3 ms·

Instead of MLB/NFL, check out summer or arena leagues. Yeah. Just because some activities have migrated from being "everyman" activities that 75% of the popula

Instead of MLB/NFL, check out summer or arena leagues. Yeah. Just because some activities have migrated from being "everyman" activities that 75% of the population can afford to things that 75% of the population can't afford, doesn't mean that reflects the overall reality of the average person's lived experience. Things like MLB/NFL games have greatly outpaced inflation. One reason people keep paying for them (aside from other obvious factors, like love of the game) is because we have been conditioned to believe that they are things "average" people can afford them when in fact that hasn't been true for a long time. Even if sports ticket prices didn't outpace inflation, the fact is that 50 years ago being at the stadium was the best way to see the game. Your other alternative was a tiny, balky TV or radio. These days you can see them at home in HD on a giant screen that would have seemed like science fiction 25 years ago and in fact, because of cable bundling, you may already be paying for this privilege even if you don't want to. (edit: There are still things that are special about the live experience, but the home experience has become massively better than it used to be) So like collecting physical music, or attending movies in movie theaters as opposed to Netflixing them it makes some level of sense for live sports attendance to migrate from "everyman activity" to "premium niche thing for diehard fans with disposable income." This is unfortunate in many ways, and it is a loss, but it does not necessarily equate to a degradation of average quality of life. That would only be the case if average people no longer had any affordable leisure options ...if there were no new affordable to replace those which migrated upscale. (FWIW, I say all of this as a sports fan who does enjoy attending some games each year)

OJFord 4y ago
Also isn't it just way better on television? The angle is always (or, to many nines of the time) great, always close. I'm not big into sports, I go on and off following ice hockey (the Leafs), so maybe that explains it, but I just think - money aside - going to see a game in person would be an all-round inferior experience. (Pay for definitely-fast food, queue for public loos, potentially surrounded by people I don't want to watch with, ...)
- wvenable 4y ago
  It's not fair to say that it's an inferior or superior experience. What it is, though, is a different experience. I occasionally enjoy going to a game in real life for that difference. If your purpose is just to watch a game you have so many more options so going in person has become a luxury experience entirely because it's no longer necessary.
  - OJFord 4y ago
    That's what I mean by 'not being bigly into sports so maybe that explains it' - perhaps I should try it some day, but the 'what you can't get at home' experience of a stadium just doesn't appeal to me, personally. Obviously it does to some people, I didn't mean to suggest that stadium-goers are idiots who don't realise it's objectively better at home! I just meant 'game-watching' - but even there, sibling commenter to you makes a point about the rawness of physical contact if you're close-up in the stadium.
- JohnBooty 4y ago
  Also isn't it just way better on television? The angle is always (or, to many nines of the time) great, always close. Yeah, absolutely, in a lot of ways. Although, people have been saying that since the dawn of TV. =) There are things that are super special about the live experience that are tough to appreciate on TV, although they're also tough to appreciate in person unless you're lucky enough to be sitting rather close or just seeing the event in a small arena. The speed and violence of an MLB player mashing a baseball in person is something else, if you ever get a chance to see it up close. Tennis is another sport where TV doesn't do it justice IMO. Hockey's definitely one that I think can be a little hard to follow in person. Although, in the pre-HD days, it was REALLY hard to appreciate on TV because it could be damn near impossible to see the puck on a fuzzy 15" CRT! In fact, "I can't follow the puck" was such a common complaint in the pre-HD days that I had a failed prediction that hockey would massively blossom in popularity once everybody had HD. Glad I had no money... I was so convinced of this prediction that I probably would have poured all my money into buying ownership stake in a hockey team or something lol.
  - 4y ago
mhzsh 4y ago
I wonder, how much of ticket price increases can be attributed to resellers? It's not long after tickets are released that it seems _everything_ for sale is third-party.
- JohnBooty 4y ago
  Yeah, for some events. Ironically, this also makes attending a game super cheap if you're willing to deal with the uncertainty of buying tickets from an online reseller right before game time (or even slightly after). The uncertainty factor, of course, makes it really tough if you're taking e.g. a family to the game. Have fun explaining to kids why you're turning around and coming home, or why mommmy is sitting 15 rows away because it was impossible to get 4 seats located together. But, for a couple of friends hitting up a game... it can be a great way to go.
cbm-vic-20 4y ago
I live in a city that has an AHL hockey team (minor league, one division below NHL), and tickets are nearly an order of magnitude cheaper than the NHL. (Except for beers, which are still laughably overpriced). Anyway, another industry that has gone this way is the ski industry. Back in college, we'd get up early, pile a bunch of people in a car, drive 3 hours to the slopes, pay $40 for a lift ticket, ski until sunset and drive home. Now, lift tickets are incredibly expensive, all the while the ski resorts built up amenities like bars and restaurants, spas, etc. And they wonder why their customers are trending older... I also believe this is a big part of why college has become much more expensive: the amenities arms race.
- tcmart14 4y ago
  Where I live, I am not from here, but I hear the stories all the time. It is a big place for skiing. An annual pass would be like $100 20 years ago, not it looks to being $1500 for an annual pass. I guess technically seasonal, but I think they use the annual terminology.
- philwelch 4y ago
  I went to a Vancouver Canucks game once. The concessions prices were still outrageous, but they were in Canadian dollars and after the exchange rate, they were perfectly reasonable.
listenallyall 4y ago
> One reason people keep paying for them is that there's no substitute. Tom Brady plays in the NFL, not USFL. Steph Curry in the NBA, not the d-league. Etc.
philwelch 4y ago
NFL is a lot worse than MLB or NBA just because 8 home games is way too few compared to 81 or even 41. Depending on how shitty your home team is, MLB can be a huge bargain. Buy some cheap seats at a Mariners game if you’re ever in Seattle.

