Starting Market Size, Fan Loyalty and Fan Interes

[Dankbud]

Market Size

Best to Worst Sizes:

1. HUGE
2. Really Big
3. Big
4. Good
5. Slightly Above Average
6. Average
7. Below Average
8. Small
9. Tiny (not used)
10. Non-existent (not used)

To determine the rankings i used the metro area population and then the actual populatin of the city. I doubled the actual city population and then added it to the metro population and that sum was used as the ranking. The metro population is listed first and the city population second.


The rankings for size (pop. in millions):

HUGE:
Yankees & Mets - 21.6 / 8.1 = 37.8

Really Big:
Dodgers - 17.3 / 3.8 = 24.7

Big:
Cubs & White Sox - 9.5 / 2.9 = 15.3

Good:
Blue Jays - 5.0 / 2.5 = 10.0
Nationals - 7.8 / .6 = 9.0
Orioles - 7.8 / .6 = 9.0
Astros - 5.0 / 2.0 = 9.0
Phillies - 5.9 / 1.5 = 8.9
Giants - 7.1 / .8 = 8.7

Slightly Above Average:
Rangers - 5.5 / 1.2 = 7.9
Tigers - 5.4 / .9 = 7.2
Red Sox - 5.6 / .6 = 6.8

Average:
Diamondbacks - 3.5 / 1.4 = 6.3
Marlins - 5.3 / .4 = 6.1
Braves - 4.7 / .4 = 5.5
Padres - 2.9 / 1.3 = 5.5
Mariners - 3.6 / .6 = 4.8

Below Average:
Twins - 3.3 / .4 = 4.1
Indians - 2.8 / .5 = 3.8
Rockies - 2.6 / .6 = 3.8
Cardinals - 2.7 / .3 = 3.3

Small:
Devil Rays - 2.5 / .3 = 3.1
Pirates - 2.4 / .3 = 3.0
Brewers - 1.7 / .6 = 2.9
Royals - 1.9 / .4 = 2.7
Reds - 2.0 / .3 = 2.6


Teams I am unsure of:

Oakland - either BA or small
Angels - how much does being near LA effect them? possibly average


As always i am open to suggestions and will consider sliding teams around the list if substantila evidence supports the move. This list is not based off real life owner's willingness to spend a ton of money on his team. You are the owner of the team and it will be up to you how to spend your available money.

[Dankbud]

Fan Interest was based of the % of the tickets sold for all home games for each team. Fan loyalty was based off of a weighted formula of home attendence %, road % attendence and combined attendence %.

Fan Interest (#/100):

Red Sox - 100
Cubs - 99
Giants - 97
Phillies - 93
Astros - 93
Angels - 93
Padres - 89
Yankees - 83
Dodgers - 77
Mariners - 76
Cardinals - 74
Orioles - 70
Reds - 67
Rangers - 65
Diamondbacks - 63
Athletics - 62
White Sox - 61
Marlins - 61
Brewers - 60
Tigers - 60
Rockies - 59
Braves - 59
Pirates - 55
Indians - 52
Royals - 52
Mets - 51
Twins - 49
Blue Jays - 46
Devil Rays - 37
Nationals - thinking about 80 as the base for any team that relocates

Fan Loyalty:

Best to Worst Loyalty:

1. GREAT
2. Very Good
3. Good
4. Average
5. Fair
6. Poor
7. Extremely Poor (will not be used)

The Rankings:

Great:
Yankees
Cubs
Giants
Red Sox

Very Good:
Astros
Padres
Dodgers
Cardinals
Angels
Phillies

Good:
Reds
Athletics
Pirates
Rockies
Diamondbacks

Average:
Braves
Brewers
Rangers
Orioles
Mariners

Fair:
Mets
Marlins
Tigers
Indians

Poor:
Blue Jays
White Sox
Twins
Royals
Devil Rays

Nationals will most likely start at average loyalty

[Phoenix]

As the owner of the angels I feel I should put my $.02 in here.

To give me LA's market would be a little unfair, as we're not really in LA. BUT it will help the marketability of the team, supposedly. I'd say take LA's market and Anahiem's market and average them out.

Another thing that might help is This list, which is the revenue each team pulled in last year. The angels placed 14th as the anahiem angels, so it is safe to assume that it will jump up as thr LAAoA, as that was the intent. Being that this is a billion dollar industry, one must assume that lots of thought and research was put into whether the name change would help the teams marketability, and they obviously came out with a yes.

so with all that in mind, I say we should be in the "good" area.

[csale]

Phoenix said:

The angels placed 14th as the anahiem angels, so it is safe to assume that it will jump up as thr LAAoA, as that was the intent.

Despite that being the intent, I really don't think the name change will have ANY effect on the Angels attendance. How do you think it will change it? Will more people make the trek to Anahaim? I doubt it.

Was there a significant change when they changed from California to Anahaim? No. There, the intent was to capitalize on the regionalism to get those in Anahaim to become fans of them rather than the dodgers.
Right now Anahaim is pulling in larger crowds, but that is due to their success rather than the market.

[Phoenix]

It's all about marketability. The change from California to Anahiem is not a good thing to base this off of. People fawn over LA, and the fact that it's the LA Angels and not the Anahiem angels is going to change it.

[csale]

Here is a link from the AP that claims that their market share will likely increase, but their fan base most likely won't change.

www.timesleader.com/mld/timesleader/sports/baseball/10568793.htm

[csale]

your link doesn't work as you need to have a membership.

But with the info I have seen, "Good" would be reasonable.

[Phoenix]

I'm not a member and it works for me

well, if anyone else has problems, I'll screencap it or something.

[Gene Starwind]

Hooray for the dumbest name in baseball.

[Phoenix]

I am interested in what your final decision of my market ended up as, Dank.

[Dankbud]

oakland is average and angels are either good or big. i think good. i will check for sure and tell you soon enough.

[sosafan27]

hey dank can you please explain to me how the orioles fan interest, and ticket sales aren't higher, because before the season when they got Sosa their ticket sales went up can you please explain it to me?

[Dankbud]

70 is pretty high so i wouldn't worry too much about it. it is based off of the ticket sales from last year so some teams are probably a little lower than they should be.

the mets signing pedro and beltran sold more tickets for this year (or at least should) but they are remaining unchanged.

fan interest chnages over time depending on how well your team does.