PDA

View Full Version : Bullpen Bar - now premier seating??


russ99
03-23-2009, 02:22 PM
The Sox are having a Bullpen Bar seat auction. (http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticketing/ticket_bpbar.jsp?partnerId=ed-2270959-55424191&source=ed-2270959-55424191) Seats start at $225/$175.

Not thrilled. What happened to regular fans paying $10 extra? It's like they're giving every cool place in the park over to the fatcats.

Edit: It's just the first row of seats, but still...

Thome25
03-23-2009, 02:26 PM
If someone is willing to pay it and all that money goes to payroll......and it looks to be alot of it......and the Sox use it to sign some of their young talent to long-term deals (I'm looking at you Quentin, Alexei, and Danks.) and/or other free-agent signings then I say go for it.

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-23-2009, 02:29 PM
Didn't they do this last year also?

I've gotten into the RF picnic tables in the 4th inning, for floating $10 to my waitress inside the BSB. I don't have the scratch to but a table at the onset, but it's a cool sidebar place to watch the game.

kobo
03-23-2009, 02:30 PM
Haven't they been doing this for a couple years? I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time they're doing this.

skottyj242
03-23-2009, 02:48 PM
Is it 200 bucks a table? Do you get food/beer with it?

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 02:55 PM
If someone is willing to pay it and all that money goes to payroll......and it looks to be alot of it......and the Sox use it to sign some of their young talent to long-term deals (I'm looking at you Quentin, Alexei, and Danks.) and/or other free-agent signings then I say go for it.

Ticket prices =/= player contracts

skottyj242
03-23-2009, 03:15 PM
Ticket prices =/= player contracts


Ticket prices=revenue=contracts. We're not talking rocket surgery here guy.

dickallen15
03-23-2009, 03:18 PM
If they sold 5 of those for every game, it comes out to about $400k or so, enough money to pay a minumum guy. If people want to pay that much for them, can you really blame them for selling at that price?

Thome25
03-23-2009, 03:20 PM
Ticket prices =/= player contracts

Why are the Yankees charging all that money for ticket prices then? CC Sabathia's McDonald's gift cards? I know TV revenue is a big part of it but, revenue is revenue and all of it gets pooled together and then allocated to players' salaries.

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 03:22 PM
Ticket prices=revenue=contracts. We're not talking rocket surgery here guy.

Thanks champ, but it's not that simple.

Ticket sales are a small part of the revenue brought in by MLB teams. So to directly attribute "these 40 seats are now more money" to "oh, well that will help us sign guys to extensions" is completely stupid.

Advertising, licensing and television deals are much bigger factors than the raising of 30-40 premimum seats.

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 03:23 PM
Why are the Yankees charging all that money for ticket prices then?

Because they can. Because people will buy them and they're in high demand. Because they are attempting to maximize their revenue.

Sports economists look at the tremendous increases in earnings of professional athletes and conclude: “The consumer demand for viewing (etc.) professional sporting events has increased. This increase in demand leads to an increase in the demand for talent. Given the restrictions on entry, this increase in demand for talent drives up the earnings of athletes. But, also, the increase in consumer demand for the sport drives up ticket prices. It is, therefore, a fallacy to look at rising ticket prices and rising earnings and conclude that rising earnings drive rising ticket prices. It is, in fact, just the reverse—rising ticket prices drive higher earnings.”
http://signsofchaos.blogspot.com/2008/01/why-do-people-think-rising-player.html

Also read: http://www.amazon.com/Baseball-Economist-Real-Game-Exposed/dp/0525949933

or this: http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2006/07/the-baseball-economist/

doublem23
03-23-2009, 03:27 PM
Why are the Yankees charging all that money for ticket prices then? CC Sabathia's McDonald's gift cards? I know TV revenue is a big part of it but, revenue is revenue and all of it gets pooled together and then allocated to players' salaries.

Because that's what the market dictates for those seats. The Yankees would be foolish not to set those prices for whatever amount maximizes revenue whether or not they just shelled out $500 million this off-season. Same with the Sox; obviously the more they can charge for seats the more money they can spend on players, but it's silly to think the Sox are pricing their product just to clear their expenses, they're going to charge as much as they feel they can.

