Merkin talks winter meetings and other possibilities

[caulfield12]

Much like any other business that gets tax breaks and TIF money, etc.

 

 

Balta, I'm sure would have done the research....but there's a ton out there about the utilitarianism of public stadium construction financing (see Miami/Loria) vs. tax increment financing for underserved/underdeveloped areas of metropolitan areas.

 

I'm not sure how we can have this conversation without going into Filibuster territory, so I'll just leave it that getting taxes waived/TIF is still not the exact equivalent, although they are on the same range or spectrum.

 

When you receive 100% public financing AND you're not in any way accountable to public shareholders, then, as Eminor mentioned, you SHOULD have even more of a responsibility to NOT abuse that trust and provide a quality product. In that sense, the team should "serve the community" not unlike policemen, firefighters or teachers.

Edited December 4, 2014 by caulfield12

[Thad Bosley]

That list was probably relevant in 2004. But 2005 happened. 3 million people showed up in 2006. All of those thoughts about the Sox fan base being so small, and non-existent were mythbusted.

 

If those same fans, who showed up in 2005/6, went back to not going to games, and are claiming any amount of reasons related stuff that happened in the 80's, they are not really fans. They are just miserable people looking for excuses.

 

2005 proved that the White Sox have a huge bandwagon component to their fan base. All the last eight years has done is reinforce it. Pre-2005 I didn't buy it at all, but now, the facts are there.

All the last eight years has done is reinforce what we saw in the first 26 years of this ownership group: making it to the playoffs just once every eight years or so and coming away from those rare appearances with practically nothing to show for it is going to result in dwindling attendance. It's that simple, and should be expected. It's not because Sox fans are "miserable people" (not a nice thing to say, btw). There should be no expectation of unconditional love here, that the 2.9 million plus who walked through the turnstiles in '06 should have done so in 2011 and 2013, or else be dismissed as "bandwagon". They are consumers, and unfortunately when Sox product isn't up to snuff, they choose not to consume as much of it.

 

Only one year in the 34 this ownership group has been running things worthy of mention. Just one! Only four playoff appearances in the other 33 years, with just four wins across all four of those appearances. THAT record is what is MISERABLE, not the fans.

[caulfield12]

JR has one of the sweetest deal ever with sox park. maybe it was coincidence was a ummm

an associate of JR.

 

you know how many times other owners tried to use JR lease as a platform.

 

here is another unrelated example, hockey, and arz. JR was trying to get the city of

arz to foot the loan at an ungodly low amount of interest.

 

JR is smart in business but ....... oh well you can fill in the rest.

 

Wouldn't have been possible without Jim Thompson's "midnight deadline" being conveniently ignored...the purest definition of a personal relationship leading to a result that permanently altered sports history for two cities (and it wouldn't be a surprise to see Tampa/St. Pete lose the Rays in the future).

[Balta1701]

Balta, I'm sure would have done the research....but there's a ton out there about the utilitarianism of public stadium construction financing (see Miami/Loria) vs. tax increment financing for underserved/underdeveloped areas of metropolitan areas.

 

I'm not sure how we can have this conversation without going into Filibuster territory, so I'll just leave it that getting taxes waived/TIF is still not the exact equivalent, although they are on the same range or spectrum.

 

When you receive 100% public financing AND you're not in any way accountable to public shareholders, then, as Eminor mentioned, you SHOULD have even more of a responsibility to NOT abuse that trust and provide a quality product. In that sense, the team should "serve the community" not unlike policemen, firefighters or teachers.

Basically the rule is that economically a publicly financed stadium is about the worst possible jobs/economic program a city could possibly imagine for itself, but it's always hard to put a price on the negative feelings that come from people when they lose a team. The team owners take full advantage of that effect.

