In what may signify historically soft demand, MLB has finally removed lagging All Star Weekend ticket strips from public sale. The strips, which include admission to the Home Run Derby, All Star Game and other events, went on sale March 1st, however after more than two months, Chase Field had still not sold out baseball's midsummer classic.
MLB is now abandoning traditional strips in favor of less expensive, unbundled event sales, beginning May 16th. Diamondhacks believes this concession may be unprecedented in modern All Star Game history, however that has yet to be confirmed.
Developing.....
Showing posts with label Tickets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tickets. Show all posts
10 May 2011
28 March 2011
Threat Level: Sedona Red
Not that many around Phoenix noticed, in the media shadow cast by Salt River Fields, but the club rolled out a new single game pricing scheme for the regular season, dumping the familiar regular/premium "gasoline" model for a complex, color-coded hierarchy, more evocative of terror threat levels.
The most expensive games are even coded red and yellow, as if to say:
For example, bleacher seats ran $15 last season, with a $5 premium for about a dozen top games. This year, only 31 of the lowest desirability dates are $15. Another fifteen games run $16, and the remaining thirty five cost between $18-22. So, a fan pays the same as last year 31 times, a little more than last year 43 times and a little less, six or seven times. (Oh yeah, and the Yankees or Red Sox arent coming to town in 2011 either.)
It's a similar tale around most of the stadium. The fattest hikes are appropriately found in the All You Can Eat sections, where this year's mean price, across the entire schedule, exceeds last year's premium rate ($35).
Other club level hikes were relatively lean, and single game rates actually came down in the priciest boxes surrounding the dugouts. But unless those seats are readily available on an individual basis, that seems an empty statistical manipulation more than anything else.
In summary, most of the cheaper and moderate entrances to the ballpark are now less accessible. The smaller but important supply of expensive boxes and club seats are relatively flat, and in a few cases lower -at least in theory.
Briefy, over on the season ticket side, it's the same deal. Eleven of sixteen stadium pricepoints increased - and they're all the cheaper and moderate sections.
Surprisingly, I have mixed feelings about some of this. For years, I've encouraged the Dbacks to roll out demand based pricing - and here it is. There's certainly economic justification for trying to flexibly match ticket price with event demand. In theory, it helps maximize revenue by matching unique seats and events with individual fans, via differentiated, almost customized, price. I think when you look at how they've valued seats, relative to one another, the pricing flow around the park may look smoother than ever.
The problem is that genuine demand-based pricing implies that you're making those sales, those connections, and from what I can derive from anticipated attendance, the Dbacks aint doin' much of that. They aint doin' that because when you look at how they've priced seats, relative to customer utility, the park may look less appealing than it ever has. These prices dont seem to match up with what most potential customers are willing to pay to watch these Diamondbacks.
I used to enjoy hunting around the seating chart, looking for relative bargains. Maybe it was a cool Friday or Saturdaynight game against the Brewers, at the standard single game price. Or "sneaking in" with a $5 ticket and moving down. Or lucking into a front row seat in a traditionally underpriced section online. Those little pleasures are all but gone now.
They've been disappearing for years, and the Diamondbacks' curious version of "demand-based" pricing, along with Ticketmaster, pretty much closes the door on those little discoveries, without offering up anything in the way of new pleasures. The stadium has almost fifty thousand seats. Surveying the whole thing, section by section, I gradually realize there's no place I'm really eager to sit anymore. Or at least no place I wouldnt feel somewhat foolish, buying a ticket from the ballclub. It's hardly terrorism, but with a venue more empty than occupied, that's not the way demand based pricing is supposed to work.
The most expensive games are even coded red and yellow, as if to say:
"Danger. You are within purchasing radius of a so called premium game. Severe risk to wallet probable."They've basically expanded premium pricing from a dozen or so dates per year - to a wishful fifty one (who honestly believes these Dbacks will participate in fifty one remotely 'premium' games?) - and divided those into five classes to help cover their tracks. It's not as if ticket face values have skyrocketed, but the expansion of even modest premiums across a broader segment of schedule is significant.
For example, bleacher seats ran $15 last season, with a $5 premium for about a dozen top games. This year, only 31 of the lowest desirability dates are $15. Another fifteen games run $16, and the remaining thirty five cost between $18-22. So, a fan pays the same as last year 31 times, a little more than last year 43 times and a little less, six or seven times. (Oh yeah, and the Yankees or Red Sox arent coming to town in 2011 either.)
It's a similar tale around most of the stadium. The fattest hikes are appropriately found in the All You Can Eat sections, where this year's mean price, across the entire schedule, exceeds last year's premium rate ($35).
Other club level hikes were relatively lean, and single game rates actually came down in the priciest boxes surrounding the dugouts. But unless those seats are readily available on an individual basis, that seems an empty statistical manipulation more than anything else.
In summary, most of the cheaper and moderate entrances to the ballpark are now less accessible. The smaller but important supply of expensive boxes and club seats are relatively flat, and in a few cases lower -at least in theory.
Briefy, over on the season ticket side, it's the same deal. Eleven of sixteen stadium pricepoints increased - and they're all the cheaper and moderate sections.
Surprisingly, I have mixed feelings about some of this. For years, I've encouraged the Dbacks to roll out demand based pricing - and here it is. There's certainly economic justification for trying to flexibly match ticket price with event demand. In theory, it helps maximize revenue by matching unique seats and events with individual fans, via differentiated, almost customized, price. I think when you look at how they've valued seats, relative to one another, the pricing flow around the park may look smoother than ever.
The problem is that genuine demand-based pricing implies that you're making those sales, those connections, and from what I can derive from anticipated attendance, the Dbacks aint doin' much of that. They aint doin' that because when you look at how they've priced seats, relative to customer utility, the park may look less appealing than it ever has. These prices dont seem to match up with what most potential customers are willing to pay to watch these Diamondbacks.
I used to enjoy hunting around the seating chart, looking for relative bargains. Maybe it was a cool Friday or Saturdaynight game against the Brewers, at the standard single game price. Or "sneaking in" with a $5 ticket and moving down. Or lucking into a front row seat in a traditionally underpriced section online. Those little pleasures are all but gone now.
They've been disappearing for years, and the Diamondbacks' curious version of "demand-based" pricing, along with Ticketmaster, pretty much closes the door on those little discoveries, without offering up anything in the way of new pleasures. The stadium has almost fifty thousand seats. Surveying the whole thing, section by section, I gradually realize there's no place I'm really eager to sit anymore. Or at least no place I wouldnt feel somewhat foolish, buying a ticket from the ballclub. It's hardly terrorism, but with a venue more empty than occupied, that's not the way demand based pricing is supposed to work.
20 January 2011
Ball Back, Spring Ahead
Reservations and what amount to advance cover charges to Casino Lounge West are reportedly disappearing as fast as a $20 bill down the street, but betting on baseball fans to attend actual Diamondback games downtown, remains more of a long shot. This surmised from snips of Derrick Hall's painstakingly leading statements, and neither comes as much surprise.
The Cactus League's latest bauble, wedged just west of its benefactor's gambling palace and east of Paradise Valley, is bound to draw its target clientele; Derrick Hall's wealthy neighbors.
The Cactus League's latest bauble, wedged just west of its benefactor's gambling palace and east of Paradise Valley, is bound to draw its target clientele; Derrick Hall's wealthy neighbors.
13 August 2010
Quote of the Day
From Dirty Gary over at dbbp.org:
That's it in a nutshell - perhaps not "right in line" with Bay Area prices as much as they were a couple years ago, but this is what I've been frothing about ad nauseum since puberty. I should add I went to an April game in Oakland - for $2 a seat -and despite being a long time Phoenix resident, havent visited Chase Field this year.The dbax are only "cheap" because of the significant discount they give on season tickets compared to the single-game price. The average single-game ticket at Chase isn't much cheaper than those at OAK or SFG. It's just that those Clubs don't offer near the discount on season tickets.
So the Diamondbacks can brag all they want about having the "cheapest" tickets, they're only cheap for those that can afford to buy a full season's worth. Otherwise, they're right in line with other markets that maintain much higher per capita/household/family incomes.
12 August 2010
Dback Tix Unreasonable, Says Scottish Authority
After defending MLB's most regressive ticket pricing model for half a decade, Sir Jim McLennan decided, on Thursday apparently, that Arizona Diamondback tickets are too high. "... the [price] gap has grown to the point that it has often been cheaper to buy a season ticket holder's unwanted seats on the secondary market, rather than from the ticket-office.
I'd also like to see dropping of single-game prices."
A glacial reckoning, considering these price gaps grew most between 2005-2007 - and were actually larger three years ago in many areas of Chase Field than they are today. What will intrepid Jim warn us of tomorrow? Leasing office space in the World Trade Center?
But all's well that ends well, I suppose, and it appears our 'pit boss recognizes and is even ready to tackle "the attendance problem", co-opting several suggestions he spent years dismissing when voiced by "undesirables":
I'd like to see the team get a bit more creative with regard to enticing fans back to the ballpark... I would love a deal with the light rail, whereby a Diamondbacks ticket is also valid for a ride to/from the park... I'd also like to see dropping of single-game prices....There's nothing like a full stadium.... hopefully it's something which we will see more of in the future.
Sound familiar? What happened to pronouncements it would take a generation, at least, before any FO could consistently draw more fans here? And how can one credibly complain about single game rates and fees and premium pricing today, after consistently endorsing Derrick Hall's "lowest prices in baseball" mantra since 2007?
14 July 2010
The Price of Loyalty
Not 24 hours after Anaheim's "day in the sun" went dark, reports are trickling in about 25% price hikes @ Chase Field, presumably tied to the ephemeral 2011 All Star Game. Dback brass have yet to confirm the regular season increases, but loyal season ticket holders are understandably livid.
Consecutive last place, non-competitive seasons. Most signs point to Kendrick further slashing payroll into 2011. Knowledgeable Keith Law surmises this ownership group wont contend "anytime soon". Employment and personal income are down in the Valley, and Derrick Hall's "fan friendliest" front office is raising prices? Again.
On azcentral.com, two presumable package holders report that their account reps informed them a pair of "Infield Reserve" uppers will increase $332 annually, when the invoice arrives later in August. For them, that's a 25% increase. An extortion tax, apparently, for the privilege of getting in line to buy ASG tickets - at MLB's All Star prices.
With seasonal attendance dwindling, this is how Derrick Hall rewards his most loyal fans? Stick with us, he implored, even while our product disintegrates. We're in this together, he cheerfully implied. Then, at the nadir of public confidence in franchise stewardship, he slams a $332 cover charge on his most price sensitive loyalists?
