Max Scherzer

[southsider2k5]

That's what "per cap" means.

 

The sox aren't going to sign Scherzer. It would be a bad business decision.

 

If you think that "showing the fans you're serious" will drive attendance, you haven't been paying attention to the white sox and attendance over the past ten years. Attendance will increase when there is a winner, and not before. If you think adding Scherzer to a 74 win team will do that, then we disagree on a different level altogether.

 

The discussion should end there.

[Dick Allen]

That's what "per cap" means.

 

The sox aren't going to sign Scherzer. It would be a bad business decision.

 

If you think that "showing the fans you're serious" will drive attendance, you haven't been paying attention to the white sox and attendance over the past ten years. Attendance will increase when there is a winner, and not before. If you think adding Scherzer to a 74 win team will do that, then we disagree on a different level altogether.

If you used that formula, you really wouldn't sign any free agents. The Sox signed Jose Abreu and attendance went down. You like Russell Martin. If he gets $15 million a year, using your formula, for him to be "worth" the contract, he is going to have to attract 5k more each game. That isn't happening.

 

They just need to sign guys that will help them win consistently for a decent period of time. No one player is going to increase attendance, and I don't think anyone here would be naive enough to suggest it. Maybe some winning will. We all know, losing will not.

 

Personally, I don't think it makes sense the Sox would be in the Scherzer bidding. The years and money and his agent all suggest otherwise, and until at least one of those is shown to not be the case anymore, I can't believe they are even interested in negotiating.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Dick Allen

[LDF]

 

the sox nations, the fans of the sox are a different breed. we don't really

care about the token signing of players to show, "hey look here we are spending

money", sign up and see the games.

 

I think the fans will demand a winner to be fielded. an actual attempt to put a

winner on the field.

 

all the formula's that people in the past have done, doesn't really work for the

the sox fans. I would like to say while we demanding are a smart group of

sports fans who want to see a winner.

[Chicago White Sox]

That's what "per cap" means.

 

The sox aren't going to sign Scherzer. It would be a bad business decision.

 

If you think that "showing the fans you're serious" will drive attendance, you haven't been paying attention to the white sox and attendance over the past ten years. Attendance will increase when there is a winner, and not before. If you think adding Scherzer to a 74 win team will do that, then we disagree on a different level altogether.

When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea.

 

And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

[Balta1701]

When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea.

 

And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

In 2010 the team lost 1000 fans a game compared to 2009. They did their "all in" campaign going into 2011, spending big on a free agent market and building a deep roster that was supposed to win right then.

 

In 2011 the team finished below .500 and lost 2400 fans a game compared to 2010. They spent big on free agents and their ticket sale drop was bigger than the year before.

 

In 2012, the team was in contention most of the year and lost 500 fans a game compared to 2010 despite spending cuts during the offseason, a change to a rookie manager, and no big free agent signing to sell.

 

So let's make that clear:

 

Biggest ticket sales drops: being under .500 regardless of whether or not there's a big free agent purchase. Ticket sales stay steady when they compete the whole year.

 

If the "Selling the team in the offseason" effect matters, it's a lot smaller than the "winning ****ing ballgames" effect.

[LDF]

When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea.

 

And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

 

if you guys don't mind, let me add that at what point will the sox fans see if the sox

are fielding a team? by signing 1 A+ player or by addressing the holes of the teams.

 

addressing the holes has many different definitions, signing token players to fill that

hole or signing good players to fill that hole?

 

I think the sox fans will know the difference.

[southsider2k5]

When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea.

 

And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

 

History dictates otherwise. Sox fans show up after a team has already been a winner, and not before.

[Chicago White Sox]

Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

 

 

If the "Selling the team in the offseason" effect matters, it's a lot smaller than the "winning ****ing ballgames" effect.

 

[caulfield12]

History dictates otherwise. Sox fans show up after a team has already been a winner, and not before.

 

 

See 2006, and even 2007...lag effect, which traditionally is 4-5 years for a World Series champion.

 

And that's exactly what happened, with 2007/2009 (despite the excitement over Peavy initially) expediting it.

