Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Jeremy Lin's Game-Winner Was Incredible, Worth Remembering

Attendance and the Rays

[Note by R.J. Anderson, 03/09/09 4:29 PM EDT ] Bumped to the front page.

I just saw this on MLBTR and it caught my interest.  According to Peter Gammons:

Major League Baseball has warned club business people that attendance is expected to be down 17-20 percent in 2009, and it could be worse, especially with franchises like the Padres, Blue Jays, Tigers, Indians, Astros, Rockies and others that could be seriously impacted by the recession.

Going into this season, the Rays have been counting on getting a significant bump in attendance figures this year in order to cover their expanding payroll.  Last year was the second highest attendance figure (22,370 people per game) the Rays have ever had outside of their inaugural season (30,942 per game).  The question, though, is how well the Rays are going to draw this year.

Star-divide

 

At the end of last season, I remember hearing it thrown about that with the newfound competitiveness of the team, the 2009 Rays could potentially reach and/or exceed their attendance figures from their inaugural year.  At the time, it certainly seemed plausible and that sort of an attendance spike would certainly help the case for building a new stadium.  However, after reading that info by Gammons, I can't help but wonder how much the recession could end up hurting the Rays' attendance figures this year.  I'm not from the Tampa region and so I have no idea how large an impact the recession has had in the area, but if the recession does end up significantly impacting the Rays' attendance figures, it makes me worried that nay-sayers will cite that as evidence that the Tampa region is a horrible baseball market, no new stadium should be built, and the team should think about moving.

I decided to make a nifty chart to take a look at what the attendance numbers could look like.  On the left are the "perfect world" attendance per game numbers, with a range of potential increases listed from about 10-50%.  The different "hit" columns are what attendance would look like if that "perfect world" attendance figure ending up suffering as a result of the recession (with percent decreases ranging from 5-20%).  If it's not clear, let me know in the comments and I'll try and clarify.

2009 attendance % increase from 2008 5% hit 10% hit 15% hit 17% hit 20% hit
25000 11.8% 23750 22500 21250 20750 20000
27000 20.7% 25650 24300 22950 22410 21600
29000 29.6% 27550 26100 24650 24070 23200
31000 38.6% 29450 27900 26350 25730 24800
33000 47.5% 31350 29700 28050 27390 26400

I've italicized the 31000 attendance number because that's basically how the Rays performed in their innaugural year.  So if the Rays expected themselves to draw an average of 31000 fans per game this season and what Gammons says is right, the actual attendance for the Rays could be more like 25K-26K per game.  That'd only be around a 10% increase from the previous year, so would that be enough to keep the nay-sayers at bay?  Would that be enough to help Friendman and Co. cover the large increase in payroll?  I can't say I have answers to these questions, but I find it interesting to ponder.

This post was written by a member of the DRaysBay community and does not necessarily express the views or opinions of DRaysBay staff.

Comment 154 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Good post

This is one of my concerns about next year. No matter what happens with attendance you can almost guarantee that NESN2 ESPN will figure out a way to belittle the locals. It sucks that the team’s first taste of success coencides with the worst economy in a number of years. I don’t think we have to worry about moving any time soon, though, as it seems the (still in) Oakland A’s and maybe even Royals might move before us.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:26 PM EDT reply actions  

Locals doing a good job belittling themselves:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101320870

I think that they’ll show up for the first month or two of the season," Hogan said, but if the team fades, they can expect dismal attendance. On top of that, Hogan adds, a visit to the stadium isn’t exactly a treat. "To me, it’s the worst place to watch a game in the entire league — and I’ve been to several stadiums.

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Mar 9, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

You forgot one important part:
Wearing a Phillies cap was Lou Hogan, who lives just a few miles from where the Rays play their regular season games. Like a lot of locals, Hogan was skeptical about the Rays’ chances of drawing big crowds.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

ugh

I really hate the sports mentality in the area. I guess because of all the tyransplants everyone is just such a freaking front runner.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

But if they're "freaking front runner"(s), shouldn't they be on the Rays bandwagon?

I’m a SoCal transplant and have a good local team (Angels) to watch. And I like them, though their playoff successes over NY lately have lessened my good feelings.

