Why buying tickets to a game has become so unaffordable
lite.cnn.com
lite.cnn.com
I guess tickets were underpriced before? The demand is clearly outstripping supply. Can't even blame this one on the hedge funds.
(I say sort of because you could say it's the same word same definition just perhaps used more literally. But it certainly has a connotation to most of us that I think is how you're reading it above.)
I think the NFL is more of an entrenched business with great brand recognition than a cartel. College football players want an NFL contract because they trust that the NFL will be around in 10 years. (Same reason that CS grads want to work for Google and not a random startup; Google will be around in 5 years.) This means that the NFL gets first pick on the most talented players. That is what prevents upstart leagues from being successful. Players have seen what happened to competing leagues; their counterparts are now unemployed. Without good players, nobody is going to watch your thing, and thus, the NFL will continue to dominate.
I think that with an infinite amount of money, you could probably create a new football league for a new generation. You will need billions of dollars to build 32 new stadiums. You will need billions of dollars to pay Patrick Mahomes $500M a year to switch sides. (x32 teams x53 players on the roster = 800 billion dollars a year in salary costs ;)
Because nobody has an infinite amount of money, it's not really going to happen that way. I bet you could woo a number of viewers over by having a sane online streaming package. I want to watch every game in the season for a fixed price. No blackouts. No ads. No delay.
Therefore, we need not argue about whether they are or are not a cartel - or are engaging in anti-competitive behavior: our government has already defined them as such.
College football around here is much more affordable (as are college basketball games, G league for basketball, and minor league baseball).
You are off on his salary by an order of magnitude. ;)
He’s also the number one paid NFL player, so extending his salary to the entire roster is just hyperbolic fiction.
Yes, you don't pay your backup defensive linemen the same as your quarterback, but the point is, people won't watch if those players are bad, and people aren't going to jump ship for free. You will have to build the league out of talent that somehow won't play for the NFL. It's going to be costly.
I've decided I'm kind of "meh" on the whole salary cap thing. I want to see some star defensive linemen play. I want to see a $10M/year punter. Let's go CRAZY with this new league.
Michael Dickson wasn’t far off from that in the NFL in recent history. I’m not even remotely a sports guy and yet I knew this.
> the big names already have guaranteed income
Actually, many don’t. Even Mahomes has so little guaranteed I’m more than sure you could sway him to your fantasy fiction league for less than half the figure you listed as guaranteed income.
Modern sports has mastered the art of storytelling and rivalry. They immerse you in the players' and coaches' lives, and fans begin to find their favorites to root for and against.
It's not surprising fans will pay $500, $1000, or more to see an especially memorable game. Or pay top dollar for a signed jersey.
This is no different than any other hobby. Lives are short and people want to immerse themselves in the things they love.
I don’t know - in Australia we oversize stadiums and, relative to population, expand our leagues much more so that there is much more opportunity to attend in person. A family of four can attend anything except finals (playoffs) for easily under au$100. But private ownership isn’t a part of the most popular codes.
I love live sport, and it’d be sad if the opportunity to attend was restricted to only the wealthy because charging half the people 5x the money is the optimal business decision.
I don't think someone could pay me to go sit through one of these (well, maaaaaaybe for $9000). What's the draw? What am I missing?
If you are asocial, it will seem pointless to you.
See what I did there.
It's not just the indoor/outdoor or introvert/extrovert thing. I think it's the idea of passive spectating (that you pay money for) that weirds me out. Even for the things I love, I'd much rather try to do it myself (however poorly) than pay money to watch someone else do it.
Am I just really unusual in that regard?
Why are you reading HN instead of doing the things people are writing about?
Going to a game isn't passively spectating. It's interaction with other fans, and being part of the show for the TV audience too. It's also something do out in the weather. It's a cultural artifact to observe and inspect like the Eiffel tower.
> Why are you reading HN instead of doing the things people are writing about?
