Friday roundup: Orioles owners get millions from state for no reason at all, plus whose relatives to hire as stadium lobbyists

Happy Friday! Just a heads-up that I’m going to be traveling some in the next 2-3 weeks, so there may be days when posts happen at weird hours or not at all. (Next week’s Friday Roundup stands an excellent chance of being a Saturday Roundup, for example.) On the bright side, I plan on picking up and mailing the Vaportecture prints before I hit the road, so those of you who’ve donated to the site will have something to entertain you on otherwise FoS-less mornings.

That’s all in the future, though, so let’s see what the recent past has in store:

  • Here is a lovely story about how the Baltimore Orioles owners decided that the lease they signed agreeing to give 45% of revenues from baseball events to the state didn’t work for them anymore, and asked the state to let them keep all the proceeds from a recent Paul McCartney concert. And the state stadium authority said sure, fine, it’s only money, at least we’ll get sales taxes! No, really, that’s what Maryland Stadium Authority chair Thomas Kelso said: “It’s a great thing. We take no risk and we make 8% of the total amount of tickets sold.” Except the other way, the way that the team owners agreed to, was to provide 45% of the actual concert revenues — if I’m reverse engineering the math right, that’s $4.5 million that the state of Maryland just handed over to the Orioles management because they asked. Time for me to move to Maryland and start asking the state for free money, they’re just giving it away!
  • WTVF-TV in Nashville has looked at the list of lobbyists hired by the Tennessee Titans owners to push for their new $2 billion stadium plan that could get $1.2 billion in subsidies, and hey, check it out, it’s the wife of the chair of the state Senate Finance Committee and the daughter of the state’s Commissioner of Tourist Development! The TV station tracking down the finance committee chair and asked him if there were ethical concerns here, and he said “Ah, no” and “There are rules in place for our kind of relationship, and I follow all of them” and he surely doesn’t know why his wife landed a ton more lobbying contracts right after she married him, jeez, you journalists and your questions, get a life already!
  • Speaking of Nashville, were you wanting to read an op-ed in the Tennessean newspaper by Nashville Mayor John Cooper about how spending $1.2 billion on a Titans stadium won’t really cost taxpayers anything because otherwise the city would have to spend “tens of millions of dollars per year” on renovations and anyway sales and hotel taxes aren’t really “your” tax money so don’t worry about it? That’s what you want from your news outlets, right, turning over space to local elected officials for long press releases without any context or asking them any questions? No need to answer, consider it done!
  • And finally from the Protestant Vatican/Hot Chicken Capital, turns out there isn’t enough parking at Nashville S.C.‘s stadium and the team has stopped running shuttle buses and fans are having to walk home when they can’t get a rideshare. Clearly the team needs a new stadium, the old one isn’t fan-friendly and is … 11 days old? That’s practically a century in stadium years, bring on the bulldozers!
  • The Erie County legislature has approved the first $100 million of its $250 million in spending on a Buffalo Bills stadium, but hasn’t yet voted on the full memorandum of understanding. The Bills owners were only supposed to receive $75 million up front originally, but the legislature upped this to $100 million because, writes the Buffalo News paraphrasing county chair April Baskin, “it became more clear that putting money down toward the stadium now will free up millions more in the future to redirect toward other county priorities.” Buffalo News, have you met the Tennessean? I bet you guys would get along swimmingly.
  • New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft is spending $225 million of his own money on a renovation of his 20-year-old stadium, which will include “a new and enhanced lighthouse in the north endzone” and “a new fan-activation area on the lower plaza” and other things that maybe make sense if you are either a Patriots fan or a marketing executive. Such is the state of the world that we feel obligated to call this a good thing because Kraft didn’t ask the state of Massachusetts to pay for this, though given Kraft’s past experience this is almost certainly because the state of Massachusetts likely would have told him to go pound sand. (Yes, despite Massachusetts being one of those East Coast states without California-style voter referendum laws. I never said that the map of the Progressive movement explained everything!)
  • I hate linking to the New York Post because I don’t want to give them the clicks, but also I like dragging them in public, so: Here’s a New York Post article about how NBA teams are hiking ticket prices even while attendance is falling. The Post portrays this as either a savvy move to make up for falling revenues or maybe a risk of alienating already-alienated fans, but … maybe they got the causality backwards, and attendance is falling because ticket prices are going up, like microeconomics says is supposed to happen? Or, wait, hang on, the Post “calculated average ticket prices by dividing gate receipts by paid attendance,” so maybe this is just a sign that more casual NBA fans are staying home to watch on TV, leaving pricey-ticket buyers disporportionately in the seats? The Post is a terrible excuse for a newspaper, any and all basic logic errors are possible!
  • KSHB-TV in Kansas City wanted to know if building new stadiums for the Chiefs and Royals was a good idea, so they talked to team executives, a guy from the city’s downtown business council, two people at a moving company, two sports radio hosts, and me. Kansas City diner patrons should rightfully be feeling unrepresented right now.
Share this post:

