173 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

The Nats obviously hurt the Os..that’s not really debateable.

[dude]

You're arguing the existence of the Nationals... and their relationship with MASN creates more money for the O's...  then the O's would have generated with their own RSN (without the Nationals) and not losing 1/3 of their single game tickets, and season ticket sales?

 

That's actually half of it, but let's back up to the attendance.

 

It's disingenuous to use "the average of the previous 10 years to the Nationals" and "the first 10 years of the Nationals" as an attendance comparison.

 

The Orioles drew over 3.6M in 1998.  In 2003 they drew over 2.4M.  They lost 1.2M in attendance that had nothing to do with the Nationals.  We could discuss a lot in there, but that fact is the Orioles seemed to do everything they could do to crush their fanbase....at a time when you should have been doing everything you can to fortify the gains in your fanbase, they hammered it into the ground.

 

Were the Nationals going to cost the Orioles some fans?  Liklely....but the Nationals couldn't hurt the Orioles attendnace more than the Orioles did.  Take that 3.6M in 1998 and run the franchise well....stay competitive...market well....solidify your fanbase.  So the Nationals show up and take 25% (I think that would be extreme for a loyal fanbase), but the Orioles still should have been drawing something north of 2.7-2.8M per.

 

When you're terrible and do nothing to build support among your fan base people are going to quit showing up.  They just stopped showing up.  The Orioles got lucky with Tejada signing and you actually see a bump in attendance from that signing of ~300k with the Nationals looming.  First year of the Nationals there was still some lingering excitement for the Orioles opportunity and they played like crap and kept the losing going.  Both teams drew 2.6-2.7M in 2005.  Two good teams would likely be sustainable above that level....but the Orioles continued to play bad.  2006 was happening with 9 straight losing seasons....why blame that drop (to 2.1+ M) on the Nationals and not a dysfunctional Orioles franchise.

 

The Nationals didn't make the Orioles a terrible team with no Plan for winning and no marketing. 

The Orioles did that to themselves.

[dude]

You're arguing the existence of the Nationals... and their relationship with MASN creates more money for the O's...  then the O's would have generated with their own RSN (without the Nationals) 

 

Attendance is interesting, but the real hammer for revenue generation is MASN.

 

I know the Orioles had talked about building a regional network (away from Comcast) before MASN existed, but the agreement with MLB handed the Orioles 75M (37.5M from MLB, 37.5M from the Lehners) solely for the formation of the Network.

 

Without that free 75M....the cost risk of MASN for an Orioles only entity goes through the roof.  Early years of MASN...do you remember the commercials they ran?  Probably not because for the most part there was almost no advertising on MASN.  I didn't get to watch MASN much after 2007, but I watched those early years and most all of the 'commercials' were internal promos.

 

As attendance and relevance was plummeting I seriously doubt the Orioles could have sustained an Orioles only entity.  It would have been a huge investment to lose money.  They would have needed to convince an enormous part of the region they were worth it (RSN cable fees to run the programming) and you could easily envision a signifcant poprtion of the region south of DC just losing interest and cable companies not anting up.

 

Then what.

 

Not only did the Nationals create the free Network, but they were a much more interesting entity for a huge portion of the assigned baseball region.  If you wanted the Nationals, the Orioles were tagging along.  I didn't really watch MASN2, but I'm guessing the Nationals had more sponsors regionally than the Orioles had (paying for advertising).

 

Which is a better haul for the Orioles

 

1) Orioles own 100% of a region they can't penetrate well

2) Orioles own 90-% of a region that has interest generated by a new Nationals team.

 

We should confidently say the Nats were a much better partner to penetrate the entire south of DC portion of the region, Delaware, Virginia, even down to NC, right?

 

Without the Nationals, the existence of MASN is certainly questionable and even if they did move forward with it (at their own cost risk) the potential for failure was significant....then you're back to Comcast (whoever) arguing you get 27-40M per year, if that.

 

We could probably still argue over a decade+ later that MASN still isn't really the revenue generator it could be, but how would the Nationals missing from the equation help the Orioles generate more revenue.

[SportsGuy]

The Os can never draw that 3+M again..because of the Nats.

[dude]

The Os can never draw that 3+M again..because of the Nats.

 

So what...they can never again draw 3M with ....

 

1) No Organizational Vision

2) No Plan for Winning

3) No ability or willingness to 'win the offseason'.

4) No marketing

 

None of that is the Nationals fault. 

 

I'll say it again...they went from 3.6+M fans in '98 to 2.4+M in '03 and that had nothing to do with the Nationals.

[dude]

The absolute best thing for both teams, from a revenue perspective, would be a Beltway Series.

 

Two well run, annually competitive teams that make the playoffs is a revenue monster for the Orioles.

 

....but they'd rather bicker like middle schoolers than face each other in the WS.

[DJ MC]

I don’t think MLB would let one of its crown jewel stadiums sit empty for long.

 

They don't give a damn about losing any of their stadiums. It's the franchises that matter.

[BSLChrisStoner]

So what...they can never again draw 3M with ....

 

1) No Organizational Vision

2) No Plan for Winning

3) No ability or willingness to 'win the offseason'.

4) No marketing

 

None of that is the Nationals fault. 

 

I'll say it again...they went from 3.6+M fans in '98 to 2.4+M in '03 and that had nothing to do with the Nationals.

 

They just had a 5 year period where they had the best record in the AL in that period, going to the playoffs 3x...

 

Their best attendance in that period being 2.46M.

You can't argue that Nats presence has nothing to do with that, right?

[dude]

They don't give a damn about losing any of their stadiums. It's the franchises that matter.

 

I don't agree with that.  Baseball has proven to be very traditional.  Baltimore has a rich Baseball History and has been part of the rich fabric of the League for decades.

 

OPaCY is still the Stadium others are measured against.

 

I'd guess MLB desperately wants a well run, competitive Orioles franchise.  Should be the Cardinals of the AL.

[DJ MC]

I don't agree with that.  Baseball has proven to be very traditional.  Baltimore has a rich Baseball History and has been part of the rich fabric of the League for decades.

 

OPaCY is still the Stadium others are measured against.

 

So what? If the Red Sox decided to leave Fenway tomorrow and build a new park, the only concern for MLB would be exactly where they would play until the new park was finished.

 

Oriole Park is nice, but if the Orioles decided it would make more sense to build a Nats Park-clone on an exit off of I-83, they would be 100% behind it.

[dude]

So what? If the Red Sox decided to leave Fenway tomorrow and build a new park, the only concern for MLB would be exactly where they would play until the new park was finished.

 

Oriole Park is nice, but if the Orioles decided it would make more sense to build a Nats Park-clone on an exit off of I-83, they would be 100% behind it.

 

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood your point.  Sure the Franchises are going to Franchise....I wouldn't be quite that dismissive about the venues, history does matter, but sure, if there's some compelling regional reason.

 

MLB wants baseball in Baltimore, they just don't want the never ending soap opera over MASN.

[SportsGuy]

So what...they can never again draw 3M with ....

1) No Organizational Vision
2) No Plan for Winning
3) No ability or willingness to 'win the offseason'.
4) No marketing

None of that is the Nationals fault.

I'll say it again...they went from 3.6+M fans in '98 to 2.4+M in '03 and that had nothing to do with the Nationals.

That’s fine..but they were also winning a shit ton of games from 2012-2016 and didn’t get that close to 3+M.

You aren’t wrong with what you are saying but even if they ever get their heads out of their collective asses, the presence of the Nats will hurt them.

[DJ MC]

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood your point.  Sure the Franchises are going to Franchise....I wouldn't be quite that dismissive about the venues, history does matter, but sure, if there's some compelling regional reason.

 

MLB wants baseball in Baltimore, they just don't want the never ending soap opera over MASN.

 

History matters to us, so it matters to MLB as long as mattering to us makes money

 

I don't think MLB particularly cares about baseball in "Baltimore". They care about a concentration of customers who associate themselves with "Baltimore", and are thus willing to spend money on and frequent advertisers associated with a Baltimore franchise. If there looked to be a better concentration of customers associated with, say, Nashville*, MLB would not hesitate to support a move there if that is what the ownership** wanted.

