Esco

Los Angeles Chargers Brand Discussion

Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

The league will never be able to force an owner to sell short of something absolutely catastrophic like the Donald Sterling debacle. Especially an owner like Spanos who's well-liked in ownership and league circles. 

 

The owners would never, ever let the league set that kind of precedent.

 

He'll be printing money once that new stadium opens just like Sterling did with the Clippers for decades.

 

Saying Spanos will move back to SD or be forced to sell the team so it can be moved back to SD is ignoring all economic and practical realities.

 

 

I never said that Spanos will move back to San Diego. I think that the league will find someone to make him an offer that's too good to pass up; and the new owner will move the team back.

And there is no reason to think that the Chargers will draw better in the new stadium in L.A. than they do now in the Galaxy's park.  Even assuming that the Rams will have success in the new stadium, the Chargers' floundering will overshadow this and will be the main story. I doubt that Spanos will continue to be so well-liked by his fellow owners as the value of his team plummets and as the Chargers' attendance woes subject the league to a great deal of ridicule.

 

The Chargers' move to L.A. was a bad mistake; several other people have observed that the team is just not wanted in L.A. This is unlikely to change. So I'd say that to expect the NFL to go on throwing good money after bad is less realistic than to think that the league will effectuate a solution that makes the problem go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

I never said that Spanos will move back to San Diego. I think that the league will find someone to make him an offer that's too good to pass up; and the new owner will move the team back.

And there is no reason to think that the Chargers will draw better in the new stadium in L.A. than they do now in the Galaxy's park.  Even assuming that the Rams will have success in the new stadium, the Chargers' floundering will overshadow this and will be the main story. I doubt that Spanos will continue to be so well-liked by his fellow owners as the value of his team plummets and as the Chargers' attendance woes subject the league to a great deal of ridicule.

 

The Chargers' move to L.A. was a bad mistake; several other people have observed that the team is just not wanted in L.A. This is unlikely to change. So I'd say that to expect the NFL to go on throwing good money after bad is less realistic than to think that the league will effectuate a solution that makes the problem go away.

 

I also addressed your idea of the league forcing Spanos to sell, much less being forced to sell to move it back to San Diego. That is a non-starter and not based on reality.

 

Additionally, saying the team will not be able to build a greater fan base over the course of years more than it does now without any supporting basis also doesn't make sense. Fanbases take time to build.

 

I again refer you to the Clippers on court ineptitude and financial success.

 

The Chargers will be able to adequately fill the stadium if nothing else by also selling tickets to fans of opposing teams.

 

Lastly, the value of the team will not plummet.

 

The Knicks might be the worst run organization in sports and they are the highest valued NBA team, purely by being in a giant market.

 

None of your points are supported by the actual business of sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, colortv said:

The Chargers will be fine.

I really don't think they will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I really don't think they will be.

 

There are over 20 million people in Southern California.

 

That's bigger than Toronto and Chicago combined.

 

It's equal to the entire population of Florida.

 

They will be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, colortv said:

 

There are over 20 million people in Southern California.

 

That's bigger than Toronto and Chicago combined.

 

It's equal to the entire population of Florida.

That may be true. Just ask the NHL how relying on population numbers alone works though.

The Atlanta Thrashers regularly needed handouts via revenue sharing to stay afloat while playing in the tenth largest media market in the US. Then they moved to a small Canadian prairie city with a fraction of Atlanta's population and proved to be such a successful draw they're now paying into the league's revenue sharing rather than receiving payments to stay afloat.

 

The lesson is that it doesn't matter how many people are in a market if not enough of them care about your product. Go where the fans are, not where they could eventually be carved out of an audience that's indifferent at best.

Spanos burnt his bridges with San Diego and no one in LA cares. So in what way do they get a sustainable part of that 20+ million people marketplace?

 

The team can't even sell out a soccer stadium of less than 30,000 seats. And when they do manage it? It's to visiting fans. It was apparent when they played the Chiefs in LA and the crowd was all red. It was made exceptionally clear when they played the Eagles, with Eagles fans basically taking over the stadium. It's an embarrassment to the Chargers organisation, Chargers fans, and the NFL as a whole. This team does not belong in LA.

