PDA

View Full Version : Ricketts says he won't move Flubs - BUT he needs help


Fenway
03-23-2011, 01:24 PM
He is crying again

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=greg-hinz&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=1daca073-2eab-468e-9f19-ec177090a35c&plckPostId=Blog%3a1daca073-2eab-468e-9f19-ec177090a35cPost%3abbb81622-4b62-408e-8

He does raise an interesting issue - since the city won't allow him to put in signage like the Red Sox have done at Fenway. Of course the Red Sox pointed out that Fenway DID have advertising all the way back so Boston let them do it. So there is millions out there that the city won't let him do.

DumpJerry
03-23-2011, 01:42 PM
Moving the team is a not a valid threat because what fan base in another city will embrace a team that last won the World Series in 1908 and is not playing home games at Beautiful Wrigley Field?

The Ricketts children are becoming poster children for 100% estate taxation. They are trust fund babies with no real experience running a large-scale business and have found themselves in over their heads because they were blinded by ambition and a love for the Cubbies going into the deal.

If someone like Reinsdorf had been bidding to buy the team from Tribco, he would have made sure he either had the capital on hand to do the work required on the stadium, driven down the price for the team or worked out a third party relationship to finance stadium renovations. Instead, the Cubs get a guy who goes ga ga because Greg Maddux works for him and he met his wife in the Bleachers.

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 01:52 PM
Moving the team is a not a valid threat because what fan base in another city will embrace a team that last won the World Series in 1908 and is not playing home games at Beautiful Wrigley Field?

The Ricketts children are becoming poster children for 100% estate taxation. They are trust fund babies with no real experience running a large-scale business and have found themselves in over their heads because they were blinded by ambition and a love for the Cubbies going into the deal.

If someone like Reinsdorf had been bidding to buy the team from Tribco, he would have made sure he either had the capital on hand to do the work required on the stadium, driven down the price for the team or worked out a third party relationship to finance stadium renovations. Instead, the Cubs get a guy who goes ga ga because Greg Maddux works for him and he met his wife in the Bleachers.couldnt have said it better myself.

Fenway
03-23-2011, 01:53 PM
The Red Sox were able to get the city to give them Yawkey Way on game days BUT unlike Wrigley nobody lives on Yawkey Way. they had to cut a deal with Twins who had the souvenir shop to do it.




Moving the team is a not a valid threat because what fan base in another city will embrace a team that last won the World Series in 1908 and is not playing home games at Beautiful Wrigley Field?

The Ricketts children are becoming poster children for 100% estate taxation. They are trust fund babies with no real experience running a large-scale business and have found themselves in over their heads because they were blinded by ambition and a love for the Cubbies going into the deal.

If someone like Reinsdorf had been bidding to buy the team from Tribco, he would have made sure he either had the capital on hand to do the work required on the stadium, driven down the price for the team or worked out a third party relationship to finance stadium renovations. Instead, the Cubs get a guy who goes ga ga because Greg Maddux works for him and he met his wife in the Bleachers.

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 01:55 PM
ricketts says cubs fans are "taxed enough" when saying he dosent want to offer PSLs at wrigley.

if that's the case, then why did YOU raise ticket prices two years ina row tommy? AND made fans pay the amusement tax ABOVE the posted face value, effectively increasing your ticket prices an additional 12%?

moochpuppy
03-23-2011, 01:56 PM
WWMCD?

(what would Mark Cuban do?)

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 01:56 PM
The Red Sox were able to get the city to give them Yawkey Way on game days BUT unlike Wrigley nobody lives on Yawkey Way. they had to cut a deal with Twins who had the souvenir shop to do it.i have read that the bars on yawkey way are very happy with the arrangement, as they have 40k potential customers able to leave the facilty and eat/drink there.

Fenway
03-23-2011, 02:02 PM
i have read that the bars on yawkey way are very happy with the arrangement, as they have 40k potential customers able to leave the facilty and eat/drink there.

Only one bar is in the Yawkey Way 'fan zone'

http://www.whosonfirstatfenway.com/Red-Sox-Game-Day.html

Twins owns it... :tongue:

DumpJerry
03-23-2011, 02:06 PM
WWMCD?

(what would Mark Cuban do?)
Write a check to a General Contractor to get the job done.

Ricketts can't do that, the check would bounce.

DSpivack
03-23-2011, 02:16 PM
The Red Sox were able to get the city to give them Yawkey Way on game days BUT unlike Wrigley nobody lives on Yawkey Way. they had to cut a deal with Twins who had the souvenir shop to do it.

There's still people living in the buildings on Sheffield between Addison and Waveland? I would've thought they were all for rooftops by now.

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 02:19 PM
There's still people living in the buildings on Sheffield between Addison and Waveland? I would've thought they were all for rooftops by now.didnt you watch undercover boss?

DSpivack
03-23-2011, 02:27 PM
didnt you watch undercover boss?

No.

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-23-2011, 02:33 PM
Forgetting that it's the Cubs for a moment....ok, moment over.

I second Dump on this. This family was so hung up on being Cubs fan that they failed to realize that behind the sunshine and ivy is one ****ed up place to play baseball.

Caveat emptor.

moochpuppy
03-23-2011, 02:57 PM
Write a check to a General Contractor to get the job done.

Ricketts can't do that, the check would bounce.

Mark Cuban would have been the best thing for this franchise but the rest of the owners didn't want to give him access to their "good ol' boys club".

g0g0
03-23-2011, 03:05 PM
The good thing in all of this (being a Cubs fan) is that it seems the Ricketts won't sit around doing nothing with the team. I don't think they'll hold onto the team if they continually lose money. I don't think they can. So who knows, maybe in 5-10 years there will be another owner.

I still would love to see the ballpark move and updated to compete with other teams. I'm not in love with the mystique of Wrigley as much as everyone else. I just want a winning team out there. :(:

SOXPHILE
03-23-2011, 03:07 PM
Mark Cuban would have been the best thing for this franchise but the rest of the owners didn't want to give him access to their "good ol' boys club".

Not necessarily. I don't get all the Cuban love. I actually am with the owners on this one, he's a raging ass bag.

Nellie_Fox
03-23-2011, 03:53 PM
Not necessarily. I don't get all the Cuban love. I actually am with the owners on this one, he's a raging ass bag.:thumbsup:

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 04:11 PM
No.one of the ricketts' posed as a new employee. he moved across the street for teh week he was "undercover"

ewokpelts
03-23-2011, 04:15 PM
Not necessarily. I don't get all the Cuban love. I actually am with the owners on this one, he's a raging ass bag.He's an ass, but he would have been the right guy to "culture shock" the cubs organization.

He took over a pitiful franchise in the Dallas Mavericks and made them into a top team in the league.

asindc
03-23-2011, 04:45 PM
He's an ass, but he would have been the right guy to "culture shock" the cubs organization.

He took over a pitiful franchise in the Dallas Mavericks and made them into a top team in the league.

This. Whatever you think of his personality, Cuban most likely would not be experiencing the same issues that the Ricketts are expressing now. IMO, Cuban is a fan's owner; money is not an issue with him. He would be ideal for a big-market MLB team.

guillensdisciple
03-23-2011, 04:49 PM
This. Whatever you think of his personality, Cuban most likely would not be experiencing the same issues that the Ricketts are expressing now. IMO, Cuban is a fan's owner; money is not an issue with him. He would be ideal for a big-market MLB team.

That's the problem with Cub culture. No one there wants to win, it is all about the money and not spending it. Wrigley is a money pit, and sooner or later Cubs fans will stop throwing away their money. They can't be that stupid can they?

gobears1987
03-23-2011, 04:56 PM
That's the problem with Cub culture. No one there wants to win, it is all about the money and not spending it. Wrigley is a money pit, and sooner or later Cubs fans will stop throwing away their money. They can't be that stupid can they?

Cuban is a competitive person who would try to introduce winning into the Cubs' culture. The Ricketts are just a group of Chads so nothing will change with them.

Fenway
03-23-2011, 04:58 PM
This. Whatever you think of his personality, Cuban most likely would not be experiencing the same issues that the Ricketts are expressing now. IMO, Cuban is a fan's owner; money is not an issue with him. He would be ideal for a big-market MLB team.

Right now I think Selig would rather have Cuban than Frank McCourt

tebman
03-23-2011, 05:11 PM
Moving the team is a not a valid threat because what fan base in another city will embrace a team that last won the World Series in 1908 and is not playing home games at Beautiful Wrigley Field?

The Ricketts children are becoming poster children for 100% estate taxation. They are trust fund babies with no real experience running a large-scale business and have found themselves in over their heads because they were blinded by ambition and a love for the Cubbies going into the deal.

If someone like Reinsdorf had been bidding to buy the team from Tribco, he would have made sure he either had the capital on hand to do the work required on the stadium, driven down the price for the team or worked out a third party relationship to finance stadium renovations. Instead, the Cubs get a guy who goes ga ga because Greg Maddux works for him and he met his wife in the Bleachers.

That wraps it up. When Ricketts was bidding for the Cubs and I read the enormous price he was willing to pay, the first thing I thought of was the cost of fixing that ballpark. The building is a remodeled, nearly 100 year-old structure. It needs major work just to remain safe in the coming years, let alone to add more amenities.

Fenway posted a while back that the architect who did the Fenway Park renovation was hired by the Cubs. She told them that the upper deck needed to be replaced. But that's not what Ricketts' people wanted to hear and she was sent home.

The ballpark is the attraction, of course. If concrete continues to fall from the upper deck and panels continue to blow off the roof, the Ricketts bunch is going to be looking at untold millions in expenses and gate losses. After paying $800 million+ can they handle that? Their plea for city help suggests that they can't.

Fenway
03-23-2011, 05:49 PM
Most fans compare Wrigley with Fenway.

But it is important to remember that most of the Fenway that exists today was built in 1934 NOT 1912 as the park had 2 major fires.

Until the early 80's, the only seats on the Fenway roof were the so called sky-views that were built as a press box for the 1946 World Series.

Wrigley did not suffer from neglect that doomed Comiskey and Tiger Stadium but close to 100 Chicago winters have taken their toll.

I was in Wrigley 3 years ago when a violent storm hit and that upper deck was shaking and one media person said he was more scared than he was at Candlestick during the World Series earthquake.

I was looking at some old files and back in 1999 when the All Star Game was at Fenway, Selig was pleased that Harrington had decided to build a new Fenway as it was impossible for Fenway Park to be viable.

