Crain's Business Story on Attendence...

[Lip Man 1]

You have to give JR credit, he's got the best stadium lease agreement in baseball:

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/201...ough-the-summer

 

Now as to why the Sox don't have a much higher payroll and a better talent level given the stadium circumstances, that's a question I can't answer.

 

Mark

[ptatc]

You have to give JR credit, he's got the best stadium lease agreement in baseball:

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/201...ough-the-summer

 

Now as to why the Sox don't have a much higher payroll and a better talent level given the stadium circumstances, that's a question I can't answer.

 

Mark

The Sox are right in the middle of the league for payroll. Money isn't the issue, better talent is.

[caulfield12]

True words have never been spoken by PTAC.

 

In economics terms, we call it "inefficient allocation of resources," or poor return on investment.

[chisoxt]

True words have never been spoken by PTAC.

 

In economics terms, we call it "inefficient allocation of resources," or poor return on investment.

It absolutely blows my mind that an organization like the Sox with supposedly limited resources has never followed the model of home grown drafted and developed players, but instead typically wastes millions on middle tier veteran players. These players are acquired either via free agency or worse, by trading what few decent cost controlled prospect for what amounts to short term rentals. Is this a blueprint for sustained success?

 

2005 was both the best and worst thing to happen to Sox fans.

[Thad Bosley]

It absolutely blows my mind that an organization like the Sox with supposedly limited resources has never followed the model of home grown drafted and developed players, but instead typically wastes millions on middle tier veteran players. These players are acquired either via free agency or worse, by trading what few decent cost controlled prospect for what amounts to short term rentals. Is this a blueprint for sustained success?

 

2005 was both the best and worst thing to happen to Sox fans.

Can we dispel with this ridiculous and nonsensical myth already? The Chicago White Sox do NOT operate with "limited resources". Once and for all, understand that the sweetheart lease deal the team suckered the state into giving them over 25 years ago GUARANTEED them just the opposite. Taxpayer funds subsidize a very healthy profit margin for the ownership. That was the whole point of the sad debacle of Reinsdorf threatening to move the team to Florida, to put in place this deal to guarantee very little on the expense side of the ledger with a minuscule requirement for rent, while handing over to the team ALL of the revenue streams the ballpark has to offer.

 

You add that the waterfall of revenue that comes through with the recent MLB TV deals, and the LAST thing anyone can conclude is that this ball club operates with "limited resources". It's beyond preposterous to even remotely suggest so.

[caulfield12]

Uh-oh....cue debate about accuracy of Forbes' numbers.

[southsider2k5]

Can we dispel with this ridiculous and nonsensical myth already? The Chicago White Sox do NOT operate with "limited resources". Once and for all, understand that the sweetheart lease deal the team suckered the state into giving them over 25 years ago GUARANTEED them just the opposite. Taxpayer funds subsidize a very healthy profit margin for the ownership. That was the whole point of the sad debacle of Reinsdorf threatening to move the team to Florida, to put in place this deal to guarantee very little on the expense side of the ledger with a minuscule requirement for rent, while handing over to the team ALL of the revenue streams the ballpark has to offer.

 

You add that the waterfall of revenue that comes through with the recent MLB TV deals, and the LAST thing anyone can conclude is that this ball club operates with "limited resources". It's beyond preposterous to even remotely suggest so.

 

Good lord. You could at least pretend to deal in reality. Of course this team has limited resources. You are just letting your bitterness taint your reality. The reality is that the Sox are a middle of baseball revenue team, with a less than middle of baseball fanbase. Your perception of their lease doesn't change the reality of what the impact of that lease is to the bottom line. A team like the Yankees quite literally has over double the revenue stream that the White Sox has. If you don't understand what the biggest teams in baseball make as compared to the White Sox, you might want to look up what the words "limited" and "resources" actually mean.

[Iwritecode]

It absolutely blows my mind that an organization like the Sox with supposedly limited resources has never followed the model of home grown drafted and developed players, but instead typically wastes millions on middle tier veteran players. These players are acquired either via free agency or worse, by trading what few decent cost controlled prospect for what amounts to short term rentals. Is this a blueprint for sustained success?

