PDA

View Full Version : Cubs v. Rooftop Owners, Round II


doublem23
06-08-2010, 04:57 PM
Rooftop owners are in violation of City ordinance, but man, the Baby Bears come off as whiners.

http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/06/cubs-complain-about-rooftop-bars-game-day-sales.html

cws05champ
06-08-2010, 07:02 PM
Rooftop owners are in violation of City ordinance, but man, the Baby Bears come off as whiners.

http://www.chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2010/06/cubs-complain-about-rooftop-bars-game-day-sales.html
I especially like the line: " The letter was obtained by the Tribune". Geeeee I wonder how.

#1swisher
06-09-2010, 08:02 AM
Looks like they own rooftop seating.

http://chicagoist.com/2010/05/23/ricketts_family_buys_an_interest_in.php

ewokpelts
06-09-2010, 10:36 AM
in 5 years, the rooftops will either be cubs owned or operated by friendly partners like the deporters.

PatK
06-09-2010, 11:12 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The Ricketts family didn't get rich by being generous. They're businessmen.

They're gonna fleece the fan base as much as, if not more, than the Tribune company did.

The "we're lifelong Cubs fans that want to get the Cubs to win the World Series" is just window dressing.

Smokey Burg
06-09-2010, 12:11 PM
Hold it, the cubs are drawing an average of 38,300 fans per game? Is that actually correct? For a product that sucks, or is mediocre at best? And the Ricketts are worried about losing a couple dollars to fans (idiots) who are willing to pay for seats that really suck? Somebody needs to call the Waaaahmbulance! I've been on some of those rooftops, albeit 20+ years ago. Those are not good sight lines, at least half of the park was blocked from view and they are a long way from the action. Twenty, thirty years ago it was kind of fun and unique to be able to go up on a rooftop and catch part of a game. But after a couple innings the charm wore off, mainly for the previously stated reasons. Besides, averaging 38,300 fans per game during the crappy weather part of the season should have the Ricketts jumping for joy and diving into their stacks of Krugerands.

Sorry for the rant, especially when I stated earlier this season that I would not comment on anything related to cub-dumb, but I just couldn't help myself on this one.

ewokpelts
06-09-2010, 12:17 PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again:

The Ricketts family didn't get rich by being generous. They're businessmen.

They're gonna fleece the fan base as much as, if not more, than the Tribune company did.

The "we're lifelong Cubs fans that want to get the Cubs to win the World Series" is just window dressing.
cubs fans will wish they had the tribsters in 5 years.....

Red Barchetta
06-09-2010, 12:20 PM
Hold it, the cubs are drawing an average of 38,300 fans per game? Is that actually correct? For a product that sucks, or is mediocre at best? And the Ricketts are worried about losing a couple dollars to fans (idiots) who are willing to pay for seats that really suck? Somebody needs to call the Waaaahmbulance! I've been on some of those rooftops, albeit 20+ years ago. Those are not good sight lines, at least half of the park was blocked from view and they are a long way from the action. Twenty, thirty years ago it was kind of fun and unique to be able to go up on a rooftop and catch part of a game. But after a couple innings the charm wore off, mainly for the previously stated reasons. Besides, averaging 38,300 fans per game during the crappy weather part of the season should have the Ricketts jumping for joy and diving into their stacks of Krugerands.

Sorry for the rant, especially when I stated earlier this season that I would not comment on anything related to cub-dumb, but I just couldn't help myself on this one.

I never understood the whole "rooftop experience" either. I attended a client's business party once on one of the RF rooftops about 10 years ago. The view was bad, however like evertything else in Wrigleyville, the experience was blown out of proportion. The client event was nice, the Cubs lost and I enjoyed some nice food and beer. I had a good time, however I certainly would not want to watch a baseball game from there. It was further away than the old Comiskey OF upper deck.

g0g0
06-09-2010, 01:07 PM
I don't think the rooftops should have been allowed in the first place. I don't see why it's bad that the Cubs want to control their product. If you want to see a Cubs game you should pay for a ticket to Wrigley (or any park they are playing in) and watch the game there. Or at home on TV.

doublem23
06-09-2010, 01:19 PM
I don't think the rooftops should have been allowed in the first place. I don't see why it's bad that the Cubs want to control their product. If you want to see a Cubs game you should pay for a ticket to Wrigley (or any park they are playing in) and watch the game there. Or at home on TV.

As a resident of Chicago, I'm all for whatever expanded business keeps funneling money and people into the city. Sure, Cub fans are kind of annoying, but we're cool as long as they empty their pockets while they're here.

mbwhitesox
06-09-2010, 02:09 PM
I don't think the rooftops should have been allowed in the first place. I don't see why it's bad that the Cubs want to control their product. If you want to see a Cubs game you should pay for a ticket to Wrigley (or any park they are playing in) and watch the game there. Or at home on TV.

I agree, what other major league team can you watch without either paying for a ticket to the ballpark or watching it on TV? If the rooftops don't make good business sense for the Cubs, they shouldn't allow them.

ewokpelts
06-09-2010, 02:23 PM
I don't think the rooftops should have been allowed in the first place. I don't see why it's bad that the Cubs want to control their product. If you want to see a Cubs game you should pay for a ticket to Wrigley (or any park they are playing in) and watch the game there. Or at home on TV.ask john mcdounough that question.

WizardsofOzzie
06-09-2010, 02:26 PM
I don't think the rooftops should have been allowed in the first place. I don't see why it's bad that the Cubs want to control their product. If you want to see a Cubs game you should pay for a ticket to Wrigley (or any park they are playing in) and watch the game there. Or at home on TV.

I agree, what other major league team can you watch without either paying for a ticket to the ballpark or watching it on TV? If the rooftops don't make good business sense for the Cubs, they shouldn't allow them.
If the Cubs didn't want the rooftops cutting into their profits, they should have continued with legal action against the respective owners rather than agreeing to a deal where they take in 17% of the gross revenue from the rooftops.

TheOldRoman
06-09-2010, 02:43 PM
If the Cubs didn't want the rooftops cutting into their profits, they should have continued with legal action against the respective owners rather than agreeing to a deal where they take in 17% of the gross revenue from the rooftops.It made sense for them before. Sell out the park every day, max out that revenue stream, and then get extra gift money for which you have to do nothing. However, as the article mentions, attendance is down substantially thusfar at the Urinal this year. Games aren't sold out, and the Cubs fear some people will buy day of game tickets for the rooftops instead of paying to get into the park. So, not only are they not selling out, they aren't getting the extra revenue for the people who buy a gameday ticket to the rooftops instead of the Urinal. THAT is when it could backfire on the Cubs. However, I don't think the lemmings came to a sudden realization about the Cubs this year. People are still going to go to Wrigley to party. And this offseason we will be hit with the annual barrage of "The Cubs are stacked, this is their year" articles from local and national news outlets to boost ticket sales.

downstairs
06-09-2010, 03:06 PM
It was a nice, quaint neighborhood attraction. But like everything in sports nowadays- it gets over corporatized and just becomes a lame gimmick.

TDog
06-10-2010, 07:01 PM
I never understood the whole "rooftop experience" either. I attended a client's business party once on one of the RF rooftops about 10 years ago. The view was bad, however like evertything else in Wrigleyville, the experience was blown out of proportion. The client event was nice, the Cubs lost and I enjoyed some nice food and beer. I had a good time, however I certainly would not want to watch a baseball game from there. It was further away than the old Comiskey OF upper deck.

I've never been in one of the rooftop bleachers, but I'm guessing people just sit around and whine about how steep and far away from the action the cheap seats at the Cell are.