Attendance

[Iwritecode]

There’s a world of difference between being in contention compared to winning the division 2 or 3 years in a row or at least 3 out of 4. Something the Tigers, Twins and Indians have all managed at one time or another.

 

Picking out years where they had a better year than the previous one or one year where they managed to barely squeak into the playoffs isn’t a fair comparison.

 

[caulfield12]

There’s a world of difference between being in contention compared to winning the division 2 or 3 years in a row or at least 3 out of 4. Something the Tigers, Twins and Indians have all managed at one time or another.

 

Picking out years where they had a better year than the previous one or one year where they managed to barely squeak into the playoffs isn’t a fair comparison.

 

 

And that's a fair indictment of the KW regime.

 

The Twins had 2002-2004/2006/2009-10. That's 6/9.

 

The Tigers have had 3 in a row, in addition to the 2006 World Series appearance and the addition of Miguel Cabrera and Scherzer via trade.

So there you have 4/8.

 

And then the Indians had the mid 90's through 2001, as well as another run at the World Series in 2007 and then 2013 again. But they've also gone through two complete tear down/rebuild cycles.

 

The best we had was the 3/9 for the 2000-2008 cycle.

[ewokpelts]

If you're telling us that these tiny crowds we see at the ballpark everyday include a whole bunch of freebies, then the problem is worse than I thought.

4/12 was a close to packed house, yet was 29k in the box score. 4/26 had a small paid number, but A lot of people came in and out for the free minoso statues.

 

These things happen , Debbie downer.

 

Get off your f***ing high horse and quit your b****ing, out of state fan

[ewokpelts]

If the excuse is based on the trailing year, 2009 was down as well, after winning a division title and one of the most exciting chases in team history.

Team sucked in 09. And the recession hit, while the sox raised prices.

[IlliniKrush]

4/12 was a close to packed house, yet was 29k in the box score. 4/26 had a small paid number, but A lot of people came in and out for the free minoso statues.

 

These things happen , Debbie downer.

 

Get off your f***ing high horse and quit your b****ing, out of state fan

Wait, people actually walked in and out for a Minoso statue? Was it a Minoso beanie baby?

[Thad Bosley]

4/12 was a close to packed house, yet was 29k in the box score. 4/26 had a small paid number, but A lot of people came in and out for the free minoso statues.

 

These things happen , Debbie downer.

 

Get off your f***ing high horse and quit your b****ing, out of state fan

Close to a packed house on 4/12, and last year the Sox outdrew the 1970 Sox. You do make a compelling argument for why the Sox' attendance issues aren't as bad as they seem. Thanks for your insights!

[southsider2k5]

Close to a packed house on 4/12, and last year the Sox outdrew the 1970 Sox. You do make a compelling argument for why the Sox' attendance issues aren't as bad as they seem. Thanks for your insights!

 

Almost as insightful as it being the owners fault that Sox fans can't be bothered to go to games for pretty much any reason except the World Series.

[Thad Bosley]

Almost as insightful as it being the owners fault that Sox fans can't be bothered to go to games for pretty much any reason except the World Series.

Not insightful as much as common sense. If you fail over and over and over again to field a team that can crack the postseason in a meaningful way, then one shouldn't be surprised when fans can't be bothered to go to games. That's the way I look at it, and why I place the accountability of the chronic attendance problem primarily on ownership. You see it differently, which I respect, but it stand firmly in this point of view.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Thad Bosley

[ewokpelts]

Close to a packed house on 4/12, and last year the Sox outdrew the 1970 Sox. You do make a compelling argument for why the Sox' attendance issues aren't as bad as they seem. Thanks for your insights!

They really aren't. Sox can make payroll just from the comcast and national tv deals.

 

You out of towners should focus on other things that sox HOME attendance.

