)
You can read (and reply to) Kerry Lengel’s post here: http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/KerryLengel/150152
###
Community Database: “Geographic Characteristics”
Posted by: | CommentsErika Sung is an ASU doctoral student in community resources and development where she focuses on non-profit management. Her analysis of the Arizona Arts & Cultural Census/Community Database is underwritten by a grant from the Lodestar Foundation.
———————–
In the previous blog, we examined the national characteristics of Arizona’s arts & cultural patrons. Today, we will examine the Arizona statistics.
So far, the 94 percent of the households in the Arizona Community Database are located in Maricopa County, while 6% of households are from only three other Arizona counties: Coconino, Pinal, and Yavapai. The interesting point here is that all the households’ data of Coconino County are from only Flagstaff, and those of Yavapai County are only from Prescott. On the other hand, the data from Pinal County show a different aspect. Even though main attendances are from Apache Junction, Gold Canyon and Casa Grande also represent a total of over 4,000 households.
Patron by Geography in AZ
[Note: Only mailable households are included; for further information, refer to the Zip Penetration Report in eMerge. (https://emerge.trgarts.com/eMerge1/launch)]
Now, we will take a look at our 94% households specifically. Based on the number of households in Maricopa County by the 2010 U.S Census, the 94% households participating in arts and cultural activities represent 24% of all the households in the county.
What city do you think is home to the most active participation in arts and cultural activities? Look at the below graph. It shows our top three candidates. As you might expect, the top three are Phoenix, Scottsdale, and Mesa.
However, that result may be simply caused by size of the city. So, it is necessary to take a look at their actual proportion of attendance depending on households of each city. Unfortunately, there are no separate households information about Laveen and Paradise Valley based on the 2010 US Census. However, we can still get some interesting results. Look at the below graph. Do you think still that Phoenix is the most culturally activated region? NO! Contrary to expectation, Phoenix shows a relatively low percentage of patron households (17%). Also, Avondale, Glendale, and Surprise appear to have the same situation as well. As you can see below, the top three regions that show the most activated cultural attendance are Cave Creek, Litchfield Park, and Scottsdale. Isn’t it interesting?
Proportion of Patron
First of all, Scottsdale is a real gem; it lives up to our expectation, representing a high percent (48%) of patrons engaging in arts and culture. Also, even though Cave Creek and Litchfield Park have less than 3,000 households, the above graph tells us that it is worthwhile to include them as important arts and culture consumers. It shows their enthusiasm for arts and cultural activities.
If you have previously overlooked their potential as a valuable asset, it is time to devote attention to those cities from now on.
Community Database: Understanding “PATRON”
Posted by: | CommentsErika Sung is an ASU doctoral student in community resources and development where she focuses on non-profit management. Her analysis of the Arizona Arts & Cultural Census/Community Database is underwritten by a grant from the Lodestar Foundation.
———————–
When an organization plans to produce arts & cultural offerings, when & how do you consider the availability of audiences?
While a quality arts or cultural experience is at the heart of every organization’s mission, there is no question but that without the PATRON, there is no experience to be had. As competition for patrons has (dramatically) increased, it is increasingly important to understand the characteristics of who comprises your organization’s audience.
The US Census (2010) reports that Arizona’s 6.4 million residents occupy nearly 2.9 million households. At about 700,000 unique households (and growing), the Arizona Community Database tracks arts & cultural participation of nearly 20 percent of ALL Arizona households and reveals fascinating insight into where Arizona’s arts & cultural audiences call home:
Because the Community Database has been most quickly embraced by organizations in the Greater Phoenix area (though it is certainly open to Alliance for Audience members in Tucson, Flagstaff & Prescott!) the data shows a preponderance of audiences members residing in Maricopa County. (The database tracks nearly 34% of ALL Maricopa County residents!)
It’s fascinating to note that 22% of the database resides outside of Arizona. All 50 states are represented somewhere in the Arizona community database (which speaks strongly to Arizona’s role as a visitor destination) – and California (not surprisingly) is the state with the largest representation.
Several new organizations from around the state are poised to join the Arizona Community Database in the next several months. It will be fascinating to measure how measuring arts & cultural participation in Tucson, Flagstaff & Prescott adds to these insights – and, in particular, to assess the extent to which the participation of Maricopa County-based residents powers arts & cultural participation around the state.