I just don’t understand this perceived need for fans to change their allegiance when they relocate. Would folks here from Tampa become Yanks or Mets fans if moved to NY for some work reason or something? Ummm… doubt it. And there’s plenty of commenters here that aren’t in Tampa – why is that okay?

by nyyfaninlaaland on Mar 9, 2009 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Actually, yes; I would.

I would change my allegiance if I have to relocate for most places; I was about to take a job offer for a company in Miami a couple of weeks back and was preparing to become a fan of the Dolphins, Panthers and Heat.

Not the Marlins. I couldn’t talk myself into cheering for a fanbase that at it’s best, was still barely better than the Rays at their worst. That is a city that flat-out doesn’t care about baseball.

Is it a coincidence that the worst fanbase in MLB for the last 10 years has been whatever fanbase that has to root for the team Jeff Loria owns?

Check out my blog on (mostly ColdFusion, but some PHP) web development at kericr.wordpress.com

by kericr on Mar 9, 2009 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Meh

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 10, 2009 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions  

They are now.

Did you not see all the idiots with mohawks and cowbells in October? The issue is there aren’t just transplants that keep their teams (that’s fine, I live in DC and I’m not a Nats fan) there are all the BW jumpers in the area and because there is no loyalty to the area because of all the transplants it’s ok. In LA when you wear a Yanks hat and walk down the street what happens? What about a Sox or Phils hat in NY/NJ? That’s the issue. Since no one identifies with the region the ties to the teams are only strong for individuals except in the best of times.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions  

Actually, in southern NJ you get a bunch of Phils fans

But if you tried pulling it off in northern Jersey…not a good idea. And Sox hats are like a beacon saying, “I want to get verbally and physically abused!”

From what I’ve gathered, it’s not nearly the same way in Tampa, but maybe you just need to give it time. What have the fans had to be proud of up until this point? If we lock this core up for a number of years and continue to be competitive, you’ll see a bigger loyal fanbase develop.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 10, 2009 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions  

If you wear an Eagles or Packer jersey in Tampa it isn't that big of a deal.

I meant the NY/NJ part not the NJ/PA part, but I see where you’re coming from.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 9:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

I've never been bothered wearing Rays gear in NYC

other than in Yankee Stadium. I got a few dirty looks last year for the first time though.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 10, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Since public transport is non-existent

I think the recent decline in gas prices may help normalize some of the losses we’d have felt by inducing more people to cross the bridge. Of course, that’s assuming rational economic actors, of which we have seen few lately.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 4:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Hasn't the Tampa area been hit particularly hard in this economy?

I know FL is up there in bankruptcies and I just assume that the lasrge retired poplation takes this pretty hard as well. I assumed the economy in Tampa was pretty bad compared to most other big league cities.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not really. It certainly hasn't been great, but...

A large amount of this area’s economy is directly tied to the government. Retries get money directly from the government. We have a large amount of defense contractors in this area. The medical manufacturing base is mostly supported by Medicare/Medicaid.

On the down side, almost 35% of office tenants in the Tampa Bay area are financial services firms, so those are certainly hurting.

I think the Rays should give out canned goods and ammunition to get more people out to the park.

by Top Gun Numba 1 on Mar 9, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Tampa Bay unemployment rate is at 9.8%; higher then both state and national averages.

Realistically, it’s probably worse than it should be.

Check out my blog on (mostly ColdFusion, but some PHP) web development at kericr.wordpress.com

by kericr on Mar 9, 2009 11:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nice

Nice. I thought about doing something very similar to this the last time this discussion came up.

I’m hoping for a 10-15% increase, which I don’t think anyone can reasonably complain about if the rest of the league as a whole is down 5-10%.

Next step would be to project the attendance of the teams expected to drop. If I remember correctly, the Rays could pass anywhere from three to six teams in average attendance depending on size of the Rays increase vs. the expected stagnancy or drop of teams like the Reds, Padres, etc.

Impact on payroll? I would hope Friedman and Co. have already planned with the economic uncertainty in mind.

by RATW on Mar 9, 2009 4:33 PM EDT reply actions  

Those numbers:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance?sort=home_avg&year=2008&seasonType=2

Going by %, I would guess we might be able to pass Minnesota, Toronto, San Diego, and maybe Houston. Assuming the latter two fanbases do react quickly to a failing season.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 4:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

At some point, failure finds its way to those who deserve it.

