a700hitter
-
Posts
70,239 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by a700hitter
-
I had posted much of this information based on my experience. I have friends who have lived in the area and worked in DC for more than 20 years. I have also visited DC about 100 times. I am somewhat familiar with the demographics of the city and surrounding suburbs and the challenges of the traffic. Your observations are much more authoritative. I am glad you have weighed in.
-
Bullpen depth in the minors.
-
Fred, you lucky bastard!
-
I've been waiting for you to weigh in on this issue as I know that you have more knowledge about the region than anyone posting in this forum. iortiz has made compelling business arguments coming to this conclusion, but we have been lacking some reliable regional input. What is your opinion about the reasons for their failure to build a following in the region?
-
There are still other income streams that are not shared under the licensing agreement. You are ignoring them. A significant amount of those income streams comes from outside the local area.
-
You didn't post for about a week, and you come back and still post nothing of substance. You just bitch and moan about other posters. There was a lot less whining when you were on hiatus.
-
I am a very Benevolent Monarch. I am letting all the Patriots fan live tonight. :lol:
-
You should become a Nationals fan. You live in their big market.
-
Two facts: 1. No one goes to their games. Attendance 14 out of 16 trailed only by Pittsburgh and Marlins. 2. No one watches their games. Ranked 27 out of 30 teams in the ratings. Conclusion: They are a big market team. LOL! They should be a big market team , but they are not.
-
This assumes facts that were not in play, so this is a pure strawman. If the Yankees were willing to pay Ortiz $12 million it would mean that the market for Ortiz would be different than it currently is. The Red Sox misjudged the actual market value for Ortiz. That was a mistake, and that is why they are being criticized. You are flipping the facts on their head and assuming that Ortiz had a $12 million market value. If the Yankees signed him for $12 milion for 1 year, a number of fans would have been upset because that would have been a misjudgment of the market in the other direction. Some fans would have been happy to let him go. What's your point-- that they are damned if they do and if they don't. Sure, you are right about that. Almost any move they make or don't make will have it's detractors. Are looking for unanimous acclaim from fans?
-
-
-
-
They have a large loyal following. That is their market. Those nutcases travel to NY and buy up tons of tickets on the secondary market when they play in NY. The Vikings fans have never done that. The Packers built their brand and their market. The fact that they are a small town stop them from establishing a big market. Your market is your customers not a population that isn't interested in your product. You are mixing things up.
-
-
Because people don't follow or support the team. Check the figures that allocate the value of the team amongst various factors-- one of those factors is market. The figures don't support your conclusion. I already posted that information.
-
-
Show some figures to support the claim that the Nats are a big market. Please. I have put out a bunch of data that indicates otherwise. Where's are the figures proving the cases. I guess ORS went back to playing video games. He presented absolutely nothing except population figures and mysterious unpublished unreported information about MASN.
-
-
Teams have moved from major population centers before. The Dodgers and the Giants moved from NY when NY's population was 8 million and the population of Brooklyn was 3 million. While their population didn't shrink, their market shrunk for a number of demographic reasons, not the least of which was that families with disposable income were migrating to the suburbs. They were both successful competitive teams chock full of exciting stars, but they lost their market. Population size doesn't directly correlate to market size.
-
The Forbes Report did take into account the other ventures of the ownership groups. Here' what it said about the Red Sox: Here's what it says about the Yankees: Here's what it says about theNats: There's no mention about the Nat's Network. The report does show that the Nats were #27 out of 30 in ratings. Nothing supports your claim that they are a big market team. I have produced numerous figures and measures. All you counter with is "network, network, network". Where are the figures, figures, figures? Forbes mentions NESN and YES, but where is the mention of the Nats network? Did they just miss it?
-
-
None of the values back up the notion of the Nats as a Big Market team. All of the reported values reflect that they are not a Big Market team. Add to that the fact that they are 14th out of 16 in league attendance ahead of only the Pirates and the Marlins, and it is obvious that their market footprint is not close to the big market teams. Should they be a big market team? I don't know the answer to that. Their is a dense population (almost 6 million), but Nats have not been able to tap into that. They are making moves and building an exciting team to try to build a following. Will it happen? Maybe. As I said earlier, it helps them that the O's suck balls. As of now, they are not a Big Market team. There is nothing to support that they are. A big population doesn't always translate to a big market for a team.
-
The amount attributable to the Nats market is $163 million. The lowest market amount for the top ten teams is 138% of that for the Nats. The Sox figure is almost 2 1/2 times that size and the Yanks is 5 times larger. From the Nats on down those figures are fairly compressed (bunched together) as is the portion of their value attributable to their brand management. They are way closer to being a small market team than a big market. They are far from the big market franchises at this point in time.
-
No, he has been proved to be right that the Nats are not a Big Market team.