Stop and think who buys upper deck season tickets to watch the Diamondbacks. These arent corporations and law firms. I did meet an MD up there once, but for the most part they're teachers, tow truck drivers and customer service reps, who breathe baseball and suffer with the team. Many bring their own food to the game. These are the fans stuck with an ultimatum, courtesy of Derrick Hall and Ken Kendrick:
Consecutive last place, non-competitive seasons. Most signs point to Kendrick further slashing payroll into 2011. Knowledgeable Keith Law surmises this ownership group wont contend "anytime soon". Employment and personal income are down in the Valley, and Derrick Hall's "fan friendliest" front office is raising prices? Again.
On azcentral.com, two presumable package holders report that their account reps informed them a pair of "Infield Reserve" uppers will increase $332 annually, when the invoice arrives later in August. For them, that's a 25% increase. An extortion tax, apparently, for the privilege of getting in line to buy ASG tickets - at MLB's All Star prices.
With seasonal attendance dwindling, this is how Derrick Hall rewards his most loyal fans? Stick with us, he implored, even while our product disintegrates. We're in this together, he cheerfully implied. Then, at the nadir of public confidence in franchise stewardship, he slams a $332 cover charge on his most price sensitive loyalists?Stop and think who buys upper deck season tickets to watch the Diamondbacks. These arent corporations and law firms. I did meet an MD up there once, but for the most part they're teachers, tow truck drivers and customer service reps, who breathe baseball and suffer with the team. Many bring their own food to the game. These are the fans stuck with an ultimatum, courtesy of Derrick Hall and Ken Kendrick:
We've strung you along for years with the hype of a made-for-TV All Star Game, that is rapidly losing appeal, and which still may never materialize in Phoenix.
You've supported us through the bad times. We dont really care if you purchase expensive ASG tickets or not. That's a separate issue. Just be a good fan and go write us another check for three hundred bucks, or you can kiss your season tickets goodbye.
Sincerely,
The New Diamondbacks Family
P.S. - We're building a championship team, just for you. Dont miss out!
01 July 2010
Fans Speak: Hall's Off The Field Superlatives Fall Broadly Short
While its methodology has been skewered more often than pineapple and shrimp, ESPN's latest franchise rankings still furnish valuable data about the Dbacks, if you poke for it. Their eighth annual survey ranks franchises in the four big sports, based on national fan input on half a dozen "satisfiers" - and a couple other tabulations.
On the face of it, the Dbacks come across quite well, ranked #26 out of 122 North American franchises. Expect the likes of Derrick Hall and Jim McLennan to trumpet this finding as evidence of organizational substance and vision. But looking closer, and I hope more meaningfully, one finds pretty much the opposite.
Meaningfully? Well, what's the value of comparing baseball teams to the Buffalo Sabres or Cleveland Browns? When baseball enjoys inherent affordability advantages and each sport cultivates its own brand of customer. In addition, ranking franchises across markets and sports (ie product) simultaneously creates excessive statistical noise. In order to more accurately evaluate the Dbacks, we need to filter out the other three sports.
Just baseball teams. The Dbacks still look pretty good. Eighth out of thirty teams. But is this proof they're doing a marvelous job? Or is there something else we can control for? There is! We can control for market, by eliminating the other 29, and comparing recent poll results with earlier in-market numbers. Apples to apples, or about as close as we can get - Phoenix to Phoenix. No skewing "noise" from entrenched bicoastal negativity; the Dodgers and Red Sox for example, and both pairs of teams from New York, all finished in the lower half of these rankings. Yes, the World Champion Yankees ranked 16th! Phoenicians are generally much easier to please. So let's control for that, mindful that each year's rank really reflects previous year's performance (ie the 2010 survey was conducted prior to the 2010 season, and reflects previous attitudes.)
ESPN first polled fans early in 2003. How did we do?
In terms of overall satisfaction, the Dbacks ranked first in baseball. The next year they ranked second. Even in the 2005 survey, reflecting a hostile ownership takeover and 111 loss season, the Dbacks (run by Colangelo through July and Kendrick the rest of the year) polled ninth. Five years later, Hall's rank of 8th doesnt sound quite so impressive, does it?
Let's look at polling components. My favorite is "affordability". Again, Arizona currently ranks eighth, which is about where I think they objectively belong (in MLB's lowest per capita income market) - but still a fair distance from Hall's largely unchallenged "lowest prices in baseball" ideology.
Wait, it gets better. Colangelo raised prices every single year. Wouldnt 2002-03, right after the World Series and a 98 win season, be the perfect opportunity for him to really gouge the base? In 2003, they ranked fatcat Jerry seventh in affordability - better than the talkative Hall's best mark! You have to laugh. For years, Hall has harangued locals about his superlative values in a half empty ballpark. Colangelo never claimed he had baseball's lowest prices. Saying so, over and over, would've been beneath him. He provided utility instead.
Additionally, year-to-year affordability numbers paint an instructive picture of when local fan utility actually fell of the cliff.
2003 - 7th Colangelo
2004 - 10th Colangelo
2005 - 12th Colangelo/Kendrick
2006 -19th Kendrick
2007 -18th Kendrick
2008 - 8th Kendrick
2009 - 9th Kendrick
2010 - 8th Kendrick
As mentioned, Jerry incremented prices every year, and fan utility was slipping, so that by the time Kendrick took over they had dropped to about twelfth. But look at 2006, which represents Kendrick's first full year at the helm. It was then - and not before then - that affordability took its sharpest plunge in franchise history. 2005-06 is when Kendrick and Moorad jacked individual game prices by 30-150% while fielding losing teams, and it's from THAT policy that Kendrick and Hall have been trying to win back fans. Not some corporate fantasy about Colangelo previously fracturing or alienating the fan base. He played a part, but a relatively small part in that transitional fracture.
Here's year to year "Ownership" data:
2003 - 2nd
2004 - 3rd
2005 - 13th Jerry? Ken? some shared dissatisfaction likely
2006 - 14th
2007 - 18th
2008 - 7th
2009 - 21st
2010 - 14th
Pretty similar. The big drop here was captured early in 2005, after the ownership transition, the Backman fiasco,etc. I'm probably being kind to Kendrick, attributing the town's negative feelings to "shared" dissatisfaction, but hey, that's the sort of guy I am.
Let's close out with a couple nuggets. Starting this year, ESPN expanded the ownership category into subclasses and ranked them as well. One subclass is ownership "honesty". I was interested in what fans felt about this, since we enjoy the most objectively "accessible" team executive in baseball, Mr Derrick Hall. Derrick is justly famous for chatting with fans, disgruntled or otherwise, and the Diamondbacks promote the image that they are the most responsive, communicative, "fan friendly" franchise in sports.
Despite, or maybe because of those efforts, they scored below league average in honesty. And this was before this summer's debacle, when Derrick defined and defended his "championship-style" team. Ouch. Maybe if he just let fans judge his product and pricing on its own terms, like they did under Colangelo and did in these surveys, he might've scored higher. Instead of, you know, trying to fool everyone and make them feel stupid for not fully appreciating his oversold and disappointing product. It's a cautionary lesson, I think, about the difference between quantity and quality of business communication.
Lastly, there's an ownership sub-category on Community Involvement. The Dbacks do better here, scoring 12th. Nothing wrong with that, except for Hall's lofty suggestions they're the most charitable and involved in baseball. Memo to Hall: the people you're reaching out to, those benefitting from your vision, think you're closer to middle third. Dont take my word for it. They're just sayin'.
On the face of it, the Dbacks come across quite well, ranked #26 out of 122 North American franchises. Expect the likes of Derrick Hall and Jim McLennan to trumpet this finding as evidence of organizational substance and vision. But looking closer, and I hope more meaningfully, one finds pretty much the opposite.
Meaningfully? Well, what's the value of comparing baseball teams to the Buffalo Sabres or Cleveland Browns? When baseball enjoys inherent affordability advantages and each sport cultivates its own brand of customer. In addition, ranking franchises across markets and sports (ie product) simultaneously creates excessive statistical noise. In order to more accurately evaluate the Dbacks, we need to filter out the other three sports.
Just baseball teams. The Dbacks still look pretty good. Eighth out of thirty teams. But is this proof they're doing a marvelous job? Or is there something else we can control for? There is! We can control for market, by eliminating the other 29, and comparing recent poll results with earlier in-market numbers. Apples to apples, or about as close as we can get - Phoenix to Phoenix. No skewing "noise" from entrenched bicoastal negativity; the Dodgers and Red Sox for example, and both pairs of teams from New York, all finished in the lower half of these rankings. Yes, the World Champion Yankees ranked 16th! Phoenicians are generally much easier to please. So let's control for that, mindful that each year's rank really reflects previous year's performance (ie the 2010 survey was conducted prior to the 2010 season, and reflects previous attitudes.)
ESPN first polled fans early in 2003. How did we do?
In terms of overall satisfaction, the Dbacks ranked first in baseball. The next year they ranked second. Even in the 2005 survey, reflecting a hostile ownership takeover and 111 loss season, the Dbacks (run by Colangelo through July and Kendrick the rest of the year) polled ninth. Five years later, Hall's rank of 8th doesnt sound quite so impressive, does it?
Let's look at polling components. My favorite is "affordability". Again, Arizona currently ranks eighth, which is about where I think they objectively belong (in MLB's lowest per capita income market) - but still a fair distance from Hall's largely unchallenged "lowest prices in baseball" ideology.
Wait, it gets better. Colangelo raised prices every single year. Wouldnt 2002-03, right after the World Series and a 98 win season, be the perfect opportunity for him to really gouge the base? In 2003, they ranked fatcat Jerry seventh in affordability - better than the talkative Hall's best mark! You have to laugh. For years, Hall has harangued locals about his superlative values in a half empty ballpark. Colangelo never claimed he had baseball's lowest prices. Saying so, over and over, would've been beneath him. He provided utility instead.
Additionally, year-to-year affordability numbers paint an instructive picture of when local fan utility actually fell of the cliff.
2003 - 7th Colangelo
2004 - 10th Colangelo
2005 - 12th Colangelo/Kendrick
2006 -19th Kendrick
2007 -18th Kendrick
2008 - 8th Kendrick
2009 - 9th Kendrick
2010 - 8th Kendrick
As mentioned, Jerry incremented prices every year, and fan utility was slipping, so that by the time Kendrick took over they had dropped to about twelfth. But look at 2006, which represents Kendrick's first full year at the helm. It was then - and not before then - that affordability took its sharpest plunge in franchise history. 2005-06 is when Kendrick and Moorad jacked individual game prices by 30-150% while fielding losing teams, and it's from THAT policy that Kendrick and Hall have been trying to win back fans. Not some corporate fantasy about Colangelo previously fracturing or alienating the fan base. He played a part, but a relatively small part in that transitional fracture.