Also, the honeymoon with the Nationals and their new park is potentially over, so they may slide as well.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

It was over last July

At least in terms of actual attendance

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Beautiful.

Atlanta is likely safe and Cleveland will be better. Arizona can probably go either way.

That leaves us middle of the pack.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll take middle of the pack

That’d be pretty awesome, especially considering the franchise’s history with attendance.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Haha...that's just comically awful

Come to the game and get a whole section to yourself!

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Didn't even crack a million fans...

Didn’t even crack 700K….damn, that’s bad.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

I guess the only upside

Is that someone out there probably has a lot of Vladimir Guerrero autographs and foul baseballs.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

What honeymoon?

No one was at those games. I went to 5-10, and there was no one there. The whole section behind home of $500 seats was completely empty. The Nats stadium is recession proof, but I don’t know if it’s National-proof.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Heck, what area could love that franchise?

I doubt they’d do dramatically better in any other city.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Passing on Strasburg would be hilariously horrific.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/organizational-rankings-30


Yes, this is kind of kicking a group of men when he’s down, but it’s impossible to find an organization in worse shape than the Nats. They’re coming off a major league worst 102 loss season and their GM just resigned amidst a scandal over significant issues with their Dominican scouting operations. Rather than hiring a new general manager, the team president is just handling business himself while giving Asst. GM Mike Rizzo some increased authority without a promotion.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I saw that article

There’s definitely a reason they got an F rating. Talk about ineptitude…

If they pass on Stasburg, I can’t see why anyone would continue to root for them. I feel like that’d be the final straw for me. Oh, you guys don’t want to win actually?

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

That should turn around a lot in the enxt year.

This time next year they should have the best prospect in the game and at least one other top 25-50 prospect. If they make decent picks in the other rounds they could do themselves a lot of favors. A rotation built around Strasburg with a nucleus of Zimmerman, Dukes, Milledge, and Dunn (at first?) could be a pretty decent team.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

"should"

The trick is if they will or not. Hopefully they get a really solid new GM and take things off on the right foot.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

For the record, I hope they do

I’ve got a soft spot for teams that have sucked for so long (wonder why…). But just going by their record, it’s got to be really tough to be optimistic as a Nats fan.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

Especially if it's over a few million.

Considering they failed to sign Crow and signed Adam Dunn despite having a handful of capable outfielders.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 5:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

Imagine if they had signed Crow.

He’d likely crack the rotation at some point this year or next year at worst. All indications were that he could reasonably be expected to be a good 2/3 guy (especially in the NL). So they’d likely have both in their rotation in 2010 and have a legit shot at being very competetive with a few more decent signings/trades. Now they have to wait to see what they’ll get with the comp pick and lose a year of development.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't see any way they pass on Strasburg.

They’re not cheap, just incompetent. And if they hire someone like La Cava they’re in good shape going forward.

by Aaron Campeau on Mar 10, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

What really sickens me

is all local sports radio talks about are the Bucs.

WoW, we’ve re-signed our backup safety=BREAKING NEWS

by Raymondo on Mar 9, 2009 4:53 PM EDT reply actions  

It's the people they hire

I don’t understand why you never see ex-baseball guys doing general sports shows…can anyone name me five?

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

NFL does a much better job

of keeeping their sport front and center year round

by Raymondo on Mar 9, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think he meant in the large picture

I feel whenever I turn on ESPN, all I ever see is football or basketball. If it’s actually baseball season, I’ll see baseball too but there’s a preponderance of football on ESPN even during their offseason.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

All you see on ESPN is the NFL.

Hell they have NFL Live on everyday I think.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's on at like Midnight or 1 am

Before or after the N.B.A. show.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 6:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

Is it really?

Shows what I know, I don’t watch much 1 AM ESPN anymore though.

by R.J. Anderson on Mar 9, 2009 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just kidding.

You think they would talk about baseball during the off season?! You crazy.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Anyway, the only reason you haven't seen the NFL in the headlines of the Daily News is that A-Rod has been there

I think my dad said it has been something like 32 days straight that A-Rod has been a headline or the cover story for the Daily News. Absolutely ridiculous…

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 9, 2009 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

The NFL is terrible.