 

 

 

In the end, it's crazy to think Max Scherzer would need to bring in 400,000 fans, even.

 

At this point, with nearly every baseball team but the bottom 5-7 for tv/radio/broadcast rights, ticket sales are somewhere in the 20-30% range in terms of total revenues.

 

We've been over this topic numerous times.

 

And the fact that the White Sox generated a higher amount of revenue with their lower attendance because of Top 4-6 prices being charged for tickets, parking, food, concessions, etc. (Now that has changed and we're closer to the middle and still losing customers/revenue, which must be scaring them a BIT).

 

You can argue that the extra $25 million from the broadcast deal could offset Scherzer, but in all likelihood it's paying for Abreu and offsetting other losses caused by the likes of Dunn and Danks.

 

Max Scherzer alone won't move the meter that much....maybe 50-100,000 in pre-sales for 2015. If the team was in first place the first 2-3 months and "dominant," that's when you would see attendance pick up substantially as summer hit, a number of sponsors jump back on the bandwagon, more revenue from luxury boxes/corporations, an increase in advertising buys and rates charged (which would benefit the White Sox due to the Comcast ownership share/s), a buyout of US Cellular and a new name for the stadium, etc.

 

It seems the more nationally-televised playoff and World Series ratings go down (NFL football beat one of the final World Series games 6.4 to 2.7), the more baseball becomes popular around the world (Asian/Pacific Rim, Caribbean, Central and South America) because of multimedia/MLB.TV/GameDay Audio/Extra Innings, etc. Then there's also the good possibility the White Sox are in a much better position around 2018-2019 to increase their tv rights (maybe not like the Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox or Rangers, but it will be substantial).

[Eminor3rd]

If you used that formula, you really wouldn't sign any free agents. The Sox signed Jose Abreu and attendance went down. You like Russell Martin. If he gets $15 million a year, using your formula, for him to be "worth" the contract, he is going to have to attract 5k more each game. That isn't happening.

 

They just need to sign guys that will help them win consistently for a decent period of time. No one player is going to increase attendance, and I don't think anyone here would be naive enough to suggest it. Maybe some winning will. We all know, losing will not.

 

Personally, I don't think it makes sense the Sox would be in the Scherzer bidding. The years and money and his agent all suggest otherwise, and until at least one of those is shown to not be the case anymore, I can't believe they are even interested in negotiating.

 

I agree with you. Most of why I was posting was to illustrate that the "sign big guy and it will pay for itself in ticket sales" is a bad formula. I'm just trying to say that a guy like Scherzer is never going to "pay for himself" in terms of increased interest. But winning will, which means you can't look at this in a linear fashion.

 

I know I was clear as mud on that, and I apologize.

[GreenSox]

I suspect that Scherzer will be paid more for past performance than future.

Pass

[Eminor3rd]

When did I say I want them to sign Scherzer? You keep implying that I said that, when in reality I think it would be a terrible idea.

 

And sorry, expectations always drive ticket sales to some extent, I can't believe you and SS2K are actually arguing against this. Fans purchase single-game and season tickets in the offseason, and those decisions are heavily based on expectations. If the team goes out and spends $40M on free agents and vastly improves the team, those fans will be excited/optimistic and will more often than not purchase more tickets than they would have otherwise. Obviously if the team fails to meet expectations, walk-ups will drop as the season progresses. Winning clearly has a major impact on ticket sales, and I would argue to a larger degree, but to say offseason expectations have no impact on is on a Greg-level of thinking.

 

I just don't agree with this. I think that it is an argument made by marketing and echoed by media, but I don't think actually affects ticket sales in a significant way, at least not in Chicago.

 

Firstly, season tickets make up a much smaller portion of total attendance than people assume. It's significant, but the industry is moving toward groups. Secondly, while all STH will be very vocal about the team's direction, the majority of them are going to renew regardless. They'll grumble, but they'll be there. You will lose some that are on the fence, but it ends up being a much smaller piece than it seems. The largest portion of the crowd on any given night is walk-ups, and they are, by far, the most sensitive to wins and losses.

 

You can look at our attendance figures the past decade and see this pattern in play. Most recently, even the IN season record hasn't affected things much. The years when you see attendance increasing are the years AFTER a successful, winning season.