John Henry proved that wasn't the case and Fenway will be around for another 25-50 years. But all they needed to do was rebuilt the roof to support everything that was added. The Cubs can't do that.

I thought Ricketts was going to be another Henry but his refusal to clean house and bring in new people indicates he is in over his head. The Tribune came close when they brought in all the Philadelphia people in 1981 but luck was not on their side.

I have a lot of friends who are Cubs fans and they really are fed up. Since Bartman they have seen the team fail to win a single playoff game, seen the Red Sox win it all, the White Sox then winning and last June the Blackhawks.

Everybody points to 1908 but to me not even winning a pennant since 1945 is even more mind boggling. They have played in 6 games where they could have won the pennant and lost them all.





That wraps it up. When Ricketts was bidding for the Cubs and I read the enormous price he was willing to pay, the first thing I thought of was the cost of fixing that ballpark. The building is a remodeled, nearly 100 year-old structure. It needs major work just to remain safe in the coming years, let alone to add more amenities.

Fenway posted a while back that the architect who did the Fenway Park renovation was hired by the Cubs. She told them that the upper deck needed to be replaced. But that's not what Ricketts' people wanted to hear and she was sent home.

The ballpark is the attraction, of course. If concrete continues to fall from the upper deck and panels continue to blow off the roof, the Ricketts bunch is going to be looking at untold millions in expenses and gate losses. After paying $800 million+ can they handle that? Their plea for city help suggests that they can't.

cws05champ
03-24-2011, 07:33 AM
Most fans compare Wrigley with Fenway.

I have a lot of friends who are Cubs fans and they really are fed up. Since Bartman they have seen the team fail to win a single playoff game, seen the Red Sox win it all, the White Sox then winning and last June the Blackhawks.
I think most compare Fenway and Wrigley because they are the two oldest stadiums and also because of the party atmosphere that surrounds the park now.

I thought it was an almost perfect storm of events that have transpired against the Cubs, and yet they still sell out the majority of their games. That is why I cheer against the Cubs....god forbid if they ever won, we would see so much crap about them it would make the vomit tag on here look commonplace. Here's the events that I see why Cubs fans are fed up, but they still show:

> Up 3-1 in the NLCS only to lose the last three games in spectacular fashion.
> Being picked as the the favorite to win the World series (famous SI cover of Wood and Prior).....and fading in Sept to not even make the playoffs.
> Red Sox ending their WS futility of 86 years with a great run in the playoffs.
> White Sox having a magical season out of nowhere to win the WS, with a team that could not even be disputed was the best that year.
> Their main rival Cardinals winning the World Series the next year.
> Cubs have the best record in the NL in 2007, only to be swept in the playoffs. And they win back to back Divison titles, only to be swept out of the playoffs once again in 2008.

All of these things in successive years after the playoff collapse. And yet they will still sell out because of the party atmosphere and location. So Tom Rickets...cry me a river because you underestimated how much it would cost to run a baseball team in crumbling stadium. You now need help?

C-Dawg
03-24-2011, 07:46 AM
Now is probably a good time to re-post this gem I found earlier, written by a Cub fan on another forum. It was about the "remodeling" of Wrigley:

This dolt needs to understand that baseball purists are his core constituency. I don't see his ownership of the Cubs ending well.

In other words, keeping Wrigley unchanged is the most important goal of all. Much more so than winning games.

asindc
03-24-2011, 07:54 AM
Now is probably a good time to re-post this gem I found earlier, written by a Cub fan on another forum. It was about the "remodeling" of Wrigley:



In other words, keeping Wrigley unchanged is the most important goal of all. Much more so than winning games.

My sense is that some Cubs fans realize that without Wrigley, they would be just another perpetually losing franchise, much like the Lions and Clippers. I would not want to face that reality, either.

Thome25
03-24-2011, 08:03 AM
The good thing in all of this (being a Cubs fan) is that it seems the Ricketts won't sit around doing nothing with the team. I don't think they'll hold onto the team if they continually lose money. I don't think they can. So who knows, maybe in 5-10 years there will be another owner.

I still would love to see the ballpark move and updated to compete with other teams. I'm not in love with the mystique of Wrigley as much as everyone else. I just want a winning team out there. :(:


Are you sure you're a Cubs fan? I've never heard or read where a Cubs fan has said something so intelligent and level-headed about Wrigley Field and the team before.

Red Barchetta
03-24-2011, 08:17 AM
My sense is that some Cubs fans realize that without Wrigley, they would be just another perpetually losing franchise, much like the Lions and Clippers. I would not want to face that reality, either.

Exactly. If the Cubs played in a dome in the suburbs, their fate would be similar to the Rays. Wrigley is the attraction, not the team and their (lack of) performance. Any action Ricketts' takes has to be centered around his MVP-Wrigley.

He needs to acquire private funding/naming rights i.e. "Wrigley Field, Home of the Chicago Cubs, sponsored by...." and go from there. He may need to shut the park down for two seasons and literally re-build it from the ground up. The bleachers/CF scoreboard and playing surface have recently been renovated, so they would need to gut the lower concourse, modernize it and completely tear down/rebuild the upper deck. This would allow them to build true luxury suites and a modern press box. If they can move forward with the Triangle plan, add a HOF shop, parking, restaurant, etc. and then perhaps move some offices off-site in order to build larger home and visitor clubhouses/training areas, they might be able to pull it off.

I also think they should put the roof top owners deal to work and instead of centering the deal around the Cubs' agreement to not install signs, allow the roof top owners their view in return for adding outfield light structures, similar to the RF warehouse roof at Camden Yards.

His only other option would be to build a brand new Wrigley II somewhere on the north side that is a very close, i.e. modern/larger replica of what he has today.

Any threat of moving will garner the same response McCaskey got when he threatened to move the Bears off the lakefront to the abandoned steel mills of Gary. Location is key and Ricketts' knows that.

doublem23
03-24-2011, 08:34 AM
Are you sure you're a Cubs fan? I've never heard or read where a Cubs fan has said something so intelligent and level-headed about Wrigley Field and the team before.

There are plenty of Cub fans who share that sentiment, they're just roughly ignored because the Cubs have, for a while now, catered to the "we're hear to have a good time," fans and not actual, hardcore baseball fans.

SI1020
03-24-2011, 08:41 AM
couldnt have said it better myself. Exactly. DJ nailed it.

ewokpelts
03-24-2011, 09:01 AM
This. Whatever you think of his personality, Cuban most likely would not be experiencing the same issues that the Ricketts are expressing now. IMO, Cuban is a fan's owner; money is not an issue with him. He would be ideal for a big-market MLB team.I doubt he would have asked for Public Money without comencing the project himself with his(the cubs') own money. And I suspect he might actually have had the guts to fire hendry and eat some of the bad paper(zambozo, sori-ass) to get the fans and organization motiviated to be a contender again.

ewokpelts
03-24-2011, 09:07 AM
btw, the landmark status does NOT apply to the grandstand. the cubs CAN tear that down if they so desired.

Rocky Soprano
03-24-2011, 09:25 AM
How many of us have not dreamed of owning a baseball team, especially the Sox? What we fail to realize is that owning a baseball team is a JOB and involves more than being a super fan with deep pockets. I think Ricketts is now realizing that being the owner of his beloved Cubs is not the piece of heaven he thought it was going to be.

I have a hard time believing that they are hurting for money. It is hilarious to hear the Cubs cry about money. :whiner:

asindc
03-24-2011, 09:27 AM
I imagine that the real baseball fans among Cubs fans are beginning to feel the same frustration I felt during the 80s with Reinsdorf and Einhorn while watching DeBartolo (who was denied Sox ownership in favor of R and E) build a mini-dynasty with the 49ers.

ewokpelts
03-24-2011, 09:32 AM
How many of us have not dreamed of owning a baseball team, especially the Sox? What we fail to realize is that owning a baseball team is a JOB and involves more than being a super fan with deep pockets. I think Ricketts is now realizing that being the owner of his beloved Cubs is not the piece of heaven he thought it was going to be.

I have a hard time believing that they are hurting for money. It is hilarious to hear the Cubs cry about money. :whiner:tommy boy flushed out his dad's trust fund to buy the team. do you think they have money to build a COMPETENT contender?

by the way, Old Man Ricketts is the TRUE owner of the tean. Tommy Boy and the cast of Undercover Boss: Chicago Cubs are just playing with thier toy.

russ99
03-24-2011, 09:53 AM
It may not be a vital need for 10-20 more years, but if they want to keep Wrigley Field around, that entire upper deck needs to be completely re-built.

That means a Cubs season somewhere else and vastly less revenue for a season which IMO is what the Ricketts' don't want to hear, not so much the capital investment needed.

I've been hearing lots of dissent from my Cub fan friends. Seems that they're done with the Lovable Losers idea, and are losing patience. The Quade hiring may have been a good baseball move, but that irritated them a bit more. Lose the fanbase, and that club is in big trouble.

Also, I can't understand why Hendry still has his job...

Fenway
03-24-2011, 10:29 AM
How many of us have not dreamed of owning a baseball team, especially the Sox? What we fail to realize is that owning a baseball team is a JOB and involves more than being a super fan with deep pockets. I think Ricketts is now realizing that being the owner of his beloved Cubs is not the piece of heaven he thought it was going to be.

I have a hard time believing that they are hurting for money. It is hilarious to hear the Cubs cry about money. :whiner:

I think one of the keys to what the Red Sox did was having Larry Lucchino decide what to do with Fenway. He brought in Janet Marie Smith who created Camden Yards and Petco and what has been done is simply astounding. Of course Fenway has warts - it is old - but you no longer feel like you are in a sardine can.

Any of you that have been to a game in Boston know that while the fanbase likes a good time, they are there for the game FIRST. Everybody knows what the score is...and if something special is happening there is a buzz.

Boston fans grumble about the costs of going to a game but no one can deny that this ownership wants to win. Of course winning keeps the park full and NESN ratings high but we also know John Henry is also a fan.

Right now he is trying to build the trust of Liverpool fans and so far he has been accepted. They may not know anything about baseball but they do know the Yankees are Manchester United and they now have hope.

The Cubs Convention was still hawking tickets the day it started...that indicates erosion of the fanbase. Ricketts seems clueless that keeping Hendry is a slap in the face to the true loyal Cubs fan. Gammons is bemused by the notion Pujoils will become a Cub. He is of the belief that the Yankees are going to struggle and then Hank will give Pujoils whatever he wants...

