Wrigley Renovation Thread

[Soul]

Let's just blow this joint. Once and for all.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Let's just blow this joint. Once and for all.

 

I wish. Hire some special ops team to implode the [expletive].

[Guest]

Let's just blow this joint. Once and for all.

 

I wish. Hire some special ops team to implode the [expletive].

 

If we're gonna do that, just implode the rooftops.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Too much collateral damage. Just put hits out on Beth Murphy and Tunney.

[SouthSideRyan]

Too much collateral damage. Just put hits out on Beth Murphy and Tunney.

 

Let me know if you plan on including Ricketts in the spree so I can get @DeadTomRicketts registered

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

Too much collateral damage. Just put hits out on Beth Murphy and Tunney.

 

Let me know if you plan on including Ricketts in the spree so I can get @DeadTomRicketts registered

 

Maybe one on his dad so he gets control of all the money.

[Guest]

Too much collateral damage. Just put hits out on Beth Murphy and Tunney.

 

Let me know if you plan on including Ricketts in the spree so I can get @DeadTomRicketts registered

 

Maybe one on his dad so he gets control of all the money.

 

And all the bison.

[davell]

How about @SelltheCubsyouDumbAss? Or @ChokeonaBisonBurgeryouCheapBastard? Or @IamaRichIdiot. Or @CanIgetSadMusicandRizzoLookingMalnourished. Or @McCourtYouAreMyHero? [expletive] it.

[Tangled Up in Plaid]

How about @SelltheCubsyouDumbAss? Or @ChokeonaBisonBurgeryouCheapBastard? Or @IamaRichIdiot. Or @CanIgetSadMusicandRizzoLookingMalnourished. Or @McCourtYouAreMyHero? [expletive] it.

 

http://i.imgur.com/ejyfIgj.gif

[Felix Leiter]

Why would the threat of a lawsuit by the rooftop owners stop any construction? The rooftops lawsuit would be about $$$ and not blocked views or anything else. I'm thinking there might be some other agenda by the front office.

[Ryne Ween]

This is asinine. No sane business starts a $500 million project with a legitimate injunction/stay threat looming, no matter how much people want to paint the owners as a bunch of dumb, entitled brats with no real money.

 

King, you would make a terrible casino developer.

[Sammy Sofa]

@McCourtYouAreMyHero?

 

As horrible as "ONLY THE COBS" is, it's ridiculous how bad things are going for them. The Dodgers have an owner go broke, they have a monster as GM, and look where they are, TV deal included. It's ridiculous.

[Guest]

Why would the threat of a lawsuit by the rooftop owners stop any construction? The rooftops lawsuit would be about $$$ and not blocked views or anything else. I'm thinking there might be some other agenda by the front office.

 

Well, for the first time, we got a clear answer from the Cubs, per General Counsel Mike Lufrano: the method by which the rooftops would legally challenge the outfield signage (the only part of the renovation with which they take issue) would actually challenge the zoning of the entire project. In other words, the Cubs really can’t start the rest of the renovation, because if things come to blows legally with the rooftops, the Cubs could have already done work that is subsequently determined to be unlawful. Can you imagine that disaster?

[Sammy Sofa]

Why would the threat of a lawsuit by the rooftop owners stop any construction? The rooftops lawsuit would be about $$$ and not blocked views or anything else. I'm thinking there might be some other agenda by the front office.

 

Well, for the first time, we got a clear answer from the Cubs, per General Counsel Mike Lufrano: the method by which the rooftops would legally challenge the outfield signage (the only part of the renovation with which they take issue) would actually challenge the zoning of the entire project. In other words, the Cubs really can’t start the rest of the renovation, because if things come to blows legally with the rooftops, the Cubs could have already done work that is subsequently determined to be unlawful. Can you imagine that disaster?

 

Holy Christ, what a cluster [expletive].

[davell]

And then, we'll jump OUT of the trojan rabbit.

[Felix Leiter]

Why would the threat of a lawsuit by the rooftop owners stop any construction? The rooftops lawsuit would be about $$$ and not blocked views or anything else. I'm thinking there might be some other agenda by the front office.

 

Well, for the first time, we got a clear answer from the Cubs, per General Counsel Mike Lufrano: the method by which the rooftops would legally challenge the outfield signage (the only part of the renovation with which they take issue) would actually challenge the zoning of the entire project. In other words, the Cubs really can’t start the rest of the renovation, because if things come to blows legally with the rooftops, the Cubs could have already done work that is subsequently determined to be unlawful. Can you imagine that disaster?

 

Not a lawyer, but wouldn't their gripe be against the city who granted zoning request? Can't see how all internal repairs wouldn't have started on Oct. 1st. It doesn't add up.

 

Although the prospect of seeing Beth Murphy throwing herself on a backhoe loader to prevent construction is equally repulsive.

[ctcf]

Also, the Cubs could like drag all the equipment in there, start construction, and then have to stop everything because the rooftops got an injunction.

 

What fun.

[Banedon]

Bernstein is going to be talking about some "sourced" information he has about the rooftop situation. He's teasing it pretty hard.

 

He did say that unless it's on the extreme down low, there's zero chance of the Cubs moving...that the Cubs have done all kinds of studies and have info about what Cubs fans want, and where they live, and where they're willing to travel to, etc and that because of that and the money involved, they won't be trying to move.

[Banedon]

Per Bernstein these are all possibilities being discussed:

 

 

 

Possibility #1: Litigation - not preferred, but Cubs feel they will ultimately prevail, but at a PR and financial cost

 

Possibility #2: Buyout the rooftop contract

 

Possibility #3: Buy all the rooftop buildings themselves - Bernstein claims this is actually a possibility.

[SouthSideRyan]

PR cost? Who is on the side of the rooftops?? Or are they concerned a lawsuit would force them to open their books to support their claims of money lost, becUse yeah, I'm guessing that could get really ugly for them

[Cubswin11]

Per Bernstein these are all possibilities being discussed:

 

 

 

Possibility #1: Litigation - not preferred, but Cubs feel they will ultimately prevail, but at a PR and financial cost

 

Possibility #2: Buyout the rooftop contract

 

Possibility #3: Buy all the rooftop buildings themselves - Bernstein claims this is actually a possibility.

That would be ridiculously expensive, with having to buy not only the real estate but also the revenue streams attached to it. But also would provide the Cubs with additional revenue sources.

[Banedon]

PR cost? Who is on the side of the rooftops?? Or are they concerned a lawsuit would force them to open their books to support their claims of money lost, becUse yeah, I'm guessing that could get really ugly for them

 

The way I took it is PR cost related to the further delay of improvements to the park, and thereby the delay of the infusion of revenue associated with that.

[apete6]

Per Bernstein these are all possibilities being discussed:

 

 

 

Possibility #1: Litigation - not preferred, but Cubs feel they will ultimately prevail, but at a PR and financial cost

 

Possibility #2: Buyout the rooftop contract

 

Possibility #3: Buy all the rooftop buildings themselves - Bernstein claims this is actually a possibility.

That would be ridiculously expensive, with having to buy not only the real estate but also the revenue streams attached to it. But also would provide the Cubs with additional revenue sources.

 

There are 16 official Wrigley Rooftops. You're looking at, probably $200MM at least and that's at market value, not "we're trying to [expletive] you over because we hate each other" value. They'd financially probably be better off waiting until the contract runs out to do any renovations.

[UMFan83]

I think that a buyout of their contract is the most logical. I'm surprised that hasn't been seriously discussed at all.

[jersey cubs fan]

Per Bernstein these are all possibilities being discussed:

 

 

 

Possibility #1: Litigation - not preferred, but Cubs feel they will ultimately prevail, but at a PR and financial cost

 

Possibility #2: Buyout the rooftop contract

 

Possibility #3: Buy all the rooftop buildings themselves - Bernstein claims this is actually a possibility.

That would be ridiculously expensive, with having to buy not only the real estate but also the revenue streams attached to it. But also would provide the Cubs with additional revenue sources.

 

There are 16 official Wrigley Rooftops. You're looking at, probably $200MM at least and that's at market value, not "we're trying to [expletive] you over because we hate each other" value. They'd financially probably be better off waiting until the contract runs out to do any renovations.

 

I really wonder if "all the buildings" is really necessary to change the equation. Seems to me that only a handful are actually affected.