Why Do I Care About Attendance?

[ewokpelts]

meanwhile, a hack job by the cub times (and a wsi contributor):

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15380578-57...ric-levels.html

[ewokpelts]

btw, tix are $20 downstairs tonight. and $24 all weekend. no excuse on price, at least this week.

[ewokpelts]

This brings up the old argument of ticket prices being so high (along with parking and concession costs). I realize that the Sox are a business and they have to make money. And I know that there's no money to be made if tickets are $10. But there has to be a happy medium. There is no question that lower ticket prices would result in more fans coming out. And as Greg pointed out, lower parking costs would help, too. Obviously ticket prices cannot be dropped dramatically, or there would be no money to pay for a quality product on the field.

 

I live 40 minutes from the Cell, and I've been to one game in the past three years. Not because I'm not a fan. But because of the cost. The average person nowadays cannot afford to take their family to a Sox game very often. And even if I wanted to go by myself (my kids would be quite pissed), I'd still be paying $50 for a ticket and parking and then another $20 or so for concessions. I just can't afford to do that very often. And frankly, if I can't go to a game with my family or at least some friends I'm going to grab a 6-pack of Hoegaarden and flop down in my recliner. That's only going to cost me about $9.

 

I would love to go to 5-10 games a year, but it's not going to happen. However, if ticket and parking prices are lowered, I might be able to come 1-2 times a year.

sox kids' club is FREE, and the sox give you TWO FREE TICKETS per kid.

a family of four can go to at least one game free, and only be on the hook for parking and concessions.

 

kid's day has $1 tix for kids, even on the lower level.

 

 

but keep telling yourself that sox tix are too expensive for families.

[IlliniKrush]

Fans have had excuses to not go to the first 155 games. Why would the last 7 be any different?

The whole point people are talking about here is that this is the last week in a pennant race, so you'd think it'd be higher. Those other games aren't the last week in a pennant race.

 

If they were winning a lot more right now and it was a true fight to the finish, more would be out there.

[ewokpelts]

The whole point people are talking about here is that this is the last week in a pennant race, so you'd think it'd be higher. Those other games aren't the last week in a pennant race.

 

If they were winning a lot more right now and it was a true fight to the finish, more would be out there.

it's also late September. race or not, kids are in school and the weather is not as good.

 

and tuesday being a day game to accommodate youkilis hurt the gate(low walk up sales and the sox offered REFUNDS/EXCHANGES for people that had tix and couldn't make the 1pm start). considering he only gave the team 1 hit, they should have just told him to stay at home and play the night game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[southsider2k5]

meanwhile, a hack job by the cub times (and a wsi contributor):

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15380578-57...ric-levels.html

 

Attendance is a perfect topic for the Sun Times. It is simple and for some reason controversial.

[southsider2k5]

The whole point people are talking about here is that this is the last week in a pennant race, so you'd think it'd be higher. Those other games aren't the last week in a pennant race.

 

If they were winning a lot more right now and it was a true fight to the finish, more would be out there.

 

They have been in first place for over 120 days this season, and we are still in the mid 20's in attendance. The whole "if they were competing" thing doesn't really hold up either.

[CyAcosta41]

I could not care less about attendance. It's an ownership issue, not a fan issue. Ownership made certain choices over the years and (exacerbated by the economy) this is where they led.

 

I spoke my mind about attendance in a recent Game Thread. Rather than reinventing the wheel, I'm copying and pasting. I'll stand by all of that. And for the remainder of the season, it's just going to be worse. I'll never use the word "choke" for a team who clearly cares (and who never had a larger than 3 game lead against a vastly more talented rival), but going 1-7 down the stretch, playing so tight that hitters can't hit league average fastballs from league average pitchers and our pitchers can't find the strike zone and can't bear down and EVER (down the stretch) throw a gem, has created a funereal, downer, of a home stretch. Who wants to watch that in person.

 

 

PREVIOUSLY (from the 9/24 Game Thread):

 

However, I personally cringe when you and anyone else brings up this attendance issue! It's not baseball; it's not fandom; it's an economics and ownership issue. Do you own the team? I don't.

 

So many people, particularly Cubs fans, grasp on to the Sox attendance woes as if it measures anything particularly significant. The historical circumstances that led to Comiskey Park built had long since changed by 1990. Had all other things been equal, there was no way that Sox ownership would have rebuilt a park at that same location. However, all other things weren't equal. Sox ownership (which included dozens of the top real estate and business minds in the Chicago community) fought hard for the sweetheart deal of the century. They won the lottery with all sorts of public concessions, allowing them to easily make solid profits year after year while their equity investment in the team skyrocketed.

