Tampa Bay and the Millennial Challenge
This is Michael Lortz’ second piece as part of his June residency at FanGraphs. Lortz covers the Tampa Bay baseball market for the appropriately named Tampa Bay Baseball Market and has previously published work in the Community pages, as well. You can find him on Twitter, as well. Read the work of all our residents here.
According to the old stereotype, Florida is an elephant graveyard where everyone’s retired grandparents go to spend their final years. They drive slow, play bingo on Wednesdays, and clog the roads on the way to their early-bird specials.
The reality, as is frequently the case, is much more complicated.
As I mentioned in my first article, Tampa Bay is a growing region. Not only economically, but also in population. Earlier this year, the Tampa Bay Business Journal reported that the region of Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater is expected to top 3 million people by the end of 2017. According to the US census, approximately 330,000 people in Tampa Bay are over 65, or 11% of the population. A significant portion, but far from the majority.
Transplants are a large segment of the Tampa Bay population. In 2014, the New York Times published an article depicting where the population of each state came from. According to the Times, only 36% of Florida residents were natives, 8% were from New York, and 8% were from other Northeast states. We can probably safely assume many of the urban parts of Florida have a higher percentage of non-native Floridians. Which means Tampa Bay may have a higher percentage of transplants than other parts of Florida.
This population diversity has a huge impact on sports fandom in Tampa Bay. According to a Facebook study in 2015, only 50% of Tampa Bay area Facebook users “like” the Rays. We can’t say Facebook is entirely indicative of the whole population, but it might be a big enough sample size to estimate, especially for younger fans. Just 50% is not good.
Since 2007, the Rays have promoted the idea that they are working on the “next generation” of Tampa Bay sports fans. Owner Stu Sternberg and staff have said many times that building a successful fanbase will take a generation or two.
In theory, this is a good idea. There’s little the Rays can do to convince a retired New Yorker who grew up watching Mickey Mantle to abandon his Yankees fandom and root wholeheartedly for the Rays — especially not with the Yankees’ spring-training facility across the bridge in Tampa. These customers are good for a few games a year, when the Yankees are in town. Ditto for retired Red Sox fans, Tigers fans, White Sox fans, or any other team in the American League. Retired fans of National League teams may root for the Rays as a second favorite due to league affiliation, but they will never be pure-blooded Rays fans.
When you have limited resources in a small market, minimal effort should be put towards winning over fans with deep-seated opposing loyalty. Fans without that sort of loyalty are an easier target.
The Rays believe the future of their fanbase came into existence at the same time the franchise came into existence. Kids born in 1998 were 10 when the Rays made it to the World Series and will be 19 this year. Kids born in 1998 are now making their own buying decisions and, in many cases, making their own income. These young fans should have gotten interested in the Rays during the time of Longoria, Price, Zobrist, and Shields.
That’s a good era in Rays history with which to bond.
But there’s a big problem with the Rays’ course of action – a giant weakness in the philosophy that may hopefully bind the team to the region for current and future generations.
The Rays are targeting the Millennial generation, a mysterious group born between 1980-ish and 2000-ish that is often written about, often analyzed, and often blamed for the failure of society as we know it. Unfortunately, there’s ample evidence showing what the Rays are doing currently might not lead to butts in the seats nor increased traditional revenue.
A few weeks ago, the New York Times featured a lengthy piece on the Yankees’ marketing and their struggle to pack Yankee Stadium in the post-Jeter era. Within the piece, Yankees front-office personnel discussed their thoughts on how Millennials perceived the Yankees experience. In order to bring younger fans to the ballpark, the Yankees lowered prices and created new experiences.
This is the Yankees, a team with generations of fans, and one of the biggest sports team brands in the world.
What chance do the Rays have hinging their entire existence in Tampa Bay on an age group with which even the Yankees are struggling?
Surprisingly, the Rays have a very good chance, if they play their political and financial cards right.
