PDA

View Full Version : This Could Have An Impact...


Lip Man 1
10-26-2011, 10:32 PM
Given the state of the economy and the way it will probably be received by the general public:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-sox-bacardi-20111027,0,1482170,full.story

The Sox don't come out looking very good in this even though it doesn't appear that anything was done illegally.

Lip

DumpJerry
10-26-2011, 10:45 PM
This could have an impact on what?

thomas35forever
10-26-2011, 10:48 PM
This could have an impact on what?
On the franchise, thus affecting our ability to sign (or re-sign) players?:scratch:

DumpJerry
10-26-2011, 10:51 PM
On the franchise, thus affecting our ability to sign (or re-sign) players?:scratch:
How? It did not affect the Sox being able to sign Dunn, Konerko and AJ to contracts at the same time.

Viva Medias B's
10-26-2011, 10:56 PM
A few years ago, at least, we all know how we would have reacted to this story given where it came from.

DumpJerry
10-26-2011, 11:24 PM
A few years ago, at least, we all know how we would have reacted to this story given where it came from.
Seeing as how the team does not appear in a negative light by this, not sure how we would have reacted differently a few years ago. The Sox got a new business enterprise with virtually no risk since someone else put their skin in the game and the Sox get the profits.

Lip Man 1
10-27-2011, 12:02 AM
Sorry for not being clear.

My impression is that the public could think the Sox "got away" with something. That the state paid to build a restaurant for them when given the economics today, the money could have been better spent somewhere else.

A segment will think, "if the Sox wanted a restaurant they should have built it themselves."

It also looked to me like the Tribune / WGN is going to make a big deal out of this. The "timing" is interesting given the praise being heaped on the Cubs for the Epstein deal (although we still don't know what the eventual compensation is going to be...)

Lip

Fenway
10-27-2011, 12:10 AM
Tribune off the hook

Somebody is shopping the story to everyone

Crain's

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20111026/NEWS02/111029790/reinsdorfs-sweet-deal-at-u-s-cellular-field-gets-even-sweeter

Fenway
10-27-2011, 12:43 AM
I wonder if somebody is ticked off about this and is making noise.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20111020/BLOGS04/310209999/white-sox-to-open-sports-apparel-store-at-u-s-cellular-field

Nellie_Fox
10-27-2011, 12:53 AM
What I'm hearing is "and they won't give the Cubs any help with The Shrine at all!"

JB98
10-27-2011, 02:03 AM
What I'm hearing is "and they won't give the Cubs any help with The Shrine at all!"

Yep. And it's timed quite nicely with the hiring of Epstein, with Cubbie glee at fever pitch.

DSpivack
10-27-2011, 02:06 AM
What I'm hearing is "and they won't give the Cubs any help with The Shrine at all!"

Yeah, that's certainly an angle I was thinking of and it would make sense, if true.

The amount that the Cubs would need to renovate Wrigley dwarfs the cost of the Bacardi At The Park.

DumpJerry
10-27-2011, 07:29 AM
Sorry for not being clear.

My impression is that the public could think the Sox "got away" with something. That the state paid to build a restaurant for them when given the economics today, the money could have been better spent somewhere else.

A segment will think, "if the Sox wanted a restaurant they should have built it themselves."

It also looked to me like the Tribune / WGN is going to make a big deal out of this. The "timing" is interesting given the praise being heaped on the Cubs for the Epstein deal (although we still don't know what the eventual compensation is going to be...)

Lip
They can think what they want, it won't change anything. It's not like the Sox are doing a major promotion of Bacardi right now and "they" want to throw cold water on it. I know the team store will be opening soon, but how many people will stay away because of how the construction was funded? Zero.

skobabe8
10-27-2011, 08:40 AM
The beer garden and private patio outside bustle on sunny game days as customers sip drinks or cut into one of Gibsons famous steaks.

There are no steaks on the menu. Nice research.

asindc
10-27-2011, 08:45 AM
Yeah, that's certainly an angle I was thinking of and it would make sense, if true.

The amount that the Cubs would need to renovate Wrigley dwarfs the cost of the Bacardi At The Park.

I wonder how well that fact will be conveyed in the media when they report/discuss this.

roylestillman
10-27-2011, 09:05 AM
I wonder how well that fact will be conveyed in the media when they report/discuss this.
Far be it for me to stoke the conspiracy theory fires, but I got a call from a former colleague at the City Tuesday night regarding ISFA funding questions being posed by investigative reporters from the SunTimes through Freedom of Information requests.

Now how odd is it that three seperate media outlets are on to the same story at he same time in the off season, without somebody shopping the story. What could be interesting is that when a story is shopped, and one of the reporters is scooped, does the shopping of the story become the story.

