Wrigley Renovation Thread

[Hairyducked Idiot]

No one is taking them seriously regardless.

[Guest]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

[Guest]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

 

It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right?

 

Saying otherwise is pure nonsense.

[Backtobanks]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

 

It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right?

 

Saying otherwise is pure nonsense.

 

They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley.

[Guest]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

 

It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right?

 

Saying otherwise is pure nonsense.

 

They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley.

 

Not necessarily, for [expletive]'s sake.

[Backtobanks]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

 

It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right?

 

Saying otherwise is pure nonsense.

 

They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley.

 

Not necessarily, for [expletive]'s sake.

 

If the Cubs moved out of Wrigley, property values would plummet. Do you really think all of those buildings in Wrigleyville are worth what they're selling for?

[treebird]

sell the properties this weekend, announce you are definitely moving to rosemont and oh man is it ever the god's honest truth on monday.

[Guest]

 

If the Cubs moved out of Wrigley, property values would plummet. Do you really think all of those buildings in Wrigleyville are worth what they're selling for?

 

They could instantly be worth nothing and that doesn't necessarily mean they would be worse off (even immediately) than staying.

[Guest]

A sunk cost is one that cannot be recovered. It's a sunk cost if they (stupidly) decide to become the Schamburg Cubs. They can recover the cost (and then some) through selling or renting, thus the property is an investment. They have yet to build anything. Any permanent structure they build would be a sunk cost once they built and paid for the structure. Wrigley is the sunk cost. Money already paid to a player is a sunk cost any money still owed is not.

[ConstableRabbit]

Plus a sunk cost is a sunk cost. If it ended up making more financial sense for them to build elsewhere (which is dubious) they wouldn't shy away from doing so because of money they've spent around Wrigley.

That's nonsense. They've invested in real estate speculating the value of it will rise do to the other big asset they own. If they move they are compounding mistakes. A sunk cost only works for assets that depreciate or have little chance to increase in value.

 

It's not nonsense. If they make out better by moving, whether they bought those properties or not, then they make out better by moving. You realize that the possibility of making more money despite those other assets not appreciating (or depreciating) exists as well, right?

 

Saying otherwise is pure nonsense.

 

They might "make out better" eventually, but they would start out with the huge debt they would take on all of the real estate investments they made around Wrigley.

 

Not necessarily, for [expletive]'s sake.

 

If the Cubs moved out of Wrigley, property values would plummet. Do you really think all of those buildings in Wrigleyville are worth what they're selling for?

Yes, the many newly-renovated homes in the wealthy, developed, clean, safe neighborhood near the lake and ample transportation wouldn't be worth anything if the Cubs left tomorrow.

[seanimal]

Schamburg Cubs

 

can we just call them this from now on?

[Guest]

@AdamHoge7m

Owned by Beth Murphy, spokesperson for the Wrigley Rooftops

[MSG T]

@AdamHoge7m

Owned by Beth Murphy, spokesperson for the Wrigley Rooftops

 

 

Stay classy, Beth.

[Guest]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20131210/BLOGS04/131219976

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/CG/20131210/BLOGS04/131219976/AR/0/AR-131219976.jpg&maxw=368&q=100&cb=20131211000157

 

The city's panel on Transportation and Public Way today OK'd the team's plan to move its property lines farther into Sheffield and Waveland avenues than what was previously approved.

 

That includes extending Wrigley Field's footprint 25 feet closer to Sheffield Avenue and just more than 24 feet on Waveland than it is today, allowing the team to move exterior outfield walls back to accommodate new signage.

 

In return, the Cubs will pay $3.75 million over the next decade into the "Cub Fund," which the city uses for infrastructure improvements to the Lakeview area, including new lighting and new traffic signals along Clark Street between Belmont Avenue and Irving Park Road.

 

That number comes from a team-commissioned appraisal of the land it's acquiring and more clearly defines the money that Mayor Rahm Emanuel has said would count as compensation for the street vacations.

 

"These are dollars the Cubs are paying into a fund that the city will control in exchange for the use of these streets," Cubs Executive Vice President Mike Lufrano said.

