Gouged

Wikipedia defines "price gouging" as when "a seller's asking price [is] much higher than what is seen as 'fair' under the circumstances".  Over the weekend we had dinner with a good friend, a season ticket holder at Yankee Stadium whose family has held their seats for decades and decades.  Their seats, incredibly proximate to the field and the Yankee dugout, have, over the years, been increasingly moved further from the magical "front row" -- the team has added additional photographers' pits and supplemental club seats in front of their own.  Despite being somewhat devalued in this manner, the prices for these seats have understandably continued to rise (over 40% last year, from $150 per chair to $220 a seat).  It was to great surprise (and eventual frustration and unbridled anger) that, in the course of being "relocated" to new Yankee Stadium my friends' "equivalent seats" were moved back and away from their present location.  This is par for the course when new arenas or stadia are built -- when the Fleet Center first opened my Dad's Bruins seats, perhaps the best in the house, were magically transformed into much more expensive mediocrities despite being called "equivalent" to his prior seats.   My father no longer has season tickets to the Bruins.  And at Fenway Park my family's seats (in our clan for over 60 years) are now an outrageous $90 a game -- two seats at $180/pair translates to nearly $15K per season for the privilege (and at this point it's a MAJOR privilege) of heading to Fenway.   For the record, the most expensive seats at the Fens are the front row of the field box; these cost $325, a seemingly ridiculous amount to spend to go see a baseball game up close (Fenway price chart here).

But the Yankees are using their move to take this expected shift in price and location to a new level, and this is what my friend, perhaps one of the most diehard Yankee fans I have ever known, is so angry about.  The seats equivalent to his prior location that my friend now has the "right" to purchase will cost either $600 or $850 a game, depending on his final choice (the above chart -- click on it for greater detail -- shows the pricing for this inner circle of seats).  And even more startling (and, to some perhaps, offensive) are the prices of the seats in the front row behind the dugouts and adjacent to them: $2500 a game.  A season ticket therefore cracks $200K.  The cheapest seat in this "Legends Suite" (encompassing the entire mass of the lower box from foul pole to foul pole) is $500, nearly 40% more than the most expensive seat in Fenway, for comparison.  The Yankees have outdone themselves here considering their already formidable wealth, their revenue stream from YES, and their generally spectacular level of popularity that would have insured a relatively full stadium even at reasonably increased prices.  Their dedicated fans should be outraged - God only knows what the "cheap seats" will eventually cost. 

Heaven forbid the Red Sox should ever leave Fenway and build a new park, fans will be singing the same tune up in Beantown. [ED: if they aren't already...]

[Update: I neglected to include the fact that my friend was also asked to re-up to these new seats for a 10 year commitment with yearly escalations in price.  So the math is: 4x$220 = $880 per game x 81 games = $71K for current seats vs. 4x$850 = $3400/game x 81 games = $275K per season x 10 seasons plus an approximate 3% escalation per year = $3.15M commitment upfront to retain his season tickets.  So, an annual commitment of $71K goes to an upfront commitment of $3M+, to a family that has had season tickets for nearly a century, if my math is correct.  This is, even to those with means, a ridiculous demand]

Comments

[stuck working]

Oh, I'm still around, YF -- I've enjoyed the site too long to be put off it entirely.

But that said, A YF should realize that his commenting style does not make me or many others want to engage him. And that's not because of the power of his arguments, as he perhaps thinks.

[SF]

FSP:

Good questions, and your point about the media revenue replacing the on-site money is also a perceptive one. But look at the NHL, stuck on VS, marginalized even further than it was years ago. And while it was always that fourth marginal national sport, the league has lost me, completely, as a fan. It has lost several friends of mine as fans, as well, and we were jersey-wearing (not quite face-painting) diehards who would watch Bruins repeats on NESN at 2 in the morning having watched the same game earlier that night. I was a massive hockey fan until my early thirties, so it wasn't just a teenage/college obsession, but rather a real love (I even learned how to play the game, and did so for several years following college) of mine. Baseball isn't immune, even as there always seem to be "replacement fans" willing to fill seats.

[A YF]

"Has any evidence piled up suggesting that continually raising the price actually has, or will, hurt the sport's popularity, long-term?"

Fantastic post and question, FSP.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for SF or YF to explain the disrespectful reply that started this nonsense. Tim and I made comments, and we were soon belittled for them. It's called leadership by example. And where was YF deploring the despicable state of his house when SF was smacking me in reference to someone getting run over by a car?

Good luck enforcing your "legal" right though.

Have a good night every one!

[LocklandSF]

A YF, I realize you're not going to agree with this, but here is some food for thought...

Almost everyone disagrees with your tone and approach to the comment section of this site, the authors, the regulars, Sox fans and Yankee fans alike, and I honestly don't remember anyone defending you once.

