Dick Allen

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:59 PM) When people are saying ticket prices are too high, they aren't saying that only if there were less tickets for sale, they could afford to buy tickets. They are saying the price of tickets are too expensive. Not counting secondary markets, there are probably less than 100,000 people that actually purchase Bears tickets during a season, and when a team plays 8 home games a year, one game is actually more of an event than going to a baseball game where 10 times the number of games are played. People are willing to pay up for the event, and if they are not season ticketholders the experience of a Bears game. More people go to White Sox games each year. Its like if you needed some gym shoes, if the K Mart shoes were $75, most would say they were too expensive. If the Air Jordans were $85, the same person wouldn't think the same thing. White Sox tickets are too expensive for the non diehard. Some things you are willing to pay up for, some things you aren't. White Sox tickets apparently are on the are not list for the majority of people living in this area.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:52 PM) Yet getting people to spend five times that to go to a Bears game isn't a problem at all. The Bears have about 500,000 seats to sell. Probably 450,000 or more are sold to season ticketholders with a waiting list probably 20 years long, so the reality is, they have to sell about 50,000 seats a year at most.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:45 PM) But if tickets were $5 apiece, then payroll would probably have to be drastically reduced. Then you might have a hard time selling 3.2 million tickets to watch a s***ty baseball team. The point being if the prices were lower, more people would attend which means price has to be an issue. If it isn't an issue, why don't they just double the prices?

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:41 PM) So maybe that's the main problem. A small fan base, not pricing. Opening a new ballpark & winning the World Series both expanded that fanbase for a while, but now it's back to it's core again. I don't think it's as simple as high prices. If the Sox priced every ticket at $5, parking was free, beer $.50, hot dogs $.50, I'd bet they would set an attendance record. The problem is, the Sox attendance problems sort of create a snowball effect. All the talk of attendance woes, seeing empty seats on TV when in first place, decreases chances of tickets being sold, especially at inflated prices.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:35 PM) In other words the face value of the tickets aren't the problem. One way to increase demand is to make it more attractive. Lowering the price usually is one way to do that. When stores want to get rid of inventory, they occassionally have sales. If the Sox want to sell some more tickets, they should lower the prices and make their pricing model easy enough for a monkey to understand.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 02:30 PM) If you compare those teams to other teams in the same leagues, they all are among the highest in average ticket price and attendance. It doesn't appear that the economy & high ticket prices have had an effect on them. Other NHL/NBA/NFL/MLB teams have much lower ticket prices, yet also have attendance issues. If the economy in Chicago is so bad, why don't any of the other teams have issues like the White Sox? Their season ticket bases are extremely high. A lot of that is corporate, also its not an 81 game committment but a 41 game committment. The Bears is a 10 game committment with pre season. There is also a larger pool for those teams, as many people loyal to the Cubs won't go to a Sox game if it were free. You don't get buses from Iowa at Sox games on a Wednesday afternoon. In fact, one article I read had a Cubs official saying 40% of their attendance was tourists.

Weren't the Sox TV ratings up this year as well? People are watching, just not at USCF.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 01:55 PM) It's funny, everyone keeps blaming the economy and high ticket prices. Yet every other sports team in Chicago has relatively high ticket prices and seems to be enjoying tons of success at the gate. The Cubs did have a decrease, but even with a 100 loss team, they were still top 10 in attendance. Apparently, White Sox fans are the only ones affected by the economy. The Sox average more customers per game than the Blackhawks and Bulls. Comparing them to the Bears with 8 home dates isn't fair. Plus those 3 are the only teams in town in their respective sports. If ticket brokers owned the same number of season tickets for the Cubs as they do for the Sox, their attendance would be far less, but we all know there are more Cubs fans in the area than Sox fans. The Sox are drawing from a fairly small pool compared to the others except probably the Blackhawks, but if they go a few seasons without the playoffs, their attendance will be dismal. People will come, but pricing is a problem.