Here's year to year "Ownership" data:
2003 - 2nd
2004 - 3rd
2005 - 13th Jerry? Ken? some shared dissatisfaction likely
2006 - 14th
2007 - 18th
2008 - 7th
2009 - 21st
2010 - 14th
Pretty similar. The big drop here was captured early in 2005, after the ownership transition, the Backman fiasco,etc. I'm probably being kind to Kendrick, attributing the town's negative feelings to "shared" dissatisfaction, but hey, that's the sort of guy I am.
Let's close out with a couple nuggets. Starting this year, ESPN expanded the ownership category into subclasses and ranked them as well. One subclass is ownership "honesty". I was interested in what fans felt about this, since we enjoy the most objectively "accessible" team executive in baseball, Mr Derrick Hall. Derrick is justly famous for chatting with fans, disgruntled or otherwise, and the Diamondbacks promote the image that they are the most responsive, communicative, "fan friendly" franchise in sports.
Despite, or maybe because of those efforts, they scored below league average in honesty. And this was before this summer's debacle, when Derrick defined and defended his "championship-style" team. Ouch. Maybe if he just let fans judge his product and pricing on its own terms, like they did under Colangelo and did in these surveys, he might've scored higher. Instead of, you know, trying to fool everyone and make them feel stupid for not fully appreciating his oversold and disappointing product. It's a cautionary lesson, I think, about the difference between quantity and quality of business communication.
Lastly, there's an ownership sub-category on Community Involvement. The Dbacks do better here, scoring 12th. Nothing wrong with that, except for Hall's lofty suggestions they're the most charitable and involved in baseball. Memo to Hall: the people you're reaching out to, those benefitting from your vision, think you're closer to middle third. Dont take my word for it. They're just sayin'.
29 March 2010
Dbacks Offer Up Booty
As rising Suns and rags to riches Coyotes print up playoff tickets, the last place Diamondbacks aim to rouse any remaining fans with Uptown.
Neither discounts nor winning are implied in the Sat/Sun promotion - just dishrags with the word "Uptown" stenciled on, presumably by third world laborers.
Fans in the full price bleacher seats, many partially obstructed by Justin Upton's prominent glutes, will be encouraged to wave the rags, in the event something positive occurs. According to dbacks.com, customers in these special, set aside sections may even have a chance to "catch a baseball" - something of a challenge for Arizona's right fielder.
Neither discounts nor winning are implied in the Sat/Sun promotion - just dishrags with the word "Uptown" stenciled on, presumably by third world laborers.
Fans in the full price bleacher seats, many partially obstructed by Justin Upton's prominent glutes, will be encouraged to wave the rags, in the event something positive occurs. According to dbacks.com, customers in these special, set aside sections may even have a chance to "catch a baseball" - something of a challenge for Arizona's right fielder.
14 March 2010
No Essay Required
Managed an online ticket steal for the April 7th ballgame, but as regular readers have no doubt envisaged, the bargain was not at Chase Field. I'll be in the Bay Area that week and bought three upper deck seats in Oakland - row 6, a little beyond third base - for a total of $17.25. That's in the nation's highest income MSA, by the way, and includes Ticketmaster "convenience" and "service" fees.
How much are comparable online seats in Phoenix - MLB's lowest income MSA? The Paradise Valley altruists touting "the lowest prices in baseball", charge $57.25.
What's the catch? None really. The $57.25 isn't for a "premier" game - that would run $72.25 online and Oakland's Wednesday promotion actually includes premier opponents like the Yankees and Red Sox. The A's run a well advertised deal where, every Wednesday all year long, they designate what looks to be ten to fifteen thousand seats for $2 each. Add in the ugly fees and my $6 purchase grew to $17.25, but I'll save the Ticketmaster rant for another time. It's still a delicious bargain, moreso since Wednesday hot dogs are only a dollar.
It's the sort of straightforward windfall for fans that current Dbacks brass, busy chirping about fans' interests instead of catering to them, would never dream of authorizing. If you want entrance to a mostly empty Chase Field for less than about ten bucks nowadays, be prepared to write Derrick Hall an essay on how you lost your job, or your wallet, or your arm in Iraq. So that he can grant you a couple of unsold uppers and make a televised show out of His largesse - selectively invoking executive privilege to override his own above market pricing.
Forget dollar seats. Forget $2 seats. In the middle of a regional depression, in the lowest income market in baseball, perhaps somebody could invoke executive privilege to bring back last year's five dollar seats, in a half empty stadium. No essay required.
How much are comparable online seats in Phoenix - MLB's lowest income MSA? The Paradise Valley altruists touting "the lowest prices in baseball", charge $57.25.
What's the catch? None really. The $57.25 isn't for a "premier" game - that would run $72.25 online and Oakland's Wednesday promotion actually includes premier opponents like the Yankees and Red Sox. The A's run a well advertised deal where, every Wednesday all year long, they designate what looks to be ten to fifteen thousand seats for $2 each. Add in the ugly fees and my $6 purchase grew to $17.25, but I'll save the Ticketmaster rant for another time. It's still a delicious bargain, moreso since Wednesday hot dogs are only a dollar.
It's the sort of straightforward windfall for fans that current Dbacks brass, busy chirping about fans' interests instead of catering to them, would never dream of authorizing. If you want entrance to a mostly empty Chase Field for less than about ten bucks nowadays, be prepared to write Derrick Hall an essay on how you lost your job, or your wallet, or your arm in Iraq. So that he can grant you a couple of unsold uppers and make a televised show out of His largesse - selectively invoking executive privilege to override his own above market pricing.
Forget dollar seats. Forget $2 seats. In the middle of a regional depression, in the lowest income market in baseball, perhaps somebody could invoke executive privilege to bring back last year's five dollar seats, in a half empty stadium. No essay required.
27 February 2010
Dbacks Less Affordable
Axing non subscription TV games and Colangelo's dollar seats apparently didnt satisfy Paradise Valley residents, Ken Kendrick and Derrick Hall. Today, in answer to the harshest recession in memory, baseball's "most affordable" and self proclaimed fan friendliest front office jacked their cheapest Chase Field ticket yet another 60%.
That comes to eight smackers for deep corner nosebleeds; nine if you hazard the audacity to purchase your ticket on gameday. I know, I know. Eight or nine dollars, even in this economy, isnt much, right? One cant expect a professional franchise to give away seats for less than that.
A few points.
For most people, eight or nine dollars isnt much, but most people also have little regard for accomodations this far above the earth's crust. Folks who sit up there, in a half empty venue are, by definition, price sensitive.
Two, as Diamondhacks brought to the sporting public's attention several years ago, Phoenix Metro bears the lowest median personal income of any major league city.
Third, and most importantly, this isnt any franchise jacking up prices on those least able to afford it. It's the club which has aggressively and inaccurately marketed itself as the most affordable in the game, three years running.
Just for fun, I putted around mlb.com to see if another ballclub charges less than eight dollars:
Cleveland $7 super value game
Detroit $5
Kansas City $7
LA Angels $5 (child only), same with Pitt $6 but child only
Yankees $5 Obstructed view bleacher
Oakland A's $2 Wednesdays + $1 dogs, includes Yanks, Red Sox
Seattle $7
Texas $6 adult, kids as low as $3
Atlanta $6 Premium $8
Cincinnati $5 incl premier, $7 regular bleachers
Colorado $4 Rockpile, incl Boston, premier, opening day
Houston $7, $1 children 14 and younger, dynamic pricing as well
San Diego $5 Park Pass
San Fran - dynamic pricing as low as $5
Washington $5 small section, day of game sales only
Essentially half of major league teams currently offer cheaper single game options than our self styled Arizona Altruists. Even the notoriously expensive Cubs sell $8 tickets at six designated "bronze" games, over at Wrigley. Maybe it's not outrageous for the Dbacks to charge eight dollars, however given the recession, oversupply of seats and local market history, I'd characterize an eight or nine dollar cover charge to gain entree to Chase Field as rather high. What's outrageous and cloying, it seems to me, is for the people behind such pricing to call themselves the most fan friendly front office - and to trumpet their "product" as the most affordable in the game.
That comes to eight smackers for deep corner nosebleeds; nine if you hazard the audacity to purchase your ticket on gameday. I know, I know. Eight or nine dollars, even in this economy, isnt much, right? One cant expect a professional franchise to give away seats for less than that.
A few points.
For most people, eight or nine dollars isnt much, but most people also have little regard for accomodations this far above the earth's crust. Folks who sit up there, in a half empty venue are, by definition, price sensitive.
Two, as Diamondhacks brought to the sporting public's attention several years ago, Phoenix Metro bears the lowest median personal income of any major league city.
Third, and most importantly, this isnt any franchise jacking up prices on those least able to afford it. It's the club which has aggressively and inaccurately marketed itself as the most affordable in the game, three years running.
Just for fun, I putted around mlb.com to see if another ballclub charges less than eight dollars:
Cleveland $7 super value game
Detroit $5
Kansas City $7
LA Angels $5 (child only), same with Pitt $6 but child only
Yankees $5 Obstructed view bleacher
Oakland A's $2 Wednesdays + $1 dogs, includes Yanks, Red Sox
Seattle $7
Texas $6 adult, kids as low as $3
Atlanta $6 Premium $8
Cincinnati $5 incl premier, $7 regular bleachers
Colorado $4 Rockpile, incl Boston, premier, opening day
Houston $7, $1 children 14 and younger, dynamic pricing as well
San Diego $5 Park Pass
San Fran - dynamic pricing as low as $5
Washington $5 small section, day of game sales only
Essentially half of major league teams currently offer cheaper single game options than our self styled Arizona Altruists. Even the notoriously expensive Cubs sell $8 tickets at six designated "bronze" games, over at Wrigley. Maybe it's not outrageous for the Dbacks to charge eight dollars, however given the recession, oversupply of seats and local market history, I'd characterize an eight or nine dollar cover charge to gain entree to Chase Field as rather high. What's outrageous and cloying, it seems to me, is for the people behind such pricing to call themselves the most fan friendly front office - and to trumpet their "product" as the most affordable in the game.
26 February 2010
The High Price of Deception
While fans of normal major league clubs anticipate Cactus & Grapefruit League action, word weary followers of the Diamondbacks brace for this spring's iteration of Baseball's Most Byzantine Memo, courtesy of President Derrick Hall. The headline, if history holds, should look something like:
DBACKS REDUCE OR HOLD TICKET PRICES on 84% OF SEATS FOR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW
The percentage deviates from year to year, but the underlying con job is the same. What the above construction has basically meant, in English, is they raised prices on the 16% of seats sat in by season ticket holders, and raised individual game prices on half a million, unaccounted for, single game buyers. Yeah, I know, that sounds incompatible with the headline, but in spirit, that's what they've done since 2005. Regularly raising prices where fans are most likely to sit - then leveling, and more recently reducing, rates in weak selling sections.