Friday roundup: Ex-D.C. mayor says his $534m Nats stadium expense was worth it, Clippers arena stymied by car trouble, MLS franchise fees to go even higher

Shouldn’t posting items more regularly during the week leave less news to round up on Fridays? I’m pretty sure that’s how it’s supposed to work, but here I am on Friday with even more browser tabs open than usual, and I’m sure someone is still going to complain that I left out, say, the latest on arena site discussions in Saskatoon. I guess lemme type really fast and see how many I can get through before my fingers fall off:

 

Share this post:

Maple Leafs ticket prices aren’t part of a grand conspiracy, except for the usual ones

A headline like “Why are NHL tickets expensive in Toronto? Because they’re cheap in Phoenix” has got to be pretty much irresistable if you’re an editor at the Globe and Mail. But does columnist Tony Keller actually make that case? Let’s follow the bouncing argument:

  • The Toronto Maple Leafs can charge through the nose for tickets because demand for hockey in Ontario exceeds the supply.
  • The Arizona Coyotes can’t charge squat for tickets because demand for hockey in Arizona is a sad joke.
  • If the Coyotes moved to Toronto or even Hamilton, it would cut into the Leafs’ market, and they’d be forced to lower ticket prices.
  • Since the Coyotes don’t make money, they have to be subsidized by revenue sharing from teams like the Leafs.
  • “The MLSE golden goose helps subsidize a squad of American lame duck franchises; those lame ducks, stuck in dry ponds, make necessary a golden goose in Toronto.”

All of this is technically true, but there are some leaps of logic here: There’s no reason to think that the NHL would allow the Coyotes to move to within spitting distance of Toronto if they left Arizona, and that Toronto “golden goose” is something the league presumably would want to keep around (and the Leafs owners would absolutely want to keep around) with or without the Coyotes’ revenue issues. There’s a difference between “the Maple Leafs owners are willing to send some money to the Coyotes’ owners to maintain their monopoly” and “this is all part of a grand conspiracy to screw hockey fans both coming and going.” (Except inasmuch as trying to use your monopoly power as the only major pro league to jack up ticket prices is the plan for pretty much every sports league that doesn’t have open promotion and relegation.)

That said, it is undeniably true that if territorial rights were eliminated and teams could move wherever they wanted, it would be arguably good for hockey fans (except those in lousy hockey markets like Phoenix) and maybe even good for the league as a whole — just the same as it would be for MLB if the Steinbrenners and Wilpons didn’t have monopoly rights to New York City. But then, sports leagues aren’t really monolithic corporations, but rather cartels of individual business owners, each in it for themselves. The only conspiracy at work here is the profit motive combined with the failure to enforce antitrust laws, which is a bigger problem than just for hockey.

Share this post:

John Oliver’s “dress like you don’t belong there” Yankees stunt ends sadly hobo-free

John Oliver’s stunt to put fans in premium New York Yankees seats who promise to dress like they’ve never been there before — a dig at team COO Lonn Trost, who defended the team’s ticket resale restrictions because sitting next to non-rich folks would be a “frustration to our existing fan base” — ended up more of a costume party, with fans dressed as Ninja Turtles, sharks, unicorns, and dinosaurs ending up seated behind home plate.

john-oliver-ninja-turtlesAP_16098111550650bronx-unicornsoliverfansAll things considered, I’ve got to say that this is kind of disappointing. The ostensible goal of this gimmick was to point out the classism behind Trost’s statement: He was implying that if fans could buy good seats for below face value, the ones who’d paid full price would be offended by having to sit next to the hoi polloi. (It’s probable that Trost doesn’t actually believe this, of course; he’s more concerned that if fans can buy seats for below face value, he’ll have a harder time selling them for thousands of dollars a pop.) Instead, it turned into two frat brothers from Villanova putting on cheap dinosaur outfits and sitting behind home plate, which is pretty much like every day at Yankee Stadium, only the dinosaurs the fans are dressing as aren’t wearing number 13.

