Athletics Nation: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Fedor vs Rogers Results and Live Coverage

So...I opened the Sac Bee's Sports page today

Just to look for the Oakland A's game series this week, along with the times and broadcast sources. I felt the Oakland As/Tigers series was pretty compelling and figured that there would be several broadcasts on Comcast.  Again, Comcast Sportsnet Bay Area ignores all the As games and instead is playing every single Giants game this week.

Needless to say, I am extremely angry at the retarded cable company I spend a mint on. Are the loser giants simply that much better with the ratings? I was thinking about writing a letter, but I figure I would only get a  automated response.

 

Anyone else pissed at this constant favoritism of Comcast toward the Giants?

0 recs  |  Comment 59 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Athletics Nation

The 2007 A's Love Wednesdays!

Aug 2007 by louismg - 22 comments

Comments

Display:

I am right there with you being upset about it

but unfortunately don’t see it changing. The Giants own a portion of Comcast Sportsnet Bay Area and will always get preferential treatment due to that. I just realized about 5 minutes ago that tonight’s game wasn’t on TV as well. I have no idea how long the A’s TV contract is, but I think they definitely could use some renegotiation.

by jpl on Jun 2, 2008 4:41 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Just move :-)

I have all 3 games on here.

Man does that suck to live there and not see any games…..I get every Angel and Dodger game all year on local here.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Jun 2, 2008 4:51 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

But then you have to watch Dodger and Angel games.

Do they play the whole game or do they stop the telecast when all the fans leave in the 6th?

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jun 2, 2008 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Nah, just flip over to another game.

The whole leave in the 6th thing has grown so crazy out of proportion, I dont notice it anymore than at any park anymore. The showing up late thing is pure LA though….even show up late to Laker playoff games.

Bring back Hammer.

by OaktownPower on Jun 2, 2008 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You could be in Oakland were...

the fans don’t show up until…never.

Hot dogs, get your hot dogs.

by jjham15 on Jun 2, 2008 8:00 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

yeah, I know.

I looked at the schedule and was SO excited we were playing the Tigers, especially, because my favourite college/minor league player just got called up to Detroit and then I see NONE of the games against the Tigers are on and then no games are on at all until Saturday! absolutely so frustrating. mlb.tv is useless because of blackouts and I’m not moving to the Bay Area so I’m just stuck here, game-less all week.

"Ryan [Sweeney] has got the perfect baseball body..." -Mike Sweeney

by Christine on Jun 2, 2008 6:23 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Jeff Larrish

I’m guessing your favorite college/minor league player is Jeff Larish, the 89th Sun Devil to reach the majors. I’m excited to see him in the bigs as another representative of ASU. It’s interesting he was the last of Pedroia/Buck/Larish trio to make the bigs. Hopefully he’s here to stay.

PT-42

by norcaldevilasu on Jun 3, 2008 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

good call :)

I was always surprised how long he was down in the minors as I’ve been following his career and was really excited to hear he was finally getting a shot with the big league club. I hope they give him a chance to stay with the team and make adjustments. I’d hate to see him just get sent right back down.

and let’s hope ASU does well at the Super Regionals this weekend :D

"Ryan [Sweeney] has got the perfect baseball body..." -Mike Sweeney

by Christine on Jun 3, 2008 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Super Regionals

I don’t know a lot about Fresno State but I’m glad we’re not facing USD and their ace pitcher Brian Matusz. Playing at home should be a benefit and hopefully by Sunday/Monday night we’ll be celebrating another CWS appearance.

PT-42

by norcaldevilasu on Jun 3, 2008 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I hope so!

Fresno State is 37-27 but you just never know. I’m not too confident in ASU’s pitching but hopefully with their offense they’ll be fine.

would be awesome if the ASU softball team wins this week, as well :)

"Ryan [Sweeney] has got the perfect baseball body..." -Mike Sweeney

by Christine on Jun 3, 2008 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Pitching

It’s hard to be confident in ASU’s pitching once you get past Mike Leake, Josh Satow and Ike Davis. It sure wouldn’t hurt to have a local player like Brian Matusz (from Cave Creek, AZ) on the team. My one complaint of the Pat Murphy years is a lack of talented arms, I’m hopeful he can remedy that situation in the near future.