OJFord 4y ago

Also isn't it just way better on television? The angle is always (or, to many nines of the time) great, always close. I'm not big into sports, I go on and off following ice hockey (the Leafs), so maybe that explains it, but I just think - money aside - going to see a game in person would be an all-round inferior experience. (Pay for definitely-fast food, queue for public loos, potentially surrounded by people I don't want to watch with, ...)

wvenable 4y ago
It's not fair to say that it's an inferior or superior experience. What it is, though, is a different experience. I occasionally enjoy going to a game in real life for that difference. If your purpose is just to watch a game you have so many more options so going in person has become a luxury experience entirely because it's no longer necessary.
- OJFord 4y ago
  That's what I mean by 'not being bigly into sports so maybe that explains it' - perhaps I should try it some day, but the 'what you can't get at home' experience of a stadium just doesn't appeal to me, personally. Obviously it does to some people, I didn't mean to suggest that stadium-goers are idiots who don't realise it's objectively better at home! I just meant 'game-watching' - but even there, sibling commenter to you makes a point about the rawness of physical contact if you're close-up in the stadium.
JohnBooty 4y ago
Also isn't it just way better on television? The angle is always (or, to many nines of the time) great, always close. Yeah, absolutely, in a lot of ways. Although, people have been saying that since the dawn of TV. =) There are things that are super special about the live experience that are tough to appreciate on TV, although they're also tough to appreciate in person unless you're lucky enough to be sitting rather close or just seeing the event in a small arena. The speed and violence of an MLB player mashing a baseball in person is something else, if you ever get a chance to see it up close. Tennis is another sport where TV doesn't do it justice IMO. Hockey's definitely one that I think can be a little hard to follow in person. Although, in the pre-HD days, it was REALLY hard to appreciate on TV because it could be damn near impossible to see the puck on a fuzzy 15" CRT! In fact, "I can't follow the puck" was such a common complaint in the pre-HD days that I had a failed prediction that hockey would massively blossom in popularity once everybody had HD. Glad I had no money... I was so convinced of this prediction that I probably would have poured all my money into buying ownership stake in a hockey team or something lol.
- 4y ago

mhzsh 4y ago

I wonder, how much of ticket price increases can be attributed to resellers? It's not long after tickets are released that it seems _everything_ for sale is third-party.

JohnBooty 4y ago
Yeah, for some events. Ironically, this also makes attending a game super cheap if you're willing to deal with the uncertainty of buying tickets from an online reseller right before game time (or even slightly after). The uncertainty factor, of course, makes it really tough if you're taking e.g. a family to the game. Have fun explaining to kids why you're turning around and coming home, or why mommmy is sitting 15 rows away because it was impossible to get 4 seats located together. But, for a couple of friends hitting up a game... it can be a great way to go.

cbm-vic-20 4y ago

I live in a city that has an AHL hockey team (minor league, one division below NHL), and tickets are nearly an order of magnitude cheaper than the NHL. (Except for beers, which are still laughably overpriced). Anyway, another industry that has gone this way is the ski industry. Back in college, we'd get up early, pile a bunch of people in a car, drive 3 hours to the slopes, pay $40 for a lift ticket, ski until sunset and drive home. Now, lift tickets are incredibly expensive, all the while the ski resorts built up amenities like bars and restaurants, spas, etc. And they wonder why their customers are trending older... I also believe this is a big part of why college has become much more expensive: the amenities arms race.

tcmart14 4y ago
Where I live, I am not from here, but I hear the stories all the time. It is a big place for skiing. An annual pass would be like $100 20 years ago, not it looks to being $1500 for an annual pass. I guess technically seasonal, but I think they use the annual terminology.
philwelch 4y ago
I went to a Vancouver Canucks game once. The concessions prices were still outrageous, but they were in Canadian dollars and after the exchange rate, they were perfectly reasonable.

listenallyall 4y ago

> One reason people keep paying for them is that there's no substitute. Tom Brady plays in the NFL, not USFL. Steph Curry in the NBA, not the d-league. Etc.

philwelch 4y ago

NFL is a lot worse than MLB or NBA just because 8 home games is way too few compared to 81 or even 41. Depending on how shitty your home team is, MLB can be a huge bargain. Buy some cheap seats at a Mariners game if you’re ever in Seattle.