Cubs reducing ticket prices for 2013 (a little bit)

[David]

The Cubs announced their ticket prices for 2013 on Tuesday, lowering prices for season ticket holders by an average of two percent following a 101-loss season.

 

The most drastic cuts will be in the bleachers, where the Cubs said the average ticket price will be 10 percent lower than in 2012. The number of marquee games in the bleachers goes from 13 games to six games, while there will be nine marquee games in the bowl seating area, including the two Crosstown Classic games against the White Sox.

 

The Cubs said season ticket holders will also pay $1-2 less per game than individual game tickets in the same location.

 

Last year the Cubs ranked third in the majors in average ticket price, accoridng to team Marketing Reporter. A poor start doomed the team early, and tens of thousands of seats were paid for but not used during the season, particularly in the bleachers.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-cubs-reduce-tickets-prices-by-two-percent-for-2013-20121016,0,140516.story

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Tanking revenue so they can cry poor in 2014 and go with their all-homegrown lineup.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

[KingCubsFan]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season, and if their intention is to actually try and field a team that has a shot of not being terrible you'd think they wouldn't have to worry about luring in people. This smacks of expectations that they're going to suck again.

[treebird]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season, and if their intention is to actually try and field a team that has a shot of not being terrible you'd think they wouldn't have to worry about luring in people. This smacks of expectations that they're going to suck again.

]

 

it also smacks of a desire for those expectations

[Hairyducked Idiot]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season, and if their intention is to actually try and field a team that has a shot of not being terrible you'd think they wouldn't have to worry about luring in people. This smacks of expectations that they're going to suck again.

 

Which had to be expected. They may not lose 100 games again, but they've been telegraphing another no-effort-to-win offseason for awhile now.

[kente777]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

[gocubs2118]

They haven't raised tickets prices since 2010. It would of been a huge PR hit if they raised ticket prices. People are reading too much into this.

[El Duderino]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

Are you kidding? They're already fielding trade requests for Rizzo and Castro.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

It's not like their only options were to raise or lower them; I was expecting/hoping they'd leave them at their current level.

[kente777]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

Are you kidding? They're already fielding trade requests for Rizzo and Castro.

 

I hope this is sarcasm.

[Guest]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

Are you kidding? They're already fielding trade requests for Rizzo and Castro.

 

I hope this is sarcasm.

 

Wow.

[El Duderino]

I guess I should have used green text.

[KingCubsFan]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season,

 

Except when they did something similar last offseason?

 

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/10/15/2491812/2012-cubs-ticket-prices-announced

 

The team sent out season ticket invoices Friday -- you may not have received yours yet, but if you are an existing STH, you will soon -- and the Cubs have indeed reduced bleacher season ticket prices, by about 14%.

 

The games designated as "marquee" have gone up. All other dates -- 68 of them -- have been reduced.

 

This is an improvement. Almost half the schedule (38 games) will cost $28 or less in the bleachers, and more than two-thirds (59 games) will be $41 or less. So thanks to the Cubs for acknowledging that they had priced their product too high and lowering the cost.

[jersey cubs fan]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

It's not like their only options were to raise or lower them; I was expecting/hoping they'd leave them at their current level.

 

I don't really see the "very, very bad sign". We knew they weren't trying to win in 2013. I guess if you thought they'd spend a ton this winter this could change your opinion. But they are selling a bad product and customers aren't as willing to spend to consume it, so they lowered the price incrementally. It's probably nothing more than a PR move, so they can't get criticized for raising prices and not trying.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

 

I don't think so. I just think it's hard to justify raising prices for a team that finished with 100 losses. This is a very modest cut and I don't think this will effect Epstein & Co. rebuilding plans at all.

 

It's not like their only options were to raise or lower them; I was expecting/hoping they'd leave them at their current level.

 

I don't really see the "very, very bad sign". We knew they weren't trying to win in 2013. I guess if you thought they'd spend a ton this winter this could change your opinion. But they are selling a bad product and customers aren't as willing to spend to consume it, so they lowered the price incrementally. It's probably nothing more than a PR move, so they can't get criticized for raising prices and not trying.

 

I wasn't expecting a spending spree; my point is basically your final sentence. They're not even going to try.

[Sammy Sofa]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season,

 

Except when they did something similar last offseason?

 

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/10/15/2491812/2012-cubs-ticket-prices-announced

 

The team sent out season ticket invoices Friday -- you may not have received yours yet, but if you are an existing STH, you will soon -- and the Cubs have indeed reduced bleacher season ticket prices, by about 14%.