Thome25
03-23-2009, 03:28 PM
Thanks champ, but it's not that simple.

Ticket sales are a small part of the revenue brought in by MLB teams. So to directly attribute "these 40 seats are now more money" to "oh, well that will help us sign guys to extensions" is completely stupid.

Advertising, licensing and television deals are much bigger factors than the raising of 30-40 premimum seats.

So then Reinsdorf was lying to us when he said that more ticket sales=bigger payroll?

He was getting tons of money from TV, advertising, licensing.....so he could've bought whoever he wanted all along right?

Revenue is like one of those pie graphs you see. How it slices up is different for each team. Ticket sales are absolutely a source of revenue that gets allocated to player salaries. Of course they're not the entire stream but, they're most certainly a part of it.

Thome25
03-23-2009, 03:30 PM
Because that's what the market dictates for those seats. The Yankees would be foolish not to set those prices for whatever amount maximizes revenue whether or not they just shelled out $500 million this off-season. Same with the Sox; obviously the more they can charge for seats the more money they can spend on players, but it's silly to think the Sox are pricing their product just to clear their expenses, they're going to charge as much as they feel they can.

I didn't think the sole reason they were charging extra for the Bullpen Sports bar seats or increased ticket prices was so they could pay some players.

But, if I see an added revenue stream for my team then obviously I think they'll put it into the players on the field. It's how the White Sox have traditionally said that they operate.

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 03:32 PM
So then Reinsdorf was lying to us when he said that more ticket sales=bigger payroll?

He was getting tons of money from TV, advertising, licensing.....so he could've bought whoever he wanted all along right?

To the best of my knowledge the TV revenue from having a 1/4 share in Comcast SportsNet Chicago is a little bit different than owning your own private-distributed cable sports network (see Yankees, Red Sox, Mets).

Big difference.

Plus the Yankees have been operating at a loss for the past 5-10 years, that's not the way Jerry wants to do business. He's a private owner, his job is to make money.

doublem23
03-23-2009, 03:34 PM
I didn't think the sole reason they were charging extra for the Bullpen Sports bar seats or increased ticket prices was so they could pay some players.

But, if I see an added revenue stream for my team then obviously I think they'll put it into the players on the field. It's how the White Sox have traditionally said that they operate.

Fair enough, I think that's reasonable. If the Sox are running a smart business, however, I'm sure they rely more heavily on standard, up front sources of revenue like advertising, broadcasting deals, season ticket, and luxury box sales to determine what sort of budget they're operating on for payroll. Those are more stable and easier to project in advance than ticket sales, which can fluctuate wildly based on the team's performance.

Put it this way, I'm sure JR's pockets aren't hurting because he owns the Sox. :wink:

LoveYourSuit
03-23-2009, 03:37 PM
Thanks champ, but it's not that simple.

Ticket sales are a small part of the revenue brought in by MLB teams. So to directly attribute "these 40 seats are now more money" to "oh, well that will help us sign guys to extensions" is completely stupid.

Advertising, licensing and television deals are much bigger factors than the raising of 30-40 premimum seats.

Are we going to go thru this again?

For 1 revenue item (one), ticket sales is the major revenue stream for any team. Makes more than TV, Radio, Concessions, or Lic.

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 03:45 PM
You should probably let baseball economists know about this 'cause they've been apparently doing it wrong for years.

doublem23
03-23-2009, 03:45 PM
For 1 revenue item (one), ticket sales is the major revenue stream for any team. Makes more than TV, Radio, Concessions, or Lic.

Got any proof to back that up?

soxinem1
03-23-2009, 03:48 PM
Is it 200 bucks a table? Do you get food/beer with it?

Yeah, right!

UofCSoxFan
03-23-2009, 03:48 PM
The Sox are having a Bullpen Bar seat auction. (http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticketing/ticket_bpbar.jsp?partnerId=ed-2270959-55424191&source=ed-2270959-55424191) Seats start at $225/$175.

Not thrilled. What happened to regular fans paying $10 extra? It's like they're giving every cool place in the park over to the fatcats.

Edit: It's just the first row of seats, but still...

It's called capitalism...this is not a new thing.

