Jump to content

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


Lip Man 1

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 10:19 PM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:49 PM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:49 PM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:49 PM)
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.

 

 

QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:56 PM)
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.

 

 

QUOTE (Dunt @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:58 PM)
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.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 04:06 PM)
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 by QuickJones81
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:24 PM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 09:00 PM)
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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 09:00 PM)
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,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 09:44 PM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 03:19 PM)
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.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 06:21 AM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Real @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 06:25 AM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 19, 2016 -> 10:40 PM)
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 by Thad Bosley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Jan 20, 2016 -> 07:11 AM)
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...