On a fundamental and important level, neoclassical supply and demand, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the last part. It makes perfect sense, actually. What's wrong, and exasperating, is the lengths Dback deciders go to dress up this for profit strategy in a righteous, almost altruistic cloak. One reason, perhaps, is that it uncomfortably contradicts Mr Hall's airy service mantra of "rewarding his most dedicated fans". By reducing prices in only low demand areas, it's generally not diehard package accounts who benefit, but discerning holdouts who may be enticed by select reductions in less than stellar seats.
The larger contradiction is simply the hikes themselves. When you rely on tenuous and misleading "evidence" to brazenly prop your franchise up as "the most affordable in baseball", raising rates every year creates dissonance in your base that must be smothered, spun or simply smiled away.
DBACKS REDUCE OR HOLD TICKET PRICES on 84% OF SEATS FOR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW
The percentage deviates from year to year, but the underlying con job is the same. What the above construction has basically meant, in English, is they raised prices on the 16% of seats sat in by season ticket holders, and raised individual game prices on half a million, unaccounted for, single game buyers. Yeah, I know, that sounds incompatible with the headline, but in spirit, that's what they've done since 2005. Regularly raising prices where fans are most likely to sit - then leveling, and more recently reducing, rates in weak selling sections.
On a fundamental and important level, neoclassical supply and demand, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the last part. It makes perfect sense, actually. What's wrong, and exasperating, is the lengths Dback deciders go to dress up this for profit strategy in a righteous, almost altruistic cloak. One reason, perhaps, is that it uncomfortably contradicts Mr Hall's airy service mantra of "rewarding his most dedicated fans". By reducing prices in only low demand areas, it's generally not diehard package accounts who benefit, but discerning holdouts who may be enticed by select reductions in less than stellar seats.
The larger contradiction is simply the hikes themselves. When you rely on tenuous and misleading "evidence" to brazenly prop your franchise up as "the most affordable in baseball", raising rates every year creates dissonance in your base that must be smothered, spun or simply smiled away.
Single tickets go on sale a week from tomorrow, yet remarkably, not a hint of individual game rates appear anywhere on dbacks.com. Despite grotesquely comic divorces that have compromised Dodger and Padre focus, both found time between sniping and court filings to prominently display prices - and the relatively amicable Rockies and Giants have been hawking regular season tix online for some time.
So why are the Diamondbacks "priceless" and arguably, clueless here? Could they be less customer focused than the Moores and McCourts? Does Mr Hall need extra time to craft this year's intricate crannies within The Memo? Is he the lone priest entrusted to upload this normally rudimentary information to the great unwashed? Is he running behind, or has he temporarily misplaced his remarkable gift of distortion? Hall might be otherwise engaged, managing fallout over the sour choice to abandon Tucson for Casino Park, and his awkward injection into Mesa's proposal to build the Cubs a new spring complex - a performance for which he was roundly pummeled by fans, media and state legislators. Whatever the "priceless" reason, it seems like a curious way to sell tickets.
Which brings us to something else Mr Hall said this week. According to beat writer Nick Piecoro, the CEO relayed that the club's 2010 attendance goal- provided that they win - is 2 million fans. I'm aware the economy is struggling, but this minimum target of theirs is lower than any annual gate realized in Diamondbacks history. Lower than 2005, when certain geniuses decided to increase prices after losing 111 games the year before. A half million lower than 2004 itself. And lower than last season, when the economy, poor play and ongoing value erosion conspired to drop attendance more than 4000 per night. Their goal is to be lower than that? Seriously?
With a team virtually guaranteed to perform better, probably much better, than last year? With the Dodgers and Giants poised for potentially significant regressions? With the Yankees on tap? With [snicker] the lowest prices in baseball? With the golden carrot of the 2011 All Star Game driving package sales? With enormously popular lightrail gliding to and from Chase Field's doorstep - from Mesa, Tempe and points north and west? With a Metro population twice as large as during the Diamondbacks' inaugural 1998 season? I'll say it again, because I know it's important - the economy is very weak. Fair enough.
But a goal of two million, in this town, is still a joke. It's an indictment. Not of fans, who averaged 3 million under Colangelo, whether he won or lost a hundred, without Mr Hall's fireworks, concerts or the city's light rail. In a Valley 20-50% smaller, with prices far cheaper than Moorad and Kendrick's - even after adjusting for the Dept of Labor's and Mr Hall's respective inflations.
In the same chat, Hall unintentionally revealed more on the subject, in that sideways manner of his:
Fans need to have confidence in the talent on the field.
That's true, certainly, and I'd go farther and predict locals will be pleasantly surprised by this year's hardball model. But Hall's tautology distracts from a more troubling, overarching ennui inspired by his "team". Phoenicians lack confidence in this ownership group, whether it be an ability or willingness to fashion a competitive product at market driven prices. In addition, baseball loving Phoenicians dont particularly like this ownership group either, which Diamondhacks has tirelessly (and tiredly!) documented since the rift went public, in 2004.
There's no denying Derrick Hall has ingratiated a personal fan club - encouraged by leadership to distract from unpopular principals, principles and not ready for prime time teams. He works hard at it and his cheerful energy can be infectious in small doses. Look no further than the insular circle of ostensible adults gushing how great it is to have "access" to a club president, who deftly schmoozes them for maximum PR exposure, while Barnuming our much larger, potential market into submission.
The profit from this targeted salesmanship is the adoration of a few hundred fanboys, and maybe a few thousand others, who think Derrick Hall's uncommon enthusiasm and people skills merit allegiance to - or very light treading upon - unpopular policies and methodically dishonest salesmanship.
The price? How much has relentless obfuscation from Hall and phony "entertainment" from talented underlings like Daron Sutton cost this franchise? It's not all their fault certainly, but two million is a nice round number. Where there used to be three.
At the end of this year, Ken Kendrick will have essentially run this franchise for as many seasons as Jerry Colangelo before him. Six years and change. Colangelo created the enterprise from essentially nothing, shepherded it to its greatest competitive heights, and bequeathed a lucrative farm system for his usurpers to exploit and mismanage. Mr Kendrick's legacy? He's managed to stabilize his rate of return by fielding a second division product in an historically weak National League. Yet even today, misguided fanboys parrot boilerplate it was Colangelo who ran "the operation" aground.
It is, at heart, a self interested, corporate deception. Fans in the nation's fifth largest city are on to it, and exacting its price on the appropriate parties.
18 February 2010
Opportunities Galore
It's not enough, apparently, to graciously reap the financial windfall of a coveted Yankee visit in June. No, MLBAM has conspired with the Dbacks to impose one of those faux lotteries on Derrick Hall's dwindling faction of "deeply valued" fans. It's not the kind of generally understood "lottery" where you actually win something. Instead, an undisclosed number of "applicants" will possibly be selected for the humbling opportunity to buy Yankee tickets. At, of course, premium prices. Gee. Bring out the bubbly.
It's also the kind of "lottery" where all the form defaults are set to deluge "applicants" with waves of spam from MLB and the Diamondbacks. Plus, you provide copious personal data with utterly no guarantee of even transacting a sale.
Just to prove they're actually doing this, I screen printed part of their Purchase Opportunity Form (yes, that's what they call it) from dbacks.com before it disappears into the night like a burglar.
This fake contest started back on September 15th (roughly four months after the parent club's fake season began in earnest under AJ Hinch), and ends today, February 19th. Gee, sales have been sluggish since 2005's transfer of power, but does it really take five months to sell Yankee tickets?
The fan friendly Dbacks bestow other ostensible ticket opportunities upon deeply valued followers. Like driving to Tucson($30) to endure exhibitions no one tries to win, and paying $14-18 for each seat with any kind of back to it. Well, $14-18 before various fees and the prevailing privilege of a traffic jam before paying extra for unpaved parking.
These are marvelous opportunities to tell the Diamondbacks, "No thanks." If you love baseball, like I do, the three time defending Pac 10 champion Sun Devils play in a verdant little jewel box in Tempe. An easy walk from light rail, and parking was free the last time I went. Tickets are $7 and $10 for seats right near the action. Players try to win. They care like hell actually, and heated ejections are common. The chattery home crowd is intense and occasionally intimidating, without the benefit of free flowing in-game alcohol or prompts from a giant advertising scoreboard.
Imagine that.
15 August 2009
Diamondbacks Aid Stroke Victim; Topple Dodgers
In gripping front page news, the Diamondbacks wrote off a ticket they couldnt sell to anyone else and gave it to a young girl bravely recovering from a stroke. In a further display of local philanthropy, the finest organization in baseball downed the despised Dodgers Friday for the first time since the late 1800's.
Thirty one thousand and change witnessed the event at Chase Field, but years from now, millions will say they were there. They will talk about "the time" former Dback Orlando Hudson came to bat in the ninth with runners on and did NOT win the game. Repeat. He did NOT win the game. They will recount how an evil liner off the bat of Casey Blake blistered the stands beyond third base, hitting a pregnant Amish woman in the shoulder, and how Derrick Hall waved his hand over her, intoning "Let's make this a win/win" - and mother and baby were instantly "well".
They will call this game The Game That Mattered for a hundred years. When Haren plugged Ethier square on his "H" and when Rusty Ryal got er done. When a team and a community pulled together, to within sixteen games of the flag, and ten games from the Freddie Lewis-led Giants.
In a miraculous stroke of good luck, tickets are still available in select areas of the ballpark.
Thirty one thousand and change witnessed the event at Chase Field, but years from now, millions will say they were there. They will talk about "the time" former Dback Orlando Hudson came to bat in the ninth with runners on and did NOT win the game. Repeat. He did NOT win the game. They will recount how an evil liner off the bat of Casey Blake blistered the stands beyond third base, hitting a pregnant Amish woman in the shoulder, and how Derrick Hall waved his hand over her, intoning "Let's make this a win/win" - and mother and baby were instantly "well".
They will call this game The Game That Mattered for a hundred years. When Haren plugged Ethier square on his "H" and when Rusty Ryal got er done. When a team and a community pulled together, to within sixteen games of the flag, and ten games from the Freddie Lewis-led Giants.
In a miraculous stroke of good luck, tickets are still available in select areas of the ballpark.
04 April 2009
Unavailable
Less than 48 hrs from real ball and Monday's Chase extravaganza's looking closer to a sellout at dbacks.com. Today they say there are no bleacher seats available, less than three days after offering four stubs together in the tenth row, about two thirds of the way down.
Wow. Those bleacher seats sure filled up fast, huh? Maybe that happens when thousands (perhaps tens of thousands) of Infield Reserve seats in the same price point are mysteriously "unavailable" for 36 hours online. We detailed this curiosity three days ago.
And hey, guess what. Now that bleachers are "unavailable", you can get half a dozen seats togther in the twelfth row of the previously unavailable 18K seat, 40 row Infield Reserve! But wait, it gets better. For days now, poor saps saving up for a pair of the worst seats in the house (OF Reserve) have been offered just that -Row 40, Row 38. Yet just now, for giggles, I requested a dozen OF Reserve seats together - and got em in Row 25!
