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


81 Responses to “Los Angeles Angels of Anahiem”

  1. Matt Staples on January 6th, 2005 12:20 pm

    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.

  2. Dave in Palo Alto on January 6th, 2005 12:30 pm

    #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.

  3. PositivePaul on January 6th, 2005 12:35 pm

    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.

  4. PositivePaul on January 6th, 2005 12:35 pm

    Add to that above post:

    Seattle Rainiers of Tacoma fan

  5. Jordan on January 6th, 2005 12:38 pm

    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.

  6. Jordan on January 6th, 2005 12:39 pm

    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.

    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.

  7. Jordan on January 6th, 2005 12:41 pm

    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”…

  8. hans on January 6th, 2005 12:52 pm

    “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.

  9. J.R. on January 6th, 2005 1:21 pm

    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.

  10. hans on January 6th, 2005 1:37 pm

    Sorry, typo. I meant to write 3 million.

  11. Eric on January 6th, 2005 1:53 pm

    Okay, but what would you say to:

    The El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora Reina de los Angeles de la Porciuncula Angels of Anaheim?

  12. PositivePaul on January 6th, 2005 1:59 pm


    No comprende 😉

    or (auf englisch)


  13. Paul Molitor Cocktail on January 6th, 2005 2:00 pm

    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.

  14. mike on January 6th, 2005 2:16 pm

    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

  15. Jordan on January 6th, 2005 2:19 pm

    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.”

  16. stiletto on January 6th, 2005 2:34 pm

    #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.

  17. Paul Covert on January 6th, 2005 2:56 pm

    Re. #64: I suppose we could call them the “San Antonio Missions of San Antonio.” 🙂

  18. David on January 6th, 2005 3:04 pm

    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.

  19. Matt Staples on January 6th, 2005 3:55 pm

    #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).

  20. scott on January 6th, 2005 3:56 pm

    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.

  21. David J Corcoran on January 6th, 2005 4:08 pm

    Re 65: Like last year, their away unis will say “Angels”

  22. J.R. on January 6th, 2005 4:19 pm

    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?”

  23. Paul on January 6th, 2005 4:40 pm

    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.

  24. wabbles on January 6th, 2005 5:04 pm

    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.

  25. Elliott on January 6th, 2005 5:19 pm

    So what will the team be called in the standings column?

  26. Evan on January 6th, 2005 5:21 pm

    #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.

  27. RealRhino on January 6th, 2005 5:26 pm

    #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?

  28. Matt Staples on January 6th, 2005 5:34 pm


  29. Jordan on January 6th, 2005 6:19 pm

    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.

  30. Paul on January 6th, 2005 6:29 pm

    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.

  31. planB on January 6th, 2005 9:45 pm

    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?