The Average Fan’s Perspective

[Semper Fenway]

First off, my name is Scott and I’m a long time lurker. I admire this site for the intellect, rational thought, and educated discussion that its members bring to the table.

As someone who admittedly doesn’t understand the advanced metrics of today’s game, I can’t help but think from the common fan’s perspective. And here’s what said fan believes about the state of the Red Sox:
1. Ownership doesn’t care about the team anymore.
2. Ownership is cheap.
3. The Red Sox aren’t committed to winning.
4. All John Henry cares about is buying teams in other sports leagues.
5. The Red Sox aren’t what they once were. They once dominated the Boston sports market. Now, they are 4th out of four in terms of popularity.
6. The Red Sox are being run like a small market team.
7. The Red Sox refuse to spend on free agents.
8. The Red Sox used to be in the mix for elite free agents. That is no longer the case.

I wouldn’t argue with any of these points.

Can anyone prove us common fans wrong? Why should we care about the Red Sox in 2024? Isn’t this just a rebuilding year? Aren’t we Red Sox fans, who pay the highest ticket prices in baseball, deserving of better?

Thanks in advance!

 

[simplicio]

If you're more invested in feeling betrayed by ownership than finding something to enjoy in the team, you probably shouldn't care and I'd say take a break.

 

[Semper Fenway]

That’s fair. I just find it difficult to root for a team that has finished in last place two of the last three years, and has made no commitment to improve itself for the upcoming season.

If you're more invested in feeling betrayed by ownership than finding something to enjoy in the team, you probably shouldn't care and I'd say take a break.

 

[InstaFace]

I for one can't fault John Henry's approach cumulatively over the last 22 years, even if there are a few of those years that I'd rather forget. So I don't know where we get the "all he cares about" armchair psychology from.

And we can argue that they've acted in a somewhat cheap manner over the last few years, or even dating to the Mookie trade. However, the Red Sox payroll has been top-5 throughout much of Henry's tenure as owner. From 2004-2007 we were 2nd every year, to the Yankees all 4 times. 2015-2019 we were never lower than 3rd, and went to 1st in 2018 (which, ya know, worked out).



When he had the core of a team to invest in, he invested in it. When there was nothing to be done - add a few wins and we'd still not be going anywhere - he sat back and stockpiled his ammunition. Or, ya know, had his President of Baseball Operations and/or GM do so.

Frankly, the only thing I feel toward him is gratitude. This feels a bit like complaining that Brady played like crap in the 2019 Wild Card loss to the Titans and judging him for it.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I for one can't fault John Henry's approach cumulatively over the last 22 years, even if there are a few of those years that I'd rather forget. So I don't know where we get the "all he cares about" armchair psychology from.

And we can argue that they've acted in a somewhat cheap manner over the last few years, or even dating to the Mookie trade. However, the Red Sox payroll has been top-5 throughout much of Henry's tenure as owner. From 2004-2007 we were 2nd every year, to the Yankees all 4 times. 2015-2019 we were never lower than 3rd, and went to 1st in 2018 (which, ya know, worked out).

View attachment 77510

When he had the core of a team to invest in, he invested in it. When there was nothing to be done - add a few wins and we'd still not be going anywhere - he sat back and stockpiled his ammunition. Or, ya know, had his President of Baseball Operations and/or GM do so.

Frankly, the only thing I feel toward him is gratitude. This feels a bit like complaining that Brady played like crap in the 2019 Wild Card loss to the Titans and judging him for it.

That trend line is pretty disturbing though. Was there nothing to be done because there was nothing to be done, or because the something that was done was to trade Mookie rather than pay him?*

* I know, here we go again...

 

[InstaFace]

That trend line is pretty disturbing though. Was there nothing to be done because there was nothing to be done, or because the something that was done was to trade Mookie rather than pay him?*

* I know, here we go again...

Responses that come to mind:

1) we might well have said the same in 2014. Things can turn around.

2) Some of our edge over the last two decades has come from punching above our weight as a metro area / region in terms of fan support and revenue, that can then be brought to bear on the roster. Both Los Angeles teams were not spending (or marketing / driving growth) to the limits of their ability and leveraging their market size into team quality. Now the Dodgers decidedly are, and the Angels frankly are spending even if they have nothing to show for it. Same goes for other markets much bigger than Boston: Houston, Dallas (the Rangers), the Mets, even the Phillies, are all top-10 spending teams whereas 20, 15, 10, even 5 years ago, they weren't, or intermittently only one would be. Visionary ownership is a superpower, but we can't be expected to win bidding wars against other active high-budget teams all the time, now that they're mostly all being better-managed.

3) If you look at our payroll vs that of the other top-10 teams over time, it isn't that we've slashed payroll dramatically year-over-year. It's that we've been flat, or haven't grown as fast, as other teams that have been skyrocketing up. Spending to the 10th-ranked payroll in the league, when frankly that more or less matches our market size, might well be considered "living within our means", and spending in the top-5 is an unsustainable "investment mode" that we can't expect to keep up for more than a few years at a time.

So yeah, I reject that we need to rush to some sort of Scrooge-like stereotype for an owner who has frankly spent well beyond what his team should be able to spend for a long time.

 

[HfxBob]

Responses that come to mind:

1) we might well have said the same in 2014. Things can turn around.

2) Some of our edge over the last two decades has come from punching above our weight as a metro area / region in terms of fan support and revenue, that can then be brought to bear on the roster. Both Los Angeles teams were not spending (or marketing / driving growth) to the limits of their ability and leveraging their market size into team quality. Now the Dodgers decidedly are, and the Angels frankly are spending even if they have nothing to show for it. Same goes for other markets much bigger than Boston: Houston, Dallas (the Rangers), the Mets, even the Phillies, are all top-10 spending teams whereas 20, 15, 10, even 5 years ago, they weren't, or intermittently only one would be. Visionary ownership is a superpower, but we can't be expected to win bidding wars against other active high-budget teams all the time, now that they're mostly all being better-managed.

3) If you look at our payroll vs that of the other top-10 teams over time, it isn't that we've slashed payroll dramatically year-over-year. It's that we've been flat, or haven't grown as fast, as other teams that have been skyrocketing up. Spending to the 10th-ranked payroll in the league, when frankly that more or less matches our market size, might well be considered "living within our means", and spending in the top-5 is an unsustainable "investment mode" that we can't expect to keep up for more than a few years at a time.

So yeah, I reject that we need to rush to some sort of Scrooge-like stereotype for an owner who has frankly spent well beyond what his team should be able to spend for a long time.

How has he spent beyond what his team should be able to spend? Are you relating this to the team's revenue or profit or some other data point?

 

[Ale Xander]

Responses that come to mind:

Spending to the 10th-ranked payroll in the league, when frankly that more or less matches our market size, might well be considered "living within our means", and spending in the top-5 is an unsustainable "investment mode" that we can't expect to keep up for more than a few years at a time.

This is patently not true. Fenway and the Red Sox is a money printing press.
This is 2022, but I would be susrprised if other seasons were much different.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/193645/revenue-of-major-league-baseball-teams-in-2010/

The Red Sox are usually the 3rd most profitable team in MLB.

 

[HfxBob]

I was very grateful to Henry for many years, but in the last few years that gratitude has been eroding, and I've been wondering if maybe it's other people that deserve more of the gratitude-Lucchino, Epstein and Dombrowski in particular. Maybe what we're seeing is Henry finally getting to do things "his way"...

 

[YTF]

I was very grateful to Henry for many years, but in the last few years that gratitude has been eroding, and I've been wondering if maybe it's other people that deserve more of the gratitude-Lucchino, Epstein and Dombrowski in particular. Maybe what we're seeing is Henry finally getting to do things "his way"...

I need you to help me out with this.

 

[HfxBob]

I need you to help me out with this.

It's nothing that hasn't been talked about at length by others here and elsewhere. It's mostly about the payroll trimming, but it's also about the seeming indifference to the fans, and just the whole strange vibe the team has since 2019. Like I say it's nothing others haven't commented on.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

So whose way was Henry funding the first 15 years or so?

 

[geoflin]

Why should we care about the Red Sox in 2024?

I've said this before elsewhere, but my reason is I love the game of baseball and I live in the Boston area and have rooted for the Red Sox my entire life. Do I want them to be better than it appears today that they're going to be? Yes. Would I like to see them spend more money than they have so far this winter? Yes. Will I stop caring about them or rooting for them? No.

 

[HfxBob]

So whose way was Henry funding the first 15 years or so?

Fans fund the team. Henry just makes money off it-a ton of money.

 

[AB in DC]

And we can argue that they've acted in a somewhat cheap manner over the last few years, or even dating to the Mookie trade. However, the Red Sox payroll has been top-5 throughout much of Henry's tenure as owner. From 2004-2007 we were 2nd every year, to the Yankees all 4 times. 2015-2019 we were never lower than 3rd, and went to 1st in 2018 (which, ya know, worked out).

View attachment 77510

It's the last few years that concern me. Look at the low spending years prior to then -- 2012, 2020, and to a degree 2014 were all years that the team needed to dump salary for obvious reasons. But 2021, 2023, and (thus far) 2024 that's not the case. And yet the team is still lagging.

 

[YTF]

It's nothing that hasn't been talked about at length by others here and elsewhere. It's mostly about the payroll trimming, but it's also about the seeming indifference to the fans, and just the whole strange vibe the team has since 2019. Like I say it's nothing others haven't commented on.

I get the vibe that folks have been talking about. I guess the use of "finally getting to do things "his way"..." led me to think that there was something more that I was missing.

 

[The Gray Eagle]

Thank god we finally have another thread where everyone can complain about the owners and express their feelings about them. The other 4 or 5 threads have fallen way down to the middle of the page.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Fans fund the team. Henry just makes money off it-a ton of money.

I still don’t see why you think things changed with the ownership five years ago, or whenever.

 

[Margo McCready]

If the majority of Bello, Casas, Mayer, Teel, Anthony, Rafaela and Abreu mature into a productive core and ownership still doesn’t spend to put that team over the top, then I’ll go grab my pitchfork. Until then, I’m not so fired up about payroll based on their overall track record. And besides, it’s not as if they weren’t over the CBT threshold in ‘22.

Do I want them to sign JM and a bat to try opening a window a year early? Yes.
Do I see the logic in holding off on huge financial commitments right now? Also yes.

 

[Semper Fenway]

To respond to somebody above, market size really doesn’t seem to dictate spending levels or the wealth of a baseball team. It seems to be the pockets of the owners that is paramount. If Mark Zuckerberg bought the Pirates, they could be become the biggest spending team in all of baseball.

 

[TomRicardo]

It is not about spending money, it is about an actual strategy.

They went from trying to be innovative, to getting a win now guy, to grabbing for lack of a better term a "hack". The moment this team moved on from Lucchino (who had his warts) to Sam Kennedy, the emphasis went from winning to earn profit to ROI driven approach where winning was secondary. Bloom was brought in because Kennedy thought the Red Sox could sustain a Tampa Bay model and still make money. Years of grabbing the right guys extending them and then filling in the holes was replaced with trying to burn everything to the ground and reactively spending money to try to fix the issues. And the money they have spent has been poor to awful because it is reactive.

The team has not been in this kind of position in 50 years. And even then they at least had Yaz. Devers is no Yaz.

Ownership has diluted (they literally brought in a man that publicly hates Boston) and went off in different directions. That makes sense. Sports ownership is a great asset to own. People give them free stadiums and you can lie and plead poverty at any time.

As a fan, I don't give a shit if LeBron James and Co. make a lot of money if the Red Sox are losing. I have no interest in investing in suboptimal product at a premium price. Normally you just walk away or just enjoy the ensuing car wreck of watching an inept business leader huffing their own supply on the way to the plane crash. Unfortunately, I have a strong identity based relationship with the Boston Red Sox. It is not just a product to me despite me realizing it just unit of entertainment. That is what FSG 2.0 was banking on. I have such a strong association of the brand that I will keep shoveling dog poop in my mouth and happily pay out whatever they do. Hey and there are people here who are still brought in, and good for them if it brings them joy. I wish I didn't fault them for it but the vitriol caused by Kennedy & Co's blatant cash grab at something I held dear is tough to keep down.

And honestly what can I do besides bitch on a message board and tune the Red Sox out.

 

[Semper Fenway]

I understand that it’s a strategy. But what kind of strategy is it when the team is in last place for two seasons in a row and then becomes demonstrably worse heading into the next season? It’s hard to maintain an interest in the team, at least, without getting angry, when the strategy requires so much waiting.

It is not about spending money, it is about an actual strategy.

They went from trying to be innovative, to getting a win now guy, to grabbing for lack of a better term a "hack". The moment this team moved on from Lucchino (who had his warts) to Sam Kennedy, the emphasis went from winning to earn profit to ROI driven approach where winning was secondary. Bloom was brought in because Kennedy thought the Red Sox could sustain a Tampa Bay model and still make money. Years of grabbing the right guys extending them and then filling in the holes was replaced with trying to burn everything to the ground and reactively spending money to try to fix the issues. And the money they have spent has been poor to awful because it is reactive.

The team has not been in this kind of position in 50 years. And even then they at least had Yaz. Devers is no Yaz.

Ownership has diluted (they literally brought in a man that publicly hates Boston) and went off in different directions. That makes sense. Sports ownership is a great asset to own. People give them free stadiums and you can lie and plead poverty at any time.

As a fan, I don't give a shit if LeBron James and Co. make a lot of money if the Red Sox are losing. I have no interest in investing in suboptimal product at a premium price. Normally you just walk away or just enjoy the ensuing car wreck of watching an inept business leader huffing their own supply on the way to the plane crash. Unfortunately, I have a strong identity based relationship with the Boston Red Sox. It is not just a product to me despite me realizing it just unit of entertainment. That is what FSG 2.0 was banking on. I have such a strong association of the brand that I will keep shoveling dog poop in my mouth and happily pay out whatever they do. Hey and there are people here who are still brought in, and good for them if it brings them joy. I wish I didn't fault them for it but the vitriol caused by Kennedy & Co's blatant cash grab at something I held dear is tough to keep down.

And honestly what can I do besides bitch on a message board and tune the Red Sox out.

 

[Salem's Lot]

Thank god we finally have another thread where everyone can complain about the owners and express their feelings about them. The other 4 or 5 threads have fallen way down to the middle of the page.

This.

The main board is becoming like a community Facebook page. The same 10 people talking in circles regurgitating the same shit every day.

 

[Semper Fenway]

I’m new here. I’m sorry for not advancing the discussion. The mods can feel free to delete my post or ban me. But this is an issue about which I feel passionate and I genuinely wanted to hear your responses.

This.

The main board is becoming like a community Facebook page. The same 10 people talking in circles regurgitating the same shit every day.

 

[Salem's Lot]

I’m new here. I’m sorry for not advancing the discussion. The mods can feel free to delete my post or ban me. But this is an issue about which I feel passionate and I genuinely wanted to hear your responses.

My comment was not directed at you or your thread topic. I was commenting on the general state of the main board.

 

[Tony Pena's Gas Cloud]

Let's knock out one of your complaints. "The highest ticket prices" is created by supply and demand. So it's the FANS, not ownership, who create the market. Ticket prices have zero to do with on-field product or wins and losses or player salaries. The Cubs have been one of the worst teams in baseball for over a century, but they play in tiny, historic Wrigley - hence high prices since the demand is always present. The Rays could sign Snell, Montgomery, and Soler tomorrow, but if the fans still don't show, the prices will be low. Besides, are the prices really out of whack with any other form of big-scale entertainment?

 

[Semper Fenway]

well, attendance is down. Long gone are the days of endless strings of sellouts. And I suspect that attendance will be even worse this year. Ratings on NESN are down as well.

Let's knock out one of your complaints. "The highest ticket prices" is created by supply and demand. So it's the FANS, not ownership, who create the market. Ticket prices have zero to do with on-field product or wins and losses or player salaries. The Cubs have been one of the worst teams in baseball for over a century, but they play in tiny, historic Wrigley - hence high prices since the demand is always present. The Rays could sign Snell, Montgomery, and Soler tomorrow, but if the fans still don't show, the prices will be low. Besides, are the prices really out of whack with any other form of big-scale entertainment?

 

[geoflin]

Fans fund the team. Henry just makes money off it-a ton of money.

A pretty large amount of funding comes from media rights and advertising among other things not directly related to fans and certainly not coming out of the pockets of fans.

 

[Ale Xander]

A pretty large amount of funding comes from media rights and advertising among other things not directly related to fans and certainly not coming out of the pockets of fans.

How is media rights and advertising not related to fans? Are they advertising to non-fans?

 

[Comfortably Lomb]

Who or what is an average fan?

This.

The main board is becoming like a community Facebook page. The same 10 people talking in circles regurgitating the same shit every day.

It seems every online community needs a low sodium spinoff now. Or else it just devolves into an irreparable, inescapable Slough of Despond.

 

[geoflin]

How is media rights and advertising not related to fans? Are they advertising to non-fans?

How does John Hancock paying to put a large sign in center field equate to fans funding the team?

 

[Ale Xander]

How does John Hancock paying to put a large sign in center field equate to fans funding the team?

Hancock is putting the sign so fans paying $30/m for NESN see it and that the fans paying the ticket prices watching the game in person see it

 

[Salem's Lot]

well, attendance is down. Long gone are the days of endless strings of sellouts. And I suspect that attendance will be even worse this year. Ratings on NESN are down as well.

And even though though the face value of tickets is still high, it is very easy to get in to Fenway for less than it usually costs to go out and consume any kind of entertainment in Boston for many non-weekend home games.

 

[twibnotes]

And even though though the face value of tickets is still high, it is very easy to get in to Fenway for less than it usually costs to go out and consume any kind of entertainment in Boston for many non-weekend home games.

to me it’s not just about the tickets - costs a small fortune to get a couple beers and hot dogs.

Sox are lucky their stadium is such a popular destination, but we’re going to start seeing more empty seats and lower nesn ratings. Many fans have concluded the price is just not aligned with the value

 

[Salem's Lot]

to me it’s not just about the tickets - costs a small fortune to get a couple beers and hot dogs.

Sox are lucky their stadium is such a popular destination, but we’re going to start seeing more empty seats and lower nesn ratings. Many fans have concluded the price is just not aligned with the value

I completely get it, but I would check out the beer & concession prices at minor league venues and concert facilities in Massachusetts. They are consistently obscenely priced. I believe that in Massachusetts the ABCC has a say in pricing of alcoholic beverages. They don’t want any 99 cent beer nights at Fenway for example. Bottom line is, it costs a lot of money to go out in and around Boston.

 

[Rovin Romine]

Thanks in advance!

 

[Tony Pena's Gas Cloud]

to me it’s not just about the tickets - costs a small fortune to get a couple beers and hot dogs.

Sox are lucky their stadium is such a popular destination, but we’re going to start seeing more empty seats and lower nesn ratings. Many fans have concluded the price is just not aligned with the value

Again, the concession prices, which are from an outside vendor, are exactly in line with any other entertainment venue. Why should Fenway be cheaper?

 

[pk1627]

The Hancock sign is on Berkley Street.

 

[SuperManny]

The Hancock sign is on Berkley Street.

That move saved the fans a ton of money

 

[twibnotes]

Again, the concession prices, which are from an outside vendor, are exactly in line with any other entertainment venue. Why should Fenway be cheaper?

It’s not a value judgment. It’s an economic decision. I’m a “diehard” - had season tix for years, been to tons of Sox playoff games, man town full of Sox stuff, yada yada…and when I see the team they’re putting on the field and the total cost of a game, it’s just not working for me anymore. As a fan, I’m highly sensitive to the degree to which the owner cares as much as I do…when that falters, I’m less inclined to open my wallet. Pretty sure I’m not alone here

 

[jose melendez]

It is not about spending money, it is about an actual strategy.

They went from trying to be innovative, to getting a win now guy, to grabbing for lack of a better term a "hack". The moment this team moved on from Lucchino (who had his warts) to Sam Kennedy, the emphasis went from winning to earn profit to ROI driven approach where winning was secondary. Bloom was brought in because Kennedy thought the Red Sox could sustain a Tampa Bay model and still make money. Years of grabbing the right guys extending them and then filling in the holes was replaced with trying to burn everything to the ground and reactively spending money to try to fix the issues. And the money they have spent has been poor to awful because it is reactive.

The team has not been in this kind of position in 50 years. And even then they at least had Yaz. Devers is no Yaz.

Ownership has diluted (they literally brought in a man that publicly hates Boston) and went off in different directions. That makes sense. Sports ownership is a great asset to own. People give them free stadiums and you can lie and plead poverty at any time.

As a fan, I don't give a shit if LeBron James and Co. make a lot of money if the Red Sox are losing. I have no interest in investing in suboptimal product at a premium price. Normally you just walk away or just enjoy the ensuing car wreck of watching an inept business leader huffing their own supply on the way to the plane crash. Unfortunately, I have a strong identity based relationship with the Boston Red Sox. It is not just a product to me despite me realizing it just unit of entertainment. That is what FSG 2.0 was banking on. I have such a strong association of the brand that I will keep shoveling dog poop in my mouth and happily pay out whatever they do. Hey and there are people here who are still brought in, and good for them if it brings them joy. I wish I didn't fault them for it but the vitriol caused by Kennedy & Co's blatant cash grab at something I held dear is tough to keep down.

And honestly what can I do besides bitch on a message board and tune the Red Sox out.

The problem is that Scott is basically right on a gut level and TRic does a good job of fleshing out the real set of issues.

We can argue all we want about what Henry's priorities, interest level etc, are, but the fact of the matter is that since the end of 2019 this team has been run in a different way, and the results, save for 2021--when I think there was just a ton of luck--have been terrible. Even if they're in rebuild mode, the "we can't quite sell everything and rebuild because people might think we don't care" has been a disaster. The Sox are not only the worst team in the AL East, they're probably the least interesting team in the AL East.

Ownership was really good for a really long time and they deserve a ton of credit for that, but they've produced a bad, boring product for a number of years now and they should get the shit kicked out of them. This is especially true when you trade what should be the face of the franchise and get very little value in return.

I think they get another year from me, but they have to show dramatic improvement this year and then spend next winter-- a lot--or I'm going to go full in on "this ownership is now failing."

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

The problem is that Scott is basically right on a gut level and TRic does a good job of fleshing out the real set of issues.

We can argue all we want about what Henry's priorities, interest level etc, are, but the fact of the matter is that since the end of 2019 this team has been run in a different way, and the results, save for 2021--when I think there was just a ton of luck--have been terrible. Even if they're in rebuild mode, the "we can't quite sell everything and rebuild because people might think we don't care" has been a disaster. The Sox are not only the worst team in the AL East, they're probably the least interesting team in the AL East.

Ownership was really good for a really long time and they deserve a ton of credit for that, but they've produced a bad, boring product for a number of years now and they should get the shit kicked out of them. This is especially true when you trade what should be the face of the franchise and get very little value in return.

I think they get another year from me, but they have to show dramatic improvement this year and then spend next winter-- a lot--or I'm going to go full in on "this ownership is now failing."

The reality is that the investment proposition for FSG has changed viz-a-viz the Sox. From 2002 to 2019 or thereabouts, the Sox were a growth investment. When they bought the team, there was a lot prior ownership had not done to optimize the value of the team. Henry & Co. brought in smarter front office management, spent money on player acquisition, vastly changed Fenway to increase its revenues, and drove the value of NESN. Winning championships along the way helped boost the value of the team.

Since 2019, the approach has changed. The team is no longer the growth engine of the FSG portfolio. There are no longer easy ways to boost revenue at Fenway beyond simple price increases - every piece of real estate in the park has been monetized (no wonder they are now looking to the real estate outside the park*). NESN viewership has peaked as people cut the cable cord in general and change the way they consume sports entertainment in particular. Competing for championships has gotten harder as more teams are better run and willing to spend on talent. Furthermore, letting more teams into the playoffs simultaneously gives mediocre teams a shot at glory while increasing the odds that a truly great team falters along the way in the post season - why spend top dollar only to be the 2023 Dodgers when you can be the 2021 Atlanta Braves? The risk of spending a lot of money has increased, the reward for spending a moderate amount of money has also increased. Finally, there are other opportunities to invest in underoptimized sports franchises, like the poorly run PGA or an NBA expansion team in virgin territory. The team is now the cash cow that funds these new investment opportunities.

From an investment standpoint, what FSG is doing seems very rational. But I am not an investor in the team, and as a fan, it sucks. Henry and company get a ton of goodwill from me for what they did in the first decade and a half or so of their ownership of the team, but that doesn't mean I have to like what they are doing now.

* It says a lot to me about the investment agenda of FSG that it is willing to invest in real estate around the park as the next avenue to increase the value of its investment in the Red Sox but it is not willing to invest in expensive free agents to the same end. When they talk about the "Fenway experience" as being the reason to come to games, they're not just in marketing mode - that's the fundamental business proposition these days.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

^^^ this is a really good post ^^^ that makes me less confident about the future of my favorite team.

 

[HfxBob]

The reality is that the investment proposition for FSG has changed viz-a-viz the Sox. From 2002 to 2019 or thereabouts, the Sox were a growth investment. When they bought the team, there was a lot prior ownership had not done to optimize the value of the team. Henry & Co. brought in smarter front office management, spent money on player acquisition, vastly changed Fenway to increase its revenues, and drove the value of NESN. Winning championships along the way helped boost the value of the team.

Since 2019, the approach has changed. The team is no longer the growth engine of the FSG portfolio. There are no longer easy ways to boost revenue at Fenway beyond simple price increases - every piece of real estate in the park has been monetized (no wonder they are now looking to the real estate outside the park*). NESN viewership has peaked as people cut the cable cord in general and change the way they consume sports entertainment in particular. Competing for championships has gotten harder as more teams are better run and willing to spend on talent. Furthermore, letting more teams into the playoffs simultaneously gives mediocre teams a shot at glory while increasing the odds that a truly great team falters along the way in the post season - why spend top dollar only to be the 2023 Dodgers when you can be the 2021 Atlanta Braves? The risk of spending a lot of money has increased, the reward for spending a moderate amount of money has also increased. Finally, there are other opportunities to invest in underoptimized sports franchises, like the poorly run PGA or an NBA expansion team in virgin territory. The team is now the cash cow that funds these new investment opportunities.

From an investment standpoint, what FSG is doing seems very rational. But I am not an investor in the team, and as a fan, it sucks. Henry and company get a ton of goodwill from me for what they did in the first decade and a half or so of their ownership of the team, but that doesn't mean I have to like what they are doing now.

* It says a lot to me about the investment agenda of FSG that it is willing to invest in real estate around the park as the next avenue to increase the value of its investment in the Red Sox but it is not willing to invest in expensive free agents to the same end. When they talk about the "Fenway experience" as being the reason to come to games, they're not just in marketing mode - that's the fundamental business proposition these days.

This is a good thoughtful post. My issue is this: where are the numbers that say the team is no longer a growth engine?

Forbes' annual Business of Baseball report for March/19 showed the team's market value at 3.2 billion. The March/23 report showed the value at 4.5 billion. The intervening time period included a pandemic. I've seen some estimates in other sources that the current market value is around 5 billion. So do the numbers support your assertion?

As for boosting revenue, like you say, there may not be any room for that within the park, but there's plenty more room in the area around the park.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

This is a good thoughtful post. My issue is this: where are the numbers that say the team is no longer a growth engine?

Forbes' annual Business of Baseball report for March/19 showed the team's market value at 3.2 billion. The March/23 report showed the value at 4.5 billion. The intervening time period included a pandemic. I've seen some estimates in other sources that the current market value is around 5 billion. So do the numbers support your assertion?

As for boosting revenue, like you say, there may not be any room for that within the park, but there's plenty more room in the area around the park.

If the value of the team has gone up a lot during a period of time where the team has generally been mediocre at best, that reinforces my contention that there is no point in FSG's eyes of spending money to build a contender.

And my interest is not in FSG increasing the value of its investment or boosting revenue if they're not going to put that money back into the team. My interest is in the Red Sox fielding a winning team. By the numbers you cite, the value of the Red Sox has increased by $1.3 billion in 4 years, yet the payroll has declined - Cot's has the opening day payroll in 2019 and 2023 as $236 million and $181 million, respectively. FSG is taking the increase in the value of the team (and the cash flow it is producing along the way) and putting that into the PGA and probably the NBA, not the Red Sox.

Simply put, FSG has decided that spending lots money on baseball players is no longer an optimal way to drive value from its investment in the Red Sox.

 

[CR67dream]

I’m new here. I’m sorry for not advancing the discussion. The mods can feel free to delete my post or ban me. But this is an issue about which I feel passionate and I genuinely wanted to hear your responses.

Well one good look around this place and you would have seen everything you've seen in this thread and then some. I'm sure you read the board for a while before joining yesterday so you should be well aware that this has been an ongoing theme across threads that didn't need its own thread to thrive.

Now that we have one, though, we have one. Maybe it's a good thing in that we can now try to keep that discussion here, and clean up those other threads to focus on actual on field baseball implications.

And why would you be banned for your take? A good chunk of the board agrees with you and it's in bounds as a subject. I will say I think it was pretty rich to claim you speak for "the common fan", as there really is no such thing, and around here we try to speak for ourselves, but you're entitled to express how you personally feel.

Did we need this thread for it? I don't think so, but that's just one guy's opinion, and as I said, it exists now, so let's keep that discussion here and try to keep the focus on the team from Breslow down to the field in other threads/discussions.

 

[HfxBob]

If the value of the team has gone up a lot during a period of time where the team has generally been mediocre at best, that reinforces my contention that there is no point in FSG's eyes of spending money to build a contender.

And my interest is not in FSG increasing the value of its investment or boosting revenue if they're not going to put that money back into the team. My interest is in the Red Sox fielding a winning team. By the numbers you cite, the value of the Red Sox has increased by $1.3 billion in 4 years, yet the payroll has declined - Cot's has the opening day payroll in 2019 and 2023 as $236 million and $181 million, respectively. FSG is taking the increase in the value of the team (and the cash flow it is producing along the way) and putting that into the PGA and probably the NBA, not the Red Sox.

Simply put, FSG has decided that spending lots money on baseball players is no longer an optimal way to drive value from its investment in the Red Sox.

That's certainly the way it looks right now. But some part of John Henry has to know that infuriating and/or driving off a big chunk of the fanbase over an extended period is eventually going to reach a tipping point where it hurts more than it helps.

 

[Semper Fenway]

I’ve looked around this board a great deal. And I wanted to put all of the “arguments” in one place, as I’ve never seen them addressed together (especially since so many of them are inter-related). My apologies for the repetitive nature of my post, however. Please see my additional comment below.

Well one good look around this place and you would have seen everything you've seen in this thread and then some. I'm sure you read the board for a while before joining yesterday so you should be well aware that this has been an ongoing theme across threads that didn't need its own thread to thrive.

Now that we have one, though, we have one. Maybe it's a good thing in that we can now try to keep that discussion here, and clean up those other threads to focus on actual on field baseball implications.

And why would you be banned for your take? A good chunk of the board agrees with you and it's in bounds as a subject. I will say I think it was pretty rich to claim you speak for "the common fan", as there really is no such thing, and around here we try to speak for ourselves, but you're entitled to express how you personally feel.

I was aiming to speak for the people who, like myself, aren’t educated in advanced metrics and who hold the ideas that I’ve expressed. From reading this board, I believe that my opinions are in the minority.

Did we need this thread for it? I don't think so, but that's just one guy's opinion, and as I said, it exists now, so let's keep that discussion here and try to keep the focus on the team from Breslow down to the field in other threads/discussions.

 

[sezwho]

That's certainly the way it looks right now. But some part of John Henry has to know that infuriating and/or driving off a big chunk of the fanbase over an extended period is eventually going to reach a tipping point where it hurts more than it helps.

I don’t have inside NESN information but only a handful of possibilities exist, in descending order of probability:

1) They are using all available cash to expand the FSG footprint
2) The bond market fluctuations have genuinely impacted JWHs liquidity

….big probability drop…

3) They are playing galaxy brain style possum and will sign a starter and RH power bat.
4) They are so lost in the clouds they think there are more crap swilling Sox loyalists than there actually are.
5) They think they can compete - I don’t actually think they think this

Don’t see any other real options.

 

[AlNipper49]

This isn't directed to you, but then you need to show your math or instead bring the conversation to somewhere more appropriate, like reddit of weei.com/forum.

I'd love for someone to show the math on how running a milquetoast franchise could be more profitable in the long run. Nobody is.

What's going to happen, instead, is we'll get a bunch of straw men. The SoSH of old is certainly dead and there is not a fucking thing that I can do about it. Sad.