Cubs Reduce Price On Wrigley Fantasy Camp
by Al Yellon on Jul 24, 2010 8:15 PM CDT
Email
PrintThis was a subject of discussion here a while back so I thought I'd pass along information I received today at the ballpark.
The price of the Wrigley fantasy camp, scheduled for August 8-9, has been reduced from $7500 to $3000. Interns were handing out flyers at the ballpark today.
That's a pretty drastic price reduction and it may reflect the fact that few were willing to sign up at the higher price. They may get more to sign up at $3000 a person, even though that's still higher than the $3995 charged for a full week at Randy Hundley's camp in Arizona next January.
This is, I believe, more evidence that while "the Wrigley experience" does have value, it has been overvalued. We'll see how many sign up at the new lower price.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
60%
i guess its still technically almost half.
by circuitclout on Jul 24, 2010 8:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Double Wow
This should increase the demand. Seems like a great time and at a good price!
There goes one over the fence...a Tru-Link fence.
by truelinkfence on Jul 25, 2010 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions
Maybe I'm just tired
But how is $3000 higher than $3995?
Somebody take Aramis' bat off the restricted list, please.
I'm guessing the value ...
….. because for the $3995 you get seven days, 10 games plus one against the pros, hotel, breakfast and lunch for six days, one complete home uniform plus one away jersey, an autographed ball signed by all the pros (about 18 pros or so), a locker nameplate signed by all the pros, all the autographs you can get/want from all the pros, and other various things that slip my mind besides going out to dinner several nights a week with Moreland or Coomer or Jody or Lee Smith or Beckert or Kessinger or Reuschel or Cardenal or Jenkins or Dernier or Durham or Willie Wilson or some combination of several of them.
At this Wrigley camp, you watch a game the first day, get to go on the field the second day, play in a four team tournament, do some drills and have a banquet. I’d say Randy gives you a lot more bang for your buck.
"When they signed Fukudome, I knew they were trying to get me fired". - Ron Santo, January, 2008
Right.
It’s not higher in real dollars, but you only get two days for your $3000, where you get a whole week and what BeerCub mentions for the $3995.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Wrigley!
I would do this in a second if I had the funds.
There goes one over the fence...a Tru-Link fence.
by truelinkfence on Jul 25, 2010 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Hahaha
You couldn’t make this up. I am pretty sure people joked about them cutting the price I hope that guy who wrote that FanPost with like 500 comments lets us know his plans.
by JSB on Jul 24, 2010 9:31 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
I hope he goes
Because if he still doesn’t after that fan-post he wrote, he deserves the comments we made.
No he's going to complain
That’s its much cheaper and now anyone can do it so its not as special anymore.
The guy wasn't THAT bad
Essentially, he was complaining about the high price for two days of Wrigley access which can be had for much cheaper just on one of the tours. A then- $7500 for what is described above is most definitely not worth it.
"When they signed Fukudome, I knew they were trying to get me fired". - Ron Santo, January, 2008
I saw this on CSN's Tribune Live Friday night
Dave Kaplan had Wally Haywood of the Cubs on and Rick Sutcliffe by phone. Wally Haywood mentioned the $3000 price, yet the web page still says $7500 for a single.
And Kaplan was helping to sell the fan experience. Here’s the video
"They come to see me strike out, hit a home run, or run into a fence. I try to accommodate them at least one way every game." - Gorman Thomas
Cubs marketing people overprice something.
I am shocked.
"Lou Piniella's been a great manager for a long time and I stand by him completely"
by Doggie Stalker on Jul 25, 2010 12:07 AM CDT reply actions
The Real Value....
is what customers are willing to pay for it.
"The big possums walk late." - Harry Caray
This team
DESPERATELY needs someoone like John McD to take over as team president. They are embarrassing themselves with moves like this. It’s one thing to drop ticket prices mid-season, it’s quite another to enact a 60% price drop on an event you just planned a few weeks ago. That is piss-poor market analysis.