I'll put my tin foil hat on and wait for comments...

hdog1017
10-27-2011, 09:15 AM
I would love to see a detailed look at the financial statements of the White Sox. Maybe Deadspin could somehow get their hands on them like they did some months ago with the Marlins and a few other teams....

Fenway
10-27-2011, 09:48 AM
I would love to see a detailed look at the financial statements of the White Sox. Maybe Deadspin could somehow get their hands on them like they did some months ago with the Marlins and a few other teams....

Good luck with that - even the landlord can't see them.

Same story gets fed to Crain's and the Tribune but by whom?

The renovation of Wrigley could be at play here ( could Kenny be behind these stories?) if for no other reason the Cubs may have to play at The Cell for 1 or 2 years. We all know JR doesn't want that but Selig would order him to do it ( or an even split with Miller Park ). With Theo in charge, Janet Marie Smith will be allowed to do her magic ( and she is good )

The people who own Grandstand must be thrilled by this new store and who paid for that being built?

If you go back to 1991, McCuddy's was promised they could open across the street when their location was lost by the new park but it never happened.

Without being political, we all know Illinois is broke. A couple of states in the Northeast will no longer accept IPass transponders because they haven't been paid.

JR's biggest headache now is he no longer has Jim Thompson to cover his flank at the stadium. He will just hope this will blow over, but a lot depends on who fed the story to the Trib and Crain's in the first place.

skobabe8
10-27-2011, 09:56 AM
I always wondered why McCuddys never had anything in writing with the new stadium deal. Why would they be OK with "We promise we will let you rebuild."?

Max Power
10-27-2011, 10:07 AM
At its core this is old news. Twenty-plus years ago the Sox got a sweetheart deal from the state. As the years have passed I think everyone has realized that fact. At the same time it's not fair to retroactively apply 2011 context to a deal done in 1988.

Without getting into PI territory, I'll just say as an Illinoisan I've never liked the deal the Sox got from the state. I don't hold it against JR though. He's a businessman and he's supposed to work to get the best deal possible. Frankly, he was ahead of his time. Now every business- sports or not- wants a nice deal from their home state.

TomBradley72
10-27-2011, 10:35 AM
At its core this is old news. Twenty-plus years ago the Sox got a sweetheart deal from the state. As the years have passed I think everyone has realized that fact. At the same time it's not fair to retroactively apply 2011 context to a deal done in 1988.

Without getting into PI territory, I'll just say as an Illinoisan I've never liked the deal the Sox got from the state. I don't hold it against JR though. He's a businessman and he's supposed to work to get the best deal possible. Frankly, he was ahead of his time. Now every business- sports or not- wants a nice deal from their home state.

I'm not completely disagreeing with your assessment- but people need to remember that the taxes that supported this are from hotels and rental cars- so primarily paid for by tourists and business travelers.

Viva Medias B's
10-27-2011, 10:37 AM
M&H were tearing Thompson a new one big time this morning, somewhat related to this but really how Thompson's role at Hollinger International (Sun-Times) where M&H used to work.

hawkjt
10-27-2011, 11:22 AM
With the timing of this story,it seems very obvious that this was fed to the media to facilitate(no pun intended) a Cubs money grab for tax cash to rebuild Wrigley for the billionaire owners on the taxpayers dime.

Now 6.9 million is not 300 million,and this is not the 1980's,so while a deal probably will be cut,it aint gonna be easy nor as sweet as Ricketts wants.

The Tribune still owns 5% of the Cubs,remember that.
The bias is obvious when they cite the Captain Morgan club and the Hard Rock at Yankee stadium as somehow comparable to the Bacardi Club.
When the Ricketts and Steinbrenners no longer own their stadiums like Reinsdorf does not own US Cell, then lets make comparison.

The Sox do not own their stadium,and if they sell the franchise the stadium is not part of the deal,unlike the Cubs and Yanks,so why would a state agency become involved in building a resturant in those stadiums? It was a dumb comparison.

Now,you could make a case that the lease the Sox have thru 2029 is tantamount to ownership, and that the 2.7 million annual rent is awfully sweet....it is.

But that ship has sailed,Tom Ricketts,and you knew that when you bought the Cubs or you did not do your due diligence.
As a property tax payer in this town,no amount of sweet talking by Theo or Rahm is going to sell a giveaway of taxpayer revenue to billionaires...and I certainly hope that Ricketts is not stupid enough to think that hiring Theo was going to soften the chicago taxpayers hearts toward lining his pockets....Theo's dreamy? who gives a rats arse?