If Oliver’s staff really wanted to drive home the point, they’d have given the tickets to somebody dressed like this: Emmett_Kelly_1953If nothing else, I’d have loved to have seen what happened when they went to sign up for the fingerprint scanning to get a fast pass through security.

Share this post:

John Oliver offers premium Yankees tickets for 25 cents to anyone who’ll annoy the rich folk

If you’ve been following the sad story of the New York Yankees banning the use of print-at-home tickets in part on the grounds that, as team COO Lonn Trost put it, it’s “a frustration to our existing fan base” that the people sitting next to them “may be someone who has never sat in a premium location,” you will enjoy John Oliver’s latest excursion into sports, in which he offers to sell two seats behind the plate at the first three Yankees home games for 25 cents apiece to anyone who promises to dress as if they’re never sat in a premium location before:

Yesterday’s Yankees home opener was rained out and rescheduled for today at 1pm. I can’t wait to tune in and see who’s sitting behind the plate, and how long it takes before team security forces whisk them off to a black site, or at least the bleachers.

Share this post:

Postseason ticket rejection saddens Mets fans, new stadium in part to blame

The New York Mets held their ticket lottery for the National League Division Series yesterday, and me and pretty much everyone I know were among those getting the “Sorry, try again next round” letter. Which put us in good company, according to Mets fan Twitter:

https://twitter.com/laurabelle44/status/643428364338892803?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Now, part of this is just the calculus of a team just returning to popularity in a big market: There are only so many tickets to go around, and no baseball fan in the city is willing to bet on Mets playoff appearances becoming an annual occurrence, stocked young pitching staff or no.

There’s another big difference between now and the last time the Mets made it to October in 2006, though, and it has nothing to do with jettisoning Paul Lukas’s least favorite uniforms. Rather, this will be (assuming the Mets don’t suffer an even more catastrophic collapse than their last couple) the first postseason played at the Mets’ new stadium, and as I noted last night for Vice Sports, Citi Field is way smaller capacity than its predecessor:

In 2006, the Mets still played at Shea Stadium, which—as was the custom in the 1960s, when it was built—could hold a hefty 57,333 fans. Citi Field, born 2009, falls more than 15,000 fans shy of that mark, though it does offer an additional 3,000 standing-room-only slots. The organization settled on this design decision for a couple of reasons:

  1. With all the luxury seating and clubs taking up more space on the lower levels, an additional 15,000 seats would have sent the new upper deck into a stratosphere far worse even than Shea’s famed nosebleeds.
  2. A smaller capacity meant it would be easier to sell out games without offering steep discounts on tickets.

That’s worked out pretty well for regular season games—Citi feels, if not exactly intimate, at least not cavernous, and the Mets have mostly been bad enough for there still to be plenty of discounts. Now that it’s the postseason, however, that’s an extra 20 to 30,000 fans per round who’ll be stuck watching at home.

There are other reasons why non-season-ticket-holder Mets fans might be getting the cold shoulder more than expected about now — for one thing, the team is apparently holding back some postseason seats to try to entice fans into plunking down deposits on season plans for 2016, despite not having indicated yet what prices will be for 2016. Plus, StubHub and its ilk have utterly changed how ticket markets operate — while it’s not completely linear, it has mostly meant that tickets to unpopular games are easy to get for dirt cheap, while the sky’s the limit on popular ones.

All of which means that the trend that rich fans are increasingly buying a larger and larger share of sports tickets should be expected to be even more true for playoff games, in all sports. Too bad New York City couldn’t have left Shea Stadium standing in the parking lot for big postseason series, like in olden times.