 

2005 was both the best and worst thing to happen to Sox fans.

 

It wouldn't be as bad if so many of the players didn't inexplicably have the worst year(s) of their career the very second they put on a White Sox uniform. Dunn, LaRouche, Samardzija, Shields, David Wells just to name a few...

 

 

[FT35]

It wouldn't be as bad if so many of the players didn't inexplicably have the worst year(s) of their career the very second they put on a White Sox uniform. Dunn, LaRouche, Samardzija, Shields, David Wells just to name a few...

 

 

Gotta agree with this! You can't really prepare for drops in production of this magnitude when you're signing a guy. OR can you? Guys switching leagues typically struggle. Just look at Albert Pujols his first year in Anaheim. If Albert struggles, LaRoche will likely struggle! We're starting to throw Todd Frazier into this mix--albeit big power numbers. You look at the guys we sign--the most consistent are players who are coming from another AL team--the numbers project better and you can account for boosts in production for our stadium when a guy knows AL pitchers already. That's all we heard about with guys like Dunn, LaRoche, Frazier etc...these guys hit at least 30+ HR's in the NL, drove in 100--they should be good for 40+ each year playing at the Cell. Well...not knowing any of the pitchers kind of cancels out any benefits of the stadium--at least their first year. Then look at Brett Lawrie--AL guy putting up comparable numbers to his career averages--not great numbers but predictable--numbers you can build around because you kind of know what you're going to get. Melky's the same way--played enough games in Toronto/KC to approach his career norms with us.

 

One would think the guys paid to assess these types things could see basic trends like these and know ways to mask them more...but we keep going to the NL power hitter well every time we need a bat and end up disappointed.

[Thad Bosley]

Good lord. You could at least pretend to deal in reality. Of course this team has limited resources. You are just letting your bitterness taint your reality. The reality is that the Sox are a middle of baseball revenue team, with a less than middle of baseball fanbase. Your perception of their lease doesn't change the reality of what the impact of that lease is to the bottom line. A team like the Yankees quite literally has over double the revenue stream that the White Sox has. If you don't understand what the biggest teams in baseball make as compared to the White Sox, you might want to look up what the words "limited" and "resources" actually mean.

Lol - it's your own special brand of bitterness that gets in the way of understanding simple math. You might want to see to work on that some.

 

Meanwhile, there is no "perception" about the lease. There is a "reality" about the lease and a "reality" about the "bottom line". The reality about the lease is that it practically eliminates what is typically one of largest expense items subtracting to the "bottom line" - rent. And without that major expense, one which all other teams have to live with, it means our net income is far greater than it otherwise would be; hence, the Sox are by no means operating with "limited resources". This has nothing to do with the Yankees but all to do with the simple math of understanding revenues and expenses. Your routine yet irrational desire to paint a distorted view of that as it relates to the White Sox does nothing to change the reality.

[caulfield12]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/attendance

 

It's pretty ridiculous we have four rebuilding teams ahead of us, and two of them THE worst teams in baseball.

 

Also interesting to note is that four of the bottom five are AL teams and the Top 4 are NL teams. Not sure what, if anything, that happens to mean (except the Indians have bad fans! or is it a bad owner who completely screwed them over twice when they had the longest streak of consecutive sell-outs at Jacobs Fields in the 1990's and up through 2001, when their first rebuild happened)

 

 

[Eminor3rd]

Oh good, this thread again.

[Panerista]

Oh good, this thread again.

Should hold us over until one of the coaches or a front office member calls out fan attendance.

[caulfield12]

Apparently, they had a ton of kids' groups/summer field trips/comped tickets today.

 

26,000+.

[southsider2k5]

Lol - it's your own special brand of bitterness that gets in the way of understanding simple math. You might want to see to work on that some.

 

Meanwhile, there is no "perception" about the lease. There is a "reality" about the lease and a "reality" about the "bottom line". The reality about the lease is that it practically eliminates what is typically one of largest expense items subtracting to the "bottom line" - rent. And without that major expense, one which all other teams have to live with, it means our net income is far greater than it otherwise would be; hence, the Sox are by no means operating with "limited resources". This has nothing to do with the Yankees but all to do with the simple math of understanding revenues and expenses. Your routine yet irrational desire to paint a distorted view of that as it relates to the White Sox does nothing to change the reality.