Not to rehash the ticket price drop, but I would never, ever drop ticket prices mid-season. If you are having trouble selling tickets, add some incentives—free tshirt, free food, coupon for % off a ticket purchase next year, etc. Dropping your ticket prices mid-season is just a horrific move. It will really hurt early-season ticket sales next year, imo, since people will feel like they can wait and see if prices drop during the season. It pisses of the season ticket holders and makes them demand amends.
The new administration is not doing a good job thus far, imo, in keeping value in their product.
DEJESUS!!!
by tomas21 on Jul 25, 2010 9:36 AM CDT reply actions 3 recs
If they were actually dropping ticket prices you would have a good point
As it is, so far all they have done is had a 1-week promotion in one section of the ballpark. I doubt many people will not buy any single-season tickets next year solely because of that promotion. I think the bigger concern is the product on the field as compared to their marketing department.
However, the point is....
… that this could be seen as a slippery slope by some. If ticket prices aren’t lowered in general next year, barring a significant improvement in that product on the field, as you correctly note, sales are likely to be down. Which could lead to more discounting. Which could lead to…
You see where this could wind up, if they’re not careful.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Sure
It is a slippery slope. They should lower ticket prices. Thing is that they could do it pretty easily without actually changing anything. Just re-classify a number of games from platinum to gold, from gold to silver and on down. Would significantly help.
They did drop ticket prices
so by your definition I did make a good point. Thanks.
DEJESUS!!!
No they didn't
They had a 1-week promotion in one section of the ballpark. That isn’t dropping ticket prices.
Did the tickets cost less then?
If so, they dropped the prices.
DEJESUS!!!
Ugh
A one-week promotion that included a limited number of discounted tickets in one section of the park isn’t the same thing as “dropping ticket prices mid-season” as your original post implied. If the Cubs had done a large scale “dropping” of prices, then there would be a big problem and incentive for people not to buy.
If you are going to go with semantics, they technically didn’t “drop” prices. They offered a limited discount for a limited time period. Just like if for one-week a limited number of iPhones were on sale, after that week was over you wouldn’t say they “dropped the price” of the iPhone. You would say that they ran a promotion.
One last comment
because for whatever reason when you respond to my posts it annoys me. I’m sure you are a nice guy in real life, you just come across to me as argumentative for no reason when you respond to my posts.
Re-read my original post (or don’t, I don’t care). My point was that if you have price drops, or sales, or “limited discounts”, or whatever you want to call it, you devalue your product in the eyes of consumers. If Toyota announces Employee pricing on the Prius for a month in August and drop the price significantly during that time, they run the risk that when the 2011 model comes out, people will be less inclined to pay full price for it, because they’ll want to wait and see if the price goes down in August again.
People pay attention to what they are paying for things. If they think they can get something cheaper by waiting, they might. If the Cubs had thrown something else in—like a Ron Santo bobblehead, or a T-shirt, or free food like a lot of other teams are doing, then they would have attracted more customers without devaluing their ticket prices.
That was my point. If you don’t agree, fine. Please don’t respond anymore. Whatever your point is, I’ll just tell you in advance I agree with you and think you’re super smart in advance if it means not continuing this discussion.
DEJESUS!!!
too broad a statement
The promotion was for ~1/8th of the ballpark for ~1/20th of the season. Not worthy of such a broad statement, “drop in prices” .
Just win the next game...!
by blackhawk24 on Jul 28, 2010 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions
I get emails from a dozen or so teams...
and I’m hard-pressed to think of one that hasn’t had a sale or discount promo this year. Hell, the Giants change their prices every day! Welcome to the new economic model.
I laughed out loud when I saw the price drop that much.
I mean, holy hell! Now not only have you clearly demonstrated that you can AFFORD to drop the price that much, but you also basically admitted you were trying to MASSIVELY gouge people who were wanting to do this before.