This is the fact of the situation.

Yet, you continue to think you're being unfairly targeted.

Think about that for a second. Do you really think this entire site, it's authors and readers, are just in on a giant conspiracy against you?

Or maybe, just maybe, it's possible that you're the one that's wrong, maybe just a little bit?

[SF]

A YF:

You have taken one phrase from a longer comment, "overly simplistic", and made it out to be an insult to end all insults. This is simply prepostorous - it was an offering of opinion, that your distillation of this post was simplistic, nothing more. My original comment that fed your anger is reproduced below, just to get it on the record again. It even included a clear criticism of the Red Sox, which you then ignored and proceeded to base an entire line of distracting argument on this bit of excision. I urge you to re-read the original comment and ask yourself if your reaction and your actions in this thread were at all warranted. And that's the last I am going to write about this issue, I think today's efforts speak for themselves.

Here it is:

this is overly simplistic and not entirely true. The comparison to gas prices is also odd, since this is not an efficient market: OPEC controls the spigot, to an extent, and can artificially control the market for petroleum. In the end, the consumer is at the mercy of a cartel; this is not free-market economics, at all.

This is all somewhat besides the point. Shouldn't the Yankees be concerned that they will alienate their fan-base? Shouldn't they be concerned that one of their long-time diehard families is on the brink of giving up their tickets? There is a bigger issue here, and it is about the relationship of a fan base to their team, about the connection of rooters to the spaces and sounds of a stadium. If Yankee Stadium becomes an elitist grounds (and the blessing of Yankee Stadium, despite my hatred of the place for other reasons, has been it's accessibility) that is a bad symbol for a franchise. These "Legends Suites" prices bode very poorly for the eventual accessibility of the cheap seats. The Stadium is going to be a different place, and it will be for the worse. This should trouble fans, not just Yankee fans. Fenway has been on that path for several years, Yankee Stadium is about to follow down the same elitist route.

[FenSheaParkway]

Re: NHL

I get what you're saying, SF, and all sports would be wise to heed what happened to the NHL as a point of caution. But MLB has, and has always had, a much larger core audience than the NHL, so I'm not sure it's 100% right to compare the two so immediately, even though the analogy is an apt one in your case. The NHL weathered their loss of a championship year less well than MLB did, and for obvious reasons, I think. I'm not saying that MLB is immune, but my guess is that they have an idea of how strong their innoculation is, and they're clearly willing to test it.

I agree with you, in that it seems like there MUST be a ceiling that MLB won't be able to break, but that idea keeps getting refuted every year. Just as an example, isn't this current era of Baseball plagued with The Greatest Scandal In The History Of The Exalted Game? And ticket sales (and other revenue) has never been stronger. What exactly will make people (us) stop caring about following the games?

[SF]

Good points, FSP. But one issue, not related to doomsaying, is just the observation that this price-gouging is simply sad. The game is pricing out, at least at the stadium a lot of fans. Some of my greatest and fondest memories of growing up were going to game, not to my parents' seats, but rather the bleachers, with my own few bucks and a scorecard, sitting by myself watching the game. Maybe I am over-romanticizing this, but this is an experience that wasn't class-based, since the entertainment was so cheap. I sense that this type of visit, at least in our two cities, is simply not available, and this is, at least to me, sad.

[IronHorse (yf)]

I'm just wondering how it is that A YF knows that I am, in fact, a hairless ape.

Incidentally, my RF bleacher cheapseats went up 20% this season and will jump up more next season. Because they are the cheapest in the stadium, this percentage leap only translates into a couple dollars a game and I expect the same next year, so it won't keep me from re-upping the package.

Frankly I'd pay that much more if they would just stop with the goose-stepping May-Day celebration during the 7th game stretch of games...but that's another debate I know.

[FenSheaParkway]

It is sad, I won't argue that, it's just a sadness that I guess I've come to expect. So much so, that I've even been joking (joking!) to people this year about the fact that I expect to see a fraction of the Mets games next year as I have gotten accustomed to the past couple of years, since I moved here. I don't believe they've announced any per seat prices yet for Citi Field, but I'm going to guess my beloved $5 upper deck seats will be a thing of the past.

So it is a very sad fact. If I'm doing anything other than sharing that lament, it's that it seems to be sad "only" on the individual level of the person who's being priced out. The media will give it their annual lip service, and then either the old fans suck it up and pay it, or the new occupants will excitedly tell all their friends that they finally got off the waiting list and 'OMG, WHO WANTS TO SIT IN MY NEW SEASON TICKETS!'

[FenSheaParkway]

Clarification, before anyone jumps on me for being spoiled with the rarity of $5 seats: I know that's a pittance, but it's the difference between seeing a couple handfuls of games a year (in April, May and September, mostly) versus choosing only a couple at $25. I know something is better than nothing, but I'm definitely not looking forward to having to choose but 2 out of 81 games to see for an entire summer.

