24/7 Wall Street: Sox 5th largest declining fanbase in sports

[fathom]

People want to know why the White Sox aren't spending, this is it. This is the same thing I have been saying for years. People don't want to believe it, but there it is in black and white. People can rationalize it however they want, however the end result is the same. The White Sox don't get the amount of resources that other teams get because of it. If our fanbase was more loyal, I would imagine we would have signed another OF months ago. Instead we still are trying to go on the cheap to fit him into the budget as dictated by revenues.

 

And it's also why the Cubs being good is bad for the Sox franchise, as the casual Chicago fan right now is definitely going to spend their money on Cubs games/merchandise as opposed to the Sox. It's truly amazing how little Sox merchandise is available at the local mall as opposed to Cubs stuff.

[harfman77]

And it's also why the Cubs being good is bad for the Sox franchise, as the casual Chicago fan right now is definitely going to spend their money on Cubs games/merchandise as opposed to the Sox. It's truly amazing how little Sox merchandise is available at the local mall as opposed to Cubs stuff.

 

I will extend that to where I live four hours away from Chicago, though we are considered "in market" there is virtually no Sox gear at any of the local stores, while there is plenty of stuff for the Cubs, Cardinals, Twins, Yankess, and Royals in that order. The Sox fanbase has an identity problem in the city, I think mostly because they took a good deal to build the stadium in a bad spot when there were better options. And nationally the Sox fanbase is pretty small relative to that of other teams.

[Dunt]

And it's also why the Cubs being good is bad for the Sox franchise, as the casual Chicago fan right now is definitely going to spend their money on Cubs games/merchandise as opposed to the Sox. It's truly amazing how little Sox merchandise is available at the local mall as opposed to Cubs stuff.

 

Walked into Dick's to look for some Sox gear around Christmas and they had 1 rack of Sox stuff as opposed to whole sections for the Cubs and Blackhawks.

[Iwritecode]

And it's also why the Cubs being good is bad for the Sox franchise, as the casual Chicago fan right now is definitely going to spend their money on Cubs games/merchandise as opposed to the Sox. It's truly amazing how little Sox merchandise is available at the local mall as opposed to Cubs stuff.

 

 

I will extend that to where I live four hours away from Chicago, though we are considered "in market" there is virtually no Sox gear at any of the local stores, while there is plenty of stuff for the Cubs, Cardinals, Twins, Yankess, and Royals in that order. The Sox fanbase has an identity problem in the city, I think mostly because they took a good deal to build the stadium in a bad spot when there were better options. And nationally the Sox fanbase is pretty small relative to that of other teams.

 

 

Walked into Dick's to look for some Sox gear around Christmas and they had 1 rack of Sox stuff as opposed to whole sections for the Cubs and Blackhawks.

 

It's been that way for many years around me. I know there are certain stores I can go to and find Sox stuff, but I also know of a lot more stores that will display Cubs stuff over Sox stuff 10 to 1. I think the people that order the stuff for the stores are simply Cubs fans because there is no rhyme or reason to it.

 

 

 

 

[QuickJones81]

It's been that way for many years around me. I know there are certain stores I can go to and find Sox stuff, but I also know of a lot more stores that will display Cubs stuff over Sox stuff 10 to 1. I think the people that order the stuff for the stores are simply Cubs fans because there is no rhyme or reason to it.

 

It's easy, Cubs merchandise sells, Sox doesn't. No business owner is going to carry stock of a product that just sits on the rack.

Edited January 19, 2016 by QuickJones81

[caulfield12]

There's one problem with this theory.

 

If the Reinsdorfs were trying to sell, while they would want to keep the payroll from being encumbered with too many bad long-term contracts, you also have a diminished product without any nationally-recognized superstars as well (referring more to the idea of bringing in players to supplement the current core).

 

And yeah, the problem is that Upton/Gordon/Cespedes aren't really superstars either, although Cespedes certainly played like one last year and has all the flair in his game. Illitch described Upton as a star, fwiw.

 

 

Since the White Sox couldn't be moved until 2029 at the earliest, you'd think they would want to have teams in 2018 and 2019 that are playoff-worthy/competitive and also look like sound broadcast rights investments for 2020-2022.

 

This current trend of the fanbase bouncing back and forth like a yo-yo (tremendous expectations coming into 2011 and 2015)...but ending up disappointed, whatever they do, whatever they have to spend...they need to field a consistent winner and soon.

 

In some ways, they've also got to hope Sano, Buxton and Berrios don't all live up to their potential or Minnesota will be a starter away from being a serious threat...luckily, that Mauer contract has encumbered them (along with the disappointments from Santana/Nolasco) enough to dampen spending for this year while they wait on their farm. But you're to the point with the Tigers and Royals desperately all-in, the Indians with a better overall young core of players and the Twins with the highest upside of all, they're going to have to pick a lane and stay in it.

 

 

[Chicago White Sox]

Outside of MLB money, it all ties together. Less fans equals less ballpark revenue, less parking revenue, less concessions revenue, less interest in advertising both in the ballpark and on television... the team also has the lowest TV ratings in the game for anyone that is widely available on TV. It is far more than just attendance.

I know you're the "blame the customer" guy, but your point on ratings is exactly why the Sox need to invest in the team and go into the red if needed. Our current TV deal expires in 2019 and if ratings to continue to suck, we're going to get a s***ty long-term TV deal. Therefore, there is every incentive in the world for Reinsdorf to spend some money and build some excitement for this team. The potential payoff in the long-run would be tenfold the likely short-term costs.

[Big Hurtin]

If you build it, they will come. On the other hand, if you stick all the profits into your pocket, you reap what you sow.