The Ricketts administration has given me zero confidence they know how to run a baseball franchise at this point
Perhaps...
This is, I believe, more evidence that while “the Wrigley experience” does have value, it has been overvalued.
The Wrigley Experience is overvalued in this economy. There has been many, many folks affected by the downturn the last 2-3 years Al and it’s these types of activities that are the first ones affected.
The economy’s impact on this fantasy camp far exceeds the issues the team is having on the field from 2009 through this season thus far. Fantasy camp attendance won’t be nearly as affected by the current teams’ play as the economy.
We don’t have to look much beyond the beautiful ivy to see how the teams’ play along side the economy and ticket prices have affected the number of fannies in the seats.
As long as Ricketts manages the overall finances of the ball club well over the next several years, including ticket prices, the Wrigley Experience will re-gain some of its lost value as the economy begins to come back. Unfortunately I don’t see an economic recovery beginning until late 2012 and actually fear a double-dip recession coming by the end 4Q this year.
Just win the next game...!
What you say is true.
… regarding the economy itself. However, even in good economic conditions you can’t sell out the ballpark for the experience alone.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
This is true
You can’t get 38,000 and sell out 25-30 games on the first weekend based on the ballpark experience. I do think that you can average 30,000 based on the ballpark alone. The Cubs could not slash their payroll to $60-80 million and turn a profit. What the Cubs cannot afford is to have a piss-poor product for $145 million. They are either going to have to put a better product on the field or drastically reduce payroll.
Possibly, BUT...
… averaging 30,000 a game would be a reduction of nearly 25% over current levels. You’re right about a possible payroll reduction, but that does not go along with the organization’s statement that they are committed to doing whatever it takes to win championships.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Well, if you take a long-view it isn't necessarily incompatible
In the short-term, yeah that is incompatible. But, if you blow everything up and start over. Paring down to a 60-80 million payroll as you rebuild might be good for the organization’s long-term health
But...
… then they can’t keep selling “the Wrigley experience” at the high prices they now have. There is no guarantee you “blow it up” and can rebuild into something that would contend on a consistent basis. Instead, you might get the Royals.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Al
I can’t count how many times you’ve done air quote around Wrigley Experience and said they can’t just expect to sell that next year.
I don’t understand (and I’m not picking a fight, I really don’t understand) how you expect the team to get better simply because the alternative is unacceptable. In all likelihood, the payroll will go down next year. There aren’t a lot of tradeable assets. What moving part are you expecting they’ll move to get better—and not just a little better, WAY better since that’s what’s required to sell something more than the wrigley experience?
You keep saying there won’t be a rebuilding because they won’t be able to draw fans to a bad team by just selling the ballpark. But there is a significant likelihood (just like there was this year) that the team will be really bad again next year. And if you don’t rebuild, then you have a really bad team AND no hope for the future. I don’t know what the solution is, short of getting hyperaggressive at the deadline, but I’m not sure I understand your stance.
DEJESUS!!!
My point is...
… that if they do as you say — and they just might — then they’re going to have a heck of a time trying to sell “the Wrigley experience” (there’s those darn quotes again) at the current prices.
To have a bad team, regardless of hope for the future, and expect to sell tickets, they will have to lower the prices. Otherwise they are likely to see a 25% or more attendance decline, which could make future contention difficult.
It’s a fine line they have to walk. If the Cubs want to be one of the big boys, they have to play their game.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
But how can they be one of the big boys
when they are coming off a 70-ish win season, and don’t have money to make additions. They might be able to add one player of significance through trade, and maybe you could hope for continued improvement from the young players, but is that enough for a 20 win improvement?
I ask because I don’t understand your logic, and because I think the Cubs need to do a lot mroe at the deadline than you expect/want if they want a shot at being good next year. They should be trying to trade everyone who won’t be back next year in order to shed enough money and pick up enough prospects to make improvement possible.
DEJESUS!!!
I think the Cubs need to do a lot more at the deadline than you expect/want if they want a shot at being good next year.
