Economic Analysis of Professional Baseball

The Economic Status of Professional Baseball By: Matthew Sargent AMS 310X: American Culture and Baseball December 12, 2013 There is little debate that baseball is “America’s pastime”. From rural towns to urban areas, from small children to old men, across the United States baseball is a game that has been passionately played and followed by people of all ages, races and religions. Baseball’s vital involvements in American cultural history and evolution have engrained it into American history forever. This aspect of baseball separates it from other sports leagues and truly legitimizes its label as America’s pastime. Although baseball’s status as America’s pastime is relatively unquestioned, recent trends in the professional sports industry show that baseball is growing slower than other professional sports in America. While the Major League Baseball association still reports an average increase in revenue amongst its teams every year, it is proportionately not growing at the rate of some of the other professional sports leagues in the United States. This brings up the question, with baseball’s loss of market share is it becoming merely America’s pastime? Since popularity and interest in the sports entertainment industry are statistically reflected by revenue, team valuation, television ratings and other quantitive statistics, they will be used to show whether the game of baseball is growing or dying. The statistical trends of the sports entertainment industry regarding both individual teams and the overall sports leagues will show the sports preferences of the American public and will allow me to draw conclusions on the cultural implications of their sports preferences. The Minnesota market is a perfect market for comparing sports teams since they have an NFL, MLB, NHL and NBA team. This situation is ideal because the sports entertainment market is essentially full in this particular setting. It also is a city in which all of the teams are considered medium cap teams, unlike a place such as New York where the Yankees are worth $2.3 billion which is far higher than the league average $744 team valuation (Forbes). The Minnesota Wild, Minnesota Vikings and Minnesota Twins are the hockey, football and baseball teams based in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area in Minnesota. In terms of team valuation, the Vikings and Twins have both seen a rise over the last decade. (Forbes). However, The Vikings have consistently remained above the Twins in the team valuation category. The Minnesota Twins were valued at $127 million in 2002 (Forbes). Their team valuation rose 28.65% between 2002 and 2005 when it rose to $178 million (Forbes). In 2002 the Viking’s team value was $437 (Forbes). By 2005 it had increased 33.6% to $658 million (Forbes). As shown above, in the early to mid-2000’s the Viking’s team value was both higher overall, and rose at a faster rate than the Twin’s. The more contemporary data is skewed as a result of the recent diminishing Viking fan base in the Minnesota area. This decrease in fan support is mainly due to the owner Zygmunt Wilf public contemplation on the thought of moving the team to Los Angeles over the past few years. As shown through baseball’s declining growth rate, it makes sense that older people would have a higher proportion of baseball fans than the younger generation. The population of Minnesota over the age of 45 is rapidly growing while the population of those under 45 is declining (U.S. Census Bureau). When the theory that baseball is followed by proportionately older people than younger people is applied to Minnesota it would make sense that in order to remain profitable that the Minnesota Viking’s move to the state with the largest population in the country where the youth population is increasing faster than any other age demographic (U.S. Census Bureau). The Minnesota Wild actually had a team value higher than the Twins in 2002 with a team valuation of $139 million dollars (Forbes). Over the next few years the Wild’s team value remained fairly constant, due to the strike in 2005. In 2006 the Wild’s team value was still $139 million and was surpassed by the Twins who had a value of $216 million by that point (Forbes). By 2009 the Wild’s value had raised 39.95% to $217 million (Forbes). Over the same duration the Twins had a slightly lower growth rate of 39.3% (Forbes). This fraction of a difference is much more significant when it is taken in to consideration that in this 3 year duration the Twins announced the construction plans for Target Field (Forbes). This new stadium played a large role in the increase of team valuation because Target Field is the second largest piece of the Twins team value behind the estimated worth of the Minnesota market (Forbes). Another factor that must be taken into consideration is the proximity of Minnesota. Minnesota’s location in the northern mid-west is a large reason why hockey is so popular there. The abundance of lakes in Minnesota in addition to the long winter season allows perfect conditions for people to participate in watching and playing hockey for a longer amount of time than in other NHL cities. This factor contributes to the unique hockey culture of Minnesota that I can attest to having resided in the suburbs of the St. Paul/ Minneapolis area in Minnesota. Revenue is another area that helps measure the popularity of baseball in comparison to other sports in the sports entertainment market. This business-based statistic measures the overall amount of income