 

So the overall point is that, IMO, the Sox should not be thinking about their acquisitions in terms of sending a signal to fans; they should just be trying to build a winner as efficiently as possible. The faster they can do that, the faster they'll be in the black. That doesn't mean Hahn shouldn't pay lip service to the media about "being aggressive," but at the end of the line, the numbers are going to follow the win column, even if they show up a year late. The best thing he can do for the team, financially, is build a team that contends for several consecutive years.

[Balta1701]

I just don't agree with this. I think that it is an argument made by marketing and echoed by media, but I don't think actually affects ticket sales in a significant way, at least not in Chicago.

 

Firstly, season tickets make up a much smaller portion of total attendance than people assume. It's significant, but the industry is moving toward groups. Secondly, while all STH will be very vocal about the team's direction, the majority of them are going to renew regardless. They'll grumble, but they'll be there. You will lose some that are on the fence, but it ends up being a much smaller piece than it seems. The largest portion of the crowd on any given night is walk-ups, and they are, by far, the most sensitive to wins and losses.

 

You can look at our attendance figures the past decade and see this pattern in play. Most recently, even the IN season record hasn't affected things much. The years when you see attendance increasing are the years AFTER a successful, winning season.

 

So the overall point is that, IMO, the Sox should not be thinking about their acquisitions in terms of sending a signal to fans; they should just be trying to build a winner as efficiently as possible. The faster they can do that, the faster they'll be in the black. That doesn't mean Hahn shouldn't pay lip service to the media about "being aggressive," but at the end of the line, the numbers are going to follow the win column, even if they show up a year late. The best thing he can do for the team, financially, is build a team that contends for several consecutive years.

The bolded is actually an argument that Season Ticket sales are in fact really important because season ticket sales for the next year are gotten by bundling them with playoff tickets.

[Eminor3rd]

The bolded is actually an argument that Season Ticket sales are in fact really important because season ticket sales for the next year are gotten by bundling them with playoff tickets.

 

I'm not saying they aren't important, but they are nowhere near a big enough piece of the pie to factor into a FA decision. And again, less than half of them are really considering not renewing anyhow.

[Balta1701]

I'm not saying they aren't important, but they are nowhere near a big enough piece of the pie to factor into a FA decision. And again, less than half of them are really considering not renewing anyhow.

I'd say they're important in that "Season Tickets are a major thing that changes when you make the playoffs". They're the payoff for making the playoffs and losing them is the punishment for missing the playoffs 6 years in a row.

[LDF]

 

the sox will not end the rebuilding by signing 1 A+ player. it will be with

others players being sign. I truly think they understand that the sox need

to field a winner, a team that can make the playoff. it is also one thing

to get there and the other is what will the team do when they get there,

find the final success.

 

I also think the sox will make sure that they can repeat as well.

 

so the best way is to start with 1 top notch front end starter. Whether it is

Scherzer or Lester or somebody like them. they will have 3 extremely tough

pitchers and with Rodon developing. if a starter gets hurt, the sox will have

the pitchers to carry them.

 

that is the start, the sox need to address other holes and they are committed

in doing so. this will reflect in the attendance. I remember in the 2005, there

were so many walk up tickets being sold, and other tickets being sold in groups.

the following yr was great for the advance tickets.

 

the biggest fear I have is the sox falls in love with what they have and do not

make the subtle changes that is needed to continue to win.

 

but these are my opinion.

[caulfield12]

I just don't agree with this. I think that it is an argument made by marketing and echoed by media, but I don't think actually affects ticket sales in a significant way, at least not in Chicago.

 

Firstly, season tickets make up a much smaller portion of total attendance than people assume. It's significant, but the industry is moving toward groups. Secondly, while all STH will be very vocal about the team's direction, the majority of them are going to renew regardless. They'll grumble, but they'll be there. You will lose some that are on the fence, but it ends up being a much smaller piece than it seems. The largest portion of the crowd on any given night is walk-ups, and they are, by far, the most sensitive to wins and losses.

