Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
West Sanctions Russian Aviation, But Moscow Decides to Keep Planes Flying Despite Risks When the U.S. and its allies slapped sanctions on Russia for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, severing aviation links was at the top of the list. Direct flights vanished and Russian airlines lost access to spare parts for their foreign airplanes. In retaliation, Vladimir Putin’s regime impounded foreign aircraft and shut off the world’s largest air space to countries imposing sanctions. Not since the early 1980s—when the U.S. suspended routes to the USSR over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, repression in Poland and downing of a Korean Air Lines plane—have aviation ties between the two countries dipped so low. Aviation sanctions today are having an impact but come with a major risk. If the fatal crash of a jetliner killing hundreds is linked to the lack of spare parts, Putin will blame sanctions and the West. The stakes are high as Russia seeks to use any issue from cluster bombs to soccer to widen cracks in Western unity over Ukraine. To get ahead of this, U.S. policymakers and their allies need to better explain the effects of sanctions, why they’re worth the risk and why the Russian state, not the West, is ultimately responsible for any fatal crash. U.S. government assessments place Russian aviation among sectors negatively impacted by sanctions. A closer look shows widening success in degrading this increasingly weak link in Russia’s political economy. By late 2021, foreign aircraft comprised 70% of Russia’s fleet of 801 passenger airplanes, which included 298 Airbuses, 236 Boeings, and 23 other foreign aircraft such as Embraers. In addition, 95% of Russian airline flights were on foreign-made aircraft. Consequently, sanctions aimed at depriving spare parts for foreign airplanes have caused many disruptions such as fare increases to cover higher costs of repairs. Some of Russia’s 53 airlines have periodically suspended or stopped flying some of their foreign planes. Reports of Russian airlines’ cannibalization of foreign aircraft similarly underscore a dire situation. Less well known is how sanctions hurt Russian manufacturing since Western technology is critical to aircraft such as the Sukhoi Superjet 100, which uses a French-Russian engine (though Russians are working on a substitution). Production of the Yakovlev design bureau’s MC-21 passenger airplane faces significant delays due to sanctions that force substitution of its Western-made parts. Sanctions even helped push Russia out of a joint venture with China to produce the CR929 widebody aircraft. While China is happy to help Russia thwart sanctions, this plane needs Western systems that sanctions complicate. In response, Russia has adapted to and thwarted some aviation sanctions, which I predicted would happen because Putin’s regime is reproducing a state-centered aviation sector rooted in the Soviet past. The war has accelerated the state’s growing control over this vital economic sector, which began before Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine. Examples include the state’s 51% ownership of Aeroflot since 1994, the merger of two smaller, state-run airlines in 2003 and the consolidation of aircraft manufacturing in the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which was created in 2006. More recently, the Russian state has helped the country’s airlines weather sanctions by facilitating the illegal confiscation of foreign aircraft. Russian airlines have also proven resourceful by purchasing spare parts through brokers in the United Arab Emirates and Turkey. Better known for supplying Russia with drones, Iran also agreed to provide Russian airlines with spare parts and has been fixing an Aeroflot Airbus for months. Many foreign airlines continue to fly to Russia, and Putin’s regime rewards friendly countries with overflight rights. But the longer sanctions remain, the harder it’s getting for Russia. To regain profitable foreign routes, its airlines are receiving government assistance to legitimately purchase the Western aircraft they illegally seized, although recent holdups in allocating such funds are causing doubts. In a throwback to the Soviet era, Putin’s regime boasts that Russia doesn’t need the West’s airplanes anyway since its one manufacturer, the UAC, will pick up the slack. Such import substitution is unlikely to succeed, as multiple delays suggest. More likely, Russia’s aviation sector will grow more reliant on the state, if not actually part of it like the UAC. This will make Russian aviation less efficient, less innovative and more expensive. Iranian airlines, which have long suffered under foreign sanctions despite some success circumventing them, present their Russian counterparts with a grim vision of the future such as being shut out of lucrative air travel markets and falling behind in emerging aviation technology. How does this shape safety in Russia’s skies? The short answer is that it’s not as bad as headlines suggest and the impact of sanctions is ambiguous at best. Click bait stories paint a dire picture but often conflate commercial, military and general aviation into alarming numbers that do not accurately capture what ordinary passengers face. Some accounts, such as one claiming 120 accidents occurred in 2023, provide few details or sources. Annual safety reports from Russia’s Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) allow for comparison over time but often obscure Russia’s situation by combining data from each post-Soviet state it monitors. Its 2019 report is mysteriously