Let's review what's happening. For at least several weeks, the Diamondbacks have systematically rerouted online shoppers from requested sections that subsequently indicated what appears to be fairly widespread availability. We have documented this in the two largest upper deck pricepoints, Infield and Outfield Reserve, and are monitoring the currently "unavailable" bleacher area in anticipation of similar developments.
We can think of two explanations for this on-again, off-again status. Either this is a strategic ruse by the Diamondbacks, or secondary sellers (brokers, concierges, etc) are contractually dumping unsold seats back to the club. In either case, our initial concern this was an isolated computer anomaly no longer applies. The problem with the secondary seller argument is that the abruptly frozen sections are upper deck, hardly the currency of resort concierges, and it's typically midrow seats that suddenly 'become available' - not low row, higher markup locations normally favored by scalpers and brokers.
If this is a strategy, why would the Diamondbacks employ it? Artificially reducing seat supply (or the supply of any commodity) increases the equilibrium trigger price for a given level of demand. Surfers looking for Opener tickets typically dont opt out when the system implies uppers are gone - not when the system reroutes them to other comparably priced sections. It creates an illusion that tickets are harder to come by, and a false sense of urgency to scoop up what's available before it's too late. This tends to drive up the price people are willing to pay for a given location. ( Keep in mind, our front office has expressed interest in artifically (albeit publicly) reducing seat supply, flirting with construction of a wall circling midway around the upper deck.
The rerouted sections appear, for the most part, to be comparably priced, so this doesnt appear to be an obvious money grab. But what else do the rerouted areas have in common? For one thing, they're more visible on television. Despite being a much larger section, IF Reserve is more easily hidden from game action cameras. Bleacher and OF Reserve vacancies are often picked up by first and third base wells and shots from behind home plate. Most shots from centerfield, focused on pitcher and batter, are too tight to catch much of the upper deck in foul territory - especially if camera operators are instructed not to.
At the very least, whether this curious practice is a cynical strategy or a secondary dump, it's evident many of the Diamondbacks' most cost sensitive customers have been systematically offered and sold seats of lesser utility (to them) by ordering their tickets farther in advance. They are effectively penalized for planning and prioritizing their ticket purchases. While this may not violate any law, it would certainly seem to fall short of many fans expectations of disclosure and fairness when they go online to purchase event tickets.
If the Diamondbacks are denying available seat locations to unknowing customers, merely to create a false sense of dwindling supply, or to look better on TV, then they have breached a longstanding trust between buyer and seller, between fan and ballclub, and between ethical men. Virtual seats arent the only thing that can be made unavailable by the click of a mouse.
And hey, guess what. Now that bleachers are "unavailable", you can get half a dozen seats togther in the twelfth row of the previously unavailable 18K seat, 40 row Infield Reserve! But wait, it gets better. For days now, poor saps saving up for a pair of the worst seats in the house (OF Reserve) have been offered just that -Row 40, Row 38. Yet just now, for giggles, I requested a dozen OF Reserve seats together - and got em in Row 25!
Let's review what's happening. For at least several weeks, the Diamondbacks have systematically rerouted online shoppers from requested sections that subsequently indicated what appears to be fairly widespread availability. We have documented this in the two largest upper deck pricepoints, Infield and Outfield Reserve, and are monitoring the currently "unavailable" bleacher area in anticipation of similar developments.
We can think of two explanations for this on-again, off-again status. Either this is a strategic ruse by the Diamondbacks, or secondary sellers (brokers, concierges, etc) are contractually dumping unsold seats back to the club. In either case, our initial concern this was an isolated computer anomaly no longer applies. The problem with the secondary seller argument is that the abruptly frozen sections are upper deck, hardly the currency of resort concierges, and it's typically midrow seats that suddenly 'become available' - not low row, higher markup locations normally favored by scalpers and brokers.
If this is a strategy, why would the Diamondbacks employ it? Artificially reducing seat supply (or the supply of any commodity) increases the equilibrium trigger price for a given level of demand. Surfers looking for Opener tickets typically dont opt out when the system implies uppers are gone - not when the system reroutes them to other comparably priced sections. It creates an illusion that tickets are harder to come by, and a false sense of urgency to scoop up what's available before it's too late. This tends to drive up the price people are willing to pay for a given location. ( Keep in mind, our front office has expressed interest in artifically (albeit publicly) reducing seat supply, flirting with construction of a wall circling midway around the upper deck.
The rerouted sections appear, for the most part, to be comparably priced, so this doesnt appear to be an obvious money grab. But what else do the rerouted areas have in common? For one thing, they're more visible on television. Despite being a much larger section, IF Reserve is more easily hidden from game action cameras. Bleacher and OF Reserve vacancies are often picked up by first and third base wells and shots from behind home plate. Most shots from centerfield, focused on pitcher and batter, are too tight to catch much of the upper deck in foul territory - especially if camera operators are instructed not to.
At the very least, whether this curious practice is a cynical strategy or a secondary dump, it's evident many of the Diamondbacks' most cost sensitive customers have been systematically offered and sold seats of lesser utility (to them) by ordering their tickets farther in advance. They are effectively penalized for planning and prioritizing their ticket purchases. While this may not violate any law, it would certainly seem to fall short of many fans expectations of disclosure and fairness when they go online to purchase event tickets.
If the Diamondbacks are denying available seat locations to unknowing customers, merely to create a false sense of dwindling supply, or to look better on TV, then they have breached a longstanding trust between buyer and seller, between fan and ballclub, and between ethical men. Virtual seats arent the only thing that can be made unavailable by the click of a mouse.
Fans can be "unavailable" too.
01 April 2009
Sellout
Less then five days to pro ball and it doesnt look like our Dream Team will sellout their opener. It's hard to definitively tell, because MLB's software doesnt let one probe each section's availability - it just spits out seat numbers within a general price level, without much of an explanation.
The old software, god bless it, did let customers visually surf thru every stadium section, but I bring it up mostly because I've been monitoring Chase availability over the past couple weeks and wanted to share some curious findings.
Two weeks ago, I clicked on "Infield Reserve", which comprises 70% of the upper deck and is the biggest area, by far, in the park, and got the following response over a 36 hour span:
The number of seats you requested in Infield Reserve was not found. However, seats were found in Outfield Reserve....
MLB software not only guided me to the Outfield Reserve - it kicked me all the way up to Section 303 Row 40, which is the top row of the stadium by the foul pole. Uecker seats, basically.
Ordinarily, this would be good news, as it implies a virtual sellout for the home team, however, bleacher seats (which go for the same price as my first option) arent even a third sold - as evidenced by my online offer in the eleventh row of Section 105. I can also get a Club Seat on Opening Day. And not just any club seat.
Club seats in the front row.
Think about that. Three weeks before the Opener, front row club seats are available. You can get bleacher seats ten or twelve rows up, no problem. Yet dbacks.com wont present a pair anywhere in the vast upper Infield Reserve for purchase. Not even Row 40, with your mohawk massaging the roof.
MLB doesnt say Infield Reserve is "Sold Out". That would be fraud, I imagine. It says "tickets are not available in the quantity requested. In my case, codependent harlot that I am, that "quantity" would be an adjacent pair. Are we to believe Phoenicians scooped up among the worst ten thousand seats in favor of front row club seats for $10 more? Or for identical cost, selected upper deck nosebleeds en masse, rather than tenth row bleacher seats within naked sight of the earth's crust?
Fast forward a couple weeks. Can I procure seats in the previously off limits area? Heck, yes. Try 317 (that's directly behind home plate, for you out of towners). Yesterday Row 10, today row 14. (Upper sections have between 33 and 40 rows, so these are some of the best seats on the entire level). I can still get four bleacher seats in the tenth row, club seats in the closest section to home plate within each price point - less than five days from The Show.
Armed with this information, I heard a corker of an April Fool's joke today. CEO Derrick Hall was "interviewed" on radio and the host, KTAR's John Gambadoro, shamelessly spoonfed him this line:
That's right Johnny, and Chrysler has a limited number of cars for sale. If you act now!
Hall coyly confirmed "some" seats were available and reassured listeners they were "good seats, too!" Well, the second part's true - it appears you can sit most anywhere in this 48K seat venue on April 6th, for Hall's price. But the first part, the little symbiotic ruse on the southwest's most powerful radio station was more than an April Fool's joke.
Gambo's supposed to be some confrontational New Yorker, but his matter-of-fact willingness to setup and further the illusion the Dbacks opener is some kind of hot ticket around town is evidence of a more longstanding joke: the notion that Phoenix has an independent sports media worth a hoot.
Hall went on:
"I can predict a sellout but we're not quite there yet".
I can predict world harmony and a Diamondbacks World Series...but we're not quite there yet either. The truth is, nobody needs to "predict" a sellout here.
That's already happened.
The old software, god bless it, did let customers visually surf thru every stadium section, but I bring it up mostly because I've been monitoring Chase availability over the past couple weeks and wanted to share some curious findings.
Two weeks ago, I clicked on "Infield Reserve", which comprises 70% of the upper deck and is the biggest area, by far, in the park, and got the following response over a 36 hour span:
The number of seats you requested in Infield Reserve was not found. However, seats were found in Outfield Reserve....
MLB software not only guided me to the Outfield Reserve - it kicked me all the way up to Section 303 Row 40, which is the top row of the stadium by the foul pole. Uecker seats, basically.
Ordinarily, this would be good news, as it implies a virtual sellout for the home team, however, bleacher seats (which go for the same price as my first option) arent even a third sold - as evidenced by my online offer in the eleventh row of Section 105. I can also get a Club Seat on Opening Day. And not just any club seat.
Club seats in the front row.
Think about that. Three weeks before the Opener, front row club seats are available. You can get bleacher seats ten or twelve rows up, no problem. Yet dbacks.com wont present a pair anywhere in the vast upper Infield Reserve for purchase. Not even Row 40, with your mohawk massaging the roof.
MLB doesnt say Infield Reserve is "Sold Out". That would be fraud, I imagine. It says "tickets are not available in the quantity requested. In my case, codependent harlot that I am, that "quantity" would be an adjacent pair. Are we to believe Phoenicians scooped up among the worst ten thousand seats in favor of front row club seats for $10 more? Or for identical cost, selected upper deck nosebleeds en masse, rather than tenth row bleacher seats within naked sight of the earth's crust?
Fast forward a couple weeks. Can I procure seats in the previously off limits area? Heck, yes. Try 317 (that's directly behind home plate, for you out of towners). Yesterday Row 10, today row 14. (Upper sections have between 33 and 40 rows, so these are some of the best seats on the entire level). I can still get four bleacher seats in the tenth row, club seats in the closest section to home plate within each price point - less than five days from The Show.
