Pick and choose your spots
The problem with having a 10-game homespan, like the one the A’s are on now, is that the casual fan has too many choices of games to attend. A fan might go to tonight’s game for the fireworks, with Dan Straily’s debut thrown in as a bonus. The same fan might go to one of two Wednesday day games to get $2 tickets in the warm sunshine. Or maybe a weekend game’s better because weekdays create scheduling conflicts, or because of the kid-oriented promotions on Saturday and Sunday.
It’s that range of choice that probably accounts somewhat for the somewhat disappointing turnout so far this homestand.
- Monday: 12,564
- Tuesday: 15,836
- Wednesday: 18,161
- Thursday: 10,823
Tonight’s attendance could surpass 30,000 because of fireworks night. Quantities of 2 or more tickets are tough to find except in some of the less desirable locations of each seating tier. There have been three Fireworks Fridays this season, and as you would expect, the attendance for all three has been much better than average.
- Game 21 vs. Yankees: 33,559
- Game 28 vs. Padres: 24,528
- Game 38 vs. Red Sox (July 3): 35,067
Just from looking at crowds over the years, fireworks can bring out an extra 10,000 fans. It also helps that two of the games were scheduled against the beasts of the east, who can be counted upon to bring thousands of fans along with them. Funny that the A’s and Rays, teams with historically some of the worst turnout over the last decade, are the two teams most dependent on other team’s fans to bolster attendance. The Giants provide three guaranteed sellouts, with easily half the house dressed in orange and black. The Yankees are good for 10-12k per date, whereas the Red Sox are worth 7-8k. Add that up and it’s around 123,000 visiting fan attendees from just those three teams. That translates to 7% of overall home attendance during recent years.. The Giants get periodic invasions of Dodger fans, but those seats would sell regardless of the opponent.
Now Monte Poole’s Thursday column raises the “quandary” of fans who hate ownership so much as to not attend games against their better instinct of showing up to support the resurgent A’s. Everyone who goes or doesn’t go has every right to express their preference. But to eternally prosecute ownership, the front office, anyone involved with the team for every little decision (or non-decision) is seriously becoming tiresome. First it was that Lew Wolff, John Fisher, and Billy Beane have conspired to keep the fans away by intentionally fielding awful teams or by trading away talent. Now that the team has been hot, it’s either that ownership is seething that the wins work against their nefarious plan or the team’s success thoroughly discounts any arguments about the Oakland fanbase, or even more absurdly, the stadium. Look at the first four games of attendance and tell me that it’s working. Beane’s moves are being microexamined as well, with the lack of a deadline trade “proving” that the team is surrendering. Then there was this today, following the Kurt Suzuki trade:
Best of luck to Zuk, a tough guy who always gave 100%.But this salary dump is something of a white flag for the 2012 season.
— Rick Tittle (@RickTittle) August 3, 2012
Apparently the detractors are looking for any excuse to pile on. Can’t give credit, oh no. Poole himself can only rise to giving the backhanded compliment “making an effort”.
Right. It doesn’t matter that the team stacks one promotion on top of another to bring in fans. That it has a weekend dedicated to Moneyball and the Streak coming up. That inserting dynamic pricing deals on tickets for the last two homestands have done a bang-up job of bringing in fans (check the field and plaza levels for the on-sale sections for proof). I even got into a debate on Twitter with a fan who drove up to the Coli on Wednesday and was angry that the A’s ran out of $2 tickets – that were sold out days if not weeks in advance. Really? You can’t plan for that?
That points to the biggest problem that the A’s and the A’s fanbase face, and they face it together. Both ownership and the fans have taken the A’s – the team, the brand, the fact that it’s one of thirty MLB franchises – for granted. Even during the Moneyball era (1999-2006), the A’s had all of these same promotions and attendance was about 500k per year (6,000 per game) better. And no, the much larger Coli back then was nowhere close to selling out, except for those games where the visiting team’s fans took up the slack. The A’s can count on the 8-10k of season ticket holders to provide some revenue while at the same time showing Bud Selig that the hardcore fanbase is too small to be sustainable. For those on the fringe like me or casual fans, there’s always a plentiful supply of tickets so that during a six or ten-game homestand, we might be able to go once or twice and feel good about ourselves.
That’s not good enough. While ownership shrugs its shoulders, Oakland partisans and East Bay supporters thump their chests about how they’ll support the team “when it’s good, and ownership respects Oakland, the fanbase, and stadium” – and also keeps ticket prices low. You can’t have all of that and be taken seriously. This is Major League Baseball. It is the upper echelon of this great sport. Constantly, the whiners and whingers seems to be conveniently unaware of that fact. The average payroll is $100 million, a number the A’s would be hard-pressed to support at the current prices unless they hit 3 million fans. That’s how far behind we are compared to the rest of the league. And we, collectively, don’t care. It’s better to get a few shots in at the enemy.
