April 25, 200620 yr I do a comprehensive study on relocation and come to the conclusion that teams aren't moving. The Hardball Times: Relocation? Your Team's Not Going Anywhere
April 25, 200620 yr I do a comprehensive study on relocation and come to the conclusion that teams aren't moving. The Hardball Times: Relocation? Your Team's Not Going Anywhere Just a few comments on the SA entry: Number of Fortune 1000 Corporations: five Number of other professional sports: two (Texans ? CFL Football; Missions ? Double-A Texas League baseball) Might be a good idea to include the total revenue listings for the Fortune 1000 companies. The total revenue and profits posted by the SA companies is as large or larger than a lot of other cities, and it can have a serious impact on naming rights, local advertising, etc. Also, some large SA companies (like HEB with 11 bil in revenue) are not included on the Fortune list for some reason (private ownership?). Also... The Texans? They played in 1995 before the CFL shut down its US operations, so no way they should be included. But included should be the AHL Rampage and the WNBA Stars. Portland and Las Vegas both have AAA teams in the PCL. passed it would generate $100 million towards the stadium construction, Wolff has said 200, not 100. Then of course the study gives the A's the entire San Fran/Oakland MSA even though it splits it with another team. And really the Giants have the bigger presence there from what I've heard. Even if you give them half the market, that's only 1.2 mil households. There's a lot of little bugs in that study. Which just a tad ahead of Portland, Indianapolis, etc. Obviously that's not how it works, just pointing out that the A's market in the study looks much larger than it really is because of the presence of a direct competitor. It also doesn't look at recent US Census estimates and changes.
April 25, 200620 yr Author It also doesn't look at recent US Census estimates and changes. Well, I certainly could have added that... and distance to other franchises... and cost of living differential.... and.... and... and... It was one of those bits of research that could be done in several parts. The need was not there to go whole hog... the point is made. On the recent estimates and changes... I did the change in-between the censuses. One could have done what you suggest, but then it doesn't make or break the findings... market sizes for relocation are considerably smaller than exisiting markets. Thanks for catching the typo on the hotel/motel rental car tax figure for SA
April 25, 200620 yr It also doesn't look at recent US Census estimates and changes. Well, I certainly could have added that... and distance to other franchises... and cost of living differential.... and.... and... and... It was one of those bits of research that could be done in several parts. The need was not there to go whole hog... the point is made. On the recent estimates and changes... I did the change in-between the censuses. One could have done what you suggest, but then it doesn't make or break the findings... market sizes for relocation are considerably smaller than exisiting markets. Thanks for catching the typo on the hotel/motel rental car tax figure for SA Yeah, I didn't really mind the census figures since you used the same figures for all markets. Although SA's growth looks really impressive in the in between 2000-2005 estimates My bigger problem was with the inaccuracies in what other teams were where, including not mentioning what teams play in the MSA's the teams are currently located, and the lack of revenue figures for the Fortune 1000 companies. Both of those are fairly big deals when discussing this. But I do agree that any team moving is certainly moving to a significantly smaller market. For some teams it'll be worth it for the increased stadium revenue, etc, but for most, not at all.
April 25, 200620 yr Author If that data were a tipping point any more than data such as median household income, which can be a factor as well, then I think you need to bring it along into the research. As I outline, however, the data presented in total is more than a solid case for saying relocation to any of the mentioned markets as unfavorable. Portland would be a stretch if the political landscape were conducive to constructive relocation discussions at this time, and they?re a considerable leap from San Antonio which has been the chief discussion, at this time.
April 25, 200620 yr Very comprehensive report. It's lengthy, yet full of well researched information. Why did you not include Palm Beach County as part of the Miami-Ft. Lauderdale area? It has been reported a very high percentage of season ticket holders are from Palm Beach County, and certainly a large part of the TV audience is from PB county as well.
April 25, 200620 yr Maury Brown Posted Today, 10:16 AM: It also doesn't look at recent US Census estimates and changes. Well, I certainly could have added that... and distance to other franchises... and cost of living differential.... and.... and... and... fyatuk Posted Today, 10:22 AM:Yeah, I didn't really mind the census figures since you used the same figures for all markets. Although SA's growth looks really impressive in the in between 2000-2005 estimates As a analyst I'm impress, good work. Just keep in mind when presenting data, people will always, no matter what, will always try and support one's own arguments. Therefore, this is not personal but business, Hmm... where have I heard that before. I too didn't mind too much you using the 2000 census, but perhaps a footnote should be noted that SA is the 3rd fastest growing city in the nation, post 2000 census. I agree that the other cities are probably growing as well, but not at the rate SA is. Although, you did note that Austin & SA could be consider one TV market, your analysis only took SA as stand alone. I don't believe that to be the case. However, I concur that any team would be moving to a smaller market, however using the term "unfavorable" is guestionable.
April 25, 200620 yr Although, you did note that Austin & SA could be consider one TV market, your analysis only took SA as stand alone. I don't believe that to be the case. However, I concur that any team would be moving to a smaller market, however using the term "unfavorable" is guestionable. The league would be daft if they didn't include the Austin-San Marcos DMA in a SA team's TV market, but at the same time, SA is being a bit dumb for trying to include it for things such as ticket sales and sponsorships... Unless you want to put the stadium along the ASA line (should be opening 2009-10) somewhere around New Braunfels, anyway.