 

But ownership can't have it both ways. I've got plenty of South Sider family and friends, but the current location is far from ideal for many fans, for business ticket holders, and for tourists. The Cubs have such a huge advantage over the Sox in each of these three things. It's why comparing their attendance to the Sox attendance is so ridiculous. I wish I could somehow get a breakdown, but I'd bet the number of actual dedicated Sox fans buying tickets for games at the Cell is close to if not more than the number of actual dedicated Cubs fans buying tickets for games at the Urinal (err ... the Shrine). The difference is business ticket holders and tourists.

 

And that's not all -- the Sox could easily draw more, lots more, if they wanted. Others with greater knowledge have discussed it far more eloquently than I could, but the Sox ticket prices, dynamic pricing, parking prices, and so forth, follow their self-professed goals of maximizing revenue (without regard to the pure number of fannies in the seat) instead of maximizing attendance. Stripping all of that down to the basics -- ownership really doesn't care for regular 30,000+ turn-outs as long as they're maximizing profits at some lower attendance figure. If they don't care, why should I? Why should you?

 

Sure, the players might like more people in the stands, but if they have a problem, take it up with ownership, not with the fans. Ownership created this mess.

[Marty34]

Currently the 8th best record in the American League. Typical KW middle-of-the-pack team.

[BigEdWalsh]

I stopped caring about White Sox attendance woes about 40 years ago. The Sox have had a smaller fan base than the Cubs for all of my life, probably since the Black sox scandal. Certain things over the course of the years have only made this fact even worse. Their fan base grows, ours shrinks. Oh well. Do I wish the Sox had better attendance? Yes, but I'm not going to fret about it.

[ewokpelts]

sox park: next to 2 cta lines, 1 metra line, and a major expressway

 

wrigley field, next to 1 cta line. 1 mile from nearest metra line. 1.5 miles from lake shore dr.(which does NOT have an off ramp at addison)

 

 

 

 

obviously, Wrigley is harder to get to for many chicagoans.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Sox still drawing better than contenders OAK and TB, and just under BAL.

 

I stopped caring about White Sox attendance woes about 40 years ago. The Sox have had a smaller fan base than the Cubs for all of my life, probably since the Black sox scandal. Certain things over the course of the years have only made this fact even worse. Their fan base grows, ours shrinks. Oh well. Do I wish the Sox had better attendance? Yes, but I'm not going to fret about it.

This is historically inaccurate. The Sox and Cubs swung back and forth, but the Sox did better more often, up until basically the time that Reinsdorff et al bought the team. At that point, the new ownership made the incredibly stupid decision to pass on a WGN TV contract and go to Sportsvision (and almost no one had cable then). Add to that the neighborhoods around The Cell had been going downhill and were getting worse, and the final and biggest blow: Wrigleyville, which was a decent but not-that-special neighborhood, suddenly became a huge draw itself beginning in the 80's. From that point (basically for the past 30 years or so), the Sox have only outdrawn the Cubs 2 or 3 seasons. And none since '93 or so.

 

Things change: nieghborhoods, TV contracts, winning and losing... and I think the Sox are doing a lot of things that will help them down the road, particularly building in a lot of great kids stuff and a much better family experience than at Wrigley. Tickets are cheaper than Wrigley, but parking is expensive in either case.

 

As for the people complaining about parking costs, there are a myriad of ways to avoid that if you just look around. CTA Red Line, CTA Green Line, Metra Rock Island (and soon to be other lines as well), buses (they have special expresses from various suburbs, in addition to the CTA options)... you can park somewhere else a lot cheaper, like in the South Loop, and take transit. So for many people, it is really a lame excuse. But, I will say, if you have small kids and are trucking in from the burbs, the mass transit options are a lot harder to do and less appealing - so the Sox could certainly do something better to bring down parking prices for that crowd (for example, discount parking if you buy X number of tickets together of the same game).

 

[BigEdWalsh]

sox park: next to 2 cta lines, 1 metra line, and a major expressway

 

wrigley field, next to 1 cta line. 1 mile from nearest metra line. 1.5 miles from lake shore dr.(which does NOT have an off ramp at addison)

 

 

 

 

obviously, Wrigley is harder to get to for many chicagoans.

Not only that, but parking at Wrigley Field is a JOKE. But again, who cares? They get the big crowds and they're perennial losers. This year they've been flat out terrible and yet they outdraw the Sox who have been in 1st place most of the year. It's just the way it is. It's not for us as Sox fans to worry about. Just care about the product on the field and enjoying the Sox as much as you can.

