rams80 Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 14 hours ago, colortv said: Of course it is. As much as sports teams like to pretend otherwise, and fans tend to forget is that they are just a business at the end of the day. The Chargers will print money in LA over the long-term that is what will ultimately prevent a move, especially to San Diego. It's a smaller overall pie than it could be. Which is what annoys the rest of the league. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 16 hours ago, Claystation360 said: I would imagine it's difficult to build a fanbase where your divisional rival used to be and when you alienated most of all your fans from your home of 56 seasons. This is undoubtedly another Lakers/Clippers deal but possibly worse for the Chargers because the Clippers weren't disliked by some of LA fans they just didn't care about them. Los Angeles didn't want them in the first place they wanted the Raiders and were force fed the Chargers as was Kroenke & the Rams to make the League happy. This will probably only manage to work because of the stadium and market, but don't think if this keeps going they won't find a way out, the lease is with Kroenke and I am sure he would let Dino out with a smile and the league would be fine if another market ponied up almost a billion dollars to build a home just for the Chargers. Also Since the Raiders are getting a stadium and 700 million + from Vegas so no matter what they aren't the LA picture anytime soon. Again, as I’ve had to hammer over and over and over again, Los Angeles didn’t want them. A specific cultural niche of Angelinos who embrace them for the bad ass colors and gang ties wanted them and they aren’t in a position to be blowing money on PSLs or even single game tickets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 4 hours ago, BringBackTheVet said: What's the Rams pricing for same seats? According to the Rams’ site: Quote For Reserved Seats, the price range for accompanying SSLs is $1,000 to $5,000 and season tickets range from $60 to $125 per game. For Premier Seats, SSLs range from $7,500 to $15,000 and season tickets will be $150 to $200 per game. Premier Seats offer the next level of exclusivity after Club Seats, including dedicated access into the building, exclusive concourse areas and the opportunity to purchase parking on-site. ... A limited number of Club Seats are available. SSLs for Club Seats range from $15,000 to $80,000 and accompanying season tickets are $375 per game, locked in for three years. So if I’m reading this correctly, the Chargers start their PSL fees at 10% of the Rams’ prices. And some of them will be 2% of the Rams’ prices. Whoa. At that point, the Chargers would be better off just saying “We don’t think PSLs are fair to fans, so we’re not going to charge them”. Play the team-of-the-people card against the Rams, try to turn the Chargers’ desperation into a principled stand. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 But that's clever marketing, and their idea of clever marketing is probably just putting an intern on Twitter to have funny arguments with Whataburger. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colortv Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 10 hours ago, Cosmic said: Tell me this language in a press release isn't a cry for help: That's the way the Bills or Bengals or Jaguars should be talking, not a NFL team in a megalopolis. I don't think Dean pitched his move to the other owners based on the need for a more affordable family option in the LA market. It's called competitively pricing your product in order to gain market share(IE fans). It's exactly what they should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Are you an actual member of the Spanos family? Trying to figure out why you’re choosing this particular hill to die on. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 The Chargers never should have ditched that sweet lightning bolt LA logo. It was the only good thing they did in the move. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wings Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Attendance numbers should be fun to watch when the Chargers move into KroenkeCastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 3 hours ago, colortv said: It's called competitively pricing your product in order to gain market share(IE fans). It's exactly what they should be doing. You are also part of a closed "not-monopoly" run by a cabal of owners. One that is not always thrilled about supporting their fellows by reasonably heavy revenue sharing. I suspect the cabal might be less than thrilled at subsidizing an owner in a market the size of Los Angeles, just so he can undercut another owner in that market. On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Which is why we now have owners leaking their displeasure to the media. Everybody loves Spanos, which is why they made Kroenke take him in the first place. But it seems unlikely they love him enough to let him flounder and fail in peace. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 3 hours ago, colortv said: It's called competitively pricing your product in order to gain market share(IE fans). It's exactly what they should be doing. Except undervaluing your product in the marketplace isn’t actually a smart move. The really smart move would have been to forego PSLs altogether. That would have been competitive pricing, and they could have gained a real advantage over the Rams by saying “we don’t charge our fans bogus fees.” By keeping PSLs but dropping the price in a Crazy Eddie fire sale, they’re getting none of the populist PR benefit while at the same time implicitly admitting that their product isn’t as good as their roommate’s. Ironic, but sometimes it’s better to just give your product away than charge a pittance for it. The former tells customers they’re lucky to get a great deal, the latter implies that it’s not worth much in the first place. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 2 hours ago, DG_Now said: The Chargers never should have ditched that sweet lightning bolt LA logo. It was the only good thing they did in the move. I do agree with this. The first iteration was a boneheaded move - they absolutely should have foreseen people would make the Dodgers comparison - but once recolored to light blue and gold they should have stuck with it until it took hold. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiddySicks Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Nah fam that’s trash. On 11/19/2012 at 7:23 PM, oldschoolvikings said: She’s still half convinced “Chris Creamer” is a porn site.