....and needed a 3.8 million loan this week to meet payroll. MLB approves a loan to keep the troubled franchise afloat while a sale to an investor group headed by Nolan Ryan is arranged.

Ugh...trouble on the horizon for other teams?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-27/rangers-to-tap-21-5-million-loan-from-major-league-baseball.html

I know this is completely off topic......but there wasn't a single pitcher age 8-18 from 1973-1990 that didn't try to imitate Nolan Ryan.

Completely legendary.


Looking around parks it's easy to believe teams could be going under.

I don't necessarily think that there will be problems for other clubs.

Hicks dropped like $100 million of his own money into the club after he bought it from the Bush family and still hasn't been able to pull them out of the shitstorm he left the ballclub in financially...

according to baseball lore major league umpire Ron Luciano once called a Ryan pitch...

"Ball, it sounded low."

putting butts in the seats isn't the way to meet the payroll anymore...it all boils down to cable/satellite, advertising and merchandising.

In other words, Steven Strasberg could single-handedly keep the Nats afloat...even if his effect on ticket sales were minimal...from merchandising and trademarking...if he is the next big thing...kids want Strasberg jerseys, they buy them online, Eastbay features the Nats, the Nat logo becomes more visible, DC-area affiliates pick up more Nat games than Orioles games, Strasberg is on Letterman, and Leno, you see him daily on ESPN, advertising dollars trickle down to the Nationals coffers...etc.

however, he could be the next Mark Prior, so ...nevermind.

Well that may be true for a bigger city team like NY or DC...Cleveland has to put fans in the seats because cable isn't going to generate that much cash.
The attendance at the indians game the other nite was 10, 166. The team could afford a $100 million payroll when it packed in 42,000....at 10, 000 that does it mean it's losing money unless the payroll is only $25 milllion?

^^^absolutely true. that's why a team like the Pirates puts a low payroll loser out there every year, and expects the Pittsburgh faithful to buy it as their civic duty. We have all done the same thing in Cincinnati since the mid-90's, and Cleveland is far past their "fair-weather" fan days. It is definitely a battle of the have and have-nots. The amazing thing is a Twins club or a Cardinals franchise that can work within this structure. Selig is by far the least visionary of any commissioner...and only the traditional and widespread popularity of baseball of all us Baby Boomers and GenX'ers will save it. 2 more decades without revenue sharing will doom the National Pastime.

or maybe Pete will be reinstated and all will be well.

Texas is in first place too right now in the AL west so ticket sales shouldnt be a problem.

Glory Days wrote: Texas is in first place too right now in the AL east so ticket sales shouldnt be a problem.

west

charliehustle14 wrote:

Glory Days wrote: Texas is in first place too right now in the AL east so ticket sales shouldnt be a problem.

west

oops

Maybe if it didn't cost a million dollars to go to a game people would give a shit.

The other major sports that cost a ton to attend at least have variety in the teams that dominate.

Baseball is dominated by the Yankees and Redsox every year so it gets boring.

Maybe they shouldn't pay the players so damn much.

Texas Rangers 2010 payroll, ranked 27th
Total=$55,250,545
Average= $1,905,191

They pay less than even the indians haha.($61,203,967)
Of the teams who pay less than the Rangers:
A's payroll $51,654,900
Padres $37,799,300
Pirates $34,943,000
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/salaries/teams?tag=pageRow;pageContainer

now granted, compared to everyone else they dont pay much. but considering they have no money, they should pay them less.

I Wear Pants wrote: Maybe if it didn't cost a million dollars to go to a game people would give a shit.

The other major sports that cost a ton to attend at least have variety in the teams that dominate.

Baseball is dominated by the Yankees and Redsox every year so it gets boring.

You actually couldn't be more wrong with those statements.

Most teams have a few sections that are less than $10 and most have thousands of $20 or less seats. Hell the average ticket is only $22.21. The NFL averaged $58.95 most recently, the NBA $45.92, and the NHL $41.19. The Rangers themselves have the third cheapest ticket in baseball at a $15.81 average.

In the last 10 World Series there have been eight different winners. Yes, the Red Sox and Yankees were the two teams to repeat, but parity among champions is as good or better than any other sport. The NHL is the same with only the Devils and Red Wings winning two in the last ten years. The NFL has had seven different champions in the last ten years with one repeat (Pittspuke) and one three-peat (New England). And the most disparate, by a wide margin, is the NBA with only three in the last ten years - Lakers six, Spurs three and Mavs one.