And it monopolizes the sports world. I really used to love it, but something has just completely turned me off of the game.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

I still follow the Bucs.

I just don’t really care that much. Maybe it’s all the personnel turnover or replay or commercials, but it just doesn’t do it for me anymore.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think for me the list goes something like this (no particular order)

1. The focus on gambling
2. The lack of concern for health and safety of the players
3. The lack of any real in-state rivalry in Florida
4. The hypocritical juxtaposition between the marketing of the violent aspects of the game, and treatment of off-field incidents of violence.
5. The DirecTV monopoly
6. The way fans get shafted by the neutral-site Super Bowl
7. The lack of guaranteed contracts, and the constant distractions it creates
8. Too much friction between head coaches and ownership
9. There is no real minor leagues, so teams have to root against their team for hope at the end of a bad season.
10. Most national analysts make Joe Buck and Tim McCarver look like geniuses.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

C'mon
1. The focus on gambling

If anything that is good. :)

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just not a fan of gambling

Just like IIRC you aren’t big on drinking. You aren’t going to convince me otherwise.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 5:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't drink.

Don’t care what other people do. I don’t bet on NFL much though, don’t follow it enough. Basketball is where I make most my money.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll do a friendly wager

Lat season the Rays reaching 80 wins netted me 2 cases of imported beer. And I’ll play dollar skins sometimes when I golf. I just never got down with the idea of putting hundreds of dollars on sometihng I couldn’t control.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

I just do small bets and build up.

My biggest one was the Rays winning the AL, I put 5 down and got 250 in return.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd agree with all that except gambling.

I hate how the players are treated in the league. I think my distatse began when the Roger Goodell era began. The No Fun League to the extreme along with the constant media circus about non-football stories.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

BUT T.O.! AND PACMAN!

I love how steroids is not a problem in the N.F.L.

Swav or Die.

by SRQman on Mar 9, 2009 5:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Of course it isn't

If it was, then Playmakers would have explored it in-depth in season two.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

Your list is strong, but If I may add:

11. The complete worthlessness of the Pro Bowl from a fan’s standpoint
12. The NFL’s emphasis on preventing players from marketing themselves
13. NFL ‘parity’ in short, has a pretty strong correlation to strength-of-schedule
14. The absolutely unimaginative play-calling, both on the offensive and defensive sides of the ball
15. Pass Interference
16. Pass Interference
17. Pass Interference

Check out my blog on (mostly ColdFusion, but some PHP) web development at kericr.wordpress.com

by kericr on Mar 9, 2009 6:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

The premise

I would say that given the situation, any increase is better than nothing but given the gaudy expectations that the ownership and management group have brought out, I would say the answer is no. It will be interesting to see if they amend their expectations down the road.

Joe

by joedobr on Mar 9, 2009 5:18 PM EDT reply actions  

Expectations

The aggressive marketing in trying to get more season ticket packages out there. The fact that Stu has come across like he increased payroll to what I think he perceives as over his personal threshold. It will be interesting if they can get more attendance (which I think they will), yet not be satisfied with the amount of percentage increase.

Joe

by joedobr on Mar 9, 2009 5:25 PM EDT reply actions  

I think they do a good job of tailoring their comments to the needs of the moment

Trying to get a stadium – ’We’ll never sell enough tickets here’
Playoffs sell out – ‘Of course they would’
Season Tix go on sale – ’We’re very pleased with renewals’
Reporter asks if they’d go after anyone else – ’We’re all maxed out…maybe that could change, hint, hint’

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 9, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

Pidgeonholing

While one would call call it spinning, the other would call it mincing. God forbid they have a bad season! I hope they don’t.

Joe

by joedobr on Mar 9, 2009 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Rays actually may get hurt less than many other teams

I suspect that the Rays generally have a lower level of reliance on purchases of corporate box seats than most other teams, and that’s probably going to drop at a greater rate than season tickets in general.

I’d bet my left arm that the Rays had more physical butts in seats last year than either the Orioles or the Nationals.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 9, 2009 5:27 PM EDT reply actions  

Having gone to a fair number of games at all three stadiums last year.

Your right. It was awful in Baltimore and Washington. I went to the second game of the year in BAL last year and sat behind home for 20 bucks.