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 A high price creates the perception - even if subliminal - of a superior product. A low price can mean inferiority. Many top brands never go on sale, and are excluded from general store sales, because they don't want their image lowered by being part of a 40% off blowout sale, or a BOGO or something. In this case, with the difference so drastic, the Chargers absolutely should have forgone the PSLs altogether. Whether they market the move as a shot at the Rams, or simply as a good-will gesture where they never actually reveal the actual value they've assigned to it (hey, we're giving you a $1k PSL for free!) that would have looked better than just saying that their tickets aren't worth nearly as much as their daddy's. And right now, the Rams are their daddy. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 If they ditched the PSLs from those 26,000 seats that only cost $100, that's only $2.6M in potential revenue they'd be losing. I think they could still get most of the good PR, and that's not a ton of money to throw away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG_ThenNowForever Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 2 hours ago, Gothamite said: I do agree with this. The first iteration was a boneheaded move - they absolutely should have foreseen people would make the Dodgers comparison - but once recolored to light blue and gold they should have stuck with it until it took hold. They could have sold a million baseball caps. The Rams may be the better team, but they don't have anything logo as instantly attractive as that. 1 hour ago, ShutUpLutz! said: and the drunken doodoobags jumping off the tops of SUV's/vans/RV's onto tables because, oh yeah, they are drunken drug abusing doodoobags Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still MIGHTY Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 All this “team of the people” and playing the affordability card is nice... but it doesn’t sound like it’s sitting well with the Chargers’ landlord. From Peter King’s PFT column: Quote Los Angeles Stadium Drama The Chargers are going to sell incredibly reasonable tickets for the L.A. market, but that’s not making everyone happy. The way this new stadium works: The Rams sell tickets separately from the Chargers. Rams owner Stan Kroenke foots the bill to build the place (about $3.1 billion), and owner Dean Spanos of the Chargers forks over all personal seat license fees to Kroenke. Spanos announced last week that the upper deck in the new Rams/Chargers stadium, opening in 2020, will have $100 personal-seat licenses per seat, plus tickets ranging from $50 to $90 per game. In today’s economy, that is stunningly reasonable. But Kroenke, I am told, never thought the PSL fees the Chargers would announce would be so low. The Rams were thinking the Chargers’ contribution to the stadium through PSL fees would be near $400 million. Now the Rams think they’ll be lucky to see $150 million out of Charger PSLs. That could mean another big chunk for Kroenke to pay. “The math in the stadium is starting to erode,” said one official with knowledge of both team’s financial dealings. Look at it this way. Say you want to buy one season ticket with a PSL in a prime section in the upper deck for each team. For the Rams, that could cost $5,000 for the PSL and $120 per ticket per game for the 10-game season. Initial investment for year one for a Rams seat: $6,200. Initial investment for a Chargers seat, including the PSL and the ticket cost at $90 per seat: $1,000. Let’s say you’re not a Rams fan, but you’re an NFL fan. You say, “I can get a pair or tickets to the new stadium, including PSLs, in a good spot of the upper deck for $2,000 for the season?” The Chargers, in this scenario, could actually take business away from the Rams because their upper-deck tickets will be in some cases one-sixth the cost. It’s going to be very interesting to see how this plays out—and to see if the Chargers, even with these advantages, can come close to selling out their games in 2020. | ANA | LAA | LAR | LAL | ASU | CSULB | USMNT | USWNT | LAFC | OCSC | MAN UTD | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 I don't know how PSLs from suites might factor in (do suites have them?), but the Chargers would be lucky to get to even that disastrous $150M figure from single seats. If you take out those 26,000 seats and their measly $2.6M in PSL revenue, then the Chargers need to average $3,332 per seat from the rest... assuming they sell every single ticket in the place. The highest PSL they've announced is $3,000 per seat. The only possible saving grace is that some of the prime tickets aren't on the price chart; I assume they're setting them aside for current STH for now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colortv Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 22 hours ago, Gothamite said: I do agree with this. The first iteration was a boneheaded move - they absolutely should have foreseen people would make the Dodgers comparison - but once recolored to light blue and gold they should have stuck with it until it took hold. My first thought was "That doesn't look like a primary NFL team logo" but then I remembered the Giants. With the way things are going it looks like they will end up going with the shield or an updated version of the shield as their primary logo, hopefully this will be a secondary. 11 hours ago, Cosmic said: I don't know how PSLs from suites might factor in (do suites have them?), but the Chargers would be lucky to get to even that disastrous $150M figure from single seats. If you take out those 26,000 seats and their measly $2.6M in PSL revenue, then the Chargers need to average $3,332 per seat from the rest... assuming they sell every single ticket in the place. The highest PSL they've announced is $3,000 per seat. The only possible saving grace is that some of the prime tickets aren't on the price chart; I assume they're setting them aside for current STH for now? Those $150 and $400 million revenue figures don't seem to make sense. They might not just be for stadium revenue, but total revenue: https://www.forbes.com/nfl-valuations/list/#tab:overall https://www.reuters.com/article/football-nfl-gb-nfl-revenues/report-nfl-teams-revenue-share-topped-8-billion-in-2017-idUSKBN1K719F If they had projected $400 million just from stadium revenue alone they would be projecting over $650 million in total revenue just from tickets and the tv contract ALONE, which would be more than every team except the Cowboys. However, $150 million cannot be total revenue because they will make over $250 million from the tv contract alone. We need clarification on these numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 59 minutes ago, colortv said: If they had projected $400 million just from stadium revenue alone they would be projecting over $650 million in total revenue just from tickets and the tv contract ALONE, which would be more than every team except the Cowboys. However, $150 million cannot be total revenue because they will make over $250 million from the tv contract alone. PSLs are one-time revenue; you can't compare the numbers to teams who are in the middle of their stadium life cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.