Newsflash: Attendance means very little anymore

[Hoofhearted]

Reds are now worth 1 billion. Forbes breaks down the Reds $1 billion in value this way: 44% from the worth of the sport overall, 30% from the city of Cincinnati and surrounding area market size, 18% from the stadium and just 8% depends on the Reds specific brand.

The Reds also got a new deal with FSO. Since Bob has bought this team, he's almost doubled his investment from 2006.

Those teams values do not yet account for the impact of legalized gambling. If they cannot spend more than 150 million on payroll, they I don't see when we ever will.

[grampahol]

(12-05-2018, 12:58 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Reds are now worth 1 billion. Forbes breaks down the Reds $1 billion in value this way: 44% from the worth of the sport overall, 30% from the city of Cincinnati and surrounding area market size, 18% from the stadium and just 8% depends on the Reds specific brand.

The Reds also got a new deal with FSO. Since Bob has bought this team, he's almost doubled his investment from 2006.

Those teams values do not yet account for the impact of legalized gambling. If they cannot spend more than 150 million on payroll, they I don't see when we ever will.

Estimated value of the team is not exactly the same as willingness to spend nor ability to spend. Just because your home is valued at a million bucks doesn't mean you have a million bucks to just spend on whatever your heart desires. We as fans need to be careful when trying to equate estimated value with willingness and ability to spend ..especially when thinking about a bidding war with much more valuable teams like the Yankees for example . Still, it does get old listening to a billionaire poor mouthing constantly .. 

[Hoofhearted]

(12-07-2018, 04:06 PM)grampahol Wrote: Estimated value of the team is not exactly the same as willingness to spend nor ability to spend. Just because your home is valued at a million bucks doesn't mean you have a million bucks to just spend on whatever your heart desires. We as fans need to be careful when trying to equate estimated value with willingness and ability to spend ..especially when thinking about a bidding war with much more valuable teams like the Yankees for example . Still, it does get old listening to a billionaire poor mouthing constantly .. 

They still get cash flow from TV deals, Disney, and a few other sources. That’s not included here. But I get it. I’m saying he’s clearly a smart, wealthy man why can’t he foot some of that additional money to help make the team more competitive? He’s not going to lose the money, it’s all still going to be re invested back into his wallet. Just like when you remodel your house as your example. But he’s got the capital and money to afford it even if it’s not actual “operational money”

[grampahol]

I think those days of the majority stakeholders dipping into their own personal fortunes is well over . The dream some fans may have had of some bazillionaire buying the team and buying a team out their own pockets was pure fantasy and I'll be one of the first to admit to entertaining that notion in the past.. It was never going to occur. 

[Hoofhearted]

(12-13-2018, 07:09 AM)grampahol Wrote: I think those days of the majority stakeholders dipping into their own personal fortunes is well over . The dream some fans may have had of some bazillionaire buying the team and buying a team out their own pockets was pure fantasy and I'll be one of the first to admit to entertaining that notion in the past.. It was never going to occur. 

It's occurring now, save the billionaire part. I can bet they're spending a pretty penny on their coaching staff. Heard rumors their investing even more into their analytics department. Most likely a good chunk of that money is coming out of their pocket and not the operational money. So I believe they're doing it, but they simply have to do a little more in the players payroll part of it since they're already footing the bill for all the other upgrades. Nothing crazy, just need to get around the 150-160 mark for payroll...shit even 140s would be alright (just above league average).

[kevin]

(12-05-2018, 12:58 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Reds are now worth 1 billion. Forbes breaks down the Reds $1 billion in value this way: 44% from the worth of the sport overall, 30% from the city of Cincinnati and surrounding area market size, 18% from the stadium and just 8% depends on the Reds specific brand.

The Reds also got a new deal with FSO. Since Bob has bought this team, he's almost doubled his investment from 2006.

Those teams values do not yet account for the impact of legalized gambling. If they cannot spend more than 150 million on payroll, they I don't see when we ever will.

There are flaws in your concept, and attendance is important. 

First, you are basing everything on Forbes, who isn't always right.  
Second, you are going on estimated net worth, which isn't the same as cash on hand. 

So lets start with The Yankees, because in real money, there is the Yankees and then everybody else. Now the Yankees have attendance, the great TV contract, the marketing, The Championship History, The New York Yankees have it all. 
So after the Yankees, where do you think the Reds are. Certainly not in the top 10.  Easily the bottom half of baseball.  The bottom 15.  The small market teams. 

Yes, the Reds have a Fox Ohio TV deal, but they won't have it for long if nobody is watching. TV rating have to be very low for the last place Reds. Commercial time will become cheaper and cheaper if Reds stay in last, because very few people are watching. Reds TV ratings are getting lower than reruns of Gilligan's Island.  Companies are not going to pay big commercial prices for TV ads nobody will see. Fox will lose money and end result will be next Reds TV contract will be a lot less money for Reds. 