Golden Sox
10-27-2011, 11:29 AM
The new White Sox Stadium was built for $120 million dollars. The new stadium for the Bears cost $630 million dollars. Is there anybody on this planet going to say the White Sox stadium deal was better than what the Bears received? And is anybody going to say that the new Soldiers Field was worth building for 630 million dollars?

hawkjt
10-27-2011, 11:39 AM
The new White Sox Stadium was built for $120 million dollars. The new stadium for the Bears cost $630 million dollars. Is there anybody on this planet going to say the White Sox stadium deal was better than what the Bears received? And is anybody going to say that the new Soldiers Field was worth building for 630 million dollars?

Soldier Field- Daley's Folly.
Between Milleum Park and Soldier Field, no one could overspend better than Daley.
I will never forget how Houston built Reliant Stadium,an 80k,retractable roof new stadium for 400 million at the same time. I was desperately hoping the Bears would build a Reliant next to Soxpark,creating a huge synergy for revitalization of the area, and making it a year-round entertainment district with Super Bowls,Final Fours, concerts year round,ect...but no...gotta build the monstrosity on the lake,with 60k seats,and spend a billion by the time all the infrastructure crap was done.
What a ripoff.

voodoochile
10-27-2011, 12:07 PM
I'm thinking this money is some of the increased revenue the Sox were guaranteed when the state redid SF though the IFSA. The Sox had an agreement about that bond generated money when the new stadium was built a bunch of that money went to the last decade's worth of improvements to the Cell. I'm betting this is just a continuation of that flow and that there was no additional money invested from the state.

doublem23
10-27-2011, 12:17 PM
Soldier Field- Daley's Folly.
Between Milleum Park and Soldier Field, no one could overspend better than Daley.
I will never forget how Houston built Reliant Stadium,an 80k,retractable roof new stadium for 400 million at the same time. I was desperately hoping the Bears would build a Reliant next to Soxpark,creating a huge synergy for revitalization of the area, and making it a year-round entertainment district with Super Bowls,Final Fours, concerts year round,ect...but no...gotta build the monstrosity on the lake,with 60k seats,and spend a billion by the time all the infrastructure crap was done.
What a ripoff.

From a fan's in-game perspective, Soldier Field is generally regarded as the best stadium in the NFL.

Noneck
10-27-2011, 12:19 PM
Looking at this sweetheart deal the Sox got and I wonder now if the Sox could ever lose money, we will never know for sure.

DumpJerry
10-27-2011, 12:20 PM
From a fan's in-game perspective, Soldier Field is generally regarded as the best stadium in the NFL.
It is pretty sweet inside.

roylestillman
10-27-2011, 12:22 PM
I'm not completely disagreeing with your assessment- but people need to remember that the taxes that supported this are from hotels and rental cars- so primarily paid for by tourists and business travelers.
...and $10 million annually from State and the City's share of the income tax.

doublem23
10-27-2011, 12:27 PM
It is pretty sweet inside.

It really is. Ugly as sin on the outside, but thanks to having to squeeze 65,000 seats in between the old columns, it's actually a wonderful place to watch football.

gosox41
10-27-2011, 10:29 PM
Yeah, that's certainly an angle I was thinking of and it would make sense, if true.

The amount that the Cubs would need to renovate Wrigley dwarfs the cost of the Bacardi At The Park.


I was thinking about this earlier today when I saw the Trib. I have little doubt Ricketts is behind this. It's pure politics plain and simple.


Bob

DSpivack
10-27-2011, 11:17 PM
It really is. Ugly as sin on the outside, but thanks to having to squeeze 65,000 seats in between the old columns, it's actually a wonderful place to watch football.

65,000? Pfft, where do you get the extra 5,000 seats from? :tongue:

doublem23
10-27-2011, 11:34 PM
65,000? Pfft, where do you get the extra 5,000 seats from? :tongue:

Only 3,500... Sorry, I rounded up. :redface:

DumpJerry
10-27-2011, 11:47 PM
65,000? Pfft, where do you get the extra 5,000 seats from? :tongue:
When I took Mrs. Dumpjerry to her first Bears' game a few years ago, I told her as we walked up to the Soldier Field that she would feel like she's at a minor league baseball game.

She went to the University of Tennessee, 100,000 is a decent crowd.

cards press box
10-28-2011, 03:44 AM
They can think what they want, it won't change anything. It's not like the Sox are doing a major promotion of Bacardi right now and "they" want to throw cold water on it. I know the team store will be opening soon, but how many people will stay away because of how the construction was funded? Zero.

Absolutely right.

The new White Sox Stadium was built for $120 million dollars. The new stadium for the Bears cost $630 million dollars. Is there anybody on this planet going to say the White Sox stadium deal was better than what the Bears received? And is anybody going to say that the new Soldiers Field was worth building for 630 million dollars?

This is a good point, too. Given the cost of publicly fund stadia these days, the Cell was a bargain. It's a good a stadium and after the last two rocky years, I am actually optimistic about next year.

gobears1987
10-28-2011, 08:04 AM
Looking at this sweetheart deal the Sox got and I wonder now if the Sox could ever lose money, we will never know for sure.

http://ology.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/post-image/adam-dunn-free-agent-chicago-white-sox.jpg

Who has two thumbs and will keep the team losing money the next 3 years?