Sure, but there’s a difference between wanting to do something and being able to do something.
They should be trying to trade everyone who won’t be back next year in order to shed enough money and pick up enough prospects to make improvement possible.
Takes two to tango.
You and I are discussing different things here. You’re talking about what kind of team the Cubs can or can’t, or will or won’t, put on the field next year.
I’m talking about whether they can sell “the experience” regardless of the team or how they position it. They can’t. It won’t work unless the Cubs try to contend. The method of that contention is irrelevant to sales. But they have to do so, because otherwise they’ll be the Royals.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I am saying
what is trying? Is running out, more or less, the same team that won arund 70 games this year trying? I don’t think it is. I think the Cubs will draw fewer fans and sell far fewer tickets next year if the don’t make big changes. The last time the Cubs were this terrible they signed Lilly, Soriano and Marquis and hired Lou Piniella. They won’t be able to do anything like that this year.
You have said you think the Cubs will be minimally active at the deadline this year. You’ve also suggested that the debt service is really hurting Ricketts ability to spend money. If they don’t do much at the deadline, and can’t spend much in the off-season, what are they trying to do to contend. they have to do more than wishing it will happen.
DEJESUS!!!
You aren't making a lot of sense
My suggestion is that the Cubs lower payroll AND lower ticket prices. Having a young rebuilding team that doesn’t require high prices to pay for it seems much more sustainable than keeping the payroll at $145 million and hoping you contend. Because if they just try to do again what they did this year, next year and have similar results they will be losing a lot of money.
You don’t need to sell the Wrigley experience at the insane ticket prices of this year if you have an $80 million payroll. A modest payroll and modest ticket prices seem to me to be the prudent move as they rebuild the organization. However, I highly doubt that is what actually will happen.
A modest payroll and modest ticket prices seem to me to be the prudent move as they rebuild the organization. However, I highly doubt that is what actually will happen.
That’s partly my point. They’re trying to sell the experience at prices that are too high. You really think that if they drop the payroll, ticket prices will make an equivalent drop?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
You think if you have incompetent management with a high payroll you will win?
We have already seen that show this year. A high payroll doesn’t guarantee anything. The Royals suck because they have an incompetent management team. If the Royals had a $140 million payroll they likely still would suck, just like the Cubs suck this year.
No, it doesn't.
And neither does a low payroll. Look at the odds. How many ‘low payroll’ teams have won a WS? (I’m looking at trends, not the ’03 Marlins).
Exactly. A team might get lucky once and beat the Yankees, Red Sox, or any other team with a ‘high payroll’, but it will NOT happen with more frequency than a team with a ‘high payroll’.
The Royals suck because of a number of things, mostly pitching.
MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT ALREADY. THIS GAME IS ABOUT ADJUSTMENTS.
by MaTheMeatloaf on Jul 27, 2010 9:46 AM CDT up reply actions
How many ‘low payroll’ teams have won a WS? (I’m looking at trends, not the ’03 Marlins).
Not many, but a lot of them have MADE the World Series, including the 2002 Angels, 2005 Astros, 2007 Rockies, 2008 Rays. Once you get there, it’s a crapshoot.
And the Royals suck largely because their GM is awful.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Agreed.
Could there be other variables that were more prevalent than payroll?
Perhaps Mike Scoscia?
Astros pitching staff?
Rockies pitching staff?
I suppose youcould place in order the reason those teams made it to the WS, and the Angels winning.
My point is that while a high payroll doesn’t GUARANTEE anything, you have a much better chance getting there WITH a high payroll as oppossed to a low payroll.
But back to my original question, how many low payroll teams have WON a WS?
Anomallys like the 02 Angels and 03 Marlins exist, but take a wider sample and see what you come up with.
MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT ALREADY. THIS GAME IS ABOUT ADJUSTMENTS.
Aaaaand....
… I think you posted this in the wrong thread.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bleed Cubbie Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