 

Go on about the Clippers if you want, but that's the thing. No team should aspire to be the Los Angeles Clippers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, colortv said:

Additionally, saying the team will not be able to build a greater fan base over the course of years more than it does now without any supporting basis also doesn't make sense. Fanbases take time to build.

 

The passage of time means nothing here.  The identities of the Rams and Chargers are established; and nothing will change L.A. fans' attitude towards them.  The Rams have a emotional base of support; the Chargers have absolutely nothing.  What's more, identity of the Raiders is also firmly established, as is their rabid support in L.A.; the Raiders arguably have greater support in L.A. than even the Rams do.

 

 

27 minutes ago, colortv said:

The Knicks might be the worst run organization in sports and they are the highest valued NBA team, purely by being in a giant market.

 

Not purely by its location; also by virtue of an established brand identity that is strongly identified with its city and has great cultural currency there, qualities which are utterly lacking with the Chargers.  The Chargers' situation is only going to look worse as time goes on. The combination of the perception of fiasco and the falling revenues will surely cause a drop in the team's value, despite its being located in L.A.

 

 

31 minutes ago, colortv said:

The Chargers will be able to adequately fill the stadium if nothing else by also selling tickets to fans of opposing teams.

 

Well, that's true.  The best thing about the Chargers being in L.A. is that this brings the Raiders to town once a year.  (The irony here is that attracting opposing fans to the games was assumed to be one of the strategies that the Raiders will employ in Las Vegas; but it's the Chargers' fate to have to rely on this in L.A. in order to have anyone at all at their games.)

 

There is no precedent in the history of sports of looking at a long-term problem and just saying "well, golly, there's nothing we can do about this but hope that it gets better".  Rich and powerful people didn't get rich and powerful by taking that attitude.  The L.A. Chargers are a problem for the NFL, and also for the Rams, who are tied to them contractually; someone is going to solve that problem eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

 

 

The passage of time means nothing here.  The identities of the Rams and Chargers are established; and nothing will change L.A. fans' attitude towards them.  The Rams have a emotional base of support; the Chargers have absolutely nothing.  What's more, identity of the Raiders is also firmly established, as is their rabid support in L.A.; the Raiders arguably have greater support in L.A. than even the Rams do.

 

 

 

Not purely by its location; also by virtue of an established brand identity that is strongly identified with its city and has great cultural currency there, qualities which are utterly lacking with the Chargers.  The Chargers' situation is only going to look worse as time goes on. The combination of the perception of fiasco and the falling revenues will surely cause a drop in the team's value, despite its being located in L.A.

 

 

 

Well, that's true.  The best thing about the Chargers being in L.A. is that this brings the Raiders to town once a year.  (The irony here is that attracting opposing fans to the games was assumed to be one of the strategies that the Raiders will employ in Las Vegas; but it's the Chargers' fate to have to rely on this in L.A. in order to have anyone at all at their games.)

 

There is no precedent in the history of sports of looking at a long-term problem and just saying "well, golly, there's nothing we can do about this but hope that it gets better".  Rich and powerful people didn't get rich and powerful by taking that attitude.  The L.A. Chargers are a problem for the NFL, and also for the Rams, who are tied to them contractually; someone is going to solve that problem eventually.

 

Again, nothing you are saying as any basis in the actual facts of sports business.

 

Fanbases aren't built overnight. It's a business that takes time and strategic growth. Not a season or half a season.

 

The Chargers sold out their season-ticket packages in stubhub, that's a fact.

 

You're talking about precedents.

 

Your precedent is the Clippers and Knicks, who in spite of being arguably the two worst run franchises in sports for periods of decades are among the most valuable in sports. purely by the markets they reside in.

 

You're basically saying, "the value of the franchise will plummet and they won't be able to build a fanbase over time" without anything to back it up. You're using talking points and emotions, not facts.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

That may be true. Just ask the NHL how relying on population numbers alone works though.

The Atlanta Thrashers regularly needed handouts via revenue sharing to stay afloat while playing in the tenth largest media market in the US. Then they moved to a small Canadian prairie city with a fraction of Atlanta's population and proved to be such a successful draw they're now paying into the league's revenue sharing rather than receiving payments to stay afloat.

 

The lesson is that it doesn't matter how many people are in a market if not enough of them care about your product. Go where the fans are, not where they could eventually be carved out of an audience that's indifferent at best.