Good point about the corporate reliance I hadn’t even thought of that.

by rglass44 on Mar 9, 2009 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

My .02 cents

I think we will draw between 29 and 30.

I work at a financial services firm in Tampa, and we’ve been hit hard. No question about that. I just don’t think it will impact the Rays that much (I can’t speak about the private boxes). The layoffs haven’t been that great around here, and I’d fully expect those people to at least go to the number of games that they went to last year.

I may be a bit biased, but I think all we can do is go up. I go to maybe 50-60 games a year and it is really the same people every game for the most part. We have a solid foundation, maybe not great on numbers, but they show up. Those people are going to go to the games this year regardless unless the world ends. For example one of my friends actually did get laid off yet he fronted the money for a whole bunch of tickets during the first month of the season. He isn’t going to miss it.

So realistically we just need fans that didn’t go to games to now go to a couple games. That shouldn’t be that hard. No matter what Obama says this isn’t the great depression. Obviously you’ve gotten hammered if you were in the market, but with no inflation and declining gas prices a couple groups of people arguably are better off now than what they were before. Even in this sucky economy we should get the new fans out to a few extra games this year. But this brings up another point…

The Bucs and Bolts. They suck. The city is getting sick of them. The Rays buzz far eclipses both teams. People are really sick of the Bucs. Many cars around town have peeled off their Bucs sticker and put a Rays one on. People were not renewing season tickets last year and it has really picked up this year. People aren’t even planning on going to their games. There are tons of empty seats at Bolts game. Heck the cost of 1 Bucs game is equal to going to how many Rays games? 3 or 4? That money is going to be diverted somewhere. I’m sure some people we stuff it under their mattress, but many people are going to spend it on the Rays.

In the end the recession will hurt the Rays far less than many other teams. Our attendance will surely increase, but will be less than if we were in a boom. The key is the difference between our attendance next year and what would have been in a boom will have a far smaller spread than the majority of teams. In comparison it just won’t impact us that much.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 8:52 AM EDT reply actions  

I hope that's true, but I don't know

It’s easy to say now that people will keep going to games even if they’re laid off, but what about a couple months from now if they still haven’t found a new job? A 9.8% unemployment rate like they’re talking about above strikes me as rather huge and rather daunting.

Also, I might argue that the group of people you’re talking about that are better off now than before the recession is pretty dang small. True, some people are probably better off, but I can’t say I’ve met or heard about any of them. But that’s just me…I don’t claim that my group of friends is a representative sample or anything.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 10, 2009 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

I didn't say my friends were a representative sample

I said with no inflation and a drastic decrease of gas prices many Americans have more money today to spend than 8 months ago. The uptick in unemployment from 8 months ago to today isn’t large enough to truly impact attendance. Essentially if you aren’t in the market you haven’t really felt any pain given you aren’t one of the few that have been laid off.

The entire what 18-35 age bracket barely dables in the market outside of say work 401k’s and an occassional IRA.

I highly doubt a 29 year old is going to not go to baseball games because his 401k has taken a hit especially when he is probably saving 50 bucks a week on gas compared to baseball season last year.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not true

That just isn’t true. Ever heard of consumer confidence?

If you have a family and a house/mortgage you need thousands of dollars to insulate your self from going deeply under if you lose your job. This doesn’t even include those that have had spouses laid off. The toll the unemployment figures take are much greater than the 8% who are affected. There is the threat of layoffs, decreased spending, etc. that you have to deal with. In a down economy people have a higher propensity to save because they have less confidence in their income in the future.

You (or your peers) are seemingly like me and mine: young, well-educated, well-paid, single, unattatched, etc. If I get laid off, all I need is rent (and that’s only if I’m worried about letting my roommates down) and a bit of money for food. I don’t have a family or anything else to worry about. I could move to Africa if I needed to for work. My worries about the economic climate are essentially limited to my current spending.

This doesn’t even take into account the fact that many people who had been living well beyond their means by borrowing are forced to not only quit borrowing, but either repay or attempt to repay. This is another drain on consumer spending.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is the problem with this thread..nearly every type of response I can give can be construed as political

My opinion isn’t want so I’ll try to keep it brief.

Firstly I don’t want to make it seem like I don’t think the recession will impact us or the Rays. I said that the difference between what will happen and what would have happened given a normal economic climate will be smaller for the Rays than other teams.

