Angelos Claims He's Not Selling

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

I have had those exact thoughts many, many times.  I've wondered if as society evolves if sports fanaticism will begin to be a thing of the past.  I don't think we're there yet, but in 20-30 years, not sure what it will look like.  Major college sports I believe will be gone by then or at the least very very different.  Baseball continues to struggle to attract younger viewers.  The NFL with the combo of gambling and fantasy football appears to still be steamrolling along.

I know a lot of formerly devout football fans who’ve turned away, either because of the increasing level of violence in the game (due to the size and strength of the athletes), or because they don’t like the way the culture of the sport has evolved.  But yes, they seem to be doing fine.  

[eddie83]

15 hours ago, Going Underground said:

Heard season ticket sales are up slightly but not great. It would help walk up and online single game tickets  if Orioles get off to a good start but walk up averages about 3,000 a game over the course of a season. 

This is not surprising. No big off season move. Ownership is not popular.  
 

Wonder what we see now that spring games are about to start? I would be promoting all the young guys like Adley, Gunnar and Grayson and showing off their personalities. They legitimately have marketable players. For several years who did people really want to go see? 

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

Interesting indeed.  I see it with my kids and their peers as well, they're not nearly as into sports and my friends and I were as kids.  Just a very small sample size there of course but completely tracks with the article you posted.

Youtubers/Tik-Tok-ers are the new sports stars.  It's quite depressing really.

It’s truly awful. The stuff my kids watch on YouTube is so stupid.

[Sports Guy]

36 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I don’t disagree, but it’s not like increased attendance pays for that much salary.   Let’s say the O’s had picked up some $20 mm/yr free agent.  It would take an attendance increase of maybe 400,000 fans to pay for that (assuming $50 revenue per fan).   

In a way, the whole idea that the O’s will increase payroll when attendance supports it is a bit of a fallacy.  First of all, they could afford a big payroll increase now with no increase in attendance whatsoever.  Second of all, profits from increased attendance won’t keep up with payroll increases.   So yes, increased attendance is helpful and important, but it’s not the only factor in planning payroll.   
 

Which is all partly why I’m skeptical of JA opening up the checkbook, especially in 2024.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Sports Guy

[eddie83]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I know a lot of formerly devout football fans who’ve turned away, either because of the increasing level of violence in the game (due to the size and strength of the athletes), or because they don’t like the way the culture of the sport has evolved.  But yes, they seem to be doing fine.  

I think the sport was much more violent years ago. We see in HD the crushing hits better now and hear the horror stories of CTE. 
 

I think even with the NFL less people care about their team. Still a ton do. It’s more about fantasy and gambling. It’s a perfect sport for TV. Limited games and they all matter. 

[eddie83]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Which is all partly why I’m skeptical of JA opening up the checkbook, especially in 2024.

You said in past he is cash poor. We certainly shouldn’t expect anything like the Padres are doing. That said there is a happy medium. 
 

If he isn’t selling it would be nice in theory for someone else to buy into the team. Could help with spending. I just don’t see anyone wanting to do it unless they can take over at some point like Bisciotti. 

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

You said in past he is cash poor. We certainly shouldn’t expect anything like the Padres are doing. That said there is a happy medium. 
 

If he isn’t selling it would be nice in theory for someone else to buy into the team. Could help with spending. I just don’t see anyone wanting to do it unless they can take over at some point like Bisciotti. 

The thing is, I don’t personally need him to spend at the levels most want him to. 
 

I can’t keep stressing how cheap the payroll is going to be anyway, because so many guys are pre arb and that will keep happening.

But you have to extend guys, you have to be willing to go multiple years out, you have to acquire better talent.

I think the amount spent on payroll is nothing compared to making sound, intelligent decisions and not spending dumb money on the last 10-15 guys on your roster.  That’s what really helps drive up your payroll figure.

He should have zero issue taking the payroll up into the 140M range, fove or take.  Some years lower (perhaps much lower) and other years higher.

This year should be another 20ishM, with a few longer term commitments thrown in.

[btdart20]

To oversimplify the infamous Bill Clinton/James Carville quote, "It's the economy, stupid."

Angelos isn't selling because he thinks he can get a better price for the team later (art, sports, alcohol tend to be value/dividend investments in troubled times).  He's not upping payroll because customers are barely able to afford eggs much less season tickets.  Of course, there are more reasons, but the macroeconomic factors can't be ignored when running a business.  Risk aversion rules the day when you don't know what tomorrow's income will be.  I have to think Elias and the SigBot pitched all sorts of scenarios where the W's and payrolls intersect in the budgetary meetings and then Mr. Market took over from there.

People point to SD as an example of spending your way out of the lower income teams.  Is that a lightning in a bottle situation?  Would we be fighting the Fed to try it now?  Should a single income parent/owner push all the chips in for that type of gambit (and what happens if it fails)?  I don't know the answer to any of these questions (and many others) but can see the uncertainties.

[eddie83]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The thing is, I don’t personally need him to spend at the levels most want him to. 
 

I can’t keep stressing how cheap the payroll is going to be anyway, because so many guys are pre arb and that will keep happening.

But you have to extend guys, you have to be willing to go multiple years out, you have to acquire better talent.

I think the amount spent on payroll is nothing compared to making sound, intelligent decisions and not spending dumb money on the last 10-15 guys on your roster.  That’s what really helps drive up your payroll figure.

He should have zero issue taking the payroll up into the 140M range, fove or take.  Some years lower (perhaps much lower) and other years higher.

This year should be another 20ishM, with a few longer term commitments thrown in.

I agree. Not about big spending for me either. Team should be cheap for awhile with all the young pre arb talent. 
 

Relevant story. 

 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, eddie83 said:

I agree. Not about big spending for me either. Team should be cheap for awhile with all the young pre arb talent. 
 

Relevant story. 

 

And I’m for these deals but it depends on how many years of free agency you buy out. 
 

As much as I like these deals, I also think they get completely overrated by fans.

 

[eddie83]

10 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

To oversimplify the infamous Bill Clinton/James Carville quote, "It's the economy, stupid."

Angelos isn't selling because he thinks he can get a better price for the team later (art, sports, alcohol tend to be value/dividend investments in troubled times).  He's not upping payroll because customers are barely able to afford eggs much less season tickets.  Of course, there are more reasons, but the macroeconomic factors can't be ignored when running a business.  Risk aversion rules the day when you don't know what tomorrow's income will be.  I have to think Elias and the SigBot pitched all sorts of scenarios where the W's and payrolls intersect in the budgetary meetings and then Mr. Market took over from there.

People point to SD as an example of spending your way out of the lower income teams.  Is that a lightning in a bottle situation?  Would we be fighting the Fed to try it now?  Should a single income parent/owner push all the chips in for that type of gambit (and what happens if it fails)?  I don't know the answer to any of these questions (and many others) but can see the uncertainties.

SD is in a unique situation. Rich owner and no NFL team. I don’t see in the long run this model working but it sure is now. They just capped season ticket sales at 24k. I heard it was around 8k. Not sure how long ago.  
 

The economy right now is a concern all over the country. Not just in Baltimore. Payroll should certainly be able to have significant increases in the upcoming years. 

 

[Going Underground]

I think the last time the Orioles even mentioned an increase or decrease in season ticket sales was in 2015. When they first moved to Camden Yards they used to say what the season ticket sales numbers were  They were also drawing 3 million or so fans. Remember when the Orioles used to put on the scoreboard to guess the attendance for that day. Attendance got so low that was gone .

After the Orioles’ exciting 2014 division championship and playoff run into the ALCS, the team decided not to increase ticket prices. And, not surprisingly, season ticket sales jumped. Orioles vice president of communications and marketing Greg Bader told The Baltimore Sun in March, 2015:

“Advancing to the ALCS certainly assisted in driving our season plan member base higher,” he said. “We also believe the decision not to raise ticket prices has also led to some good season ticket numbers.”

[eddie83]

Media is not letting up.  

[RZNJ]

You know, if we were a Padres board there would still be the same amount of negativity?   
 

Can’t win the big one.  I could put together a better team for 250 million.   The usual stuff.

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Media is not letting up.  

 Bout time