Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Did you see the Dow?

For those of you who read the Wall Street Journal, you will enjoy their article on sports and the economy found here. My favorite part of the article is the following quote:

"We're not just competing for people's entertainment dollars anymore," said Brett Yormark, chief executive of the National Basketball Association's New Jersey Nets. "We're going up against milk and orange juice."

Now maybe this soundbite is an exaggeration, but I think it has some merit considering how the Dow hit 8,000 last week and nearly wiped out 2 trillion dollars in stockholder value. Here is what I would add to the WSJ article:

1) I've noticed that Redskins fans have taken out loans against the value of their homes to pay for season tickets. Now, with housing prices in decline and foreclosure rates on the rise, fans might struggle not only to make payments on their homes, but also to pay off additional expenditures linked to the declining value of their homes. But then again foreclosure rates are pretty low around the DC area and both Vegas and LA, two of the hardest hit areas in terms of foreclosures, do not have football teams. So maybe this downturn won't hit the NFL or Redskins in the short-term, assuming the markets and values of homes stabilize. But then again, it's going to be harder to obtain credit in the future so how will fans finance these purchases? Maybe it will get easier to get season tickets in the future...

2) Corporations now own a majority of Redskins season tickets. And I think it's safe to assume that they also own the majority of season tickets in other major cities. So with the credit crisis hitting Wall Street and soon to hit Main Street, how are business going to justify season tickets when their firms are laying people off or cutting back on marketing costs? I know the cost of tickets isn't a lot of money in the grand scheme of things, but it still seems like a bad thing to have around if you're laying off workers, at least symbolically. But then again, is the incremental amount of happiness clients get from attending sports events worth the investment for companies trying to win deals or contracts?

3) Entertainment usually thrives during economic downturns. Why? People need a distraction to make them feel good while their jobs or money are going down the toilet. It's same reason why Hollywood thrived during the Great Depression.

4) I've thought this for a long time, but you can't deny how expensive it is to attend professional sporting events. Frankly I don't understand how regular families of four, probably making close to the average household income of 40-50k per year, can afford to pay Dan Snyder $400 for tickets, $100 for food, and $50 for parking. And honestly, considering how badly Snyder has managed our team, who in their right mind would pay that much money to see the stinking Redskins?

5) The state of California's economy will almost certainly preclude the NFL from moving there in the next few years. That's not say it won't happen, but I think that the recent spate of foreclosures and rising unemployment will probably make the investment difficult to justify for a potential owner. For example, how will they pay for the new stadium when no one is lending on Wall Street? Or, how will they sell tickets when the price of everyone's home is underwater?

6) I'm worried about the NHL, despite their recent comments suggesting that the league is not in trouble due to the economic crisis. Aside from individual franchise ticket and advertising sales, the league does not have a major TV contract which bolsters the weaker teams in the league. And many leagues, like the NBA and NFL, rely on these types of contracts to keep less profitable teams like the Bills in business. So will the NHL be able to keep it's weaker teams afloat and continue paying lucrative contracts to their budding stars? I hope so. I plan on enjoying the Caps this year...

4 comments:

MFerrante said...

The NHL needs to cut the number of teams in half. All of these warm weather cities with tiny populations that don't care about hockey shouldn't have teams. I'm looking at you, Nashville. I would watch the NHL again if these were the remaining teams:

Eastern:
Rangers
Pens
Devils
Flyers
Canadiens
Leafs
Sabres
Caps or Islanders

Western:
Wings
Blues
Blackhawks
Oilers
Canucks
Flames
Avalanche
Minnesota North Stars (fuck the Wild, move the Stars back)


I realize that some of the cities left have a questionable ability to support a team (Buffalo and Pittburgh) but I think there is enough history that these teams would hopefully make it.

16 teams, 2 divisions, 4 from each division make the playoffs. The quality of play will increase dramatically and people will watch not only for that reason but because it is much more interesting to watch the Flyers and Red Wings play than the Sharks and Lightning. Then maybe they can get a TV deal on a channel I can actually find.

Nick L. said...

Agree totally. There is no denying that hockey is a regional game. Bringing it into those markets and tightening up the competition would be great. I'd obviously like to see teams in Hartford, Winnipeg, and Quebec but I'd settle for this plan.

I assume you meant to include the Bruins in that list of 8 from the East. It would be no loss to me (as an asshole Bruins fan once threatened to throw me over the railing at the Hartford Civic Center when I was only about 7), but as an original 6 team I think they deserve it. Maybe the Devils can go. Despite their success, their following is weak.

Anonymous said...

I think you could leave the Caps in there and remove the Islanders or keep the Islanders and keep the San Jose Sharks in there since they've been good since the lockout.

On another NHL note that may need a separate post -- did anyone see the caps rally 4 goals to beat the penguins last night? and did anyone see ovie try to destroy malking throughout the entire game?

he is fucking sick, even when not scoring goals or points

Nick L. said...

Go ahead, fall into the trap. You'll regret it when they move your team away.