I'm probably one of those people who spends more time writing than reading on forums. Being longwinded like me doesn't help... sigh. But it's a way to bounce ideas back and forth between people, discuss, debate, get insulted now and then, etc :) HN is one of the more socially interactive things I do, actually.
It feels like many of the IRL things I end up doing with friends are of the "let's do something individually, together" variety... like whether it's a hike or a rock climbing or karaoke or trivia games, most of it is centered around each person being in their own little world and doing their thing and only occasionally making smalltalk about nothing in particular. It's hard for me to do that for very long, vs the concentrated dose of interesting things to discuss on HN. Maybe I'm just bad at real world interactions.
Good points though. Now you've got me wondering if I have some sort of adult ADD, lol. Might be worth reflecting on...
Some of my friends that I can think of also don’t watch any sports.
I can't handle large arenas when they are completely packed or there is too much tension in the crowd, so I'd recommend starting small and with a friendly game if you feel the same. Having said that, I found I absolutely hate watching baseball, golf and cricket (edit for reasons: not interested in drinking alcohol all day) but have grown to love sharing intense games like basketball, tennis and football with friends.
I play a lot of Counter-Strike, but I also find lots of value in watching professional players compete. Observing pros can be incredibly insightful: it showcases the pinnacle of skill and strategy within the game (literally the same game I play), serving as both inspiration and a learning opportunity. It's fascinating to see how far one can excel in a game, providing ideas and setting benchmarks for what's possible.
This blend of "active participation" and "passive spectating" offers new angles to better appreciate and understand the game. It's not just about watching (which I find pretty entertaining on its own); it's about learning and pushing the boundaries of my capabilities by observing the best in the field.
To me that seems similar to not seeing the appeal of watching sports.
They are analogous. You go to watch people you admire do what they’re good at, in a crowded atmosphere.
So what makes chess fun to watch?
It's what happens between those periods of movements.
Football is a game of strategy played out by two coaches. The players are their pawns.
Half the game is coming up with a plan and strategy. The other half is trying to perform that strategy.
You are only paying attention to the latter half.
For jocks and athletic people the latter half is interesting; I'm surprised the strategy and planning aspect isn't more acknowledged and appreciated by us nerdy types.
Maybe there is a reason most of the game is not live play.
>It's what happens between those periods of movements.
Commercials? Players standing around on the field, or walking to a huddle or walking back to the line?
Commercials do suck. They do hide some of what is going on in the sidelines and a lot are forced for the TV netwroks.
But players standing around the field or walking around because they have nothing to do - the game is not in their court right now. The coaches are making the next play. That is the game. Its coach vs coach. The players don't do anything without the coach directing them.
Maybe it would help more if the cameras zoomed into the coaches in a heated battle of what play to run next and the game was advertised or listed as coach v. coach that this match up would be more obvious.
It's like the Madden game. The player avatars on the screen are just robots, going through the motions. The actual brains or interesting action is going on with whoever holds the controller. The plays or lines or formations they run and who they put in the game, etc.
It is not because chess takes 7 hours, because vast majority of the games are boring, take known lines and end up in an early draw.
I watch test cricket and I find classical chess boring to watch despite having played semi-professionally.
Test cricket goes on for 5 days, baseball goes on hours both are incredibly technical , as is f1 or golf.
I rather watch test cricket than nfl , there is just unconsumable levels of ad to content ratio
It is not because it is long with lot of breaks in the middle of the action to be strategic that it is not as interesting .
There is a reason why NFL gets no traction outside the USA , all other sports I listed have global audiences even baseball
> So what makes chess fun to watch?
Trick question? Chess isn't exactly a fun spectator sport (enjoy playing it though).
I'm not even a "sports guy" but going to games of most sports is often a lot of fun because it's about more than just the game.
When I was a know-it-all teen/young adult I had some of that "sportsball is dumb and for idiots" mentality but as I got older I grew out of that and appreciate the simple fun of it all. Plus it's easy small talk fodder.