According to Time Magazine, the Millennial population in Tampa Bay has increased 3.6% since 2010. They’re a big part of Tampa Bay’s future. Their impact is the reason Tampa Bay Lightning owner Jeff Vinik is hosting a Millennial Impact Forum in downtown Tampa later this month.
If the Rays can find the ideal location and the ideal financing for the ideal new stadium, they could create a new era in stadium experiences – breaking the mold as Camden Yards did in 1991. Whereas the Rays began play in the last of the cookie-cutter domes of the 1970s and 1980s, they now have a chance to create their own future, cater to a new generation, and build a home that is the envy of Major League Baseball.
Both from interviews I have conducted with the front office and a study of their public efforts, I gather that Rays leadership seems to understand the stakes. If all the ifs work in the Rays’ favor, the franchise has a chance to mold the stadium to how different generations want to experience the game.
Innovation is on the Rays’ side, with a blank slate and plenty of research on their target customers. The Rays need to be creative in order to make revenue on the Millennial generation – especially if their purchasing habits will drive the Rays’ revenue in years to come. Combined with a new TV contract – perhaps also a new more fluid model based on performance and ratings – and other revenue streams, the Rays might finally be able to generate the revenue needed to compete with the rest of the AL East.
I know writing about Millennials is overused and cliché, but they are the future of the Rays fanbase. Including and attracting them is essential if the Rays want to survive in Tampa Bay.
Michael Lortz is a consultant in the Tampa Bay area. He wrote about the business of Tampa Bay baseball on his site: TampaBayBaseballMarket.com . He can be reached at @tbbaseballmkt . His first novel, Curveball at the Crossroads, is now available.
Great article! Very interesting.
Maybe free skinny jeans and entitled attitude for season tix holders?
You obviously don’t actually associate with many millennials. Very few are actually like this. Hell, we millenials dislike people like that about as much as anyone because they give us a bad rep.
Nah, I think they used up their promotion money on collapsible housing markets for baby boomers.
He’s probably from Alabama and on disability. Ironic he mentions entitlement…
OldManYellsAtCloud.jpg
No, it’s the children who are wrong.
Well at least we know who is doing the fanatical thumb downs
Wouldn’t a ticket deal like the A’s work great in St. Petersburg?
The Devil is in the details but I’m sure $20 a month is more than the average a potential seat filler would be spending (which is probably closer to $0).
I know it doesn’t help the long term problems, but it seems like it’d help the fixed income seniors and the non-yuppie youngsters.
On the other hand, I’m an idiot
“This population diversity has a huge impact on sports fandom in Tampa Bay. According to a Facebook study in 2015, only 50% of Tampa Bay area Facebook users “like” the Rays. We can’t say Facebook is entirely indicative of the whole population, but it might be a big enough sample size to estimate, especially for younger fans. Just 50% is not good.”
This doesn’t have much impact when no context is given about the percentage of Facebook users in other areas who “like” their local MLB team.
Clik the hyperlink, it’s all there. Very cool visualization of markets.
Diamondbacks have some of the lowest percent “Like.”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/24/upshot/facebook-baseball-map.html?_r=1#4,33.946,-92.180
For Mets and A’s fans, that is perhaps the most depressing map created.
Lol 63% Giants fans in the same zip code as the Oakland Coliseum. Ouch.
The link does not have the average % of Facebook likes, the median %, the highest %, the lowest %, etc. I can guess how high 50% is relative to the rest of the country by looking st shades of colors, but that is the only means of analysis available, and it is very imprecise.
If you zoom on the map, you can see the % breakdown by county. Zoom further and it’s broken down by zip code. Mean, median, std dev, etc have not been spoon fed to you, but the data is there if you care enough to calculate them yourself.
Have you taken the time to do hours upon of hours of manual calculations to find all those figures?
Today I learned that not a single Canadian Facebook user likes baseball.
