I'd promised this rant to Nate for a while, as it's been stewing in my head for a considerable amount of time. Since I'm struggling to get the wording right so that it doesn't come off like I'm a rich prick who doesn't care about fans, it took a little while. As you read this understand that I'm not rich, and I am a fan. But I'm also a businessman, and that is where I take my perspective.
I'm generally annoyed by the Natosphere's take on season tickets. Every time I read "I threw away my invoice for my 20 game package" it just makes my blood boil. The three main reasons given are these:
1. "The cost increase of a $1 a game is robbery"
2. "The cost increase of a $1 a game for the same/substandard product"
3. "The Nats are going to suck, so I don't want to give the team any money".
Let me start my rant here -- I paid for my 81-game package, and my seats are on the lower deck. Thus, my cost increase was measured in thousands of dollars, not hundreds. Since I own my own company, I buy the tickets for my customers and staff, and use a few with the Triple Play crew. So while it's something the company does
budget for, it's still smarts to pay a big jump. I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for those who are complaining.
Objection One: “"The cost increase of a $1 a game is robbery"
Price increases are the nature of the beast -- this is just what happens. Everyone likes to forget that baseball is, ultimately, a business. If you think anyone in MLB is doing this just for the love of the game, you're nuts -- and naive. Do you pay the same for gas that you did last year? How about food? Is your house worth the same as it was last year? Get over yourselves -- you're going to pay more every single year from now until the day you die for everything, including baseball tickets. If you want to feel better,
remember that I shelled out more than you did anyway. Feel good about that.
Objection Two: "The cost increase of a $1 a game for the same/substandard product"
Now, let's look at the product angle. Ultimately, the Nats on the field aren't the same team any year. I think every one is right in that this year, it's going to be worse than last. And this leads to Bowden -- I agree that the guy has made some really, really weird moves. However, unlike every other GM in the game, he has two things that completely change the game for him. The first -- NO OWNER TO INCREASE HIS BUDGET. Blame whoever you want, but ultimately, the guy is stuck with the budget he has, and no wiggle room at all. Second, he feels unable to make any long-term moves due to the fact that he has no long-term guarantees from the team.
Bowden, could, in fact, screw everyone who comes after him by signing multi-year deals. As GM, he has that right. He has, however, chosen to only take deals that don't restrict whoever gets the job next. This is actually a very honorable thing to do, as he's not restricting his successor. It does mean that for now he's treading water, but that's really the best he can do.
So, in keeping options open for the future, and not sticking new owners or GMs with deals they have to live with, he's limited to the kinds of deals he can make -- resulting in a lower quality team in 2006, but wide open options for business whenever the stupidity of ownership is brought under control.
Now, onto Objection Three: "The Nats are going to suck so I won't give the team any money". (Also known as the “I’ll show them” angle)
See my earlier point about baseball being a business. This theory implies that the fan, by not supplying money, is going to make a difference in the operation of the team. Let me bring you to some reality here.
Ultimately, fans are not really the business MLB/The Nationals/our new owner truly care about. Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's true. Sports make their money from corporations, who buy the much more profitable luxury boxes, sponsorships, advertising,
broadcasting, and all the other little pieces that go into a Major League team.
Additionally, the team is looking for growth. They are much more concerned about selling the 81-game packages than the 20 game ones. Besides being much more valuable in numbers, it's less work -- one purchaser rather than 3 to manage. That's 1/3 the overhead to manage it. So a price increase of $4 per game in the lower deck, to one customer shouldering the entire thing, is a much better profit margin than a price increase of $1 per game in the upper deck, spread across three customers (meaning three invoices, etc).
Let's also look at their corporate customer -- generally companies give the tickets out, both to staff, customers, etc. This 'quasi-fan', who might not go often, is likely to spend a pile of money at the ballpark, on all the little pieces, since they don't go often. Again, more profitable to the business.
Have some perspective on the business of MLB, and this all makes more sense.
This isn't to say that all owners don't care about the game. But as our friend Danny in Landover has proven, ownership is in it for the cash, not for the fans. If you want to truly feel like you're being used for your pocketbook, an overnight delivery company has their name on a stadium in Maryland you can drop your cash into.
So here's the business of this. I'm putting my money into the Nats, and I think you should too.
First off, there is the basic premise that before we didn't have baseball at all, and I'd rather have it than not. Thus, the cash machine must be paid. But more importantly, there is the business.
What we really want from the Nats is quality product. The way to get that is to make the situation viable for the owner -- and frankly, an owner that is making money is a good thing for us, and an owner who isn't is a bad thing. Whatever new ownership we get is going to have shelled out an inordinate amount of money for the team. In order for our new ownership to pay that off, the basics of revenue need to be in place. And frankly, the ownership is going to be stuck with whatever mess they are handed. (I'll point out that for all of you Bowden critics, his moves have one overriding principle -- no long term mess). The owner needs that machine to start returning money on his investment, and the part we control is the part that is fueled by attendance. Remember, the stadium debacle in the DC Council is all related to money. Everything in this ultimately boils down to dollars.
I commented earlier that the smaller ticket plans are not a core part of MLB’s business. That's true, but no business is ever going to turn down the revenue. More money in the coffers is a good thing for the business, and ultimately, good for the success of baseball in
Washington.
So swallow hard, renew your tickets and do your small part for better baseball in D.C.