[Marty34]

The expendable income difference between those within walking distance of Wrigley and those within walking distance of Sox park is enormous. Not too mention the difference in sheer numbers.

[BigEdWalsh]

Sox still drawing better than contenders OAK and TB, and just under BAL.

 

 

This is historically inaccurate. The Sox and Cubs swung back and forth, but the Sox did better more often, up until basically the time that Reinsdorff et al bought the team. At that point, the new ownership made the incredibly stupid decision to pass on a WGN TV contract and go to Sportsvision (and almost no one had cable then). Add to that the neighborhoods around The Cell had been going downhill and were getting worse, and the final and biggest blow: Wrigleyville, which was a decent but not-that-special neighborhood, suddenly became a huge draw itself beginning in the 80's. From that point (basically for the past 30 years or so), the Sox have only outdrawn the Cubs 2 or 3 seasons. And none since '93 or so.

 

Things change: nieghborhoods, TV contracts, winning and losing... and I think the Sox are doing a lot of things that will help them down the road, particularly building in a lot of great kids stuff and a much better family experience than at Wrigley. Tickets are cheaper than Wrigley, but parking is expensive in either case.

 

As for the people complaining about parking costs, there are a myriad of ways to avoid that if you just look around. CTA Red Line, CTA Green Line, Metra Rock Island (and soon to be other lines as well), buses (they have special expresses from various suburbs, in addition to the CTA options)... you can park somewhere else a lot cheaper, like in the South Loop, and take transit. So for many people, it is really a lame excuse. But, I will say, if you have small kids and are trucking in from the burbs, the mass transit options are a lot harder to do and less appealing - so the Sox could certainly do something better to bring down parking prices for that crowd (for example, discount parking if you buy X number of tickets together of the same game).

I'm fully aware and remember when the Sox outdrew the Cubs in the 50's and early 60's. And I remember a few times since then, too. But, in terms of fan base, especially outside of the Chicago city limits, the Cubs have for a very long time had the much larger fan base.

[southsider2k5]

Sox still drawing better than contenders OAK and TB, and just under BAL.

 

 

This is historically inaccurate. The Sox and Cubs swung back and forth, but the Sox did better more often, up until basically the time that Reinsdorff et al bought the team. At that point, the new ownership made the incredibly stupid decision to pass on a WGN TV contract and go to Sportsvision (and almost no one had cable then). Add to that the neighborhoods around The Cell had been going downhill and were getting worse, and the final and biggest blow: Wrigleyville, which was a decent but not-that-special neighborhood, suddenly became a huge draw itself beginning in the 80's. From that point (basically for the past 30 years or so), the Sox have only outdrawn the Cubs 2 or 3 seasons. And none since '93 or so.

 

Things change: nieghborhoods, TV contracts, winning and losing... and I think the Sox are doing a lot of things that will help them down the road, particularly building in a lot of great kids stuff and a much better family experience than at Wrigley. Tickets are cheaper than Wrigley, but parking is expensive in either case.

 

As for the people complaining about parking costs, there are a myriad of ways to avoid that if you just look around. CTA Red Line, CTA Green Line, Metra Rock Island (and soon to be other lines as well), buses (they have special expresses from various suburbs, in addition to the CTA options)... you can park somewhere else a lot cheaper, like in the South Loop, and take transit. So for many people, it is really a lame excuse. But, I will say, if you have small kids and are trucking in from the burbs, the mass transit options are a lot harder to do and less appealing - so the Sox could certainly do something better to bring down parking prices for that crowd (for example, discount parking if you buy X number of tickets together of the same game).

 

The funny part? The Cubs came crawling back two decades later to become a part owner of that same network, now known as Comcast SportsNet

[southsider2k5]

Not only that, but parking at Wrigley Field is a JOKE. But again, who cares? They get the big crowds and they're perennial losers. This year they've been flat out terrible and yet they outdraw the Sox who have been in 1st place most of the year. It's just the way it is. It's not for us as Sox fans to worry about. Just care about the product on the field and enjoying the Sox as much as you can.

 

Cubs attendance is down 20% this year, and will be down HUGE next year when the ticketbrokers who got boned in the ass on tickets this year, don't renew.