I understand there is far more that goes into it than that group of people having 500 dollars a week after fixed costs compared to 450 dollars a week last year.

The key is the demographics that go to Rays games and the demographics of the TB Area.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't understand the uproar-now redacted-

wasn’t half of the Three Cheers for China thread political (not the original post itself)? Statements about protectionism, embargo’s, and ‘thinly veiled’ criticisms of former presidents and their views on our enemies being able to ‘cut heads off at a whim’? I do appreciate the non-political wishes of this site, but this was blown way out of proportion.

Kaz/Shields/Garza/Sonny/Price/Davis/Hellickson-necessitate a drool cup or a 7 man rotation

by CubFanRaysaddict on Mar 10, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

I never really went there, so I don't know.

Agreed it was blown out of proportion that’s why it was hidden. I may have been overzealous in trying to keep the discussion on topic. Oh well, you live and you learn.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 1:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

thanks for the clarification, the one below too

as a recent grad w/ a poly sci/history degree just about anything looks like politics to me, I’m sure others on the site with similar backgrounds agree, and thank you guys again for trying to keep this site from being political, i’m more worried about Garza right now anyway lol

Kaz/Shields/Garza/Sonny/Price/Davis/Hellickson-necessitate a drool cup or a 7 man rotation

by CubFanRaysaddict on Mar 10, 2009 1:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just looked at the thread and I did comment on it.

More economics than politics, but it was fairly political. I guess it just seems like trade/economic discussion is fairly legitimate (because people usually can discuss it reasonably) whereas discussions involving political figures/parties is the realm of the dramatic, the name-cqalling, and the incindiary.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

This isn't polarizingly politcal which is what we want to avoid.

It is an economic discussion.

The demographic that goes to Rays games (largely I’d guess) are three groups: families, retirees, young people (college/YoPros).

Two of those groups are hit very hard by this economy. One isn’t.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

I didn't mean my last comment to be an attack at what you said or anything...sorry if you read it that way

I was just clarifying that in my group of friends, I know a lot of people that are getting hit by this. I’m also a graduating senior at a rather expensive liberal arts college, so I know a lot of people that have had to scrape to pay for tuition and will have lots of debts upon graduating…so like I said, my friends are not representative. I didn’t mean that as an attack on your statement…sorry ’bout that.

I just know that I was really hoping to use senior week to go down to FL and see a bunch of games, but I don’t think it’s going to happen at this point. You’re quite possibly right about the Tampa area…not living there and never having been to a game at the Trop (sad face…), I don’t know what it’s like there. Like rglass said, though, there are a lot of variables out there….it’s just really tough to say.

"I never threw an illegal pitch. The trouble is, once in a while I toss one that ain't never been seen by this generation." - Satchel Paige

by Steve Slowinski on Mar 10, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Your situation is unique though, and it doesn’t really impact attendance that much. The key with attendance is getting the people here to go. I understand vacations and trips in general are going to decline. The question in terms of attendance is whether the people that live around here with a fairly short drive, able to buy extremely cheap tickets, and able to park very cheap will go to the games. The cost of going to one game for an individual living in the TB area is quite small. It is almost no different than going out to see a movie. It is like we’ve been going to see a cheap crappy movie for years and now finally Braveheart came out. Sure it costs a couple extra real dollars, but are we really not going to see Braveheart just because the cost is slightly more? For you it is far different.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's all in perceptions

I’d really like to see some of our posters with families to support chime in on this thread.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

Exactly.

Despite the economy I will still go to between 20-50 MLB/MILB games this year (depending on work/GF schedule), even though very few will there be a team I care about. That’s because I have disposable income and no responsibility (or self discipline for that matter) coupled with a very high propensity to spend money on baseball. The economy will have little impact on my trips to the ballpark (unless I can’t find work which is unlikely given my location, skillset, and willingness to do pretty much anything). Others have different priorities because of additional responsibilies or less finacial freedom. I recognize that I am fairly lucky as far as this discussion goes and am in the minority. Most people are affected a bit differently.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 2:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

It all depends on fans' perceptions...

Consumers are going to look for outlets for entertainment, for rest and relaxation, regardless of their personal economic condition. So, if the fans perceive going to a baseball game as a cheaper version of going to a Bucs game, then they’re actually more likely to do that. For instance, my family of all Colts fans have been going to every Colts-Jags game for the last four years, but with more constrict budgets this year, it looks like I might be able to convince them to make it a Rays game this summer instead.

So, it all depends on whether fans perceive baseball as an inferior good to football or all other alternatives for entertainment. Inferior goods are booming right now. Massage parlors are taking all the money that formerly went to out-of-town vacations. Sectors – the producers of the so-called inferior goods – are actually doing quite well right now. It’s just not the kind of infotainment that 24 hr news networks like to cover (go NPR!).

B Rad the Ray Fan

by BWoodrum on Mar 10, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think that's a low estimate

I think we’ll draw more than that, but a lot of the expensive seats will still be empty. I’d be willing to bet we have close to 25k just on season ticket averages. Most of the season tickets were purchased before the brunt of the current meltdown started, when the Rays were making the playoff push last year.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 10, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

“Obviously you’ve gotten hammered if you were in the market, but with no inflation and declining gas prices a couple groups of people arguably are better off now than what they were before.”

Very few. Even the people who are better off are still mostly worried about potentially losing their jobs if the economy doesn’t turn around in the next 6 – 12 months, which is part of why spending is down in general.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 10, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not to mention that people can't borrow.

Good luck getting a credit card or borrowing unless you are extremely well-qualified.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

How many people have really lost their credit cards?

And how many people with THAT bad of credit were actually going to Rays games? I doubt they made up that much of the crowd.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think you'd be surprised.

I can’t even sniff a decent credit cad right now, and I don’t even have bad credit (I just have none either way). I know my parents have lost cards they don’t use in the last 6 months (ones they had for certain benefits they rarely used), and they have excellent credit.

Whether or not it’s a big group, I wouldn’t doubt it’s at worst near as large as your group of people that are better off.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

Quite a few

Especially those with adjustable rates…who may have not LOST their cards per se, but have seen their ability to borrow effectively ended.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

How much do you spend going to games?

On average…not including drinks/food at the game or drinks/food after the game (I spend a fortune at Fergs)

Between the game and parking I averaged maybe $10 per game. There were plenty of free places to park. My $10 includes some really good seats I’ve paid for. However there are tons of cheap tickets outside every single game. I probably had 10 tickets given to me by scalpers for free. Now I don’t expect this to be the case with everyone (well nearly anyone) because with families and old folks far more planning has to go into it. They aren’t as likely to walk the extra block to save money or scalp a ticket to save money.

However given that no matter how you slice it the game is so cheap wouldn’t you predict that people would cut out other things in order to fit in the Rays? Cut out a movie? A night out to dinner to like chipotle?

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:22 PM EDT reply actions  

Chipotle stinks.

J/K sort of.

For most people in this area I think a Rays game is somewhat low on the priority list. The other issue is the fact that baseball is generally a family event, so it cost a bit more for a family to go.

by rglass44 on Mar 10, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd say the priority (in terms of entertainment) would be far higher.

I also disagree about it being a family event (for the Rays). How many groups where 1 to 2 incomes were bringing 4+ people to the game really sit in the cheap seats? If those folks were in more expensive seats they could downgrade. Typically in the cheaper seats you see people that support themselves and maybe 1 other person at the game. Of course there are tons of larger groups, but it isn’t like 1 friend is paying for all 10 friends.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well a few things (in reverse order)

1. It’s much easier to justify an expense like Chipotle. You have to eat anyways, and you’re only really adding $5 or less to your total expenses with a meal like that.
2. A movie is probably a closer fit, assuming you’re content to sit in the upper deck, but this doesn’t take into account the fact that the Rays charge more for premium games, while the only difference in movie pricing involves the time of day.
3. Most people with kids aren’t going to leave it to chance in the way you do. 7 year olds aren’t typically very reassured when you tell them ’It’s ok, if we don’t score, we go to Fergs’…Also, because of the historical illegality of scalping, I could even see where some would dub this behavior bad parenting (fairly or not).
4. It’s not uncommon at all for me to go to a game and not eat or drink a thing while I’m there. I also have no affinity for foam fingers, and don’t really want a baseball card with me on it. Again, I assume the spending equation will change when I have kids.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

As to #4

I’d say on average, for the games where my wife attends, my spending goes up at least 2.5X per game.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

I have no doubt about that

But what about other activities you do with your wife? I’d venture to say when you go out to dinner with her, go to a movie with her etc that your expenses also go up 2.5x. So in terms of cutting something out it would be proportional wouldn’t it?