Armed with this information, I heard a corker of an April Fool's joke today. CEO Derrick Hall was "interviewed" on radio and the host, KTAR's John Gambadoro, shamelessly spoonfed him this line:
I understand there are limited tickets available
That's right Johnny, and Chrysler has a limited number of cars for sale. If you act now!
Hall coyly confirmed "some" seats were available and reassured listeners they were "good seats, too!" Well, the second part's true - it appears you can sit most anywhere in this 48K seat venue on April 6th, for Hall's price. But the first part, the little symbiotic ruse on the southwest's most powerful radio station was more than an April Fool's joke.
Gambo's supposed to be some confrontational New Yorker, but his matter-of-fact willingness to setup and further the illusion the Dbacks opener is some kind of hot ticket around town is evidence of a more longstanding joke: the notion that Phoenix has an independent sports media worth a hoot.
Hall went on:
"I can predict a sellout but we're not quite there yet".
I can predict world harmony and a Diamondbacks World Series...but we're not quite there yet either. The truth is, nobody needs to "predict" a sellout here.
That's already happened.
12 March 2009
Hall To Fans: Let Them Eat Cake
As MLB teams deliver creative, tangible discounts, Derrick Hall continues to deliver little more than empty sermons on affordability.
Here's how some teams are actually enticing fans, with more than a line and a smile (hat tip: AZ Snakepit):
How have the Dbacks responded?
1. Their 10 pack, which I've praised in the past as a flexible price bridge between season tickets and single games, is more expensive than ever, at odds with Hall's "most affordable commitment"- and rather astonishing given the economic climate.
2. On Opening Day at The Lovely Morgan, two seats in the vast upper deck Infield Reserve run you $50 online. These are not box seats hugging the rail. Outrageous for an Opener? Maybe not, but several NL teams ask less for comparable seats, including the Braves, who charge $35.05 inclusive, a whopping 30% less than our self-described "most affordable" franchise.
3. In addition to raising prices, USA Today reports the Dbacks took grim note of the spiraling economy, and in an edict that must delight Marie Antoinette's ghost, "will invite fans to bring their own food to the ballpark." Hall, the communications Svengali most responsible for a half empty stadium, is now "inviting" people to bring their own food - something they've always been allowed to do. What windfall can a strapped populace expect next from Paradise Valley's Pied Piper of Affordability? A cheerful offer to walk to games in July, to save on fuel and parking?
This uncommonly useless "invite" could fool a few Phoenicians to buy overpriced tix they otherwise wouldnt, but brown bagging upper deck patrons also require fewer support staff (vendors, concessionaires, cleanup). This is classic Derrick - saving the club bucks and peddling it as some illusory fan "benefit". Maybe we wont have to walk to games in the searing summer, but expect a healthy walk if you want a soda or dog in the upper deck -that concourse may largely shut down, like it was late 2004, when Kendrick slashed point of sale services.
To be fair, it's still twenty six days til gameday. At this point, however, I've decided not to buy seats until prices better reflect the real market - especially considering Mr Hall has hinted at attractive deals. I imagine a lack of sales revenue as much as any concerted marketing "plan" will generate more realistic offers as the year progresses - as in previous seasons.
Perhaps not in April, when an unusually high profile home schedule should dramatically bolster the gate. But soon enough. Mr Hall has stood out from MLB peers, brimming with optimism about seasonal attendance - he says it looks flat, or possibly up slightly from last year. While it's too early to call his bluff, preliminary indications on the ticketing web pages and elsewhere - at these prices - suggest Mr Hall may be eating his cake before customers are having any of it.
**********************
Song of the Day - Show Me (My Fair Lady)
Here's how some teams are actually enticing fans, with more than a line and a smile (hat tip: AZ Snakepit):
- The ever uber-demand Yankees, boasting a glittering new park, introduced $5 tickets.
- The Blue Jays, with an empty seat problem similar to the Dbacks, now offer 81 games in the upper deck for $95 - that's $1.17 per game, in one of North America's largest, moneyed metros.
- The Brewers and Braves, midmarket teams that outdrew Arizona, now sell dollar seats, according to USA Today.
- The Astros, who also outdrew AZ and play in a larger, higher income market, offer a ten pack for just $70. Compare with Arizona's upper deck Ten Pack, starting at $120 (I was billed $173.50 for mine, which I immediately cancelled.)
- The Twins are having fun with the recession, tying daily ticket prices to the stock market. What used to be $21 seats are going for $6-7.
How have the Dbacks responded?
1. Their 10 pack, which I've praised in the past as a flexible price bridge between season tickets and single games, is more expensive than ever, at odds with Hall's "most affordable commitment"- and rather astonishing given the economic climate.
2. On Opening Day at The Lovely Morgan, two seats in the vast upper deck Infield Reserve run you $50 online. These are not box seats hugging the rail. Outrageous for an Opener? Maybe not, but several NL teams ask less for comparable seats, including the Braves, who charge $35.05 inclusive, a whopping 30% less than our self-described "most affordable" franchise.
3. In addition to raising prices, USA Today reports the Dbacks took grim note of the spiraling economy, and in an edict that must delight Marie Antoinette's ghost, "will invite fans to bring their own food to the ballpark." Hall, the communications Svengali most responsible for a half empty stadium, is now "inviting" people to bring their own food - something they've always been allowed to do. What windfall can a strapped populace expect next from Paradise Valley's Pied Piper of Affordability? A cheerful offer to walk to games in July, to save on fuel and parking?
This uncommonly useless "invite" could fool a few Phoenicians to buy overpriced tix they otherwise wouldnt, but brown bagging upper deck patrons also require fewer support staff (vendors, concessionaires, cleanup). This is classic Derrick - saving the club bucks and peddling it as some illusory fan "benefit". Maybe we wont have to walk to games in the searing summer, but expect a healthy walk if you want a soda or dog in the upper deck -that concourse may largely shut down, like it was late 2004, when Kendrick slashed point of sale services.
To be fair, it's still twenty six days til gameday. At this point, however, I've decided not to buy seats until prices better reflect the real market - especially considering Mr Hall has hinted at attractive deals. I imagine a lack of sales revenue as much as any concerted marketing "plan" will generate more realistic offers as the year progresses - as in previous seasons.
Perhaps not in April, when an unusually high profile home schedule should dramatically bolster the gate. But soon enough. Mr Hall has stood out from MLB peers, brimming with optimism about seasonal attendance - he says it looks flat, or possibly up slightly from last year. While it's too early to call his bluff, preliminary indications on the ticketing web pages and elsewhere - at these prices - suggest Mr Hall may be eating his cake before customers are having any of it.
**********************
Song of the Day - Show Me (My Fair Lady)
06 March 2009
Sticking the "Plus" to Ten Pack
Single game tickets will go on sale soon, so I thought I'd grab me a "Ten Pack" instead. They've been a good value, even with silly, last minute fees that dont pop up until the invoice page. No blackout dates, buy a minimum of ten seats across as many games as you want- in any combination - for considerably less than what single tickets cost. ( One time, we scored club level tix for well below what season ticket holders pay, without the 83 game commitment. Nice! )
Anyway, I log in last night to buy the 2009 10 PackPlus; the one advertised for $120, where they toss in a $10 Fry's Gift Card. There was only one catch: it cost $173.50.
Ugh. I cancelled the order. It's not just the fees. Those were "only" $23.50 and are old hat. What's new is $30 of add-ons for so called premier games. Previous packs waived premier differentials since, presumably, you were committing to a ten ticket minimum - a pretty nice incentive to splurge for the bigger overall outlay.
Characteristically, the Dbacks dangled a $10 Gift Card to distract from a pair of underreported unpleasantries - the aforementioned premier charges, plus the $10 increase ($110 to $120) from the 2008 package base price, essentially negating the bright and shiny Fry's Card. These maneuvers have Derrick and his buddies' fingerprints all over it, yakking wide-eyed about value and affordability while quietly crafting derivative hikes on the cusp of a national depression.
To be fair, the premier levies arent completely hidden. The Ten Pack page does indicate upfront those games will cost you more (although it doesnt tell you which games, or how much more, until after you order). So while fraud isnt the issue here, being invoiced 44% more than the advertised $120 is a bit of a jolt, especially considering the mailing/will call fee is only $3.50 and there's no added tax.
The practical issue is: Why should a fan commit to ten tickets now, at $17 per seat in the upper bowl, when he can buy the same (or fewer) seats individually, for close to the same price later? Based on the row numbers offererd in my aborted order, many fans seem to share this hesitation. I received rows 8 and 9 for every game (including the Opener and the 4/10 Dodger Friday night premier), which are the first two rows in the relevant sections! That's not to say big games wont eventually draw well or even sell out - single game sales havent started and Opening Day is still four weeks away -but these packages have been advertised since before the holidays and it appears (from the row numbers) the club has sold next to none of them.
Which is interesting in that CEO Derrick Hall has, unlike most clubs, consistently exuded confidence projecting 2009 attendance. It could be warranted. He has propietary data to look at and we agree a depression in Phoenix could benefit local summer entertainments - escaping to an air conditioned ballgame (or theatre or bowling alley) will be cheaper than escaping to San Diego or elsewhere.
All the same, havent the Dbacks hiked the effective cost of their value packs at a most curious time? Why would any enterprise, particularly one relying on discretionary income, substantially raise the practical cost of their value packs now? In March of 2009, it's ironic to consider that such a firm sabotaging its most attractive deals, may also be the outfit least shy with the superlatives when it comes to their self-described value, affordability and sincere commitment to customers.
Anyway, I log in last night to buy the 2009 10 PackPlus; the one advertised for $120, where they toss in a $10 Fry's Gift Card. There was only one catch: it cost $173.50.
Ugh. I cancelled the order. It's not just the fees. Those were "only" $23.50 and are old hat. What's new is $30 of add-ons for so called premier games. Previous packs waived premier differentials since, presumably, you were committing to a ten ticket minimum - a pretty nice incentive to splurge for the bigger overall outlay.
Characteristically, the Dbacks dangled a $10 Gift Card to distract from a pair of underreported unpleasantries - the aforementioned premier charges, plus the $10 increase ($110 to $120) from the 2008 package base price, essentially negating the bright and shiny Fry's Card. These maneuvers have Derrick and his buddies' fingerprints all over it, yakking wide-eyed about value and affordability while quietly crafting derivative hikes on the cusp of a national depression.
To be fair, the premier levies arent completely hidden. The Ten Pack page does indicate upfront those games will cost you more (although it doesnt tell you which games, or how much more, until after you order). So while fraud isnt the issue here, being invoiced 44% more than the advertised $120 is a bit of a jolt, especially considering the mailing/will call fee is only $3.50 and there's no added tax.