Why is it "fair" that Joe EveryFan can get these seats for $10 (but doesn't value them enough to spend $275 on them) just b/c he got there first while someone who is willing to spend more on these seats isn't allowed to do so?

This argument never made sense to me.

Seriously...the whole tickets are too expensive for the average joe arguement really gets tiresome for me. If someone is willing to pay more for a seat than I am, he fully has the right to have that seat. This is similar to ticket scalping to me, which is a free market in its purest form, but many people dislike it because it means they are charged what the seat is actually worth, not what the team decides to charge for it. People forget that scalpers sometime have to sell seats for less than face if the market goes down, and they don't complain then.

skottyj242
03-23-2009, 04:00 PM
Thanks champ, but it's not that simple.

Ticket sales are a small part of the revenue brought in by MLB teams. So to directly attribute "these 40 seats are now more money" to "oh, well that will help us sign guys to extensions" is completely stupid.

Advertising, licensing and television deals are much bigger factors than the raising of 30-40 premimum seats.


Did I say that it was Sizzle Chest? But to say that ticket sales do not equal player contracts is idioic.

FedEx227
03-23-2009, 04:14 PM
They do, no doubt. But there are about 100 other factors that also go into it, some more important than others.

It really stems from being annoying by people bitching about players contracts causing "Average Joe" to not be able to bring his kids to a game or some bull****. Which is where I inevitably felt the conversation was going to go.

doublem23
03-23-2009, 04:17 PM
They do, no doubt. But there are about 100 other factors that also go into it, some more important than others.

It really stems from being annoying by people bitching about players contracts causing "Average Joe" to not be able to bring his kids to a game or some bull****. Which is where I inevitably felt the conversation was going to go.

Oh, it's only been two hours and 20-something posts. Give it time.

champagne030
03-23-2009, 04:21 PM
Got any proof to back that up?

Ticket sales make up the single largest revenue stream and while all revenue is important nothing else is really even close.

http://www.secinfo.com/$/SEC/Filing.asp?T=sVS7.62Nx_1flg

CashMan
03-23-2009, 04:54 PM
It's called capitalism...this is not a new thing.

Why is it "fair" that Joe EveryFan can get these seats for $10 (but doesn't value them enough to spend $275 on them) just b/c he got there first while someone who is willing to spend more on these seats isn't allowed to do so?

This argument never made sense to me.

Seriously...the whole tickets are too expensive for the average joe arguement really gets tiresome for me. If someone is willing to pay more for a seat than I am, he fully has the right to have that seat. This is similar to ticket scalping to me, which is a free market in its purest form, but many people dislike it because it means they are charged what the seat is actually worth, not what the team decides to charge for it. People forget that scalpers sometime have to sell seats for less than face if the market goes down, and they don't complain then.


I think it has to do with who your market is. If you piss off the Joe Sixpack because tickets go to the highest bidder, then he stops buying tickets to other games, stops buying merchandise, and soon, the Sox turn into the Pirates. Isn't scalping illegal? I don't think Jerry wants to go back to the 10,000 people in attendance again.

DumpJerry
03-23-2009, 05:40 PM
The Sox lost two major corporate sponsors this year: Pontiac and Bank of America. They did pick up LG, but I don't know how much LG made up for the loss of Pontiac and Bank of America.

Something tells me this was a factor in the decision to market the tables.

doublem23
03-23-2009, 05:41 PM
I think it has to do with who your market is. If you piss off the Joe Sixpack because tickets go to the highest bidder, then he stops buying tickets to other games, stops buying merchandise, and soon, the Sox turn into the Pirates. Isn't scalping illegal? I don't think Jerry wants to go back to the 10,000 people in attendance again.

He's talking about "legal" scalping like reselling your tickets via StubHub or eBay or going to a ticket broker.

As for Joe Sixpack, the Sox still offer plenty of affordable alternative ticket options, and even as ticket prices have dramatically risen the past decade, the Sox still lured over 30,000 fans to the park last season, so perhaps our "blue collar" identity is a bit misleading.

russ99
03-23-2009, 05:44 PM
I think it has to do with who your market is. If you piss off the Joe Sixpack because tickets go to the highest bidder, then he stops buying tickets to other games, stops buying merchandise, and soon, the Sox turn into the Pirates. Isn't scalping illegal? I don't think Jerry wants to go back to the 10,000 people in attendance again.