[SI1020]

meanwhile, a hack job by the cub times (and a wsi contributor):

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/15380578-57...ric-levels.html

Sorry I have to disagree. This is not a hack job at all, but a timely issue with accurate statistics in the article. The Sox and their fans can't continually cry foul over the attendance issue. The fact is that it's lousy. Premium pricing and the moribund economy are definitely a factor, but the Sox blew a big opportunity to cut into the Cubs popularity when they couldn't follow up on 2005.

[IlliniKrush]

They have been in first place for over 120 days this season, and we are still in the mid 20's in attendance. The whole "if they were competing" thing doesn't really hold up either.

Again, we're talking about this week in particular, not attendance throughout the year.

[BigEdWalsh]

Cubs attendance is down 20% this year, and will be down HUGE next year when the ticketbrokers who got boned in the ass on tickets this year, don't renew.

Couldn't happen to a finer organization.

To be honest, a long time ago when I was in my late-teens and early 20's I use to obsess about Sox attendance. I used to go to as many games as I could thinking in part that I had to do my part to help save the Sox. In those days there was a lot of talk and concern that the Sox might move. Man, back then a good crowd was 10,000. I was often there when there about 1,000-2,000. In 1970 total attendance wasn't even 500,000! I used to check attendance in the box scores, always hoping to see that they had a "good crowd". But, especially in this day and age when I think that it's pretty safe that the Sox aren't moving elsewhere, there is NO good reason for fans to fret about the Sox attendance woes.

[southsider2k5]

Sorry I have to disagree. This is not a hack job at all, but a timely issue with accurate statistics in the article. The Sox and their fans can't continually cry foul over the attendance issue. The fact is that it's lousy. Premium pricing and the moribund economy are definitely a factor, but the Sox blew a big opportunity to cut into the Cubs popularity when they couldn't follow up on 2005.

 

It is lazy lowest common denominator reporting. Meanwhile it takes the USA to break a story that actually matters on the field of play, that Adam Dunn is still playing with a torn muscle.

[southsider2k5]

Again, we're talking about this week in particular, not attendance throughout the year.

 

Its all a part of the same picture.

[NorthSideSox72]

I'm fully aware and remember when the Sox outdrew the Cubs in the 50's and early 60's. And I remember a few times since then, too. But, in terms of fan base, especially outside of the Chicago city limits, the Cubs have for a very long time had the much larger fan base.

 

Certainly true. But...

 

Cubs attendance is down 20% this year, and will be down HUGE next year when the ticketbrokers who got boned in the ass on tickets this year, don't renew.

 

Here is the thing. The Sox in the late 90's were drawing mid-teens in thousands per game. It started going up in the 2000's, then of course 2005 happened, but it never went back down to those 90's and early 2000's numbers. Mid-twenties in thousands per game is still more than they were drawing every year from 1995 up through 2004, I believe. The Sox fan base is still of course well below the Cubs fan base, but the gap is narrowing, and has been for a while now.

 

[SI1020]

The expendable income difference between those within walking distance of Wrigley and those within walking distance of Sox park is enormous. Not too mention the difference in sheer numbers.

Demographic studies have shown that Sox and Cubs fans are very similar overall, with some slight variations.

 

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06...s-wrigley-field

[LVSoxFan]

Even though it looks bad, and is a sore spot because of Cubs fans, I don't think the attendance drop is

 

A) that financially impactful, given that we have maybe 10 percent less fans than the team could have reasonably expected

B) much worse than the rest of baseball in this economy, and given the number of HD options / DVR options people have at home. Also, ticket prices are outrageous these days compared to what they should be, inflation adjusted, compared to the 90s.

 

Look at Tampa, Oakland, Baltimore and Washington. All contenders - all not drawing.

 

My take on it is this: the games are too expensive for the fan base. We do not have the blueblood/yuppie/upscale fan base or appeal that the Cubs/Wrigley Field does, so in a down economy we take the hit more than they do. That is why they're outdrawing us even though they suck and we've been in first place since July.

 

I also draw this conclusion from something I read that said radio/TV ratings are actually UP this season, which tells me that the interest is there, just not the attendance. I think it's a logical conclusion then that the games are just too pricey to attend live.

 

Two bleacher seats are $75. Beers are $7 each. Hot dogs, what? $5? $5.50? Water is $4. FOUR DOLLARS FOR A WATER. $20 for parking, etc., etc.

 

To your point, what is the price of tix, inflation adjusted, compared to the 90s? I'd love to see that.

 

The Cubs also have a non-baseball appeal and corporate clientele which we don't that helps sustain them. Any out-of-towner would accept an invite to go see Wrigley Field but ask about a Sox game and they'll say "Chicago has two teams?"