Dick Allen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 11:57 AM) More than the bleacher seats? I'd bet that is a nice midpoint. I don't think so, but if you're correct, any talk about empty seats by White Sox employees should be banned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 01:08 AM) I don't think so, but if you're correct, any talk about empty seats by White Sox employees should be banned. That's why it's always double-talk to complain about attendance when it's not fans they want, it's fans that pay the "maximized" or idealized amount of money (from the Sox standpoint) to attend games...which isn't really fair in this economy to criticize anyone with a family for hesitating. Even if their attendance "exploded" comparatively from here on out, the best they would possibly do is 23rd in the majors. They're 27th now...and more than 500 away from 26 and 25. It will be pretty tight by the end of the Cubs' series, but they'll still be 27th despite their best drawing home series of the year. That alone is pretty indicative of how the attendance has been so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) That's why it's always double-talk to complain about attendance when it's not fans they want, it's fans that pay the "maximized" or idealized amount of money (from the Sox standpoint) to attend games...which isn't really fair in this economy to criticize anyone with a family for hesitating. Even if their attendance "exploded" comparatively from here on out, the best they would possibly do is 23rd in the majors. They're 27th now...and more than 500 away from 26 and 25. It will be pretty tight by the end of the Cubs' series, but they'll still be 27th despite their best drawing home series of the year. That alone is pretty indicative of how the attendance has been so far. I agree. The fact that they are using Groupon and have different "deals" weekly does show they realize their pricing is screwed up. I do understand and agree they shouldn't alienate their season ticketholders and give someone a better deal for the same seat type the season ticketholder bought for multiple games months before the season started, although the Sox for years have never given season ticketholders a break for half price Monday tickets. Maybe if dynamic pricing wasn't used, attendance would be the same and revenue would be lower. I just find that hard to believe. They are letting too many seats go unsold which leaves empty parking spots, unsold beer and hot dogs and t-shirts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 11:42 AM) Why? 33k at those price points is way better than filling up the place with $5 upper deck seats in terms of revenue.yeah, the cubs sox series used to draw 40k. even when both teams were horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 11:31 AM) Its $90.45 for bleachers tonight. Brooks needs to avoid the person who turned him on to dynamic pricing. I'm confused by dynamic pricing for these games. They aren't selling out and don't seem to be selling many more tickets. (I assume many tickets were bought in the spring) Shouldn't the price be going down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 12:23 PM) I agree. The fact that they are using Groupon and have different "deals" weekly does show they realize their pricing is screwed up. I do understand and agree they shouldn't alienate their season ticketholders and give someone a better deal for the same seat type the season ticketholder bought for multiple games months before the season started, although the Sox for years have never given season ticketholders a break for half price Monday tickets. Maybe if dynamic pricing wasn't used, attendance would be the same and revenue would be lower. I just find that hard to believe. They are letting too many seats go unsold which leaves empty parking spots, unsold beer and hot dogs and t-shirts. speaking as a former season ticket holder, i dont care if some seats are discounted. STH's get prime playoff tickets, reduced prices on EVERY GAME as well as reduced parking. not to mention all the other perks. the guy buying a $5 upper is not the same type of customer oas the sth. BUT, he could become someone that buys a group package, or an STH. lure them with cheap tickets, and sell them on the experience at the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 11:31 AM) Its $90.45 for bleachers tonight. Brooks needs to avoid the person who turned him on to dynamic pricing.stubhub is actually CHEAPER for some of the seating levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 12:14 PM) That's why it's always double-talk to complain about attendance when it's not fans they want, it's fans that pay the "maximized" or idealized amount of money (from the Sox standpoint) to attend games...which isn't really fair in this economy to criticize anyone with a family for hesitating. Even if their attendance "exploded" comparatively from here on out, the best they would possibly do is 23rd in the majors. They're 27th now...and more than 500 away from 26 and 25. It will be pretty tight by the end of the Cubs' series, but they'll still be 27th despite their best drawing home series of the year. That alone is pretty indicative of how the attendance has been so far. if they started drawing 30k a night here on out, they may end up averaging 25k when the season ended. that's middle of the pack, their normal attendance