It just seems to me that the Sox have been shifting their target market the last few years. All the new parts of the park (other than Fundamentals) have been targeted to the premier clients.

Not just the Scout Seats and Jim Beam Club either. The first year it was open, the fan deck could be used by regular joes, now it seems it's for group sales only at $100 a person. Now the same mentality is starting to apply to the first row of the outdoor seats of the bullpen bar. It's like they're trying to add demand in this market by increasing exclusivity. This a big thing with other entertainment too, like $200 concert tickets, and VIP passes to other events, like Lollapalooza.

The thing that confuses me is that if the Sox expect less sales from the premium ticket market (i.e. businesses bringing clients to the park) due to the recession, why do they go out and push for this?

And on the other hand, if the park's fairly empty (not that it would happen anytime soon) will they then charge single-game prices for the premium areas? There has to be a bounce-back at some point. You can't make the entire park premium seating - although the Cubs are trying to with their demand-based pricing.

But I do understand that if they can make that extra cash, more power to them.

DumpJerry
03-23-2009, 05:55 PM
We're talking about 32 of 81 games this new scheme applies to. That leaves plenty of games where those of us who can hustle as soon as the gates open can buy a table.

DSpivack
03-23-2009, 05:56 PM
It just seems to me that the Sox have been shifting their target market the last few years. All the new parts of the park (other than Fundamentals) have been targeted to the premier clients.

Not just the Scout Seats and Jim Beam Club either. The first year it was open, the fan deck could be used by regular joes, now it seems it's for group sales only at $100 a person. Now the same mentality is starting to apply to the first row of the outdoor seats of the bullpen bar. It's like they're trying to add demand in this market by increasing exclusivity. This a big thing with other entertainment too, like $200 concert tickets, and VIP passes to other events, like Lollapalooza.

The thing that confuses me is that if the Sox expect less sales from the premium ticket market (i.e. businesses bringing clients to the park) due to the recession, why do they go out and push for this?

And on the other hand, if the park's fairly empty (not that it would happen anytime soon) will they then charge single-game prices for the premium areas? There has to be a bounce-back at some point. You can't make the entire park premium seating - although the Cubs are trying to with their demand-based pricing.

But I do understand that if they can make that extra cash, more power to them.

It's not like the Sox suddenly have decided to make tickets more expensive or anything like that. More demand, same supply=higher prices. The Sox are a much better franchise than they were 10 years ago, and more people want to go to games, so they can charge more.

Dibbs
03-23-2009, 05:59 PM
I guess I never understood the bullpen bar seating. I wouldn't pay the $10 to look through the chain link fence, so I can't imagine who would be dumb enough to pay $200+.

LoveYourSuit
03-23-2009, 06:22 PM
Got any proof to back that up?


Yes, common sense.

TomBradley72
03-23-2009, 06:23 PM
I guess I never understood the bullpen bar seating. I wouldn't pay the $10 to look through the chain link fence, so I can't imagine who would be dumb enough to pay $200+.

Thank you, you beat me to it. The seats are not that great, and from my experience in that whole area, the service isn't that great either. IMO, the only "premier seating" that is a decent value is the Club Level seating.

grv1974
03-23-2009, 06:28 PM
The Sox are having a Bullpen Bar seat auction. (http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticketing/ticket_bpbar.jsp?partnerId=ed-2270959-55424191&source=ed-2270959-55424191) Seats start at $225/$175.

Not thrilled. What happened to regular fans paying $10 extra? It's like they're giving every cool place in the park over to the fatcats.

Edit: It's just the first row of seats, but still...

Yup, that's exactly what they're doing. And, if you can believe it, these prices are still nothing in comparison to what they're doing at New Yankee Stadium.

LoveYourSuit
03-23-2009, 06:28 PM
Ticket sales make up the single largest revenue stream and while all revenue is important nothing else is really even close.

http://www.secinfo.com/$/SEC/Filing.asp?T=sVS7.62Nx_1flg


That's good enough proof to me, common sense should have been enough, but you hit it right there.