The practical issue is: Why should a fan commit to ten tickets now, at $17 per seat in the upper bowl, when he can buy the same (or fewer) seats individually, for close to the same price later? Based on the row numbers offererd in my aborted order, many fans seem to share this hesitation. I received rows 8 and 9 for every game (including the Opener and the 4/10 Dodger Friday night premier), which are the first two rows in the relevant sections! That's not to say big games wont eventually draw well or even sell out - single game sales havent started and Opening Day is still four weeks away -but these packages have been advertised since before the holidays and it appears (from the row numbers) the club has sold next to none of them.
Which is interesting in that CEO Derrick Hall has, unlike most clubs, consistently exuded confidence projecting 2009 attendance. It could be warranted. He has propietary data to look at and we agree a depression in Phoenix could benefit local summer entertainments - escaping to an air conditioned ballgame (or theatre or bowling alley) will be cheaper than escaping to San Diego or elsewhere.
All the same, havent the Dbacks hiked the effective cost of their value packs at a most curious time? Why would any enterprise, particularly one relying on discretionary income, substantially raise the practical cost of their value packs now? In March of 2009, it's ironic to consider that such a firm sabotaging its most attractive deals, may also be the outfit least shy with the superlatives when it comes to their self-described value, affordability and sincere commitment to customers.
01 June 2008
There You Go Again
When we got home after Saturday night's game, we parked the car, parked ourselves on the sofa and, even more predictably, Derrick Hall parked himself on the FSN postgame show. It cracks me up when he dutifully thanks nervous underlings, like Mark McClune, for "inviting" him onto this hour long Diamondbacks commercial masquerading as an analysis segment - like Derrick's a guest by virtue of anything other than the fact he runs the place. After losing four in a row with more paltry homestand attendance numbers (through Friday, anyway), Hall appeared eager to pounce into the booth at the first wisp of good news in a week - a Dbacks' victory -to inflate flagging public confidence, with his confidence game.
The Dbacks had been freefalling against the weakest overall schedule in all of baseball, and with Webb facing the NL's worst offense and some kid named Bergmann - let's face it - they really needed the win. But to listen to Derrick (and local fans have little choice in the matter), everything's wonderful or soon will be. His team (the one with the sub .500 RPI) is great and incredibly exciting. Every aspect of the Chase Field experience is "great", although customers - the people even Hall would publicly concede matter most - beg to differ. Indeed, several fans near me last night in Sec. 133 complained about various aspects of Hall's dumbed down assault on the game experience.
Derrick even abandoned laments about lagging season ticket sales to suddenly assert they're fantastic, which likely represents a manipulation of terms more than a particularly meaningful increase in sales. He hinted the current base is almost 16000 - "up from 12000 a year ago" - yet a year ago he claimed the base was 14000 - I know, because we discussed this subject in a 2007 online chat. He quoted the 14K figure all over town back then. Well, sometime this spring, after that record breaking 94% ST retention he likes to brag about, it turns out the 2007 base was more like 12000.
Well, la di da.
This is the kind of creative accounting that positions Congressional spending increases as "cuts" and gave us the quarter million "trained" Iraqi police three years ago who ended war as we know it - but Hall gets away with his shenanagans because this isnt life and death after all - it's only baseball (a $6B enterprise with fiercely private books and publicly financed stadiums). The solemn visage of Don Rumsfeld or Ted Kennedy isn't required here - just a boyish looking Team President with years of high level executive experience, grinning like an oblivious greeter at Wal-Mart.
He tried to plant the perception that the season ticket base grew by almost 4000 (30+%) since last year, which is either true or false depending on how one defines "season tickets". If you define them (as 99% of the public does) as full season packages, Hall's claim is laughably false, as evidenced by individual game crowds this year barely eking over historical franchise lows. An Astros game in April failed to draw twenty thousand; the Giants barely drew 21 last Thursday - figures incompatible with an influx of four thousand new season ticket holders.
So, this "four thousand" (or is it two thousand, I forget?), evidently includes the morass of partial packages which is just how Derrick Hall likes it. Why? Because it's confusing as hell and he can fashion unlike numbers into misleading impressions without ever defining his terms. And dont think he doesnt know it. In the same 2007 online chat, my request for a breakdown of full and partial packages was deftly and cheerfully sidestepped. It's powerful information he doesnt want to give up.
Instead, Hall prefers to implicitly (and obtusely) define "season tickets" one way, hoping to spark a buzz amongst a public that defines the term entirely differently (and more accurately). Not long ago, I purchased a ten pack for about $150. For all I know, I'm one of his new 4000 season ticket holders, which would be downright amusing were it not for the fact that I enjoy none of the discounts or privileges associated with that designation.
The Dbacks had been freefalling against the weakest overall schedule in all of baseball, and with Webb facing the NL's worst offense and some kid named Bergmann - let's face it - they really needed the win. But to listen to Derrick (and local fans have little choice in the matter), everything's wonderful or soon will be. His team (the one with the sub .500 RPI) is great and incredibly exciting. Every aspect of the Chase Field experience is "great", although customers - the people even Hall would publicly concede matter most - beg to differ. Indeed, several fans near me last night in Sec. 133 complained about various aspects of Hall's dumbed down assault on the game experience.
Derrick even abandoned laments about lagging season ticket sales to suddenly assert they're fantastic, which likely represents a manipulation of terms more than a particularly meaningful increase in sales. He hinted the current base is almost 16000 - "up from 12000 a year ago" - yet a year ago he claimed the base was 14000 - I know, because we discussed this subject in a 2007 online chat. He quoted the 14K figure all over town back then. Well, sometime this spring, after that record breaking 94% ST retention he likes to brag about, it turns out the 2007 base was more like 12000.
Well, la di da.
This is the kind of creative accounting that positions Congressional spending increases as "cuts" and gave us the quarter million "trained" Iraqi police three years ago who ended war as we know it - but Hall gets away with his shenanagans because this isnt life and death after all - it's only baseball (a $6B enterprise with fiercely private books and publicly financed stadiums). The solemn visage of Don Rumsfeld or Ted Kennedy isn't required here - just a boyish looking Team President with years of high level executive experience, grinning like an oblivious greeter at Wal-Mart.
He tried to plant the perception that the season ticket base grew by almost 4000 (30+%) since last year, which is either true or false depending on how one defines "season tickets". If you define them (as 99% of the public does) as full season packages, Hall's claim is laughably false, as evidenced by individual game crowds this year barely eking over historical franchise lows. An Astros game in April failed to draw twenty thousand; the Giants barely drew 21 last Thursday - figures incompatible with an influx of four thousand new season ticket holders.
So, this "four thousand" (or is it two thousand, I forget?), evidently includes the morass of partial packages which is just how Derrick Hall likes it. Why? Because it's confusing as hell and he can fashion unlike numbers into misleading impressions without ever defining his terms. And dont think he doesnt know it. In the same 2007 online chat, my request for a breakdown of full and partial packages was deftly and cheerfully sidestepped. It's powerful information he doesnt want to give up.
Instead, Hall prefers to implicitly (and obtusely) define "season tickets" one way, hoping to spark a buzz amongst a public that defines the term entirely differently (and more accurately). Not long ago, I purchased a ten pack for about $150. For all I know, I'm one of his new 4000 season ticket holders, which would be downright amusing were it not for the fact that I enjoy none of the discounts or privileges associated with that designation.
18 April 2008
This Week's Hacks
All I remember about Jackie Robinson was 1972, when he died in a Connecticut suburb adjacent to ours. He was not a player I naturally warmed to, so old and serious, the ancient embodiment of adult injustice encroaching on my child's game. I remember Howard Cosell, somberly imparting what a monumental figure had left us. Cosell was, like me, from Brooklyn, and idolized ol' 42. The other thing I remember was how old Robinson looked, like a second term President. He was only fifty three.
It helps to be old, older than me, to really appreciate what Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey did way back in 1947, less than two years after U.S. troops (many still segregated) stood up against at least the principle of ethnic cleansing, and eight years before Rosa Parks actually parked her rear on the front of that Mongomery bus. Even the NBA was all white. For Rickey to pull this off, he had to be right, and smarter than everyone else - and he was. As for Robinson, I never saw him play. My father had, at Ebbets Field, and said he was very good - but not as great as Hornsby.
MLB released quite a banquet of feel good homilies to their sacrificial lion, but none more meaty than this wonderfully hamfisted political screed from Mike Bauman. Enjoy!
While the Mets plan to honor Robinson at their new park, sadder news at their old one, the latest in a line of violent incidents at Shea. I'd document the trend, but cant summon the energy to rummage through MLBlogs for old drafts at the moment.
Speaking of MlBlogs, it needs to be noted that I can now create a sidebar link on my old blog! Ta da! That only took seventeen days. Why, it should be World Series time before Mark's crackerjack team:
And that's just the sidebar, folks.
The Dbacks have opened up MLB's largest lead (3.5 g), after taking the last four series against the NL West. Tonight, Arizona would seem to be heavy favorites over Greg Maddux and his lazy lidded Padres, who lost earlier today in the longest (and perhaps dullest) MLB game since 1993. San Diego exhausted six relievers over fourteen innings, but baseball is a funny game. Just when everything's going your way...boom!
Speaking of which, a young cocky Dbacks "Acct Executive" called yesterday, trying to sell me season tickets. Poor guy.
It helps to be old, older than me, to really appreciate what Jackie Robinson and Branch Rickey did way back in 1947, less than two years after U.S. troops (many still segregated) stood up against at least the principle of ethnic cleansing, and eight years before Rosa Parks actually parked her rear on the front of that Mongomery bus. Even the NBA was all white. For Rickey to pull this off, he had to be right, and smarter than everyone else - and he was. As for Robinson, I never saw him play. My father had, at Ebbets Field, and said he was very good - but not as great as Hornsby.
MLB released quite a banquet of feel good homilies to their sacrificial lion, but none more meaty than this wonderfully hamfisted political screed from Mike Bauman. Enjoy!
While the Mets plan to honor Robinson at their new park, sadder news at their old one, the latest in a line of violent incidents at Shea. I'd document the trend, but cant summon the energy to rummage through MLBlogs for old drafts at the moment.
Speaking of MlBlogs, it needs to be noted that I can now create a sidebar link on my old blog! Ta da! That only took seventeen days. Why, it should be World Series time before Mark's crackerjack team:
- restores link list order capability (other than alphabetical)
- restores order capability within a given list
- restores the Tooltip option, so sidebars arent cluttered with unwanted text
- restores Display/Dont Display capability on Link Lists, so that Lists in Draft Status dont automatically display.
- restores image, caption and layout specifications on all photo albums created
- restores html functionality to enable widget basics like Site Meters, Team Schedules, Weather Icons and customized color and font coding.
And that's just the sidebar, folks.
