Wrigley Renovation Thread

[davell]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/10-degrees--dodgers-and-their-crazy-tv-deal-top-mlb-s-biggest-disappointments-053835872.html

 

Oops. This can't be good for us or anyone else wanting a mega TV deal.

 

But LOL at the Dodgers.

[SouthSideRyan]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/10-degrees--dodgers-and-their-crazy-tv-deal-top-mlb-s-biggest-disappointments-053835872.html

 

Oops. This can't be good for us or anyone else wanting a mega TV deal.

 

But LOL at the Dodgers.

 

I mean, lol at the Dodgers fans, the team is still getting their TV payout.

 

And yeah, we're probably fucked of course

[davell]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/10-degrees--dodgers-and-their-crazy-tv-deal-top-mlb-s-biggest-disappointments-053835872.html

 

Oops. This can't be good for us or anyone else wanting a mega TV deal.

 

But LOL at the Dodgers.

 

I mean, lol at the Dodgers fans, the team is still getting their TV payout.

 

And yeah, we're probably [expletive] of course

 

I know the deal is signed, sealed and delivered, but if they don't get help from DirecTV, I'd think that it'll get murky quick. If they're only in 30% of the market, Time Warner is going to be losing their asses. And the Dodgers lose tons of exposure, hurting them as well. I can't see that going on TOO long without something happening. Whether its an ill-fated BK or having to pay to get DirecTV to release the market to them, their deal is very likely to wind up not being nearly as good as it appears now.

 

On the other hand though, you're right. We're fucked.

[Gmoney08]

I'm all for it. Re-open Wrigley Field in 2014 with a completely renovated ballpark and a rebuilt roster that is on the upswing and ready to compete for a division title in the near future.

 

 

I dont know why but I decided to torture myself and read some posts from the first few pages of this thread.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I'm all for it. Re-open Wrigley Field in 2014 with a completely renovated ballpark and a rebuilt roster that is on the upswing and ready to compete for a division title in the near future.

 

 

I dont know why but I decided to torture myself and read some posts from the first few pages of this thread.

I don't even know what I was responding to, but upswing and 2014... oh how naive I was.

[Guest]

Good news, maybe? I think?

 

Dear Season Ticket Holders,

 

Thank you to all who sent their best wishes to Wrigley Field as we celebrated the 100th birthday of the Friendly Confines on April 23. We have been touched by how much Wrigley Field means to so many of our Season Ticket Holders.

 

As you know, we have been working tirelessly to win a World Series, preserve Wrigley Field and invest in our community. This is why our Wrigley Field restoration and expansion plan is so important.

 

We have to put the team and the fans first. So today we are asking the City of Chicago to approve a revised expansion plan that includes our original proposal to add several signs and a revised seating configuration in the outfield. If approved, we are prepared to get construction started.

 

The bleacher expansion, including the outfield signs, are an integral part of the overall Planned Development and will be a tremendous source of revenue to help fund other parts of the restoration. The revised expansion plan includes additional seating and open spaces in the Budweiser Bleachers, new group terraces in right and left field, enclosed hospitality areas and new outfield lighting. The overall capacity of the ballpark will not increase from the number of fans we can accommodate today.

 

The following video message from Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts will tell you why it's time to act now and exercise the team's right to invest in Wrigley Field.

 

Our expansion plan will provide the revenue needed to preserve the greatest ballpark in baseball and invest in building a championship ballclub. We welcome your help in this process.

 

Nearly 30,000 of you have lent your support to us by signing up at WrigleyField.com. If you haven't signed our petition, please visit our site to add your voice. We will continue to communicate regularly as the project moves forward.

 

To save Wrigley Field and give our players the advantages they need to compete, we must move forward with our plan for Wrigley Field. We appreciate your support.

 

Hopefully, the city will go ahead and rubber stamp that and hopefully this is some way of adding additional revenue and making sure the "expansion" language in the rooftop agreement is applicable.

 

I'm confused by the language stating that it'll increase seating but won't increase fan capacity? Maybe because some seats are lost in other areas?

 

Would be pleased if that additional OF lighting isn't just the lights we've already seen in the JumboTron.

 

 

Here's PTR's video:

 

http://www.wrigleyfield.com/?partnerId=ed-8221307-704524963

[Guest]

Based on the video, sounds like they intend to go forward regardless of the rooftops. Seems like they are finally going with the FU option.