[southsider2k5]

All the last eight years has done is reinforce what we saw in the first 26 years of this ownership group: making it to the playoffs just once every eight years or so and coming away from those rare appearances with practically nothing to show for it is going to result in dwindling attendance. It's that simple, and should be expected. It's not because Sox fans are "miserable people" (not a nice thing to say, btw). There should be no expectation of unconditional love here, that the 2.9 million plus who walked through the turnstiles in '06 should have done so in 2011 and 2013, or else be dismissed as "bandwagon". They are consumers, and unfortunately when Sox product isn't up to snuff, they choose not to consume as much of it.

 

Only one year in the 34 this ownership group has been running things worthy of mention. Just one! Only four playoff appearances in the other 33 years, with just four wins across all four of those appearances. THAT record is what is MISERABLE, not the fans.

 

Sox fans can break their arms to pat themselves on the back and make excuses all they want. The only ones they hurt by staying home is themselves. Say what you want about Cub fans, but their franchise has had an open ability to do whatever they want to rebuild fully from the ground up, and they still have the money to go out and sign big named free agents after a MUCH longer drought than the Sox. Hard to say they are the stupid ones when their franchise gets that kind of flexibility.

 

Out of curiosity, if fans that only show up when you win aren't bandwagon fans, what are?

 

And yes, if there are fans out there using excuses from the 1980''s, to not go to games in 2014 or 2015, that is pretty much the definition of miserable.

[Eminor3rd]

This is exactly why the Cubs were able to do the rebuild they have done, and why we can't. We have to spend all of our revenues on major league players, because our fans don't have the patience to wait on prospects. Kenny Williams was the perfect GM for White Sox fans.

 

No, Cubs fans go to games because it's a social event. It's a completely different situation. If you've spent any time in Bridgeport and Wrigleyville, it's very easy to see that. Also, Cubs attendance has declined substantially over the past few years.

[caulfield12]

All the last eight years has done is reinforce what we saw in the first 26 years of this ownership group: making it to the playoffs just once every eight years or so and coming away from those rare appearances with practically nothing to show for it is going to result in dwindling attendance. It's that simple, and should be expected. It's not because Sox fans are "miserable people" (not a nice thing to say, btw). There should be no expectation of unconditional love here, that the 2.9 million plus who walked through the turnstiles in '06 should have done so in 2011 and 2013, or else be dismissed as "bandwagon". They are consumers, and unfortunately when Sox product isn't up to snuff, they choose not to consume as much of it.

 

Only one year in the 34 this ownership group has been running things worthy of mention. Just one! Only four playoff appearances in the other 33 years, with just four wins across all four of those appearances. THAT record is what is MISERABLE, not the fans.

 

And the White Sox, fwiw, really overestimated the "good will" that was built up in 2005.

 

They gouged their ticket buyers from that 2006-2012 time period, finally relenting and lowering prices when it was too late, in 2013.

 

For much of that time period, they had somewhere between the 4th and 6th highest average price for a family of 4 if you factor in tickets, parking, souvenirs and concessions.

 

Recently, dynamic pricing for a number of teams that weren't even really prime draws in the minds of many fans has also left a sour taste. It might have maximized revenue, but it alienated a lot of fans in the process.

 

Going away from the Pepsi discount nights, reliance on fireworks and family days/groups/Sundays...they just placed too much faith in their season ticket buyers and the corporate community to support the team through thick and thin at elevated prices.

 

That model worked for awhile, but came crashing down in 2007 and especially 2009 and with the Dunn fiasco in 2011.

 

If you look at teams like the Dodgers and Angels, they never had to charge nearly what the White Sox were charging their fans. While they have a bigger population base, the disposable income is similar...instead of broadening their fanbase, they narrowed it, putting more and more financial pressure on the remaining season ticket holders and corporate sponsors. They probably could have gotten away with it, too, if they would have managed to consistently field playoff teams.

 

We always hear this argument that the Sox are 18th-26th in attendance but were in the Top 6-12 in terms of spending for many of those years (2006-2012). The problem is that doesn't take into consideration what prices were being charged or revenues derived, it's one simple measure that doesn't square with the fact that no fanbase (other than the Cardinals or Cubs, maybe) will be satisfied with that track record of success (or lack thereof).