 

The appraisal also said the Cubs would be getting $250,000 worth of air rights along the streets, which the city determined the team would pay for through things like advertising during games for public transportation, use of remote parking lots and city services.

 

But the Cubs aren't ready to start building yet.

 

Even if the full Wrigley Field renovation planned development gets City Council approval, the team still wants to finalize terms of a proposed ordinance that would allow fans to carry alcohol out of the ballpark and into an adjacent plaza in a marked cup.

 

Then, it comes down to its ongoing discussions with rooftop owners, and the team maintains that it will not start work on large portions of the renovation and redevelopment plan unless the Wrigleyville Rooftop Association agrees not to sue the team over blocked views.

 

However, the Cubs have said they might erect a city-approved right field advertising sign to activate their new Anheuser Busch InBev sponsorship even if those discussions hit a stalemate.

[SouthSideRyan]

Even if the full Wrigley Field renovation planned development gets City Council approval, the team still wants to finalize terms of a proposed ordinance that would allow fans to carry alcohol out of the ballpark and into an adjacent plaza in a marked cup.

 

I have a hard time seeing this one

[Guest]

Even if the full Wrigley Field renovation planned development gets City Council approval, the team still wants to finalize terms of a proposed ordinance that would allow fans to carry alcohol out of the ballpark and into an adjacent plaza in a marked cup.

 

I have a hard time seeing this one

 

IIRC that one was actually initially expected to go through but was met with a little resistance.

 

From Brett last week:

http://www.bleachernation.com/2013/12/05/obsessive-wrigley-renovation-watch-license-committee-signs-off-on-tweaks-plaza-booze-delayed/

 

Not addressed, however, was the recently-introduced plan to allow alcohol sales at the planned plaza just west of the ballpark. That plan has been tabled for now, to allow for more community input. It doesn’t sound like the situation is as contentious as other community-related items have been in the past, but the Cubs and Alderman Tom Tunney both seem open to working on the particulars. One issue is when alcohol can be sold at the plaza on non-game days. Another issue is simply providing the right contours for the provision of alcohol near stadiums, since it’s an entirely new thing for Chicago (remember, this could impact other teams’ stadiums, not just Wrigley Field).

 

The Cubs and Tunney both have an interest in making the plaza something that draws folks to Lakeview year-round, so I anticipate something will get done in plenty of time for the plaza to actually be constructed over the next few years.

 

And from the Sun Times article he linked:

The question of allowing the team to sell beer and wine from kiosks at an open-air plaza was put on hold.

 

Local Ald. Tom Tunney (44th) promised changes after community feedback on his “sports venue license” ordinance that, as currently written, would authorize year-round liquor sales — up to 11 p.m. on weekdays and midnight on weekends — on a plaza that would also feature live music.

 

“It’s a brand new type of license, so we’ve got a lot of work to do. . . . The community wants more input. . . . I’m sure we’ll have a substitute,” Tunney said.

 

Pressed on what changes he anticipates, Tunney said it’s an open question whether liquor sales should be year-round. Area residents are also concerned about loud music. They would prefer a quieter form of activity, such as farmer’s markets or a skating rink, the alderman said.

 

The provision that would allow fans to carry alcohol in plastic cups between the ballpark and the plaza has also drawn fire from local bar owners who fear it’ll cost them business from Cubs fans who are their bread-and-butter.

 

On that point, Tunney strongly disagrees.

 

“This is going to be synergistic. . . . Having a remodeled stadium and the whole plaza 365-days-a-year with a hotel and an office building will bring enhanced activity many, many more days than the current, whatever it is, 80 or 90 days now. . . . One of the problems is, it’s feast or famine,” Tunney said.

 

Cubs Vice-President and General Counsel Mike Lufrano agreed that allowing liquor sales on the open air plaza makes Wrigleyville “an exciting place to visit year-round” and that helps everybody.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/24170212-418/wrigley-night-game-ordinance-advances-but-liquor-sales-on-plaza-delayed.html

 

Seems like it's just an issue of deciding just how restricted it's gonna be.

[Guest]

Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts on Tuesday night declined to address rumors the team is closer to an agreement with two Sheffield Avenue rooftop owners whose view will be affected most by a beer sign planned for the right-field bleachers.