YEAR TWO should be an interesting thing to watch unfold.

roylestillman
03-24-2011, 12:27 PM
I think one of the keys to what the Red Sox did was having Larry Lucchino decide what to do with Fenway. He brought in Janet Marie Smith who created Camden Yards and Petco and what has been done is simply astounding. Of course Fenway has warts - it is old - but you no longer feel like you are in a sardine can.

Any of you that have been to a game in Boston know that while the fanbase likes a good time, they are there for the game FIRST. Everybody knows what the score is...and if something special is happening there is a buzz.

Boston fans grumble about the costs of going to a game but no one can deny that this ownership wants to win. Of course winning keeps the park full and NESN ratings high but we also know John Henry is also a fan.

Right now he is trying to build the trust of Liverpool fans and so far he has been accepted. They may not know anything about baseball but they do know the Yankees are Manchester United and they now have hope.

The Cubs Convention was still hawking tickets the day it started...that indicates erosion of the fanbase. Ricketts seems clueless that keeping Hendry is a slap in the face to the true loyal Cubs fan. Gammons is bemused by the notion Pujoils will become a Cub. He is of the belief that the Yankees are going to struggle and then Hank will give Pujoils whatever he wants...

YEAR TWO should be an interesting thing to watch unfold.

Didn't the Cubs fire Janet Marie Smith after she recommended that they should tear down the upper deck. Frankly you have to start over up there if you want viable concessions and seats you can sell as unobstructed.

It is amazing that 85% of the talk since the Ricketts arrived have surrounded facilities and not baseball. It confirms my suspicion that they bought a ballpark and got this team thrown in with it.

Red Barchetta
03-24-2011, 12:57 PM
Didn't the Cubs fire Janet Marie Smith after she recommended that they should tear down the upper deck. Frankly you have to start over up there if you want viable concessions and seats you can sell as unobstructed.

It is amazing that 85% of the talk since the Ricketts arrived have surrounded facilities and not baseball. It confirms my suspicion that they bought a ballpark and got this team thrown in with it.

That's because the ballpark is 85% of their product. The owners know it and the fans know it. The Tribune marketing created the monster and Ricketts can either try to continue to market Wrigley and the trendy neighborhood or it will be a slow return to the 70s-era Wrigley when they closed the upper deck due to lack of attendance.

Winning of course would change that...

kittle42
03-24-2011, 01:12 PM
That's because the ballpark is 85% of their product. The owners know it and the fans know it. The Tribune marketing created the monster and Ricketts can either try to continue to market Wrigley and the trendy neighborhood or it will be a slow return to the 70s-era Wrigley when they closed the upper deck due to lack of attendance.

Winning of course would change that...

Yup. Put any MLB team in that park and market it similarly and it will be filled. Take the Cubs and put them in the Cell or even in a new stadium somewhere near the city and watch attendance dwindle when losing continues.

TDog
03-24-2011, 01:47 PM
Moving the team is a not a valid threat because what fan base in another city will embrace a team that last won the World Series in 1908 and is not playing home games at Beautiful Wrigley Field?

The Ricketts children are becoming poster children for 100% estate taxation. They are trust fund babies with no real experience running a large-scale business and have found themselves in over their heads because they were blinded by ambition and a love for the Cubbies going into the deal.

If someone like Reinsdorf had been bidding to buy the team from Tribco, he would have made sure he either had the capital on hand to do the work required on the stadium, driven down the price for the team or worked out a third party relationship to finance stadium renovations. Instead, the Cubs get a guy who goes ga ga because Greg Maddux works for him and he met his wife in the Bleachers.

Well put. And, of course, it is particularly bad business to demand help while dismissing the leverage of moving the team. There are no consequences for failing to help the Cubs other than maintaining the status quo.

It's possible, though that the Cubs would work as a tourist attraction in an Iowa cornfield.

Fenway
03-24-2011, 02:09 PM
Didn't the Cubs fire Janet Marie Smith after she recommended that they should tear down the upper deck. Frankly you have to start over up there if you want viable concessions and seats you can sell as unobstructed.

It is amazing that 85% of the talk since the Ricketts arrived have surrounded facilities and not baseball. It confirms my suspicion that they bought a ballpark and got this team thrown in with it.

She was very nervous about what she saw in an engineering report. She is the expert in the field and her track record speaks volumes.

Remember 10 years ago when Anaheim rebuilt the park - even during the season? BUT they had areas for staging that Wrigley doesn't have. My 'hunch' is they trying to get it to Year 100 - have a big party and then deal with it.

I expect Fenway to go overboard next year for the 100th anniversary.

Dan H
03-24-2011, 02:12 PM
I am one who is not impressed with Ricketts. BP cups and block parties don't make it. The Cubs are actually getting to the point where they have to win. There is something about round numbers and 100 is a nice round number. The championship drought is no longer lovable; it is an embarrassment. The bubble on the north side is going to burst if this team can't make it to the World Series sometime soon. As for me, I'm glad I'm not a Cub fan. I wouldn't feel safe going to that baseball shrine. Ricketts needs to fix the stadium and then the team. I have little confidence that he will do either.

Carolina Kenny
03-24-2011, 02:43 PM
I am one who is not impressed with Ricketts. BP cups and block parties don't make it. The Cubs are actually getting to the point where they have to win. There is something about round numbers and 100 is a nice round number. The championship drought is no longer lovable; it is an embarrassment. The bubble on the north side is going to burst if this team can't make it to the World Series sometime soon. As for me, I'm glad I'm not a Cub fan. I wouldn't feel safe going to that baseball shrine. Ricketts needs to fix the stadium and then the team. I have little confidence that he will do either.

My first impression of Ricketts was that he was a empty suit. He is perfect for that organization. The poorly attended Cub Convention is a good indicator that the Ricketts Era is has stumbled badly out of the blocks.

Once again the White Sox have been given a second golden opportunity to take over the town. The first was is 2005. Now we have another chance. Reinsdorf is a far superior owner/operator and obviously sharper business man than this trust fund baby.

Frontman
03-24-2011, 03:15 PM
How many of us have not dreamed of owning a baseball team, especially the Sox? What we fail to realize is that owning a baseball team is a JOB and involves more than being a super fan with deep pockets. I think Ricketts is now realizing that being the owner of his beloved Cubs is not the piece of heaven he thought it was going to be.

I have a hard time believing that they are hurting for money. It is hilarious to hear the Cubs cry about money. :whiner:

I thought they said on the Score earlier this week the value of the Cubs has gone down since the Ricketts purchased them. Given that fact, I'm not surprised that they're crying about it. Just hilarious that the worry has been more focused on retaining the troughs in the bathrooms and honoring dead broadcasters instead of fixing their ballpark.

eriqjaffe
03-24-2011, 03:19 PM
Remember 10 years ago when Anaheim rebuilt the park - even during the season?The only Angels game I went to while I was living in LA was during that season. Somewhere, I have a commemorative "ticket" they gave out to celebrate the first Interleague series (saw 'em play the Giants).

DumpJerry
03-24-2011, 03:26 PM
Steve Rosenbloom absolutely blisters Ricketts (http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/rosenblog/2011/03/can-the-cubs-play-their-game-better-than-the-owner-plays-his.html). Total burn.

Frontman
03-24-2011, 04:29 PM
Steve Rosenbloom absolutely blisters Ricketts (http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/rosenblog/2011/03/can-the-cubs-play-their-game-better-than-the-owner-plays-his.html). Total burn.

Usually can't stand him, but he's got it dead-bang on.

Lip Man 1
03-24-2011, 04:48 PM
If the Cubs are in fact "losing money" it's their own fault. How can you screw up a gold mine like they have?

Lip

Fenway
03-24-2011, 05:18 PM
If the Cubs are in fact "losing money" it's their own fault. How can you screw up a gold mine like they have?

Lip

Lip the reality is they most likely are. It was a gold mine for Tribune but they cashed out.

The Tribune paid roughly 20M in 1981 so they had no debt service to speak of. (plus they controlled all TV-radio revenue in-house) -

Ricketts paid $845M and a good chunk of that is certainly on loans. That is one big nut. One of the first indications they were getting squeezed is when they hiked ticket prices last year.

Now part of what they bought was 25% of CSN-Chicago which then pays then 450K for each game. Compare that to the Red Sox who own 80% of NESN who in turn is paying the Red Sox 600K for each game.

We don't know what the new TV deal between the Cubs and WGN is but you can be certain Tribune worked it to their advantage. Bottom line is they overpaid for that team in a blind desire to own it. Now throw in the fact that they are limited in advertising panels at Wrigley and they have problems.

The White Sox are the cash cow now....they have no debt service to speak of, a good lease on the park and TV revenue that at least from CSN is equal to the Cubs.

WGN can make the TV deal work as long as they can still carry the games on WGN America but for how much longer. MLB got TBS to give up the Braves and move them back to channel 17 which is now branded Peachtree TV but not available outside the south ( except in Canada under a quirk in Canadian cable laws).

Sam Zell played the Ricketts well as others that looked couldn't make the numbers worked.

Lip Man 1
03-24-2011, 05:56 PM
Fenway:

You've been posturing for years about the "death" of Superstations and it hasn't happened yet. (In fact if memory serves you posted a few years ago that the Sox would be off WGN by 2010.... I might be wrong on the year but I know you made that comment more than once.)

The White Sox will continue to be a part of WGN America for decades to come.

Please...just stop trying to stir the pot.

Lip

Fenway
03-24-2011, 06:07 PM
Fenway:

You've been posturing for years about the "death" of Superstations and it hasn't happened yet. (In fact if memory serves you posted a few years ago that the Sox would be off WGN by 2010....)

The White Sox will continue to be a part of WGN America for decades to come.

Please...just stop trying to stir the pot.

Lip

MLB has succeded in eliminating EVERY other superstation that carries MLB games out of market. WWOR and WPIX gave it up so they could keep local NYY and NYM games. TBS dropped the Braves in favor of the MLB package.

Nobody is happy about it but that is the way it is.

Frontman
03-24-2011, 06:17 PM
Did I miss something today? I thought it was Harry Houdini's birthday, not pick a fight with Fenway day.

I keep getting those two mixed up......

Lip Man 1
03-24-2011, 06:40 PM
Front:

Just pointing out what he's said in the past and it hasn't come true... that's all.

I'll let it go.