missing and its decision not to investigate the fatal crash of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Embraer Legacy 600 plane suggests meddling from above. That said, the IAC source base is the most systematic we have. Keeping in mind the potential for the politicization of its conclusions, what does a critical reading of its data alongside other sources suggest? First, fatal crashes in commercial and general aviation actually decreased in Russia from 18 in 2021 to 13 in 2022, and related deaths decreased from 70 to 24. Data for the first half of 2023 points in the same direction, with six fatal crashes and nine deaths. This trend was likely helped by the 14% decline in traffic after February 2022. While so many fatal crashes sound substantial, all but three in 2021 and all but one in 2022 involved small aircraft under 5,700 kilograms, not the jetliners we associate with most commercial flying. Absolute figures on crashes and deaths capture headlines but they don’t say much about safety without considering their relation to passengers flown or departures. According to the IAC, the rate of aviation accidents and the rate of fatal crashes per one million departures both increased from 2020 to 2021 but then decreased in 2022. The IAC does not single out Russia from other post-Soviet states for this metric. But since Russia has the largest aviation sector among those countries, these data suggest that its aviation safety has not dramatically worsened since early 2022. Indeed, even critics who argue that Russian airlines are less safe partly because of sanctions conclude that “2022 and 2023 were also good years for airline safety [in Russia] compared to 2021.” Comparisons with the U.S. similarly suggest that passenger aviation is not as disastrous as some headlines suggest. The IAC data indicates that Russia and other post-Soviet states are usually but not always behind the U.S. in passenger aviation safety. In 2018, for example, IAC countries reported a 0.8 rate of fatal crashes per 1 million departures of passenger aircraft above 5,700 kilograms. Comparable statistics from the National Transportation Safety Board showed a 0.11 rate for that year for scheduled U.S. carrier flights. In 2019, the rates were 2.3 (IAC) and 0.10 (U.S.), but in 2020, both IAC countries and the U.S. enjoyed a 0.0 rate of fatal crashes. The following year, however, IAC countries reported a 1.9 rate of fatal crashes, whereas the NTSB reported a 0.0 rate.1 Against this background of Russian airline safety, let’s now turn to the impact of sanctions. While some commentators emphasize that no fatal crashes have been tied to sanctions, others claim they make Russian airlines unsafe and that it’s only a matter of time before such a fatal crash happens. Some even argue that life-threatening dangers prove aviation sanctions are effective and could help turn Russians against Putin. To reassure the public, Russian aviation officials insist the country’s airlines are safe despite sanctions, as do Russian business media and aviation journalists. This plays to Putin’s claims to legitimacy based in part on withstanding anything the West throws at him. In sharp contrast, Ukrainian media tells Russians their airlines are a disaster waiting to happen precisely because of sanctions. Independent Russian journalists banished by Putin concur, raising alarms about efforts to cover up the impact of sanctions and about the many ways Russian airlines cut corners on safety. In short, an information war exists around the morbid question of whether a Russian jetliner will crash and the role sanctions could play. Fears of a fatal crash were validated by the emergency landing of a Ural Airlines A320 in September, apparently caused by malfunctioning hydraulics tied to sanctions. But a closer examination by a Russian aviation journalist suggests the pilots played a more important role by pressing on to an airport for which there wasn’t enough fuel. Recent Russian state assessments of aviation safety similarly point to pilot error and poor training as the chief causes of aviation incidents. More generally, airplane disasters are usually caused by a convergence of factors—bad weather, a manageable mechanical failure and pilot error—not just one problem. In public discussions, however, pinpointing sanctions’ role tracks more with the politics of the war than technical expertise. At the end of the day, Russian airlines and aviation authorities are solely responsible for putting planes in the sky and Russians’ lives at risk. They continue to claim that everything is fine. But if a fatal crash of a Boeing or Airbus flown by a Russian airline kills hundreds, I predict this narrative will quickly change. Putin will blame the West as he does for everything else affecting his legitimacy, from Russia’s economic problems and his diplomatic failures to protests against his regime and even the war he started in Ukraine. Such a scenario will be a serious test for policymakers who argue that punishing Russia with sanctions is still worth it. To prepare for this, they need to take a page from the Biden administration’s release of intelligence on Russia’s military buildup before the full-scale invasion: publicize as much intelligence as possible on sanctions and their impact, as well as Russia’s aviation sector and what it does or doesn’t do to ensure safety. As Putin’s regime falls back on Soviet-era secrecy about airline safety, sharing such intelligence will be a powerful tool. This will also contribute to broader Western efforts at combatting Russia’s better known disinformation campaigns such as those denying its human rights abuses in Ukraine.