 

"There have been a lot of different ideas thrown out," Ricketts said at the winter meetings. "I'm not sure where we're at in terms of (being) closer or farther."

 

Ricketts wouldn't confirm only two right-field rooftops would have their views obstructed by the ad, as some rooftop owners suggest.

 

"It depends," he said. "There are a lot of conversations. Nothing definitive."

 

Ricketts has been unwilling to increase President Theo Epstein's baseball operations budget based on revenue projections from when the signage and a jumbo-sized video board in left field, leaving the Cubs acting like a small-market team.

 

Ricketts said he did not know when the new clubhouse renovation would begin and had "nothing to report" on a new local TV deal. The Cubs exercised an option to get out of their WGN-Ch. 9 contract after 2014.

 

Asked why he couldn't simply install the video board for 2014, Ricketts replied: "I think we're looking at everything as a package."

 

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-1211-brite-winter-meetings-cubs-chicago-2-20131211,0,2946032.story

 

If it's true that they're doing everything as a package and are nearing an agreement with two rooftops on the RF signs AND there have been indications from the team that they want to move forward with the new Budweiser signage in RF this season, would that mean the JumboTron is a possibility for 2014 as well?

 

Seems unlikely. It'd be really nice to have a clearer idea of where things stand.

[apete6]

Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts on Tuesday night declined to address rumors the team is closer to an agreement with two Sheffield Avenue rooftop owners whose view will be affected most by a beer sign planned for the right-field bleachers.

 

"There have been a lot of different ideas thrown out," Ricketts said at the winter meetings. "I'm not sure where we're at in terms of (being) closer or farther."

 

Ricketts wouldn't confirm only two right-field rooftops would have their views obstructed by the ad, as some rooftop owners suggest.

 

"It depends," he said. "There are a lot of conversations. Nothing definitive."

 

Ricketts has been unwilling to increase President Theo Epstein's baseball operations budget based on revenue projections from when the signage and a jumbo-sized video board in left field, leaving the Cubs acting like a small-market team.

 

Ricketts said he did not know when the new clubhouse renovation would begin and had "nothing to report" on a new local TV deal. The Cubs exercised an option to get out of their WGN-Ch. 9 contract after 2014.

 

Asked why he couldn't simply install the video board for 2014, Ricketts replied: "I think we're looking at everything as a package."

 

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/ct-spt-1211-brite-winter-meetings-cubs-chicago-2-20131211,0,2946032.story

 

If it's true that they're doing everything as a package and are nearing an agreement with two rooftops on the RF signs AND there have been indications from the team that they want to move forward with the new Budweiser signage in RF this season, would that mean the JumboTron is a possibility for 2014 as well?

 

Seems unlikely. It'd be really nice to have a clearer idea of where things stand.

 

[expletive] the Ricketts family. They couldn't have handled this entire process any worse and the fans and players are the ones paying for it. I honestly hope the [expletive] it all up, don't get anything approved, and have to sell the team. They have literally done nothing right since taking ownership besides hiring Theo, but the even fucked that up by basically neutering him with a lack of payroll/investment. There has been nothing on or off the field that has gone well unless you count moving up in the mythical prospect rankings that ultimately could end up meaning nothing. They pissed away a ton of money in the Dominican Republic just in time to be boned by international spending limits. The radio booth is a disaster. Obviously the major league team is complete garbage. I'm sure the new Spring Training stadium will suck dick also just because they hate doing things correctly. In a previously unfathomable point of view, I'd rather have the Tribune back. At least they had the sense to bring in McDonough and play up the nostalgia garbage correctly. Fuuuuuck this whole situation.

[jersey cubs fan]

[expletive] the Ricketts family. They couldn't have handled this entire process any worse and the fans and players are the ones paying for it. I honestly hope the [expletive] it all up, don't get anything approved, and have to sell the team. They have literally done nothing right since taking ownership besides hiring Theo, but the even [expletive] that up by basically neutering him with a lack of payroll/investment. There has been nothing on or off the field that has gone well unless you count moving up in the mythical prospect rankings that ultimately could end up meaning nothing. They pissed away a ton of money in the Dominican Republic just in time to be boned by international spending limits. The radio booth is a disaster. Obviously the major league team is complete garbage. I'm sure the new Spring Training stadium will suck dick also just because they hate doing things correctly. In a previously unfathomable point of view, I'd rather have the Tribune back. At least they had the sense to bring in McDonough and play up the nostalgia garbage correctly. [expletive] this whole situation.

 

I get the desire to list everything they've Fd up but, the radio booth?

 

 

I honestly hope your hope never comes true because that is going to lead to a good decade or more of continued crappiness.

[apete6]

[expletive] the Ricketts family. They couldn't have handled this entire process any worse and the fans and players are the ones paying for it. I honestly hope the [expletive] it all up, don't get anything approved, and have to sell the team. They have literally done nothing right since taking ownership besides hiring Theo, but the even [expletive] that up by basically neutering him with a lack of payroll/investment. There has been nothing on or off the field that has gone well unless you count moving up in the mythical prospect rankings that ultimately could end up meaning nothing. They pissed away a ton of money in the Dominican Republic just in time to be boned by international spending limits. The radio booth is a disaster. Obviously the major league team is complete garbage. I'm sure the new Spring Training stadium will suck dick also just because they hate doing things correctly. In a previously unfathomable point of view, I'd rather have the Tribune back. At least they had the sense to bring in McDonough and play up the nostalgia garbage correctly. [expletive] this whole situation.

 

I get the desire to list everything they've Fd up but, the radio booth?

 

 

I honestly hope your hope never comes true because that is going to lead to a good decade or more of continued crappiness.

 

You say that like everything's not on that path already. If they basically do nothing this offseason, the Wrigley renovation won't be complete until the 2018 season (if they are able to start next year). If the team isn't any good at that point, the whole thing will be a failure anyway. The absolute worst case scenario is that the farm system doesn't turn out quite as good as we all hope, they STILL don't spend money, and the stadium renovations is that they don't start until 2022 when that stupid rooftop contract expires, potentially ending the worst decade in a terrible franchise's history. Awesome.

[UMFan83]

[expletive] the Ricketts family. They couldn't have handled this entire process any worse and the fans and players are the ones paying for it. I honestly hope the [expletive] it all up, don't get anything approved, and have to sell the team. They have literally done nothing right since taking ownership besides hiring Theo, but the even [expletive] that up by basically neutering him with a lack of payroll/investment. There has been nothing on or off the field that has gone well unless you count moving up in the mythical prospect rankings that ultimately could end up meaning nothing. They pissed away a ton of money in the Dominican Republic just in time to be boned by international spending limits. The radio booth is a disaster. Obviously the major league team is complete garbage. I'm sure the new Spring Training stadium will suck dick also just because they hate doing things correctly. In a previously unfathomable point of view, I'd rather have the Tribune back. At least they had the sense to bring in McDonough and play up the nostalgia garbage correctly. [expletive] this whole situation.

 

I get the desire to list everything they've Fd up but, the radio booth?

 

 

I honestly hope your hope never comes true because that is going to lead to a good decade or more of continued crappiness.

 

You say that like everything's not on that path already. If they basically do nothing this offseason, the Wrigley renovation won't be complete until the 2018 season (if they are able to start next year). If the team isn't any good at that point, the whole thing will be a failure anyway. The absolute worst case scenario is that the farm system doesn't turn out quite as good as we all hope, they STILL don't spend money, and the stadium renovations is that they don't start until 2022 when that stupid rooftop contract expires, potentially ending the worst decade in a terrible franchise's history. Awesome.

 

I can't even imagine how apathetic the fan base would be if the team was still bad in 2018. I don't know how Pirates fans did it for 20 years. Actually I guess they didn't they all found other ways to occupy their summers until the team showed a pulse again.

[treebird]

i am pretty excited about the fact that "suck dick" gets by the word censors

[SouthSideRyan]

i am pretty excited about the fact that "suck dick" gets by the word censors

 

Finally some good news this offseason

[NOLA]

i am pretty excited about the fact that "suck dick" gets by the word censors

 

Finally some good news this offseason

But for God's sake, don't type f u l l b a c k.

[Guest]

Nice meltdown. Don't forget Santo died under their watch. I think you are letting Theo of lightly.