Meanwhile, still waiting for a response from those suggesting otherwise.

soxfan21
03-23-2009, 10:32 PM
Thank you, you beat me to it. The seats are not that great, and from my experience in that whole area, the service isn't that great either. IMO, the only "premier seating" that is a decent value is the Club Level seating.


Agreed, the club seats are an "affordable" premium seating option especially for the "regular" games on the schedule. I try to get one or two games during the season up there, the food is very good and the service is also good IMO.

Streets
03-23-2009, 10:48 PM
I guess I never understood the bullpen bar seating. I wouldn't pay the $10 to look through the chain link fence, so I can't imagine who would be dumb enough to pay $200+.

I sat down there on OD last year for the first time. We bought uppers off of stubhub and had no intention of sitting there...

I thought this view "through the chain link" sitting on the other side of JD running for a live ball was one of the coolest views I've ever had at a game.

I was planning to do the same thing this year but it looks like I'm out of luck? Where is this info being found?

DumpJerry
03-23-2009, 10:51 PM
I sat down there on OD last year for the first time. We bought uppers off of stubhub and had no intention of sitting there...

I thought this view "through the chain link" sitting on the other side of JD running for a live ball was one of the coolest views I've ever had at a game.

I was planning to do the same thing this year but it looks like I'm out of luck? Where is this info being found?
It's only 32 games that are affected.

UofCSoxFan
03-24-2009, 10:01 AM
I think it has to do with who your market is. If you piss off the Joe Sixpack because tickets go to the highest bidder, then he stops buying tickets to other games, stops buying merchandise, and soon, the Sox turn into the Pirates. Isn't scalping illegal? I don't think Jerry wants to go back to the 10,000 people in attendance again.

And that's a fair point...but that's why the Sox have multiple pricing levels. They aren't charging $200 for every seat...because obviously doing so would not maximize profits, and like you said there is a trickle down effect beyond just ticket sales (this is why, for example, the Bears decided not to go 100% season tickets, although it hasn't really hurt the Packers). We are talking about them charging more for a few seats.

If attendance did drop to 10,000 people, the Sox would lower ticket prices to reflect the reduced demand, ...that's how a free market works. Either that or you could by tickets on the secondary market from Stub Hub, or a guy on the street for less than face value from all the speculators that bought up expecting higher demand (which is legal...only above face is illegal if I'm not mistaken).

I highly doubt we'll ever see the days of 10,000 fans again unless the Sox go into a complete tailspin. I feel those days had a lot to do with the stigma of the old US Cellular field, pre-renovation, and once people saw the park for themselves they realized its a pretty fun time. I think the strike turned off a bunch of fans too for awhile, who are now back. You couple that with some competent management for once, including the GM and the marketing department, an up and coming neighborhood around the park, and I just don't see it happening. I never really thought people stayed away before because tickets were too pricey.

And honestly, to my broader point, if the Sox could charge $200 for every seat and still sell out, I personally feel it would be reasonable for them to do so (since that is what the market bears)...the fact that the don't do this isn't out of charity, but it is because doing so would decrease overall profits (including revenue from tickets sold, consessions, merchandise, parking, etc...) The Sox are a private business, granted one with significant ties to the community and one that is heavily subsidized by the government, but still, their main purpose is to make money...like it or not. Sure there are some owners that run their teams as a toy, not caring about the bottom line but just wanting to win championships, but the vast majority would still like to earn a profit.

doublem23
03-24-2009, 10:27 AM
Yes, common sense.

See, that's not actually proving your point.

That's good enough proof to me, common sense should have been enough, but you hit it right there.

Meanwhile, still waiting for a response from those suggesting otherwise.

As we learned in 1994 the owners never have (and never will) actually open their books to third-party inspection. And if you believe 10+ year old data from another team proves your point, well, after I stop laughing I'll just have to agree to disagree.

Ragator43
03-24-2009, 10:39 AM
I guess I never understood the bullpen bar seating. I wouldn't pay the $10 to look through the chain link fence, so I can't imagine who would be dumb enough to pay $200+.

They're not paying ten bucks to look through a fence. The tables up for auction are the first row of the upper level and have an unobstructed view of the field. The lower level is still free and filled on a first come first served basis.

LoveYourSuit
03-24-2009, 10:50 AM
See, that's not actually proving your point.



