Los Angeles Angels of Anahiem
DMZ · January 5, 2005 at 7:36 pm · Filed Under General baseball
In response to recent changes —
I will not be calling the Angels this until we have to.
Thank you for your understanding during this difficult time,
Washington State Derek Zumsteg of Long Beach, Presented by Anchor Steam
Comments
81 Responses to “Los Angeles Angels of Anahiem”
USSM uses and recommends
Umm, until Bud Selig and Bob Dupuy show up at my house dressed as stormtroopers threatening to saw off my testicles with a blunt spoon, I’m never going to call them that, and I’ll never feel that I have to.
I never got over calling them the California Angels.
P.S. uh, Dave, what if Bud and Bob were dressed as, say, nurses, instead of stormtroopers…
Just curious. I’ll be quiet now.
Originally, they were the Los Angeles Angels. That sounds a lot better to me than “California Angels” or “Anaheim Angels.” Moreno has been trying to change the Anaheim to “LA” for a while, and it seems to me that the “of Anaheim” is a weak attempt at a compromise with the Anaheim city officials who were upset with the idea of the name change. I think the intention is for the Angels to be the “LA Angels,” and all the uproar surrounding the weird name is missing that point. The only reason the AL West has a team officially from a weak LA suburb is because the team was owned by Disney, also from Anaheim.
I think I might be the only person who thinks this is cool, but Los Angeles Angels is a great name. The “Angels” makes a lot more sense next to “Angeles,” and many pro teams are named after cities that are much farther away from their stadia than Los Angeles is from Anaheim. Besides, the standings page looks better with teams from LA, Oakland, Seattle, and Texas than it does with a team from Anaheim. Maybe I’m the only one…
By the way, I WAS assuming that the point was to kind of ignore the “of Anaheim” appendage.
I simply don’t understand how they think adding L.A. to their name is going to change anything. Their obviously bitter that the Dodgers always draw higher attendances. But what kind of person is going to see the new name and actually start coming to games because of it?!!
“Oh, look! Los Angeles Angels! I’ve been a Dodger fan but it looks like L.A. actually has two teams! I better check out these ‘Angels’”.
what is wrong with people?!
…and I’m assuming they changed it to try and drive up attendance…
The the angels Angels of Anaheim.
No, just no. And most names that end in “of (city)” tend to suck. Hard.
OK, obviously it was an advertising move, and “of Anaheim” is dumb. But if the change does happen, i bet it will only ever show up on their letterhead. They want to be the Los Angeles Angels, which they were back when they started, and which sounds a hell of a lot better than Anaheim Angels, which they were only ever called for the sake of bringing more people to Disneyland.
This story has so many weird sidebars:
1. On the one hand, it’s not the Irving Cowboys, the Pontiac Lions, the New Jersey Jets or the Foxboro Patriots. There’s no huge precedent for naming a team after the community in which they actually reside.
2. On the other hand, the stadium IS in Anaheim, and I don’t see a good reason to kick the city’s civic pride in the teeth by taking away that name while still requesting their police and fire support, as well as utilities, taxes and other services.
3. On the third hand, how does this help marketing? It’s still one hell of an obnoxious drive from the actual city of Los Angeles to Anaheim … or, frankly, anywhere in the metropolitan region outside Orange County. There’s no easy well to sell the rest of Southern California on THAT.
4. On the fourth hand, the name is ridiculous, and people will never get past the ridiculousness of it.
This is just stupid. It would be like the Seattle Mariners of Bellevue, or some other suburb. Just Stupid.
Either Los Angels Angels or Anaheim Angels make your choice.
I would take Seattle Mariners of Bellevue over Bellevue Mariners. (Just ignore the ‘of,’ man.)
the silly thign is them trying to add LA to expand their market. Anaheim is 26 miles from LA, it is a different City
Jim Street’s goof of the day taken from: http://seattle.mariners.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sea/news/sea_news.jsp?ymd=20050105&content_id=928026&vkey=news_sea&fext=.jsp
The foursome of Sexson, Boone, Reese and Beltran gives the Mariners one of the most seasoned infields in the American League.
We signed Carlos Beltran to play 3rd? Two things I didn’t know! Good job Street!
#8/J:
That’s funny, I didn’t even think of that. “The Los” anything is redundant (for instance, the Los Angeles Dodgers). “The Los Angeles Angels” doubly so… the the angels angels.