 

You can look at our attendance figures the past decade and see this pattern in play. Most recently, even the IN season record hasn't affected things much. The years when you see attendance increasing are the years AFTER a successful, winning season.

 

So the overall point is that, IMO, the Sox should not be thinking about their acquisitions in terms of sending a signal to fans; they should just be trying to build a winner as efficiently as possible. The faster they can do that, the faster they'll be in the black. That doesn't mean Hahn shouldn't pay lip service to the media about "being aggressive," but at the end of the line, the numbers are going to follow the win column, even if they show up a year late. The best thing he can do for the team, financially, is build a team that contends for several consecutive years.

 

Up until recently, the given formula is sports marketing was 80% season ticket holders, 20% walk-up.

 

In April/May/September, it's probably closer to 90-95% STH.

 

As far as the group/one-off outings go, that's true...but I also think some of the bloom is definitely off that type of "Groupon" marketing.

[Eminor3rd]

Up until recently, the given formula is sports marketing was 80% season ticket holders, 20% walk-up.

 

In April/May/September, it's probably closer to 90-95% STH.

 

As far as the group/one-off outings go, that's true...but I also think some of the bloom is definitely off that type of "Groupon" marketing.

 

Season ticket holders provide EIGHTY percent of the revenue? How?

[caulfield12]

Season ticket holders provide EIGHTY percent of the revenue? How?

 

 

Because most teams have season ticket (guaranteed attendance) in the 8-22,000 range, with some quite a bit higher than the high teens/low 20's.

 

That's already pre-ticket revenue for the entire season before they even open up the gates.

 

If you go back over the last five seasons or so, you'll see that a significant walk-up attendance the day of the game is around 4-6,000 tickets (not counting other single game tickets sold).

 

It might be 75/25 (season ticket to individual/day-of-game), but I'm willing to wager that's pretty close to the breakdown for revenues from ticket sales.

[LDF]

Because most teams have season ticket (guaranteed attendance) in the 8-22,000 range, with some quite a bit higher than the high teens/low 20's.

 

That's already pre-ticket revenue for the entire season before they even open up the gates.

 

If you go back over the last five seasons or so, you'll see that a significant walk-up attendance the day of the game is around 4-6,000 tickets (not counting other single game tickets sold).

 

It might be 75/25 (season ticket to individual/day-of-game), but I'm willing to wager that's pretty close to the breakdown for revenues from ticket sales.

 

I believe, but I may be wrong here, the revenue that the sox brass talks about is what is

seen, fans in the seat. that is why when you hear JR or Hahn or KW talking about support,

they are talking about tickets sold, fans in the seats, ticket holders.

 

I think they will never dare to expose their true revenue, corp sponsorship, commercial

deal, tv deal etc... the true hidden revenue.

Edited November 13, 2014 by LDF

[Chicago White Sox]

Because most teams have season ticket (guaranteed attendance) in the 8-22,000 range, with some quite a bit higher than the high teens/low 20's.

 

That's already pre-ticket revenue for the entire season before they even open up the gates.

 

If you go back over the last five seasons or so, you'll see that a significant walk-up attendance the day of the game is around 4-6,000 tickets (not counting other single game tickets sold).

 

It might be 75/25 (season ticket to individual/day-of-game), but I'm willing to wager that's pretty close to the breakdown for revenues from ticket sales.

I'm not sure about the percentages, but I've always thought walk-ups made up a relatively small portion of our total ticket sales. Maybe it's different for other baseball teams, I can't really say.

[LDF]

I'm not sure about the percentages, but I've always thought walk-ups made up a relatively small portion of our total ticket sales. Maybe it's different for other baseball teams, I can't really say.

 

for me, I don't know. is there a way to really gage that or will that be internal?

 

 

[Kyyle23]

for me, I don't know. is there a way to really gage that or will that be internal?

 

We can get it gaged, but nobody will like what happens when it gets gaged. New sayings happen when things get gaged, the english language changes when things get gaged.

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

Justin Gage?

[LDF]

We can get it gaged, but nobody will like what happens when it gets gaged. New sayings happen when things get gaged, the english language changes when things get gaged.

 

ok, my English or lack of got the better of me.