Spanos burnt his bridges with San Diego and no one in LA cares. So in what way do they get a sustainable part of that 20+ million people marketplace?

 

The team can't even sell out a soccer stadium of less than 30,000 seats. And when they do manage it? It's to visiting fans. It was apparent when they played the Chiefs in LA and the crowd was all red. It was made exceptionally clear when they played the Eagles, with Eagles fans basically taking over the stadium. It's an embarrassment to the Chargers organisation, Chargers fans, and the NFL as a whole. This team does not belong in LA.

 

Go on about the Clippers if you want, but that's the thing. No team should aspire to be the Los Angeles Clippers.

 

I think you're comparing apples to oranges. Hockey is a niche sport that expanded into the sunbelt when it shouldn't have. Atlanta wasn't a great sports town to begin with on top of that.

 

The Chargers sold out their season-ticket packages, just to be clear about that.

 

I'm not saying any team should aspire to be the Clippers.

 

I'm talking purely in terms of economics. The Chargers will print money in LA over the long-term just by the size of the market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your speculation is not any more fact-based; and it rests on an assumption that is beyond fanciful, namely that the Chargers will somehow find fans in L.A.   What if they don't?  You need to conceptualise an outcome of that likely scenario.

 

NFL owners share revenue from tickets, licencing, and television.  A reasonable expectation is that the Chargers will be ranking near the bottom in ticket sales, gear sold, and television ratings.  The other owners are going to tolerate a partner that is not holding up his own end for only so long; they won't carry Spanos forerver.

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said:

Your speculation is not any more fact-based; and it rests on an assumption that is beyond fanciful, namely that the Chargers will somehow find fans in L.A.   What if they don't?  You need to conceptualise an outcome of that likely scenario.

 

NFL owners share revenue from tickets, licencing, and television.  A reasonable expectation is that the Chargers will be ranking near the bottom in ticket sales, gear sold, and television ratings.  The other owners are going to tolerate a partner that is not holding up his own end for only so long; they won't carry Spanos forerver.

 


 

 

Here's the difference between what we are saying.

 

I'm saying a multi-billion dollar entertainment enterprise built around the most popular sport in the country with endless resources at it's disposal will be able to expand upon it's fan base in an area of 20 million people with countless wealth and businesses willing to buy up seats and luxury boxes, over the course of years, sufficient enough to put 60-70k people in seats 8 times a year, with opposing fans factored in as well.

 

I'm saying you can look at another San Diego team that moved in the Clippers, in a less popular sport with worse ownership that moved 40 years ago when there were less people, less resources, and less money in sports and went through decades of futility but is now one of the most valuable franchises in sports based purely on the size of the market.

 

Now what you're saying is...

 

They won't be able to build a fanbase, just because it doesn't fit my narrative or what I want to believe will happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, colortv said:

 

There are over 20 million people in Southern California.

 

Yet, only around 10,000 (and that's being generous) are actually showing up to watch the Chargers play and not the visiting team. This team is not wanted here. They will struggle unless they build a Super Bowl winning team, but this is the Chargers we're talking about. 

 

You keep mentioning the Clippers, but they have gone through their best stretch in franchise history and still couldn't compete with the Lakers in terms of overall financial value, TV ratings and popularity in Los Angeles, despite the Lakers going through their worst stretch in franchise history. 

 

The Chargers will struggle to match the Clippers in terms of popularity here. The Clippers. The Chargers couldn't even fill Staples Center with their own LA based fans, let alone the massive 70,000 seat football cathedral Kronke's building in Inglewood. And there aren't that many fans of non-LA teams for every team the Chargers will face to sell out the new Inglewood stadium. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Rockstar Matt said:

 

Yet, only around 10,000 (and that's being generous) are actually showing up to watch the Chargers play and not the visiting team. This team is not wanted here. They will struggle unless they build a Super Bowl winning team, but this is the Chargers we're talking about. 

 

You keep mentioning the Clippers, but they have gone through their best stretch in franchise history and still couldn't compete with the Lakers in terms of overall financial value, TV ratings and popularity in Los Angeles, despite the Lakers going through their worst stretch in franchise history. 

 

The Chargers will struggle to match the Clippers in terms of popularity here. The Clippers. The Chargers couldn't even fill Staples Center with only their own LA based fans, let alone the massive 70,000 seat football cathedral Kronke's building in Inglewood. And there aren't that many fans of non-LA teams for every team the Chargers will face to sell out the new Inglewood stadium. 