Anaheim isn’t a suburb of Los Angeles. It’s a different city, different county, different world. It’s closer to having a team in Bellingham call itself the Seattle mariners then Bellevue.
If the Anaheim really bothered someone that much, then go back to California Angels. But to horn in on the Los Angeles market when there is already a team there is silly.
It’s a patently ridiculous name.
The big question, really, is “Will the media go along?”
I remember a few years ago, the Denver Post refused to recognize that Mile High Stadium had changed its name to Invesco Field, on grounds of aesthetic purity, but quietly dropped the boycott a few months later for mysterious reasons. The fan boycott faltered quickly in its wake.
DMZ..Right on who cares they are the Angels. Unfortunatly better than M’s.
Unless M’s sign Beltran. Levels the field regardless of budget this year. M’s need to play fast catchup as better minds that run this site know.So many reasons it is the truth.
I don’t think this is to increase stadium attendance, so much as for TV purposes. Actually, Anaheim ranks 3rd in attendance in MLB (just slightly behind the Dodgers).
(See: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/attendance )
While it may be an obnoxious drive, many baseball fans rarely actually go to the stadium, but only watch on TV (I am one, because there is no baseball near me.)
However, the name is wishy-washy and likely to tick more people off I think than it attracts.
7 years at 15 million a year should prove to be serious. High because more than Vlad..who else is close as comparison?
# 20 is reffering to Carlos Beltran. Front Office should feel obligated to deliver him to M’s fans that support the huge revenue. Fans should not be placated by a few good moves after years of apathy
Better: The Los Angeles Baseball Team Formerly Known as the Anaheim Angels.
Anchor Steam. Now that’s a tasty beer.
Even with the Angels tacking “of Anaheim” to the end of their new name, I think the city of Anaheim has a pretty strong case for breach of contract. I hope they win, it’s pretty shady on the part of the Angels. Then the city of Anaheim can say “Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Moreno!” and cackle gleefully while collecting their settlement.
No one else hears “Disneyland Angels” when they hear “Anaheim Angels?” The name changed when Disney bought the team and gave the team a periwinkle cartoon logo.
If the Angels want to capitalize on a new marketing scheme and enhance their name recognition, the answer is obvious — The “O.C.” Angels. Fox will have no choice but to air their games every week.
Think of it this way:
1. How many people in Seattle would want to wear jerseys that said “Bellevue” in it, if the Mariners were actually located on the Eastside? At the same time, how many people in Bellevue wear Mariners jerseys, hats, and otherwise associate themselves with Seattle? My point is that people won’t actually come to the stadium from LA just because the team changed its name, but people in LA are now more likely to buy merchandise and otherwise support the team, while people in OC probably won’t abandon the team because of the name change. It’s kind of like Hillary Clinton getting on the Armed Services committee and coming out strong against illegal immigration — she is appealing to people on the other side, and it’s not like her “base” is going to jump ship to the other side.
2. It’s also for TV and other national exposure reasons (including the merchandising angle I alluded to above … junior high kids in Fresno, Bakersfield, Utah, or some other place without a clear association to a local team are a lot more likely to purchase LA merchandise than Anaheim merchandise. Compare merchandise sales of the Nets to the Knicks.
I think the best possible outcome, and probably the one that the Angels organization is hoping for anyway, is that people will simply drop the compromise, afterthought, cobbled-together, “of Anaheim” steer manure and just call them the “Los Angeles Angels.” Names get shortened colloquially all the time, and this one will most certainly be. When’s the last time you heard someone not paid to do so refer to the “Bank of America Arena at Hec Edmundson Pavillion?” When have you last complained about the traffic on the “Governor Albert D. Rosellini Floating Bridge at Evergreen Point?”
Hey, I happened to like it. It’s THE historic baseball name in that area after all – the LA Angels were the PCL team until the Dodgers moved into town in ‘58 (I mean naming them Hollywood Stars would be even more of a stretch). Of course when they played at Wrigley Field (home of Herman Munster’s Dodgers tryout with Leo Duroucher) and later Chavez Ravine prior to 1966 that was their original name in the American League.
As an outsider this whole portrayal of LA County vs Orange County as a bitter civic rivalry seems as ludicrous as portraying the Oregon / Oregon State Civil War as a bitter rivalry. Or people in Tacoma whining when the PCL team was renamed the Rainiers.