 

The games designated as "marquee" have gone up. All other dates -- 68 of them -- have been reduced.

 

This is an improvement. Almost half the schedule (38 games) will cost $28 or less in the bleachers, and more than two-thirds (59 games) will be $41 or less. So thanks to the Cubs for acknowledging that they had priced their product too high and lowering the cost.

 

No, the Cubs don't have a longstanding history of lowering prices after a bad season. What we have is a short term history of the new-ish owners doing it seemingly in anticipation of a bad season, and now doing it again. Huzzah.

Edited October 17, 2012 by Sammy Sofa

[jersey cubs fan]

I wasn't expecting a spending spree; my point is basically your final sentence. They're not even going to try.

 

Okay, I understand that interpretation, but, didn't we already expect that to be the case? This isn't so much a sign of other things to come but another step in the process that was made clear long ago.

[XZero771679666304]

The Cubs are not going to contend in 2013 (virtually regardless of what the FO does this offseason, and we knew this), are coming off of 100 losses, and the ticket prices are going to be marginally lowered to ease the pain of two consecutive losing seasons.

 

I don't see any horrid revelation or ill omen here.

[Guest]

The Cubs are not going to contend in 2013 (virtually regardless of what the FO does this offseason, and we knew this), are coming off of 100 losses, and the ticket prices are going to be marginally lowered to ease the pain of two consecutive losing seasons.

 

I don't see any horrid revelation or ill omen here.

 

I think signing Upton and 2 of Marcum, McCarthy, Jackson, Sanchez, and whoever else you might lump into this group would give them a punchers chance at one of the wild cards.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Cubs are not going to contend in 2013 (virtually regardless of what the FO does this offseason

 

That's not true. They've were -5 pythagorean wins, they had 17 wins worth of sub-replacement players, and they have $60-75 million to spend if they want to. They could contend if they felt like it was a priority.

[sneakypower]

I wasn't expecting a spending spree; my point is basically your final sentence. They're not even going to try.

"oh yeah, no, we're not looking to steal away more Anthony Rizzos, in fears it'll make us too good"

[KingCubsFan]

This is potentially a very, very bad sign.

I think it had to be expected.

 

Why? They don't have a history of lowering prices after a crappy season,

 

Except when they did something similar last offseason?

 

http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2011/10/15/2491812/2012-cubs-ticket-prices-announced

 

The team sent out season ticket invoices Friday -- you may not have received yours yet, but if you are an existing STH, you will soon -- and the Cubs have indeed reduced bleacher season ticket prices, by about 14%.

 

The games designated as "marquee" have gone up. All other dates -- 68 of them -- have been reduced.

 

This is an improvement. Almost half the schedule (38 games) will cost $28 or less in the bleachers, and more than two-thirds (59 games) will be $41 or less. So thanks to the Cubs for acknowledging that they had priced their product too high and lowering the cost.

 

No, the Cubs don't have a longstanding history of lowering prices after a bad season. What we have a is a short term history of the new-ish owners doing it seemingly in anticipation of a bad season, and now doing it again. Huzzah.

When they did it last year, they hadn't even hired Theo. I don't even think they had even interviewed anybody yet. So you're basically saying that, before Ricketts hired anyone new in baseball operations, he was intent on tanking a season and lowered ticket prices in anticipation. That seems like a stretch. The season ticket prices are a reflection of last year's results. It's October 16, they haven't even made any moves yet. While I don't think they'll go out and try and rebuild the team through a bunch of long-term free agent deals (which I agree with), I don't think these prices really have anything to do with that strategy.

[XZero771679666304]

The Cubs are not going to contend in 2013 (virtually regardless of what the FO does this offseason

 

That's not true. They've were -5 pythagorean wins, they had 17 wins worth of sub-replacement players, and they have $60-75 million to spend if they want to. They could contend if they felt like it was a priority.

 

But what is there to spend it on? The only way I see them contending in 2013 is if they sign 2 of the better SP on the market, Upton, trade for a 3B (Wright) and sign/trade for another 2-3 relievers. Even then it'd be iffy. Cincy and St. Louis probably aren't going away, and the Brewers probably aren't going to be that bad, either. There would be a chance, but as David put it, it'd be a puncher's chance at best.

 

But the point is that 2013 being approached as a likely lost season shouldn't be surprising, and very modest ticket price drop isn't indicative of anything that wasn't already perfectly clear.