I was reading yesterday (on the great Biz of Baseball site) about variable pricing. Last year the Giants (who supposedly played in NYC at a place called “Polo Grounds” but I don’t believe it) experimented with demand-based pricing.
Here’s how it might work:
It’s a Saturday and the Wilpons wake up and see that it’s going to be 83 degrees, sunny, and Santana is pitching for the first place Mets. Prices go up on the fly. Like what airlines do on three day weekends.
Conversely (and hopefully) when half the team is injured and Pat Misch is starting on a 34 degree night against the Nationals (who by the way have some players now) the Mets would discount the half empty stadium.
The thought of variable pricing scares me and I worry that the discounting wouldn’t actually happen. I miss the days of one price for all games, but teams like the Cubs and Red Sox see what’s happening on Stubhub. I’m really not sure what is fair.
In theory a business should charge whatever they can get, but I’m sure I’d be the loudest complainer about Santana gouging and I hated what the Cubs did last week. I guess deep down I have bought into the great lie that baseball belongs to the fans and to the cities, and you’d think we would have all learned a lesson in 1957.
Why do you think about variable pricing?
I can’t see many teams going variable due to the potential of what happened to the Mets last year. A team devastated by injury runs the risk of having to discount the last 2 months of the season.
Also if I’m a season ticket holder in such a season should I expect a refund for every game post-July? On the flip side if my team goes on a magical run (Rockies a few years ago) am I going to be expected to pay additional money to maintain my seat for the pennant run?
Finally with the Mets, can we really expect anyone in the organization to make the right decisions as to which games have an additional value? I fully would expect them to claim a Jon Niese Start vs. the Nats on a cold April Night is reason for increased prices because it is scarf night.
It’s a bad idea, because the Mets can probably get more than they are for tickets, especially if they have a good year.
An interesting question arises from it. What would a Kansas City Royal fan do? Say he wants to take his family to a game or two, but he knows it’s just for the fun of the game, the team is going nowhere. Would he pay the extra money to see Greinke, or would he figure since the games don’t matter, just go see the team and find cheap games?
As much fun as it is to ‘add on’ Santana games to games I’ll go to, if I was only going to a couple, It’s more about the team than any one player.
The variable pricing would probably even this out. But teams already tend to gouge when NY comes to town.
While business does say, price ’em at whatever’ll get you the most money, I’m not sure the attitude of milking your customers for every last cent is a good practice. If they doubled the price for a Halladay-Santana game (they could), they’d just be demanding more money from the loyal customers. There are a couple of die-hards that can afford it, but I think overall this would lead to less people attending games in general. You might splurge on a Santana game, and then decide you’re not going again for two weeks.
Also, how would it work for plan holders? We would presumably pay a different price than what the games were actually worth. (granted, sometimes in our favor, and sometimes not). Would we be refunded the money or charged the difference?
More here:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Giants-make-a-dynamic-move-on-ticket-pricing-83857452.html
The Giants on Saturday became the nation’s first major professional sports team to rely on dynamic pricing to calculate ticket costs for virtually all seats in its ballpark. Season tickets are not affected.
Under the system, prices will rise and fall as a game nears based on factors influencing ticket demand, such as the weather forecast, the starting pitcher, the opponent and the likelihood that the Giants will make the playoffs
Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Giants-make-a-dynamic-move-on-ticket-pricing-83857452.html#ixzz0gNAwSW9M
We already have variable ticket pricing. Opening Day & the Yankee games cost more than watching the Marlins mid-week in April.
Thanks to StubHub, we see how variable ticket pricing could work. Yes, you will pay more for the more desirable games. But if the sellers try to get more than the market will bear, they end up eating the tickets and get nothing.
I’m in favor of a more dynamic model, like StubHub, rather than paying extra for what the Mets think will be the desirable games before the season starts.
The Mets are usually pretty right on about what games will be desirable.
On one hand, die-hard fans can get ahead by being willing to go to rainy games. (Actually, that’s another thing. If you have tickets to a rainout, the value will plummet so much that you won’t even be able to redeem them for another game.)
San Fran already has the same type of variable pricing the Mets have (and pretty much all of baseball I bet). This “dynamic” pricing scheme, on top of their current variable system, seems a\like an all out effort to shake the last bit of change out of the fans pockets. You have to wonder if this will lead to “dynamic” concession prices too. Hot summer games see an increase in the costs of cold drinks, Late in the season and in the pennant race, everything goes up 15%. Out of the running, -1.5% adjustment.
Maybe the San Francisco Port Commission should use “dynamic” adjustments on the Giants annual rent, seems only fair.
Teams that finish the season under .500 should give more tickets away, not operate under the delusion that any of their games are “prime”. I went to two games as a fan last year, had a great time, but they have a lot more work to do as an org before they get any more of my money.