Lip

jdm2662
03-24-2011, 06:55 PM
Fenway, what you are saying about the Superstation may be true, but the Tribune does very well in court. When David Stern was on top of the sports world, the Tribune took him to court, and they won. 15 years later, the Bulls are still on the Superstation, eventhough the NBA had been against it long before the spat started. Sure, they are mainly only on Saturday nights, but the Bulls are still shown 15 times a year.

Fenway
03-24-2011, 07:07 PM
Front:

Just pointing out what he's said in the past and it hasn't come true... that's all.

I'll let it go.

Lip

Lip - Maury Brown who runs the bizofbaseball.com site was the one who told me that back then. He doesn't understand what happened and can not get anybody from MLB to speak about it.

The Yankees and Mets are now screaming as WGN broke a 'gentlemans agreement' to keep WGN out of New York but Time Warner in Manhattan just picked them up which the WGN America website is promoting.

WGN America does NOT show all the Bulls games that channel 9 carries and NONE of the Hawks games.

WGN America is far different now than Channel 9 - many prograns run in Chicago they can not put on the national feed. MLB still is allowing it...

soltrain21
03-24-2011, 09:41 PM
Front:

Just pointing out what he's said in the past and it hasn't come true... that's all.

I'll let it go.

Lip

Oh, are we going to start doing that on the board now? I'm sure I could find quite a bit of posts like that from each and every person that posts here.

Moses_Scurry
03-24-2011, 10:40 PM
The cubs leaving Chicago would be a magical fantasy dream come true. I can't even think about it because it would be so wonderful. I know it is a serious crack pipe dream, but I could live with the cubs running off a Pittsburgh Pirate-like streak of suck.

Lamp81
03-24-2011, 11:45 PM
I have always dreamed of being wealthy enough to purchase the Cubs, and then re-locate them, as the ballpark needs to be replaced.

Seriously, as a kid I always said I was going to buy the Cubs and have them play in Alaska, outdoors. And if you thought the owner in the Major League movie tried to sabotage her team, it would be nothing compared to what I'd do to the Cubs.

asindc
03-25-2011, 07:24 AM
Lip - Maury Brown who runs the bizofbaseball.com site was the one who told me that back then. He doesn't understand what happened and can not get anybody from MLB to speak about it.

The Yankees and Mets are now screaming as WGN broke a 'gentlemans agreement' to keep WGN out of New York but Time Warner in Manhattan just picked them up which the WGN America website is promoting.

WGN America does NOT show all the Bulls games that channel 9 carries and NONE of the Hawks games.

WGN America is far different now than Channel 9 - many prograns run in Chicago they can not put on the national feed. MLB still is allowing it...

The part about none of the Hawks is true, but several Bulls games are shown on WGN America every year. My guess is at least 10-15 games this year alone, home and away.

Red Barchetta
03-25-2011, 07:40 AM
The cubs leaving Chicago would be a magical fantasy dream come true. I can't even think about it because it would be so wonderful. I know it is a serious crack pipe dream, but I could live with the cubs running off a Pittsburgh Pirate-like streak of suck.

The irony with comparing the Cubs to the Pirates is that the (then) new Pirates owners focused entirely on securing a new ballpark deal. They did that and they built, arguably, one of the nicest ballparks in the league. However, they completely gutted and destroyed the baseball operations of the team and their "Streak of Suckage" is now entering its 19th straight season. A beautiful view can't hide the ugly view of the play on the field.

Too bad, because I remember the days when the Pirates used to come into Wrigley and knock the Cubs around on a regular basis. :D:

Fenway
03-25-2011, 07:47 AM
Fenway, what you are saying about the Superstation may be true, but the Tribune does very well in court. When David Stern was on top of the sports world, the Tribune took him to court, and they won. 15 years later, the Bulls are still on the Superstation, eventhough the NBA had been against it long before the spat started. Sure, they are mainly only on Saturday nights, but the Bulls are still shown 15 times a year.

WGN America apparently has angered MLB brass by doing this

http://www.satellitetv-news.com/time-warner-cable-launches-wgn-america-available-to-east-regionnyc-market-digital-subscribers/

New York was supposed to be 'off-limits' - keep in mind WWOR gave up being a superstation so they could carry Yankees games over the air in NY ( and WPIX is no longer available on cable outside of NYC for the Mets)

It isn't an issue in New England as Comcast will not pick up WGN ( RCN does but they have had WGN forever ) - we did get WWOR and WPIX on cable going back to the 70's but they both vanished about 5 years ago.

Fenway
03-25-2011, 08:01 AM
The part about none of the Hawks is true, but several Bulls games are shown on WGN America every year. My guess is at least 10-15 games this year alone, home and away.

I posted WGN America does not show ALL of the games that Channel 9 does.

I don't know why the NHL played hardball with WGN as you would *think* the league would be thrilled to have a major outlet showcasing the Stanley Cup Champions. What is ironic is the Hawks games ARE show on WGN in Canada because of how Canada's cable laws work. So in Toronto you still get Braves games from Channel 17 (Peachtree TV) and they get the LOCAL Chicago feed of WGN. The CRTC only allows US broadcast stations in as they are transmitted in the local city. So when WTBS changed to Peachtree TV TBS in Canada vanished - yet they allow TNT as it is not a broadcast station. The Canadian CRTC has been able to do what no other country has been able to do - keep ESPN out. ESPN is forced to own a small part of TSN and can not brand the station ESPN. They did allow ESPN Classic in Canada which is not the same as the US one.

MLB broadcast rules are simply byzantine. We all know how insane the blackout rules are. Look at Buffalo, New York where you CAN NOT get the Indians or Pirates on Extra Innings but you can get the Blue Jays. ( Mets and Yankees are also on basic cable)

soxfanreggie
03-25-2011, 08:25 AM
How many of us have not dreamed of owning a baseball team, especially the Sox? What we fail to realize is that owning a baseball team is a JOB and involves more than being a super fan with deep pockets. I think Ricketts is now realizing that being the owner of his beloved Cubs is not the piece of heaven he thought it was going to be.

I have a hard time believing that they are hurting for money. It is hilarious to hear the Cubs cry about money. :whiner:

There is a lot to do as an owner unless you have a Team President who is great at running the business part of the operations and a GM who is good at making personnel moves. If you have those things, you can be a lot more hands-off.

Most people who can afford teams (the non-trust fund/non-inheritance owners) didn't get where they are by being hands-off.

If I was controlling owner of the Sox, you bet I would pay to have a crackerjack staff advising me. I would definitely make sure I had the working capital to fund the team. Nothing like buying a house and not being able to afford to put anything in it - actually, this could be quite like that. ;-)

Fenway
03-25-2011, 08:39 AM
There is a lot to do as an owner unless you have a Team President who is great at running the business part of the operations and a GM who is good at making personnel moves. If you have those things, you can be a lot more hands-off.

Most people who can afford teams (the non-trust fund/non-inheritance owners) didn't get where they are by being hands-off.

John Henry is a good example - he has Lucchino as COO and Epstein running baseball ops - When Larry and Theo clashed JWH then stepped in where now both report to him.

A friend at the Red Sox says both the Cubs and White Sox have marketing issues that most clubs don't have. In a city with 2 teams companies don't jump at being the Official 'whatever' of the team as fans at the other team will pout.

asindc
03-25-2011, 08:41 AM
I posted WGN America does not show ALL of the games that Channel 9 does.

I don't know why the NHL played hardball with WGN as you would *think* the league would be thrilled to have a major outlet showcasing the Stanley Cup Champions. What is ironic is the Hawks games ARE show on WGN in Canada because of how Canada's cable laws work. So in Toronto you still get Braves games from Channel 17 (Peachtree TV) and they get the LOCAL Chicago feed of WGN. The CRTC only allows US broadcast stations in as they are transmitted in the local city. So when WTBS changed to Peachtree TV TBS in Canada vanished - yet they allow TNT as it is not a broadcast station. The Canadian CRTC has been able to do what no other country has been able to do - keep ESPN out. ESPN is forced to own a small part of TSN and can not brand the station ESPN. They did allow ESPN Classic in Canada which is not the same as the US one.

MLB broadcast rules are simply byzantine. We all know how insane the blackout rules are. Look at Buffalo, New York where you CAN NOT get the Indians or Pirates on Extra Innings but you can get the Blue Jays. ( Mets and Yankees are also on basic cable)

Yes you did. My mistake.:smile:

gobears1987
03-25-2011, 10:25 AM
Too bad, because I remember the days when the Pirates used to come into Wrigley and knock the Cubs around on a regular basis. :D:

The Pirates still do that, they just lose to every other team in the NL.

Lip Man 1
03-25-2011, 11:24 AM
The Bulls just to clarify, have 12 regular season games on WGN America, this season.

Lip

AZChiSoxFan
03-25-2011, 11:28 AM
Oh, are we going to start doing that on the board now? I'm sure I could find quite a bit of posts like that from each and every person that posts here.


Bingo!

Steelrod
03-25-2011, 12:15 PM
If the Ricketts family cannot afford to run the team and maintain it's assets, they should take their loss, sell the team, and move on.

dwitt76
03-25-2011, 12:43 PM
The Pirates still do that, they just lose to every other team in the NL.

Zing!

gf2020
03-25-2011, 06:37 PM
The Bulls just to clarify, have 12 regular season games on WGN America, this season.

Lip
Wrong. It's 15. I've watched 13 already myself.

http://www.wgnamerica.com/sports/bulls/wgna-bulls-2010-2011-tv-schedule,0,2312320.htmlstory

TDog
03-25-2011, 08:20 PM
I have always dreamed of being wealthy enough to purchase the Cubs, and then re-locate them, as the ballpark needs to be replaced.

Seriously, as a kid I always said I was going to buy the Cubs and have them play in Alaska, outdoors. And if you thought the owner in the Major League movie tried to sabotage her team, it would be nothing compared to what I'd do to the Cubs.

That could be closer to Cubs tradition than you might expect. Alaska has one or the top summer amateur baseball leagues. Bobby Thigpen played on the Kenai Peninsula Oilers in 1984. Mark Teahen, like Randy Johnson, played for the Anchorage Glacier Pilots.

One of the interesting aspects of Alaska summer baseball is that while they play night games, they don't use lights, in the true Wrigley tradition.

Lip Man 1
03-25-2011, 08:52 PM
GF:

I've got the Bulls schedule in front of me that I printed out at the start of the season off the WGN site. It lists 12 games on WGN America. Take it for what it's worth.