[southsider2k5]

Not insightful as much as common sense. If you fail over and over and over again to field a team that can crack the postseason in a meaningful way, then one shouldn't be surprised when fans can't be bothered to go to games. That's the way I look at it, and why I place the accountability of the chronic attendance problem primarily on ownership. You see it differently, which I respect, but it stand firmly in this point of view.

 

Eh, I'd buy it if history didn't tell me otherwise. Even years when they have met the winning criteria, the other complaints problems pop up, such as weather, school, cost, location, transportation, who they don't like, white flag, seat color, seat location, angle of the upper deck, parking cost, the cost of beer, the cost of food, too far away from the park.

 

The two observations I have left on this topic are

 

-I think a lot of Sox fans were fooled by the 05/06 attendance #'s into thinking there were a lot of new fans at the ballpark. I don't think there were. I think they were fans of winning, and not the team. I think you have seen a mix of the #'s settling into the historical norms, which is why you still have seen down years, even when the team has won. Whether it was company's snapping up desirable tickets to give out, ticket-brokers, scalpers, whatever, I think a huge chunk of that number wasn't Sox fans, but opportunistic buyers.

 

-The decibel level at which a person voices complaints about the teams attendance is usually directly related to how far away from the ballpark they live. I'm not quite sure why that is, but it sure seems to be true. The closer people live, the less they complain about it. You rarely see these things coming from someone in the city or suburbs of Chicago.

[Dick Allen]

They really aren't. Sox can make payroll just from the comcast and national tv deals.

 

You out of towners should focus on other things that sox HOME attendance.

So you are saying the Sox are fine with 7 years declining attendance and declining viewership on television because they can make payroll? You are satisfied with the once every 5 or 6 years they make the playoffs. The fact is attendance is not where it should be, and it is not just on the White Sox, the fanbase has been ridiculous. It's one of those chicken/egg arguments, is the ridiculousness because of White Sox management or does White Sox management have to act like they are operating in KC because of the fanbase? I think it's a lot of both myself. This team should have the means to make a mockery of the ALC division. They have advantages the others do not. The White Sox are a large market team with a pretty small market mentality right now. And their fans will always find some excuse not to attend games.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Dick Allen

[southsider2k5]

So you are saying the Sox are fine with 7 years declining attendance and declining viewership on television because they can make payroll? You are satisfied with the once every 5 or 6 years they make the playoffs. The fact is attendance is not where it should be, and it is not just on the White Sox, the fanbase has been ridiculous. It's one of those chicken/egg arguments, is the ridiculousness because of White Sox management or does White Sox management have to act like they are operating in KC because of the fanbase? I think it's a lot of both myself. This team should have the means to make a mockery of the ALC division. They have advantages the others do not. The White Sox are a large market team with a pretty small market mentality right now. And their fans will always find some excuse not to attend games.

 

While they play in a big market, I'm not sure I would call the Sox a big market team. The vast majority of this market belongs to the Cubs, let's face it. With nearly 10 million (9.5 estimated) people in the whole metro area, what percentage of those people do you think are actual Sox fans? It isn't like a one team town where they can count the whole market as "fans". If you say 2/3 Cubs, 1/3 Sox, that cuts your number to about 3 million people, which is half of the Houston metro area. KC is 2.3 million metro area. Minneapolis is 3.5 million. Detroit is 3.7 million.

 

Guess what, there is some validity in those comps.

 

Again, I think because of 2005, some people are way overestimating the fan base. Attendance is down from the 2005 levels, but if you cut out the two big historical anomalies in the WS and the opening of the new park, attendance is at a pretty high historical level. I think there is some room to come back from what happened last year, but in general, historically if this team goes over 2 million fans, that is a pretty good number.

[Thad Bosley]

Eh, I'd buy it if history didn't tell me otherwise. Even years when they have met the winning criteria, the other complaints problems pop up, such as weather, school, cost, location, transportation, who they don't like, white flag, seat color, seat location, angle of the upper deck, parking cost, the cost of beer, the cost of food, too far away from the park.