 

If you want to change your fortunes, you have to do what the Mariners are doing. They witnessed firsthand one of the model MLB franchises dwindle into an afterthought. It still might not work in the long-term, but, at the very least, their fans can FEEL that the team is doing everything possible to win.

[southsider2k5]

No, Cubs fans go to games because it's a social event. It's a completely different situation. If you've spent any time in Bridgeport and Wrigleyville, it's very easy to see that. Also, Cubs attendance has declined substantially over the past few years.

 

It is. It absolutely is. Cub fans go to games, when Sox fans won't. That is completely different.

 

And Cubs attendance last year after something like six straight losing seasons is still higher than Sox attendance in every other year but 2 in their entire history. It even went up a tiny bit last year.

 

And they are now reaping the benefits by getting to go after literally any free agent they want to go after.

[caulfield12]

Sox fans can break their arms to pat themselves on the back and make excuses all they want. The only ones they hurt by staying home is themselves. Say what you want about Cub fans, but their franchise has had an open ability to do whatever they want to rebuild fully from the ground up, and they still have the money to go out and sign big named free agents after a MUCH longer drought than the Sox. Hard to say they are the stupid ones when their franchise gets that kind of flexibility.

 

Out of curiosity, if fans that only show up when you win aren't bandwagon fans, what are?

 

And yes, if there are fans out there using excuses from the 1980''s, to not go to games in 2014 or 2015, that is pretty much the definition of miserable.

 

 

 

Then couldn't you say the entire Midwest/Rust Belt (Kansas City, Cincy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Minnesota, Milwaukee) was miserable because of their reaction to the baseball strike?

 

It's not about just the White Sox. It's about that specific region of the country, and an economics history lesson.

 

Of course, Detroit and Milwaukee were able to right their ships (the Cubs and Cardinals have always been insulated for unique reasons), and new stadiums were built in those other cities, but there's a tremendous amount of evidence that a lot of those franchises lost 25-35% of their fans for a decade or more.

[southsider2k5]

Then couldn't you say the entire Midwest/Rust Belt (Kansas City, Cincy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Minnesota, Milwaukee) was miserable because of their reaction to the baseball strike?

It's not about just the White Sox. It's about that specific region of the country, and an economics history lesson.

 

Of course, Detroit and Milwaukee were able to right their ships (the Cubs and Cardinals have always been insulated for unique reasons), and new stadiums were built in those other cities, but there's a tremendous amount of evidence that a lot of those franchises lost 25-35% of their fans for a decade or more.

 

immediate reaction /= 30 years

[Eminor3rd]

It is. It absolutely is. Cub fans go to games, when Sox fans won't. That is completely different.

 

And Cubs attendance last year after something like six straight losing seasons is still higher than Sox attendance in every other year but 2 in their entire history. It even went up a tiny bit last year.

 

And they are now reaping the benefits by getting to go after literally any free agent they want to go after.

 

It's because it's fun to go to games there. It's easy to get there, you can hang out all day. Winning is only a component of what makes it fun to show up.

 

When I lived in Chicago, I would go to 4-5 games per year, whether they were garbage or not. They could go undefeated and I'd still got o 4-5 games per year. Why? Because it's generally a lot more fun for me to watch them on TV ~100 games a year. Am I a bad fan? I'm consuming their product via a channel they made available to me which they get paid handsomely for. If they want me to choose a different way to consume the game, they need to make that way more attractive. And then they also have to deal with lesser revenues from the incumbent way.

 

It's the same challenge every team faces.

[thxfrthmmrs]

Of the metropolitan area that features 2 teams, the Sox revenue/attendance situation is similar to Oakland's. This probably has been said many times, attending games isn't a priority for Sox fans unless team is doing well, and for an extended period of time. Cubs fans would attend games if they have nothing better to do, being in a neighborhood full of recent college grads and young single people helps. Attending games is considered a treat for many Sox fans, as most of the fans come in from the suburbs or areas that are not close to the park. Most people living around the park are retired, low income, or don't care for baseball. With the Cubs taking away most of the well off, single, and upper echelon income level fans, it's hard for the Sox to consistently draw a large crowd. The revelation of the Blackhawks in recent years isn't helping either.