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 01:18 PM) I think there's truth in this. Can you really expect people to pay $25-100 on a ticket plus parking plus food on something that happens 162 times over a 6 months span? I understand football being expensive as there are less than twenty games a year. I always think the media is talking to me when they complain about attendance, but I always attend a handful of games each year. How much are we expected to attend? Am I really the problem or are they only targeting people that go to zero? We talk about prices like they're a one-time expense, but don't we really need a bunch of people going to a lot of games to improve attendance? If you want someone to go to ten games, you're asking for several hundred dollars. Now, if you're taking a family of four, you're talking potentially thousands. I don't think there's any question if you asked 1000 random Sox fans why they don't go to more games in 2012 the #1 answer would be financial the #2 answer would be time committment.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2012 -> 12:20 PM) That has been pretty well blown out of the water too. Outside of a couple of series, there were pretty much always cheap tickets available somewhere. Not walk up. Stubhub purchases don't increase attendance. There were some deals if people want to try and find them. Walk up attendance is usually pretty minimal even when there is high demand for tickets. Rarely do the Sox sell more than 5k tickets day of game. Plus, dynamic pricing really blew any chance of a big walk up in 2012. If the White Sox season ticket base drops, their attendance will most likely drop no matter how well they do that season. The Sox attendance was higher in 2007 than it was in 2005. It was a residual of winning the WS. In fact, stubhub having better deals with better locations than the Sox dynamic deals hurts attendance, and causes some to rethink their investment in season ticket packages.

Once you get into Sept. and Oct. football takes over. I read something yesterday where 50% of people watching the NFL is due to fantasy football. Maybe one reason the Yankees didn't sell out on Sunday. 2011 had an impact on 2012 attendance. Bad season, lose Buehrle. Even in 2005, when the Sox were never out of first place, there were some lame attendance figures in September. 2012 should help next year's attendance. But 6 consecutive downturns should probably make Brooks a little nervous whenever someone tells him JR wants to see him.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 15, 2012 -> 07:08 PM) I understand your point but it could sway a young fan in my opinion. I have White Sox and Cubs fans in my family. I could have gone either way. When I was a kid, Frank Thomas came up. I am a White Sox fan because of Frank Thomas. What if a guy like Courtney Hawkins is awesome. If the Sox affilaite was in say Schaumburg, it is possible that a young kid could reasonably have Hawkins (or any other spect) as his/her favorite player. I know that isnt a scenario that is extremely common but it is reasonable. I would imagine the vast majority of Frank Thomas fans are fans because of what he did for the White Sox, not the Birmingham Barons. As a Sox fan, it would be interesting to have a minor league affiliate in the area, just to watch once in a while. I really doubt it would have much impact on the future size of the fan base.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Oct 15, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) I'm trying to figure out what sort of competitive advantage that would give them other than saving a few bucks on travel costs. How often does a situation really come up where they need to get a player from one minor league team to another on short notice? Seems to me it would make more sense to want to get a player from the minors to the major league club on short notice. I think its more for their staff of evaluators and roving instructors.

I'd probably take ARod for $10 million a year. Maybe he's not very likeable, but certainly more than Albert Belle, plays a position of need and in a bad year was still at about the same OPS as Adam Dunn. He probaby would hit more homers with home games at USCF as opposed to Yankee Stadium. He also would probably sell a few tickets. I don't think it would happen. But its getting to the point the Yankees and ARod are both going to be looking to get him out of the Bronx. You would have to work out those 5 $6 million bonuses. The other problem with ARod is he hasn't been able to play 140 games since 2007.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2012 -> 08:25 AM) At the end of the day we will know if it was profitable in 2012 by how it is used in 2013. It seems this year it was used like airlines use their pricing methods. I remember Brooks being quoted as basically saying the system was something that they expected fans to take some time getting used to. Obviously, having tickets drop to next to nothing the day before and day of the game isn't going to help revenue. I think they should ditch the system until the attendance starts trending upward.

