1983 Uniform w/New BP Cap is Now An Official Alternate

[Chez]

Originally Posted by anewman35

It sort of goes both ways - yes, they're probably not going to get additional ticket sales because of 1983 uniforms or the lack of tuxedo stripes or diamond sock patches. But conversely, are they losing ticket revenue? Is there anybody here (or anywhere) who has bought or will buy fewer tickets because you don't like the uniform changes?

I understand your point and I think not. But the post to which I responded suggested that the alternate uniform will increase the liklihood of the Sox building a contender because alternate uniforms = more revenue from ticket sales. I disagree with suggestion.

[anewman35]

Originally Posted by Chez

I understand your point and I think not. But the post to which I responded suggested that the alternate uniform will increase the liklihood of the Sox building a contender because alternate uniforms = more revenue from ticket sales. I disagree with suggestion.

I get that point, but it seems like it's possible it could help and it won't hurt. Here's the rational - the fact that they are going to wear these uniforms means that they're going to get exposure for the uniforms, which means they'll sell more of them. This can lead to more exposure of the team, which can lead to more ticket sales (and if some kid loves the look, maybe they become a fan for life). Again, it probably won't really happen, but it's not going to hurt either, so what's the harm?

[Chez]

Originally Posted by anewman35

I get that point, but it seems like it's possible it could help and it won't hurt. Here's the rational - the fact that they are going to wear these uniforms means that they're going to get exposure for the uniforms, which means they'll sell more of them. This can lead to more exposure of the team, which can lead to more ticket sales (and if some kid loves the look, maybe they become a fan for life). Again, it probably won't really happen, but it's not going to hurt either, so what's the harm?

Yes, but your argument kind of assumes that the 1983 uniforms are better or "cooler" than the current uniforms. They were ok last year as a novelty and celebration of the anniversary of the 1983 team. I think our current uniforms are way better than the 1983 uniforms and it's more likely to hook a kid to be a fan for life with our current uniforms than the 1983 uniforms. But we can agree to disagree. There really is no substitue for putting a good product on the field no matter what uniforms they wear. Winning builds a fan base not uniforms (duh!).

[Milw]

Screw it, let's just pull every uniform scheme the Sox have had over the past 113 years and put them in regular rotation. Imagine all the extra merchandise sales! And nobody's going to stop going to games because of it, so what's the downside?

I'm being facetious, but only partly. Seriously, if we're going to do away with consistent branding a little, then **** it, let's go full bore.

[anewman35]

Originally Posted by Chez

Yes, but your argument kind of assumes that the 1983 uniforms are better or "cooler" than the current uniforms. They were ok last year as a novelty and celebration of the anniversary of the 1983 team. I think our current uniforms are way better than the 1983 uniforms and it's more likely to hook a kid to be a fan for life with our current uniforms than the 1983 uniforms. But we can agree to disagree. There really is no substitue for putting a good product on the field no matter what uniforms they wear. Winning builds a fan base not uniforms (duh!).

I agree with you, I think the Black/Silver standard uniforms are way better than the 1983 uniforms. However, based on the amount of 1983 stuff I see on people, many people disagree.

[Brian26]

Originally Posted by My_Sox_Summer

What organization DOESN'T do this?

I would consider the Cardinals a first-class organization. They have multiple color and logo changes.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/heritag...7626521167364/

That's a bad argument. We're talking about a kitschy early 80s Sox uniform that doesn't hold up. The Cardinals aren't wearing their late 70s/early 80s powder blue v-neck softball pullovers on a regular basis. If they were, that would be an appropriate analogy, but even those look better than the '83 Sox jersey.

[Brian26]

Originally Posted by anewman35

I agree with you, I think the Black/Silver standard uniforms are way better than the 1983 uniforms. However, based on the amount of 1983 stuff I see on people, many people disagree.

I like the '83 jersey for nostalgia purposes. I think it's a fun jersey to own and wear, but I don't want to see the team wear it semi-regularly. I was ok with the Sunday thing last year, but I'd hate to see it worn 30 times this summer.

[MarksBrokenFoot]

Originally Posted by Chez

I understand your point and I think not. But the post to which I responded suggested that the alternate uniform will increase the liklihood of the Sox building a contender because alternate uniforms = more revenue from ticket sales. I disagree with suggestion.