You can tell almost exactly where Wisconsin and Michigan end and where the next state begins based on this map.
IMO, that map is everything that’s wrong with how info is presented these days. It tells you nothing until you move your cursor.
Thats not really true; there are 6 michigan counties that are all Brewers there, taking up a substantial amount of space
Its wierd actually because I grew up in one of those counties and never met a Brewers fan, and they are pretty small areas population wise (Ontonagon county is population 7000, and is bigger than Rhode Island).
Oooooooooh, I definitely don’t know whether low attendance can be attributed to Millennials, though they are a key growth market.
The challenge is that this is directly correlated to the previous Tampa Bay Area piece. St Pete’s downtown is a pretty fun place, but what percentage of Bay Area millennials live on that side of the bay? (This is an actual question, I don’t know.) I have a hunch that more millennials live in the Tampa area, or in Channelside, or by USF, or by Ybor City, all areas that are nearly an hour’s drive from Tropicana.
I don’t like cross-comparing, but the Blue Jays crowd over the past 10 years has substantially changed, and it does look younger. Is that because of effective marketing? Is that because the Jays have an in-house DJ? Or is it because downtown Toronto is becoming younger and wealthier, and it’s an easy walk to SkyDome? Or, maybe, was it because they were winning for a couple of years?
It is important to target further growth demographics, but our entertainment dollars (and time!) are scarce, and there are many, many entertainment options that compete against baseball. The Tampa Bay baseball experience needs to be fun, and close to fans, young and old.
Regarding Toronto, I think it’s a combo of 1) Toronto getting younger, 2) Toronto getting wealthier, and 3) immigrants/first gen Canadians discovering baseball. Toronto is a very cosmopolitan city.
The Jays are doing exactly what the Rays want to do. Get a stadium downtown, work the civic pride card, and make it a destination.
Small payroll in the AL East is not a great place to start. They should be cashing in on Loria’s attempts to destroy the Marlins. But they can’t seem to get anything done. If I was in Florida especially the Tampa area I’d be a Yankees fan because of the MLB success and the single A team being in town. If I’m going to go to a game I want to go to games where my team has a chance meaning I’d never go to a ballpark with a team that is normally a bottom feeder in the division with little hope of a post-season birth. Get better players if you want people in the seats.
If you want a post-season birth, wait until spring training has started before knocking her up.
The Rays have had a playoff birth once in the last 5 years and only been competitive 2 out of those 5. In 2016 they were 21 games back of the second wild card and 25 back for the division. In 2015 6 games back of the second wild card and 13 back in the division. 2014 11 games back of the second wild card and 19 games back in the division. 2013 they got the second wild card and were 5.5 games back in the division. 2012 3 games back of the second wild card and 5 games back of the division. The last time they won the division was 2010. Yes, these small budget teams can be competitive but usually when they hit a good core, but they normally have only a 2-3 year window to do anything. Then they end up bottom feeding to build up top end prospects before bouncing back. Those slumps can go on quite awhile if the team misses on prospects. They can go on even longer when your in a division that routinely takes 1 of the AL wild card spots.
21 games out last year. I am going nowhere near that stadium if I’m in that area.
If you’re talking about the next generation of young fans, postseason births would be good, though postseason conceptions would be better, and postseason berths would be the best for everyone in this regard.
Low wages in the East, but is not a good place to start. They need to zararivati about Loria’s efforts to destroy the separatists. But they can’t love. I’m in Florida, especially the Tampa area would have to cheer for the Iankees because they spit a successful MLB team and town. If I get out, I’m going to play where my team hasn’t felt the opportunity to track routes with a team that is usually in the food chain in pieces with very little hope in the post season. With the best players if you want to sediljtima people.
Are you having a stroke?