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

During Baseball Season?

I believe I used the phrase ‘You knew this when you married me’ approximately 12 times.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

But in seriousness

I plan on selling a lot more of my tickets this year than last. Not so much because I can’t afford the tickets, but the ballpark spending. That, and after going to 85 games last year, I’m trying to have a more diverse entertainment budget, and maybe even get to sleep at regular hours on weekdays.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Also with regards to the 2,5 number

Honestly, I don’t do those types of things by myself. I have never been to a movie alone, and have only eaten alone at a non-fast food joint maybe a handful of times in my life. So I couldnt answer.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

By yourself I meant you are paying for just yourself (say you and a friend go)

Compared with going with your wife and being her slave and having to buy her snow caps, popcorn, and a large soda.

by matthan on Mar 10, 2009 2:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not so sure

Generally, I find there is more social pressure to have a beer/hot dog/etc. regardless of who I am with, than when I’m by myself. When I go alone, I don’t really have to explain what a cheap-skate I am.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

My biggest spending nights actually come when I go with buddies I haven't seen in a while

Despite the fact my wife induces me to spend, she tends to cut me off at 3-4 beers, whereas my friends from school are just getting warmed up at that number.

by GomesSweetGomes on Mar 10, 2009 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Most people don't just spend on tickets and parking

To a lot of people, going to a game just isn’t fun without refreshments.

Vogt early, Vogt often.

by Brickhaus on Mar 10, 2009 4:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

Correct

So instead of having 5 drinks have 4. Instead of drinking an expensive beer drink a cheaper one. Maybe have a couple cheaper drinks before the game than the more expensive ones during?

by matthan on Mar 11, 2009 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

You're discounting a large section of the local population

The economy has hit retired people quite hard. Sure, some people are on fixed incomes, pensions, social security, etc – but I’d imagine those people don’t attend a lot of games anyway.

There are a lot of retired people in Pinellas County (and the surrounding area) that were better off and likely had more discretionary income by way of investments. Those investments are worth a whole lot less these day…and that has cut out the discretionary income of a lot of people.

I think that’s going to hurt the Rays.

But – the increase in season ticket holders will certainly help out all around – especially on those Tuesday games no one attends. (it should also increase the number of tickets in the parking lot for those that do attend)

by TallMatt on Mar 10, 2009 2:43 PM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Founded in 2005, DRaysBay is home to, "Progressive statistical analysis and reasoned argument."

Please read our Community Guidelines.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Zobrist vs Pedroia vs Cano
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #31 Runoff

Recent FanPosts

Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospects #39
Small
Joe Maddon Town Hall meeting on the Ron and Ian show. Any ideas for questions I should ask?
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #37
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #35
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #34
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #33
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #32
Scaled_php_small
Rays Community Prospect #31

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

"RHP Brandon Gomes will be behind at the start of spring training after...
2 minor league signings with invitations to spring...
Jeff Bagwell, Fred McGriff, The Hall of Fame, and 400 Home Runs
ESPN Chat with Matt Moore
Danny Clyburn: 1974-2012
Joe Maddon Town Hall Contest
Hickey said as of now all of the starters -- Wade Davis, Jeff Niemann,...
White Sox sign Dan Johnson
Indians acquire Canzler
Justin Ruggiano to Elect Free Agency

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

DRB Fantasy Baseball

Friends of the Site

DRB Suggestion Box

Drb4_medium


Managers

Slowsky__1__small Steve Slowinski

Dad_small Jason Collette

Brad_small BWoodrum

Price_small Erik Hahmann

Analysts

Lob-city_design_small rglass44

Untitled_small EminenceFront

Small Mulva

Rutg_uakjmedjwh9ndzd4lkll_small Imperialism32

100_1952_small MrNegative1

Steak-with-crown_small CBJones

Whelk_small Whelk

Small PGP

Scaled_php_small mr. maniac

Tampa_theatre_small jcmitchell

Me_small John Gregg