At least they haven’t named a franchise after a Disney movie like the NHL did. Or named a franchise after a failed Boeing product like the NBA Supersonics were.
Mmmmm….Anchor Steam.
I’m going to call them, uh, the Los Angeles Angels in the Outfield. Yeah. Blame Steve Finley.
I like the name. Why suck up to just one city if you can suck up to both?
I grew up in Orange County about 5 miles from Angels Stadium. My mom from NY followed the Dodgers to L.A. and has been a fan for 60 years. Orange Countians HATE L.A. and vice versa – they are two totally separate worlds, like L.A. and the Bay area. The annual “freeway series” was always a big hate-in; rooting for the Dodgers at Angel Stadium could be detrimental to my health (but we did it anyways, quietly). Seems to me that the new Angels management doesn’t know much about their fans and their area’s “culture” – seems guaranteed to piss everyone off, OC’ers and L.A.’ers. Me, I hate the stupid Angels *and* OC – I hope this move helps them lose a few fans! I am looking forward to the Mariners giving them repeated asskickings in 2005!
New Yorkers disdain New Jerseyites too — at least, the more obnoxious New Yorkers do. That doesn’t make them “totally separate worlds” any more than SF and the East Bay or LA and Anaheim. Obviously they are related, and obviously there are distinctions. If Anaheim has nothing to do with Los Angeles, and is not a suburb of Los Angeles, where does all their attendance come from? Just Orange County?
The name change is silly, but not because it includes “Los Angeles” in the name. Everyone has always — sensibly — considered it an LA market team. Do the Angels games get front page full-story coverage in the sports section of the LA Times? I’ll be stunned if they don’t.
well, the new england patriots are obviously trying to promote themselves as a regional team, so i suggest the angels call themselves “the american league team west of arlington and south of oakland in anaheim, which is close to los angeles angels”.
it gets even better… from today’s wire:
“The city of Anaheim asked a judge to block the Angels from adding Los Angeles to their name. The suit filed yesterday in Orange County Superior Court asked for a temporary restraining order against the use of the name “Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim.” City spokesman John Nicoletti said a judge was expected to rule on the request tomorrow.
Anaheim officials claim the name violates a stadium-lease agreement that has provided nearly $30 million in public subsidies to renovate the club’s ballpark. Anaheim argues that the change hurts its ability to market itself as a tourist destination — a key issue in a city that depends on a hotel-room tax as its largest source of income.
The Angels said the name change, which was announced Monday, is intended to attract more fans and advertisers, and eventually more lucrative broadcast contracts, by emphasizing the team’s connection to the nation’s second-largest media market. Club officials have said they believe the name change is legal and is necessary to generate more revenue for a club with the third-highest payroll in baseball.”
Five words:
Oriole Park at Camden Yards.
(OK, just a few more) It’s not unprecidented, even in the AL, let alone baseball. Not *exactly* the same thing, but it’s only a story because Anahiem wants a few minutes in the spotlight, and nobody else can help commenting on a controversy.
Hahahahaha. That’s almost as bad as the city of Napavine…a little town off I-5 at exit 68 whose main source of income is revenue generated by speeding tickets.
Having lived in OC for 36 years, I can definitely say yes, LA and OC are two culturally separate worlds. OC is a Republican bastian; LA is strongly Dem, for example. Me and my hubby had several jobs in LA while living east, and the differences were painfully apparent; we felt like outcasts in LA. And I would have trouble believing that there was a strong LA fan base for the Angels, partly because the freeway system would make travelling to Anaheim from LA very difficult. Also partly because LA’ers wouldn’t cross the “Orange Curtain” out of disdain. The rest of the US may consider OC part of the greater LA area geographically, but the folks there don’t feel integrated. Don’t get me wrong – I hate both groups of plastic phonies!
I think Moreno made a lousy decision, here.
The agreement with Anaheim requires that the name of the team be changed to include “Anaheim” no later than the start of 1997. They did that – the team switched from the California Angels to the Anaheim Angels prior to 1997. That part of the deal has been satisfied.
For Moreno to be consistent, I think he needed to drop Anaheim from the name entirely while still claiming that he breached no contracts. By leaving Anaheim in in such an awkward way, it’s a sort of de facto admission that he’s still trying abide by the Anaheim deal.