That wasn't what my post said. I said alternate uniforms would increase revenue, period. I only mentioned tickets in my joke about the team playing in underpants. Your picking of the nits kind of proves my point, our fan base is determined to be unhappy, so why bother trying to please them? Wear whatever increases the revenue the most so I can watch another World Series with the Sox playing, hopefully in their underpants.

[LITTLE NELL]

Could have been worse, one of these might have won the contest back after the 1981 season.

[Brian26]

This is a pretty cool video. It's the debut of the Sox uniform in the summer of 1990 with Jeff Torborg talking about it:

[FoulTerritory]

Originally Posted by anewman35

Not a single person in the entire world who actually matters cares about the lost diamond patch or the tuxedo pants stripe. The team doesn't care. The team shouldn't care. It would be a problem if the team DID care about such incredibly minor things.

Interesting post. I'm not sure what it means to be a person who "actually matters in the world." I hadn't been certain if I matter, but thanks for clarifying that my liking of the diamond sock logo confirms that I do not, in fact, matter in this world.

Also, you say that the team shouldn't care about this logo and that they shouldn't care about any such minor things? Isn't that the entire job of a marketing department . . . to make sure the uniforms and such are attractive and the ballpark experience is enjoyable? Aren't these exact "minor details" the reason that we have Brooks Boyer?

Please sir. I need someone who matters to enlighten me further.

[Chez]

Originally Posted by MarksBrokenFoot

That wasn't what my post said. I said alternate uniforms would increase revenue, period. I only mentioned tickets in my joke about the team playing in underpants. Your picking of the nits kind of proves my point, our fan base is determined to be unhappy, so why bother trying to please them? Wear whatever increases the revenue the most so I can watch another World Series with the Sox playing, hopefully in their underpants.

Just because I don't share your opinion doesn't make me "unhappy" or "toxic." It's a message board. Opinions are welcome. And I am happy, dammit!

[anewman35]

Originally Posted by FoulTerritory

Interesting post. I'm not sure what it means to be a person who "actually matters in the world." I hadn't been certain if I matter, but thanks for clarifying that my liking of the diamond sock logo confirms that I do not, in fact, matter in this world.

Also, you say that the team shouldn't care about this logo and that they shouldn't care about any such minor things? Isn't that the entire job of a marketing department . . . to make sure the uniforms and such are attractive and the ballpark experience is enjoyable? Aren't these exact "minor details" the reason that we have Brooks Boyer?

Please sir. I need someone who matters to enlighten me further.

It's fine to like the Diamond Sock logo. I like the Diamond Sock logo. But the White Sox should not care at all if I like it or you like it, they should do what they think is the best for the TEAM, and that means ignoring opinions of one or two people. They aren't just making **** up - they have surveys and research, and that must show that for whatever reason the Diamond Sock patch is not the best thing for the team's branding. If Brooks Boyer had decided that, but then a few people e-mailed him to complain and he changed his mind, then, yes, I think that would be a problem - he's not only marketing to the WSI Superfan (and he's probably marketing less to us, because we're already hooked), he's marketing to the average person.

[Milw]

Originally Posted by anewman35

It's fine to like the Diamond Sock logo. I like the Diamond Sock logo. But the White Sox should not care at all if I like it or you like it, they should do what they think is the best for the TEAM, and that means ignoring opinions of one or two people. They aren't just making **** up - they have surveys and research, and that must show that for whatever reason the Diamond Sock patch is not the best thing for the team's branding. If Brooks Boyer had decided that, but then a few people e-mailed him to complain and he changed his mind, then, yes, I think that would be a problem - he's not only marketing to the WSI Superfan (and he's probably marketing less to us, because we're already hooked), he's marketing to the average person.

In theory, you are absolutely right. I think the point of frustration for many of us is that we don't actually believe that Brooks and his team AREN'T just making **** up. Or, at the very least, I don't believe that, if they are making these decisions based on data, that they are in fact interpreting the data correctly.

We'll never know the truth, of course, but every season I become more and more convinced that the Sox marketing team doesn't know what they're doing.

[FoulTerritory]

Originally Posted by anewman35

They aren't just making **** up - they have surveys and research

And yet, they seem to have little intuition.