Expert Perspective: UMW's Steven E. Harris lends his opinion to The Russia File
The following piece was written by Steven E. Harris published by the Wilson Center in April 2024 Sanctions Are Spoiling Russia’s Plans to Make Its Own Airplanes Putin’s regime is feeling confident these days. Advances on the battlefield in Ukraine, expansions in armaments production, and the dithering of Republicans in the U.S. Congress show the war has turned in Russia’s favor. A well-orchestrated presidential election and some real public support buoy the regime. Political opponents are either dead, in prison, or in exile. Putin’s regime has also declared victory in blunting Western sanctions and now plans to permanently thwart them with programs of import substitution. Nowhere is this better seen than in aviation, where the state proclaims it will produce over a thousand new airplanes to replace the foreign aircraft its airlines have long flown. But this bold vision for aviation autarky has little chance of succeeding. Russia’s Short-Term Success in Blunting Aviation Sanctions Thus far, Putin’s regime has weathered aviation sanctions through a two-pronged strategy. First, Russian airlines illegally kept about 400 foreign airplanes—primarily Airbuses and Boeings—owned by foreign leasing companies. Second, the state bankrolled settlement claims in order to purchase some of these airplanes so that airlines could fly them abroad without risk of repossession and reduce their foreign debt. To date, approximately 170 foreign airplanes have been legally acquired in this fashion, and the Ministry of Transportation recently asked for more cash to continue settling claims on the remaining 230 foreign planes. The next question is how long Russian airlines, from the state-owned flag carrier Aeroflot to private companies such as S7 and Ural Air Lines, can continue flying their foreign planes. As I wrote in late October, safety has been degraded far less than predicted. But in the absence of spare parts, software updates, and thorough maintenance by foreign providers, Russian airlines have about two years before they will have to ground Boeings and Airbuses for major repairs performed using third-party spare parts. Anticipating the eventual retirement of foreign planes, Putin’s regime has embarked on a massive program to make all-Russian airplanes. This program promises independence from Western technology and leasing companies but reveals the success of sanctions and fundamental weaknesses in state capacity. The 2030 Aviation Manufacturing Plan Announced in June 2022, the program calls for the state-owned industrial conglomerate Rostec to manufacture 1,036 airplanes with only Russian parts by 2030. In January 2024, the state allocated 283 billion rubles (U.S. $3.1 billion) to help finance the production of 609 airplanes and prioritize medium-haul aircraft in the overall manufacturing plan. Before sanctions, Russian manufacturers produced a small number of narrow body, medium-haul airplanes such as the MC-21 and the Superjet-100 (SSJ-100) with Western components. Twelve SSJ-100s were manufactured in 2021 and ten the following year. Among the aircraft slated to replace Boeings and Airbuses, the plan called for production in 2023 of three medium-haul Tupolev-214 (Tu-214) airplanes and two Superjet-NEW planes (Superjet-100s with all-Russian parts). None of these were built. In fact, the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) failed to manufacture a single passenger airplane in 2023. More recently, the UAC conceded further delays of up to two years for rollout of the MC-21, SSJ-NEW, and Tu-214, as well as of smaller, short-haul aircraft such as the Ilyushin-114 (Il-114) and the “Baikal.” The transition to total import substitution is proving difficult, making it impossible to fulfill early targets of the manufacturing plan. By withdrawing access to Western technology critical for manufacturing, sanctions have successfully shut down production. Russian manufacturers will produce at best inferior aircraft that fly shorter routes using more fuel. At its current rate, the UAC is unlikely to manufacture more than a dozen or so showcase narrow body airplanes before 2030. The manufacturer may have better luck producing simpler planes, such as the Baikal, but the state’s injection of 283 billion rubles doesn’t target its production or that of two other short-haul airplanes. Since the UAC will likely not meet the plan’s annual targets any time soon, Russia’s airlines will have to make do with their aging foreign airplanes and acquire spare parts from third parties. Putin admitted as much at his call-in event in December 2023, during which he praised the import-substitution plan but added that the government would continue to purchase illegally held foreign planes. What Will Russia’s Aviation Manufacturing Plan Actually Produce? Rather than produce new aircraft, the immediate purpose of the state’s manufacturing plan is political theater. The infusion of 283 billion rubles was meant to show the public, before the presidential elections, that Putin’s regime is serious about securing commercial aviation and to generate a sense of normalcy in the midst of war. In the long run, the