I think he has a stronger legal case if he simply claims that the terms of the Anaheim deal have been met, and are not perpetual. By leaving Anaheim in the name, he’s not doing that.
Can somebody smarter than me explain how this will add revenue? Add fans? Add advertisers? The only rational explanation I’ve heard so far is that it may boost jersey and cap sales to non-fans. Can that really be so much of their revenue? (In other words, Angels fans aren’t really going to care if the stuff says Anaheim or LA on it; if you’re a fan you’ll buy a hat. It’s not like your supporting the CITY of Anaheim, everybody would know it’s an Angels cap. And even fans who wouldn’t can still get gear with just “Angels” on it, w/o the Anaheim. Or just the “A” (like those kids in their Tar Heels caps). So really, we’re talking about increased sales to that small market that (a) aren’t fans, (b) are fans who don’t want something with just “Angels” on it, or (c) just want something that says “Los Angeles” on it.)
As has been asked before, are there really fans in LA who weren’t aware of the existence of the team such that now, when they hear “LA Angels,” they’ll think, “Hey, we should go check those guys out since their in town!”? And for advertisers, seriously? Are there businesses out there who will buy ad space/time even though the Angels presumably reach the same market? You tell me you are getting broadcast to an additional 5 million homes, I’m interested. You tell me that you are still getting seen by the same people but with a new name, not so much.
I thought Anaheim Angels sounded fine. As did the California Angels. Los Angeles Angels just kinda sounds funny.
I think Moreno should just move to LA if he wants to call the team LA Angels. Either that or just call ‘em the LA Anaheimgels. Ha!
I haven’t heard this discussed yet, and I haven’t paid particularly close attention to this, but I think the ridiculous inclusion of “of Anaheim” might be to technically not violate the lease agreement with the City of Anaheim (which I believe was what originally necessitated the change to Anaheim Angels, and required the team to maintain “Anaheim” in the name). I doubt that Moreno wants to keep Anaheim in the name at all, but it’s for technical legal reasons (which may or may not work, either from practical or legal standpoints).
Why “LA?”
Imagine if the subject of this website were the “Kent Marniers.” Locals would know where to find them, but tourists and people unfamiliar with the area would probably just pass on the whole thing rather than put the time into figuring out where the heck the team is located. Heck, I live in (northern) CA and I had to go look at a map to see exactly where Anahiem is.
Second, I’d guess that even though the Mariners have a great TV deal that plays thier games all over the northwest, there are probably a higher percentage of Seattlites who are fans than there are in Tacoma or Olympia or anywhere else. It’s a hometown pride thing.
Sheri says the two areas don’t really get along. If you had to choose between two cities in which to market your team, wouldn’t you choose the bigger metro area? And if you could market (ahem, pander) to both, all the better.
There’s also issues of national identification. If I’m on the East Coast, I don’t try and explain where I’ve grown up and lived around the Seattle area when they ask me where I’m from — I say “Seattle” and leave it at that. For national advertising and so on, Seattle’s name carries value far beyond its city-limits population. I imagine it’s the same in LA and other places.
Some of the Anaheim vs LA arguments are just too precious.
The Anaheim civic officials didn’t hesitate to destroy the Big A in the early ’80s to lure a certain NFL football team. And the team wasn’t called the Anaheim Rams.
Re #43 – The agreement didn’t require the name to be maintained – only that the name be changed to include Anaheim prior to a specified date. The team did that, thus satisfying the requirement.
What happens to the name now is no longer governed by that agreement.
Here we go. Section 11, subsection (f) of the agreement with the City of Anaheim:
Team Name
Tenant will change the name of the team to include the name “Anaheim” therein, such change to be effective no later than the commencement of the 1997 season.
Does that require the name be maintained in perpetuity? Does that require that no other cities be mentioned in the name? I don’t see how it does. Moreno has violated no contracts, and indeed wouldn’t have even if he’d left out the “of Anaheim” altogether.