THIS GUY!

russ99
10-28-2011, 08:25 PM
Seems like a non-story to me.

The state owns the facility. If the Sox wanted to improve the facility, then the only way they could make this improvement is to get the state to help out.

soxinem1
10-30-2011, 11:49 AM
The stadium deal today is pennies versus what has been built in other cities.

And compared to the new Soldier Field cost, the city receives far less tax revenue from 60K fans eight times a year than it does from a park that draws 25-30K fans a game, even in bad years, and plays 81 games a year.

Additionally, no one mentioned that the $$$$ the White Sox received from naming rights upgraded a ballpark the team does not own.

I did not like the original Cell at all, and even frowned upon the deal when it was made (especially the rent and other sweet perks the team got), however since 2003 it has become a great place to watch a game, and it kept my favorite team in Chicago.

The only reason this story gets any traction is because of the dire financial situations of both Chicago and Illinois. If we were in Connecticut or New Hampshire, no one would even care.

And regarding Theo Epstein, his bloated signings of Matsuzaka, JD Drew, and Lackey wasted over over $200 million of BOS money.

That alone is more than the original cost to build The Cell and the subsequent upgrades. Nuff said.

Golden Sox
10-30-2011, 12:58 PM
The Bears have a gift shop at Soldiers Field. Did the Bears pay for the store? Are they giving any of the profits to any government agency?

Wsoxmike59
10-30-2011, 01:31 PM
I'm thinking this money is some of the increased revenue the Sox were guaranteed when the state redid SF though the IFSA. The Sox had an agreement about that bond generated money when the new stadium was built a bunch of that money went to the last decade's worth of improvements to the Cell. I'm betting this is just a continuation of that flow and that there was no additional money invested from the state.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. You are correct Voodoo, the White Sox were earmarked $20-22M dollars in the Soldier Field ISFA renovation deal to do infrastructure improvements and any remodeling or refurbishing as they saw fit.

This deal was struck back in 2002-'03 if I remember correctly. I found it curious that the Tribune failed to mention that in the Bacardi At the Park article this week.

Lip Man 1
10-30-2011, 04:15 PM
Maybe you should e-mail them and let them know about it. Provide any documentation that you can too. (i.e. links)

Lip

DumpJerry
10-30-2011, 05:31 PM
The Bears have a gift shop at Soldiers Field. Did the Bears pay for the store? Are they giving any of the profits to any government agency?
The White Sox already have about six or seven gift shops already at Comiskey, been there for a long, long time. But then, I'm pretty sure all MLB teams have gift shops on-premises (I've seen them at every park I've been at). Further proof that this is a non-story.

Fenway
10-30-2011, 05:45 PM
The White Sox already have about six or seven gift shops already at Comiskey, been there for a long, long time. But then, I'm pretty sure all MLB teams have gift shops on-premises (I've seen them at every park I've been at). Further proof that this is a non-story.

Yes during games.....but not on off-days.

The Red Sox do NOT own the team store across from Fenway. To get the rights to the street being open before games, the Red Sox gave the rights to a team store to Twins.

http://yawkeywaystore.com/

Wsoxmike59
10-30-2011, 06:26 PM
Maybe you should e-mail them and let them know about it. Provide any documentation that you can too. (i.e. links)

Lip

http://home.uchicago.edu/~arsx/Bears&SoldierFieldJuly04.pdf

Lip on page 19 of this document they mention the Sox got in on the Soldier Field deal in the fine print.

I also remember reading about it (I think in Crain's) at the time the deal was struck, and wondered how Reinsdorf was able to finagle additional funding to fix up the Cell aka New Comiskey.

Mike

DumpJerry
10-30-2011, 06:32 PM
Yes during games.....but not on off-days.

The main gift shop on the 100 Level is open on off days and during the off season.

I've been there on such days.

DrCrawdad
10-30-2011, 08:35 PM
Sorry for not being clear.

My impression is that the public could think the Sox "got away" with something. That the state paid to build a restaurant for them when given the economics today, the money could have been better spent somewhere else.

A segment will think, "if the Sox wanted a restaurant they should have built it themselves."

It also looked to me like the Tribune / WGN is going to make a big deal out of this. The "timing" is interesting given the praise being heaped on the Cubs for the Epstein deal (although we still don't know what the eventual compensation is going to be...)

Lip

I wonder if somebody is ticked off about this and is making noise.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20111020/BLOGS04/310209999/white-sox-to-open-sports-apparel-store-at-u-s-cellular-field

Yep. And it's timed quite nicely with the hiring of Epstein, with Cubbie glee at fever pitch.

With the timing of this story,it seems very obvious that this was fed to the media to facilitate(no pun intended) a Cubs money grab for tax cash to rebuild Wrigley for the billionaire owners on the taxpayers dime.

Now 6.9 million is not 300 million,and this is not the 1980's,so while a deal probably will be cut,it aint gonna be easy nor as sweet as Ricketts wants.

The Tribune still owns 5% of the Cubs,remember that.
The bias is obvious when they cite the Captain Morgan club and the Hard Rock at Yankee stadium as somehow comparable to the Bacardi Club.
When the Ricketts and Steinbrenners no longer own their stadiums like Reinsdorf does not own US Cell, then lets make comparison.

The Sox do not own their stadium,and if they sell the franchise the stadium is not part of the deal,unlike the Cubs and Yanks,so why would a state agency become involved in building a resturant in those stadiums? It was a dumb comparison.

Now,you could make a case that the lease the Sox have thru 2029 is tantamount to ownership, and that the 2.7 million annual rent is awfully sweet....it is.

But that ship has sailed,Tom Ricketts,and you knew that when you bought the Cubs or you did not do your due diligence.
As a property tax payer in this town,no amount of sweet talking by Theo or Rahm is going to sell a giveaway of taxpayer revenue to billionaires...and I certainly hope that Ricketts is not stupid enough to think that hiring Theo was going to soften the chicago taxpayers hearts toward lining his pockets....Theo's dreamy? who gives a rats arse?

I was thinking about this earlier today when I saw the Trib. I have little doubt Ricketts is behind this. It's pure politics plain and simple.

Something reeks about this story and it's timing. Cubbie fan, Barry Rozner, said he thinks there should be an investigation (or investigative story) about the persons behind this story.

Lip Man 1
10-30-2011, 09:37 PM
In many ways the timing reminds me of the "bad neighboorhood" story run on the front page of the Tribune the day the Sox hosted Game #1 of the 2005 ALDS.

Coincidence? Me thinks not...

At least back in 05 the Tribune Company owned the Cubs, they don't now...so you wonder what the basis for their motivation is.

Lip

pdimas
10-31-2011, 10:30 AM
It wouldn't be the first time I've seen the Tribune sit on a story and later present it to shed bad light on a target.

They would do it with the O'Hare expansion, which they were against, all of the time. Whenever something favoring the expansion would happen the Tribune would simultaneously run an article that put the expansion in bad light. Sometimes these "unfavorable" stories happened months before they were presented in the paper but of course a time line was never given. By the time they appeared in the paper they were no longer relevant but the average reader wouldn't know that.

Fenway
11-08-2011, 04:06 PM
Sun Times

http://www.suntimes.com/csp/cms/sites/dt.common.streams.StreamServer.cls?STREAMOID=qt17y n1F9rJduQrEbP9_Ic$daE2N3K4ZzOUsqbU5sYsoUSLIiaKHScE _FnZYYZQDWCsjLu883Ygn4B49Lvm9bPe2QeMKQdVeZmXF$9l$4 uCZ8QDXhaHEp3rvzXRJFdy0KqPHLoMevcTLo3h8xh70Y6N_U_C ryOsw6FTOdKL_jpQ-&CONTENTTYPE=image/jpeg

Fenway
11-18-2011, 05:17 PM
The Mayor just declared war against the White Sox

Emanuel dumps Daley nephew, 2 others, from sports stadium board

http://www.suntimes.com/8905609-417/emanuel-dumps-daley-nephew-2-others-from-sports-stadium-board.html

tebman
11-18-2011, 05:33 PM
In many ways the timing reminds me of the "bad neighboorhood" story run on the front page of the Tribune the day the Sox hosted Game #1 of the 2005 ALDS.

Coincidence? Me thinks not...

At least back in 05 the Tribune Company owned the Cubs, they don't now...so you wonder what the basis for their motivation is.

Lip

Who knows? The Tribune is in such corporate dysfunction that it might be as simple as an angle to sell papers. George Knue huffed and puffed on here several years ago defending the Tribune's spotless integrity, and we didn't buy it. Now that they own only 5% of the Cubs I doubt that it's their investment they're worried about as much as appealing to their North Shore customer base.

Reinsdorf's a smart guy. He had to know that he was setting up the Sox for this kind of blowback when they made the deal. But maybe he didn't care because in the end they did make the deal. And to a good businessman, that's what's important.

Lip Man 1
11-19-2011, 01:45 AM
The Mayor replaced three members of the Illinois Sports Stadium Authority board today. Tribune says part of the reason might be blowback from this White Sox restaurant paid for with tax payer money.

Lip

slavko
11-19-2011, 11:40 AM
Who knows? The Tribune is in such corporate dysfunction that it might be as simple as an angle to sell papers. George Knue huffed and puffed on here several years ago defending the Tribune's spotless integrity, and we didn't buy it. Now that they own only 5% of the Cubs I doubt that it's their investment they're worried about as much as appealing to their North Shore customer base.

Reinsdorf's a smart guy. He had to know that he was setting up the Sox for this kind of blowback when they made the deal. But maybe he didn't care because in the end they did make the deal. And to a good businessman, that's what's important.

I question again JR's status as a great businessman. From resorting to a threat to leave instead of selling the deal as a necessity, to letting KW create an unbsustainable business model, to peeving off the public at every opportunity, I could make a case for the opposite.

Fenway
11-19-2011, 11:46 AM
The Mayor replaced three members of the Illinois Sports Stadium Authority board today. Tribune says part of the reason might be blowback from this White Sox restaurant paid for with tax payer money.

Lip

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2854530&postcount=51

Fenway
11-19-2011, 12:14 PM
I question again JR's status as a great businessman. From resorting to a threat to leave instead of selling the deal as a necessity, to letting KW create an unbsustainable business model, to peeving off the public at every opportunity, I could make a case for the opposite.

The genius of JR is letting people think he is hurting with the White Sox when today in 2011 he is more likely in far better shape than Ricketts is.

The White Sox now generate more TV revenue than the Cubs by having more games on Comcast which pays more than WGN. Ricketts is stuck with a bad deal that Zell made that gives the Tribune a sweetheart deal for TV and radio.

He isn't paying any property tax on The Cell like the Cubs do at Wrigley, and what he pays in rent depends on attendance. He pays for upkeep but that is a lot less for a 20 year old stadium than one that is 100.

The team also has a good source of revenue with the club level and suites.

The White Sox also have in stadium advertising in abundance while the Cubs options are very limited.

His biggest issue is that season tickets top off at around 21,000 - nobody wants season tickets in the upper deck and once the season begins most fans are savvy enough to check out Stub Hub or other secondary ticket outlets.

The team may have lost money in 2011 - but if things were that bad some of the partners would be selling and that isn't the case.

The previous mayor looked the other way on many things because of his Bridgeport roots - those days are gone.

roylestillman
11-19-2011, 12:57 PM
I think saying that Rahm declares war on Sox is a little harsh. He put his guys on the board and they are all come from financial/ investment firms in the City. A couple of them are no strangers to various public sector boards. The biggest impact was the removal of Jim Thompson from the ISFA board. He was the one that did JR's bidding. Those dynamics have all changed, as I assume will the mission, which I'm sure will expand to include Wrigley.
What JR has going for him is that lease, revised and sweetened twice to accommodate the US Cellular money and then the Soldier Field deal. It is iron clad in setting out the pots of money that come his way via improvements and maintenance of The Cell. It protects him from the backloaded debt service payments coming from Soldier Field, and leaves little financial room for Wrigley's renovation.

DumpJerry
11-19-2011, 02:43 PM
I question again JR's status as a great businessman. From resorting to a threat to leave instead of selling the deal as a necessity, to letting KW create an unbsustainable business model, to peeving off the public at every opportunity, I could make a case for the opposite.
If you knew his life story before he bought the White Sox, you would disagree with your post.

In fact, if you looked at how he has run the White Sox, you might disagree with your post.

SI1020
11-19-2011, 03:43 PM
If you knew his life story before he bought the White Sox, you would disagree with your post.

In fact, if you looked at how he has run the White Sox, you might disagree with your post. I'm not a big fan of Reinsdorf, but if you're a city kid who grew up rough around the edges you have to give the man his props. He has done really well with his life. Dumb he is not. Neither is he a bad businessman. He's had his mistakes and failures but who the hell hasn't? He also appears to me to be a complex mixture of soft hearted sentimentalist and hard as a rock negotiator. His tenure as head honcho of the Sox has reflected that. There have been many phases in the Reinsdorf era. Nevertheless as smart and as tough as Reinsdorf can be the recent brouhaha over Bacardi and the lease does not bode well for him and the Sox. Rahm is a tough customer too and the state of Illinois is beyond broke. I see a one two punch coming his way.

DSpivack
11-19-2011, 04:07 PM
I'm not a big fan of Reinsdorf, but if you're a city kid who grew up rough around the edges you have to give the man his props. He has done really well with his life. Dumb he is not. Neither is he a bad businessman. He's had his mistakes and failures but who the hell hasn't? He also appears to me to be a complex mixture of soft hearted sentimentalist and hard as a rock negotiator. His tenure as head honcho of the Sox has reflected that. There have been many phases in the Reinsdorf era. Nevertheless as smart and as tough as Reinsdorf can be the recent brouhaha over Bacardi and the lease does not bode well for him and the Sox. Rahm is a tough customer too and the state of Illinois is beyond broke. I see a one two punch coming his way.

I don't really see what that one-two punch would be, that lease is pretty set in stone.

Reinsdorf may be a good businessman, but I think his tenure with the White Sox shows that PR is not his strong suit, to say the least.

kufram
11-19-2011, 04:13 PM
I don't know anything about JR the business man or Illinois property dealings. What I do know is that Paul Konerko kept the winning ball from the World Series and gave it to Jerry Reinsdorf at the celebration for all of Chicago to see. PK didn't have to do that. That, and how JR received the ball, tells me something about what kind of a man he is.

Fenway
11-19-2011, 04:32 PM
While I am certain that JR's has an ironclad lease, I also know Chicago.

The city has ways to make simple things suddenly hard.


I'm not a big fan of Reinsdorf, but if you're a city kid who grew up rough around the edges you have to give the man his props. He has done really well with his life. Dumb he is not. Neither is he a bad businessman. He's had his mistakes and failures but who the hell hasn't? He also appears to me to be a complex mixture of soft hearted sentimentalist and hard as a rock negotiator. His tenure as head honcho of the Sox has reflected that. There have been many phases in the Reinsdorf era. Nevertheless as smart and as tough as Reinsdorf can be the recent brouhaha over Bacardi and the lease does not bode well for him and the Sox. Rahm is a tough customer too and the state of Illinois is beyond broke. I see a one two punch coming his way.

SI1020
11-19-2011, 05:10 PM
While I am certain that JR's has an ironclad lease, I also know Chicago.

The city has ways to make simple things suddenly hard. I'm an OF so I have a different perspective. The city has changed in many ways since I was a kid living there, but it's still Chicago. Often as subtle as the jaw breaking sucker punch you never saw coming. Maybe they can't touch the Sox with this but then again it's Chicago. You never know.

Fenway
11-19-2011, 05:34 PM
I'm an OF so I have a different perspective. The city has changed in many ways since I was a kid living there, but it's still Chicago. Often as subtle as the jaw breaking sucker punch you never saw coming. Maybe they can't touch the Sox with this but then again it's Chicago. You never know.

Hypothetical situation -

City suddenly passes a law limiting the number of night games in the 11th Ward because residents in a senior citizen building can't sleep. :tongue:

Sounds silly doesn't it. But that is what cities do at times.

Trying to keep politics out of this but this does involve the White Sox.

DumpJerry
11-19-2011, 10:08 PM
I don't really see what that one-two punch would be, that lease is pretty set in stone.

Reinsdorf may be a good businessman, but I think his tenure with the White Sox shows that PR is not his strong suit, to say the least.
Public relations skills were not required for his pre-White Sox successes. He worked at the IRS right out of law school where he learned how to work the Tax Code-an important skill if you're going to make money with money. He then started a real investment firm in his garage which became very successful (sounds like Steve Jobs?). So successful that American Express bought it for a ****load of money. He then used the money to buy the White Sox. He then bought the Bulls when they had drafted Michael Jordan, but not yet signed him, in other words he got the Bulls at the sweet spot of the investment.

Fenway
11-19-2011, 10:24 PM
JR went to a public high school in Brooklyn that has a very impressive alumni.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erasmus_Hall_High_School

Brooklyn of the 1950's was changing and that inspired many to push harder to escape. Of course the Dodgers meant everything to them.

He was 21 when the Dodgers left Brooklyn but by then he had gone to college in Washington and moved to Chicago. Still I find it fascinating that he was willing to be Walter O'Malley to Sox fans if he didn't get his way. Was he prepared to be like Art Modell and never step foot in his adopted city again if he had moved the club?

I have no doubt he loves the game - but he also loves power. At the age of 21 he played the University of Chicago against Northwestern to get the best deal for him for law school.

He stinks at PR - but he doesn't care.

Public relations skills were not required for his pre-White Sox successes. He worked at the IRS right out of law school where he learned how to work the Tax Code-an important skill if you're going to make money with money. He then started a real investment firm in his garage which became very successful (sounds like Steve Jobs?). So successful that American Express bought it for a ****load of money. He then used the money to buy the White Sox. He then bought the Bulls when they had drafted Michael Jordan, but not yet signed him, in other words he got the Bulls at the sweet spot of the investment.

SI1020
11-20-2011, 09:42 AM
He stinks at PR - but he doesn't care. That is so true.

Golden Sox
11-20-2011, 11:14 AM
The State of Illinois agreed to build a new White Sox stadium. When there was no progress on the new stadium the White Sox started talking to Florida about moving the team to St. Pete. If the State of Illinois would of proceeded with building the stadium the White Sox would not of threatened to move to Florida. Eddie Einhorn, and not Jerry Reinsdorf was the main person who wanted to move to Florida. As a matter of fact, after the White Sox agreed to stay in Chicago, Einhorn sold virtually all of his shares of the White Sox to Reinsdorf. Einhorn owns less than 1% of the White Sox today and lives in Arizona. Einhorn basically has nothing to do with the White Sox today.

roylestillman
11-30-2011, 02:00 PM
More trouble for the White Sox landlord:

http://www.chicagonewscoop.org/city-taxpayers-on-hook-for-shortfall-at-sports-stadium-board/

I think this may trigger a major overhaul of this deal which could impact the White Sox, Bears, and any chance of a Wrigley deal.

Lip Man 1
11-30-2011, 04:16 PM
Tribune is right on this one as well with both feet:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-taxpayers-helped-pay-for-work-at-us-cellular-field-soldier-field-20111130,0,3031072.story

Lip

DSpivack
11-30-2011, 11:58 PM
More trouble for the White Sox landlord:

http://www.chicagonewscoop.org/city-taxpayers-on-hook-for-shortfall-at-sports-stadium-board/

I think this may trigger a major overhaul of this deal which could impact the White Sox, Bears, and any chance of a Wrigley deal.

They're not going to break that contract, not if Reinsdorf still owns the Sox.

WhiteSox5187
12-01-2011, 01:05 AM
They're not going to break that contract, not if Reinsdorf still owns the Sox.

If it's a battle of wits and knowledge of real estate law between Jerry Reisendorf and Emil Jones, Jerry will win. If Rahm and the city of Chicago start playing hardball, then it becomes more difficult for Jerry but he might still come out on top

JC456
12-01-2011, 10:51 AM
So I guess I'm lost. Why is this a negative to the White Sox? Do you think someone is getting paid from the team? Nope. I'd look at the sales tax that is made out of that place and I bet the return on investment is quite good there. It was packed for every game I attended last year (27). If anyone is at risk of anything based on this article is Jim Thompson. Who is he to give away tax payer money. All the Sox did was say okay! Wouldn't you if someone gave it out? Wouldn't the Cubs if they were smart enough to take advantage of it? Oh, that's it, the Sox look smart because they did something apparently that no other team has done. Had the state pay for something extra without having to threaten anything. If you read it, this was all Jim Thompson's idea! My word!

Vernam
12-02-2011, 03:37 PM
At first I was surprised no one had posted this update (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-01/news/chi-mayor-dont-use-taxpayers-as-atm-machine-to-cover-costs-at-us-cellular-field-soldier-field-20111201_1_hotel-tax-atm-machine-taxpayers) from today's print edition of the Trib, but then I noticed they've got it thoroughly buried on their website. Had to Google creatively to find it at all. The gist is that yesterday's story about a $1.1M shortfall was wrong, and the amount is $185,000. There had been an "accounting error" on the sports authority's part. Or maybe the heat got too much and they "found" the money.

Definitely more than meets the eye here.

Vernam

mrfourni
12-02-2011, 03:52 PM
At first I was surprised no one had posted this update (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-01/news/chi-mayor-dont-use-taxpayers-as-atm-machine-to-cover-costs-at-us-cellular-field-soldier-field-20111201_1_hotel-tax-atm-machine-taxpayers) from today's print edition of the Trib, but then I noticed they've got it thoroughly buried on their website. Had to Google creatively to find it at all. The gist is that yesterday's story about a $1.1M shortfall was wrong, and the amount is $185,000. There had been an "accounting error" on the sports authority's part. Or maybe the heat got too much and they "found" the money.

Definitely more than meets the eye here.

Vernam

The other thing I get from the last two articles is that the majority of the money is going towards the Soldier Field rebuild/renovation yet Reinsdorf/Thompson is taking the brunt of the criticism vs Halas/Daley. $600M+ for Soldier Filed vs. ~200M towards US Cellular

Fenway
12-05-2011, 01:15 AM
State worker gave promoter use of Sox skybox, got Lollapalooza passes

http://www.suntimes.com/9161027-417/state-worker-gave-promoter-use-of-sox-skybox-got-lollapalooza-passes.html

Wsoxmike59
12-09-2011, 08:35 AM
I've often wondered how much tax revenue the City, State and other various agencies have made off of the New Comiskey Park/U.S. Cellular Field since it opened in 1991. I googled it and came up with this.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-07/news/ct-edit-sox-20111107_1_sports-authority-sales-taxes-taxpayers

The paragraph below jumped out at me. If this is true, the state has more than made back their money on the investment of the new ballpark on the Southside.

He (Jim Thompson) also said the Sox are responsible for $250 million in tax revenue collected since 1991 by Illinois, Chicago, Cook County and the Regional Transportation Authority. We'd have missed out on all that money and a World Series championship! if the White Sox had moved to Tampa Bay.