April 25, 200620 yr Interesting stuff there. What are the chances that the folks who are in the Hialeah council, M-D Commission, Codina group, etc., read the reports done by Maury, et al? If so, then we may find Loria's position a bit more weakened.
April 25, 200620 yr fyatuk Posted Today, 12:51 PM:SA is being a bit dumb for trying to include it for things such as ticket sales and sponsorships Agreed. During the weekdays we would have to fill the stadium on our own for any team that decides to move to SA. But, I believe that on w/e we will get help from the surrounding areas to include Austin. I've driven on the w/e to Austin to see a couple of Longhorn football & baseball games.
April 25, 200620 yr fyatuk Posted Today, 12:51 PM:SA is being a bit dumb for trying to include it for things such as ticket sales and sponsorships Agreed. During the weekdays we would have to fill the stadium on our own for any team that decides to move to SA. But, I believe that on w/e we will get help from the surrounding areas to include Austin. I've driven on the w/e to Austin to see a couple of Longhorn football & baseball games. A little bit yes. Some from San Marcos and very South Austin on the weekends. Doubtful anyone north of Downtown Austin would even think about it. They'd probably rather stay in Austin and watch the Express. But we'd certainly get people coming in from the RGV and Corpus as well. We get more people from the RGV than Austin at the Spurs games. We'd probably get some Austinites during the weekday to, particularly if the stadium is visible from IH-35 (they'd be able to snag some of those what, 25k daily commuters). Just nowhere near what Wolff, et al., seem to be expecting. Never been to a Longhorn game for anything. I did however speed up to Austin after work with a few friends to watch an SA Iguanas/Austin Icebats game. That was great fun
April 25, 200620 yr Maury, You ignore a number of issues. Such as the existing markets aren't as good as advertised. There's a reason why these teams are threatening to leave and it's not simply because they want to make a few more millions. Without a decent stadium and in the case of Oakland and Miami, without an adequate lease, these markets haven't been able to match their potential. Operating under Huizenga's lease, Miami is far closer to the idealized Portland and San Antonio than anything remotely similar to a large market. In baseball, even all world 5-tool talents get sent packing if they can't prove to play the game. The same with large markets who refuse to play the stadium game. From our past correspondence you have yet to prove that the broadcast territories are crafted and controlled by MLB and its teams, rather than in actuality, the regional sports networks' with their negotiated contracts with MLB teams and cable operators. The Nationals, Orioles and MASN may have set a precedent, but looking at the possible relocation options, they are an extreme example quite different from Portland, Norfolk, Charlotte and San Antonio which are many more miles from a major league baseball town and their protected territories.
April 26, 200620 yr Maury Brown Posted Today, 10:16 AM: It also doesn't look at recent US Census estimates and changes. Well, I certainly could have added that... and distance to other franchises... and cost of living differential.... and.... and... and... fyatuk Posted Today, 10:22 AM:Yeah, I didn't really mind the census figures since you used the same figures for all markets. Although SA's growth looks really impressive in the in between 2000-2005 estimates JRTexas55 Posted Yesterday, 12:09 PM:As a analyst I'm impress, good work. Just keep in mind when presenting data, people will always, no matter what, will always try and support one's own arguments. Therefore, this is not personal but business, Hmm... where have I heard that before. I too didn't mind too much you using the 2000 census, but perhaps a footnote should be noted that SA is the 3rd fastest growing city in the nation, post 2000 census. I agree that the other cities are probably growing as well, but not at the rate SA is. Although, you did note that Austin & SA could be consider one TV market, your analysis only took SA as stand alone. I don't believe that to be the case. However, I concur that any team would be moving to a smaller market, however using the term "unfavorable" is guestionable. San Antonio housing market keeps getting hotter
April 26, 200620 yr Author San Antonio housing market keeps getting hotter They'll be ready for MLB in about 5 years... maybe. A looming factor is compensation to Hicks and McLane over television broadcast territory. It's academic at the moment... Can't see an MOU being signed. Just not enough on the table by SA to warrant such a deal.
April 26, 200620 yr They'll be ready for MLB in about 5 years... maybe. A looming factor is compensation to Hicks and McLane over television broadcast territory. It's academic at the moment... Can't see an MOU being signed. Just not enough on the table by SA to warrant such a deal. That's about how long it'd take a team to be able to move down here since we have no adequate facility already But yeah, the compensation for the TV area will be a bit of a sticking point. You'd basically effectively have to buy out part of the Astros contract with FSN (not really the Rangers since the Astros are nearly exclusive down here). And the Astros will certainly be fiesty about it. It'll cost a lot more than buying out the Missions territorial rights will anyway. Marlins would be stupid to sign an MOU with SA until they are 100% sure they can't get what they need out of S.FL. So, it ain't happening. I'm still keeping my fingers crossed for something to happen with either MLB or NFL though. SA needs a second team soon to satisfy all the fans and businesses.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.