I don’t know how the season’s gonna end. Maybe the A’s will make the postseason, maybe they won’t. Progress will be measured in part by the rise in season ticket sales. If subscriptions don’t grow it’ll tell me two things: that A’s ownership isn’t trying hard enough (hard to believe from the calls I’ve gotten from ticket services), and that the holdouts are hoisting themselves on their own petard. It would prove to me that both sides are fine with the status quo: low, non-major league prices, low season ticket rolls, and “disenfranchised” fans complaining yet again about being alienated. At some point, it comes down to how much you and I value this team as it’s currently formulated, the A’s legacy, and optimism about the future. It also matters how much we care about having a MLB franchise here. If that’s not enough, then well, the petard is waiting in the form of an empty Coliseum and no future ballpark. Though I’m sure there’ll be plenty of recriminations for that too.
@pjk: maybe this is what Selig meant when he said they still have many questions for both sides …
What I want to know is if Oakland blind sided Selig with HT.
..
They said were coming out to check both cities where they are at. They get to Oakland and say so tell us your plan on this Coliseum City. Oakland pulls out stuff for HT and say this really is our best site. But we need a year to get some information and then do the EIR. So can you please give us some time before making any decisons because we know this is a home run.
…
First VC then CC now HT? What’s next? are they really just trying to delay it till a Stadium falls in there laps?
@Mike: some blindside. We have a site but we need more time. That’s no offer, it’s a wisp of something … Sounds like Coliseum city.
Side note: All of a sudden there is a second “Mike” so I’ll try to keep logged in, so My thoughts are not getting confused with the new one. Though I know its bound to happen. The first and fourth Mike comments are mine. Maybe I should just post as like eb or someone and all of a sudden it will look like he prefers San Jose. I kid I kid
@Baynativeguy my fear is if Selig is just looking for excuses for not making a decision on it. He can just say now. Well this is new let’s give them time to see what they can come up with. Then we just end up with more waiting and waiting.
@ the “Mike” who responded to me: we’ll, I was already predicting more waiting anyhow just because we’ve waited so long already, what three more years?
ML. when are we going to get an article about the new developments? being the Blue ribbon panel mettings in both san jose and oakland??? seams like both cities making their last plee to MLB before a final decision. also seams pretty newsworthy for something on this site. not sure if someone has already mentioned this or not, but i cant wait to hear your take on it.
“Maybe I should just post as like eb or someone and all of a sudden it will look like he prefers San Jose. I kid I kid”
Them’s fightin words
PJK writes “If MLB was never going to even consider dumping the t rights, as some have claimed, why did the committee waste its time meeting with San Jose?”
Bingo! As has been written by you, me and others……..if TR was solid as a rock then why visit with SJ? Why even let it go on this long, why not have told the A’s long ago “no to SJ” and forced them to work with Oakland (or move) and get this issue settled? Why even speak publicly about the A’s and Giants negotiating a settlement? If TR is a brick wall then where is the sense in any of those actions by MLB?
Nothing has changed because MLB visited with both cities. MLB baseball would be foolish to not hear proposals from both cities (even if they are not viable proposals from either). If Fremont or Pleasanton or anyone else in the Bay Area wanted to land the A’s, MLB would be foolish not to hear them out too. Also, MLB would be foolish not to publicly show they are giving both parties a fair chance. There is a PR side to this process too. If MLB were to give a blatant middle finger to Oakland, they risk alienating some fans/potential fans. But if they can say “we heard everyone, gave their ideas ad nauseum consideration and proposal X was the better proposal”, it would give MLB plenty of room for PR cover.
Lastly, as others have mentioned, Oakland just pushed HT. Wasn’t it VC a while back? Wasn’t it Coliseum parking lot a while back? Wasn’t it CC just recently?…..how can any serious thinking person believe a group of businessmen would see that (among many other things) and say “that is the deal for us. Lets write that half billion dollar check right now!”. I’m sure MLB also doesn’t care that the Raiders are knocking on the same door MLB is to get their own stadium….and MLB is arguably 2nd (or even 3rd in lone behind the W’s). Hey, if MLB has decided to not be serious about having the A’s in a new stadium in a 3 years and is open to a long, problem laden, highly tentative process in Oakland then the needle has swung back to Oakland. Otherwise this story is another demonstration of failing journalism.Journalism that appears incapable or unwilling to report the obvious of: Oakland remains unprepared, indecisive, steeped in malfunctioning politics and up to their ears in stadium issues (Raiders, A’s, W’s). But hey! never mind that, MLB just met with Oakland officials. Obviously the needle just swung in Oakland’s favor. Wow, just wow.