As for the women’s softball team, they’ve been on fire this post season. Katie Burkhart is a stud and we’re lucky to have her. It’s amazing how quickly a program can turn around with a new coach as just 4 years ago our softball program was a Pac-10 bottom feeder. We lucked out getting Clint Meyers.

PT-42

by norcaldevilasu on Jun 3, 2008 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Seems odd to describe a female athlete as a "stud"...

maybe the term has become gender neutral, but…

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

In women's softball, do the relief pitchers

come from the bullpen?

formerly known as mdl

by iglew on Jun 4, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

do MLB players have nightmares?

Who has Cust love, besides us? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 4, 2008 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There are no relief pitchers in women's softball

(OK, I exaggerate slightly, but generally relievers are only used in case of injuries or blowouts. A&M’s ace had 44 decisions in 45 appearances this year.)

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 4, 2008 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Go Bulldogs!!!

There is no A in OFFENSE!!

by wacchampions on Jun 4, 2008 3:57 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's pathetic

And then the A’s wonder why no one comes to the games. Who knows about them?

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jun 2, 2008 7:11 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

At least I know where my pants are today.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 2, 2008 8:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'll give them back to you tomorrow.

(Sorry if they have a little goat hair on the in-seam.)

I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal

by Nico on Jun 2, 2008 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

They damn well better

It took me a long ass time to get it into the in-seam to begin with.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 2, 2008 9:30 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

actually, the pants never make it on TV

but I know who stole them, the creepy guy with no pants watching those poor children. Why won’t CSN do something about him! Think of the children!

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's baffling, but yes
Are the loser giants simply that much better with the ratings?

You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the goddamn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all. ~Earl Weaver

by UncleLeo on Jun 2, 2008 9:15 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I think Beane (and the marketing dept) need to realize that yes, fans do associate with "Star" players.

Those familiar faces do bring fans back, as long as they’re good.

Would Giambi have helped? Probably. Would Tejada have helped? Defiantly. Would Hudson have helped? Yes.

Swisher was becoming such a player for the A’s as well. But I don’t know what Swisher’s future is, if he will make the jump and become a great player, or if he will continue to play as is and end up an .800 OPS RF/1B.

If Carlos Gonzalez can get it together and live up to expectations, he could be that player. But the A’s need to KEEP those guys instead of sending them away.

by Zonis on Jun 2, 2008 10:34 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I hope they don't "realize" that

There are plenty of other ways to successfully market the team without allowing PR to dictate roster moves.

Despite all my revulsion for the Selig Cabal, the one thing that I think is a positive outcome of divorcing franchise fiscal success from marginal attendance increases is the freedom that it allows GMs like Beane to build rosters without having to consider the PR angle.

If a new stadium enables the A’s to retain a superstar-level player through his most productive years, I’m all for that approach.

But piggybacking the incidental retention of our non-superstars because they’re fan favorites? No thanks.

Who has Cust love, besides us? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 3, 2008 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Exhibit A: Mariners

I know it’s baffling to think of Richie Sexson as a star, but that’s how he’s been presented and there’s years of investment in the PR image. The general public in Seattle is only just now starting to catch on to the fact that he sucks.

formerly known as mdl

by iglew on Jun 4, 2008 10:09 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Seattle runs a lot of their roster to that end

The Ichiro signing and extension (the first justified, the second debatable), the Johjima signing (debatable) and extension (stupid), Sexson, to soem degree Bedard—their current regime is a bad mix of the worst elements possible of roster construction.

Who has Cust love, besides us? @('.')@

by monkeyball on Jun 4, 2008 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed, but with the caveat

that I don’t think the Bedard trade was a bad move. As much as I love Adam Jones, the reality is that a stud outfielder who can play CF has more value on another team than it has for the Mariners, who already have Ichiro and some serviceable backups. Assuming they can get equivalent value, it makes sense as win-win to trade him for something they need more. Whether it works out or not remains to be seen, but I think Bedard was a reasonable attempt at that. Held to a general Bavasi standard, the deal has to be considered above average.