 

It's their first year, and they sold out their season ticket packages so there is a demand that can be built upon. see everything I wrote above about growing over time.

 

The Clippers were in LA for 30 years before their recent success, and they were printing money long before Chris Paul or Blake Griffin ever wore a uniform.

 

That's just it,  isn't it. The Chargers don't need to be #1. They can be a distant #2 in a market that size and STILL print money and turn a profit like the Clippers and Jets.

 

There are countless companies who will purchase luxury boxes for the novelty and to wine and dine clients.

 

The NFL isn't even a gate-driven league. The TV contracts alone virtually guarantee a profit.

 

The NFL has a franchise in Jacksonville that turns a tidy profit while only putting 60k fans in the seats.

 

Jacksonville.

 

The Brooklyn Nets right now are in talks to sell off a piece of the franchise valuing the whole team at over $2 billion. The Nets, who are as mickey mouse of a franchise as the Clippers and play in the smallest arena in the league, simply because they play in New York.

 

All the Spanos family has to do is turn a nice profit in LA, and that's virtually guaranteed in a market that big.

 

At the end of the day the NFL is a business and teams care as much if not more about turning a profit as being the next 80's 49ers.

 

The Chargers don't have to do much of anything to turn a nice profit in a market like LA, and for precisely that reason they won't move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speak of the devil, I just saw an ad on Facebook for Chargers-Broncos tickets, and people are saying bring down the ticket and parking prices a bit(Chargers ticket prices are some of the highest in the league right now, I imagine to makeup for the small venue) and parking is apparently $100 in some places, and they will be more inclined to go to games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, colortv said:

The Clippers were in LA for 30 years before their recent success, and they were printing money long before Chris Paul or Blake Griffin ever wore a uniform.

Because the Clippers had a sweetheart lease with the Staples Centre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

Because the Clippers had a sweetheart lease with the Staples Centre.

 

They were printing money in the 90's before Staples ever opened. Obviously not to the Lakers extent but they were a profitable franchise.

 

The Chargers also have a sweetheart lease in Inglewood, the league forced Kroenke to give it to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, colortv said:

They won't be able to build a fanbase, just because it doesn't fit my narrative or what I want to believe will happen.

I don't have a narrative aside from being a Chargers fan. And I'm an out of town fan. Which means I have no more loyalty to SD than I do LA. It's the Chargers I'm a fan of, regardless where they play. So seeing as they are very much stuck in LA? I'd like them to make it work.

I just don't think they will. Nothing, from fan polls to the media's reaction to the relocation, to fan response, to stadium attendance, to tv ratings tells me the Chargers have made a positive first step in building a fanbase. I'm not giddy over this failure, because I want the Chargers to succeed. I don't have any narrative aside from being a fan of the team.

 

Now compare that to you. You've got a long-dead stadium proposal as an avatar. You lamented the Rams' Inglewood stadium and lamented the Rams moving by claiming they messed your preferred situation of Raiders/Chargers. It seems to me like you're the one pushing a narrative. You're claiming this is going to "work" despite every Chargers home game in LA being a de factor road game.

If I had to guess? You want the Chargers in LA to work because you dislike the Rams and/or Stan Kroenke for G-d knows what reason.

 

So please don't make a show of assuming the motives of others. Not unless you want the mirror turned back around.

 

4 hours ago, colortv said:

Fanbases take time to build.

The Rams only have a one year head start and their fanbase seems far larger than the Chargers' by every relevant metric.

 

3 hours ago, colortv said:

The Chargers sold out their season-ticket packages in stubhub, that's a fact.

Then where are the fans? Those Chiefs and Eagles games might as well have been played in Kansas City and Philly respectably.

 

You mentioned the NHL's half-cocked foray into the Sunbelt being something that you can't compare this to. Except that the Coyotes and Panthers actually showed some promise building fanbases early on before a combination of bad stadium decisions, inept management, and just a lack of deep roots in the locales turned them into the punchlines they are today. Still? At first? There was excitement. There were full arenas.

Here? The Chargers were met with aggressive rejection from LA the moment they announced the move. I've yet to a relocation or expansion franchise fail this spectacularly so early on.