the organization brings in from television contracts, attendance, branding and other business ventures. The difference between revenue and team valuation is that a team value takes other factors into account with different proportional value than revenue. For example, the Yankees are worth $2.3 billion which is almost quadruple of the the Twins $578 million, but the Yankees bring in a revenue of $471 million which is still higher than the Twins’ $214 million, but not by nearly as much proportionally to the discrepancy in the team valuations of both teams (Forbes). The Twins revenue has seen a pretty consistent rise in the last decade. In 2002 the Twins brought in revenue of $75 million (Forbes). By 2005 the Twins revenue had risen 26.47% to $102 million (Forbes). The Vikings had a similar rise in revenue over the same time duration. In 2002 the Viking’s team revenue was $121 million (Forbes). Over the next three years it increased 26.2% to $164 million dollars (Forbes). It is evident here that the Minnesota Vikings have had a much higher revenue than the Minnesota Twins over the year, but have actually grown slower in this particular three year time period. This differs from industrywide trends, as the average league growth rate of the NFL is higher than that of the MLB. One reason for this difference is that during this duration the Twins won their division in three out of the four years (2002, 2003, 2004), while the Vikings only made the playoffs one of the four years and finished with sub-par records in two of the four years. Another reason for this differentiation from league average numbers is the loss of Viking’s franchise players Randy Moss through a trade and the Dante Culpepper to a season ending knee injury. One year after Dante Culpepper led the Vikings to the playoffs for the first time in years they had lost their two franchise players, had an in-season incident involving 17 of their players at a party involving prostitutes (of which 4 were eventually charged), missed the playoffs and fired their head coach. It’s safe to say that 2005 was definitely a bad year for the Vikings and it showed on their bottom line. In the future the Viking’s revenue will rise as a result of the brand new stadium that has been announced and will be partially financed by both the state of Minnesota and the City of Minneapolis (Forbes). This has started to affect team valuation, along with the Viking’s post-season appearance and best record in years during the 2012 season, but has yet to affect the actual revenue of the organization. In 2008 the Twins recorded $149 million in revenue, which was an increase of 31.54% (Forbes). Between 2008 and 2011 the Twins revenue rose 30% to $213 million (Forbes). This rise has been widely attributed to the Twins’ new stadium and 45% increase in ticket prices (Forbes). In the future the Vikings will bring in a higher amount of revenue as a result of the new stadium that is planned. This has already started to affect team value, but until the stadium is actually finished and open it will not affect revenue much. Over the last 5 years league revenue growth rate (CAGR) in the professional sports industry has been dominated by the NFL and NHL. The NFL has a league revenue growth rate of 6.3% (WR Hambrecht + Co.). This is topped only by the NHL, which comes in with a CAGR of 6.4% (WR Hambrecht + Co.). The MLB is behind those two leagues and has a CAGR of 4.8% (WR Hambrecht + Co.) . So clearly the MLB is growing, but the concern is that it is not growing as fast as other professional sports and therefore losing market share in the professional sports industry. This loss of market share is a direct result of changes in consumer interest, and attendance which obviously are the biggest factors in determining revenue. These changes in consumer interest are due to changes in the American population’s beliefs, habits and interests. Overall, the loss in market share that professional baseball is experiencing is a direct result of change in American culture. If you look at the team valuation in the MLB as well as the league revenue, it is evident that when compared to the NFL the MLB is behind in both categories. The average league revenue in 2011 for the NFL was $8, 867 million (WR Hambrecht + Co.). The MLB trailed at $6,464 million, while the NHL comes in last at $3,090 million (WR Hambrecht + Co.). With the growth in revenue explored above it seems inevitable that if current trends continue the NFL will maintain its dominance in the professional sports industry, and the NHL will eventually catch the MLB in terms of revenue if it maintains a revenue growth rate of 6.4%. In terms of team valuation in the NFL, the leagues average team valuation is $1,036 million (Forbes). The MLB trails behind at $523 million, while the NHL comes in last once again at $240 million (Forbes). As revenue rises at a faster rate in the NHL team value will increase, and eventually if growth continues at its current pace, the NHL will pass the MLB in popularity. While in theory this makes sense, the only problem is that this theory relies on the maintenance of the NHL’s 6.4% revenue growth rate and the lack of growth in both the NFL and MLB. With the rising growth rate of the NHL the MLB is certainly losing market share. As more people spend money on attending NHL games, NHL merchandise and watch the NHL on TV, the market share of hockey will rise at baseball’s expense. The United States consumer population is faced with a decision every time they walk into a sports store, or have the time to attend a sporting event. As a consumer financial resources are not unlimited and the disposable income and time available to spend in the sports entertainment market remains relatively constant. When a consumer wants to buy a hat sporting their favorite sports team logo, they have to make the decision between what sport/team they want to support the most and as the NHL and NFL become more popular, less consumers are making the decision to buy MLB sports merchandise and attend MLB baseball games in comparison to NHL and NFL sports merchandise and sporting events. Television Ratings are a major statistic in determining the growth of various sports in the sports entertainment industry. Major League Baseball has actually declined in television ratings in comparison with both the NFL and NBA (WR Hambrecht + Co.). This is shown by the 2012 World Series, which was the least viewed ever averaging just 12.7 million viewers during the Giants' four-game sweep of the Tigers (Business Insider). The last eight years have produced the seven least-watched World Series on record (NY Times). The NBA Finals on the other hand, averaged 17.5 million viewers per game (Business Insider). Also, in 2012, the NBA’s regular season ratings on ABC were about double of the Major League Baseball regular season ratings on Fox (WR Hambrecht + Co.). For multiple years the World Series television viewership ratings have continued to fall. There are multiple league-wide statistics that can show the overall decline of popularity in the Major League Baseball market. For example, between 2006 and 2011 regular season attendance has declined for the NFL by -.4% and the NBA by -.3%, while the MLB’s regular season attendance declined by almost double the rate at -.7% (WR Hambrecht + Co.). The NHL’s attendance actually increased .2% over this particular five year duration (WR Hambrecht + Co.). According to this source baseball’s attendance is not only declining, but declining at a faster rate than the other three major sports combined (WR Hambrecht + Co.). Those who disagree that the MLB is declining in popularity cite the decrease in television ratings in comparison to the NHL, NBA and NFL as season based. With the NFL, NBA and NHL seasons taking place fall through winter, it makes sense that people would rather stay in their homes and be more inclined to watch television rather than do alternative activities outside. The attendance rates completely refute this claim. If people were more inclined to be outside and enjoying the weather during summer wouldn’t baseball attendance rise? Both the television and attendance ratings point to a very obvious decrease in baseball’s popularity relative to the three other major sports. Cultural change plays a very large role in the popularity and resulting profitability of a business. Throughout American history cultural changes have caused some businesses and industries to come into existence and thrive, while others are surpassed and come to an end. For example, the emergence of technology software super powers such as Apple and Microsoft was led by the entrance of the United States into the technology era in the 90’s. People like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs made millions, while other industries and businesses died. For example, the postal service has been largely replaced by email. Blockbuster is another valid example; as technology grew and the majority of the population owned computers and had access to internet service, Netflix began to offer movies online from the convenience of your home. Why would someone spend the time to drive to Blockbuster and waste money to rent a movie they could just stream through there Netflix account for a small monthly fee? As American culture became more reliant on the internet and other services catered to the changing culture’s wants, companies like Blockbuster that used to be extremely successful failed and lost the majority, if not all of their market share. An example of a business taking advantage of a cultural change would be Ford. With the American economy booming in the roaring 20’s Henry T. Ford created his model T car creating a brand new product and industry. When Ford began to mass produce these cars and they became affordable and available to the general public, Ford suddenly became the most profitable company in the transportation industry, as the previous existing methods of transportation lost market share to Ford. This new car catered to the increasingly capitalistic American culture in the 20’s. Since the car was mass produced it was affordable for the average American if he worked hard enough, which was consistent with the idea of the American dream that was becoming stronger in the 20’s. Americans in the time were giving way to innovation and leaps in technology, this booming culture was a perfect place for new inventions such as the car. The same type of analysis can be used for why football and hockey are growing faster than baseball these days compared to in the past. As American culture changes baseball is becoming less a part of it, while other sports, especially football are rising rapidly in popularity due to the nature of the sport and it’s conduciveness to American culture. There are many reasons that have been proposed as to why baseball is relatively declining in popularity in the United States. Most of these reasons have a connection to American culture and how it has evolved over time. From baseball’s peak in the mid 1900’s to present day, changes in American culture can be both directly and indirectly connected to baseball’s decline in popularity. First and foremost is the lack of parity in the MLB. The unfairness of having big market teams like the Yankees be able to spend tons of money unregulated by a salary cap, while small market teams like the Twins are stuck with a fraction of their player expenses but still competing for the same championship just doesn’t sit well with potential viewers. Take the Baltimore Orioles for example; as a smaller market team competing in the same division as the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox, who are ranked 1st and 3rd in team value in the MLB, the Orioles are almost bound to finish at the bottom every year (Forbes). How does a market like Baltimore compete in the same division as big market teams like New York and Boston? This issue became headline news on the ESPN show SportsCenter when free agent Mark Teixeira chose to join the Yankees instead of his hometown Baltimore Orioles. Needless to say this didn’t sit too well with Baltimore fans. Unfortunately this scenario is all too familiar in the current MLB landscape and is pushing fans away from rooting for small market teams such as the Astros. This past September the Houston Astros recorded a 0.0 Nielsen rating during a game against the Cleveland Indians (Jaffe). To put that into perspective, that is under 1,000 viewers. In fact, simultaneous broadcasting of both a static football scoreboard on the NFL network, and Cosby show re-runs had a higher Neilson rating in Houston during the Astros game (Jaffe). The reason the lack of parity has such a large effect in baseball is the locality of the game. Almost every MLB game will be on local television, with very few out of market games per week. This is different from football in that there are usually 4-7 nationally televised games per week. Keith Olbermann, a sports commentator and writer for the ESPN network recently published a statistic on his show that 70% of NFL fans would watch a game their team was not in, while 50% of baseball fans will only watch their team on television (Business Insider). The current television format allows football to be a national game, with a national audience, while baseball remains a much localized game. When the lack of parity issue is applied to this format, the small market teams are hit much harder than the large cap teams because of the lack of national viewers and the lack of a fan base that enjoys watching the sport, not just their particular team. Large cap teams such as the Yankees and Red Sox however, have much larger metro area populations and have to rely less on national viewers. Sports reporter Bob Costas of the NBC network described the national implications of the disparity between large cap and small cap teams and how it is viewed on the national stage, “If Tampa Bay plays Cincinnati in the World Series, I don’t care if the series goes seven games and every game goes into extra innings, baseball is screwed… that’s not fair to the Rays or the Reds, but it’s true” (NY Times). The NFL has made a strong effort to avoid this issue. Over 40 years ago, former NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle foresaw the problems that a lack of parity in the league could present and determined that what was good for one team was good for all (ESPN). The revenue sharing that Rozelle instituted made it possible for a small market team in Green Bay to compete with teams in big markets such as New York. American society seems to be becoming less acceptable of big money entities beating up on smaller market entities. Take for example, the protests on Wall St. the past few years. The so-called 99%ers came to protest the unfair disparity in wealth between the upper class and middle class. With this trend rising in popularity in the American culture, why would more people tune into, or go to a game where big market teams are very often much better than small market teams? Frankly the national audience has no will to see the Yankees beat up on the Astros, and the Astros are losing fans and viewers that are tired of their team being so horrible and not being able to compete with big market teams in the league. Another part of American culture that supports the NHL and NFL over baseball is the increasing amount of violence in American society. From elementary school kids killing each other with M-16’s in online video games to violent television shows and movies it is very evident that American popular culture is supportive of violence. Brad Bushman, professor of communication and psychology at Ohio State University worked on a study involving the increase in the violence of movies. After his research he reported that he “found that the amount of gun violence in PG-13 films, those are films for thirteen or older, had more than quadrupled since the rating was introduced in 1985” (BBC). The more alarming statistic that the investigation revealed was that PG-13 films actually had more gun violence than films rated R, which are intended for ages 17 and over (BBC). These statistics show an alarming increase in the violence of films in American society, but also that American children and teenagers are actually shown more violence in films than adults. It seems that the audience of the PG-13 films, being largely children and teenagers, is more intrigued by the violence in films than adults and therefore filmmakers are trying to appease this demand. With the younger generation being fed more violent images, films and even partaking in online video simulations of violence it is no wonder that collision sports such as hockey and football are rising in popularity faster than the sport of baseball, in which players can go the entire game without making contact. A blogger on ESPN claims that the violence of football and hockey actually provides a stress relief to viewers that baseball simply can’t provide, “…though it may be (distasteful) for some to admit, there’s a visceral sense of gratification one gets from vicariously joining in the gridiron mayhem that baseball simply can’t duplicate” (ESPN). Video game designer and writer David Cage recently described the gaming industry as cluttered with video games based on violence and adrenaline (Barnes). This connection between adrenaline and violence is perhaps the reason that violent sports such as football and hockey are rising in popularity in comparison to a sport like baseball with minimal contact and violence. In theory the violence seen both in person and on television while watching professional football and hockey has the physiological effect of an adrenal rush in many people. For those unfamiliar with the concept of an adrenal rush, it is caused by excitement, heightened emotions and the feeling of danger. This internal physiological reaction triggers the release of the neurotransmitter adrenaline and causes increased heart rate, increased pace of respiration, as well as a sudden boost of energy, a feeling of increased strength and heightened senses (Brogaard). Essentially the felt effects of an adrenaline rush are usually deemed as positive, and very desirable. Fans of all sports and teams seem to idolize and emphasize with players, therefore even though there is no present danger to a fan when a hockey or football player is physically threatened on every play, there is an indirect feeling of heightened emotions resulting from the violent nature of the game. The decreasing attention span in America is also a reason why baseball is struggling to compete with other fast-paced sports such as hockey, basketball and football. There has been much debate about whether or not attention span in the United States is actually physiologically decreasing or is the result of an overabundance of technology, information availability and smart phones. Regardless, there is no debate that American society is faster paced than ever and with the invention of smart phones we have a world of information at our fingertips. The decrease in attention span, especially amongst America’s younger generations has served well for the NHL, NBA and NFL. Hockey for example is a fast paced sport with very few stoppages throughout each individual period. Basketball is very similar, with 4 quarters of fast paced ball movement and activity. The NFL has about 40 seconds between plays, but this time is usually filled with 2-3 replays of high speed collisions and other physical contact that keep the perceived pace of the game high to a television viewer. Baseball however is a very slow paced game. Some pitchers take a long time between pitches, and when 300 pitches are thrown in a game, that involves watching a whole lot of nothing for the television viewer. According to author Kevin Baker baseball was once celebrated for its speed in the early 1900’s. It is evident that as the pace of society picked up, so did the demand to watch sports with a faster pace. Even though football has been around for over 100 years, it didn’t surpass baseball in popularity until the age of television. Jonathon Mahler, a writer for the NY Times describes the tie between television and football in American culture, “If baseball was a game you followed, football was one you watched. Beneath the surface, it was an enormously complicated sport. But the passing, the running, the tackling? This was great television” (NY Times) The last major area that has affected the decrease in the popularity of baseball in comparison to football is gambling. From the Black Sox scandal in 1919 to Pete Rose’s infamous banning from baseball on gambling charges it seems ironic that baseball, a sport with a history of intertwinement in the gambling world, would be losing popularity due to the lack of gambling. Football easily lends itself to wagering. Team A is favored by a certain amount of points over Team B, pick a team and watch your gamble play out. Baseball however, is much more complicated to gamble on. It involves a run line, and other complicated numerical data. One must also take into account that whether someone bet on a football game at a casino, or bet a case of beer with a friend, this adds an incentive to watch to the game. The most mainstream part of sports gambling today is fantasy sports, which consists of fake drafting sports players and having your own “fantasy” team. According to Forbes, football is the most popular fantasy sport, with an estimated 8 million users. Fantasy football accounted for about $100 million in sales in 2004, while fantasy baseball brought in 20% of that at $20 million, according to estimates from the Fantasy Sports Trade Association (Forbes). One of the main reasons for this discrepancy is that the baseball season has 162 games, whereas football season has 17 games and allows fantasy users to be competitive by spending less than 15 minutes a week setting their lineup. With 8 million Americans playing fantasy football, many of which with small $5-$25 buy-ins, it makes sense for them to prioritize watching an NFL team they’re not a fan of with their fantasy football players on it, on television, rather than watching a baseball game in which they’re not a fan of either team. The NFL of course can’t sanction this, but realistically why else would they require teams to publish accurate, detailed injury reports mid-week (ESPN)? When looking at the statistical data presented above it is extremely evident that baseball is not growing as fast as football or hockey in the United States. Although baseball is losing market share in the sports entertainment industry to both of these teams, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is dying. Baseball has been a sustainable business for over 100 years and will remain a profitable industry for at least the rest of my lifetime. This sustainability is largely due to the large cap teams such as the Los Angeles Dodgers, New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox who account for a very large portion of the Major League’s value and revenue. It is important to remember that even while baseball is losing market share and becoming relatively less popular, the business is still producing revenue and continues to grow. While baseball may not be as popular as it was in the early to mid-1900s, it is still the surviving American pastime. The decrease in baseball’s market share can be attributed to the number of reasons explored throughout my research above, which can all, in turn, be linked to changes in the values, beliefs and habits of an evolving and ever changing American culture. Using the changes in American culture that have caused the decrease in baseball’s popularity over the last decade, it is possible to predict and examine the direction that American society could be heading in. With the decreased interest in baseball as a result of the lack of parity, does that mean as a society we are becoming more aware of the increasing gap between the haves and the have nots? The protests on Wall St. would certainly exemplify this progress in the socio-economic competence of our society. The decreased attention span of Americans may not be as positive of a cultural sign. Very few would debate that it’s not nice to have an abundance of technology and a mass amount of information at their fingertips, but the effects on the human attention span may be a negative sign to American culture. With people more interested in their phones and video games than in human contact, is it possible that the community will suffer? Is it possible that the younger generation suffers from a severe lack of intrapersonal skills stemming from the lack of social interaction outside of school and online video games? The recent explosion in the growth of the social networking industry that allows people to experience both voluntary and required social interaction without face to face contact would support this potential scenario. Lastly, could the rapid increase of violence in adolescence and young adult based movies result in a more violent, angry American culture? The effect that tobacco product placement has had in past movies, encouraging the vulnerable, adolescences, young adult market to replicate the actors and smoke, would suggest so. Works Cited/Consulted Barnes, Adam. "Gamers Too Focused On 'Violence & Adrenaline'" NowGamer. N.p., 6 Feb. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. Brogaard, Berit. "What Causes Adrenaline Rushes?" Livestrong.com. 6 Aug. 2010. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. Brook, Tom. "Sandy Hook and On-screen Violence." BBC. 11 Dec. 2013. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. "California QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau." California QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau. United States Department of Commerce, 27 June 2013. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. Fizel, John, Elizabeth Gustafson, and Lawrence Hadley. Baseball Economics: Current Research. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1996. Print. Futterman, Matthew. "Has Baseball's Moment Passed?." Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition 31 Mar. 2011: D11. Academic Search Premier. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. Gaines, Cork. "The Theory That Baseball Is Dying Is A Total Myth." Business Insider. N.p., 25 Oct. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. Jaffe, Jay. "Astros Draw 0.0 Nielsen." The Strike Zone. Sports Illistrated, 23 Sept. 2013. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. Kang, Peter. "Fantasy Football Vs. Fantasy Baseball." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 14 Mar. 2005. Web. 5 Dec. 2013. Mahler, Jonathon. "Is the Game Over?" New York Times. N.p., 28 Sept. 2013. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. McAdam, Sean. "Football Leaving Baseball in The dust." ESPN.com. N.p., 10 Feb. 2004. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. "Minnesota QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau." Minnesota QuickFacts from the US Census Bureau. United States Department of Commerce, 27 June 2013. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. "MLB Team Values: The Business Of Baseball." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, n.d. Web. 10 Oct. 2013. Morisette, James. "MLB: Is Baseball a Dying Sport or Is It as Strong as Ever?" Bleacher Report. N.p., 21 Apr. 2012. Web. 8 Dec. 2013. Rosner, Scott, and Kenneth L. Shropshire. The Business of Sports. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett, 2004. Print. "World Series Attendance." Sports Business Daily. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. WR Hambrecht + Co. "The U.S. Professional Sports Market & Franchise Value Report 2012." (2012): Web. 5 Oct. 2013.