However, your statements bring up the biggest problem that baseball has - perception. It is the best value and most competitive sport out there, but many people think it is the opposite. Don't get me wrong, there are some real problems that need fixed, but like mentioned earlier some teams have it figured out even in small markets. They just have to have the desire and business accumen to make it happen.

Why would anyone want to buy the Rangers at this point? Do they think that a new marketing strategy can increase revenue?

BCBulldog did you look up your NBA champs or just guess?? lol

And the Celtics, too

And Pistons.

Rotinaj wrote: BCBulldog did you look up your NBA champs or just guess?? lol

Damnit, I was looking at the wrong list. That was just western conference champions. It should have been five different champions - Lakers four, Spurs three, Pistons one, Heat one and Celtics one. Still makes my point, just not as dramatically.

HitsRus wrote: according to baseball lore major league umpire Ron Luciano once called a Ryan pitch...

"Ball, it sounded low."

Its in his book, its true.

Reading it right now.

I think that Nolan Ryan and his associates are trying to buy the club to really turn it around. They're in a good market(Dallas) and there's no reason why they shouldn't be competitive

Being in the Dallas area should give them at least a fighting chance...

BCBulldog wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Maybe if it didn't cost a million dollars to go to a game people would give a shit.

The other major sports that cost a ton to attend at least have variety in the teams that dominate.

Baseball is dominated by the Yankees and Redsox every year so it gets boring.

You actually couldn't be more wrong with those statements.

Most teams have a few sections that are less than $10 and most have thousands of $20 or less seats. Hell the average ticket is only $22.21. The NFL averaged $58.95 most recently, the NBA $45.92, and the NHL $41.19. The Rangers themselves have the third cheapest ticket in baseball at a $15.81 average.

In the last 10 World Series there have been eight different winners. Yes, the Red Sox and Yankees were the two teams to repeat, but parity among champions is as good or better than any other sport. The NHL is the same with only the Devils and Red Wings winning two in the last ten years. The NFL has had seven different champions in the last ten years with one repeat (Pittspuke) and one three-peat (New England). And the most disparate, by a wide margin, is the NBA with only three in the last ten years - Lakers six, Spurs three and Mavs one.

However, your statements bring up the biggest problem that baseball has - perception. It is the best value and most competitive sport out there, but many people think it is the opposite. Don't get me wrong, there are some real problems that need fixed, but like mentioned earlier some teams have it figured out even in small markets. They just have to have the desire and business accumen to make it happen.

Nope.

Also, the Rangers rank 15th in average attendance with 26,673, about 54% of the stadium.

The Phillies lead in attendance at 45,114.
The Indians.....dead last at 15,565.....back in 2001, Cleveland was ranked 4th behind the yankees at 39,694. its amazing what happens in 10 years.

I Wear Pants wrote:

BCBulldog wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: Maybe if it didn't cost a million dollars to go to a game people would give a shit.

The other major sports that cost a ton to attend at least have variety in the teams that dominate.

Baseball is dominated by the Yankees and Redsox every year so it gets boring.

You actually couldn't be more wrong with those statements.

Most teams have a few sections that are less than $10 and most have thousands of $20 or less seats. Hell the average ticket is only $22.21. The NFL averaged $58.95 most recently, the NBA $45.92, and the NHL $41.19. The Rangers themselves have the third cheapest ticket in baseball at a $15.81 average.

In the last 10 World Series there have been eight different winners. Yes, the Red Sox and Yankees were the two teams to repeat, but parity among champions is as good or better than any other sport. The NHL is the same with only the Devils and Red Wings winning two in the last ten years. The NFL has had seven different champions in the last ten years with one repeat (Pittspuke) and one three-peat (New England). And the most disparate, by a wide margin, is the NBA with only three in the last ten years - Lakers six, Spurs three and Mavs one.

However, your statements bring up the biggest problem that baseball has - perception. It is the best value and most competitive sport out there, but many people think it is the opposite. Don't get me wrong, there are some real problems that need fixed, but like mentioned earlier some teams have it figured out even in small markets. They just have to have the desire and business accumen to make it happen.

Nope.

Care to elaborate?

Glory Days wrote: Also, the Rangers rank 15th in average attendance with 26,673, about 54% of the stadium.

The Phillies lead in attendance at 45,114.
The Indians.....dead last at 15,565.....back in 2001, Cleveland was ranked 4th behind the yankees at 39,694. its amazing what happens in 10 years.

That is a very interesting fact right there.