By the way, the Mariners PR machine did start to make initial moves toward building up Adam Jones’ name and image last fall, which suggests to me it was not a foregone PR conclusion that he’d be moved.

formerly known as mdl

by iglew on Jun 4, 2008 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

plain and simple

Giants have a larger fan base than the A’s, TV time is worth more and Giants probably pay more than the A’s are willing to, to get on comcast

"But if he's swinging at real flies, well, in that case there are two definite solutions: 1) Fresno 2) Ritalin." - howtheyscored

by CPGiant756 on Jun 2, 2008 11:08 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

It's the other way around

Comcast pays the team to televise the games

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The other problem, is for some reason KMAX 31, is not simulcasting as many

A’s games from the KICU feed. I don’t know if that is a ratings thing, or the A’s didn’t pay them to do as many.

by theblackpearl on Jun 3, 2008 6:24 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

It's garbage like this that lowers attendance figures. It's beyond me why

ownership is so oblivious to this. They keep running out the same tired ads, the same tired promotions, and expect things to change/attendance to go up.

Think outside the box Lew! Think/model your approach after Arte down in LAnaheim. For the better part of 35 years the Angels were a non-factor/played second fiddle in the LA market but Arte was able to change that in a flash. About the only thing I see Lew doing similar to Arte is running out that retarded trumpet puppet.

We’ve had this discussion on here numerous times, but Lew et al. never think outside of the box. It’s a tired act.

by 33SwisherSweet on Jun 3, 2008 10:03 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

The real problem is they're failing econ 101

Supply and demand. They have a lot of supply and little demand but instead of lowering prices, they raise them.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 10:12 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

No, I don't think they are.

Their desired end result is increasing revenue/turning a profit.

If they are generating more revenue by charging more money to less fans, that’s what they are going to do.

by mikev on Jun 3, 2008 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

You're assuming

that cutting the price by about 15%/20% and doubling they’re Box office take wouldn’t make them more money. I’m assuming that making that cut would double their take. I’ve been known to be wrong, but the only way to find out for sure is to make that kind of change. One thing is clear (at least to me), increasing ticket prices this year was a seriously bad idea.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The team's revenue increased the season after they put the tarps on

by a significant amount, even though attendance went down about 15%.

You assume far too much.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 11:25 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think the price of a ticket factors into the equation

regarding the decision to go, or not to go, for many potential patrons. Sure, a family of four looks at $40 for four seats, and may go versus $60 for four, but IMO that is not the reason causing the diff between a typical crowd of 11,000 for a game, and a potential crowd of 22,000 for a game. IMO, no study cited.

All the talk about location and prices have an uphill climb against the next-door example:

Oracle Arena

I’ve only been in the Arena a few times, but they still get sellouts with big dollar prices. Sure they’re the only NBA team in town, but really I think the problem with the Coli, is that it is an uncomfortable place in the evening, with the marine layer, humidity, and temperature. And it is grey, concrete ugly inside the walkways. Gosh, County of Alameda, your revenue is down for the sake of unpainted concrete! Wake up, someone.

I’ve accepted seats at Giants night games, way the f**k up in the upper reaches and edges, but I certainly WOULD NEVER BUY such a seat. Just like the Coli, it is cold and uncomfortable. And, I saw plenty of empty rows of seats on so-called “sellout crowds” a couple of years ago. So, what’s with that?

Well, the Giants lined up corporate purchasers with their “new ballpark”. Corporations bought blocks of tickets, and then gave them away. So, on a given date of the “sellouts”, a lot of “butts in the seats” didn’t pay for their seats, and, many choice seats were vacant.

The seats were pre-sold because the venue is/was attractive, but there is a disparity in actual attendance versus “sold seat attendance”. Tha A’s have no such “open seating attractiveness” at the Coli. The Alameda County Coliseum is a monument to 1960s thinking and architecture, and it inherently is “dis-inviting”, and the County has no leadership to fix the problem. So you’re getting few corporate “buys” except for luxury boxes. Those no doubt pump up revenue, but do not do much for attendance figures.