 

The two observations I have left on this topic are

 

-I think a lot of Sox fans were fooled by the 05/06 attendance #'s into thinking there were a lot of new fans at the ballpark. I don't think there were. I think they were fans of winning, and not the team. I think you have seen a mix of the #'s settling into the historical norms, which is why you still have seen down years, even when the team has won. Whether it was company's snapping up desirable tickets to give out, ticket-brokers, scalpers, whatever, I think a huge chunk of that number wasn't Sox fans, but opportunistic buyers.

 

-The decibel level at which a person voices complaints about the teams attendance is usually directly related to how far away from the ballpark they live. I'm not quite sure why that is, but it sure seems to be true. The closer people live, the less they complain about it. You rarely see these things coming from someone in the city or suburbs of Chicago.

"Decibel level"? Oh, for heaven's sake. Stop with that.

 

Whether I'm voicing my opinion from the ChiSox Bar and Grill (which I was at a couple of weeks ago when I was in town prior to watching Sale's outstanding start against the Padres) or from the moon is irrelevant to the discussion. As a former season ticket holder in Comiskey Parks Old and New and who still makes it to 2-3 games a year when I'm in town, I am more than qualified to speak on this subject.

 

Fact remains the Sox have an attendance problem. It's because they don't have enough season ticket holders. They don't have enough season ticket holders because they don't win enough and get into the playoffs enough to generate the kind of interest it takes for people to justify spending money on season tickets. The Sox haven't gotten into the playoffs enough times because White Sox management simply hasn't put together teams that have managed to get the job done. I'm not saying they haven't tried, but the record of performance is what it is over the past few decades, which is not very good. And from an accountability perspective, that's not the fan's fault. That's on Sox management, and ultimately, the buck stops on Mr. Reinsdorf's desk.

[southsider2k5]

"Decibel level"? Oh, for heaven's sake. Stop with that.

 

Whether I'm voicing my opinion from the ChiSox Bar and Grill (which I was at a couple of weeks ago when I was in town prior to watching Sale's outstanding start against the Padres) or from the moon is irrelevant to the discussion. As a former season ticket holder in Comiskey Parks Old and New and who still makes it to 2-3 games a year when I'm in town, I am more than qualified to speak on this subject.

 

Fact remains the Sox have an attendance problem. It's because they don't have enough season ticket holders. They don't have enough season ticket holders because they don't win enough and get into the playoffs enough to generate the kind of interest it takes for people to justify spending money on season tickets. The Sox haven't gotten into the playoffs enough times because White Sox management simply hasn't put together teams that have managed to get the job done. I'm not saying they haven't tried, but the record of performance is what it is over the past few decades, which is not very good. And from an accountability perspective, that's not the fan's fault. That's on Sox management, and ultimately, the buck stops on Mr. Reinsdorf's desk.

 

If it is only about "winning" why do teams with MUCH worse recent histories consistently out-draw the White Sox? Milwaukee? Colorado? San Diego? The Nats?

 

It doesn't add up.

[Dick Allen]

While they play in a big market, I'm not sure I would call the Sox a big market team. The vast majority of this market belongs to the Cubs, let's face it. With nearly 10 million (9.5 estimated) people in the whole metro area, what percentage of those people do you think are actual Sox fans? It isn't like a one team town where they can count the whole market as "fans". If you say 2/3 Cubs, 1/3 Sox, that cuts your number to about 3 million people, which is half of the Houston metro area. KC is 2.3 million metro area. Minneapolis is 3.5 million. Detroit is 3.7 million.

 

Guess what, there is some validity in those comps.

 

Again, I think because of 2005, some people are way overestimating the fan base. Attendance is down from the 2005 levels, but if you cut out the two big historical anomalies in the WS and the opening of the new park, attendance is at a pretty high historical level. I think there is some room to come back from what happened last year, but in general, historically if this team goes over 2 million fans, that is a pretty good number.

I wouldn't say 2/3 Cubs fans,and if they are, that is on White Sox management. The Cubs have been horrible for a long time. Also, the media markets are totally different. What is the metro population of Milwaukee? Look at their attendance. They are in the find a reason to go mode. Sox fans are the opposite. I think winning seasons will do it, but it's going to have to be several, because you have to take the excuse that you just knew the team would fall apart the last 2 weeks as the reason you wouldn't go to games in the summer when they were in first place away. Every time they take away an excuse, a new one pops up.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Dick Allen

[Thad Bosley]

If it is only about "winning" why do teams with MUCH worse recent histories consistently out-draw the White Sox? Milwaukee? Colorado? San Diego? The Nats?

 

It doesn't add up.

Fair point, SS2K. Fair point. I get where you are coming from, and quite frankly, I can't answer that question, but it's a good one. But let me see to come at my point from a different angle to see if it makes more sense that way.

 

If the Sox could add, say, 10-12K more season ticket holders, then all of a sudden - boom! No more attendance problem! We'd be averaging in the low to mid 30K range in attendance, which would be fine. How do you get those extra season ticket holders? Green seats and Mullet Night aren't getting it done. But if the Sox, say, went on a run the next five years where in three of those years they went deep into the playoffs and it was very exciting and the whole city was watching, I say they generate a new level of interest in the team that would easily translate into new ticket holders over the course of those five years. But to do so you gotta win. Win, win, win - and do so consistently. And if I'm wrong, then what you've been saying all along about the fan base would absolutely be true. But I'd like to try out this winning consistently idea before I have to agree with that conclusion.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Thad Bosley

[Eminor3rd]

To me, there's way too much in these threads about "earning" and "winning" and "fickle fans" and "excuses" and justice and righteousness and crap.

 

The bottom line is this: the Sox are in the entertainment business, and if people aren't watching, they need to do something different to make them watch. They don't "deserve" fans. It doesn't matter what happens in Milwaukee or whatever. They're a business on the south side of the city of Chicago, and their market is made up of people that live on the south side of Chicago. So they need to get creative to produce a product that will appeal to those people to the degree that those people will consume the product in a profitable manner.

 

All this "shaming" crap has got to stop. We make the team sound like a book store whining about the Amazon Kindle. "Well I just don't know why people don't enjoy the FEEL of a real book like EYE do! I just shake my head at kids these days! This generation just doesn't have GOOD taste!" No, the reality is the world doesn't bow to your whim. Just because you make a book doesn't give you the right to be paid handsomely for it. This is how capitalism works. There are people and they have money, if you want that money than you must do something that convinces them to give it to you. Changing nothing and whining because people don't mold their desires around YOU does nothing but put you out of business. "Poor musicians" are the same way. You actually DON'T have the right to live your dream; what you DO have is the right to attempt it unimpeded. No one is going to write you a check in the event that you didn't do something that anyone gave a s*** about.

 

If attendance is really an issue, the Sox need to be willing to discard the model of how a team gets people in the stadium and replace it with one based on Chicagoans in 2014. Between the constant evolution of technology and pop culture, the answer to "what people want" is always changing and always will. Discovering and executing this is the very nature of private business.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[bmags]

To me, there's way to much in these threads about "earning" and "winning" and "fickle fans" and "excuses" and justice and righteousness and crap.

 

The bottom line is this: the Sox are in the entertainment business, and if people aren't watching, they need to do something different to make them watch. They don't "deserve" fans. It doesn't matter what happens in Milwaukee or whatever. They're a business on the south side of the city of Chicago, and their market is made up of people that live on the south side of Chicago. So they need to get creative to produce a product that will appeal to those people to the degree that those people will consume the product in a profitable manner.

