The Economic Status ofProfessional 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.