[gscool89]

Tom Ricketts here, in front of some cheesy music.

[Guest]

More from the Trib:

 

Chicago Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts is offering a new pitch to long-suffering fans as he struggles to get a Wrigley Field renovation underway: If the rooftop owners are going to sue us anyway over blocked views into the stadium, we might as well get more of what we want in an upgraded ballpark.

 

To that end, he plans to submit a revised proposal to City Hall that would feature more large electronic signs, additional seats, bigger clubhouses and a relocation of the quaint bullpens from foul territory to a spot under the bleachers by removing bricks and some of the iconic ivy and covering the space with a material that would allow relievers to see onto the field, according to a high-ranking Cubs source.

 

If approved against what's sure to be fierce opposition, the changes would put more pressure on the rooftop club owners to reach a deal with the Ricketts family, as team officials acknowledged that more signs could further block rooftop views into Wrigley. Talks between the two sides have proved fruitless after more than a year of negotiations that continued even after city officials signed off on the Cubs' $500 million plan to remake the historic ballpark and surrounding area.

 

Rooftop owners, who have a revenue-sharing agreement with the team that expires at the end of 2023, countered with their own message: We'll see you in court.

 

"Unfortunately, this decision by the Ricketts family will now result in this matter being resolved in a court of law," said Ryan McLaughlin, spokesman for the Wrigleyville Rooftops Association.

 

Ricketts unveiled his latest gambit in a six-minute video to fans was posted on the team website early Thursday.

 

"We've gotten nowhere in our talks with them to settle this dispute. It has to end. It's time to move forward," he said. "We need to press ahead with the expansion and the many planned improvements."

 

The team hopes to get a hearing before the Commission on Chicago Landmarks next month and start construction this year. Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who helped the Cubs navigate city approval last year, could go to bat for the team again.

 

"Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn't want to wait for next year, and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall — and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it — it's worth taking a look at," Emanuel spokeswoman Sarah Hamilton said in a statement.

 

Ald. Tom Tunney, 44th, views Ricketts' move as a likely "negotiating position" in the dispute with the rooftop owners. But Cubs spokesman Julian Green said that wasn't the case.

 

"We've negotiated as far as we can do, and now it's about moving the project forward," Green said.

 

Ald. Patrick O'Connor, 40th, who tried to bring the two sides together on a compromise, also said the new, larger ballpark signs plan is not a negotiating tactic.

 

"I see this as the Cubs saying this is what we would like to get in terms of advertising in the ballpark," said O'Connor, a key Emanuel ally. "I think it's a way for the Cubs to say we're all in, this is what we want in the end."

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-ricketts-wrigley-field-met-0522-20140522,0,5800428.story

 

 

So basically, it's FU rooftops, if you're not gonna cooperate, we're going to put up even more signs.

 

 

EDIT - Also, [expletive] you Tunney:

 

Tunney made it clear that the Rickettses could be in for a battle. "Through lots of pain last year, we approved a very generous sign package and they haven't done anything with it," Tunney said. "I think we gave them a fair package to get going (on renovations), and I think the neighborhood gave them a lot of concessions. We rolled out the red carpet to keep the team at the historic corner of Clark and Addison."

 

 

Also, HOLY [expletive].

The revised proposal would ask for seven signs lining the outfield, including three 650-square-foot LED signs in left field, along with a video board of nearly 4,000 square feet. In right, there would be another, 2,400-square-foot video board, along with a 650-square-foot LED sign and the illuminated script sign.

 

One more edit, missed this:

 

Capacity at the ballpark would be increased by 600, to 42,495, with the addition of 300 new seats and 300 new standing room positions, according to the team.

 

This has gotta be a way for them to cement the fact that it's an expansion (and contradicts what the STH letter said about not increasing seating).

[Guest]

I totally glossed over the relocation of the bullpens to under the bleachers. About time.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'm just going to assume they were getting too close to approal forcing their hand to actually start Reno so they had to add all this [expletive] to hold it up further

[Guest]

I'm just going to assume they were getting too close to approal forcing their hand to actually start Reno so they had to add all this [expletive] to hold it up further

 

Any chance in hell Rahm manages to get all of this rubber stamped before the end of the season?