 

*And other relocation candidates like Oakland and Tampa are no longer an issue, which is part of why this really isn't a worry at the moment.

 

**Reason number two why this isn't a worry now. No matter what else you want to say about them as a group or individually as baseball people, the Angelos family cares deeply about the city.

[dude]

They just had a 5 year period where they had the best record in the AL in that period, going to the playoffs 3x...

 

Their best attendance in that period being 2.46M.

You can't argue that Nats presence has nothing to do with that, right?

 

Drawing fans is more than record.

 

The Orioles tout the phrase "we aren't trying to win the offseason"....you can find them saying it (Buck too) over and over.

 

They have no ability to create energy for ticket sales.  The teams weren't projected to win (despite the fact that they did), they did nothing to reinforce the success of the team as it turned things around and they did nothing to market.

 

Winning the offseason isn't about the upcoming record, it's about ticket sales.

 

Look at the impact of of the Tejada signing (Dec 18th) on attendance the next 2 seasons (they still weren't winning) and the Nationals were looming (2004) and then there (2005)

 

List the significant moves the Orioles have made before Christmas the last 7 years.

 

Look at the bump the Padres got in 2015-2016 even though the plan (for winning) failed.  I mentioned this before but the Padres CFO(?) was interviewed and they were basically hitting him up on how bad the costs were for that failed plan (they were eating money to dump guys)....and his response was basically..."no, we did fine."

 

If you don't have a strategy for winning (or really any plan for winning at all), it's tough to be the marketing guy.

[dude]

... but even if they ever get their heads out of their collective asses, the presence of the Nats will hurt them.

 

Maybe we'll never fully understand, but if you offered me

 

A) 3.2M per year, Baltimore (100%) with Comcast

or

B) 2.7M per year, Baltimore (67%) and DC (33%) with MASN

 

I'll take B and I'd bet it will destroy the revenue of A.

[SportsGuy]

Maybe we'll never fully understand, but if you offered me

A) 3.2M per year, Baltimore (100%) with Comcast
or
B) 2.7M per year, Baltimore (67%) and DC (33%) with MASN

I'll take B and I'd bet it will destroy the revenue of A.

You have no Idea what they would have done TV wise if the Nats weren’t there.

[BSLChrisStoner]

You have no Idea what they would have done TV wise if the Nats weren’t there.

I think they might have partnered with Leonis (Caps, Wizards).

[BSLChrisStoner]

Maybe we'll never fully understand, but if you offered me
 
A) 3.2M per year, Baltimore (100%) with Comcast
or
B) 2.7M per year, Baltimore (67%) and DC (33%) with MASN
 
I'll take B and I'd bet it will destroy the revenue of A.

If its Comcast and not their own...I'd agree with you.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Drawing fans is more than record.
 
The Orioles tout the phrase "we aren't trying to win the offseason"....you can find them saying it (Buck too) over and over.
 
They have no ability to create energy for ticket sales.  The teams weren't projected to win (despite the fact that they did), they did nothing to reinforce the success of the team as it turned things around and they did nothing to market.
 
Winning the offseason isn't about the upcoming record, it's about ticket sales.
 
Look at the impact of of the Tejada signing (Dec 18th) on attendance the next 2 seasons (they still weren't winning) and the Nationals were looming (2004) and then there (2005)
 
List the significant moves the Orioles have made before Christmas the last 7 years.
 
Look at the bump the Padres got in 2015-2016 even though the plan (for winning) failed.  I mentioned this before but the Padres CFO(?) was interviewed and they were basically hitting him up on how bad the costs were for that failed plan (they were eating money to dump guys)....and his response was basically..."no, we did fine."
 
If you don't have a strategy for winning (or really any plan for winning at all), it's tough to be the marketing guy.

Agree with some of this...(I better as I've argued some of it)...but when you have sustained winning for 5 years... and attendance still has issues... it's more than just marketing.

DC existence as a franchise can't be just ignored when it comes to looking at attendance.

That said...there other things at play as well. Some will point to costs. Some will point to fear. Some will point to better experience at home.

Regardless..without the Nationals...the OS would be selling more tickets, selling more boxes, have more corporate partners...

[dude]

ok