The term “millennials” doesn’t mean that much. They’re pretty heterogeneous and want different things. We’re not even sure when “millennials” begin and “Gen X” ends. So I don’t know that teams are going to be able to do outreach to “millennials” as a group because of this heterogeneity. And a lot of things that we do know about them (like that they are “digital natives”) doesn’t give a clear marketing angle.
The one thing we know that is relevant is that the people who entered the labor force between 2007 and 2012 had a rough go of it in the “Great Recession.” This means they have less money as a group and because their careers got started later they are likely to have worse job-career outcomes overall (since career trajectories tend to follow a Matthew Effect). So they don’t have as much money now, and might not have as much money later. And this goes double for Florida, which was hammered by the Great Recession.
So if I were to design something to appeal to millennials I’d make sure there were some decent outfield bleacher seats for $20. Maybe the $15 “cover charge” to hang out at Yankee stadium does this, but my guess is that for that price most non-fans would want to go a club and most fans would rather go to a sportsbar instead. Bleacher seats used to be where college kids could go and have a good time. At the Trop they’re $30, which is sort of in the right range. Dropping that even to $25 and trying to fill it with young people would be a huge benefit since hopefully they’d upgrade to pricier options as they get older. But there are $30 seats at the Trop that were literally $10 in 2009, so it just doesn’t seem likely to backtrack.
Unfortunately, there’s another issue which is that people “grow up” as sports fans. It’s a lot easier to convince a kid who grew up going to games to be a fan than one who didn’t. But if the ticket prices are high for families–and it’s about $50-60 for a good seat at the Trop–that’s over $200 for a family of four. How many kids grew up going to games? And if they’re not going to game as kids, what’s going to make them go as adults? To get a generation on board with something like this, you’ve got to get to them about 10 years before they’re making purchasing decisions.
Those are great points and I just want to expand on the ticket pricing part:
In my opinion, $30 for bleacher seats is way too high. From 2010-2014 I went to college in Baltimore and a couple Fridays a month the Orioles would have $6 outfield pavilion seats for students. And as a result on those nights the outfield seats would be packed with people from that prized millennial demographic. And I think $25-$30 tickets would have probably priced a lot of us out of going as much or even at all.
And while I was born in LA and am a dyed-in-the-wool Dodger fan, the Orioles are now easily my second favorite team. Since college I’ve purchased a good amount of O’s gear and have gone to a few more of their games. All of that is money funneled to a team as a result of “hooking” me with super cheap bleacher seats. Sample size of one, of course, but it seems like the Rays might be shooting themselves in the foot by pricing their seats the way they do.
I agree. You have to find a way to scale prices down for students (HS students too) in the bleacher seats. But they don’t have any advertised specials for that. I remember in HS I would always go with my friends to the bleacher seats and it would be packed with 16-22 year olds. And then as we got older and had more money and our backs started hurting more and (most importantly) we didn’t want to hang out with teenagers, many of us scaled up to something nicer. This is how you build brand loyalty.
They do have a good deal for $2 tickets for kids who go with an adult on Tuesday nights, which is a really aggressive pricing scheme for getting a family out to the game. That’s also a good long-term play; you want kids to think about the good times they had as a kid at the park.
” And a lot of things that we do know about them (like that they are “digital natives”) doesn’t give a clear marketing angle.”
Your example is odd because it does give a very clear marketing angle – market digitally, nearly exclusively. Buy mobile adspace instead of running print, TV, and radio commercials.
Fair enough. I just don’t know how to make baseball “digitally fun” but there are definite advertising opportunities.
“The Rays are targeting the Millennial generation, a mysterious group born between 1980-ish and 2000-ish that is often written about, often analyzed, and often blamed for the failure of society as we know it.”
Millennials make less money compared to cost of living as the generations before them. Its just they way of the this country IMO. no more $$$ for under-educated unskilled people, which is a huge percentage of millennials sorry to say.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/01/13/millennials-falling-behind-boomer-parents/96530338/
That’s why i think Las Vegas is a target for MLB. However you might have to live here to understand. Millennials make A LOT of money here in the restaurants and casinos. That is what I did while in college and I took a huge pay cut when I graduated and started a “real” job. So tempting to go back 30-35 hours a week and making 55K a year, only claiming 30K. It was awesome…(sigh)
All they have to do is follow the Coors Field model. Make a rooftop for GA tickets for $18, give whomever buys those tickets a stipend towards food/beer, and watch that area fill up. Make it comparable to a bar setting on happy hour, at least for a few drinks.
I go to Rockies games as a Dodger fan somewhat frequently, and I’ve definitely noticed an increase in 18-30 year old fans over the past couple of seasons. I think it’s partially due to the Rooftop and partially due to the surrounding neighborhood recently becoming a cool new urban neighborhood with lots of bars, clubs, restaurants, and condos. I’ve heard a few resentful comments about how these new young fans “are just there for the party, not the game”, but then why would they choose to pay for a ticket when there are a million bars and clubs within walking distance?
Seems like people feel very strongly that when you buy a ticket to a baseball game, you have an obligation to sit in your seat and stare unflinchingly at the field. I think teams, especially those with difficulty drawing, should reevaluate this mentality, and certainly fans should.
Baseball’s a long season. I go to enough games and watch enough on TV to where buying a cheap ticket just to get in the park, then spending the game eating and drinking with the field as the backdrop is appealing. Missing a few innings doesn’t matter. From the sport’s perspective, people being in the stadium, spending money and having fun is a net positive.
In other words, I agree. Cheap entry, a rooftop or mezzanine bar of some kind with a good view are a good start. Then sprinkle throughout the stadium some craft beer spots and a bunch of different food options. Amenities make the difference, because if you’re just going to sit and remain stationary, it’s way cheaper and easier to do that at home.
The Rays can work in Tampa. A new stadium would be obviously huge.
If the Rays want the way into the “Millenninal” heart though, start with cheap tickets, craft beer, and Uber discounts.
This piece petered out in the last few paragraphs, which devolved from the opening theme into what seems like a Rays P.R. handout:
“If the Rays can find the ideal location and the ideal financing for the ideal new stadium, they could create a new era in stadium experiences …”
— Pure P.R. phrase.
“… they now have a chance to create their own future, cater to a new generation, and build a home that is the envy of Major League Baseball.”
— Again.
“Rays leadership seems to understand the stakes.”
— Okay, but who doesn’t?
“Combined with a new TV contract – perhaps also a new more fluid model based on performance and ratings – and other revenue streams, the Rays might finally be able to generate the revenue needed to compete with the rest of the AL East.”
— That’s a lot of ifs, as you acknowledge. But I saw nothing concrete about those things.
Millennials are a potential for growth but I’m not sure you can bank on them as the main group, especially if you want paying customers and not making cool and cheap actions all the time.
Yes mlb should try to improve on millennials but they are also doing well on older people and boys under 13. Yes you can get some growth attracting women and millennials more but you also need to attract the classic main audience (father, grandfather and little son/grandson)
The problem with millennials is that most baseball careers end at age 13 and then the kids lose interest in baseball until they have 4 to 5 year old kids themselves and play catch with them.
i don’t think it is that hard to figure out. I u played a sport, u are likely to follow that sport. And, in general, the regional team u grew up with, is the one you follow.
most “millenials” annoy me despite the fact im generally considered one.its unnerving to think about the 1st generation that completely lacks etiquette.
i don’t think it is that hard to figure out. I u played a sport, u are likely to follow that sport. And, in general, the regional team u grew up with, is the one you follow.
I’m a transplanted Braves fan who now roots for the Rays and attends two or three games each year (I drive about 100 miles to get to the current stadium). It is indeed discouraging to see all the Yankee and Red Sox fans at Rays home games. Retirees actually should be ashamed of themselves. When one moves to a new area one should adopt the new area’s team. That’s the way it should be.