Dick Allen Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (champs2005 @ Nov 15, 2012 -> 10:55 AM) Of course traffic was a top issue in the survey. My point is that in Chicago traffic is a factor for al major sports, big events, etc. Traffic is a given. It doesnt seem to be affecting the attendance at all the other places. And you cant really DO anything about traffic as an owner. It is a cheap excuse. I hate Jerry. I would venture to guess if the Bulls or Hawks had to draw 30,000 to 35,000 a night for attendance to be considered sufficient, you would hear the same reasons when they most likely, except when MJordan was around, would fail. The excuse is legit. Especially for baseball when, if you have season tickets, its every day for spurts. The Cubs are different. They have Wrigleyville. Edited November 15, 2012 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 QUOTE (Marty34 @ Nov 15, 2012 -> 12:11 PM) Yep. Traffic wouldn't be a problem worth mentioning if they had a team that made the playoffs more than once since 2006. Is ChiSox traffic really that much worse than every other ballpark? I mean, they have as good of highway access as anywhere. Street traffic to get to the highways is annoying but it's only a couple blocks, and, barring construction/renovation, there is solid public transit access as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlliniKrush Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2012 -> 01:34 PM) Is ChiSox traffic really that much worse than every other ballpark? I mean, they have as good of highway access as anywhere. Street traffic to get to the highways is annoying but it's only a couple blocks, and, barring construction/renovation, there is solid public transit access as well. Yeah, highway access that serves as a parking lot. Chicago traffic can be absolutely brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Nov 23, 2012 -> 02:44 PM) Yeah, highway access that serves as a parking lot. Chicago traffic can be absolutely brutal. In recent years I've covered Fenway and both of the LA Ballparks in addition to the Cell. Traffic to the LA ones was terrible, took 3x as long as any ride I've ever taken to or from the Cell, and the public transit options were worse. Fenway, a few rich people drove, but everyone else arrived by public transit. I just don't feel like traffic to the Cell, even on a very busy day, was any worse than any other place I've been. I get that any of it is annoying, but if it's not an impediment to seeing the Angels Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 23, 2012 -> 02:50 PM) In recent years I've covered Fenway and both of the LA Ballparks in addition to the Cell. Traffic to the LA ones was terrible, took 3x as long as any ride I've ever taken to or from the Cell, and the public transit options were worse. Fenway, a few rich people drove, but everyone else arrived by public transit. I just don't feel like traffic to the Cell, even on a very busy day, was any worse than any other place I've been. I get that any of it is annoying, but if it's not an impediment to seeing the Angels He's ALIVE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 23, 2012 Share Posted November 23, 2012 QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 23, 2012 -> 02:52 PM) He's ALIVE! Sometimes even your #2 poster needs a break/breather. Edit: and you have no idea how much work I've gotten done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Yeah, highway access that serves as a parking lot. Chicago traffic can be absolutely brutal. I drove the Ike back and forth from Harlem to Manheim every day for 5 years. That made the Dan Ryan seem empty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnB Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 26, 2012 -> 12:51 PM) I drove the Ike back and forth from Harlem to Manheim every day for 5 years. That made the Dan Ryan seem empty. Unless I'm missing something, Harlem to Mannheim is like 5 miles...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 Unless I'm missing something, Harlem to Mannheim is like 5 miles...... Yes, and that 5 miles has more cars than 10 miles of the Dan Ryan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Nov 28, 2012 -> 01:33 PM) Yes, and that 5 miles has more cars than 10 miles of the Dan Ryan. It depends on the day. I drive that way everyday because it's usually faster than the Ryan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeynach Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 29, 2012 -> 08:31 AM) Yes. Though, now that I think about it... if the amount of money is going to be basically the same for ALL teams, then this actually benefits the smaller market teams more than the larger market teams. $50M a year for the Royals is like doubling their payroll. For the Yankees, its nice, but not a huge difference maker. Some teams don't spend, they are in business for profit not championships. Pirates and Marlins ownership comes to mind. Both have been accused of pocketing or hoarding significant portions of revenue sharing dollars. Loria was even forced by MLB in 2010 to sign a waiver that stated he could no longer hoard revenue share dollars and had to invest them in player/stadium/team operations. The Pirates have been accused of similar actions by media and fans alike. In my opinion b/c the teams weren't forced to spend, no salary floor, no enforcement to spend the revenue share money, some teams didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (joeynach @ Dec 3, 2012 -> 11:05 PM) Some teams don't spend, they are in business for profit not championships. Pirates and Marlins ownership