"I never predict anything, and I never will." Paul Gascoigne, English footballer

by One won lost won on Jun 3, 2008 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I have a crazy idea...HOW ABOUT WORKING TO CREATE DEMAND...

The A’s “business model” has not evolved since I’ve been a fan. It’s as if they think fans are magically going to appear just because. It further worries me that they really think the new stadium is going to be some sort of cure to all their financial ills. Under this current “business model” I suspect they see an initial bump in attendance revenue, but then return to anonymity.

Without Billy Beane we might possibly have the worst franchise in the MLB. They have very little marketing/advertising/business sense that actually get people to want to come to the games. It really blows my mind. Sorry Lew, it takes a bit more than the Trumpet Puppet to fix this mess.

by 33SwisherSweet on Jun 3, 2008 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'll freely admit I'm making broad assumptions base on my own personal case

BUT, I’m guessing the increase in revenue had little to do with ticket sales and more to do with the money from the profit sharing and MLB revenues. Now, if you find something that says the that ticket revenue went up 15% after the tarps went up and they increased pricing, then i’m completely 100% wrong, but until i see that, while it’s still an assumption, it’s still plausible.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm talking about ticket revenue

The average price of a sold ticket went up dramatically. Attendance went down, but not enough to cancel it out. See prior discussion here:

http://www.athleticsnation.com/2006/11/14/20383/997#346113

and probably elsewhere, too, but that’s the one I found with an offhand AN search.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't see it anywhere

that the higher revenue discussed was strictly confined to ticket concessions or in any tangibly related way. Nor do i see any linkage to these reported numbers. I have see elsewhere that they did make more money overall (about 15% if I’m recalling correctly), but that’s total net, not specific to tickets. All I’m seeing is that higher ticket pricing/artificial scarcity didn’t hurt the overall outcome, but there are other factors in there. I suppose the argument could be made that what they lost in the revenue from tickets was gained in revenue sharing, but that’s not a good business model to base your company off of, because it’s not reliable.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The average ticket price rose considerably

I believe it went up like 7 bucks a seat. In a lot of cases, people weren’t paying face value for sure, but they weren’t the year prior either.

The reason for the rise was the reduction of available “cheap” seats.

So if you looked at it and said there was 20,000 people at the game in 2005, and 10,000 of them were in the cheap seats. In 2006 when there was 20,000 people and only 4,000 cheap seats available it only stands to reason that the higher average ticket price, at least partially, resulted in the boost.

by jeffro on Jun 3, 2008 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Whatever, dude

If you think I’m lying, fine. I don’t really care. I’m not spending half my lunch hour digging around in internet archives to prove the point.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bottom line is that TICKET PRICE has LITTLE TO DO

with the lack of interest in this team. That’s a sorry excuse used by the unimaginative owner. Try cutting beer prices, being customer friendly, marketing your team, etc. Use a little creativity.

by 33SwisherSweet on Jun 3, 2008 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Drop prices to $2 a ticket

See if that doesn’t increase demand… and concessions sales.

Notes From The Nat has a new home: http://www.natnotes.com

by Ozzz on Jun 4, 2008 12:39 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't think you're lying

and I certainly accept the possibility that you’re right. I haven’t bothered to look either, why would anyone waste their time on that :).

I just think (unfounded) that there is a correlation between ticket price and attendance. Whether the attendance gained by lowering the price actually winds up making the team money, I’d certainly hope not if the team isn’t willing to do it.

I will say that they’ve priced me out of games I’d have gone to in the past. Am I the norm? Probably not.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Certainly there is a (negative) correlation between ticket price and attendance

That’s pretty much axiomatic.

However (dredging back into microeconomic theory here…), it appears that the demand for baseball tickets is highly inelastic. (Translation: you can soak the customers without losing many of them. Also often seen in markets for addictive goods, like cigarettes.) So raising the price raised revenues, even though it lowered the quantity sold.

You may have “kicked the habit” when the price went up, but you appear to be atypical in that regard.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

One thing that has changed from a macro standpoint

is that consumer confidence is at its lowest point in 16 years (as reported last week).