Lip

TheVulture
03-26-2011, 02:04 PM
I am laughing my ass off the Cubs went from WGN to this clown. Serves the smug cub fans right.

fram40
03-26-2011, 02:34 PM
My first impression of Ricketts was that he was a empty suit.

My first impression of the four children - from that first press conference on the day they took control - was the eerie resemblance to the McCaskeys. Everything that has happened since just cements the impression. Tom's mannerisms (and his looks, vaguely) remind me of Michael McCaskey.

Fenway
03-26-2011, 03:36 PM
Cubs home opener has been one of the hardest tickets in the broker markets...

Seet Geek doesn't list them in the Top 5

http://www.nesn.com/2011/03/red-sox-home-opener-costs-the-highest-average-ticket-price-amongst-all-mlb-team-openers.html

Boston, Yankees, RANGERS:?:, Giants and Phillies are the most expensive out there right now.

Texas opens with Boston but I don't think this is Red Sox related. From what Dallas friends are tellling me is that finally after 40 years people in the Metroplex really care - and that Jerry Jones is so hated now people are starting to ignore the Cowboys.

gf2020
03-26-2011, 04:54 PM
GF:

I've got the Bulls schedule in front of me that I printed out at the start of the season off the WGN site. It lists 12 games on WGN America. Take it for what it's worth.

Lip
It's wrong. I DVRd and watched all games that were on the schedule I linked to and we're already up to 13 on that score. I only get WGN America.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/tvschedule_100902.html

"In addition to Chicago’s 15 nationally-televised games on WGN America, the team will also appear on TNT seven times, ESPN nine times, NBA-TV nine times and ABC twice."

Fenway
03-26-2011, 05:23 PM
GF:

I've got the Bulls schedule in front of me that I printed out at the start of the season off the WGN site. It lists 12 games on WGN America. Take it for what it's worth.

Lip

http://www.wgnamerica.com/sports/bulls/wgna-bulls-2010-2011-tv-schedule,0,2312320.htmlstory

15

Frontman
03-26-2011, 05:30 PM
The one thing I find laughable is the Ricketts shock that the city doesn't want to help them out. This is what happens when fans run things, instead of business people.

forrestg
03-27-2011, 07:32 AM
rename wrigley field with corporate sponsorship. People will still know its wrigley field and most probably would still consider a trip to the shrine.

DumpJerry
03-27-2011, 09:32 AM
rename wrigley field with corporate sponsorship. People will still know its wrigley field and most probably would still consider a trip to the shrine.
A year or so ago when there was serious talk of naming rights there it was thought the name would be XXXX Ballpark at Wrigley Field.

All I have to say is that the Wrigley Chewing Gum company must be laughing at the corporations that have to actually shell out money to get their name on a stadium.

Frontman
03-27-2011, 04:58 PM
Anyone else think the WGN spots have been a bit weird this season for the Cubs? I'm not making fun of them, but the one where the woman says the day after her Dad dies she remembers the Cubs being on WGN tv.

I find that a bit bizarre. I certainly can't remember who the Sox were playing when my Dad died, nor could I remember any Sox games around the time Laura was hospitalized last year. (Although they were on that phenomenal run in late June. Laura joked not to let WSI know she was in during their undefeated run, as the attending surgeon was also a Sox fan and might not discharge her until November!)

ewokpelts
03-28-2011, 10:33 AM
I think the reaction from local polliticians is justified, seeing as the Cubs were sold for the highest dollar ammount ever for an MLB team. That and Ricketts magically has the money for the triangle building. He somehow dosent have the funds for the more costly rennovation project.

Fenway
03-28-2011, 12:49 PM
Ed Sherman looks at Year Two

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3ab1c652f2-ac49-4359-85ed-bac091eeaee1&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Fenway
03-28-2011, 01:32 PM
I knew the Cubs had a lot of debt - something the Trib never had to worry about...

No way are they making money right now.

$583 million in debt service is a BIG NUT - that is a LOT of monthly interest.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3a603c5482-e8db-45bf-ad1c-fa4633b91b3e&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

TomBradley72
03-28-2011, 01:42 PM
Cubs home opener has been one of the hardest tickets in the broker markets...

Seet Geek doesn't list them in the Top 5

http://www.nesn.com/2011/03/red-sox-home-opener-costs-the-highest-average-ticket-price-amongst-all-mlb-team-openers.html

Boston, Yankees, RANGERS:?:, Giants and Phillies are the most expensive out there right now.

Texas opens with Boston but I don't think this is Red Sox related. From what Dallas friends are tellling me is that finally after 40 years people in the Metroplex really care - and that Jerry Jones is so hated now people are starting to ignore the Cowboys.

I just went online via ticketmaster "looking for 2"- White Sox home opener- nothing available.

Cubs home opener- tickets still available.

Fenway
03-28-2011, 02:05 PM
I just went online via ticketmaster "looking for 2"- White Sox home opener- nothing available.

Cubs home opener- tickets still available.

All the signs for Cubs erosion are there - The Convention not selling out - fans upset about ticket prices and the team itself. I think the Blackhawks winning was the final straw for the Cubs fans.

A know a few hardcore Cubs fans and they are as angry as White Sox fans were after white flag.....as long as Hendry stays - they will not go.

ewokpelts
03-28-2011, 02:57 PM
I just went online via ticketmaster "looking for 2"- White Sox home opener- nothing available.

Cubs home opener- tickets still available.
cubs opening day tix on stubhub are $33. that's just bad.

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-28-2011, 03:39 PM
My BIL is a die hard Cubs fan (but still owns a Sosa jersey so I have to give him grief); he's off this weekend for the opener but he decided him and his friends are going to Wrigleyville but not the game. He said Ricketts doesn't deserve a nickel of his $ to see that "**** on the field" (direct quote) and wishes KW was the Cubs GM.

Just sharing....

Fenway
03-28-2011, 04:04 PM
My BIL is a die hard Cubs fan (but still owns a Sosa jersey so I have to give him grief); he's off this weekend for the opener but he decided him and his friends are going to Wrigleyville but not the game. He said Ricketts doesn't deserve a nickel of his $ to see that "**** on the field" (direct quote) and wishes KW was the Cubs GM.

Just sharing....

Friend owns a bar in Lakeview - he caters to Red Sox fans being from Boston but he says everybody asking around for White Sox tickets - he has 4 for the cubs opener and NOBODY wants them for free :?:

Wrigley is 15 minutes away by foot....

If things are bad..fans stop going. It happened at Fenway during the Ralph Houk and Butch Hobson eras.

http://www.theheckler.com/wp-content/uploads/wpsc/cache/product_img_223_300x300.jpg

jdm2662
03-28-2011, 04:11 PM
My BIL is a die hard Cubs fan (but still owns a Sosa jersey so I have to give him grief); he's off this weekend for the opener but he decided him and his friends are going to Wrigleyville but not the game. He said Ricketts doesn't deserve a nickel of his $ to see that "**** on the field" (direct quote) and wishes KW was the Cubs GM.

Just sharing....

I know plenty of Cub fans that gave the ol Cub fans are awesome, etc. for years. Last year, most of them feel the same way and stopped giving the Cubs their money. I can't say I blame them.

Frontman
03-28-2011, 05:12 PM
Last summer after the Blackhawks won the Cup I stated that the Cubs were now "irrelevant" in discussion about championships. Some said I was off-base, that one post-season appearance will snap that.

I still contend that, to the CASUAL Chicago fan; the Cubs winning a World Series now will appear as "last person to the party." Bears, Bulls (MY GOD, were they dominant,) Sox, and now the Blackhawks all won their respective championships. And I think the Cubs are beginning to get that treatment.

Yes, they will always be popular in this town. But I have a feeling that unless they turn it around DRASTICALLY and RAPIDLY, their casual fanbase is going to dry up.

Ron Karkovice
03-28-2011, 05:14 PM
Friend owns a bar in Lakeview - he caters to Red Sox fans being from Boston but he says everybody asking around for White Sox tickets - he has 4 for the cubs opener and NOBODY wants them for free :?:

Wrigley is 15 minutes away by foot....

If things are bad..fans stop going. It happened at Fenway during the Ralph Houk and Butch Hobson eras.



Come on... I live in Lakeview and I can not see anyone turning Cubs opening day tickets down...

Fenway
03-28-2011, 05:20 PM
Come on... I live in Lakeview and I can not see anyone turning Cubs opening day tickets down...

That is what he told me this morning.....

AZChiSoxFan
04-01-2011, 12:01 PM
It's interesting to note that the cubs spring training attendance in Mesa this year was down 13% from last year.

I know, there are other factors. The D-backs/Rockies new stadium in Scottsdale was wildly popular and seems to have siphoned off attendance from every other Cactus League team this season. The economy, Easter being late this year, I've heard all the supposed reasons.

Still, even with all of those factors, nobody thought the cubs would be down 13% in ST attendance.

Dub25
04-01-2011, 11:22 PM
He's an ass, but he would have been the right guy to "culture shock" the cubs organization.

He took over a pitiful franchise in the Dallas Mavericks and made them into a top team in the league.

But when have the Mavs won a title?

Hitmen77
04-02-2011, 11:58 PM
Cubs home opener has been one of the hardest tickets in the broker markets...

Seet Geek doesn't list them in the Top 5

http://www.nesn.com/2011/03/red-sox-home-opener-costs-the-highest-average-ticket-price-amongst-all-mlb-team-openers.html

Boston, Yankees, RANGERS:?:, Giants and Phillies are the most expensive out there right now.

Texas opens with Boston but I don't think this is Red Sox related. From what Dallas friends are tellling me is that finally after 40 years people in the Metroplex really care - and that Jerry Jones is so hated now people are starting to ignore the Cowboys.

The Rangers are defending American League Champions. That has to help ticket demand.

Hitmen77
04-03-2011, 12:05 AM
I knew the Cubs had a lot of debt - something the Trib never had to worry about...

No way are they making money right now.

$583 million in debt service is a BIG NUT - that is a LOT of monthly interest.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/section/blogs?blogID=business-of-sports&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&uid=f5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4ad&plckPostId=Blog%3af5555513-c950-4657-a93a-80db16fdf4adPost%3a603c5482-e8db-45bf-ad1c-fa4633b91b3e&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Interesting stuff. Ironic how the 3 biggest markets in the National League (NY, LA, Chicago) are teams with debt and/or ownership (or however you'd describe the McCourt situation) issues.