The Sox for a team whose attendance is what it is, do pretty well on Mondays when the tickets are half priced. Pricing is a problem. Last offseason was a problem because it took the season ticket base down. For all those who don't think pricing is a problem, how would attendance be if tickets cost $1 each and parking was free? The argument the fans don't like the team is silly, that they don't like JR, that's silly or the Bulls would have empty seats. Its that tickets cost a lot of money. Parking costs a lot of money. Concessions and souveniers cost a lot of money, on top of that you pay a ticketmaster fee which is one of the highest ticketmaster fees in baseball. I would think every team that goes through ticktmaster has the same fees charged, but apparently not. Dynamic pricing probably works gloriously when you have a base buying up a lot of tickets, but it works terribly if you are trying to build up your base. People don't want to jump through hoops to find a Dynamic deal or a Sox save of the week or search the internet for discount codes. Dump the system. I think it cost the Sox money in 2012.

QUOTE (MuckFinnesota @ Oct 13, 2012 -> 10:42 PM) Are any of you concerned that revenue will tumble with the red line being worked on next summer? It's definitely going to complicate things for me to get down to the ballpark from the loop. Minimal effect. Red line will still run but switch to green line tracks south of Roosevelt. The green line stip at 35th was where the red line used to stop before the orange line came to be. Really no big deal and if the green line tracks are slow zone free form Roosevelt to 35th, it may even be quicker even with the extra 2 block walk.

A Rod is owed $114 million plus $6 million each for homer 660, 714, 755, 762 and 763.

If blowing a 3 game lead is the biggest collapse in team history, Sox fans are spoiled and really have nothing to complain about.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Oct 9, 2012 -> 02:29 AM) McCann at 3/36? Yes, McCann at 3/$36M. Though he's worth more, he's broken down multiple times in recent seasons and for a catcher that's big trouble. His current deal has him at a team option for that same $12M. He's seven years younger, is a better offensive player and would be a huge defensive upgrade over AJ. Rays are gonna take on salary to get rid of Zobrist? The Rays are not destitute any longer. They have new TV deal money coming to them. The Rays have no hitting. As nice a player as Zobrist is he's wasted in that lineup. He's a glorified role player. The Rays would be acquiring one of the top OFs in MLB last season that would upgrade their lineup in a dynamic way hitting in front of Longoria. They would also obtain a young, cost controlled reliever that picked up 29 saves as a rookie. Those guys are not easy to find. Both impact players for Ben Zobrist. Rangers are going to move Andrus... for RAMIREZ?! Profar projects to be a better SS for Texas and The Rangers are very much rumored to be moving Andrus this offseason. There are other reasons why an Andrus deal could make sense this off-season. First, there are the rules laid out by the new MLB collective bargaining agreement that make it likely the Rangers would get much more for Andrus in 2013 than 2014 -- teams who trade for a player in the final year of his contract are no longer entitled to collect draft compensation if he leaves via free agency. Ramirez is a more impactful offensive player with comparable defensive skills. Alexei averages a .276 / 17HR / 77RBI / .725 OPS slash over 162 for his career Andrus averages a .275 / 4HR / 53RBI / .695 OPS slash over 162 for his career Alexei + Gavin Floyd for a defense first SS that steals a decent amount of bases. If this is all so unrealistic you haven't read this entire thread. McCann also thinks he needs shoulder surgery.

QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Oct 9, 2012 -> 02:29 AM) McCann at 3/36? Yes, McCann at 3/$36M. Though he's worth more, he's broken down multiple times in recent seasons and for a catcher that's big trouble. His current deal has him at a team option for that same $12M. He's seven years younger, is a better offensive player and would be a huge defensive upgrade over AJ. Rays are gonna take on salary to get rid of Zobrist? The Rays are not destitute any longer. They have new TV deal money coming to them. The Rays have no hitting. As nice a player as Zobrist is he's wasted in that lineup. He's a glorified role player. The Rays would be acquiring one of the top OFs in MLB last season that would upgrade their lineup in a dynamic way hitting in front of Longoria. They would also obtain a young, cost controlled reliever that picked up 29 saves as a rookie. Those guys are not easy to find. Both impact players for Ben Zobrist. Rangers are going to move Andrus... for RAMIREZ?! Profar projects to be a better SS for Texas and The Rangers are very much rumored to be moving Andrus this offseason. There are other reasons why an Andrus deal could make sense this off-season. First, there are the rules laid out by the new MLB collective bargaining agreement that make it likely the Rangers would get much more for Andrus in 2013 than 2014 -- teams who trade for a player in the final year of his contract are no longer entitled to collect draft compensation if he leaves via free agency. Ramirez is a more impactful offensive player with comparable defensive skills. Alexei averages a .276 / 17HR / 77RBI / .725 OPS slash over 162 for his career Andrus averages a .275 / 4HR / 53RBI / .695 OPS slash over 162 for his career Alexei + Gavin Floyd for a defense first SS that steals a decent amount of bases. If this is all so unrealistic you haven't read this entire thread. McCann also thinks he needs shoulder surgery.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Oct 3, 2012 -> 06:52 AM) It amazes me how much people will cherry pick stats to support "their guy" over "not their guy". Viciedo strikes out 118 times, walks 78 fewer times than Dunn, with a 39 point lower OBP and a 43 point lower SLG, and people want to ship Dunn out the first chance they get but will scream bloody murder if the Sox try to get good talent in return for Viciedo. And even with all those strikeouts Viciedo had, he still made enough contact to be second on the team in GIDP. If you're going to have an irrational hatred of strikeouts, then at least hate them for everybody and not just one guy. Viciedo is 23 and just completed his first full season in the major leagues. There is reason to think he will improve. Dunn appears to be on the downward side of his career and makes considerably more money which could be spent elsewhere if he were movable. It would shock me if all these things were considered and the Sox had a deal to make and another team had to choose between Viciedo and Dunn and take their contracts, if one other team would take Dunn. Last year he sits out at the end so he doesn't qualify for the worst average of all time, this year he sits so he won't set the strikeout mark. At least he hit so homers, but he has been nowhere near worth what the Sox have paid him.

QUOTE (Cali @ Oct 7, 2012 -> 02:10 PM) f*** the MLB and Choke-land. I don't know who to blame more. "Home field advantage" doesn't just mean "more home games" starting a series at home is a HUGE advantage for any team. f***, the Tigers might sweep and at that point would have really had home field advantage. 2 games in Detroit, 1 game in Oakland. not to mention the lower seat also would get an extra gate.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 5, 2012 -> 01:25 PM) At least you read my post. Thank you. PTATC, I realize some people who have money are not buffoons. My brother is a rich tax lawyer and he is not a dick. But a lot of people like Loria are out of control, rich mama's boys. Joe Girardi told him to shut up and he wanted him fired after the game. He waited til after the season. I read that article and my god. If they want to fire Ozzie for those reasons. That is so laughable. If you reversed Miami's record this year, all that stuff that was printed would be considered AWESOME. They'd all be Ozzie being Ozzie. Reverse the record and Ozzie is satan. that is the first article I've ever read that indicated the manager was hexing the team and part of some sort of satanic religion. Geez. That would be criminal if the Marlins fire Cora just to pray Ozzie quits. But that is truly possible. But that article. Ozzie unprofessional? What is this, the world Chess association? This is baseball, baby. Tobacco chewing, cussing, BASEBALL! That article made me laugh. My god. Yes, those traits the Marlins brass are now calling "unprofessional" are the same traits they apparently admired when they hired him. Its pretty comical that appears the reason to can him, and I'm no Ozzie fan.

People write about Hawk's ego, but isn't if all this stuff is true, the problem Stone's ego?