Ken, i liked your post and the commentary on Barbara's post. I was thinking about the high salaries of stars in both corporate and sport world. Its not just simple supply-demand. It seems to go in opposite direction from my experience, the more the star players in the game the higher the price or stake. In India, cricket is widely popular (just as NFL) and with the increasing number of games player per years and hence more star players emerging; the money that cricketers get is only increasing. The same goes in the corporate world. Companies always need more and more star players to increase the stake of the game.
Thanks for the complement on my last blog and your take on professional sports. I have a different view on the NFL which I will share as it relates to materials costs in the supply chain.
I think players’ salaries impact profits but not ticket prices. As long as the NFL can fill stadiums, the prices will be high. What’s good about the NFL is that they can fill their seats and attract television viewers better than any other sport. They can do this because they create value for their customers. They constantly study the game and change the rules of play so that the offence and defence remains in balance thereby maintaining customer interest and game excitement. Their actions are all real world driven with the customer first. Changing the rules is regulation for the good.
Players’ salaries are high, probably at a level that is undeserved, but the NFL pays these salaries in cash. Their cash is a product of real world value creation unlike CEO stock compensation of the corporate expectations world. The NFL players are not incented to cheat or manipulate outcomes as their motivation and behaviour is aligned with the customer; they are motivated to win the game not effect the points spread.
I too believe professional athletes are overpaid and would like to see lower ticket prices so that average families with kids could go to more games; but I do not equate ticket price with cost. You are right when you say price is determined by the market and, at Freebenchmarking.com, we see a wide range in market prices as different companies buy the exact same electronic components at widely varying prices sometimes different by many times. The cost of making the components purchased by customers isn’t different but the price sure is. Some companies manage the market price while others live with it.
This being said, I don’t know how to bring down the cost of professional sports tickets! Wish I did.
There is a notion that seems to be shared by progressives and staunch capitalists alike that I have a problem with. It's said from time to time that corporations are mandated to return value to the shareholder regardless of what may or may not be legal (this is one of the main points in the documentary, "The Corporation" that came out some years ago).
Virtually all states where articles of incorporation are drawn up require the officers incorporating the business to state its purpose. Invariably, the purpose is stated as "To comply with the laws of such and such a jurisdiction."
This practice is standard and seems curious to me. However I just attribute it as being just one more layer in the legal boilerplate. In any case it seems to refute the ideas that the law ends at the receptionists desk.
Ken--great blog! I tried to discuss sports and business in a previous blog (How many do-overs...) with minimal success. The point about the NFL is perfect--professional sports in general clearly does not care about customers, otherwise ticket prices would not be so high. They are high because players demand insane salaries, because the "market will bear it..." I hope professional sports sees the equivalent of Occupy Wall Street, where fans just refuse to pay ticket prices and force a sea change.
I can't say I'm optimistic, though, season tickets for Boston sports continue to be something you get only if a ticket-holder passes on
Ken, when majority of the wealth or money is getting concentrating to some particular category of peoples, others can get frustrated. We know most of the corporate are handling majority of the wealth, where somebody’s profit or asset is more than nation’s wealth or per year income. In such cases instead of doing something for the public, such companies are trying to get more benefit from the government to increase their profit. This can be surly a frustrating reason for common peoples and those who are below poverty line.
Thank you for this entertaining post. I am a firm believer in the real world and wish that companies would spend more of their time attending to it rather that pursuing the quarter by quarter folly of maximizing shareholder value.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.