rank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 19, 2012 Author Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 12:26 PM) I'm confused by dynamic pricing for these games. They aren't selling out and don't seem to be selling many more tickets. (I assume many tickets were bought in the spring) Shouldn't the price be going down?one would think. or at least stay static. an upper reserved seat for the cubs series was $42(plus fees) back in feb. it's $49 now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 "Dynamic" playing at home is the only solution for this mess, lol. Even then, it's going to take a lot more than that 17-5 run (or 26-5 in 2010) to fully convince anyone to buy in at the prices they're charging. It's almost like they want to DISCOURAGE fans because that will lead to higher media/broadcast and advertising rate revenues if everyone watches from home or MLBTV.com. But I can't imagine the ratings blip from .1 or .2 for a Nielsen share is anywhere close to the difference of 1-2-3,000 fans per night that they're losing out on because of the dynamic pricing and parking prices. That would be a good cost/benefit analysis for an econ student. What are the t.v. ratings so far this year for the Cubs and Sox? Compared to 2011? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Between variable/dynamic ticket pricing schemes and the secondary ticket market, tickets should be available at a price that fans think is just. And given that that are several tiers of seating, there should be a “right price” for anyone who is interested in going to a game. Yet, by the looks of it, fans are not buying. In trying to generate ticket sales, teams and consultants have responded with all sorts of programs. These programs basically adjust ticket prices according to daily demand and then variously reach out to both avid and casual fans. This way, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, team decision-makers effectively end-up reacting in “real-time” rather than having to predict weeks or months in advance what will be the demand for a specific game. This seems rational and is essentially the thinking that the pricing strategies are based on. But it’s worth pointing out that these strategies may have two key design flaws, both of which can be fixed: 1) The first flaw is that there may be too many choices. Conventional wisdom is that human beings prefer to have as many options as possible because its gives us the freedom to choose. (Isn’t it also the American way to have the opportunity to choose, apple pie in hand, to purchase tickets to a baseball game from either an official team website or secondary market websites—and at a price that has been set by the “free market”? The excitement is almost too much to bear.) And that may be the problem. As the psychologist Barry Schwartz has explained, choosing between 175 types of salad dressing tends to paralyze a person’s decision-making and leave that person dissatisfied. Can the same be said for ticket sales, especially when they include a daily (sometimes hourly) fluctuation in price? 2) The second flaw is that the pricing schemes ultimately shift the burden of pricing decision and activity from the franchise (the producer) to the fan (the customer). With variable/dynamic ticket pricing, fans are in a way tasked with trying to determine what is the right price for a ticket and, therefore, are effectively being put to work. Or may be this way of getting tickets is now fully integrated into “the experience.” Also, in the long-run, variable/dynamic ticket pricing may tax franchise personnel more than establishing ticket prices in the off-season and sticking with them for the 162-game slate. The traditional way requires relatively long-range planning, and is grounded in knowing what customers consider value and organizing to anticipate how they might react to the team’s performance throughout a season. Now, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, the planning has switched to the short-term; the only real long-term consideration is which formula will be used in the season-long pricing strategy. How many successful businesses focused on “making numbers” today while sacrificing the needs of tomorrow—and existed long enough to tell about it? The general point is this: stop making ticket sales so confusing. http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/20...mlb-attendance/ FWIW, White Sox tv ratings were 25th in 2010. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 12:44 PM) Between variable/dynamic ticket pricing schemes and the secondary ticket market, tickets should be available at a price that fans think is just. And given that that are several tiers of seating, there should be a “right price” for anyone who is interested in going to a game. Yet, by the looks of it, fans are not buying. In trying to generate ticket sales, teams and consultants have responded with all sorts of programs. These programs basically adjust ticket prices according to daily demand and then variously reach out to both avid and casual fans. This way, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, team decision-makers effectively end-up reacting in “real-time” rather than having to predict weeks or months in advance what will be the demand for a specific game. This seems rational and is essentially the thinking that the pricing strategies are based on. But it’s worth pointing out that these strategies