comes to mind. Both have been accused of pocketing or hoarding significant portions of revenue sharing dollars. Loria was even forced by MLB in 2010 to sign a waiver that stated he could no longer hoard revenue share dollars and had to invest them in player/stadium/team operations. The Pirates have been accused of similar actions by media and fans alike. In my opinion b/c the teams weren't forced to spend, no salary floor, no enforcement to spend the revenue share money, some teams didn't. Royals are definitely in this category as well, with a few exceptions (the Gil Meche contract)...under new ownership, the Padres fit this mold, too, although they've committed more money to guys like Quentin than expected recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 02:09 AM) Royals are definitely in this category as well, with a few exceptions (the Gil Meche contract)...under new ownership, the Padres fit this mold, too, although they've committed more money to guys like Quentin than expected recently.You gotta give the padres a lil more time. New ownership groups typically cleanhouse and then makes money runs. Also, we'll see what happens when their new tv deal(which pays close to what the sox get from csn) as well as the new mlb tv money kicks in. If they stay cheap, then f*** them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 09:57 AM) You gotta give the padres a lil more time. New ownership groups typically cleanhouse and then makes money runs. Also, we'll see what happens when their new tv deal(which pays close to what the sox get from csn) as well as the new mlb tv money kicks in. If they stay cheap, then f*** them. When does the Sox local TV deal expire? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 As for the Sox, it clearly looks like the new ticket prices reflect that the Sox make more money off tv now than tickets. But an empty ballpark hurts the brand and future sales. Keep the park close to full, and the long term health of the team is solid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason82807 Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 10:59 AM) Keep the park close to full, and the long term health of the team is solid. I agree, short term as well. I believe that with the new Sox ticket pricing structure, ticket revenue will be roughly the same as last year, but concessions/merchandise revenue will increase in the short term, and TV and billboard advertising revenue will increase in the long term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Jason82807 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:21 PM) I agree, short term as well. I believe that with the new Sox ticket pricing structure, ticket revenue will be roughly the same as last year, but concessions/merchandise revenue will increase in the short term, and TV and billboard advertising revenue will increase in the long term. The other thing you have is when people see the park relatively full on television, they are far more likely to buy tickets. A good percentage of the population are sheep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 09:58 AM) When does the Sox local TV deal expire?I think in 2019 for CSN. But they also have an equity stake in that channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 5, 2012 Author Share Posted December 5, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 01:28 PM) The other thing you have is when people see the park relatively full on television, they are far more likely to buy tickets. A good percentage of the population are sheep.exactly. you need to build the experience up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) But they'll get something like an extra $75 million from the new national baseball network contract. Ticket revenues are sliding. Used to be 50% or more of a team's revenue stream, now it's down in the 20-25% range for a number of organizations, and continuing to descend. Edited December 6, 2012 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFirebird Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Interesting ticket idea Sox came up with....Holiday vouchers. You can exchange them for either UD or Outfield seats. http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticket...19160-478323570 Not a bad idea as a gift for a Sox fan. I didn't go through the process, but it looks pretty cheap to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 6, 2012 Author Share Posted December 6, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 5, 2012 -> 08:58 PM) But they'll get something like an extra $75 million from the new national baseball network contract. Ticket revenues are sliding. Used to be 50% or more of a team's revenue stream, now it's down in the 20-25% range for a number of organizations, and continuing to descend. i think most teams have simply reached the "f*** it, i'll watch it on tv" price point. clearly the sox saw that the last few years and have adjusted prices. even the yankees are not immune to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goober Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Fewer seats in the stadium. Just one row all the way around Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 8, 2012 Share Posted December 8, 2012 Season ticket renewals right now over 90%. Last year they were 50%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 8, 2012 Author Share Posted December 8, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 7, 2012 -> 06:21 PM) Season ticket renewals right now over 90%. Last year they were 50%. Where did u hear this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.