A year or so ago when there was serious talk of naming rights there it was thought the name would be XXXX Ballpark at Wrigley Field.

All I have to say is that the Wrigley Chewing Gum company must be laughing at the corporations that have to actually shell out money to get their name on a stadium.

I think the reaction from local polliticians is justified, seeing as the Cubs were sold for the highest dollar ammount ever for an MLB team. That and Ricketts magically has the money for the triangle building. He somehow dosent have the funds for the more costly rennovation project.

I think the Cubs should to sell naming rights before there is even talk of public funding of Wrigley renovations. Why should any more public money than needed be spent just to preserve their park's sacred name?

Also, I know Ricketts inherited a bunch of bad contracts, but I have a hard time feeling sorry for the Cubs asking for money when they have one of the top payrolls in baseball. If they need money, they can cut payroll instead of asking for public money.

I know these steps won't give them all the funds they need, but it would be ways for them to cut the public expense they are seeking.

My first impression of Ricketts was that he was a empty suit. He is perfect for that organization. The poorly attended Cub Convention is a good indicator that the Ricketts Era is has stumbled badly out of the blocks.

Once again the White Sox have been given a second golden opportunity to take over the town. The first was is 2005. Now we have another chance. Reinsdorf is a far superior owner/operator and obviously sharper business man than this trust fund baby.

Exactly. I hope the Sox really take advantage of this opportunity by going deep into the playoffs again. You think Cubs fans are disgruntled now? Imagine how pissed or disillusioned fans will be about them if the Sox win another pennant while the Flubs and Ricketts flounder.

doublem23
04-03-2011, 12:54 AM
The Rangers are defending American League Champions. That has to help ticket demand.

They also hosted the Red Sox in their Opener, and they notoriously travel well.

Fenway
04-03-2011, 09:22 AM
Game 2 drew 6,000 less than the opener - just another indicator that the bloom is off the rose.

bluedemon45
04-03-2011, 10:42 AM
http://www.stubhub.com/chicago-cubs-tickets/cubs-vs-diamondbacks-4-4-2011-1004789/

Tickets on Stubhub going for $1.00 for tomorrows game against the D-Backs.

LongLiveFisk
04-03-2011, 10:49 AM
http://www.stubhub.com/chicago-cubs-tickets/cubs-vs-diamondbacks-4-4-2011-1004789/

Tickets on Stubhub going for $1.00 for tomorrows game against the D-Backs.

I wouldn't have believed it until I saw it with my own eyes.

Wow.

ewokpelts
04-04-2011, 08:25 AM
But when have the Mavs won a title?they did make the finals.

ewokpelts
04-04-2011, 08:28 AM
Tuesday's game is Starlin Castro Bobblehead day. Tickets as low as $1.40. I can sell the bobble on ebay for $15 easy.

roylestillman
04-04-2011, 10:04 AM
Tuesday's game is Starlin Castro Bobblehead day. Tickets as low as $1.40. I can sell the bobble on ebay for $15 easy.

Tickets for today's game are listed on Stub Hub for 80 cents.

Hitmen77
06-02-2011, 03:58 PM
Rosenbloom rips into Ricketts:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column

russ99
06-02-2011, 06:03 PM
Rosenbloom rips into Ricketts:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-cubs-owner-tom-ricketts-plays-fans-for-stupid-20110602,0,1480359.column

Man, I love that last sentence. :D:

Go ahead throw a couple hundred million at Pujols and it will make it all better...

Steelrod
06-02-2011, 06:39 PM
It appears to me that their family bought the mistique of the Cubs, and figured all they had to do was collect the cash. They have made zero positive steps, other then threaten Mesa (worked), then Chicago(didn't). They don't even sell out spring any more. Ya can't just ride on the laurels of the past.
Weren't they short money in the first place and had to scramble? Wouldn't be surprised to hear that they are underfinanced!

Hendu
06-02-2011, 11:05 PM
Man, I love that last sentence. :D:

Go ahead throw a couple hundred million at Pujols and it will make it all better...

Ha, I think he's going to have to use that money to pay off debt instead.

Cubs in Violation of MLB Debt Service Rules
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-0603-mlb-cubs-chicago--20110602,0,344709.story)

MARTINMVP
06-03-2011, 08:23 AM
Also, I can't understand why Hendry still has his job...

For all the problems that team faces now, I think Hendry being kept for two years into the new ownership is really what has irked Cub fans the most. That move by itself really cemented the deal for Cub fans that the new owner is not the flashy, bright and smooth business man with a plan that they had all hoped for.

Once it was announced that Hendry would be retained going into "Year 1," I remember one of the Cub insiders on the radio suggesting that Ricketts is just getting settled and that after the first year, he'd clean house and bring in his own team of smart baseball people to help make things right. :redface:

g0g0
06-03-2011, 09:10 AM
For all the problems that team faces now, I think Hendry being kept for two years into the new ownership is really what has irked Cub fans the most. That move by itself really cemented the deal for Cub fans that the new owner is not the flashy, bright and smooth business man with a plan that they had all hoped for.

Once it was announced that Hendry would be retained going into "Year 1," I remember one of the Cub insiders on the radio suggesting that Ricketts is just getting settled and that after the first year, he'd clean house and bring in his own team of smart baseball people to help make things right. :redface:

Spot on...unfortunately. I gave them a pass last year, but Henry came back and it's been business as usual. I'm beginning to regret not supporting Cuban when he made his bid. :(:

asindc
06-03-2011, 09:23 AM
Spot on...unfortunately. I gave them a pass last year, but Henry came back and it's been business as usual. I'm beginning to regret not supporting Cuban when he made his bid. :(:

I don't mean to rub it in, but Cuban would have been perfect for the Cubs.

Selig has really botched the last two ownership transfers. I think he and the long-term owners have over-estimated how solvent the major market franchises will remain in the hands of highly leveraged owners.

russ99
06-03-2011, 09:26 AM
I don't mean to rub it in, but Cuban would have been perfect for the Cubs.

Selig has really botched the last two ownership transfers. I think he and the long-term owners have over-estimated how solvent the major market franchises will remain in the hands of highly leveraged owners.

Interersting.

The impending Astros sale to Jim Crane is heavily reliant on debt, so much so, that there's a possibility it may not be approved.

But Cuban would never have been approved by the old boy network of big league owners, so that's pretty moot.

Fenway
06-03-2011, 10:12 AM
For all the problems that team faces now, I think Hendry being kept for two years into the new ownership is really what has irked Cub fans the most. That move by itself really cemented the deal for Cub fans that the new owner is not the flashy, bright and smooth business man with a plan that they had all hoped for.

Once it was announced that Hendry would be retained going into "Year 1," I remember one of the Cub insiders on the radio suggesting that Ricketts is just getting settled and that after the first year, he'd clean house and bring in his own team of smart baseball people to help make things right. :redface:

Rickets had the blueprint of what to do from the Red Sox ownership change...

2002 was their Year One and about 15 seconds after Harrington was told the $$$ had been transferred they fired Joe Kerrigan who was a disaster as a manager. Duquette was fired a couple of days later...

By 2003 most of the Harrington-Yawkey people were gone...

It is amazing to watch

kaufsox
06-03-2011, 10:26 AM
I don't if you all heard the interview with Joe Ricketts that Rosenbloom was playing a couple of nights ago, but very telling. Basically Joe Ricketts wanted nothing to do with the Cubs, then wanted nothing to do with running the team. I was always skeptical of Tom Ricketts and his supposed business savvy. That interview really shed some light on the whole deal and what Tom really brings to the table, which is basically very little.

On another note, I noticed people saying who would want a team with a 100 year tradition of losing? The answer is plenty. I'm not saying they would be smart moves (MLB and smart moves are distant cousins) but plenty of metro areas without a MLB franchise would crawl naked over glass to get a hold of the Cubs and Ricketts should, but has said he won't move the team. Like JR years ago he needs to make good on some leverage or he'll never get anywhere with the city and state. Off the top of my head Ricketts should "explore" moving the team to Indianapolis, New Jersey, the Carolinas, Portland to name a few. The feasability isn't the issue at this point, the point is seeing what these metro areas can bring to the table. If it's enough, even MLB and it's territorial rules can make a way around it. Hell, they got a team in Baltimore's backyard. Hmmm, I feel a blog coming on, or maybe it's just gas...

Moses_Scurry
06-03-2011, 10:31 AM
I don't if you all heard the interview with Joe Ricketts that Rosenbloom was playing a couple of nights ago, but very telling. Basically Joe Ricketts wanted nothing to do with the Cubs, then wanted nothing to do with running the team. I was always skeptical of Tom Ricketts and his supposed business savvy. That interview really shed some light on the whole deal and what Tom really brings to the table, which is basically very little.

On another note, I noticed people saying who would want a team with a 100 year tradition of losing? The answer is plenty. I'm not saying they would be smart moves (MLB and smart moves are distant cousins) but plenty of metro areas without a MLB franchise would crawl naked over glass to get a hold of the Cubs and Ricketts should, but has said he won't move the team. Like JR years ago he needs to make good on some leverage or he'll never get anywhere with the city and state. Off the top of my head Ricketts should "explore" moving the team to Indianapolis, New Jersey, the Carolinas, Portland to name a few. The feasability isn't the issue at this point, the point is seeing what these metro areas can bring to the table. If it's enough, even MLB and it's territorial rules can make a way around it. Hell, they got a team in Baltimore's backyard. Hmmm, I feel a blog coming on, or maybe it's just gas...

Oh god, don't tease me like that. This would remind me of the world that Lional Hutz imagined when he imagined there being no lawyers. I'm pretty amateur about posting outside graphics, so I would leave it up to someone else to post the YouTube clip.

Hitmen77
06-03-2011, 10:38 AM
Oh god, don't tease me like that. This would remind me of the world that Lional Hutz imagined when he imagined there being no lawyers. I'm pretty amateur about posting outside graphics, so I would leave it up to someone else to post the YouTube clip.

At your command!
0u9JAt6gFqM


.....oh, and there is no way in hell the Cubs will ever move out of Chicago.

doublem23
06-03-2011, 10:38 AM
I don't if you all heard the interview with Joe Ricketts that Rosenbloom was playing a couple of nights ago, but very telling. Basically Joe Ricketts wanted nothing to do with the Cubs, then wanted nothing to do with running the team. I was always skeptical of Tom Ricketts and his supposed business savvy. That interview really shed some light on the whole deal and what Tom really brings to the table, which is basically very little.