As we learned in 1994 the owners never have (and never will) actually open their books to third-party inspection. And if you believe 10+ year old data from another team proves your point, well, after I stop laughing I'll just have to agree to disagree.


Honestly, what in your opinion is the #1 source of revenue for a baseball team, oil drilling?

tick53
03-24-2009, 11:27 AM
The Sox are having a Bullpen Bar seat auction. (http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/cws/ticketing/ticket_bpbar.jsp?partnerId=ed-2270959-55424191&source=ed-2270959-55424191) Seats start at $225/$175.

Not thrilled. What happened to regular fans paying $10 extra? It's like they're giving every cool place in the park over to the fatcats.

Edit: It's just the first row of seats, but still...

Agreed! First the Fan Deck now the Bar. The wealthy get it all. I'm perturbed about this. I thought the South Side park was the workingman's park.

Note: The last few times I was at a game, the FanDeck was occupied by private parties. I'm not sure if that's true all the time only because I can only attend 4-5 games per season.

beasly213
03-24-2009, 12:12 PM
Agreed! First the Fan Deck now the Bar. The wealthy get it all. I'm perturbed about this. I thought the South Side park was the workingman's park.

Note: The last few times I was at a game, the FanDeck was occupied by private parties. I'm not sure if that's true all the time only because I can only attend 4-5 games per season.

Welcome to the state of baseball. There are no more "working mans parks". All stadiums have premium seating areas and options. We should consider ourselves lucky that bleacher seats aren't $60.00 yet like some parks in this town...

Also the FanDeck isn't always reserved for private parties. Also I'll always take the concourse over the fan deck anyway if I want to stand and watch the game. Less crowded and a better view in my opinon.

kaufsox
03-24-2009, 01:37 PM
Also the FanDeck isn't always reserved for private parties.

This is very true, but I also think it is unfair to classify a private party as a "fat cat" type of thing. The Sox are very reasonable about bookings for parties, FanDeck parties included. Is it as cheap as renting the church social hall? well, no but if that is the expectation then I think that is being unreasonable.

As far as the fascinating discussion regarding the number one stream of revenue for teams I think that it varies from team to team and there is a greater reliance on it depending on the team. For instance the White Sox probably (and since we never get to see the books, this is all guess work, maybe some common sense) rely more on ticket sales than the Yankees. To be sure the Yanks do well at the gate, but if they have a 10% dip at the box office it wouldn't have the same effect a 10% drop would have on the White Sox. The streams that the Yankees generate are some of the most profitable for any sporting franchise and they can weather lackluster attendance a little better than other teams.

russ99
03-24-2009, 01:41 PM
And honestly, to my broader point, if the Sox could charge $200 for every seat and still sell out, I personally feel it would be reasonable for them to do so (since that is what the market bears)...the fact that the don't do this isn't out of charity, but it is because doing so would decrease overall profits (including revenue from tickets sold, consessions, merchandise, parking, etc...) The Sox are a private business, granted one with significant ties to the community and one that is heavily subsidized by the government, but still, their main purpose is to make money...like it or not. Sure there are some owners that run their teams as a toy, not caring about the bottom line but just wanting to win championships, but the vast majority would still like to earn a profit.

Well, that's the big change. Even as recently as the early 90's, baseball was a break-even business at best. The only time MLB owners made a significant profit was when they sold the team.

Now there's a much bigger focus on turning a profit, which is not necessarily a change for the better.

russ99
03-24-2009, 01:45 PM
This is very true, but I also think it is unfair to classify a private party as a "fat cat" type of thing. The Sox are very reasonable about bookings for parties, FanDeck parties included. Is it as cheap as renting the church social hall? well, no but if that is the expectation then I think that is being unreasonable.

I have a group every year, and neither me nor my guests couldn't handle the $100 per person tab for a fan-deck party, which is also restricted to something like 50-150 guests.

Do you think anyone earning less than 6 figures can front that $5,000 -15,000 (+fees) for a group in the fan deck for one game? It may not be as top-shelf or as pricy as the Scout Seats, Jim Beam Club or skyboxes, but it is pricing a previously common area out of the range of regular fans.