I’m thinking that trips to see major league baseball games are considered less essential when economic times are tough than when the dot-coms and the housing market are booming. Perhaps, for many consumers, the shape of their demand curve for baseball attendance has changed from years past. Demand may be more price-sensitive now that people feel that they need to pour so much of their earnings into their gas tanks (and, in my experience, their grocery carts). The family that attended ten games in past seasons…maybe they are thinking that once a month is sufficient this year.

If management raises prices AND its customers’ elasticity of demand for the product has increased, you’re going to lose quite a bit of business.

by Soaker on Jun 3, 2008 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I used to come down from Sacramento about 8 times a year

but I can’t afford that anymore.

I’ve attended one game and plan to go to one more.

Then again, I’m a cheap bastard and buy the cheapest tickets anyway and bring my own food.

"You have to have a catcher or you'll have all passed balls."- Casey Stengel

by Gaijin_Suketto on Jun 3, 2008 5:19 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Are you attending more Rivercats games this year?

In economics terms, are you substituting consumption of less expensive Rivercats baseball for consumption of pricier Oakland Athletics baseball?

It has been almost 30 years since I sat in Wheeler with 800 other Cal freshmen madly taking notes in Econ 1 lectures…this thread is making it all come flooding back…

by Soaker on Jun 3, 2008 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It's possible, but it seems unlikely to me

Analysts of baseball business have noted (and been puzzled by) the fact that it seems to be unusually recession-resistant.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jun 3, 2008 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I can agree with that

Particularly when it terms of economics.

Thankfully we haven’t heard too much complaining from ownership (or maybe i’m just happily blind and deaf to it) about the lack of attendance. Or more importantly, I haven’t seen the current ownership issue complaining statements to the media. Most of it is the media, players or outside sources. This suggests to me that some of the attendance issue is purposeful, basically the idea that they’re making enough money right now to be worth it, that the lowering of prices to fill the stadium vs. the financial gain it would give them isn’t worth it to them or none existent. But, at it’s current price and the current market place (general, not necessarily baseball), expecting to fill the stadium seems delusional at this price.

In search of a new signature. Say something funny and you may see your comment here!

by DMOAS on Jun 3, 2008 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

There is no box

per Amory Lovins. First time I saw that comment, it startled me a bit.

But it’s true. There is no box.

"I never predict anything, and I never will." Paul Gascoigne, English footballer

by One won lost won on Jun 3, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

A's vs. Giants

It has always been that way. Oakland vs. San Francisco. A’s vs. Giants. Good vs. Evil. KICU vs. CSN. Don’t get me started on KNBR. I’m eCrying right now.

by passionately objective on Jun 3, 2008 2:28 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Oakland Athletics.

Community Guidelines ANcillary Terms
Start posting about the Athletics »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Ph3spec_small
Having fun with Pythagoras, or, who got lucky during 2009
Dsc00764_small
DLD - 11/07/2009 - How to Keep Yourself Occupied in the Off-Season
527918550406_0_bg_small
2010 Off-Season Blueprint
Depaulbluedemons_small
Community Prospect List #15
Super_grover_small
2010 Offseason Primer

Recent FanPosts

Bill_king_small
AFL Rising Stars Showcase Tonight on MLBN @ 5PM
Me_at_att_park_small
Greener Grass, Episode 4: The Biggest Off Season (Potential) Decision Doesn't Involve Free Agents
Oaklandathletics_small
Hardy to Minnesota. What's with the early offseason trades?
Tyler_at_maya_school_small
Happy 6th Birthday, AN!
Oaklandathletics_small
facebook Members: Keep the A's in OAKLAND
Bill_king_small
Organizational Statistics: Winter Leagues

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Managers

Tyler_at_maya_school_small Tyler Bleszinski

08-_the_author_small 67MARQUEZ

Baseball_small baseballgirl

Poochini-butt_in_box_2_small Nico

As_kings_cal_small louismg

Editors

Countdown_small Taj Adib

Ziegler160px_small Flashfire

527918550406_0_bg_small notsellingjeans