If 90% of the seats are empty, you can bet nobody is watching on TV either. Poor attendance is a sign of a franchise in trouble, be it baseball, basketball, whoever. Poor attendance teams often fold or move to another city.  Even in the TV revenue sharing NFL, no owner wants poor attendance.  Mike Brown doesn't have to share the attendance money, so the more seats sold, that is real money, not estimated hypothetical net worth.  Look at all the franchises that have folded or moved in sports over poor attendance.

So Fan Attendance does mean a lot to these sports franchises. The big cities don't really have to worry about low attendance.  The smaller cities like Cincinnati.  Look for the Rays to move out of St Petersburg to the mainland of Tampa because they can't afford the low attendance in St Pete.  If attendance means nothing, the Reds would not have fired everybody.  They have not brought in a new manager and a whole new coaching staff for no reason.  Last Place, Poor Attendance and Low TV Ratings are Killing the Cincinnati Reds franchise. They have milked the Pete Rose events for every last drop and the cow is dry.  

The good news is the Reds are making changes.  Bell looks like a good hire and I think even Buddy Bell is on Reds Front Office staff. Joe Morgan and Barry Larkin are on Reds staff. These are indeed baseball people that could turn this last place franchise around. Even Lou Piniella is on staff.  Reds could win more which would make attendance rise and TV ratings go up, and as Yogi Berra said, that is money which is as good as cash. 

Lets also add Sports Service or whoever Reds now have selling beer, pop, hot dogs, bobble heads, you name it. The bars and restaurants inside GABP. Attendance means everything to them. Also to the parking lots, the restaurants and things in Cincy and Covington. Poor attendance means these businesses lay off workers and eventually fold. Often a franchise with poor attendance asking for tax payers to buy a new stadium, those tax payers say Adios Amigo. Don't let the door hit you in your corporate assets.

Again, the GOOD NEWS is signs of life in Reds off season moves. Hey, I would rather watch Reds in Fox Ohio since it's part of my TV package anyway. However if 2019 is like the last few years, reruns of Soupy Sales or the guy selling Flex Seal or Dick Van Dyke doing Tai Ching even start looking better TV than the Reds losing every game. Every time I turn on the Reds, they are losing, so I change the channel. The Reds seem to be trying to put up more wins this year. That is the Good News.

[Hoofhearted]

(12-13-2018, 11:06 AM)kevin Wrote: There are flaws in your concept, and attendance is important. 

First, you are basing everything on Forbes, who isn't always right.  
Second, you are going on estimated net worth, which isn't the same as cash on hand. 

So lets start with The Yankees, because in real money, there is the Yankees and then everybody else. Now the Yankees have attendance, the great TV contract, the marketing, The Championship History, The New York Yankees have it all. 
So after the Yankees, where do you think the Reds are. Certainly not in the top 10.  Easily the bottom half of baseball.  The bottom 15.  The small market teams. 

Yes, the Reds have a Fox Ohio TV deal, but they won't have it for long if nobody is watching. TV rating have to be very low for the last place Reds. Commercial time will become cheaper and cheaper if Reds stay in last, because very few people are watching. Reds TV ratings are getting lower than reruns of Gilligan's Island.  Companies are not going to pay big commercial prices for TV ads nobody will see. Fox will lose money and end result will be next Reds TV contract will be a lot less money for Reds. 

If 90% of the seats are empty, you can bet nobody is watching on TV either. Poor attendance is a sign of a franchise in trouble, be it baseball, basketball, whoever. Poor attendance teams often fold or move to another city.  Even in the TV revenue sharing NFL, no owner wants poor attendance.  Mike Brown doesn't have to share the attendance money, so the more seats sold, that is real money, not estimated hypothetical net worth.  Look at all the franchises that have folded or moved in sports over poor attendance.

So Fan Attendance does mean a lot to these sports franchises. The big cities don't really have to worry about low attendance.  The smaller cities like Cincinnati.  Look for the Rays to move out of St Petersburg to the mainland of Tampa because they can't afford the low attendance in St Pete.  If attendance means nothing, the Reds would not have fired everybody.  They have not brought in a new manager and a whole new coaching staff for no reason.  Last Place, Poor Attendance and Low TV Ratings are Killing the Cincinnati Reds franchise. They have milked the Pete Rose events for every last drop and the cow is dry.  

The good news is the Reds are making changes.  Bell looks like a good hire and I think even Buddy Bell is on Reds Front Office staff. Joe Morgan and Barry Larkin are on Reds staff. These are indeed baseball people that could turn this last place franchise around. Even Lou Piniella is on staff.  Reds could win more which would make attendance rise and TV ratings go up, and as Yogi Berra said, that is money which is as good as cash. 

