Chicago Tribune News Alert
BREAKING NEWS ALERT
April 10, 2013
Goat's head delivered to Wrigley Field
A goat's head was delivered to Wrigley Field this afternoon, addressed to Cubs owner Tom Ricketts, a team spokesman said.
Rooftop owners are getting pissed. unnatural carnal knowledge em.
If Ricketts had any business sense or a spine, this all would have been settled a year ago. I have no faith in that man.
Agreed... It should be noted that the other way that the Ricketts could increase revenue is to actually win games and go to the post season. I guess they feel that its easier to just put up an ad filled screen, add more night games/concerts and build a hotel...
Ricketts should move the team just to shove it up the asses of the ridiculous Chicago politicians. They would do great in DuPage County (not Rosemont, however).
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 11, 2013, 08:25:58 AM
If Ricketts had any business sense or a spine, this all would have been settled a year ago. I have no faith in that man.
Curious to know what you're basing this on.
I actually feel quite the opposite.
Is Rickets trying to get a share of the revenue from the owners of the rooftop seating on Waveland and Sheffield?
I've said it before, the Cubs could resurrect Three Rivers Stadium in Rosemont and I wouldn't care, as long as they win the World Series!
Quote from: Warrior's Path on April 11, 2013, 09:37:22 AM
Curious to know what you're basing this on.
I actually feel quite the opposite.
+1.
Frankly, Ricketts is doing exactly what I would be doing if I owned the Cubs: securing maximum revenue streams that are the least sensitive to the performance of the on-field product. Look what Jim Crane and Jeff Loria have done.... the fans may hate them, but those guys are probably just as profitable as (if not more than) the Steinbrenners.
Quote from: Benny B on April 11, 2013, 09:59:51 AM
Jeff Loria have done....
Do not ever speak of that man's ownership in a positive light. Sports is still entertainment and increasing revenue streams by making a mockery of sports is deplorable. Congrats on building an empty stadium.
Quote from: JWags85 on April 11, 2013, 10:22:28 AM
Do not ever speak of that man's ownership in a positive light. Sports is still entertainment and increasing revenue streams by making a mockery of sports is deplorable. Congrats on building an empty stadium.
As a baseball fan, I think that Loria is a schmuck... and frankly, I think I'm being too nice in saying that.
But as a business man, he clearly has some sense about him because he's making money and hasn't been indicted. That was my point.
I think everyone agrees that Ricketts is trying to do the right things. He did get a great front office staff and he does need to maximize the Wrigley Revenue Stream.
I think what Merritt's stash is getting at is that Ricketts has been terrible at getting the Wrigley deal done.
1.) Asked for $200 million is state bonds while Springfield was facing a $15 billion shortfall.
2.) Instead of discussing it with the governor, went straight to Madigan.
3.) His father royally pissed off the Mayor when looking to the City for help.
4.) Ricketts bought Wrigley knowing there was a contract in place preventing him from blocking the rooftop views. Crane Kenney gave these rooftop owners the contract, why he still collecting a paycheck blows my mind.
5.) Ricketts gave up all leverage when trying to get this renovation plan approved. He said they would never move and 'wants to win the World Series in Wrigley". Idiot, idiot, idiot, idiot.
6.) Keeps talking to media outlets on how close a deal is, but it has never been further apart at this point.
Quote from: real chili 83 on April 11, 2013, 09:42:27 AM
Is Rickets trying to get a share of the revenue from the owners of the rooftop seating on Waveland and Sheffield?
"Rooftop owners reserve the right to use any and all means necessary to enforce the remaining 11 years of our 20-year contract," said Beth Murphy, the owner of Murphy's Bleachers and a spokeswoman for the Wrigleyville Rooftops Association.
Rooftop owners currently share 17 percent of their profits with the Cubs
Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/sports/wrigley-renovation-rooftop-owners-lawsuit-201675881.html#ixzz2QBKhZPNc
More Cubs failure.
https://player.theplatform.com/p/VHZQDC/WXkPz58YT84h/select/4HgaMFLy9qAi?autoPlay=true¶ms=zone (https://player.theplatform.com/p/VHZQDC/WXkPz58YT84h/select/4HgaMFLy9qAi?autoPlay=true¶ms=zone)
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 11, 2013, 08:25:58 AM
If Ricketts had any business sense or a spine, this all would have been settled a year ago. I have no faith in that man.
He tried but Rahm threw a fit like a five year old because Rickett's dad was going to donate $10 million to an anti-Obama group last year. So, Rahm punished him by making him wait another year.
Quote from: real chili 83 on April 11, 2013, 09:42:27 AM
Is Rickets trying to get a share of the revenue from the owners of the rooftop seating on Waveland and Sheffield?
Yes, under a deal the rooftops owners signed 8 years ago, the rooftops give the cubs 33% of their revenue. 17.5% goes to the cubs and 17.5% goes to MLB under baseball's revenue Sharing agreement.
Quote from: PTM on April 11, 2013, 01:39:20 PM
1.) Asked for $200 million is state bonds while Springfield was facing a $15 billion shortfall.
This has been one of the most misreported things .... Ricketts asked for the state to issue a muni bond at lower interest rates than he would have gotten otherwise. The state was not going to pay anything unless cubs defaulted.
Quote from: PTM on April 11, 2013, 01:39:20 PM
2.) Instead of discussing it with the governor, went straight to Madigan.
Madigan is more powerful than the governor.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 11, 2013, 09:18:57 AM
Ricketts should move the team just to shove it up the asses of the ridiculous Chicago politicians. They would do great in DuPage County (not Rosemont, however).
You're kidding, right??? At least half of the people who show up aren't Cubs fans...they're Wrigley Field fans. Buy a few (or more) beers...soak some rays...check out the girls....and hit the neighborhood bars afterwards. The game is secondary.
Move to sterile, new stadium in the 'burbs and that goes away.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on April 11, 2013, 06:30:10 PM
This has been one of the most misreported things .... Ricketts asked for the state to issue a muni bond at lower interest rates than he would have gotten otherwise. The state was not going to pay anything unless cubs defaulted.
Madigan is more powerful than the governor.
That's why I called it a bond. I know the difference as do you, but as you said it was misreported. It came off as the rich kid looking for free money for his toys. It was a poor strategy.
I also know Madigan is more powerful, however, it pissed off Quinn. I could give a crap about Quinn as well, but again it's how he has gone about doing things that people have been able to turn against him.
Quote from: Groin_pull on April 11, 2013, 07:19:00 PM
You're kidding, right??? At least half of the people who show up aren't Cubs fans...they're Wrigley Field fans. Buy a few (or more) beers...soak some rays...check out the girls....and hit the neighborhood bars afterwards. The game is secondary.
Move to sterile, new stadium in the 'burbs and that goes away.
Huge misconception.
Maybe they aren't drawing 2.8 million in a bad year, but they still will draw 2.2-2.3 million. Those lost gate and concession revenues are offset by the revenue generation of the stadium.
There's also a significant portion of the fanbase that doesn't want to deal with getting to Wrigley as well.
Quote from: Benny B on April 11, 2013, 09:59:51 AM
+1.
Frankly, Ricketts is doing exactly what I would be doing if I owned the Cubs: securing maximum revenue streams that are the least sensitive to the performance of the on-field product. Look what Jim Crane and Jeff Loria have done.... the fans may hate them, but those guys are probably just as profitable as (if not more than) the Steinbrenners.
Jimmy Crane may not be such a great example this week
Quote from: Groin_pull on April 11, 2013, 07:19:00 PM
You're kidding, right??? At least half of the people who show up aren't Cubs fans...they're Wrigley Field fans. Buy a few (or more) beers...soak some rays...check out the girls....and hit the neighborhood bars afterwards. The game is secondary.
Move to sterile, new stadium in the 'burbs and that goes away.
I wasn't kidding. Why would a new stadium be sterile? It'd blow Wrigley away. The Cubs have a huge fanbase, which is spread all over Illinois, Iowa and Indiana.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on April 12, 2013, 11:27:05 AM
I wasn't kidding. Why would a new stadium be sterile? It'd blow Wrigley away. The Cubs have a huge fanbase, which is spread all over Illinois, Iowa and Indiana.
So if they move to the suburbs and build a new stadium, what does the Ricketts family do with the Wrigley? And the property across the street from it?
Quote from: LAZER on April 12, 2013, 11:45:42 AM
So if they move to the suburbs and build a new stadium, what does the Ricketts family do with the Wrigley? And the property across the street from it?
Let Target build a store inside. That'd be sweet.
Quote from: LAZER on April 12, 2013, 11:45:42 AM
So if they move to the suburbs and build a new stadium, what does the Ricketts family do with the Wrigley? And the property across the street from it?
Leave up the marquee, bleachers, and scoreboard. Put a 15,000 seat basketball arena inside the shell of Wrigley and let DePaul play there.
Problems solved. ;D
Quote from: PTM on April 11, 2013, 10:07:26 PM
Huge misconception.
Maybe they aren't drawing 2.8 million in a bad year, but they still will draw 2.2-2.3 million. Those lost gate and concession revenues are offset by the revenue generation of the stadium.
There's also a significant portion of the fanbase that doesn't want to deal with getting to Wrigley as well.
This.
Just look at Miller Park during a Cubs game. If you survey the Cubs fans who attend, about half will tell you that a) yes, they live in Illinois and b) no, they won't be attending a game a Wrigley this year.
Quote from: LAZER on April 12, 2013, 11:45:42 AM
So if they move to the suburbs and build a new stadium, what does the Ricketts family do with the Wrigley? And the property across the street from it?
Knock it down and build condos, especially since so many people say they just love the neighborhood, except for that stadium that apparently appeared after they moved in.
Have there been any recent examples of MLB teams moving from a city location to a suburban location?