Well I can think of one reason to string SJ along… it keeps Oakland in the game. Without the tangible threat of San Jose out there, Oakland has little incentive to get a new park plan rolling. Which as we’ve seen today has resulted from the continuing threat. Whether Oakland can actually execute is another less likely matter, but they would not have even gone this far without the lingering SJ threat.
it is beginning to look like Sacto situation now. Stern helped KJ put together a last minute deal. I am convinced Selig and the g’s are helping Oakland by stringing this along until the clueless mayor of oakland can figure something out. Oakland is using Don Knauss like KJ used Ron Burkle. KJ needed a guy with money. The clueless mayor of oakland has her guy now.
@daniel and how did that work out for Sacramento again?
Dan/Daniel, I see the concept of pro sports leagues/owners pitting city against city to gain a preferred and/or improved deal. That for sure happens. However considering the following for the A’s situation:
1) After this many years and all but no movement in Oakland (with the pitch now HT, literally Oakland’s site — never mind their plan — is all but at square one), MLB has been an unmitigated failure in gaining leverage. Where was, at minimum, the public hinting to control the situation/plan? MLB has been virtually mum with little to no “unnamed sources” saying anything to coax the situation toward a leveraged situation. Almost inconceivable to look for leverage with Pols without public coaxing.
2) Very arguably MLB has made the leverage situation worse and that should have been apparent many, many months ago. In effect MLB has done zilch to keep the group of Pols/city of Oakland from becoming hostile toward MLB’s product (the A’s). Now the removal of LW/JF is a distinct possibility if an Oakland plan is to happen (the atmosphere is poisoned). Anyone think BS is heading toward or even planned for a removal of these guys from the A’s? Anyone think it is a good idea to make/allow two sides of a negotiation become very hostile to each other?
3) MLB must have missed the publicly known Raider issue while executing their leverage plan. The Raiders are knocking on the same door for a stadium and they likely are first in line in front of the A’s. It is good for leverage to have another party looking for the same thing from the same people in the same city (never mind the A’s may be in front of the line soon too)?
4) It is almost unarguable to think LW is not a good “Lodge” member. Yet MLB’s plan for leverage called for LW/A’s ownership to not be on board with the leverage plan? Correct me if I am wrong but HT has been deemed unequivocally and unambiguously dead/unworkable by LW. Now this good “lodge” member will need to be made out to be a liar and/or incompetent. MLB will have to, in effect, say HT is the best site and LW is just wrong…. AND tell LW to get out his half billion checkbook or oust him from the A’s.
What a fair reading of the situation says is either MLB has executed a plan of leverage almost laughably incompetently or there was no plan of leveraging Oakland by using SJ at all (other than the inherent leverage of any single entity to multiparty negotiation). IMHO there was no plan and MLB cannot realistically believe that Oakland has a viable plan and ability to make it happen. If they do then I am inclined to believe MLB did have a leverage plan and they simply are bumblers who executed it laughably bad.
Oops I did not realize I was the second “Mike”. I was trying to point out that trying to over turn a Baseball’s anti trust exemption would be costly and not likely to happen thru the court systems.
In 1998, Congress passed the Curt Flood Act, which partially repealed the antitrust exemption to give the Players Association the same rights as the unions in the other major sports. Congress specifically stated that the exemption was still intact with respect to relocation, the reserve clause, the minor leagues, and broadcasting contracts. This Act also had the effect of writing the antitrust exemption into law, ensuring that a full repeal will only come from Congress, and not the Supreme Court
If Lew Wolf and Co and SJ cant reach an agreement with the Giants/MLB allowing the A’s to relocate than Congress would have to get involved revoking MLBs exemption on franchise movement.
Oops I did not realize I was the second Mike. I was trying to point out that it would be hard to overturn baseballs AT lawsuit thru normal court channels.
In 1998, Congress passed the Curt Flood Act, which partially repealed the antitrust exemption to give the Players Association the same rights as the unions in the other major sports. Congress specifically stated that the exemption was still intact with respect to relocation, the reserve clause, the minor leagues, and broadcasting contracts. This Act also had the effect of writing the antitrust exemption into law, ensuring that a full repeal will only come from Congress, and not the Supreme Court