 

So where do the Sox rank in revenue versus spending? Then talk to me about "irrational" and "distorted" views. When you use the term "unlimited" it is insulting to the reality that shows this is a midmarket team at best.

[caulfield12]

Braves have surpassed the White Sox now for having the most "team friendly" stadium deal...private parking outlawed within 1/2 mile of the stadium, even though they currently have 2,500 less spaces than Turner Field and no Metro access YET parking issues were used as the justification of moving out to the suburbs. They should have just done what the NBA ownership group did and said "our predominantly white customers are deathly afraid of African-American people downtown, especially after night games."

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/news/braves-and-co...-161843537.html

 

[ewokpelts]

Apparently, they had a ton of kids' groups/summer field trips/comped tickets today.

 

26,000+.

Comp tickets don't count toward attendance figures. But yes, Thursday was "summer fun day" where they offer tickets to day camps and other summer programs.

[caulfield12]

I was actually kind of shocked they were offering SOME $5 tickets for recent games...at least online.

 

Thought $10 was the close to the absolute floor for most MLB tickets these days.

[ewokpelts]

I was actually kind of shocked they were offering SOME $5 tickets for recent games...at least online.

 

Thought $10 was the close to the absolute floor for most MLB tickets these days.

Sox sell tickets at $7 almost every game except Sunday's, where they have $5 tickets.

[greg775]

Sox sell tickets at $7 almost every game except Sunday's, where they have $5 tickets.

That's very smart marketing. The possibility of a Sox sellout is limited to games versus the Cubs. No other games will ever be sold out, except playoff games. So when you are certain there will be no more than 23,000 on hand like most games, why not market the hell out of the fact you can go to a game for 5 or 7 bucks a head. Fill as many of the nosebleed seats as you can and those folks will be paying for parking still and probably buying lotsa goods for the family once in the stadium.

It's a win/win situation. I'd definitely try to get the word out about the 5 dollar tickets. So much cheaper than a movie.

[caulfield12]

People that pay $5-7 dollars per ticket will often also find a way to avoid the parking charge as well.

 

They're usually not the ones spending lots on concession or souvenir items. Some do, as they feel the savings from parking and ticketing justify spending more in other areas, but numerous minor league teams have done studies and found that almost all free/discounted ticket nights lead to much lower than the averaging spending you'd seen on "full price" nights (even with 20% lower attendance).

 

There's also an argument to be made that discounting tickets that heavily erodes the value of your higher or premium-priced tickets to an extent. And that it's much harder when the team's playing better or contending to get those $5-7 ticket buyers to get out of that "cheap" mentality and be willing again to pay $15-35 per ticket.

Edited July 2, 2016 by caulfield12

[jasonxctf]

Live example. Got 3 comp tickets to the Kane county Cougars game on Friday night. Paid the $5 for parking. Spent $5 in the kids zone. Bought a snow cone for the kid and the wife got a churro. Total amount spent was $20. Daughter caught a foul ball, her first ever.

 

Fixed costs vs variable costs. The Cougars got $20 from me and it didn't cost them anything to do it.

[greg775]

Live example. Got 3 comp tickets to the Kane county Cougars game on Friday night. Paid the $5 for parking. Spent $5 in the kids zone. Bought a snow cone for the kid and the wife got a churro. Total amount spent was $20. Daughter caught a foul ball, her first ever.

 

Fixed costs vs variable costs. The Cougars got $20 from me and it didn't cost them anything to do it.

Yes and you could have easily spent a lot more than that. You didn't buy any food/drink for yourself. No beers. No Cokes for anybody.

[jasonxctf]

Yes and you could have easily spent a lot more than that. You didn't buy any food/drink for yourself. No beers. No Cokes for anybody.

 

Had dinner at Portillos before we went. Was shocked at the concession prices... Definitely not minor league prices for food. ?

In fact was shocked at the spring training prices too. As a kid, I swear I remember that those games were a lot less expensive all around. (Food, tix, etc)