Law11
03-24-2009, 02:22 PM
I sat out there for a guy who bought some kind of package for the playoffs in that first row vs Tampa. Not a bad place but because of the way the tables are turned not everyone can see well.

UofCSoxFan
03-24-2009, 02:31 PM
Well, that's the big change. Even as recently as the early 90's, baseball was a break-even business at best. The only time MLB owners made a significant profit was when they sold the team.

Now there's a much bigger focus on turning a profit, which is not necessarily a change for the better.

While profits are probably at an all time high, with increased televesion revenues, I find it very hard to believe that all owners were breaking even for 90 plus years and that a) the league didn't fold and b) people would continually pay more and more money to own a team that had little chance of making them money unless they could sell it to some other rich sap. I mean this is the equivalent of a housing/oil bubble that lasted for a century. Please.

This isn't a relatively new phenomenon that people want to make money with the business they own.

It really is time to drop the Cubs are the rich person's team, Sox are the blue collar team. Both fan bases are pretty similar economically, with each having a similar mix of blue collar and white collar fans.

Foulke You
03-24-2009, 03:50 PM
Honestly, what in your opinion is the #1 source of revenue for a baseball team, oil drilling?
For the Sox, the revenue streams break down like this:

Plain Churros- 40% team revenue
Vanilla Churros (formerly known as Bavarian Creme)- 25% team revenue
Chocolate Churros- 25% team revenue
Strawberry Churros- 10% team revenue

:cool:

LoveYourSuit
03-24-2009, 04:24 PM
For the Sox, the revenue streams break down like this:

Plain Churros- 40% team revenue
Vanilla Churros (formerly known as Bavarian Creme)- 25% team revenue
Chocolate Churros- 25% team revenue
Strawberry Churros- 10% team revenue

:cool:

Plain Churros are the ultimate prize!

the other 3 you can have, yuck.

TomBradley72
03-25-2009, 09:47 AM
So somehow it's become our inalienable right to have tables at the Bullpen Sports bar or sit on the fan deck to watch millionaires play baseball?

Much ado about nothing. I expect the ability to watch a baseball game at a reasonable market price for a ticket. Which is the case with the White Sox. The White Sox are a "for profit" organization, they are not obligated to sell their product below market value. I wouldn't want my employer to sell our products and services below market value...eventually I'd be out of a job.

LoveYourSuit
03-25-2009, 10:25 AM
So somehow it's become our inalienable right to have tables at the Bullpen Sports bar or sit on the fan deck to watch millionaires play baseball?

Much ado about nothing. I expect the ability to watch a baseball game at a reasonable market price for a ticket. Which is the case with the White Sox. The White Sox are a "for profit" organization, they are not obligated to sell their product below market value. I wouldn't want my employer to sell our products and services below market value...eventually I'd be out of a job.


Couldn't agree more.

Buy a lower level seat if you you so desparately want to sit that close.

russ99
03-25-2009, 10:55 AM
So somehow it's become our inalienable right to have tables at the Bullpen Sports bar or sit on the fan deck to watch millionaires play baseball?

None whatsoever. If they wanted the Bullpen Bar or Fan Deck to be a more exclusive area, they should have done that in the first place.

What I object to is despite plenty of options for the well-heeled or corporate client schmoozer in the park already - that the Sox turn over areas or part of areas that were initially designated for regular fans to those types of fans.

chisoxfanatic
03-25-2009, 11:00 AM
None whatsoever. If they wanted the Bullpen Bar or Fan Deck to be a more exclusive area, they should have done that in the first place.

What I object to is despite plenty of options for the well-heeled or corporate client schmoozer in the park already - that the Sox turn over areas or part of areas that were initially designated for regular fans to those types of fans.
This I can agree with. They call it the FAN Deck for a reason. There are many times I've been turned away from accessing it due to it being bought out for the game. And, you never know when it will be open and when it's spoken for!

The Fan Deck holds a special place in my heart now, because I sat up there for Buehrle's no-hitter.

UofCSoxFan
03-25-2009, 11:04 AM
None whatsoever. If they wanted the Bullpen Bar or Fan Deck to be a more exclusive area, they should have done that in the first place.

What I object to is despite plenty of options for the well-heeled or corporate client schmoozer in the park already - that the Sox turn over areas or part of areas that were initially designated for regular fans to those types of fans.

So now the team can't make adjustments to its operations? Really?

By that logic, the Fan Deck, green seats, redoing of the upper deck, player statues, relocation of the bullpens, etc...should never have been implemented since they weren't "done in the first place" when the park opened.

UofCSoxFan
03-25-2009, 11:06 AM
This I can agree with. They call it the FAN Deck for a reason. There are many times I've been turned away from accessing it due to it being bought out for the game. And, you never know when it will be open and when it's spoken for!

The Fan Deck holds a special place in my heart now, because I sat up there for Buehrle's no-hitter.

Just because someone is at a private event or has money they automatically aren't a FAN...or aren't a fan in the White Sox sense of the word? One could argue that someone that is willing to shell out more cash than you to see the Sox is at least as big a fan, at least if you believe people speak with their wallets.

Jerko
03-25-2009, 11:07 AM
People are mad because the fan deck and the bullpen bar used to be free and every year it seems a different "price range" appears. Stadium club has been doing that for a few years now. Used to be able to sit anywhere up there, now there's an extra charge to be "on the glass". Difference is, you already have to pay to get up there whereas the bullpen bar and fan deck were free originally.

UofCSoxFan
03-25-2009, 11:08 AM
Why do I get the feeling that the people that are complaining in this thread may have also had some issues when the Sox decided to clamp down on people from the Upper Deck sneaking into the lower bowl?

UofCSoxFan
03-25-2009, 11:13 AM
People are mad because the fan deck and the bullpen bar used to be free and every year it seems a different "price range" appears. Stadium club has been doing that for a few years now. Used to be able to sit anywhere up there, now there's an extra charge to be "on the glass". Difference is, you already have to pay to get up there whereas the bullpen bar and fan deck were free originally.

And my arguement to that is it probalby either should have never been free and people should count their blessings that they enjoyed something free of charge for years that others were willing to pay for OR I would argue that back then, with low attendence, charging those premiums could not be justified by the demand, but now that we have a much better stadium and a consistently good team, their are higher costs associated with a better product.

chisoxfanatic
03-25-2009, 11:14 AM
Just because someone is at a private event or has money they automatically aren't a FAN...or aren't a fan in the White Sox sense of the word? One could argue that someone that is willing to shell out more cash than you to see the Sox is at least as big a fan, at least if you believe people speak with their wallets.
My post was not intended to spark this kind of a response. They call it the FAN Deck, so it should be available for ALL fans, not just those who can afford to shell out a lot of cash. As russ99 already pointed out, there are plenty of other options for those people in the ballpark.
Why do I get the feeling that the people that are complaining in this thread may have also had some issues when the Sox decided to clamp down on people from the Upper Deck sneaking into the lower bowl?
Not I. I am a season ticket holder in the lower deck, and I actually like it, as the bathroom and concession lines are already jammed as it is.

kaufsox
03-25-2009, 12:55 PM
I have a group every year, and neither me or my guests could handle the $100 per person tab for a fan-deck party, which is also restricted to something like 50-150 guests.

Do you think anyone earning less than 6 figures can front that $5,000 -15,000 (+fees) for a group in the fan deck for one game? It may not be as top-shelf or as pricy as the Scout Seats, Jim Beam Club or skyboxes, but it is pricing a previously common area out of the range of regular fans.

Yes someone making less than 6 figures can come up with the money, especially because it probably wouldn't be just one person. Also $100 per person isn't exactly a princely sum. To have a patio party is $41 and you have to move from the patio at the beginning of the game. Also if the restriction of 50-150 guests is cumbersome, the cost of getting a decent package should be further deffered in a better part of the ball park. Finally, if a group of people want to get together at a reasonable price in a good location, why shouldn't the Sox rent it out?

LoveYourSuit
03-25-2009, 01:15 PM
What ever happened to the days of buying a ticket to an event and sitting your ass on the seat that was assigned to you?

Foulke You
03-25-2009, 04:32 PM
Plain Churros are the ultimate prize!

the other 3 you can have, yuck.
I'm partial to the Vanilla myself but conceded that plain churros represent the most revenue. All the churros are my children though. It is hard to choose sometimes.:tongue: