National Television Contract

[nielsoncp]

I was looking at the latest email (the changes look GREAT, by the way - I have a job that is crazy busy in March but slacks off in April, sooooooooooo I know how I'm spending that month...) and noticed that the national television contract is still set at $25 million a year. I believe the real life contract is currently about $50 million a year - could that change get incorporated into the game? (reference: MLB reaches eight-year agreement with FOX, Turner | MLB.com) As a fan of a small market team, that extra $25 million makes a big difference in what I/we can do.

Thanks again for all you do - the game is truly amazing!

[Le Grande Orange]

Keep in mind that clubs in OOTP have considerably fewer expenses as compared to real life. If you look closely at that financial page screenshot, player expenses account for nearly 84% of total expenses. In real life the MLB average is closer to 55%. The range (according to Forbes' analysis of the 2013 season) was from a low of 38% to a high of 65%—and that includes benefits and bonuses.

Real-life clubs have to pay for such things as team travel, spring training, park operation and maintenance, game-day expenses (e.g. ticket takers, ushers, security, etc.), ticket sales expenses, office staff, marketing, minor league operations, and so forth. None of these expenses are modelled in OOTP. Consequently revenue has to be artificially curtailed compared to real life in order to more properly match the reduced level of expenditures.

[Torgonius]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Real-life clubs have to pay for such things as team travel, spring training, park operation and maintenance, game-day expenses (e.g. ticket takers, ushers, security, etc.), ticket sales expenses, office staff, marketing, minor league operations, and so forth. None of these expenses are modelled in OOTP.

There's a to-do to add to OOTP 17. Make it like tax deductions... there's an easy mode where it's just a flat rate, or you can itemize and set levels for spending that have a further bearing on outcomes. Spend more on marketing, and it may increase ticket sales. Cheap out on the VIP seat food, your sales and reputation may suffer. Better travel arrangements might make your team a little more rested... or you could go full Major League and have them riding a bus!

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Torognius

Spend more on marketing, and it may increase ticket sales. Cheap out on the VIP seat food, your sales and reputation may suffer. Better travel arrangements might make your team a little more rested... or you could go full Major League and have them riding a bus!

Those sound all right in theory but the problem is there is no real-life data available to serve as a reference when constructing a model as to the level of effect raising or lowering such expenses should have. There is also the question that unless there are real incentives to adjust these less important expenditures, users will probably just max them out and be done with them.

[Le Grande Orange]

Some real-life numbers for consideration. The average revenue and expenses in percentage terms of the Texas Rangers over the 2008-09 seasons.

REVENUE
Gate receipts: 28.3%
Local media: 29.5%
Concessions: 6.2%
Luxury suites: 3.4%
Parking (net): 1.6%
Advertising: 8.9%
Merchandising (net): 2.0%
National revenue (net): 18.9%
Other: 1.4%

EXPENSES
Player salaries: 48.9%
Team operations: 12.2%
Minor league operations: 7.3%
Scouting: 4.9%
Ballpark operations: 8.2%
Ticket office: 1.4%
General & administrative: 6.1%
Marketing: 10.9%

Notes
Gate receipts include spring training.
Advertising includes signage, publications, promotions, and sponsorships.
National revenue (net) refers to the combined net national revenue from media contracts and MLB Properties.
Team operations include manager and coach salaries, equipment, medical, travel, and spring training.
Ballpark operations include park security, maintenance, staff, utilities, grounds upkeep and crew.
Marketing includes advertising, broadcasting, marketing, publications, promotions, public relations, and sales.

For OOTP purposes, some of these revenue and expenses categories could be combined. Concessions revenue could be rolled in with merchandising, as they both involve selling goods to spectators. (Arguably advertising could also be included.) Ticket office expenses could be rolled in ballpark, marketing, or general & administrative costs, depending on how one categorizes them.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by Torognius

There's a to-do to add to OOTP 17. Make it like tax deductions... there's an easy mode where it's just a flat rate, or you can itemize and set levels for spending that have a further bearing on outcomes. Spend more on marketing, and it may increase ticket sales. Cheap out on the VIP seat food, your sales and reputation may suffer. Better travel arrangements might make your team a little more rested... or you could go full Major League and have them riding a bus!

I would not mind a little more financial control, but I suspect a large majority would want to focus on baseball rather than finances.

[CabreraforPresidente]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I would not mind a little more financial control, but I suspect a large majority would want to focus on baseball rather than finances.

I would set hot dog prices with and without mustard if I could get away with it...

[TomVeal]

Originally Posted by CabreraforPresidente

I would set hot dog prices with and without mustard if I could get away with it...

What's important (and statistical evidence backs this up) is beer prices.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I would not mind a little more financial control, but I suspect a large majority would want to focus on baseball rather than finances.

Then make it optional!

Actually it would be cool if there were more levels of financial detail than just on or off.

(I appreciate that this would likely be easier said than done).

[shawa666]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

Then make it optional!

Actually it would be cool if there were more levels of financial detail than just on or off.

(I appreciate that this would likely be easier said than done).

I wish we had some sort of hardcore GM mode.

[r0nster]

Would love it where we the GM or the owner can dictate prices for various seats around the stadium including luxury suites

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by r0nster

Would love it where we the GM or the owner can dictate prices for various seats around the stadium including luxury suites

The problem there is, again, a nearly complete lack of good real-life data from which to construct a model. Remember, if you're setting different prices for different seats, now you need to model attendance amounts for each type of seating. How much do high-price seats sell as compared to low-price seats? There is no data available on this at all.

[Assos]

And to judge by eye is also tough due to the sliding down into empty seats and all of the fancy standing room tickets that can be sold at games in some parks. Also, luxury boxes come in different types and varieties with food and drink, with food but without drink, or just the box. And of course different combos of packages and stuff. Very complex, hard to factor into a game.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by r0nster

Would love it where we the GM or the owner can dictate prices for various seats around the stadium including luxury suites

I like the idea in theory, but I think it would be too hard to pull off. There are some other attendance related issues that need fixed first. Mainly the one about how you can set your ticket prices 10 times about the baseline and always fill your stadium to 10% capacity.

Originally Posted by shawa666

I wish we had some sort of hardcore GM mode.

Truthfully, all of this does not fall in line with the duties of the GM.

[Assos]

That is the difference between a Team President/CEO and a GM.

[Le Grande Orange]

I do think the idea of luxury suites or premium seating in general can be incorporated. But I would go with a more indirect route.

Basically, you could adjust the percentage of your seats in your ballpark that are premium seating. Premium seating gives a monetary bonus on top of the gate receipts for that game. So more premium seats yields more additional revenue for the club. But it's based on the attendance generated for the game and the current ticket price, thus eliminating any need to have more complicated attendance models based on the type of seating.

Of course, to add more premium seating to your ballpark you'd have to spend money as it costs money to make such physical improvements to the park. There is another tradeoff in that the higher the proportion of premium seating the lower your overall park capacity becomes (since premium seating takes up more physical space to accommodate its various amenities).

A similar alternative would be to use a somewhat abstracted "luxury suite" count instead of a premium seating percentage. The luxury suite number serves as a proxy for both suites and other premium seating. To add more luxury suites to your park you'd have to spend money. But hopefully the additional revenue the extra suites bring in will recoup the investment in the longer term. As before, adding more suites would gradually reduce the overall seating capacity of the park meaning there is a tradeoff. The suites provide a revenue bonus based on the actual attendance and ticket price of the club during the season.

There is enough real-world data to serve as a foundation for these suggestions, and it also has the benefit of being fairly simple at its core yet offering some meaningful decisions to the user.

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I would not mind a little more financial control, but I suspect a large majority would want to focus on baseball rather than finances.

This will keep holding OOTP back if it keeps its very simplified approach to team finances.

I can understand not wanting to deal with it. But if you are trying to produce a professional baseball GM simulator then you kind of have to include the intricacies of finance.
You cannot have one without the other. Professional baseball and finances are not two things that you can separate.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

This will keep holding OOTP back if it keeps its very simplified approach to team finances.

I can understand not wanting to deal with it. But if you are trying to produce a professional baseball GM simulator then you kind of have to include the intricacies of finance.
You cannot have one without the other. Professional baseball and finances are not two things that you can separate.

Lol I'm not arguing that there should not be improvements to finances. I'm just saying that ticket prices and stadium deals are not a part of the gm's duties

[Assos]

But it should be a factor in what kind of budget you are getting from your owner. If your owner is profit hungry and not getting results i.e. fans in the higher end seats that your team and talent should bring in, you get a lower budget to work with. With the addition of GM tasks that an owner would like to see, which is a great addition, the game has taken on more of a real life feel. Now, like LGO said, it is doable to tweek the seating charts, so that might be something that could happen in the near future.

[BigCity]

Although a few financial tweaks would be great, I would MUCH rather have a more detailed historical ballpark model. Something would require the team to have to upgrade and replace ballparks as time goes on to increase attendance. Maybe even force a move due to no cooperation/interest from the city.