[A YF]

It's not that it was an "an insult to end all insults" (that was posting, in reference to me, about a homicidal maniac), it's that there was an insult at all and completely unprovoked (esp. to Tim who I've never seen post here).

Worse, you were "overly simplistic and not entirely true" in saying that gas prices are an "odd" comparison. "In the end, the consumer is at the mercy of a [baseball] cartel; this is not free-market economics, at all." That's exactly why complaining about ticket prices is like complaining about the cost of gasoline. It does just as much good and few are going to change their behavior in protest.

To answer your questions, again:

"Shouldn't the Yankees be concerned that they will alienate their fan-base?"

No. Have the Red Sox ever been?

"Shouldn't they be concerned that one of their long-time diehard families is on the brink of giving up their tickets?"

Not when it's by choice because they don't want to move ten or twenty rows back.

Meanwhile:

"The game is pricing out, at least at the stadium a lot of fans."

Where is any evidence of this? Because you pointing to the experience of this blue blood ain't close to it. Care to offer one shred of evidence. Because attendance increases across the board, as FSP points out, forcefully argue the exact opposite.

Right now, that bleacher seat costs $14 at Yankee Stadium. Hard to imagine you growing up today and not being able to afford that.

[A YF]

And what's sadder?:

a) The increasing ticket prices across all major sports.

b) One person can spend more on baseball entertainment than 75% of U.S. household make in that same year?.

c) $71k could feed 200 people for a year in many parts of this world.

Sad is a relative term.

[IronHorse (yf)]

A YF, why are you spending so much time arguing with us hairless primates????? I would have thought that as a more fully evolved species you would be off solving world hunger or some such thing. Or maybe the global energy crisis given your obvious expertise on the petroleum industry.

Looking forward to your Nobel speech...

-Cornelius

[Giambi's Thong]

The Yanks are stinking up the House the Ruth Built on the way out the door so I can understand the 10 year commitment. They need to cash in now before the mass exodus of bandwagon fans and celebs like Billy "Mets hat in City Slickers" Crystal happens when they miss the playoffs this year.

People pay big bucks to see a winner and with Hank now at the wheel, he'll be asking my boy to borrow me for the front office soon enough. I just hope I don't catch something from l'il Stein (at least, that's what his wife calls him).

[FenSheaParkway]

Sad IS a relative term. And we're using it here relative to Baseball fans.

And sure, $14 isn't a lot, relative to many things. It isn't a lot for a whole box of copy paper. It isn't a lot for a monthly magazine subscription. It isn't a lot for a car tune-up (correct me if I'm wrong; I don't own a car). But it might be a lot for someone who wanted to see 5 games for $50 but who can now only get 3 for $42 (for example, I don't know what those tickets used to cost in the recent past). What's being questioned here is the wisdom of forcing the biggest supporters of the team to consider supporting the team less. It might be the same amount of money for the team, but less experience for the fan. And experiencing the team is what makes the fan a fan.

[Sacto-SF]

+1

to stuckworking's: "[I] lose all desire to read or contribute around here when your aggressive, obnoxious attitude takes over and drives a thread, as you've done here."

[soxgirl]

yep, me too. And ordinarily I like reading through all the debate just to see how the other half thinks.

[A YF]

You people really think I care what you think? I'm very happy to maintain an unpopular opinion. I was also against the Iraq War from the beginning. Popularity has never equaled Truth.

Ask SF the definition of "troll".

But I'm really done now. Have fun saying all the things you're too weak to say with me here.

[IronHorse (yf)]

See you in Oslo A YF.

[FenSheaParkway]

"Have fun saying all the things you're too weak to say with me here."

- An Anonymous Poster

[attackgerbil]

> You people really think I care what you think?

I have not thought about that at all. I have decided I do not care what you think, which is all the effort I will expend upon the topic henceforth.

[Brad]

By "here", you mean the internet, right?

ha.

[Ferenc]

The simple supply and demand model is pretty irrelevant in situations that lack perfect competition, such as the market for sports tickets. This ain't selling pizzas in the neighborhood. It's already obvious that the supply of tickets is controlled by a monopoly, but let's not kid ourselves by thinking that the Yankees actually expect very many private individuals, albeit wealthy, to shell out 200k for season tickets. I think we should just consider the demand side of the equation as reserved for corporations. Private money and corporate money are completely different animals. I agree that it's the prerogative of the Yankees to covet the corporate cash, but they seem to be denigrating the loyalty of the fans who have supported them through the decades, not all of which were as fruitful as the 90s. I'm cynical enough to know the Yankees will never be seriously called to task for it, but I hope I'm wrong.