Big difference between Kent and Anaheim. There are seriously people who don’t at least have an inkling where Anaheim is? Same city as Disneyland? And is that really what Moreno is counting on? The tourist market? I would think you’d do a lot better being the Anaheim Angels and catching the Disneyland tourists who want to give their kids something to do on their vacation besides go to Disneyland than calling yourselves the LA Angels, meaning that those people coming to Disneyland from all over that don’t know where Anaheim is would miss on going to games (thinking they were in LA, so not planning to go), AND you lose out on the LA tourist market after they find out they gotta go all the way to gd Anaheim to get to the ballpark when they thought it was right there in LA. So great, you lose two tourist groups by confusion instead of getting all of one of them. A big one, with kids, disposable income and time on their hands.
I still don’t understand how changing the name means “marketing in” LA. I guess I take the point that people in LA may better self-identify with the team if it’s called the LA Angels, but who are these people? If they’re baseball fans already, aren’t they going to be Dodgers fans already? And they’re going to switch because Anaheim changed its name? And if they’re not baseball fans, are they really going to go to all that many games? And if they become baseball fans, isn’t the stadium still down in Anaheim? So their self-identification with the “LA” Angels isn’t going to do a whole lot of good if it encourages these new fans to see one game a year, is it? One game, one cap: $50. Sweet.
DMZ, I agree with your point, but still don’t understand how it extends to increased revenue for the team. Yes, I tell people from the East Coast that I’m from Seattle (or “the Seattle area”), because it’s just easier for them to understand. How does that translate into money? Who are these national advertisers that are going to get more out of the “LA” Angels? I can understand, say, Seattle’s Best Coffee getting something out of the name (as opposed to, say, Kent’s Best Coffee), because Seattle connotes coffee excellence and SBC might actually try to sell to Winn Dixie markets in the South, for example. So the buyer thinks, “Hmm, Seattle means good coffee, this is from Seattle, I’ll put it in my stores.” How is that analogous to how the Angels expect to benefit? Am I just being dumb here?
Even in Europe, people generally right where Seattle is. Generations of Weyerhauser, Kaiser, Boeing, Jimi Hendrix, Microsoft, Real and Curt Cobain: thank you.
I openly ridiculed this name change when I first saw it. Now I imagine that the objective is simply “LA Angels” and that Moreno figures that all the Disney and Angel marketing in the world won’t make Anaheim into a household name, a privileged destination or even into well-known spa, and that he is tired of trying to fight the flow.
Rhino, I think if you combine Derek’s most recent point with the ones I’ve been making, you have your answer, or at least some assertions that neither of us can probably back up with facts (but which Moreno assuredly has). The use of LA broadens the appeal of the team nationally, if not regionally (particularly for those who haven’t had the misfortune of spending an extended period of time there).
The analogy you seek above might be had if you accept the premise that, as Seattle connotes coffee excellence, LA connotes (in the minds of some, I suppose), coolness a la the Hollywood scene, images of beautiful beaches, a national center of culture, etc. … imagine if Tacoma were a bit bigger, but with the same general reputation it has now, and the Mariners played there — especially back in the 90s, when Seattle was the new “it” city and a capital (at least a provincial one) of the new economy … the “Tacoma Mariners” might change their name in a similar way (and even this doesn’t fully set forth the analogy, given that LA is 14 times as big as Seattle). This has nothing to do with connoting good baseball, but it is another type of the the trademark-type argument you make above — use of the “mark” of LA is designed to associate the team with the factors I describe above, to add to merchandise sales and, more generally, present the Angels as a national, rather than provincial, team. I’m not saying I can see how it will particularly work, either, but I doubt such measures are aimed at people with IQs over 120, anyway.
#48 — Hopefully Moreno has lawyers more skilled than you. The name change was part of the quid pro quo. Your argument that Moreno could change the club’s name for a nanosecond is the sort of loser “gotcha” argument that gets nowhere in court. The real argument is whether Moreno complies with the provision by keeping the “of Anaheim” in the club name.
Funny thing about that Angels club. Before Moreno, people called it a “small market” club, for reasons I never figured out. Milwaukee is small. The great mass of commerce and population south of LA is not small. I guess if you have a small payroll, you are ipso facto a small market club. Or something. Now they are a big market club, I think all would agree. Why would throwing in “Los Angeles” make a whit of difference? If going from “California” to “Anaheim” coincided with the era of the Angels’ greatest success, hard to see the team name as much of a gating factor on profit. Oh well.