 

I assume that we don't draw as well as other smaller market teams because they have more high income level fans than us, and their stadium is located in areas more accessible and around fans that are more interested in baseball, i.e. downtown, or an area where single people lives.

 

Oakland stadium is also located in the less prosperous part of their metropolis, and the Bay area is one of the larger metropolitan areas in US. They had average attendance as little as 19,000 in 2011. Even though they were the team to beat for most of this year, they only averaged 25,000 a game this year. Then you can also take into account that average Sox ticket cost $26, vs $23 for Oakland, while premium ticket for Sox averages $85, and $48 for them.

 

The Sox can consistently pull in larger crowd if they turn themselves into a perennial contender, or if they relocate their stadium and associate themselves with higher income level folks. But both of those can't be easily achieved. So we will discuss this same s***ty problem year in and year out.

[caulfield12]

It is. It absolutely is. Cub fans go to games, when Sox fans won't. That is completely different.

 

And Cubs attendance last year after something like six straight losing seasons is still higher than Sox attendance in every other year but 2 in their entire history. It even went up a tiny bit last year.

 

And they are now reaping the benefits by getting to go after literally any free agent they want to go after.

 

 

Other than Joe Maddon, who have they been able to attract over the last couple of offseasons?

 

First, it was going to be Russell Martin. Then Lester and Peavy, etc. Until they translate that "soft power" into an actual signing, it's pretty meaningless.

 

And then there's the underlying financial stress on the ownership group itself, which can't be discounted.

 

Remember when Ozzie Guillen being the manager was going to translate into a new pipeline into Latin America/Venezuela...and we'd be able to bring in guys like Miguel Cabrera and Victor Martinez as a result? It resulted in only ONE significant addition, that was F. Garcia, and that was just as much a family thing as a fellow Venezuelan thing.

 

 

So until they pay Lester $150 million or Scherzer whatever he's going to end up with, we can't take them 100% seriously. Or trading Castro for pitching, at the very least.

[Dick Allen]

No, Cubs fans go to games because it's a social event. It's a completely different situation. If you've spent any time in Bridgeport and Wrigleyville, it's very easy to see that. Also, Cubs attendance has declined substantially over the past few years.

Their attendance has plummeted so much, there have been 4 seasons the White Sox drew more than the 2014 Cubs. 1991,1992,2006,2007. Think aboit it, no White Sox playoff team has ever outdrawn the 2014 Cubs.

 

White Sox fans as a whole, suck. They always have some excuse. In 2012, the line was they didn't go to games when they were in first place for a few momths because they "knew" they would fall apart.

[caulfield12]

Their attendance has plummeted so much, there have been 4 seasons the White Sox drew more than the 2014 Cubs. 1991,1992,2006,2007. Think aboit it, no White Sox playoff team has ever outdrawn the 2014 Cubs.

 

White Sox fans as a whole, suck. They always have some excuse. In 2012, the line was they didn't go to games when they were in first place for a few momths because they "knew" they would fall apart.

 

 

Then they need an owner like Moreno who took the fight right to the Dodgers.

 

The problem is he hasn't managed to win a World Series, whereas a corporate board pulled off that trick in 2002.

 

But he's proven that a 2nd sister team in a major market can compete head-to-head.

Edited December 4, 2014 by caulfield12

[thxfrthmmrs]

People need to stop comparing the Cubs to the Sox, their fanbase is 2 different cultures. Their stadium location/neighborhood attractions is day and night.

[Eminor3rd]

Their attendance has plummeted so much, there have been 4 seasons the White Sox drew more than the 2014 Cubs. 1991,1992,2006,2007. Think aboit it, no White Sox playoff team has ever outdrawn the 2014 Cubs.

 

White Sox fans as a whole, suck. They always have some excuse. In 2012, the line was they didn't go to games when they were in first place for a few momths because they "knew" they would fall apart.