[southsider2k5]

I know you're the "blame the customer" guy, but your point on ratings is exactly why the Sox need to invest in the team and go into the red if needed. Our current TV deal expires in 2019 and if ratings to continue to suck, we're going to get a s***ty long-term TV deal. Therefore, there is every incentive in the world for Reinsdorf to spend some money and build some excitement for this team. The potential payoff in the long-run would be tenfold the likely short-term costs.

 

They "invested in the team" last year. How'd that work out?

[Dick Allen]

I know you're the "blame the customer" guy, but your point on ratings is exactly why the Sox need to invest in the team and go into the red if needed. Our current TV deal expires in 2019 and if ratings to continue to suck, we're going to get a s***ty long-term TV deal. Therefore, there is every incentive in the world for Reinsdorf to spend some money and build some excitement for this team. The potential payoff in the long-run would be tenfold the likely short-term costs.

While what you say I mostly agree with, there is zero chance if the terms were s***ty that the White Sox would sign a long term deal,

[BaconOnAStick]

This came from a blog named 24/7 Wall Street, not the WSJ.

[LittleHurt05]

I've never had a problem with how much money the Sox have spent, the problem is with how they have spent their money. Given their attendance, they have still been willing to spend IMO. They have just haven't gotten much in return at all.

[Jose Abreu]

This came from a blog named 24/7 Wall Street, not the WSJ.

Same thing.

[caulfield12]

They "invested in the team" last year. How'd that work out?

 

Do you think Rick Hahn deserves a higher grade for his performance than the fans rewarded him with in terms of attendance last season?

[Chicago White Sox]

They "invested in the team" last year. How'd that work out?

You really think they went into the red last year?

[Chicago White Sox]

While what you say I mostly agree with, there is zero chance if the terms were s***ty that the White Sox would sign a long term deal,

When I say s***ty, I simply mean not optimal. If we're still last in the league in local ratings, we're going to lose out on a lot of value in our next TV deal.

[caulfield12]

Someone at another Sox related site claimed they made $31 million in profits, but that must have been 2014...?

 

I think part of the hangup was determining which year Abreu's signing bonus was counted against.

[The Ginger Kid]

10 years ago also was the peak attendance of the franchise. The thing is, they drew a lot more last year than any year before Reinsdorf owned the team.

Maybe he should threaten to move them again.

[cabiness42]

When I say s***ty, I simply mean not optimal. If we're still last in the league in local ratings, we're going to lose out on a lot of value in our next TV deal.

 

Ratings is a percentage of households. Sox market is so huge, they are still pulling in more viewers than most teams. Yes, next deal won't be near what the Cubs get, but it will still be good.

[Real]

People want to know why the White Sox aren't spending, this is it. This is the same thing I have been saying for years. People don't want to believe it, but there it is in black and white. People can rationalize it however they want, however the end result is the same. The White Sox don't get the amount of resources that other teams get because of it. If our fanbase was more loyal, I would imagine we would have signed another OF months ago. Instead we still are trying to go on the cheap to fit him into the budget as dictated by revenues.

 

so a disloyal fan base is why the sox have had one of the leagues worst farm systems in the last 15 years or more?

 

gmab.

 

[Chicago White Sox]

Ratings is a percentage of households. Sox market is so huge, they are still pulling in more viewers than most teams. Yes, next deal won't be near what the Cubs get, but it will still be good.

You're right about the amount of viewers we're pulling despite the low ratings. But my point is about potential, and if we're middle of the pack vs. dead last in ratings, we'll be pulling in significantly more viewers and geting significantly more value in our next TV deal. Therefore, the incentive to have an exciting, competitive team over the next few years should be clear as day for this ownership group and refusing to go into red for a few years to achieve that goal would be incredibly short-sighted an absolutely terrible business decision.

[caulfield12]

so a disloyal fan base is why the sox have had one of the leagues worst farm systems in the last 15 years or more?

 

gmab.

 

 

We have to keep trading our best prospects for veterans because our best prospects are either not good enough and/or fans don't have the patience for a Marcus Semien, Trayce or Micah to develop so we have to trade them for more expensive veterans past their primes because playing too many youngsters would constitute a rebuild and we have to be all in every season because of fairweather fans who didn't even fully support the 2012 team that was in first place for most of the season.

 

The End.

[Thad Bosley]

They "invested in the team" last year. How'd that work out?

That's their job, right? Each and every year, they should be investing in the team to try and continually improve it. And let's be clear about last year's so-called investment: it only brought the total team payroll to a mere $2M and $5M more than that of the small market Royals and Twins, respectively. Middle of the pack at best. So let's not ever make the mistake of describing last year's investment as some sort of effort to go above and beyond. As another poster has pointed out, that would be accomplished by going in the red for a year or two to try and lift this team up. To date, that hasn't happened.

Edited January 20, 2016 by Thad Bosley

[southsider2k5]

That's their job, right? Each and every year, they should be investing in the team to try and continually improve it. And let's be clear about last year's so-called investment: it only brought the total team payroll to a mere $2M and $5M more than that of the small market Royals and Twins, respectively. Middle of the pack at best. So let's not ever make the mistake of describing last year's investment as some sort of effort to go above and beyond. As another poster has pointed out, that would be accomplished by going in the red for a year or two to try and lift this team up. To date, that hasn't happened.

 

Because you know the fans are sitting at home saying, "well they went into debt this time"... Nope, they are busy ignoring Frazier and Lawrie, and throwing a temper tantrum about Cespedes and Upton.

[Brian]

This was the Blackhawks in some polls until they turned it around so obviously the White Sox are on the verge of a dynasty.