PDA

View Full Version : Correlation of Attnedence to Payroll


jabrch
04-19-2004, 12:31 PM
Last year we had 1.9mm paid, on the season. For that, we get a 65mm payroll this season. We are mostly assuming that there is some flexibility again this year like we had last year to add players if we need to (although last year we didn't pay salary for people we added). Lets say we can max at 70. How many more fans do you think we need for JR to raise the payroll for 60 up to 70? 75? 80?

poorme
04-19-2004, 12:37 PM
I dunno, but if we drew 2.5 million, there would be no excuse for not having a $90 million payroll...though I'm sure JR could come up with one.

Randar68
04-19-2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Last year we had 1.9mm paid, on the season. For that, we get a 65mm payroll this season. We are mostly assuming that there is some flexibility again this year like we had last year to add players if we need to (although last year we didn't pay salary for people we added). Lets say we can max at 70. How many more fans do you think we need for JR to raise the payroll for 60 up to 70? 75? 80?

W/O half-price Mondays, I don't know. None of us knows the real financial situation or what promises have been made to investors, etc. I just don't know that anything but a substantial increase in attendance this year, coupled by an increase in season-ticket plans for next season will convince JR to go anything more than 70 million in the future. If JR give KW 70 million to work with for 2005, they could have a pretty good chance at making some moves with the added flexibility of taking Jose/Koch/Konerko off the payroll and Lee freeing up payroll after 2005.

Randar68
04-19-2004, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by poorme
I dunno, but if we drew 2.5, there would be no excuse for not having a $90 million payroll...though I'm sure JR could come up with one.

Then he'd have to pay rent, LOL! no net gain?

Tekijawa
04-19-2004, 12:39 PM
Wait until June or July, I remember Kenny saying something at Sox Fest that moves would be made then... I wouldn't be surprised if at that point our total moves up a little bit, especially if we keep doing so well and the CUbs keep floundering around 500...

batmanZoSo
04-19-2004, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Tekijawa
Wait until June or July, I remember Kenny saying something at Sox Fest that moves would be made then... I wouldn't be surprised if at that point our total moves up a little bit, especially if we keep doing so well and the CUbs keep floundering around 500...

There's not doubt in my mind we'll get a player or two of high caliber by July if we're in contention. The question is will we keep him? I know the odds are it's gonna be a guy in his contract year, but it would be sweet to get someone who's already signed for at least through 05.

The good thing is attendance will almost surely be better than last year if we play at near this level all year long. Last year we stunk at the beginning so it took a while for the fans to come out.

Lip Man 1
04-19-2004, 01:29 PM
The thread starter poses an interesting question.

It has always been my question as to why the Sox organization doesn't specifically address this with a specific number they say the team needs to draw in order to make money, sign free agents, retain their own free agents and so forth.

I mean what are we talking about here? 2.5 million? 4 million?? See what I mean?

My personal opinion is that the Sox will never do this because Sox fans are onery enough to say 'fine, we'll draw the number you need just to put you on the spot to be forced to spend the money.'

Sox ownership isn't stupid when it comes to finances. They're not willing to take that risk then be on the hook. Also it's much easier with their sweetheart lease to stay nebulous on this and then whenever they need to use the 'attendence issue,' as a crutch, no one can come up with specific numbers to call them out of it.

Lip

JohnBasedowYoda
04-19-2004, 01:41 PM
after reading some of these replies it sorta makes me feel like being a sox fan is a job that i have to pay for doing, and i have to go to the cell to do my job.

Shouldn't we just focus on going to games to have fun and let the rest fall in place?

bennyw41
04-19-2004, 01:51 PM
[i]
Shouldn't we just focus on going to games to have fun and let the rest fall in place? [/B]



Amen to that. Do what you can, which is go to the game and support the team. Hopefully it will all fall into place. Excellent post

SSN721
04-19-2004, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by JohnBasedowYoda
after reading some of these replies it sorta makes me feel like being a sox fan is a job that i have to pay for doing, and i have to go to the cell to do my job.

Shouldn't we just focus on going to games to have fun and let the rest fall in place?

Absolutely, I love the team, I dont pay to see the owner. I dont like Reisdorf much either but he is also only part of the entire ownership group so it is hard to place the blame squarely on him I think, none of us have any idea what is going on behind closed doors. I love going to the games and watching my team play too much to let who owns the team effect how many times I go to the park.

Iwritecode
04-19-2004, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by batmanZoSo
There's not doubt in my mind we'll get a player or two of high caliber by July if we're in contention. The question is will we keep him? I know the odds are it's gonna be a guy in his contract year, but it would be sweet to get someone who's already signed for at least through 05.

The good thing is attendance will almost surely be better than last year if we play at near this level all year long. Last year we stunk at the beginning so it took a while for the fans to come out.

Even if they win 100 games this year I think they'll be hard pressed to draw more than 2 million.

You have to remember how much the season ticket base dropped off this year compared to last year. It's unrealistic to hope for 20,000 walk-ups for every game...

Deadguy
04-19-2004, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
Last year we had 1.9mm paid, on the season. For that, we get a 65mm payroll this season. We are mostly assuming that there is some flexibility again this year like we had last year to add players if we need to (although last year we didn't pay salary for people we added). Lets say we can max at 70. How many more fans do you think we need for JR to raise the payroll for 60 up to 70? 75? 80?

Right now our payroll is 14th in the Majors, while our attendance last year was in the 20s, so I don't really see much of a problem with where we are in terms of payroll. It's still the highest in the division.

The problem lies in the way we are allocating this money, and KW is partly to blame for this. The reason we were handcuffed in terms of off season moves is because of the kickers that went into many player's contracts. It's possible to to be a playoff contender with the payroll we have, as long as smart moves are made. In KW's defense, however, he has very little room for error, as opposed to the teams that can afford to waste money on a few marginal players, since they have the luxury of having more revenue at their disclosure.

iwannago
04-19-2004, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by Randar68
W/O half-price Mondays, I don't know. None of us knows the real financial situation or what promises have been made to investors, etc. I just don't know that anything but a substantial increase in attendance this year, coupled by an increase in season-ticket plans for next season will convince JR to go anything more than 70 million in the future. If JR give KW 70 million to work with for 2005, they could have a pretty good chance at making some moves with the added flexibility of taking Jose/Koch/Konerko off the payroll and Lee freeing up payroll after 2005.

Would someone please tell me of another business in which the customer is supposed to lay out a sizable some of money and get a second rate product. Then the customer is told if you want a first rate product, more customers are needed before I will possibly give you a first rate product.