I just don’t remotely understand or feel any connection whatsoever to anything watching any sports in person or on TV.
Which is fine, I’m not complaining or anything, it’s just what it is.
College football is a bit different though (probably with exceptions to stadiums over 65k)
I personally think baseball, with the slow pace, is actually the best in social terms.
It's largely considered the most boring to go to because it's slow. In fact, it was recently so slow and uneventful, that added rule changes just to speed things up for fans...
I guess there's a case to be made it leaves more time to be "social" and talk to your friends at the game, but it's going to be hard to get them to go in the first place...
Quite fascinating to watch, and ranges from very mellow to nail-biting tension.
Many years ago, I got tickets to a wrestling event (WWE, I believe) at a corporate box. We went (coworkers and I) only interested in drinking in the box, but found ourselves getting very into it. Being there definitely has that energy and experience.
I will also theorize that this is a major contributing factor to the not insignificant number of people that prefer college football to the NFL, even in cases where they are not alumni of the local college.
"Did you see that ludicrous display last night?"
I like the things I like because of how they must affect my brain, but I’m not sure exactly why they affect my brain the way that they do.
If you do, then you understand the appeal of doing something exciting with people that share that excitement in a loud, uncomfortable place for hours, even if you don't personally find football exciting.
If you don't, then you've learned something about yourself: you have an unusually low tolerance for noise and crowds, which is valuable information. There's a lot of people like you, but even more that aren't.
There's a lot of snarky responses to your comment, but I do think your question has a lot of merit. Watching football/baseball/soccer/basketball isn't like watching an mma match (there's something very primal about how brutal those fights can be), nor is it like watching video games where someone has a shared connection with an activity they do frequently. And the data backs this up. Sports viewership is in decline, and there's a drop in how important sports is to each subsequent generation. And people, imo rightfully, blame things like video games, and social media.
So that's my 2c, it's familiarity.
I generally don't do it neither, but oh boy did you grow up in a plastic bubble? Such an experience is almost impossible to avoid literally anywhere in the world, and folks enjoy it tremendously.
Bubble, broke, bad environment. It happens. The closest I had to that before high school (where I'd at least take a few field trips for national competitions) was playing card games or Pokemon battles or whatnot. But this was an era before people would watch other people play those things and see how much strategy building there can be in those things.
Never understood the appeal of live sports or watching games in person. Some teams I followed, I just looked up if they won or not, next day.
Went to a random soccer match a few years ago. That was one of best experiences of my life. The energy of crowd gets you really in the game. Everything else in your life doesn’t matter for a few hours.
It changed my perspective on watching sports in person. Same thing with watching sports at home or in a bar with really passionate fans is a lot fun and way better than watching it by yourself or with not very passionate fans.
You may feel compelled to stand up when others stand.. to move a bit.. you feel it's normal to move and make noise, it's okay.. you expel energy.. if you go enough you learn the songs, the words, you jump at the chance to exclaim..
which is not normal in most people's day to day I think / feel..
There is an energy, and an expelling of energy in these group gatherings..
Something that is not allowed in our normal day to day - that I appreciate exists with these sporting things.
I often ask, what spaces exist in our modern society where it is okay for men to (and yes others not just men) shout, cry, touch each other, to cheer, to (word for opposite of cheer? - express sadness / loss).. together or even as individuals..
Some of this can be done with associates watching the game at home / sport bar, etc to a lesser degree and depending on your local conditions -
Yet there is something about being in the group place where everyone has to be a certain class to be there, and others are expressing..
I guess it's similar to some church type events, where being there can make you feel empathy easier then just watching..
I'm also wondering what other types of experiences / places / events allow for these expressions in modern day life.. perhaps there are more of these outside the US? or outside what I know to be 'normal' ?
Closest I've seen is bonfire / drum circle kind of thing maybe.
At home I get to see the action from multiple camera angles, there's a guy who knows what's going on narrating the game for me, I can watch replays of the best moments.