may have two key design flaws, both of which can be fixed: 1) The first flaw is that there may be too many choices. Conventional wisdom is that human beings prefer to have as many options as possible because its gives us the freedom to choose. (Isn’t it also the American way to have the opportunity to choose, apple pie in hand, to purchase tickets to a baseball game from either an official team website or secondary market websites—and at a price that has been set by the “free market”? The excitement is almost too much to bear.) And that may be the problem. As the psychologist Barry Schwartz has explained, choosing between 175 types of salad dressing tends to paralyze a person’s decision-making and leave that person dissatisfied. Can the same be said for ticket sales, especially when they include a daily (sometimes hourly) fluctuation in price? 2) The second flaw is that the pricing schemes ultimately shift the burden of pricing decision and activity from the franchise (the producer) to the fan (the customer). With variable/dynamic ticket pricing, fans are in a way tasked with trying to determine what is the right price for a ticket and, therefore, are effectively being put to work. Or may be this way of getting tickets is now fully integrated into “the experience.” Also, in the long-run, variable/dynamic ticket pricing may tax franchise personnel more than establishing ticket prices in the off-season and sticking with them for the 162-game slate. The traditional way requires relatively long-range planning, and is grounded in knowing what customers consider value and organizing to anticipate how they might react to the team’s performance throughout a season. Now, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, the planning has switched to the short-term; the only real long-term consideration is which formula will be used in the season-long pricing strategy. How many successful businesses focused on “making numbers” today while sacrificing the needs of tomorrow—and existed long enough to tell about it? The general point is this: stop making ticket sales so confusing. http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/20...mlb-attendance/ FWIW, White Sox tv ratings were 25th in 2010. Too many choices is pretty good. I take a bus to work in the morning. A lady always gets on the bus in front of me. If the bus is empty, it takes her until the next stop to find a seat. If there are only a couple open, she sits down before the bus moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 01:31 AM) if they started drawing 30k a night here on out, they may end up averaging 25k when the season ended. that's middle of the pack, their normal attendance rank. IF IF IF being a huge one. We've only drawn that many, what, 2-3 times all season? And that would still only put us at 23rd in the majors. Middle of the pack now in the majors is low to mid 30's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 they barely cracked 30k in PAID admissions last night. $49 tickets just to walk in the door, and the sox wonder why no one is coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 and it looks like the $14 ticket is not moving as fast as those $5 toronto tickets..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 01:58 PM) and it looks like the $14 ticket is not moving as fast as those $5 toronto tickets..... I am going Friday night because Chris Sale is pitching. I bet the fact that Humber and Quintana go on Saturday and Sunday has something to do with that. The $14 seats are pretty high up but if you purchase them you can always move up to empty seats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swingandalongonetoleft Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I threw my Friday ticket onto Stubhub for $35 on account of the Aerosmith show at the UC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 02:27 PM) I am going Friday night because Chris Sale is pitching. I bet the fact that Humber and Quintana go on Saturday and Sunday has something to do with that. The $14 seats are pretty high up but if you purchase them you can always move up to empty seats.the whole section is $14. and i see plenty of tix within the first 10 rows online. it's not ok to sit in row 16 in sec 506, but it's ok to pay more for an "upper box" seat in 533 row 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share Posted June 21, 2012 32k tonight. They averaged 31k for this series. Last year it was 35k. 2010 was 39k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balfanman Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jun 20, 2012 -> 01:27 PM) I am going Friday night because Chris Sale is pitching. I bet the fact that Humber and Quintana go on Saturday and Sunday has something to do with that. The $14 seats are pretty high up but if you purchase them you can always move up to empty seats. I really have no idea how much who the starting pitcher is effects attendance. I would think that unless that starter is really good, or really bad that it would not effect it very much. In my case, I go to watch the Sox and usually do not put much thought towards who the starter might be for that particular game. That being said, while I think Phil Humber appears to be a great guy, if it looks like he is going to be the starter for a particular game that I might want to go to, I will definitely choose another game. I know that teams have to give guys plenty of opportunity to come out of their funk, but Humber is to the point where you almost have to give someone else a start (Axlerod ?) to get a few more people in the ballpark. Not that I would make it a point to see someone like an Axlerod pitch, but i would not waste my hard earned money to go see what will most likely be a Sox loss if Humber starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share Posted June 21, 2012 the sox have a groupon offer out now, if anyone's interested: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticket...B174M37G1V-1Q81 $56 for the brewer series. the cost of the patio ticket plus the game ticket is only $6 higher than what was posted back when tix first went on sale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Jun 21, 2012 -> 09:35 AM) the sox have a groupon offer out now, if anyone's interested: http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticket...B174M37G1V-1Q81 $56 for the brewer series. the cost of the patio ticket plus the game ticket is only $6 higher than what was posted back when tix first went on sale. That deal would be way better if the food/drink was included during the game. I don't want to get there two hours early just to take advantage of it and be forced to a timie limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigruss Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jun 21, 2012 -> 10:04 AM) That deal would be way better if the food/drink was included during the game. I don't want to get there two hours early just to take advantage of it and be forced to a timie limit. Patio Party is a freakin blast if you go with a group of friends. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share Posted June 21, 2012 looks like the deal's over. stupid sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jun 19, 2012 -> 10:44 AM) Between variable/dynamic ticket pricing schemes and the secondary ticket market, tickets should be available at a price that fans think is just. And given that that are several tiers of seating, there should be a “right price” for anyone who is interested in going to a game. Yet, by the looks of it, fans are not buying. In trying to generate ticket sales, teams and consultants have responded with all sorts of programs. These programs basically adjust ticket prices according to daily demand and then variously reach out to both avid and casual fans. This way, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, team decision-makers effectively end-up reacting in “real-time” rather than having to predict weeks or months in advance what will be the demand for a specific game. This seems rational and is essentially the thinking that the pricing strategies are based on. But it’s worth pointing out that these strategies may have two key design flaws, both of which can be fixed: 1) The first flaw is that there may be too many choices. Conventional wisdom is that human beings prefer to have as many options as possible because its gives us the freedom to choose. (Isn’t it also the American way to have the opportunity to choose, apple pie in hand, to purchase tickets to a baseball game from either an official team website or secondary market websites—and at a price that has been set by the “free market”? The excitement is almost too much to bear.) And that may be the problem. As the psychologist Barry Schwartz has explained, choosing between 175 types of salad dressing tends to paralyze a person’s decision-making and leave that person dissatisfied. Can the same be said for ticket sales, especially when they include a daily (sometimes hourly) fluctuation in price? 2) The second flaw is that the pricing schemes ultimately shift the burden of pricing decision and activity from the franchise (the producer) to the fan (the customer). With variable/dynamic ticket pricing, fans are in a way tasked with trying to determine what is the right price for a ticket and, therefore, are effectively being put to work. Or may be this way of getting tickets is now fully integrated into “the experience.” Also, in the long-run, variable/dynamic ticket pricing may tax franchise personnel more than establishing ticket prices in the off-season and sticking with them for the 162-game slate. The traditional way requires relatively long-range planning, and is grounded in knowing what customers consider value and organizing to anticipate how they might react to the team’s performance throughout a season. Now, with variable/dynamic ticket pricing, the planning has switched to the short-term; the only real long-term consideration is which formula will be used in the season-long pricing strategy. How many successful businesses focused on “making numbers” today while sacrificing the needs of tomorrow—and existed long enough to tell about it? The general point is this: stop making ticket sales so confusing. http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/20...mlb-attendance/ FWIW, White Sox tv ratings were 25th in 2010. Paralysis by analysis. I went to the Dodger game with my daughter for Father's Day. After searching through Dodger website, various ticket agencies ,ebay, trying to find discount codes, looking for seats in the shade I was getting pretty confused. Thank goodness I let my daughter do it. Somehow she found seats in the shade for the whole game field level for like $50 apiece. Thank God she's smarter than me . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.