 

All this "shaming" crap has got to stop. We make the team sound like a book store whining about the Amazon Kindle. "Well I just don't know why people don't enjoy the FEEL of a real book like EYE do! I just shake my head at kids these days! This generation just doesn't have GOOD taste!" No, the reality is the world doesn't bow to your whim. Just because you make a book doesn't give you the right to be paid handsomely for it. This is how capitalism works. There are people and they have money, if you want that money than you must do something that convinces them to give it to you. Changing nothing and whining because people don't mold their desires around YOU does nothing but put you out of business. "Poor musicians" are the same way. You actually DON'T have the right to live your dream; what you DO have is the right to attempt it unimpeded. No one is going to write you a check in the event that you didn't do something that anyone gave a s*** about.

 

If attendance is really an issue, the Sox need to be willing to discard the model of how a team gets people in the stadium and replace it with one based on Chicagoans in 2014. Between the constant evolution of technology and pop culture, the answer to "what people want" is always changing and always will. Discovering and executing this is the very nature of private business.

 

Pitch perfect.

[southsider2k5]

Fair point, SS2K. Fair point. I get where you are coming from, and quite frankly, I can't answer that question, but it's a good one. But let me see to come at my point from a different angle to see if it makes more sense that way.

 

If the Sox could add, say, 10-12K more season ticket holders, then all of a sudden - boom! No more attendance problem! We'd be averaging in the low to mid 30K range in attendance, which would be fine. How do you get those extra season ticket holders? Green seats and Mullet Night aren't getting it done. But if the Sox, say, went on a run the next five years where in three of those years they went deep into the playoffs and it was very exciting and the whole city was watching, I say they generate a new level of interest in the team that would easily translate into new ticket holders over the course of those five years. But to do so you gotta win. Win, win, win - and do so consistently. And if I'm wrong, then what you've been saying all along about the fan base would absolutely be true. But I'd like to try out this winning consistently idea before I have to agree with that conclusion.

 

Saying "win for five years" is nearly impossible to actually accomplish. So few teams can actually pull it off, even less if you have limited resources and most importantly of all, a fanbase that will support a team when it is bad, so that resources are there when it is good.

 

Compare the Sox to the Cubs. Because their fan base is so much bigger, if they ever do get good again, they won't have to wait years for attendance to eventually/hopefully pick back up again. They will actually be able to retain players and sustain a run. It is how the Yankees stay good every year. It is how the Dodgers can go out and spend money, even when they aren't good. The Sox just don't have that fan base. They tried to go for it after 2005, but as soon as a few clouds moved in, the non-Sox part was gone, despite a division title, and long periods of time in first place.

[caulfield12]

Pitch perfect.

 

 

Except for Anna Kendrick singing Titanium in the shower...

 

The funny thing is that's exactly what Marty or Ayn Rand would also say.

 

Since 2005, maybe there is this idea coming from ownership that the fans "owe" the White Sox their loyalty/allegiance and discretionary dollars, as if they were Shakespeare in the Park or a ballet company operating as a non-profit/501-c-3.

 

Well, as all research proves, you lose the goodwill from a World Series title after about 5 seasons, and that's exactly what happened...despite that 26-5 run in 2010, not making the playoffs that year and then the disastrous 2011 season with Rios/Dunn/Ozzie becoming a joke and the running feud with KW turned off a lot of fans who were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[bmags]

I still think that both teams going in the crapper at the same time, especially with baseball's popularity struggles with teenagers was terrible news for the Sox. I have not had a single person invite me to a baseball game this year (I've invited several). Nobody talks or cares, and it's no surprise when people talk about baseball they say both teams are terrible. They aren't even bothering to pay attention.

 

If cubs get competitive with Sox, all things considered, that is good news for attendance. But I'm surprised baseball revenues are up because it has some terrible popularity trends coming their way.

[Kyyle23]

Except for Anna Kendrick singing Titanium in the shower...

 

The funny thing is that's exactly what Marty or Ayn Rand would also say.

 

Since 2005, maybe there is this idea coming from ownership that the fans "owe" the White Sox their loyalty/allegiance and discretionary dollars, as if they were Shakespeare in the Park or a ballet company operating as a non-profit/501-c-3.