I think this is a smart move. The trained-linguist in me has a certain affection for the alliteration in “Anaheim Angels” while simultaneously loathing the echoing redundancy found in “The Los Angeles Angels…” (”The the Angels Angels”, when translated). However, I’m not a huge Disney fan, and the whole “Anaheim” thing really didn’t sit well with me. I always still called them the California Angels anyway. As long as MLB approves, and it’s Moreno’s team, so he should be able to change it to whatever he legally can.
Add to that above post:
Sincerely,
Seattle Rainiers of Tacoma fan
My bad. Never used this function before. Anyways:
So the city of Anaheim levied a hotel-room tax to fund the ballpark renovations and now they’re worried about there ability to market themselves as a tourism destination? Priceless.
I guess the real question on my mind is:
How long will it take Niehaus to get up to speed with this name change?
I love the guy, but man, the next time I hear “Welcome to the Kingdome”…
“Where does all their attendance come from? Just Orange County?”
Is that not enough people? According to the latest census, Orange county has about 4 million people (as compared to about 1 3/4 million in King county).
I consider it laughable that the Angels are trying to latch on to a little bit of the LA popularity. For those outsiders who do not see a great distinction, who have not been “behind the Orange curtain”, it is very significant.
LA is a cosmopolitan city. It has interesting restaurants, bars, museums, things to see and do. It has large minority populations who appreciate the culture of their ancestors and have brought it to the city. Orange County has beaches, shiny cars, chain restaurants, shopping malls, tanning salons and has large minority populations that work as maids, nannies, and gardners.
2002 Population totals
ANAHEIM - 343,000
O.C. – 3,017,300
Anaheim itself is not much smaller then Oakland (399,484), but the OC has a large population in a small area. The comparisons of Seattle and Bellvue are a little off, its more like Seattle and Tacoma, and I garantee you that if Tacoma had a pro sports team they would not put up with it being called the Seattle BlaBlaBla of Tacoma. Its a matter of city pride. Anaheim provides alot to the Angles, I say if they change the name Anaheim should refuse to send any police or fire or any city services to the staduim.
Sorry, typo. I meant to write 3 million.
Okay, but what would you say to:
The El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora Reina de los Angeles de la Porciuncula Angels of Anaheim?
#61:
No comprende
or (auf englisch)
Huh?
Does that require the name be maintained in perpetuity? Does that require that no other cities be mentioned in the name? I don’t see how it does. Moreno has violated no contracts, and indeed wouldn’t have even if he’d left out the “of Anaheim” altogether.
I would think that the name had to be kept in perpetuity (of the contract, at least); otherwise the name could have been changed the next day.
BUT – if Moreno is exploiting a loophole by using the suffix “of Anaheim”, then he has to be very careful. If they start calling the team “the LA Angels” or “Los Angeles Angeles” without “of Anaheim”, the city could claim that he’s not in compliance. In fact, just looking at their latest site, you just see “Angels” without any reference to the city name.
New Mariners Farm System team names:
Seattle Aquasox of Everett
Milwaukee Timber Rattlers of Appleton
Los Angeles Stampede of San Bernardino
San Antonio Missions (well… they’re already in a big league city)
Seattle Rainiers of Tacoma
What city name would they wear on their away jerseys?
That would probably solve the dispute (at least between the Angels and the city of Anaheim).
Oh, and please don’t say “Los Angeles of Anaheim.”
#45 & 49. I also think that there’s a difference between seattle and LA on this. If you tell your east coast acquaintances you are from seattle, so you don’t have to bore them by explaining where kent, or bellingham, or even tacoma is, that’s fine. I do it too. I’m here in spokane (ok, 17 miles to the south, in Cheney). but if you tell someone on the east coast you live in aneheim, there’s name recognition there. there’s a big recreational facility there too. Disneyland obviously put aneheim on the map and gave it it’s own name.
makes me wonder if people in St. Paul Minn, say they’re from Minneapolis? I’d think not. hmmm.
Re. #64: I suppose we could call them the “San Antonio Missions of San Antonio.”
David from Poulsbo RV Sports and Bremertonians presented by your local Pepsi bottler salutes you, Derek, for taking a stand against that team from southern California that wears red and has that monkey and those thundersticks and stuff.