manufacturing plan is more likely to produce further distortions in Russia’s political economy. These include corruption, secrecy, technologically backward aircraft, and even more state control over commercial aviation. The 283 billion rubles will help Rostec keep state-run subsidiaries such as the United Engine Corporation operating with soft budget constraints and favorable contracts that now lack any competition from Western firms. Executives will siphon off their share of the funds, while Putin’s regime will turn a blind eye as long as everyone remains loyal. If the manufacturing plan continues to falter, state-owned manufacturers will have more incentive to keep their failures secret. In 2023, for example, the Ural Civil Aviation Factory kept hidden cost overruns for the Baikal. When news of a 48 percent increase was finally publicized, Putin’s point man for the Far East region, Yuri Trutnev, was incensed and proclaimed, “Our people are like that: they don’t like to share information.” For now, Putin’s regime allows the Russian business media to report fairly openly about the country’s aviation industry on issues such as spare parts and safety, state subsidies, and shortfalls in production. But if commercial flying becomes more precarious and the manufacturing plan remains unfulfilled, the government will likely limit what the public knows about its airlines and long-term plans to maintain them. As the economic historian Mark Harrison shows in his recent book, Secret Leviathan, secrecy in the Soviet era significantly degraded state capacity in many areas, including production. Post-Soviet autocrats face a similar “secrecy/capacity tradeoff,” while newer techniques of disinformation further erode capacity. In attempting to revive the Soviet Union’s autarkic aviation industry, Putin’s regime will find it hard to avoid similar reductions in capacity. Insofar as Russia’s commercial aviation industry is concerned, the lesson for the West is that it pays to play the long game. Russia has effective tools for blunting sanctions in the short run, but in the long run it faces structural obstacles and the absence of Western technology, both of which will degrade this economic sector. The main question remains whether the United States and its allies can keep up the pressure by enforcing sanctions.
Presidential scholar Meena Bose was interviewed by WNYW Fox 5 about the Democratic National Convention, and why New York City Mayor Eric Adams may not have been asked to take on a more prominent role. Dr. Bose is a professor of political science, executive dean of the Public Policy and Public Service program, and executive director of the Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency. Dr. Meena Bose is available to speak with media - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams '95 M.S. took the trip of a lifetime in June, traveling to the International Space Station (ISS) on Boeing's Starliner spacecraft. Not long after their arrival to the ISS, however, the spacecraft began having mechanical issues. Since then, the pair have been left stranded in space with no return flight booked to come home. As the scientific world, public and international media watch, experts like Don Platt from Florida Tech are supporting ongoing media coverage until the two astronauts return to Earth. To return Starliner to Earth, the thrusters need to fire correctly at the right time to get the crew safely out of orbit. "Clearly, you need to have thrusters to be able to position your spacecraft, to move away from the space station, to get into the position to safely reenter the Earth's atmosphere," said Don Platt, associate professor of space systems at Florida Tech. "They claim just doing a rocket burn, they can probably make it home, but they don't know where'd they land," said Platt. The problem lies with the propulsion system inside the service module. "It sounds as if they've experienced a different amount of heating than expected with some of these thrusters, and had some affected things like valves that control the flow of propellant to the thrusters. So sometimes those valves will leak or not open all the way based on the amount of heat they are experiencing," said Platt. Platt explained that the valves for these thrusters are comparable to fuel injectors in a car. They simply open and close to feed the propellant into the combustion chamber − the end result being thrust (power). Part of the challenge for Boeing teams is that they can't exactly replicate what the spacecraft is experiencing in space. Platt said that heat is not just created from the thruster itself, but from the Sun. August 11 - Florida Today Don Platt, the director of Florida Tech’s Spaceport Education Center in Titusville and an associate professor of space systems, explained that Boeing is currently trying to figure out what went wrong with Starliner and to see if there is still a chance to use the thrusters. "There's probably very little they can do to fix them at this point," Platt said. "What they can do is they can look at what thrusters are working properly, and how can we then use those thrusters to efficiently get the vehicle back into the atmosphere and then to the surface of the