 

Well, as all research proves, you lose the goodwill from a World Series title after about 5 seasons, and that's exactly what happened...despite that 26-5 run in 2010, not making the playoffs that year and then the disastrous 2011 season with Rios/Dunn/Ozzie becoming a joke and the running feud with KW turned off a lot of fans who were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

there is so much caulfieldian language in this post i simply cannot stop reading it

 

Movie Reference

2005 reference

at least 3 current and ex players all mentioned

inference that another poster would say something

 

and cherry on top Ayn Rand reference

[Iwritecode]

Eh, I'd buy it if history didn't tell me otherwise. Even years when they have met the winning criteria, the other complaints problems pop up, such as weather, school, cost, location, transportation, who they don't like, white flag, seat color, seat location, angle of the upper deck, parking cost, the cost of beer, the cost of food, too far away from the park.

 

The winning criteria (i.e. make the playoffs 2 years in a row or win the WS) has only been met once in our lifetimes. And guess what? The attendance went up.

 

Saying "win for five years" is nearly impossible to actually accomplish. So few teams can actually pull it off, even less if you have limited resources and most importantly of all, a fanbase that will support a team when it is bad, so that resources are there when it is good.

 

Who's asking for 5 in a row?

 

We’d settle for 2 post-season appearances in a row. 3 in 4 years would be even better. Something 3 other teams in the AL central alone have already managed since the division was created. I’m sure plenty of other teams have done it as well.

 

 

[ewokpelts]

So you are saying the Sox are fine with 7 years declining attendance and declining viewership on television because they can make payroll? You are satisfied with the once every 5 or 6 years they make the playoffs. The fact is attendance is not where it should be, and it is not just on the White Sox, the fanbase has been ridiculous. It's one of those chicken/egg arguments, is the ridiculousness because of White Sox management or does White Sox management have to act like they are operating in KC because of the fanbase? I think it's a lot of both myself. This team should have the means to make a mockery of the ALC division. They have advantages the others do not. The White Sox are a large market team with a pretty small market mentality right now. And their fans will always find some excuse not to attend games.

 

Of course they are not happy about that. But the business side of the sox is set up to withstand attendance decline. It's well documented that the sox are ran more like a sustainable business than a rich man's plaything. All one has to do is look at the quick turnaround this 2014 squad has made vs last year's debacle. Rick and Kenny aren't swimming in a sea of bad debt and horrible contracts like some "geniuses" up north. And they were able to make payroll room for guys like Abreu and make a bid for Tanaka because they were proactive and worked in the boundaries of their budget.

 

I said this before, but the only people that should care about sox attendance are the Sox ticket sales staff.

[Thad Bosley]

Of course they are not happy about that. But the business side of the sox is set up to withstand attendance decline. It's well documented that the sox are ran more like a sustainable business than a rich man's plaything. All one has to do is look at the quick turnaround this 2014 squad has made vs last year's debacle. Rick and Kenny aren't swimming in a sea of bad debt and horrible contracts like some "geniuses" up north. And they were able to make payroll room for guys like Abreu and make a bid for Tanaka because they were proactive and worked in the boundaries of their budget.

 

I said this before, but the only people that should care about sox attendance are the Sox ticket sales staff.

Well, you may choose to not care about attendance, but for those of us who attend the games and/or watch them on TV, seeing the team you love playing in an empty ballpark is downright depressing. Is it not a different experience for you when the park is packed vs. the ghost yard experience we're typically treated to? And as far as payroll goes, we'd be able to cover an even larger payroll if we had more ticket and concession revenue coming in.

 

You do bring up one interesting point, though - the "rich man's plaything". Maybe that approach should be adopted. Could be fun, ya know, and it certainly couldn't render any worse results than the so-called "sustainable business" model you claim they're employing. Go "rich man's plaything", I say! Get wild! Shake this thing up a little bit, and who knows? WE MIGHT START WINNING MORE!!