 

I don't understand why anyone is surprised at this attendance disparity, lol. The north side of Chicago is a f***ing treat. It's a fantastic place to live and hang out. The South side of Chicago is the butt of all of America's murder jokes. The best argument anyone has to live in Bridgeport is "it's cheap" and "it's really not that bad anymore." People have way more money up north, they have way less money down south. There are cheaper, more effective, more convenient ways to follow the team. The Cell is a f***ing bore. There's nothing to see. Even if there was, they don't let you on the main concourse unless you have a ticket in the bottom bowl, lol. There's hardly even anything to buy in the team store. It's the worst team store of any major league sport I've ever seen.

 

It's not 1965 where you had to either go to the game or listen on the radio. You can follow the action ten times better on the TV, and it's cheaper too! If you want people to spend $50 to come somewhere, you have to make that place worth $50 to go to. The Cubs have an entire neighborhood filled with dozens of bars, restaurants, dance clubs, and trendy retail amongst a culture of attractive, affluent people. The Sox have a f***ing highway and a huge parking lot. Oh, and Bacardi at the Park, lol. Is that even still open?

Edited December 4, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[caulfield12]

I don't understand why anyone is surprised at this attendance disparity, lol. The north side of Chicago is a f***ing treat. It's a fantastic place to live and hang out. The South side of Chicago is the butt of all of America's murder jokes. The best argument anyone has to live in Bridgeport is "it's cheap" and "it's really not that bad anymore." People have way more money up north, they have way less money down south. There are cheaper, more effective, more convenient ways to follow the team. The Cell is a f***ing bore. There's nothing to see. Even if there was, they don't let you on the main concourse unless you have a ticket in the bottom bowl, lol. There's hardly even anything to buy in the team store. It's the worst team store of any major league sport I've ever seen.

 

It's not 1965 where you had to either go to the game or listen on the radio. You can follow the action ten times better on the TV, and it's cheaper too! If you want people to spend $50 to come somewhere, you have to make that place worth $50 to go to.

 

 

Amen.

[southsider2k5]

I don't understand why anyone is surprised at this attendance disparity, lol. The north side of Chicago is a f***ing treat. It's a fantastic place to live and hang out. The South side of Chicago is the butt of all of America's murder jokes. The best argument anyone has to live in Bridgeport is "it's cheap" and "it's really not that bad anymore." People have way more money up north, they have way less money down south. There are cheaper, more effective, more convenient ways to follow the team. The Cell is a f***ing bore. There's nothing to see. Even if there was, they don't let you on the main concourse unless you have a ticket in the bottom bowl, lol. There's hardly even anything to buy in the team store. It's the worst team store of any major league sport I've ever seen.

 

It's not 1965 where you had to either go to the game or listen on the radio. You can follow the action ten times better on the TV, and it's cheaper too! If you want people to spend $50 to come somewhere, you have to make that place worth $50 to go to.

 

I am not surprised at all.

 

Excuses are a part of the Sox fan culture. Cub fans go. Sox fans find excuses not to. The bottom line is that it allows the Cubs more resources.

 

What surprises me is that Sox fans some how feel cheated because they don't have the resources that other teams have, and spend so much time thinking they are entitled to more.

[thxfrthmmrs]

I live in South Loop and make decent money for a single guy. I only go to about 5 Sox games a year, and probably just as much Cubs games. Why? Because most of my buddies who are Sox fans couldn't afford to go to more games. Most of my coworkers who could afford to go to games are Cubs fans. Plus, every time we go to Wrigley, there are always things to do after. And I consider myself a diehard Sox fan.

[Dunt]

I live in South Loop and make decent money for a single guy. I only go to about 5 Sox games a year, and probably just as much Cubs games. Why? Because most of my buddies who are Sox fans couldn't afford to go to more games. Most of my coworkers who could afford to go to games are Cubs fans. Plus, every time we go to Wrigley, there are always things to do after. And I consider myself a diehard Sox fan.

 

It might not have quite the multitude of options that wrigleyville has, but there is plenty to do around the Cell.