#66: I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you, but it’s nonetheless a matter of opinion as to the distinction between Spokane/Seattle and LA/Anaheim. I’m not sure that most people, especially from the East Coast, know or care where Anaheim is. A lot of it has to do with familiarity … until shortly before I went to law school there, I didn’t know and didn’t really care where Berkeley was (or that it was so close to Oakland, essentially contiguous with it). I don’t think most people know where Anaheim is in relation to LA, notwithstanding Disneyland. Most people just think it’s part of the enormous, sprawling LA metroplex … although they may have some inkling that it’s in southern California and near LA, they probably don’t know how it relates to LA geographically (unless they happen to know that the OC is south of LA and that Anaheim is part of it). You don’t see the Arlington Rangers, New Jersey Giants, New Jersey Jets, Minneapolis Twins, etc. … again, although I think this name sucks, I also think there are probably justifiable reasons for wanting to do it (although I can’t verify them, Moreno has explicitly said this decision is backed by a lot of research).
great article on the bullpen today….i noticed you left Mateo out of the bp though….did i miss something? I thought for sure he’d be in there.
Re 65: Like last year, their away unis will say “Angels”
Dodger Blues reaction:
“The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim? Let’s at least be honest and call them the Los Angeles Parasites of Anaheim. How long before the Anaheim stadium grounds becomes ‘Chavez Ravine’? How long before Rex Hudler starts going by the name ‘Vinny’? How long before the Angels retire Sandy Koufax’s number? How long before Dave Spiwack is pitching for the Angels at Dodger Stadium with Leslie Neilsen calling balls and strikes?”
I know some of the new front office people for the Angels. They are very smart, hardworking guys. While I haven’t talked to them personally about this, there is a method here.
It is all about the TV dollars. In the number two market in the US, you are not going to see Chubby and Tubby advertising on a broadcast. They are fighting for national ad dollars (mostly from NY and Chicago).
If they have a good product on the field they will get the ratings and 25 year old MaryLou media buyer will spend some money with them. If you are sitting in NY and you see ratings for the LA Angels at 8.0 and the LA Dodgers at 7.5, it makes sense to spend some money with the Angels.
They will sell there share of the tickets. They already did last year. By the time the Dodgers ownership is finished making their mess, the Angels will own over 50% of the market (TV, Radio and Tickets). Pretty good for a team from Anaheim.
This name change is as silly and done for the same reasons (and will last as long) as “The Chicago Bears presented by BankOne” or whatever that nonsense was a years ago. The Bears couldn’t sell stadium naming rights because it was a memorial stadium. So they sold the team name instead. It didn’t last long and neither will this.
So what will the team be called in the standings column?
#52 – That just means the American legal system doesn’t work the way I think it should. That’s what the contract says; that’s what it should mean. Especially if you can demonstrate that the change to Anaheim wasn’t intended to be permanent, lest one be accused of bargaining in bad faith.
I’m a hyper-rationalist. Contracts should be enforced as written, not as intended.
#69 — When were you at Boalt?
#73 — Since you seem to have a good idea about this, could you guess how this generates national ad revenue for them? Is it just that East Coast media buyers see “LA” and think, “Heyyy, we should advertise on the Angels broadcasts,” as opposed to seeing “Anaheim” and thinking, “Hmmm, how quaint?” Is this how the ad biz works? The company reps or media buyers or whatever they’re called look around for stuff on which to advertise? Or do the Angels proactively try to sell ad time? Who calls who first?
2001-2004.
On that note–Please, from now on, refer to me in my full name:
Ballard Jordan Bullock of Northwest Hospital in Seattle Presented in Close Conjunction with the Laws and Principles of Science, Property of CallVision, Inc.
If you must, you can use BJBNWSPCCLPSPCVI, though only in writing please.
Real Rhino
Agencies are always looking for the best way to communicate with their client’s customer. They research ratings and qualitative data about who is watching the program.
In some cases the agency is searching out the buy through FSN or a local station, but in others they are comparing packages that have been pitched to them by either the station or the team (or a combination).
This is about perception and reality. The Angels for the next few years will have a much better product than the Dodgers. The Dodgers only have history on their side.
Who in Seattle ever thought the Mariners would be a better property than the Seahawks.
Markets do change and I think the Angels stock is hot right now and the Dodgers stock is not.
My two cents; with respect to aural pleasure:
Anaheim Angels > California Angels > Los Angeles Angels
…even without the ridiculous “of” suffix, what is he thinking?