What can the stadium experience bring to the table that beats all that? The feeling of unity with other fans? Well, I didn't root for any team in particular, and the loud crowds of people around me only made me uncomfortable.
Sports is unique as a form of drama in which the outcome isn't known (to anyone) in advance. (Conspiracy accusations aside.) There's a type of suspense possible with sports that doesn't exist in any other kind of entertainment.
And it's not just the outcome that's unpredictable, there's random feats, drama, narratives, entertainment that can come out nowhere that no one would have ever written. A pitcher hitting a bird in mid air. A baseball bouncing off a wall, hitting the ground, then a player's thigh, then going over the wall. In the late innings of a close playoff game. The game has to be stopped while it's figured out what that means because it hasn't happened in decades, if ever. A football player running into the butt of his teammate with his face, falling down and fumbling.
Many games are mundane but the exciting or funny moments arise from the vast hours and repetition, there's a lot of opportunities for the unexpected. Again, other forms of drama are more predictable not just in their outcomes but in where and when the beats will happen.
That itself isn't enough on its own, you also need to care about the outcome in order for that suspense to be enjoyable. Like religion, it helps to have been indoctrinated by family or geography when you were young. I don't think I'd have been able to start caring as an adult.
It's also dependable in a way your favorite shows, books, movies, musicians aren't. It's reliably been there for every year of my life, for over 35 years. That's meaningful.
(Though there's the occasional strike, and some people are unlucky enough for their team to leave their city.)
It's not reliably exciting, any one game can be boring, any one year (or decade) can be fruitless. But it amounts to something much more than the sum of its parts.
Some fans are more drawn to the strategy and mechanics of the game, but for me it's more about the history and mythology of the team and the sport in my own life.
And I haven't even touched on the social aspect, or the off-field drama that can be its own kind of meta entertainment.
it’s a totally different vibe compared to watching it at home
Try 'calcio storico' on youtube.
Then we moved into an apartment across the street from Oracle Park, where the SF giants play.
Early in the season they have a sale where you can pick up $5 tickets. My wife and I try to buy tickets for one game out of each home series.
A day with my wife sitting outside in the beautiful northern California weather, with beautiful views of the bay and city, drinking cold beer and eating pizza. At first I was like "why do people do this", now I'm like "why didn't I do this sooner".
It's nice to sit in the park, eat a hot dog or pizza slice, drink a beer and watch some sport. Take away all the advertising and hype BS and just enjoy it for what it is at its core. Play.
I've also seen A/B tests where they experiment with higher fees. Using a different browser sometimes gets you a different price.
For US pro sports, I think it’s actually trending away from Ticketmaster. Baseball (MLB) tickets are now directly sold through the MLB. At least some (all?) American Football (NFL) teams have started partnering with SeatGeek. Basketball (NBA) and Ice Hockey (NHL) still seem to be through Ticketmaster.
Which means, the article actually boils down to “supply is being artificially constrained to increase the price, and maximize profit”
It's been many years since I went to a San Jose Giants game, but I picked up free tickets at the hardware store and all of the food was only a little overpriced (and very delicious), I don't drink, but I don't think the beer was too expensive. Movie theater/airport pricing, rather than theme park pricing.
Also, you can get SF giants tickets for $5, they have a few sales a year.
Seconded on this parent and it's parent both. Baseball is a great, affordable day/night out for even non- fans.
Greed ?
Some other text only news sites:
TV coverage already has better viewing angles than going to the game. People go to the game for a day out, to actually be there when it happens, to make noise the players hear and to celebrate with tens of thousands of other people. You don't get that with a headset.
I think quite a lot of people enjoy buying their friends and family food and drink, even if it is overpriced and not that tasty. Beats buying lootboxes for fake people at any rate
The only thing I want a strong VR headset for is so I can have large screens with me when I travel. I really have no desire to engage with AR through what the current state of VR headsets is.