PDA

View Full Version : Bleacher boxes & more to be added at "Northside Ballpark"


WhiteSoxFan84
01-16-2006, 02:37 AM
McGuire said 253 stadium seats with backs on them will be built in the far right-field bleachers and sold on a reserved basis as "bleacher box seats." McGuire said the seats are targeted toward "aging Baby Boomers who want the bleacher experience but can't handle the bench seats, or maybe some of the language they might hear." Like the premium "dugout box seats" behind home plate and the "bullpen boxes" between the visitors' dugout and bullpen, the new "bleacher boxes" will be sold separately from the individual seats, which go on sale Feb. 24. No date was given, but Maloney said it's expected to be sometime in March. No price was given, but they're expected to cost significantly more than a regular bleacher ticket.

AWESOME news, more money to spend on key free agents that will make the team better!...........
http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_113961.jpghttp://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_133982.jpghttp://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_118065.jpghttp://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_150218.jpg

............nevermind.


Linky (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-060115cubsbleachers,1,3380582.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines)

MUsoxfan
01-16-2006, 02:55 AM
Well, if you build it they will come. I don't blame the Cubs on this. Their fanbase is ready and willing to be fleeced. To them, it's well worth it to pay several dollars more for a seat that has a back on it

soxwon
01-16-2006, 07:06 AM
Did ya notice besides the white sox the cubs only have det coming in?
im suprised usually teams have 2 teams coming in besides their rival.

the tigers ummm big draw.

TornLabrum
01-16-2006, 08:07 AM
Here's my favorite part of the whole article:

McGuire said, "the reality is people clearly don't like" Wrigley Field Premium, a Tribune Co. subsidiary that resells Cubs tickets that used to go to group sales or VIPs. McGuire said the Cubs sold about 15,000 tickets to Wrigley Field Premium in '05, calling it a "very, very small percentage" of the 3 million-plus tickets sold.

Nothing was said about the Cubs dumping this "unpopular" venture, though.

Hangar18
01-16-2006, 08:25 AM
Well, if you build it they will come. I don't blame the Cubs on this. Their fanbase is ready and willing to be fleeced. To them, it's well worth it to pay several dollars more for a seat that has a back on it

You hit the nail on the head. the Tribune knows these people are stupid and are willing to pay Big Money for anything as long as its got the cubby stamp on it ......... Sheep Never Learn

34 Inch Stick
01-16-2006, 09:13 AM
A seat with a back on it is not a bleacher, it is just a seat in the outfield.

itsnotrequired
01-16-2006, 09:14 AM
A seat with a back on it is not a bleacher, it is just a seat in the outfield.

So what do you call the bleachers at the Cell?:tongue:

Hitmen77
01-16-2006, 09:34 AM
I've sat in the Wrigley bleachers a few times (years ago, before I decided to stop putting money in the Trib's pockets) and I have to say that those are the most uncomfortable seats I have ever sat in at a major sporting event. I'll gladly take the seat-backs at The Cell anyday.

The fact that those Wrigley bleacher seats are so prized is just a testament to the power of marketing/image and the stupidity of the consumer. In addition to being uncomfortable, those seats are no closer to the action than the outfield seats at any ballpark. They were once the 'cheap seats' for a reason.

Hangar18
01-16-2006, 09:39 AM
Notice how the article also quietly acknowledges the fact that the Cubs
have been very SHADY about the whole process ......."Because the Cubs have refused to talk about the project since it begain in October...."

The article leads you to believe that NOBODY knew what the cubs were up to, the Cubs were supposed to be expanding their bleachers, NOT TEARING DOWN THE ENTIRE THING and building Restaurants and more expensive seats. The cubs pulled a fast one on their own fans ........typical of an Arrogant Corporation

Chicken Dinner
01-16-2006, 10:55 AM
Notice how the article also quietly acknowledges the fact that the Cubs
have been very SHADY about the whole process ......."Because the Cubs have refused to talk about the project since it begain in October...."

The article leads you to believe that NOBODY knew what the cubs were up to, the Cubs were supposed to be expanding their bleachers, NOT TEARING DOWN THE ENTIRE THING and building Restaurants and more expensive seats. The cubs pulled a fast one on their own fans ........typical of an Arrogant Corporation

Isn't that when the Cubs start all their projects.....in October? They don't have to worry about baseball being played their.

Hitmen77
01-16-2006, 11:10 AM
Here's another curious quote from the article:

A lot of people on the field want to compare us to the Red Sox, and they want us to have the result of the Red Sox," he said. "We certainly have not had the results the Red Sox have had, but if you compare the pricing at Fenway Park to Wrigley Field, you feel better about the prices we're charging."

:?: So, Cub fans should feel better about the Cubs ticket prices because they're better than the prices the Red Sox are charging? Why? Because Wrigely and Fenway are both old? Fenway is 1,000 miles away and in a different metro area.

itsnotrequired
01-16-2006, 11:23 AM
Here's another curious quote from the article:



:?: So, Cub fans should feel better about the Cubs ticket prices because they're better than the prices the Red Sox are charging? Why because Wrigely and Fenway are both old? Fenway is 1,000 miles away and in a different metro area.

The Red Sox at least try to put a winner on the field. They have had a winning record for 9 of the last 10 seasons, have gone to the post-season for 5 of those 10 seasons and won the whole show to boot.

You have to go back to 1977 to get 9 winning Cub seasons (and that '77 season was a .500 one at that). In the last 10 years they have only gone to the post-season twice.

Yes, comparisons to the Red Sox is a logical course of action.

:rolleyes:

HomeFish
01-16-2006, 11:26 AM
the tigers ummm big draw.

1945 World Series rematch, so it actually might be.

Chicken Dinner
01-16-2006, 11:28 AM
Here's another curious quote from the article:



:?: So, Cub fans should feel better about the Cubs ticket prices because they're better than the prices the Red Sox are charging? Why because Wrigely and Fenway are both old? Fenway is 1,000 miles away and in a different metro area.

Cub pricing is better because they make up the difference by owning the Tribune Scalping Corp.

SaltyPretzel
01-16-2006, 12:38 PM
1945 World Series rematch, so it actually might be.

Their first visit to Chicago in 60 years!

slavko
01-16-2006, 12:40 PM
The Red Sox at least try to put a winner on the field. They have had a winning record for 9 of the last 10 seasons, have gone to the post-season for 5 of those 10 seasons and won the whole show to boot.

You have to go back to 1977 to get 9 winning Cub seasons (and that '77 season was a .500 one at that). In the last 10 years they have only gone to the post-season twice.

Yes, comparisons to the Red Sox is a logical course of action.

:rolleyes:

The not-so-subtle reason for the Red Sox comparison is that the Red Sox have the highest ticket prices in MLB, so it makes anyone else look good.

Notice how the Cub front office guys stick their heads out of the foxhole once in a while and then you don't see their names in print for a long time? I guess it's a way of avoiding the heat.

miker
01-16-2006, 01:19 PM
Quote:
McGuire said the seats are targeted toward "aging Baby Boomers who want the bleacher experience but can't handle the bench seats, or maybe some of the language they might hear."

Wait a minute, I thought only Sox fans had poor posture and used bad language?

Frater Perdurabo
01-16-2006, 01:24 PM
Regarding the building to be built on the "triangle" property adjacent to the park:

McGuire mentioned a fan could call from the park on his cell phone, order food and go pick it up.

Cubs' ownership certainly knows their target demographic!
:roflmao::rolling::roflmao::rolling:

ewokpelts
01-16-2006, 03:06 PM
The family section is also being moved to the tiniest section the urinal...section 101...the bleachers are now 100% trixie/fratboy

Gene

Sox-o-matic
01-16-2006, 06:08 PM
I don't see the point of adding new seats to raise the ticket prices. All they have to do is erect a statue of a giant cow outside the ballpark (or better yet inside to match the crap on the field) and all the hayseed yokels from Iowa will happily throw on a buisness suit and a couple more bumperstickers to see another 'historic site' in Chicago. Another $40 per seat or so wouldn't be a problem.

SouthSide_HitMen
01-16-2006, 07:08 PM
The family section is also being moved to the tiniest section the urinal...section 101...the bleachers are now 100% trixie/fratboy

Gene

Speaking of Trixies, when is their website going to be up and running? I hope the Tribune fixes it before Opening Day 2006 or I'm going to get in my Jetta, grab a Frappuccino & Scone on the way and march up to Tribune Towers to demand something be done.

http://www.lptrixie.com/

Archieved site:

http://web.archive.org/web/*hh_/lptrixie.com/

http://web.archive.org/web/20001017234246/www.lptrixie.com/home.asp

http://web.archive.org/web/20001018121418/www.lptrixie.com/essentials/jetta/index.htm

ThatGuyOnTheL
01-16-2006, 08:42 PM
Their first visit to Chicago in 60 years!

Well played :D:

RichFitztightly
01-16-2006, 08:44 PM
1945 World Series rematch, so it actually might be.

Probably not, cub fans don't know anything that requires actual baseball knowledge.

PKalltheway
01-16-2006, 10:00 PM
Their first visit to Chicago in 60 years!

Not to be picky, but the Tigers actually visited Wrigley for an interleague series in 2000.

Fenway
01-16-2006, 10:17 PM
The Red Sox at least try to put a winner on the field. They have had a winning record for 9 of the last 10 seasons, have gone to the post-season for 5 of those 10 seasons and won the whole show to boot.

You have to go back to 1977 to get 9 winning Cub seasons (and that '77 season was a .500 one at that). In the last 10 years they have only gone to the post-season twice.

Yes, comparisons to the Red Sox is a logical course of action.

:rolleyes:

I just don't know how much more the Red Sox can charge. A lot of fans have been priced out

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/bos/ticketing/seating_pricing.jsp

TornLabrum
01-16-2006, 10:31 PM
I don't see the point of adding new seats to raise the ticket prices. All they have to do is erect a statue of a giant cow outside the ballpark (or better yet inside to match the crap on the field) and all the hayseed yokels from Iowa will happily throw on a buisness suit and a couple more bumperstickers to see another 'historic site' in Chicago. Another $40 per seat or so wouldn't be a problem.

They could have the cow **** dollar bills and call it the "Cash Cow"!!!!!

dcb56
01-16-2006, 11:49 PM
You have to go back to 1977 to get 9 winning Cub seasons (and that '77 season was a .500 one at that). In the last 10 years they have only gone to the post-season twice.




Indeed, and to further illustrate the Cubs' futility, the last time the Boston Red Sox had a 90 loss season was in 1966. Since that year the Cubs have had nine 90 loss seasons and another seven seasons with 85 or more losses.

Fenway
01-17-2006, 08:31 AM
Turns out the Red Sox have figured out a way to charge even more :(:

Seat licenses hike fans’ bottom lines (http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121650)
By Scott Van Voorhis
(http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121650)The priciest seats in all of baseball are about to get even more expensive in a move that has some of Fenway Park’s highest rollers grumbling. [more (http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121650)]

Hangar18
01-17-2006, 08:42 AM
Indeed, and to further illustrate the Cubs' futility, the last time the Boston Red Sox had a 90 loss season was in 1966. Since that year the Cubs have had nine 90 loss seasons and another seven seasons with 85 or more losses.


Ahhh, this reminds me of a Stupid Cub Fan Moment during the Yanks/BoSox ALCS 04.
RedSox"fan": Cmon Cubbies!
Hangar18: Did you just say cmon cubbies?
RedSox"fan": Yeah I did
Hangar18: You realize the RedSox and Yankees are playing right?
Not the Cubs?
RedSox"fan": Yeah I know, Im just cheering for the RedSox
Hangar18: So your really a cub fan cheering for the RedSox? Why?
RedSox"fan": Yeah, theyre just like us ......Losers.
Hangar18: What are you talking about, theyve been to the world series and have had a winning team for quite some time. You guys havnt had 2 winning seasons in a row since Nixon was in office.
RedSox"fan: (is silent for a moment) .............Cubbies Woo!

1951Campbell
01-17-2006, 08:57 AM
Turns out the Red Sox have figured out a way to charge even more :(:


Now, I'm not saying this will happen in 2006, but...someday the Red Sox will be in a rebuilding year and win about 70 games. It happens to all teams. What's going to happen to ticket prices then? Who wants to spend $330 a pop to watch such a team?

Fenway
01-17-2006, 09:05 AM
Now, I'm not saying this will happen in 2006, but...someday the Red Sox will be in a rebuilding year and win about 70 games. It happens to all teams. What's going to happen to ticket prices then? Who wants to spend $330 a pop to watch such a team?

That is the question everybody in New England is asking. Plus the only available land that a new stadium could be built in the downtown area has just been sold by Frank McCourt to Ruppert Murdoch so we going to be stuck with Fenway for a long, long time.

http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121273
Fox Entertainment Group, a unit of Rupert Murdoch’s giant News Corp., will be taking over Frank McCourt’s prime 24 acres of South Boston parking lots in a deal that’s already attracting intense interest from developers eager to build on the valuable waterfront-area land.
McCourt, who used the property as collateral when he bought the Los Angeles Dodgers from Fox via a loan two years ago, will “sell” the land to Fox Entertainment, sources said, allowing him to pay off $145 million in debt tied to the Dodgers deal.

mjharrison72
01-17-2006, 09:13 AM
I don't see the point of adding new seats to raise the ticket prices. All they have to do is erect a statue of a giant cow outside the ballpark (or better yet inside to match the crap on the field) and all the hayseed yokels from Iowa will happily throw on a buisness suit and a couple more bumperstickers to see another 'historic site' in Chicago. Another $40 per seat or so wouldn't be a problem.
Not trying to cause trouble here, but not everyone from Iowa is a "hayseed yokel." We don't like it when people stereotype Sox fans, so let's not do it to the people from the great state of Iowa, mmmkay? :wink:

1951Campbell
01-17-2006, 09:16 AM
That is the question everybody in New England is asking. Plus the only available land that a new stadium could be built in the downtown area has just been sold by Frank McCourt to Ruppert Murdoch so we going to be stuck with Fenway for a long, long time.


Who owns Beacon Yards these days? I realize Allston isn't truly "downtown", but it's the only big chunk of land in the city limits I can think of off the top of my head, and I remember Harvard discussing expanding there.

Fenway
01-17-2006, 09:26 AM
Who owns Beacon Yards these days? I realize Allston isn't truly "downtown", but it's the only big chunk of land in the city limits I can think of off the top of my head, and I remember Harvard discussing expanding there.

Harvard bought it from CSX railroad after Conrail went under. Harvard also just bought the WGBH campus forcing them to move as well.

Harvard has been very quiet over their plans for Allston ever since the Herald obtained a secret memo from Harvard Real Estate that indicated Harvard wanted to move the Charles River

http://www.allston.harvard.edu/maps/allston_base.jpg

SouthSide_HitMen
01-17-2006, 09:48 AM
Turns out the Red Sox have figured out a way to charge even more :(:

Seat licenses hike fans’ bottom lines (http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121650)
By Scott Van Voorhis
The priciest seats in all of baseball are about to get even more expensive in a move that has some of Fenway Park’s highest rollers grumbling. [more (http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=121650)]


God Bless the Boston Herald for exposing what the incestuous Red Sox / Boston Globe combine (which mirrors our Tribune / Cub combine)!!!

1951Campbell
01-17-2006, 09:54 AM
Harvard bought it from CSX railroad after Conrail went under. Harvard also just bought the WGBH campus forcing them to move as well.

Harvard has been very quiet over their plans for Allston ever since the Herald obtained a secret memo from Harvard Real Estate that indicated Harvard wanted to move the Charles River


Wait...am I reading that right? They wanted to move the river, as in Army Corps of Engineer-type stuff? :o:

Fenway
01-17-2006, 10:02 AM
Wait...am I reading that right? They wanted to move the river, as in Army Corps of Engineer-type stuff? :o:

Thats what they want to do so the Allston/Cambrige campus would be together.

Harvard usually gets what they want

This link is an overview of part of Harvard's plans
http://www.allston.harvard.edu/gallery/gallery.htm


http://www.allston.harvard.edu/gallery/photos/PV-Aerial-BostSkyline_Athle.jpg

Hangar18
01-17-2006, 10:27 AM
According to your Map, isnt Fenway Currently located near N Harvard Avenue & Western Avenues?

1951Campbell
01-17-2006, 10:46 AM
According to your Map, isnt Fenway Currently located near N Harvard Avenue & Western Avenues?

It's farther east, at Comm. Ave. and Brookline Ave., essentially. Kenmore Square.

Fenway
01-17-2006, 10:47 AM
According to your Map, isnt Fenway Currently located near N Harvard Avenue & Western Avenues?

no that is the Harvard athletic fields known as Soldiers Field

What Harvard has done is blocked Boston University from expanding to the west and the city loses more taxable property.

The train yard mentioned here was a major part of the problem with Braves Field as smoke from the locomotives used to cover the grandstand.

Fenway
01-17-2006, 12:06 PM
meanwhile they still hammering away at 1060 W

http://images.bleedcubbieblue.com/images/admin/wrigley0114a.jpg

http://images.bleedcubbieblue.com/images/admin/wrigley0114c.jpg
http://images.bleedcubbieblue.com/images/admin/wrigley0114j.jpg
http://images.bleedcubbieblue.com/images/admin/wrigley0114b.jpg

Chicken Dinner
01-17-2006, 12:24 PM
Do you think they're using non-cracking concrete??

peeonwrigley
01-17-2006, 12:27 PM
Thats what they want to do so the Allston/Cambrige campus would be together.

Harvard usually gets what they want


What? I can't see that alumni base having any money or political influence!

I don't really see the logic behind moving the river... and seemingly the cost would greatly outweigh the benefit. I would have loved to have a river flow through campus at U of I; would have been way cooler than having Green St divide the normal and enginerd:D: campuses.

Fenway
01-17-2006, 12:32 PM
What? I can't see that alumni base having any money or political influence!

I don't really see the logic behind moving the river... and seemingly the cost would greatly outweigh the benefit. I would have loved to have a river flow through campus at U of I; would have been way cooler than having Green St divide the normal and enginerd:D: campuses.

http://www.hno.harvard.edu/guide/finance/index.html
Harvard gets by
Harvard University's endowment, valued at $25.9 billion at the end of FY 2005, is a collection of more than 10,800 separate funds established over the years to provide scholarships; to maintain libraries, museums, and other collections; to support teaching and research activities; and to provide ongoing support for a wide variety of other activities. The great majority of these funds carry some type of restriction.


That does not include their real estate holdings :o:

kittle42
01-17-2006, 12:37 PM
Are the Cubs raising the 2006 Bleacher Expansion Championship flag at the same game they're raising the 2005 Attendance Championship flag, or are they going to spread those occasions over two games?

Hangar18
01-17-2006, 12:54 PM
Are the Cubs raising the 2006 Bleacher Expansion Championship flag at the same game they're raising the 2005 Attendance Championship flag, or are they going to spread those occasions over two games?

Hate to break to "historians" and "traditionalists" alike, but seeing all of this brand spanking new concrete, seats and the like, this isnt a "historic" ballpark anymore, its 1/2 new ballpark now.

34 Inch Stick
01-18-2006, 07:40 AM
Yep. When the nose fell off the Sphinx did they replace it?

itsnotrequired
01-18-2006, 07:56 AM
Hate to break to "historians" and "traditionalists" alike, but seeing all of this brand spanking new concrete, seats and the like, this isnt a "historic" ballpark anymore, its 1/2 new ballpark now.

Not to mention that the bleachers were put in over 20 years AFTER the stadium first opened...

mrfourni
01-18-2006, 12:01 PM
Yep. When the nose fell off the Sphinx did they replace it?

No, but they did put plastic netting over it so nobody would get hit by falling stone.