[LDF]

Wouldn't have been possible without Jim Thompson's "midnight deadline" being conveniently ignored...the purest definition of a personal relationship leading to a result that permanently altered sports history for two cities (and it wouldn't be a surprise to see Tampa/St. Pete lose the Rays in the future).

 

you have a great point, i just choose not to say it, in so many words.

[LDF]

And the White Sox, fwiw, really overestimated the "good will" that was built up in 2005.

 

They gouged their ticket buyers from that 2006-2012 time period, finally relenting and lowering prices when it was too late, in 2013.

 

For much of that time period, they had somewhere between the 4th and 6th highest average price for a family of 4 if you factor in tickets, parking, souvenirs and concessions.

 

Recently, dynamic pricing for a number of teams that weren't even really prime draws in the minds of many fans has also left a sour taste. It might have maximized revenue, but it alienated a lot of fans in the process.

 

Going away from the Pepsi discount nights, reliance on fireworks and family days/groups/Sundays...they just placed too much faith in their season ticket buyers and the corporate community to support the team through thick and thin at elevated prices.

 

That model worked for awhile, but came crashing down in 2007 and especially 2009 and with the Dunn fiasco in 2011.

 

If you look at teams like the Dodgers and Angels, they never had to charge nearly what the White Sox were charging their fans. While they have a bigger population base, the disposable income is similar...instead of broadening their fanbase, they narrowed it, putting more and more financial pressure on the remaining season ticket holders and corporate sponsors. They probably could have gotten away with it, too, if they would have managed to consistently field playoff teams.

 

We always hear this argument that the Sox are 18th-26th in attendance but were in the Top 6-12 in terms of spending for many of those years (2006-2012). The problem is that doesn't take into consideration what prices were being charged or revenues derived, it's one simple measure that doesn't square with the fact that no fanbase (other than the Cardinals or Cubs, maybe) will be satisfied with that track record of success (or lack thereof).

 

If you want to change your fortunes, you have to do what the Mariners are doing. They witnessed firsthand one of the model MLB franchises dwindle into an afterthought. It still might not work in the long-term, but, at the very least, their fans can FEEL that the team is doing everything possible to win.

 

1 or the best post i have read, you said things i was trying and failed at. very good.

 

let me add, when the sox were charging so much, they at least had a relative decent

product on the field. but when it was a bad product, lower the ticket price, not to keep

it the same.

 

the fans are smart people, they will not spend money foolishly on blind loyalty especially

when it is expensive.

[LDF]

It is. It absolutely is. Cub fans go to games, when Sox fans won't. That is completely different.

 

And Cubs attendance last year after something like six straight losing seasons is still higher than Sox attendance in every other year but 2 in their entire history. It even went up a tiny bit last year.

 

And they are now reaping the benefits by getting to go after literally any free agent they want to go after.

 

i am flopping all over like fish out of the water.

 

the biggest problem the sox will always have is if they try to compete or compare themselves

to the northsiders. the sox will always loose.

 

don't worry about the northside, don't worry about comparison of the attendance. there is and

always be a distinct difference. the sox had a golden opportunity to make chi their own. that was

after 2005, they screwed up, b/c of $$$.

[LDF]

Other than Joe Maddon, who have they been able to attract over the last couple of offseasons?

 

First, it was going to be Russell Martin. Then Lester and Peavy, etc. Until they translate that "soft power" into an actual signing, it's pretty meaningless.

 

And then there's the underlying financial stress on the ownership group itself, which can't be discounted.

 

Remember when Ozzie Guillen being the manager was going to translate into a new pipeline into Latin America/Venezuela...and we'd be able to bring in guys like Miguel Cabrera and Victor Martinez as a result? It resulted in only ONE significant addition, that was F. Garcia, and that was just as much a family thing as a fellow Venezuelan thing.

 

 

So until they pay Lester $150 million or Scherzer whatever he's going to end up with, we can't take them 100% seriously. Or trading Castro for pitching, at the very least.

 

or to get premiere exciting hispanic base players. now it will be the Cuban factor as i was

always mentioning.