Earth." While Starliner has been having extensive issues and now Boeing has some tough decisions to make about what's next, Platt said we need to remember that this was a test mission. "I think that we've had a lot of success in space over the last decade or so, and we've probably gotten used to things going perfectly," Platt said. "Although space is not that easy, and we can see problems, problems do pop up from time to time. Even back in the days of the shuttle program, there used to be issues with the orbiter, even on orbit, and they'd have to think about, 'can we keep flying this mission, or do we need to return to the Earth?'" August 13 - Central Florida Public Media For now, all we can do is watch and wait. But if you're a journalist following this ongoing story, then let us help with your coverage. Dr. Don Platt's work has involved developing, testing and flying different types of avionics, communications, rocket propulsion systems as well as astrobiology/biotechnology systems and human deep space exploration tools. Don is available to speak with media anytime. Simply click on the icon below to arrange an interview today.
#ExpertSpotlight: The History of DNC Conventions in America
As one of the most significant political events in American history, the Democratic National Convention (DNC) has shaped the political landscape and influenced presidential elections for over a century. Understanding the history of DNC conventions offers a window into the evolution of American politics, party ideologies, and electoral strategies. This topic is newsworthy not only because of its historical significance but also due to its ongoing impact on contemporary political discourse, party unity, and voter mobilization. Furthermore, the DNC conventions reflect broader societal changes, such as shifts in public opinion, the role of media in politics, and the influence of grassroots movements, which include: The evolution of the DNC’s role in shaping party platforms and political agendas Key historical moments from past DNC conventions that defined U.S. politics The impact of DNC conventions on voter engagement and turnout The role of media coverage in shaping public perceptions of the DNC How grassroots movements and protests have influenced DNC outcomes The significance of keynote speeches and how they have launched political careers By covering these angles, journalists can provide their audiences with a comprehensive look at the history of these important conventions and topics readers, listeners and viewers want to know more about. Connect with a political expert about the History of DNC Conventions: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com Photo Credit: Kelly Sikkema
#ExpertSpotlight: Mpox - are we ready?
As global health continues to navigate the challenges of infectious diseases, the re-emergence and spread of Monkeypox (now known as Mpox) underscores the ongoing threat posed by zoonotic viruses. This topic is critical not only because of its public health implications but also due to the broader issues it raises concerning global preparedness, vaccination strategies, and the socio-economic impact of outbreaks. The resurgence of Mpox, particularly in non-endemic regions, highlights the need for vigilant public health measures and cross-border cooperation to contain its spread. As the world remains focused on preventing another global health crisis, Mpox serves as a pertinent reminder of the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. Key story angles include: Vaccination strategies and public health response: Explore how different countries are deploying vaccines to control Mpox, and the challenges faced in achieving widespread immunity. Global health security and disease surveillance: Investigate the effectiveness of international disease surveillance systems in detecting and responding to outbreaks like Mpox, and the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. The role of zoonotic diseases in global pandemics: Examine the origins of Mpox as a zoonotic disease, and the broader implications for how human activities are influencing the spread of diseases from animals to humans. Impact on marginalized communities: Discuss how Mpox disproportionately affects marginalized populations, including those with limited access to healthcare, and the importance of equitable health interventions. Public communication and misinformation: Analyze the role of media and public health authorities in communicating accurate information about Mpox, combating misinformation, and educating the public about prevention and treatment. Economic implications of outbreaks: Examine the economic impact of Mpox outbreaks, particularly in regions where tourism, trade, and healthcare resources are significantly affected by public health crises. By addressing these angles, journalists can provide critical insights into the multifaceted impact of Mpox on global health, public safety, and socio-economic stability, contributing to a more informed and prepared public. Connect with an expert about Mpox: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com Photo Credit: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
#ExpertSpotlight: What is a Blue Moon?
