iortiz
-
Posts
17,693 -
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
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by iortiz
-
Everything.
-
-
market places, no market teams.
-
-
It is just another perspective though. For once and for all, Forget that definition it was not accepted in this thread anyway. Again, Read my post #323. Drop it. Move on. Again that is your opinion (respectable one), and it could have helped a lot after my post #323, instead, you went in circles. Well that is your conclusion not mine. Heres is mine If you do not agree, fine, but please do not try to convince me that I'm wrong. I have read a lot and I won't change my opinion. I do not agree with your conclusion either.
-
The thing ORS is that you always show up with a bad attitude "you do not know this or that..." "No excuses" " f*** this, f*** that" "running speed...", etc. and you do not even read the threads and its contexts. You have said that you weren't interested in this thread and suddenly you seem to be the most interested poster; you said that you didn't want to read the whole thread, but you make me accusations... sorry I just do not get it. I've been telling you that I used that argument as an another perspective, you refused to accept what I meant. You do not want to believe me. I do not know why. What else can I do?. I really do not know what are your intentions. If you had read my post #323 we shouldn't even have this discussion. Since you didn't read that post (I suppose) we are going in circles again, look at your post #373. We already had begun a new whole exercise.
-
My bad, I put a bad perspective here, and you are right. What I was trying to say is that a big market place doesn't guarantee them success.
-
-
-
That definition was not accepted in this thread, reason why I started another analysis. UN? put the bases, the rest is history. If the Nats do not get fans (even in a big market place) they will not succeed and mostly if they spend like UN? suggests. Clearer?
-
I have explained to you in so many different ways over and over again. Sorry, I just do not find another better way to do it. This is turning in circles.
-
Drop it. Move on. Seriously. You are going in circles.
-
Again, nobody knows what is going to happen. It could take both directions (success and failure). Let me put a perspective.... I know I know... you do not like them, but let me try with this. Let's say that you want a girl and you go to a bar where always are lot of hot girls. If you are ugly and shy and if you do not go and talk to a girl, your objective will fail. You will not get a lady, even if out there are tons of hot girls.
-
I suggested to read the whole thing, You refused to do it. I use it as another perspective, beyond that definition which btw was not accepted in this thread. You said that revenue is the way to do it. I supposed that you didn't accept it either. Now you say that wiki is good book. You are contradicting yourself. You are confused dude, you are going in circles with this. You will not change my position on this, no matter how hard you try, I know what I meant. That call stands. look at TV ratings, that is a way to measure. Those are the facts. if you can't see that, the conversation is worthless. I invited everybody to participate in the analysis. You only want to go in circles. Make your conclusions. I already made mine. if you do not like it... sorry but that's the way I see the thing.
-
Totally disagree. If they do not penetrate as they expect, or even worse, if they do not gain more fans or lose their current fans they will be in jeopardy mostly if they invest as UN? suggests. The market place is only an opportunity to succeed, it is not for granted (for sure). They have to win that market place, they have not. Elk already gave us the current DC scenario. It will be very challenging.
-
Well, as I said, I considered several factors in the analysis.
-
well, some do not trust it. It was another perspective if you do not like it, it's up to you. This.
-
yup, This is why I am making a deeper analysis. You put the bases and I already put my conclusions. Put yours If you are not agree... no big deal to me. As I said, I only wanted to enrich my perspective and I already did.
-
oks lets give them a 1.5 in that department since it is on the edge. agree?
-
Exactly. This is why I put the small-market comment (thin fan base). The rest is history.
-
pride for this? Nope... at all. Look at my conclusions.
-
It was another perspective ORS, I have told you that hundred times; besides that definition was not accepted in this thread; They say that wiki is not reliable. Also, their media market share is #27 in TV ratings and #21 in attendance through the 30 MLB teams. (poor fan base even in their own market)
-
Well my conclusion would be: Nats' Value #16 Nats' Payroll #23 Nats' Market share: #21 attendance #27 in TV ratings. If we split 1-10 Big market, 10-20 Mid market, 20-30 small market... and if we give values to each scenario... lets say... Big Market... 3 Mid Market... 2 Small Market ... 1. Its values would be: Value: 2 Payroll: 1 Attendance: 1 Ratings: 1 That gives you a 1.25, so... with this perspectives they are a small market. On the other hand... They have this RSN share that could help them to generate more revenue. They have showed desire in invest and could change its payroll ranking in the future. They play in an interesting market place but it has a complexity (fan base distribution). Their fan base is very thin even in their own home town. This is their biggest challenge. They could reach a mid-class market size in the mid/long term if those factors/issues play in their favor otherwise they will be in serious trouble.
-
The only definition that I found out of small market team is related with the size of its media market share. Some discredited that definition, fine. UN? suggested revenue (make money)/market share (ratings/attendance) /payroll (spend). Call me crazy, but the solid facts do not allow me see them even as a mid-market team. What do you think Elk? are they a mid-market team after seeing the facts?
-
What will happen if they they do not win. What will happen if they do not take more revenue sharing pie? Again UN?.. We are speculating... BTW We are going in circles. That is exactly what I wanted to avoid. Not at all. I just want to put a fair scenario, with current/solid facts, I want to avoid "ifs" and "woulds" as possible, that's all. Your suggestion brings noise to case, IMO. I would like to hear other's opinion about this before continue.