Fan attendance makes up a small portion of the money they make as noted in my post (18%). And yes, you're correct about the surrounding areas suffering because of this, but that is not something that is relatable with them sharing their figures. But it most certainly suffers, just don't know how much.

And the TV ratings actually grew last year. The Reds ranked 8th in regional TV ratings. So there's fans watching, but just not from the park. 

[kevin]

(12-13-2018, 11:19 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Fan attendance makes up a small portion of the money they make as noted in my post (18%). And yes, you're correct about the surrounding areas suffering because of this, but that is not something that is relatable with them sharing their figures. But it most certainly suffers, just don't know how much.

And the TV ratings actually grew last year. The Reds ranked 8th in regional TV ratings. So there's fans watching, but just not from the park. 

Then I tell you the TV ratings have been doctored.  There is no way the small market last place Reds are # 8 in baseball in TV ratings.  I can guarantee you Reds are not # 8 in TV in major league baseball.   There is no way.  You can take the newspaper, turn it upside down, and instead of Reds at bottom they will be at top, but that doesn't make it so.  There are just too many big city franchises of more viewers and too many teams playing better ball than last place Reds.  Your source on TV ratings is in error. There is no way Reds are # 8 in TV in baseball, no way. No possible way.

[Hoofhearted]

(12-13-2018, 11:46 AM)kevin Wrote: Then I tell you the TV ratings have been doctored.  There is no way the small market last place Reds are # 8 in baseball in TV ratings.  I can guarantee you Reds are not # 8 in TV in major league baseball.   There is no way.  You can take the newspaper, turn it upside down, and instead of Reds at bottom they will be at top, but that doesn't make it so.  There are just too many big city franchises of more viewers and too many teams playing better ball than last place Reds.  Your source on TV ratings is in error. There is no way Reds are # 8 in TV in baseball, no way. No possible way.

Why would they want to do that tho? If they're going to doctor it, why 8th? 

[kevin]

F Forbes. I guarantee you not 1 of the 30 major league baseball owners would ever say Attendance Means Very Little. Not One. You show me one owner that says this. I guarantee you won't find one.

[Hoofhearted]

(12-20-2018, 10:34 AM)kevin Wrote: F Forbes.  I guarantee you not 1 of the 30 major league baseball owners would ever say Attendance Means Very Little.  Not One.  You show me one owner that says this.  I guarantee you won't find one.

Just like I would never say my wife looks ugly in a certain dress. It's suicide. It doesn't make sense. But it doesn't mean we can't draw certain conclusions with the data given, even if it's not entirely true (I did state very little, not nothing at all).

[samhain]

Teams might profit without consistently good attendance, but they're still not maximizing profits. Allowing fan interest to dissolve for a long period of time is crap business, period. What person goes into any business without the goal of making the most possible money in mind? Have you ever heard a good businessman say they were satisfied with their profits and that there was no need to try and get more?

If a team is allowed to stagnate as the Reds have and the ownership remains content, they're throwing away money.

[Hoofhearted]

(12-22-2018, 05:33 AM)samhain Wrote: Teams might profit without consistently good attendance, but they're still not maximizing profits. Allowing fan interest to dissolve for a long period of time is crap business, period. What person goes into any business without the goal of making the most possible money in mind? Have you ever heard a good businessman say they were satisfied with their profits and that there was no need to try and get more?

If a team is allowed to stagnate as the Reds have and the ownership remains content, they're throwing away money.

I’m not arguing that. I’m saying it’s something that’s not going to make the ship crash into the ocean. For those that hold out going to the game, it just doesn’t hit them as hard as we’d like to imagine. Not like it used to.

[SunsetBengal]

(12-13-2018, 11:46 AM)kevin Wrote: Then I tell you the TV ratings have been doctored.  There is no way the small market last place Reds are # 8 in baseball in TV ratings.  I can guarantee you Reds are not # 8 in TV in major league baseball.   There is no way.  You can take the newspaper, turn it upside down, and instead of Reds at bottom they will be at top, but that doesn't make it so.  There are just too many big city franchises of more viewers and too many teams playing better ball than last place Reds.  Your source on TV ratings is in error. There is no way Reds are # 8 in TV in baseball, no way. No possible way.

The numbers aren't doctored.  I read the article, and was quickly able to figure out that the numbers are based on what percentage of homes in that particular market are watching, rather than total number of people watching.  For example, market A could have 100 tvs, and if 6 are watching baseball, that's a 6% market share.  Then you take market B, with 500 tvs, and 25 of them are watching baseball, that's a 5% market share.