The phenomenon of a Blue Moon, though rare, captures the imagination and curiosity of the public, making it a prime topic for media coverage. A Blue Moon typically refers to the occurrence of an additional full moon within a specific time frame, usually two full moons in a single calendar month or an extra full moon in a season. This celestial event is not just an astronomical curiosity but also a cultural and symbolic event that resonates deeply with people around the world. The significance of a Blue Moon extends beyond its scientific rarity, touching on themes of folklore, human understanding of time, and the natural world's rhythms. Journalists can explore several angles to connect this event with broader societal interests, including: Astronomical Significance: Explaining the science behind what causes a Blue Moon, how often they occur, and the different types of Blue Moons. Cultural and Historical Context: Delving into the myths, legends, and folklore associated with the Blue Moon across various cultures and how these stories have shaped human perception of time and nature. Impact on Astrology and Horoscopes: Investigating the Blue Moon's influence in astrology, including predictions and interpretations tied to this rare event. Environmental and Ecological Implications: Exploring how lunar cycles, including Blue Moons, affect wildlife, tides, and natural phenomena, contributing to broader discussions on the environment. Art and Literature: Highlighting references to Blue Moons in art, literature, and music, and how this natural phenomenon has inspired creativity throughout history. Public Engagement and Education: Covering events, public viewings, and educational opportunities that allow people to learn more about the moon and other astronomical phenomena. By covering these angles, journalists can provide their audiences with a comprehensive look at the Blue Moon, connecting this celestial event to a wide range of cultural, scientific, and environmental topics that resonate with the public's interests. Connect with an expert about Blue Moons: To search our full list of experts visit www.expertfile.com Photo Credit: Kym MacKinnon
VP Harris Picks Gov. Tim Walz as Her Running Mate
Dr. Meena Bose talked to NY1 Spectrum News about Vice President Kamala Harris selecting Minnesota Governor Tim Walz as her presidential running mate. The interview was conducted by Hofstra alum and NY1 news anchor Shannan Ferry ’14. Dr. Bose is a professor of political science, executive dean of the Public Policy and Public Service program, and executive director of the Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency. Dr. Meena Bose is available to speak with media - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Expert Insight: NFL Fandom: The Last Cultural Unifier?
In 2024, few cultural touchstones unify America. One of the remaining cultural unifiers is the NFL. It is almost guaranteed that the Super Bowl will be the most watched television program each year. Add Taylor Swift (another rare cultural unifier) attending to watch her boyfriend and an appealing halftime musical guest, and you can have over 120 million people watching the same program at the same time. Nothing else comes close. There is little doubt that the NFL is the undisputed champion of American sports. But how do the various NFL fandoms compare? Which team has the top fandom, and which struggles (struggle is relative here, as the lowest-ranked NFL fandom is still impressive)? This is an interesting question in a couple of ways. First, it reveals something important about the level of connection in different cities. Cities with stronger fan bases tend to have more of a shared identity. Boston residents share more love across their teams (Celtics, Red Sox, Bruins, Patriots) than folks from Tampa Bay. “Sports” cities are fundamentally different. It's also an interesting marketing analysis. Fandoms are people who share passion and love for what are essentially brands. Examining fandom can reveal something critical about how brands that inspire fandom are built. Comparing fan bases can also inflame passions. Sports fans are (often) the ultimate fans as they closely identify with their teams and feel each victory as a personal triumph and each loss as a defeat. Because fans’ identities are tied to their teams, ranking fan bases can feel like an attack. Saying Browns fans aren’t as good of fans as Ravens fans feels like an attack on Cleveland. The deeper perspective motivating this analysis is that fandom is about cultural passion, so what people are fans of largely dictates the tone and content of our societies. A society that loves baseball, country music, and trucks feels very different from one that favors soccer, opera, and Vespas. The fandom rankings are a snapshot in time of how fandom works in the NFL. And remember, the NFL is not just the top sports league in America but also the closest thing we have in 2024 to a shared societal passion. Analyzing Fandoms I have been ranking NFL and other fan bases for more than a decade. These fandom analyses are an example of brand equity analytics, and they use two types of data. The goal is to understand the relationship between market characteristics and fandom outcomes at the league level. We can then evaluate each team based on how it performs relative to league norms. The fandom or market outcome measures include things like data on prices, attendance, and social media following. These are measures of fan engagement. Prices provide a signal of how much market power a team has created. Attendance shows the enthusiasm of fans in the market to pay for tickets and take the time to travel and attend. Social media following reveals how many fans the team has in and out of their home market. Each metric has advantages and limitations. Social media following provides an indication of national fandom, but it also captures casual fans who would never pay for a ticket. The second aspect of the analysis focuses on market potential. NFL markets vary from New York, with a population of 20 million, to Green Bay, with a few hundred thousand. Income levels in San Francisco are far higher than in Jacksonville or Cleveland. I use a range of demographics, but income and population are the major factors. Again, the metrics are good but not perfect. For example, using MSA populations isn’t perfect because teams have different footprints. The Packers are more of a Wisconsin team than a Green Bay team. The teams in New York and LA share a market. Should they each get half of the metro area population? One factor that I do not control for is competition. In the southeast, NFL teams may compete with SEC teams. I have debated this issue (with myself) and have decided to neglect it. This year's analysis includes a significant change from last year. The significant change is that I am not controlling for team performance. Controlling for team performance is helpful because it isolates core or unchanging fandom. This approach has appeal, as we can argue that teams with more passionate fandoms will be more resilient against losing seasons. The downside of controlling for performance is that we get less of a measurement of the fandom's overall value. If a team like Kansas City is on an extended winning streak, then the Chiefs brand is very valuable at the moment. Controlling for winning makes the analysis more about the core, near-permanent passion of a fandom, while not controlling makes the results more relevant to current brand power. The analysis involves three steps. The first step creates measures of each team’s relative fandom outcomes and market potential. The second step develops a statistical model of the relationship between market potential and fandom outcomes. The third step compares each team's fandom outcomes with the statistical model's predictions. The third step is a comparison of actual results versus predicted – the key point is that the prediction is based on leaguewide data. As these analyses are always imperfect, the best way to consider the fandom rankings is as tiers. I like the idea of quadrants. Some brief comments on the members of each quadrant (Elite, Solid, Role Players, Benchwarmers). I will be discussing each fandom on social media. TikTok: @fanalyticspodcast Instagram: @fanalyticsmikelewis YouTube: @fanalyticsmike A bonus figure follow the Quad overviews. The Results Quadrant 1: The Elite The Dallas Cowboys lead the top group of teams, followed by the Packers, Eagles, Chiefs, 49ers, Raiders, Patriots, and Steelers. Sounds a lot like what the man on the street would list as the top NFL brands. The Cowboys and Packers leading the way is no surprise. The Cowboys are second in social following and the leaders in attendance. The Packers are an astonishing fandom story as the team is located in the definitive small market. The Eagles leading the Steelers is going to be troubling in Western Pennsylvania, but the Eagles have more pricing power and more social following. The 49ers are a solid NFL fandom with few weaknesses. The Patriots are in a new era, and it will be fascinating to see if they maintain their top-tier position as Brady and Belichick become memories. The Chiefs' presence in the top group is a change from past years and is due to the shift away from controlling for performance. The Chiefs have a great fandom, but the team’s success currently pumps them up. The Chiefs are in a brand-building phase as the team continues building its dynasty. The question for the Chiefs is where they end up long-term. I don't fully understand the Raiders' ranking. The Raiders are midrange in attendance and social following but do well because are reported to have the highest prices in the league. I suspect this is more an idiosyncrasy of the Las Vegas market than a reflection of significant passionate fandom. Quadrant 2: Solid Performers The Quadrant 2 teams are the Broncos, Giants, Panthers, Seahawks, Saints, Ravens, Texans, and Browns. These