 

Look, I'm not saying the Chargers will move back to SD. There's too much money invested in this to turn back. I'm just not optimistic about the team's future in the city they're seemingly trapped in. NOTHING about this first year of LA Chargers Football 2.0 says they're taking productive first steps to building a fanbase in the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ice_Cap said:

I don't have a narrative aside from being a Chargers fan. And I'm an out of town fan. Which means I have no more loyalty to SD than I do LA. It's the Chargers I'm a fan of, regardless where they play. So seeing as they are very much stuck in LA? I'd like them to make it work.

I just don't think they will. Nothing, from fan polls to the media's reaction to the relocation, to fan response, to stadium attendance, to tv ratings tells me the Chargers have made a positive first step in building a fanbase. I'm not giddy over this failure, because I want the Chargers to succeed. I don't have any narrative aside from being a fan of the team.

 

Now compare that to you. You've got a long-dead stadium proposal as an avatar. You lamented the Rams' Inglewood stadium and lamented the Rams moving by claiming they messed your preferred situation of Raiders/Chargers. It seems to me like you're the one pushing a narrative. You're claiming this is going to "work" despite every Chargers home game in LA being a de factor road game.

If I had to guess? You want the Chargers in LA to work because you dislike the Rams and/or Stan Kroenke for G-d knows what reason.

 

So please don't make a show of assuming the motives of others. Not unless you want the mirror turned back around.

 

The Rams only have a one year head start and their fanbase seems far larger than the Chargers' by every relevant metric.

 

Then where are the fans? Those Chiefs and Eagles games might as well have been played in Kansas City and Philly respectably.

 

You mentioned the NHL's half-cocked foray into the Sunbelt being something that you can't compare this to. Except that the Coyotes and Panthers actually showed some promise building fanbases early on before a combination of bad stadium decisions, inept management, and just a lack of deep roots in the locales turned them into the punchlines they are today. Still? At first? There was excitement. There were full arenas.

Here? The Chargers were met with aggressive rejection from LA the moment they announced the move. I've yet to a relocation or expansion franchise fail this spectacularly so early on.

 

Look, I'm not saying the Chargers will move back to SD. There's too much money invested in this to turn back. I'm just not optimistic about the team's future in the city they're seemingly trapped in. NOTHING about this first year of LA Chargers Football 2.0 says they're taking productive first steps to building a fanbase in the market.

 

The bolded. I was referring to Ferdinand about narrative, not you.

 

I also have nothing against Kroenke or the Rams.

 

I'm actually both a Rams and Chargers fan. 

 

A bigger Rams fan at the moment for obvious reasons.

 

As far as the Chargers "initial" fanbase, I don't think an out of towner can truly understand how Southern California sports works here unless they've lived here.

 

We don't live and die by sports like other towns. There's just too much going on and too much to do. It doesn't mean we can't or won't support teams or that we don't love sports. They just don't define us as much as they do other places.

 

It just means it's a process for a team to build themselves in the market more than it is other places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ice_Cap said:

Then where are the fans? Those Chiefs and Eagles games might as well have been played in Kansas City and Philly respectably.

 

I think it has become very obvious that So Cal based ticket brokers bought up the majority of season tickets.  They may decide not to make the same kind of commitment in season 2 or 3.  All those opposing colors at stubhub center could be replaced by empty seats.

 

Something needs to change if they want to salvage their move to LA.  I'm now on the side of a name change and full rebranding.  Pair that with Dean Spanos stepping down and AG Spanos taking over as president and CEO.  It will give the franchise a second chance to make a first impression with the LA market.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, colortv said:

 

It's their first year, and they sold out their season ticket packages so there is a demand that can be built upon.

...in a 27,000 seat stadium, so GTFO talking about how they sold out anything. Even with "sold out" season tickets, even with opposing fans overwhelming the Chargers' faithful, they still can't sell out a 27,000 seat stadium. It's not just single seats, either; it's a big chunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the move was a disaster and I want it undone at the earliest possible opportunity. 

 

But he’s right - they will make money in LA and be more than able to survive there.  And if they actually win?  They could actually do very well.

 

I understand the appeal of the NFL forcing the Spanoses to sell.  I understand the appeal of seeing them move back to SD.  But he’s right - that’s purely an emotional fantasy and there’s no scenario in which that would happen in our universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now