On another note, I noticed people saying who would want a team with a 100 year tradition of losing? The answer is plenty. I'm not saying they would be smart moves (MLB and smart moves are distant cousins) but plenty of metro areas without a MLB franchise would crawl naked over glass to get a hold of the Cubs and Ricketts should, but has said he won't move the team. Like JR years ago he needs to make good on some leverage or he'll never get anywhere with the city and state. Off the top of my head Ricketts should "explore" moving the team to Indianapolis, New Jersey, the Carolinas, Portland to name a few. The feasability isn't the issue at this point, the point is seeing what these metro areas can bring to the table. If it's enough, even MLB and it's territorial rules can make a way around it. Hell, they got a team in Baltimore's backyard. Hmmm, I feel a blog coming on, or maybe it's just gas...

The only teaser about the Cubs moving was looking at other places in the Chicagoland area outside Wrigley, places like Schaumburg, etc. I would sincerely doubt the marriage of the Cubs ever wanting to leave Chicago and MLB allowing it to happen will ever occur in my lifetime, especially when the best alternatives are ****holes like Indianapolis or the Carolinas.

asindc
06-03-2011, 10:47 AM
I don't if you all heard the interview with Joe Ricketts that Rosenbloom was playing a couple of nights ago, but very telling. Basically Joe Ricketts wanted nothing to do with the Cubs, then wanted nothing to do with running the team. I was always skeptical of Tom Ricketts and his supposed business savvy. That interview really shed some light on the whole deal and what Tom really brings to the table, which is basically very little.

On another note, I noticed people saying who would want a team with a 100 year tradition of losing? The answer is plenty. I'm not saying they would be smart moves (MLB and smart moves are distant cousins) but plenty of metro areas without a MLB franchise would crawl naked over glass to get a hold of the Cubs and Ricketts should, but has said he won't move the team. Like JR years ago he needs to make good on some leverage or he'll never get anywhere with the city and state. Off the top of my head Ricketts should "explore" moving the team to Indianapolis, New Jersey, the Carolinas, Portland to name a few. The feasability isn't the issue at this point, the point is seeing what these metro areas can bring to the table. If it's enough, even MLB and it's territorial rules can make a way around it. Hell, they got a team in Baltimore's backyard. Hmmm, I feel a blog coming on, or maybe it's just gas...

That would be an epic PR disaster.

g0g0
06-03-2011, 10:48 AM
I don't if you all heard the interview with Joe Ricketts that Rosenbloom was playing a couple of nights ago, but very telling. Basically Joe Ricketts wanted nothing to do with the Cubs, then wanted nothing to do with running the team. I was always skeptical of Tom Ricketts and his supposed business savvy. That interview really shed some light on the whole deal and what Tom really brings to the table, which is basically very little.

On another note, I noticed people saying who would want a team with a 100 year tradition of losing? The answer is plenty. I'm not saying they would be smart moves (MLB and smart moves are distant cousins) but plenty of metro areas without a MLB franchise would crawl naked over glass to get a hold of the Cubs and Ricketts should, but has said he won't move the team. Like JR years ago he needs to make good on some leverage or he'll never get anywhere with the city and state. Off the top of my head Ricketts should "explore" moving the team to Indianapolis, New Jersey, the Carolinas, Portland to name a few. The feasability isn't the issue at this point, the point is seeing what these metro areas can bring to the table. If it's enough, even MLB and it's territorial rules can make a way around it. Hell, they got a team in Baltimore's backyard. Hmmm, I feel a blog coming on, or maybe it's just gas...

Carolinas maybe, Portland definitely, but Indianapolis absolutely out of the question. We are so overlapped here with Cincy and St. Louis, not to mention Chicago. I don't think they would let them move there. Plus we have a good AAA team with a beautiful ballpark. I would hate to lose the Indians.

Fenway
06-03-2011, 10:54 AM
At your command!
0u9JAt6gFqM


.....oh, and there is no way in hell the Cubs will ever move out of Chicago.

They would never leave Chicagoland but move outside the city limits......

but just remember

The Cleveland Browns had one of the largest fanbases in the NFL and POOF!!!!

Back in 1991 I was at a Indians game in September and there were 1800 people there.....the sports section was BROWNS, BROWNS....

I told my wife the Indians will be somewhere in 5 years.... but not Cleveland

Never say never

Moses_Scurry
06-03-2011, 11:15 AM
At your command!



.....oh, and there is no way in hell the Cubs will ever move out of Chicago.

Thanks for the clip. I know they will never leave the Chicago area. The sheer awesomeness of it would cause our heads to explode.

khan
06-03-2011, 11:56 AM
After further review, I have to agree with those that assessed the Rickettses to be wealthy clowns with little-to-no idea about how to own and operate a club.

Up to this point, I'd given them the benefit of the doubt because of the business accomplishments of the family patriarch and their educational background. Alas [for them], it appears that none of their privileged background [from a familial nor an academic standpoint] has sunk in.

They ridiculously overpaid for the scrubs, and have failed the PR battles in virtually every way. On the field, their retention of Hendry, et. al has been disastrous. As Rosenbloom states, it appears that there is no vision for the club. [Why trade away prospects for Garza, when you're not in a position to win anything?]


For us as SOX fans, it may turn out that the scrubs may become the "small market team" in town, due to the Scrubs' organization's crippling debt, their ****ty veteran contracts, and an overall lack of vision. I for one welcome this, and will cherish the Ricketts' ownership for years to come.

Soxfest
06-03-2011, 12:55 PM
Empty seats a plenty and well deserved!:cool:

doublem23
06-03-2011, 01:10 PM
Empty seats a plenty and well deserved!:cool:

My brother, Cub fan, really likes this screen grab.

You can almost hear him thinking about how much money is disappearing.

miker
06-03-2011, 01:28 PM
Empty seats a plenty and well deserved!:cool:

Yeah, but a certain diminutive sportscaster on Channel 7 won't mention it like he did with new Comiskey.

That's ok. I don't mind seeing the Cubs floundering. Builds character. And it couldn't happen to a nicer organization and fan base....:rolling:

SoxandtheCityTee
06-03-2011, 01:40 PM
After further review, I have to agree with those that assessed the Rickettses to be wealthy clowns with little-to-no idea about how to own and operate a club.

Up to this point, I'd given them the benefit of the doubt because of the business accomplishments of the family patriarch and their educational background. Alas [for them], it appears that none of their privileged background [from a familial nor an academic standpoint] has sunk in.



Agreed. That still leaves the question of how their advisers (as opposed to their dumb selves) got so badly taken by Zell. I mean, they had the money to hire negotiators and representatives who could look at the books and the deal and tell them things at least as cogent as the conclusions drawn by posters on a sports message board who were going off of only what was publicly available info. It reeks of the rich client wanting to do something and just not listening, thinking they knew better.

It took them so-oh long to find out. But they found out.

khan
06-03-2011, 02:17 PM
Agreed. That still leaves the question of how their advisers (as opposed to their dumb selves) got so badly taken by Zell. I mean, they had the money to hire negotiators and representatives who could look at the books and the deal and tell them things at least as cogent as the conclusions drawn by posters on a sports message board who were going off of only what was publicly available info. It reeks of the rich client wanting to do something and just not listening, thinking they knew better.

It took them so-oh long to find out. But they found out.
I'm guessing that they were deceived by their own fandom. I'm nowhere near as well-to-do as the Rickettses, and can only imagine how any of us might behave if we had the means and a realistic chance of buying the SOX.

While a huge degree of "irrational exuberance" was in-play in terms of their valuation, it certainly wasn't their only mis-step.

Them stupidly asking for a handout from the taxpayer to fix the urinal is the EPITOME of dumb. Their stupid retention of the dumbest imbecile of a GM was dumb.

And so for me, it wasn't just one action that betrayed them as being stupid. It is an ongoing cavalcade of bad and dumb that amazes me with respect to the Rickettses.

Fenway
06-03-2011, 02:26 PM
I'm guessing that they were deceived by their own fandom. I'm nowhere near as well-to-do as the Rickettses, and can only imagine how any of us might behave if we had the means and a realistic chance of buying the SOX.

While a huge degree of "irrational exhuberance" was in-play in terms of their valuation, it certainly wasn't their only mis-step.

Them stupidly asking for a handout from the taxpayer to fix the urinal is the EPITOME of dumb. Their stupid retention of the dumbest imbecile of a GM was dumb.

And so for me, it wasn't just one action that betrayed them as being stupid. It is an ongoing cavalcade of bad and dumb that amuzes me with respect to the Rickettses.


The real time-bomb will be 2012 - these people dumping tix for 98 cents are going to think twice of renewing.

khan
06-03-2011, 02:45 PM
The real time-bomb will be 2012 - these people dumping tix for 98 cents are going to think twice of renewing.

No doubt. And this makes the Garza trade dumber, IMO.

Who knows what they can even sell off the roster to save money. But even at that, it would appear that they're not recovering every dollar that they can at the venue, so a bloated payroll might be the least of their ownership's problems. The Rickettses are reeking of the type of desperation that can't be good for the team...

This could get bad [for the scrubs] real quick and good for SOX fans.

kaufsox
06-03-2011, 03:01 PM
They would never leave Chicagoland but move outside the city limits......

but just remember

The Cleveland Browns had one of the largest fanbases in the NFL and POOF!!!!

Back in 1991 I was at a Indians game in September and there were 1800 people there.....the sports section was BROWNS, BROWNS....

I told my wife the Indians will be somewhere in 5 years.... but not Cleveland

Never say never

True and I'm not saying the Cubs would move, but like JR they have to have another card to play other than, "you gave money to them, now it's our turn!" And threatening to move is the best card, got the White Sox a new stadium.

Hitmen77
06-03-2011, 03:35 PM
The real time-bomb will be 2012 - these people dumping tix for 98 cents are going to think twice of renewing.

I wonder this would be worsened (for the Cubs) if the Sox were somehow able to dig themselves out of the hole they're in and make a playoff run this year.

Yeah, I know, Cub fans don't care about the Sox. But I could see where success on the South Side would even further enrage Cubs fans thinking about renewing for 2012.

Frontman
06-03-2011, 05:14 PM
I definitely agree that the Ricketts have no focus or long term plan for the Cubs. The keeping of Hendry screamed they don't. The focus on keeping the "ambience" and history of the urinal troughs screamed they don't. The fact that Ricketts will once again disappear as the team flounders (for his annually planned trip overseas) will scream they don't.

The fact that there were empty seats in the bleachers at Monday's game, a game they promoted that their TV broadcast crew would broadcast from the same bleachers?

Shows that, like the song goes, "Meet the old boss, same as the old boss."

And Cubs fans aren't too thrilled that its turned out that way.

Fenway
06-03-2011, 06:51 PM
True and I'm not saying the Cubs would move, but like JR they have to have another card to play other than, "you gave money to them, now it's our turn!" And threatening to move is the best card, got the White Sox a new stadium.

Families in the north burbs can say screw Wrigley we can see them in Milwaukee. There is the unknown percentage that root for both teams....

The team is a wreck, the stadium is a dump and FINALLY Cub fans are staying away.

I am serious - Woo-Woo could do a better job than Ricketts has.

Fenway
06-03-2011, 07:49 PM
http://www.csnchicago.com/06/03/11/Rovell-Cubs-debt-a-way-of-life/mobile_landing.html?blockID=532218&feedID=661&awid=4670454890121672302

Intersting take - Ricketts may have assumed 40,000 would show up when we opened the gates...


oops

cards press box
06-04-2011, 10:31 AM
Shows that, like the song goes, "Meet the old boss, same as the old boss."

And Cubs fans aren't too thrilled that its turned out that way.

I am serious - Woo-Woo could do a better job than Ricketts has.

If I had any doubts that the Cubs had a problem, that doubt was removed when I saw this picture:

http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y210/Dymaxion/Wpics/tomRicketts.jpg

What does this picture tell us? A lot, actually. Mr. Ricketts, I assume, was among the Cubs faithful in mid '80's who saw Harry Caray as the old, eccentric and tipsy proverbial uncle. I was always amazed that those Cub fans who had no clue of who Caray was in his hey day -- a hard driving powerhouse and probably the best announcer of his generation with the Cardinals and later the White Sox. Harry and Jimmy Piersall were decades ahead of their time but the cool, Cubbie crowd in the Ryno years just veiwed him as a funny little guy to laugh at (and not to laugh with).

The picture tells us something else. Is this a picture of a driven businessman always thinking ahead with a plan for three months from now and three years from now? Or is this a guy with no plan who, at the end of the day, just wants to be at the Wrigley party?

Families in the north burbs can say screw Wrigley we can see them in Milwaukee. There is the unknown percentage that root for both teams....

The team is a wreck, the stadium is a dump and FINALLY Cub fans are staying away.

We'll see. The Cubs have lived off the almost hypnotic grip that television and day baseball gave them over kids who grew up in Chicago in the mid 60's through the mid '70's. But what is happening, I think, is that the children of those TV kids from the '60's and '70's are not as hooked on the Cubs and their parents and won't just keep showing up at what Dave Wills called the Shrine unless they get a good reason to do so.

Fenway, you may have a point. In a few years, the Ricketts ownership group may have a serious declining attendance problem.

Fenway
06-04-2011, 10:44 AM
The NFL loans money for teams to build new stadiums....MLB may have to do that as no way is public funding even an option now.

I think if McDonough was still with the Cubs he would have seen this coming and taken steps. Rocky just promoted him so he not going back.

Ricketts needs someone like him or Larry Lucchino to run things.




If I had any doubts that the Cubs had a problem, that doubt was removed when I saw this picture:

http://s6.photobucket.com/albums/y210/Dymaxion/Wpics/tomRicketts.jpg

What does this picture tell us? A lot, actually. Mr. Ricketts, I assume, was among the Cubs faithful in mid '80's who saw Harry Caray as the old, eccentric and tipsy proverbial uncle. I was always amazed that those Cub fans who had no clue of who Caray was in his hey day -- a hard driving powerhouse and probably the best announcer of his generation with the Cardinals and later the White Sox. Harry and Jimmy Piersall were decades ahead of their time but the cool, Cubbie crowd in the Ryno years just veiwed him as a funny little guy to laugh at (and not to laugh with).

The picture tells us something else. Is this a picture of a driven businessman always thinking ahead with a plan for three months from now and three years from now? Or is this a guy with no plan who, at the end of the day, just wants to be at the Wrigley party?



We'll see. The Cubs have lived off the almost hypnotic grip that television and day baseball gave them over kids who grew up in Chicago in the mid 60's through the mid '70's. But what is happening, I think, is that the children of those TV kids from the '60's and '70's are not as hooked on the Cubs and their parents and won't just keep showing up at what Dave Wills called the Shrine unless they get a good reason to do so.

Fenway, you may have a point. In a few years, the Ricketts ownership group may have a serious declining attendance problem.

southside rocks
06-04-2011, 11:25 AM
Don't know if this has been posted, but here's a YouTube clip of Joe Ricketts talking about why he bought the Cubs.

This was being discussed on the Score the other day. It's quite interesting, about 5 minutes long.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac6h2wczxGA

roylestillman
06-04-2011, 12:12 PM
http://www.csnchicago.com/06/03/11/Rovell-Cubs-debt-a-way-of-life/mobile_landing.html?blockID=532218&feedID=661&awid=4670454890121672302

Intersting take - Ricketts may have assumed 40,000 would show up when we opened the gates...


oops
Of course he did, as about every other Cub fan whose history with the club began in 1984.

With debt service, lack of parking revenue, millions in annual costs of shoring up that 100 year old building and reduced stadium ad revenue, I figure that even with nearly the same payroll, the Cubs have to draw about 700,000 more each year to be on par with the Sox financially.

This family simply spent too much and will never see that money back.

DumpJerry
06-04-2011, 01:08 PM
The Cub faithful in the media think Zell took Ricketts for a ride. I don't see why Zell would do that.








Zell is one of the owners of the White Sox.......:wink:

Frontman
06-04-2011, 01:37 PM
The Cub faithful in the media think Zell took Ricketts for a ride. I don't see why Zell would do that.






Zell is one of the owners of the White Sox.......:wink:

The fans who complain like that need to realize that the Ricketts are adults. If (and I do mean IF) Zell 'took them for a ride' then they (the Ricketts') have only themselves to blame. MLB and Zell were quite open about the financials when it came to the state of the Cubs franchise. If they were too busy picturing full bleachers, guest singers, and the beauty of the 'old ballpark?'

It's on them, not Zell or anyone else for that matter.

SI1020
06-04-2011, 02:25 PM
The fans who complain like that need to realize that the Ricketts are adults. If (and I do mean IF) Zell 'took them for a ride' then they (the Ricketts') have only themselves to blame. MLB and Zell were quite open about the financials when it came to the state of the Cubs franchise. If they were too busy picturing full bleachers, guest singers, and the beauty of the 'old ballpark?'

It's on them, not Zell or anyone else for that matter. Me thinks Zell took them to the cleaners, and like you said if so then oh well. Let them figure out what to do now.

Frontman
06-04-2011, 03:13 PM
Me thinks Zell took them to the cleaners, and like you said if so then oh well. Let them figure out what to do now.

It's one thing to think it; its another to complain about it. I certainly think Zell took advantage of a rich family who were fans first, business orientated second. If they were blind to the reality of the financials?

It's on them.

white sox bill
06-05-2011, 06:28 AM
I've bought and sold a few businesses and I can tell you this is no different than 99% of any other transactions. The seller always wants more than the buyer wants to pay. Its up to the buyer to bring the price down.

Same principle when negotiating in real estate, cars, bank loans etc. Buyer beware, and do your due diligence.

Brian26
06-05-2011, 10:55 AM
It's one thing to think it; its another to complain about it. I certainly think Zell took advantage of a rich family who were fans first, business orientated second. If they were blind to the reality of the financials?

It's on them.

Zell's a businessman first and foremost. I wouldn't classify it as "taking advantage of". Zell had no obligation to give the team away, and nobody put a gun to Ricketts head to buy it either. The Ricketts are a business entity as well. Bottom line, Ricketts got destroyed on this transaction. It's totally on them.

One other thing, they didn't even buy this at the top of the market. The market was well on its way down when this deal went through.

soxyess
06-05-2011, 11:03 AM
I think Zell sensed Ricketts was making a decision based on it being cool to own the Cubs, and Zell stuck hard to his price. Cuban looked at deal from a business standpoint, and im sure if he bid, bid substantially less than Ricketts. MLB wanted the most it could get for a franchise so it pushed the Ricketts ownership. Now the Ricketts have a ton of debt service, an under performing old stadium,no public money for improvements, a bad product, a recession, the most expensive tickets, and disgruntled fans. Ricketts either moves the Cubs to a bigger stadium with more revenue streams, or he guts the team of big payrolls and tries to build it from the minor leagues.(Tampa, KC) Either way the Cubs will be bad for many many years to come. Cub fans wanted a new owner. They screamed for years.

Be careful what you wish for.

Frontman
06-05-2011, 11:40 AM
Zell's a businessman first and foremost. I wouldn't classify it as "taking advantage of". Zell had no obligation to give the team away, and nobody put a gun to Ricketts head to buy it either. The Ricketts are a business entity as well. Bottom line, Ricketts got destroyed on this transaction. It's totally on them.

One other thing, they didn't even buy this at the top of the market. The market was well on its way down when this deal went through.

Maybe "taking advantage" is a bit strong of wording; but its the concept of working to get the best deal possible.

And again, the Ricketts ignored the fact that the economy is down right now, and didn't consider the Cubs (or any sports team) would suffer from it. People are holding onto their extra dollars a bit more nowadays; and just because a product is put out doesn't mean the consumer will pay for it.

Fenway
06-05-2011, 04:32 PM
I saw in the Sat Sun-Times he still hopes the state will buy Wrigley and also sell PSL's like the Bears if need be.

His best hope is Wrigley burns down some night and start over....

The landmark problems are killing revenue stream options...

Frontman
06-05-2011, 05:31 PM
I saw in the Sat Sun-Times he still hopes the state will buy Wrigley and also sell PSL's like the Bears if need be.

His best hope is Wrigley burns down some night and start over....

The landmark problems are killing revenue stream options...

Didn't the Cubs themselves push for the landmark status?

Fenway
06-05-2011, 06:14 PM
Didn't the Cubs themselves push for the landmark status?

The Trib did but they didn't really need the ad panels. 10 years ago I doubt the Trib ever saw a reason to think they would sell the team, it was a cash cow.

They had no debt.