Royals 29th in TV viewers

But the real story is who is 30th, and how few people watch.

More to the point, the lowest average household numbers, aside from the Nats, watch the Royals (28,000), Orioles (33,000) and Pirates (34,000). To repeat, the Nationals' number was 9,000, less than a third of the viewership in next-to-last Kansas City. The lowest average ratings, aside from the Nats, are found watching the Angels (1.24), Rangers (1.49) and Dodgers (1.57). To repeat, the Nationals' number was 0.39.

9,000 viewers a game?!?!? That's ridiculous. They should think about relocating that franchise. There's an empty stadium in Montreal.

Its up to you Will, to boost those numbers once you arrive in DC.

about 1 year ago RoyalsRetro 14 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

This is one of the reasons the Royals can't afford a $90M payroll

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 8, 2008 1:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

but one of the poorest cities in the country got to buy them a stadium

DC was a mistake, I still believe that

by royalsreview on Jul 8, 2008 3:21 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

By not planting that team out in Loudoun

they lost a ton of income and fans, seriously. They made this huge thing about how a stadium near Dulles wouldn’t be anywhere near the Metro—well, guess what? Most of the people who DO go to the games have to drive to get TO the Metro in the first place. And then having to play at RFK just didn’t help matters. I don’t know anyone who’d say “I like going to RFK, it’s a pleasurable experience.” If I did, I’d inquire as to their medication.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 8, 2008 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sports Teams = biggest municipal scam running

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Jul 9, 2008 12:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stadium location shouldn't have a major impact on TV ratings. They need a winning season to build up a fanbase.

Longlorious.
Free Kila Kaaihue!

by RATW on Jul 8, 2008 11:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It has a major impact on who bothers to go to the ballpark

Especially - ESPECIALLY - in an area where nobody is a native. Most of the people around here have their own home team they still root for, just like me. You can’t build a TV fan base unless people are invested in the team, and you don’t get invested in the team unless you can hit the park.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 9, 2008 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

People invest in a team when it’s a winner.

Tampa Bay is filled with transplanted northerners, but they are setting ratings records and seen a huge attendance jump this year not because they moved the stadium across the bay to Tampa but because they are finally winning.

Longlorious.
Free Kila Kaaihue!

by RATW on Jul 9, 2008 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

No, people jump on a bandwagon when a team's a winner.

And they jump right back off as if the bandwagon were on fire the minute they’re not, if they aren’t truly invested. Many, many very well-off individuals in this area were all set to buy season tickets had the team moved to Northern Virginia, because the Dulles site was only a 10-15 minute drive from Leesburg, Ashburn, Reston, etc. (Where all the cash is around here.)

When they chose the District, most of those people shrugged their shoulders and stopped caring because a 20-30 minute drive on jam-packed I-66 or the Toll Road just to get to the Metro station wasn’t the sort of thing they felt like doing right after work. Meanwhile, most of the people with easy access to Metro can’t afford season tickets.

I’ve heard, although I can’t provide any documentation, that more people out here buy MLBXE to follow another team than watch the Nationals (and that’s certainly the case for me; the only Nationals games I’ve seen on TV this year have been the late-night replays which follow Royal/Oriole games on MASN). Had the stadium been located closer to the money, the money would have migrated to the stadium.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 9, 2008 4:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

While what you say might be right

I used to live in Northern Virginia and I thought the idea of a stadium near Dulles was a terrible idea and I probably never would have driven out to see it. The Metro is pretty easy to get around, even if you have to drive to a station. Driving to Dulles at 6pm is a pain in the ass.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 9, 2008 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

How long ago?

I think you’re underestimating the Internet Millionaires infesting the area between Reston and Leesburg. Seriously, the average income in Ashburn is off the charts.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 9, 2008 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The northern Virginia (near DC) population has skyrocketed over the last 10 years

I would have thought that this would increase the chances of a DC MLB team’s profitability. This demographic change is also what has turned Virginia from a clear red state to more of a purple state.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 9, 2008 5:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Unfortunately

most of us just hate going into DC. About the only folks out here who do so routinely for entertainment purposes are in their early 20s, and it involves going to seedy warehouse clubs to do X or going to Adams Morgan to Look Cool.

Getting to DC from west of Reston = not worth the effort, especially since Metro actually closes down instead of running all night.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 9, 2008 5:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

People in their 30's, 40's and 50's don't go into DC for the restaurants, plays, musicals, concerts, etc.?

I assumed it would be like NYC in that regard. It’s a bitch to get into or out of the city, but that’s where things are happening, so people go.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 9, 2008 6:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The sad reality is the vast majority fans are of the bandwagon variety.

The ratings chart referenced in the story above shows virtually every losing/disappointing team with declining ratings vs. much improved ratings for winners—Chicago and Tampa Bay in particular. Both teams just so happen to lead their respective leagues.

It’s amazing how that “long drive across the bridge” from Tampa to St. Pete or virtual lack of public transit suddenly don’t matter when the team wins. It’s amazing how ratings increase 35% in a half-season of competitiveness.

I see no evidence of a difference in “truly invested” fans based on the location of the stadium. You see temporary attendance bumps for new venues, but it is just that, temporary. If you don’t follow it up with winning, it doesn’t matter where the stadium is located, or how nice it looks—unfortunately for Pittsburgh and Baltimore.

Longlorious.
Free Kila Kaaihue!

by RATW on Jul 9, 2008 6:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs