Thursday, November 16, 2006

Boo of the Week: CitiField
The Mets held their ceremonial ground breaking for CitiField earlier this week. I'm fine with the name. Sure, it would have been nice to honor Jackie Robinson, but $20 million per year is a lot of money. I'm not sure if the decision requires any further justification, but I'll also note that (1) Jackie Robinson never played for the Mets; (2) he's already honored by every team in baseball (who have all retired #42); and (3) the Mets will have a centrally located statue honoring his life at the new park. And I might've been offended if they'd renamed Shea, but this is a new stadium, so I don't understand why some people think it needs to have the same name as the old one.

But, as a Mets fan, I have to say that I'm not looking forward to the new park. Shea Stadium has a capacity of over 57,000. The new park will have a capacity of approximately 45,000. That figure apparently includes standing room for either 1,600 or 2,500 fans; I've seen both figures reported. So at best, there will be approximately 43,400 seats. The average attendance for the Mets at crappy old Shea Stadium this season was 43,328. So, on an average day, there will still be 72 seats available!

Okay, that's not a fair way to analyze the situation. Using the higher 45,000 figure, the Mets would've only sold out 36 of the 78 (there were three rainouts that were made up as part of doubleheaders) games at Shea this year. An optimist might think that means there will be plenty of days they'll be able to stroll up to the citiField box office and buy tickets for that night's game. They'd be wrong. First of all, some of the people who would've gone to the 38 sold out games will instead buy tickets to less desirable games. Secondly, the mere threat of sell-outs will make people more likely to buy tickets in advance. So, even ignoring the short-term increase that will result from a shiny new stadium, I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of Mets games will sell out as long as the Mets continue to be a consistent contender.

That's bad for Mets fans. I've been a Mets fan for over 20 years. Even during the '80s, one could walk up to Shea and buy tickets for almost any game. Once CitiField opens, there will probably be a few weeknight games in April that don't sell out, but if you want to go to any other game, you're going to have to make a decision in January. That's a serious pain in the ass for a lot of people. I guess I'm biased. I went to a bunch of regular season games this year and only bought tickets in advance once (for a friend's bachelor party, and that was through illegal means). I like being able to send out an email to a bunch of friends on a random day to see if anyone feels like going to a game. Now I'm going to have to send out that email in January and haggle over dates with a group of friends, half of whom will wind unable to attend once August 24th actually rolls around.

Combine all this with what will surely be higher prices, and the result is a lot of people will be going to a lot less Mets games. Sure, there are some people who can afford to buy tickets from a scalper, or who can buy expensive ticket plans and just pawn off tickets they're not going to use. But, a lot of people are just going to have to sacrifice. I'm sure there are families out there who only make it to a game or two a year. It's tough to drag the kids out on a weekday night, but those weekend games are going to be the first ones to sell out. What happens if the ticket they purchase in January winds up being for a game on a rainy July afternoon? Better take that Airborne.

My complaint is from the perspective of a Mets fan, but I also want to address one factor that may have been ignored from a business perspective. I understand the short-term advantages to a smaller stadium. I'll have to assume that the Mets did an analysis to determine what size stadium would give them the most revenue in the coming years, but I wonder if they thought about the possible negative long-term impact.

Some fans come and go, but all baseball teams have a lot of lifetime fans. These people buy tickets, buy merchandise, and watch games on TV when the team wins and when the team loses. Most of these loyal fans choose a team to root for while they're children and stick with them for a lifetime. The impact will probably be minimal, but I think the smaller stadium will lead to less Mets fans, some lost to the Yankees and some lost to other interests. For New York City children, the choice of what team to root for is usually between the Mets and the Yankees. There are more important factors (who their parents root for, which team is better, etc.), but one factor that may have an influence is whether a child gets to attend games at one of the teams' stadiums.

For some children, the inability to attend baseball games in person may make them less likely to turn into lifelong fans of the sport. Baseball is still the easiest major sport to attend, but it's about to get a lot harder. I think that the result will be some smaller number of children becoming fans.

Also, it's easier than ever to be a fan of a team that plays far away from home. The internet makes it just as easy to read news about the Cardinals as the Mets. And other games are available on tv and the internet. So, there's little standing in the way of people choosing to root for teams other than the Mets and Yankees. One of the remaining advantages the two New York teams have is that fans can form a deeper connection by seeing them in person. Now that it will be harder to do so, maybe some new baseball fans will start rooting for other teams. If little Timmy can't go to a Mets game, but gets to go to a couple of Marlins when he visits his grandparents over the summer, maybe he'll become a lifelong Marlins fan.

No comments: