BullsCubsBearsHawks
New member
- Joined:
- Feb 10, 2012
- Posts:
- 16
- Liked Posts:
- 2
Screen looks terrible.
- Joined:
- Aug 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 8,292
- Liked Posts:
- 3,054
- Joined:
- Aug 12, 2010
- Posts:
- 8,292
- Liked Posts:
- 3,054
Boobaby1
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 18, 2013
- Posts:
- 2,236
- Liked Posts:
- 1,180
People in baseball love the nostalgia and the past. The park where all the greats played including Ruth. Reworking Wrigley where it stands is the best option IMO. They can make it a state of the art facility for fans and players, and the quicker, the better.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
Ricketts just threw down the gauntlet. Kap says Ricketts told them point blank that if the renovation plans are blocked, he'll consider moving out of Wrigley.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
Compiled a few of Kap's tweets and some of our stuff here:
http://worldseriesdreaming.com/2013/05/01/april-done-on-to-may/
Rooftops probably get the short end of the stick at this point. Just a matter of time before the city powers it through, the city and the Ricketts wouldn't release a statement if they weren't confident the deal would go through. At this point the Ricketts are just trying to be good neighbors and then they'll just say "fuck you all" if the rooftops decide to try something.
http://worldseriesdreaming.com/2013/05/01/april-done-on-to-may/
Rooftops probably get the short end of the stick at this point. Just a matter of time before the city powers it through, the city and the Ricketts wouldn't release a statement if they weren't confident the deal would go through. At this point the Ricketts are just trying to be good neighbors and then they'll just say "fuck you all" if the rooftops decide to try something.
KBisBack!
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,497
- Liked Posts:
- 1,424
The Cubs rank 3rd in revenue and Ricketts is saying that he needs the Jumbotron for 'much needed revenue'.
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
The third in revenue is a Forbes estimate cobbled together by piecemeal data, so that should also be taken with a grain of salt. If you want the team to be successful, maybe it's not such a bad idea for the rich owner to make more money that he can then spend to make more money.
AmericanFlyer1
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 22, 2013
- Posts:
- 81
- Liked Posts:
- 97
Even so KB, he is a businessman first; baseball owner second. That means he cares more about profit then winning.
What is unbelievable is that he can't see that winning would equal more profit. But then again, a lot of business people only see the dollar signs. Everything else is just "other".
GoCubs
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2013
- Posts:
- 6
- Liked Posts:
- 4
So today Rickets threatens to leave Wrigley...nice...about time he grew some balls
KBisBack!
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,497
- Liked Posts:
- 1,424
Of course it is an estimate, but to think that the Cubs are not one of the top revenue generating teams is foolish. Yes it may or may not be 'piecemeal' data, but it is also one of the most respected financial publications around, so they probably have a fairly good idea what they are doing. Probably better than most, if not all, of us around here.
The team already has more than enough revenue and more revenue than most of the teams who are successful.
Yet Ricketts wants to say that the lack of revenue is keeping the team from being successful?? Really?
Revenues have already gone up in the time that Ricketts has owned the team, so by your theory that means payroll should have gone up also? It hasn't. It has gone down drastically.
This is just another ploy to pocket more money or he is going to take his ball and go home while dangling the World Series carrot in front of the fans to distract them from the absurd amount of money he is making while fielding an absurdly bad baseball team.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
If revenues are high, but a lot of it are going into maintenance of a crumbling stadium, that means not as much is going back into the on-field product. There are probably hundreds of expenses that we haven't taken into account as well. Until they decide to open up their books for all to see (won't happen) all we have is speculation.
KBisBack!
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,497
- Liked Posts:
- 1,424
And you really think the maintenance is significantly more then it was when the team fielded a $145M payroll?
Has anyone seen the construction crews fixing the infrastructure to the ballpark??
We say the team build a shiny new beer garden for RF but I haven't seen any stories on the construction of fixing up the infrastructure. There were plenty of stories about it when the Tribune owned the team and pieces were literally falling off the stadium, but I haven't heard anything the last couple years.
KBisBack!
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,497
- Liked Posts:
- 1,424
But winning might not equal more profit. That is the problem.
The Cubs are reported to have been the most profitable team in baseball last year and one of the worst on the field.
So where would be the incentive to field a better team??
If he wants to be a businessman and milk all of the profit he can out of the team that is fine. His family has ponied up the cash to buy the team, it is his right. But don't bullshit the fans with the stories about what a great fan of the team you are and how you met your with in the bleachers and make repeated claims that winning the World Series is the main goal when every action you have taken has not moved the team one step closer to winning a World Series.
Don't piss on me and tell me it is raining.
AmericanFlyer1
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 22, 2013
- Posts:
- 81
- Liked Posts:
- 97
Point taken and I agree with that. However, you would have to agree that with winning a lot of baseball games, comes increase media attention, which leads to higher merchandise sales, bigger attendance, more concessions sales, and a higher overall worth to a team.
Sure, you may not be able to see that in your bottom line until the next year or the year after. And yes, it all depends on how much you win and how long it takes before you are a consistent one. It may be actually less profitable in the short run because your investments won't pay dividends immediately. However, if you invest wisely, or in this case...invest at all, then the dividends will pay in the long run.
This is why I think they are spreading the fallacy of being a "consistent winner". Because the profit margins will be non-existent if it's a one playoff berth in 10 years. So, it would be easier to just field a decent AA team while spreading the "win the world series every year" mantra so they can keep their profits up without having to pay into the investment.
I guess we will know their baseball plan when and if they decide to ever get into the game. However, the business plan is very much apparent. I am not saying I agree with it; but if business was more important than the baseball team winning, I would be operating the "business" the exact same way.
KBisBack!
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,497
- Liked Posts:
- 1,424
If professional sports were a traditional business, I would agree with you on these points.
But how much media attention have the Cubs gotten the last couple years just by hiring Theo Epstein and now the ballpark talks?? A lot.
I don't have the numbers, but I have to think they are still near the top in merchandise sales.
Look at what the estimated value of the ballclub is worth now compared to when they bought the team?? They bought the team for $700 million three years ago and it is now estimated to be worth $1 billion dollars.
Look at what the value of the Royals has done since David Glass bought the team. He bought the team about 10 years ago for less than $100 million. They are now worth over $400 million and there hasn't been a much worse team over the last ten years.
It is probably true that winning would bring an increase to revenues.
But with if the cost of fielding that winning team was greater than the increase in revenues?
Less profit.
chibears55
Well-known member
- Joined:
- Apr 18, 2013
- Posts:
- 13,554
- Liked Posts:
- 1,924
i guess that didnt mean much to the yankees and the fans in newyork for them to tear down the actual house that ruth built..
:crazydance:
patg006
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 16, 2013
- Posts:
- 1,413
- Liked Posts:
- 986
- Location:
- Chicago
Ricketts probably is trying to get as much cash from Chicago as he can; and hes putting up a front that doesnt care if the rooftops take action. Hes trying to pull something.
I'm sure Stevens in Rosemont is salivating right now......
Flacco4Prez
New member
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2013
- Posts:
- 913
- Liked Posts:
- 170
The Cubs have been one of the biggest spenders in baseball over the past decade and now all of a sudden they need a billboard/scoreboard to generate enough money? Please, this is just his way of trying to muscle out the rooftops and make more money in the process.
- Joined:
- Jun 7, 2011
- Posts:
- 18,077
- Liked Posts:
- 3,472
- Location:
- Chicago
In context...
The Tribune (which went bankrupt prior to selling the team btw) was negligent in the upkeep of Wrigley Field which is why we're in the situation we're in now. Also, many of those contracts towards the end of the Tribune years were designed to artificially drive up the value of the franchise, and the largest contracts (including Soriano's) were backloaded to ensure that the bulk of the money would be paid by the new owners.
It's actually not too unreasonable that the Ricketts cannot sustain such heavy spending given the revenue generating mechanisms (or lack thereof) and debts/liabilities they inherited from the Tribune.