The Dbacks have opened up MLB's largest lead (3.5 g), after taking the last four series against the NL West. Tonight, Arizona would seem to be heavy favorites over Greg Maddux and his lazy lidded Padres, who lost earlier today in the longest (and perhaps dullest) MLB game since 1993. San Diego exhausted six relievers over fourteen innings, but baseball is a funny game. Just when everything's going your way...boom!
Speaking of which, a young cocky Dbacks "Acct Executive" called yesterday, trying to sell me season tickets. Poor guy.
20 January 2008
2008 Diamondback Prices (Part I) : Season Tickets
Ordinarily, deconstructing a baseball club's ticket prices is of limited interest, but due to inventive press releases oozing from Derrick Hall's Office of Misinformation, this mundane exercise rises to something of a public service in Arizona. Rather than allow Mr Hall's elaborate craftsmanship to speak for his organization's strategic pricing model - we'll let prices speak for themselves, serving to illustrate some overdue lessons learned.
First, here are 2008 season ticket rates. The very best and worst seats at Chase Field held steady with 2007: lower level clubhouse seats behind the plate remain $110 each, as do the theoretically attractive $8 and $5 options comprising most of the upper deck. In every other seating area, however, the price of season tickets changed:
Lower Deck (per seat)
1st/3rd Base Box $75........up 15%
Dugout Box $65.........up 18%
Infield Box $35.........up 13%
Baseline Reserve $21..........up 5%
New buffer sections $15........down 25%
Bullpen Reserve $10...........down 38%
Bleachers $10.......................down 16%
Middle Deck
Box $36..........down 10%
Reserve $21...down 25%
Bullpen $15.....down 46%
Upper Deck
MVP Box $17........down 11%
The best lower level seats increased in price, but why all these dramatic discounts after a surprisingly successful, even watershed season? When you already offer "the lowest prices in baseball"? Derrick Hall desperately wants fans to believe these changes represent a "reward" to loyal fans, but it turns out he's increased prices where most of the "loyal" base resides, and reduced prices in relatively empty sections - in hopes of driving new sales. This strategy better reflects (and exploits) actual demand across the venue and is, indeed, a welcome (and overdue) change - however, it has nothing to do with rewarding the currrent ST fan base.
The fans "rewarded" today are the constituency of holdouts who declined to buy season tickets at previous prices, who may have an interest in doing so now. And they're not being rewarded in any altrusitic sense - rather, their collective self discipline has forced the somnambulant, Paradise Valley-based "Dream Team" to face the bracing truth that much of Chase Field has been overpriced for this particular market - now placing Hall in the extraordinary position of slashing many pricepoints on the heels of a shocking playoff appearance, in order to drive revenue.
This, and some of the club's more documented miscalculations - throwing a veritable army of popular team fixtures (Colangelo, Gonzo, team colors, dollar seats, etc.) under the proverbial Sedona Red bus - shouldnt blind fans to the fact that there are attractive season ticket deals to be had here, relative to the rest of MLB. For example, does any other team offer lower level seats inside the foul pole for just $10? Starting in 2008, the Diamondbacks do. Kudos. Outfield sections of the Zirconia club level, which gathered dust at $28, now sell for between $15 and $21. And, just as last year, one can still buy a respectable upper level seat for $8.
Well, 83 seats minimum, or if you're like most people, 166 and up. Bear in mind, we're talking season tickets, but if you're price conscious and interested in that kind of commitment, these are significant changes. If the ST base expands, it will do so almost exclusively from these targeted areas, largely unoccupied since 2005 (when new ownership curiously hiked ST prices 8% after the worst on field performance by any National League team in forty years).
To the extent price reductions fail to increase the base much, one shouldnt assume Phoenix has innately uninterested fans. Current TV ratings and earlier attendance at the ballpark (1998-2004) strongly suggest otherwise. Has there been a drop of utility at the ballpark transcending simple won lost record? We're talking about a 2007 team that grabbed first place in July, with "the lowest prices in baseball", yet still got outdrawn by a 2004 death squad that lost 111 games with, presumably, higher prices - contradicting the enormously popular notion that Phoenix is some unusually shallow, frontrunning fan base that only supports a winner. Something else, clearly, is suppressing recent ticket sales.
First, the brazen and disingenuous zeal with which new ownership discarded aspects of franchise identity has turned off many locals, particularly older fans. To them, so-called Sedona Red almost seems like a different franchise, one worthy of a separate moniker, a la "Chameleons". Second, the Dream Team suppresses walk up sales by charging the largest % single-game differentials in all of MLB. Third, the team pimps this singularly regressive shell game in MLB's lowest per capita income market. And fourth, variable or sectional pricing around the stadium can only be described as peculiar, at least in terms of driving actual sales - to wit, slashing ST rates in the massive upper level Infield Reserve, despite structurally tepid demand for 83+ seats that far from the earth's crust.
The Diamondbacks may not have earned many tangible customers from that lofty exercise, but Derrick Hall has derived plenty of mileage from it nonetheless. It turns out that Chase season tickets now rank as MLB's most affordable overall, largely due to these upper deck "deals" that hardly anyone wants. Hall has had a field day embellishing this rather empty acheivement, (more on that later), but the larger point is that a weighted average of ST prices doesnt necessarily reflect actual values at the park, as defined by those who know best: fans. Nor do these "averages" reflect single-game or comprehensive prices in any way. In both cases, this is especially true of the D-Backs.
Unfortunately, no reliable study exists regarding single game pricing, because MLB's dizzying jumble of differentials, premiums and premier game schedules, overlayed on top of 30 distinct seating configurations each with unique ST penetration and seat amenities, renders such a comparison more exhausting than exhaustive.
So, instead, everyone uses TMR's season ticket figures - not because they're definitive or comprehensive, but because they're far easier for TMR to capture. And that's a shame, because fans of certain teams, who rely exclusively on the TMR, receive a distorted view of their team's relative standing on overall pricing. Comparing apples to apples can be instructive, less so when evaluating entire produce departments.
First, here are 2008 season ticket rates. The very best and worst seats at Chase Field held steady with 2007: lower level clubhouse seats behind the plate remain $110 each, as do the theoretically attractive $8 and $5 options comprising most of the upper deck. In every other seating area, however, the price of season tickets changed:
Lower Deck (per seat)
1st/3rd Base Box $75........up 15%
Dugout Box $65.........up 18%
Infield Box $35.........up 13%
Baseline Reserve $21..........up 5%
New buffer sections $15........down 25%
Bullpen Reserve $10...........down 38%
Bleachers $10.......................down 16%
Middle Deck
Box $36..........down 10%
Reserve $21...down 25%
Bullpen $15.....down 46%
Upper Deck
MVP Box $17........down 11%
The best lower level seats increased in price, but why all these dramatic discounts after a surprisingly successful, even watershed season? When you already offer "the lowest prices in baseball"? Derrick Hall desperately wants fans to believe these changes represent a "reward" to loyal fans, but it turns out he's increased prices where most of the "loyal" base resides, and reduced prices in relatively empty sections - in hopes of driving new sales. This strategy better reflects (and exploits) actual demand across the venue and is, indeed, a welcome (and overdue) change - however, it has nothing to do with rewarding the currrent ST fan base.
The fans "rewarded" today are the constituency of holdouts who declined to buy season tickets at previous prices, who may have an interest in doing so now. And they're not being rewarded in any altrusitic sense - rather, their collective self discipline has forced the somnambulant, Paradise Valley-based "Dream Team" to face the bracing truth that much of Chase Field has been overpriced for this particular market - now placing Hall in the extraordinary position of slashing many pricepoints on the heels of a shocking playoff appearance, in order to drive revenue.
This, and some of the club's more documented miscalculations - throwing a veritable army of popular team fixtures (Colangelo, Gonzo, team colors, dollar seats, etc.) under the proverbial Sedona Red bus - shouldnt blind fans to the fact that there are attractive season ticket deals to be had here, relative to the rest of MLB. For example, does any other team offer lower level seats inside the foul pole for just $10? Starting in 2008, the Diamondbacks do. Kudos. Outfield sections of the Zirconia club level, which gathered dust at $28, now sell for between $15 and $21. And, just as last year, one can still buy a respectable upper level seat for $8.
Well, 83 seats minimum, or if you're like most people, 166 and up. Bear in mind, we're talking season tickets, but if you're price conscious and interested in that kind of commitment, these are significant changes. If the ST base expands, it will do so almost exclusively from these targeted areas, largely unoccupied since 2005 (when new ownership curiously hiked ST prices 8% after the worst on field performance by any National League team in forty years).
To the extent price reductions fail to increase the base much, one shouldnt assume Phoenix has innately uninterested fans. Current TV ratings and earlier attendance at the ballpark (1998-2004) strongly suggest otherwise. Has there been a drop of utility at the ballpark transcending simple won lost record? We're talking about a 2007 team that grabbed first place in July, with "the lowest prices in baseball", yet still got outdrawn by a 2004 death squad that lost 111 games with, presumably, higher prices - contradicting the enormously popular notion that Phoenix is some unusually shallow, frontrunning fan base that only supports a winner. Something else, clearly, is suppressing recent ticket sales.
First, the brazen and disingenuous zeal with which new ownership discarded aspects of franchise identity has turned off many locals, particularly older fans. To them, so-called Sedona Red almost seems like a different franchise, one worthy of a separate moniker, a la "Chameleons". Second, the Dream Team suppresses walk up sales by charging the largest % single-game differentials in all of MLB. Third, the team pimps this singularly regressive shell game in MLB's lowest per capita income market. And fourth, variable or sectional pricing around the stadium can only be described as peculiar, at least in terms of driving actual sales - to wit, slashing ST rates in the massive upper level Infield Reserve, despite structurally tepid demand for 83+ seats that far from the earth's crust.
The Diamondbacks may not have earned many tangible customers from that lofty exercise, but Derrick Hall has derived plenty of mileage from it nonetheless. It turns out that Chase season tickets now rank as MLB's most affordable overall, largely due to these upper deck "deals" that hardly anyone wants. Hall has had a field day embellishing this rather empty acheivement, (more on that later), but the larger point is that a weighted average of ST prices doesnt necessarily reflect actual values at the park, as defined by those who know best: fans. Nor do these "averages" reflect single-game or comprehensive prices in any way. In both cases, this is especially true of the D-Backs.
Unfortunately, no reliable study exists regarding single game pricing, because MLB's dizzying jumble of differentials, premiums and premier game schedules, overlayed on top of 30 distinct seating configurations each with unique ST penetration and seat amenities, renders such a comparison more exhausting than exhaustive.
So, instead, everyone uses TMR's season ticket figures - not because they're definitive or comprehensive, but because they're far easier for TMR to capture. And that's a shame, because fans of certain teams, who rely exclusively on the TMR, receive a distorted view of their team's relative standing on overall pricing. Comparing apples to apples can be instructive, less so when evaluating entire produce departments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