Share this post:

Crain’s Cleveland editors dis ticket taxes, reveal they don’t understand how ticket taxes work

This Cleveland Scene article about the stadium sin tax debate is a week old, but I just noticed something in it that really needs to be commented on:

Crain’s Cleveland Business published an editorial this week officially endorsing the sin tax as well. They insisted their stance had nothing to do with their connections to the business community; nor was the endorsement a snap decision. “It came after thorough consideration of the legal, practical and economic ramifications.”

Crain’s thinks an admissions tax is “not a smart” option because it would “dampen demand, which would defeat the purpose of using the buildings as magnets to attract people downtown.”

Let’s think this one through for a second. The argument that Crain’s is making (here’s the original editorial) is that tacking on an admission tax would raise ticket prices, making it less likely for people to go to games. And because going to games is the raison d’être of sports facilities — and publications like Crain’s pretend that people who don’t go to games just sit on their money and don’t spend it, but we’ll leave that aside for the moment — that would be a bad thing for the city.

Except that’s not how ticket prices work. Because the marginal cost of selling an extra ticket is pretty close to nil (you might have to hire a couple of additional ushers or hot dog vendors if more people are showing up to the game, but that’s a trivial cost per ticket), team owners are pretty much just setting prices based on what the market will bear — in other words, what people are willing to pay to go to a game instead of doing something else that night. So if Cuyahoga County were to apply a $2 per ticket surcharge, say, then the most likely scenario is that the Indians and Browns and Cavs would all cut ticket prices by around $2 to keep maximizing the amount of revenue they get from ticket sales. (Or, more likely, since teams hate to actually cut prices, they’d just hold off on ticket price hikes they otherwise would have implemented.)

It’s this pricing dynamic that is why virtually all economists count ticket taxes as part of a team owner’s contribution to a stadium project, even though it’s technically public tax money: It ultimately comes out of the owner’s pocket. If admission taxes are a legal possibility (some sports leases prohibit them), they’d actually be a great way for Cuyahoga County to live up to its lease commitment to fund upgrades to Cleveland’s sports facilities without hitting up local taxpayers too badly. Yet another important topic we didn’t have time for during the Octoboxathon.

Share this post:

Football fans oddly upset at being asked for more money

Time magazine has an overview of the trend toward personal seat licenses at NFL stadiums, and while there’s not a whole lot new there — fans resent paying them! but many do anyway! — it does include the greatest paragraph in the history of paragraphs:

During a public comment period after the agreement was reached, critics bashed the project as a raw deal for fans and taxpayers. “This is fricking ridiculous, man,” said Jeff Wagner, one of 35 candidates reportedly running for mayor in Minneapolis. Wagner removed his shoes and tossed them on the table before announcing, “You can keep my shoes because basically you are just stealing from the people.”

Just sit and enjoy that one. I think my favorite part is “reportedly.”

Share this post:

Ticket bubble watch: Slate today, Orlando ESPN tomorrow

I haven’t written much about the sports ticket bubble lately (though there’s plenty to comment on, including the Pittsburgh Piratesno-fee week and some impressively low StubHub prices for the New York Liberty). If you’ve been wanting an overview of the lay of the deflating-ticket-price land and what it could mean for the sports industry, check out my new article on the same in Slate.

On a related note, I’ll be on ESPN 1080 in Orlando at 10:05 am tomorrow (Friday), talking about my Nation article and the Slate article. If you’re in Orlando, tune in on your radio; if not, use the streaming doohickey.

Share this post:

Sports bubble watch: Yanks draw another record low

And it’s another record low attendance at the New York Yankees‘ new stadium:

An announced crowd of 40,081 came to the Bronx on Thursday night to watch Yankees-White Sox, setting a new low for attendance at the new Yankee Stadium.

The previous low was an announced crowd of 40,267 on April 5. Capacity at the new Stadium is a little over 52,000.

In case you’re wondering how overall MLB attendance is doing so far this year, it’s down about 2.3% at the moment, in line with the last time I checked, as well as with the per-season average over the last three years. It’s not a crisis just yet, but it is definitely a trend — and a further sign that the sports ticket price bubble is still deflating.

Share this post: