12 Comments
User's avatar
Eben Novy-Williams's avatar

This is a rare Big 4 sports critique where I feel like my automatic "the NHL actually does this better" canned response is un-usable!

Philip Orlins's avatar

I'm not condoning the decisions, but it's not thought of as a zero-sum game. The theory is that by using the digital replacements they can customize the advertising to different markets (including international) and create more value by targeting the ads than they can with a single advertiser. Essentially creating a larger than zero-sum to split up.

Eben Novy-Williams's avatar

Phil, do you think we'll ever see a higher-priced subscriber tier with the digital ads turned off?

Philip Orlins's avatar

Truly not my area of expertise. Just my opinion, I think it's difficult to get people to pay extra to avoid a visual annoyance or inconvenience. I think some people will pay for to avoid commercials, pre-rolls ... anything that takes time. I don't see a lot of people dipping into their pockets to avoid larger signage.

James Burke's avatar

Excellent breakdown. My biggest frustration is when broadcasts cover the back of the visitors mound with a shoddy brown box. It's so distracting.

They're also playing a zero-sum game by overlaying digital ads. If they haven't already, sponsors are going to catch on that they're only ever getting half the audience.

Jacob Feldman's avatar

Ya the mound is a classic example of one of those things you never notice—and then once you do, you see it everywhere.

And agreed on the accounting front, though I fear the follow-up to any drop in pricing would be finding more placements to make up for that...

5 Boro Baseball's avatar

I find Globe Life’s backdrop so much more distracting somehow. I prefer the sea of faces rather than like 4 groups of ticketholders with deep pockets. Sometimes they even have fans wearing shirts with ads in those boxes!

Great article and love the interactive graphics!

Jacob Feldman's avatar

Thanks! Yes would def take a packed stands, but I'm still putting club seats > billboard in my rankings.

Michael Vainisi's avatar

I could better live with the ads if they weren't degrading the center-field camera framing. As you so skillfully detail, these cameras are now zoomed way out to create more empty space to fill with ads, and it's a pretty ugly viewing experience with the pitcher and catcher looking so small. Doesn't really present baseball as an exciting sport.

Jacob Feldman's avatar

Yes! I don't know exactly how much ad exposure plays into those decisions, but look at how much the Orioles players shrunk! https://mlbbackstops.netlify.app/#orioles

Grant Marn's avatar

I've noticed these for some time and have a theory that they and crowd seating behind home plate have made it more difficult for pitchers to locate the glove target coming out of their motion. Today it's way too busy behind home plate compared with games of the past. A jumbled mess that makes glove location nearly impossible with corresponding less accuracy.

Compare hitters who are required to have the benefit of a solid background in center to pick up the ball from the pitcher...the "Batter's Eye." The same would benefit pitchers.

Jacob Feldman's avatar

I love the idea of creating a Pitcher's Eye (or a Viewer's Eye lol)