are the solid performers of NFL fandoms (brands). These are teams with above expected fandom outcomes for their relative market potentials. The Quadrant 2 clubs are all passionate fanbases (maybe one exception) despite very different histories. For example, the AFC North rival Ravens and Browns differ in both relative history and frequency of winning. Cleveland fandom involves significant character, while the Ravens are a “blue-collar” brand that has been a consistent winner. There are a lot of great stories in Quad 2. The Saints were once the Aints but are now a core part of New Orleans. The Broncos and Giants are great fandoms who are probably angry to be left out of Quad 1. The Panthers' position is unexpected and may be due to some inflated social media numbers. This is the challenge when an analysis is based only on data. When data gets a little weird, like an inflated social media follower count dating back to Cam Newton's days, the results can also get a little weird. This is a teachable moment—do not analyze and interpret data without knowing the context (the data-generating processes). Quadrant 3: Role Players Quadrant 3 fandoms are teams whose fandom outcomes are slightly below average league performance (for similar markets). The Quadrant 3 teams include (in order) the Bills, Falcons, Buccaneers, Jets, Vikings, Bears, Dolphins, and Bengals. There are some interesting teams in Quad 3. The Bills have a great and notorious fandom. Jumping through flaming tables in subzero weather should get you into the top half of the rankings? The big-market Jets and the small-market Bengals have two of the most fascinating QBs in the league. Both clubs could be poised to get to Quad 2 with a Super Bowl or two. Da’Bears may be one of the most disappointing results. A team with an SNL skit devoted to their fandom in a market like Chicago shouldn’t be in Quad 3. Other quick comments: The Falcons need to win a title. Florida is tough for professional teams. The Vikings should play outside. Quadrant 4: Hopium These are the NFL's weakest fandoms, with the key phrase being “the NFL’s.” The Quad 4 teams, in order, are the Lions, Rams, Jaguars, Colts, Titans, Commanders, Chargers, and Cardinals. It’s a lot of teams who have not won regularly and have many moves and name changes. The Lions are poised for a move upward and maybe a sleeping giant of a fandom. They have the most watchable coach in the league and the most surprising celebrity fan. An interesting side story in Quad 4 is the battle for Los Angeles between the Rams (formerly of Saint Louis) and the Chargers (previously San Diego). They play in the same market, but the Rams have won more. But will Herbert lead the Chargers past the Rams? Quad 4 illustrates an important lesson: consistency. The Rams moved from St. Louis and then back to LA. The Chargers went from San Diego to LA. The Colts left Baltimore in the middle of the night. The Titans were the Oilers and moved from Houston to Nashville. The Cardinals were the other NFL team Saint Louis lost. The Commanders should have stopped with their previous name. The Fandom Outcomes / Market Potential Matrix The following figure is a bit of bonus material that may provide some insight into the inner workings of the analysis. The figure below shows the performance of each team on the Fandom Outcome and the Market Potential Indexes. The upper left region features teams with less lucrative markets but above-average fandoms, like the Packers, Steelers, and Chiefs. The lower right region is the teams with below-average fandom outcomes despite high potential markets, like the Commanders, Chargers, and Rams. This pictorial representation is also interesting as it shows teams with similar positions. These similarities can be somewhat surprising. For example, the Lions and Dolphins have very similar profiles despite the differences between Detroit and Miami. Mike Lewis is an expert in the areas of analytics and marketing. This approach makes Professor Lewis a unique expert on fandom as his work addresses the complete process from success on the field to success at the box office and the campaign trail. Michael is available to speak with media - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today. Interested in following Future Fandom! Subscribe for free to receive new posts.
Housing and Health: How are they connected?
Dr. Martine Hackett, associate professor and chair of Hofstra’s Department of Population Health, spoke to Newsday about the connection between housing and health. She noted that the connection between housing and health has always existed and when we look at the elderly and the type of health conditions they have you can determine that the quality of their housing is key to maintaining their health. Dr. Hackett's research focuses on public health and health inequities, particularly in the American suburbs and minority communities. She's available to speak with media - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
