Indians sales staff faced down big-time pressure

March 4, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Late last September, the Indianapolis Indians stared down the barrel of financial disaster.

Following the 2009 season, three-fourths of the team’s sponsorship deals expired, and in this economic climate that’s enough to make just about any sports business administrator hit the panic button.

But Indians officials stood in the batter’s box, dug in their cleats and didn’t blink. Instead, the team’s front office rolled up their sleeves and went to work.

They re-signed the vast majority of those sponsors and enough new ones to see a 5 percent sponsorship sales increase this year. Ticket sales also look positive a little more than a month before the season opens.

Among the Indians, there was never any doubt. In fact, the team kept with its philosophy of investing in Victory Field.

Since it opened in 1996, the Indians have poured $4 million in improvements to the ball park sitting on the west edge of downtown. Anyone in baseball will tell you no minor league team spends more on keeping its ballpark pristine than the Indians.

Despite the rocky economy and an uncertain future, the Indians stuck with that strategy. Instead of being detrimentally tight-fisted, the minor league affiliate of MLB's Pittsburgh Pirates dropped $600,000 into a new video board on the left field wall and $125,000 into much-needed front office renovations, including a re-vamped conference room and trophy display area. Indians officials also initiated a host of game promotions and specials to enhance the experience for fans during Indians home games.

Remember, the Indians are no major league franchise. The team’s financial performance has been steady, but their margins are thin. It takes solid management to churn out a profit near or slightly above $1 million year-after-year. Indians' total operating revenue for 2009 was only $8.5 million, less than one-fourth the operating budget for the Indianapolis Colts or Indiana Pacers.

It would be oh so easy to miscalculate by $10,000 here and $100,000 there and miss the mark and end up in the red. But for decades, the Indians never have. That’s probably why Indians stock trades as high as $25,000 per share.

So, even when times looked tough, like during this off-season, Indians management led by Chairman Max Schumacher and General Manger Cal Burleson never waivered.

And come the end of the team’s fiscal year Sept. 30, I’m sure they’ll register a solid score.

To read more on the Indians’ off-season initiatives and ramp-up for the 2010 season, see the March 8 IBJ print edition.

  • That's a lot of selling
    As someone in sales, I can tell you that's a dang lot of selling. No matter what economy or under what conditions and no matter what business sector in. Renegotiating 3/4ths of your deals and coming up 5% ahead of last year is pretty darn good.
  • Odd
    It's odd in sports business practices to set up your sponsorships to have so many expire during the same year. A number of NBA franchises have been bitten by this. The Pacers for one, had bunches of suite leases expire the same year (2008) and had to really scramble to get those filled. The Pacers didn't have nearly the success ratio the Indians did. Anyway, you have to hand it to the Tribe staff for pulling this off at a less than ideal time. I bet they're trying to better stagger their deals now.
  • Odd?
    My take on contract expiration is that most of it depends on the clients wants/needs. I'm sure every business would like to stagger renewals but that's not always easily done, especially in the economy. Getting any multi-year deal in this climate is a win. Good timing Anthony on a Tribe post, best weather day around here in a long while.
  • Not so odd, Conseco opened in 1999 or 10 years ago. it might be smart to stagger contracts to expire in multi year groups.

    But in the Pacers defense, who would have seen the perfect storm of the Artest situation, the recession and the emergence of the Colts. All have taken their toll on the interest in the Pacers. They need to get a high draft pick and try to build a team around him.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. Liberals do not understand that marriage is not about a law or a right ... it is a rite of religous faith. Liberals want "legal" recognition of their homosexual relationship ... which is OK by me ... but it will never be classified as a marriage because marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. You can gain / obtain legal recognition / status ... but most people will not acknowledge that 2 people of the same sex are married. It's not really possible as long as marriage is defined as one man and one woman.

  2. That second phrase, "...nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens..." is the one. If you can't understand that you lack a fundamental understanding of the Constitution and I can't help you. You're blind with prejudice.

  3. Why do you conservatives always go to the marrying father/daughter, man/animal thing? And why should I keep my sexuality to myself? I see straights kissy facing in public all the time.

  4. I just read the XIV Amendment ... I read where no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property ... nor make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunitites of citizens ... I didn't see anything in it regarding the re-definition of marriage.

  5. I worked for Community Health Network and the reason that senior leadership left is because they were not in agreement with the way the hospital was being ran, how employees were being treated, and most of all how the focus on patient care was nothing more than a poster to stand behind. Hiring these analyst to come out and tell people who have done the job for years that it is all being done wrong now...hint, hint, get rid of employees by calling it "restructuring" is a cheap and easy way out of taking ownership. Indiana is an "at-will" state, so there doesn't have to be a "reason" for dismissal of employment. I have seen former employees that went through this process lose their homes, cars, is very disturbing. The patient's as well have seen less than disireable care. It all comes full circle.