[Guest]

http://politics.suntimes.com/article/chicago/cubs-push-forward-expanded-plan-wrigley-renovations/wed-05212014-718pm

 

Sun-Times story on it

 

After months of nowhere negotiations, the Cubs declared an impasse with rooftop club owners Wednesday and essentially declared war — with a new proposal to build seven outfield signs, including a second video scoreboard, 300 new seats and new outfield lights.

 

The decision to ask Mayor Rahm Emanuel and his handpicked Commission on Chicago Landmarks to dramatically enhance the already generous package approved last summer is aimed at provoking a lawsuit by the rooftops that’s been years in the making.

 

Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts acknowledged just that in a carefully crafted “video message” to Cub nation.

 

“During the political process to accommodate rooftop owners, we tapered the plan to move forward with a sign in right field and a video board in left. But in the months since, the rooftop owners have made clear that, despite the city approval and our clear contractual rights, they plan to file lawsuit to try and stop our renovation and expansion plan,” Ricketts said.

 

“We’ve spent endless hours in negotiations with rooftop businesses. We’ve gotten nowhere in our talks with them to settle this dispute. It has to end. It’s time to move forward. I have to put the team and the fans first,” he said. “So today, we are going forward with our original plan. We are proposing a master plan to expand Wrigley Field and to have several signs in the ballpark.”

 

Ricketts did not explain details of the new doozy of a request that will be presented to the Landmarks Commission on June 5. It includes:

 

• A second video scoreboard in right field — in addition to the already approved jumbo screen in left field that will now be reduced to 3,990 square feet.

 

• Four more LED signs throughout the outfield, each up to 650 square feet.

 

• 300 additional seats in the “Budweiser Bleachers” and 300 additional standing room positions to reclaim capacity lost to prior renovation plans.

 

• New outfield light standards inside the ballpark, rising 92 feet, so that fly balls will be lit from both the front and back; the intent is to reduce notorious shadows that have made fly balls an adventure for outfielders.

 

• A 30,000-square-foot clubhouse beneath the new outdoor plaza, up from 19,000 square feet in the original plan.

 

• Relocating both home and visiting bullpens from the foul lines to a protected area under the expanded bleachers.

 

EDIT:

 

Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), the mayor’s City Council floor leader, tried desperately to forge a deal with the Cubs and rooftop club owners who share 17 percent of their revenues with the team.

 

At one point, he thought he had a deal to move the scripted sign in right field to the top of one of the rooftop buildings. But, when the rooftops made a similar demand about the video board in left field, the talks fell apart and O’Connor was never able to put them back together.

 

“At one point in time, everybody thought we were there. And it turned out we were wrong. There’s so many individuals and disparate interests, it just became apparent it wasn’t gonna move any further,” O’Connor said.

 

The revised proposal may appear to be so big as to invite rejection by Emanuel’s appointees on the Landmarks Commission. They are the final arbiter, since the City Council has already approved a “master plan” for new signs and will not get a second chance to vote on it.

 

But, O’Connor said, “My impression is, this is a very real proposal. They made an effort to try and resolve this for the short term and basically have been unsuccessful. I would think if it conforms to the landmark ordinance, they have a right to it — and my impression is, it conforms. There’s a very good possibility” it will be approved.

 

Emanuel would dearly love to break ground on the revenue- and job-creating Wrigley project before the Feb. 24 mayoral election. That’s apparently why City Hall struck a similar tone.

 

“Like all Cub fans, the mayor doesn’t want to wait for next year and if this proposal helps the Cubs get closer to a ballpark renovation this fall — and the jobs and neighborhood investments that come with it — it’s worth taking a look at,” Sarah Hamilton, the mayor’s communications director, said in an emailed statement.

[Guest]

Cmon now, big announcement like this and no new mockups? PICS PLZ

[Guest]

Cmon now, big announcement like this and no new mockups? PICS PLZ

 

Might have to wait til June 6th

[Tryptamine]

Finally he's flipping the rooftop owners the bird. It's half a year late, but at least it got done eventually.

[NOLA]

So, Emmanuel's office is orchestrating this now because of his pending reelection is getting closer. Am I off base here?

[Guest]

So, Emmanuel's office is orchestrating this now because of his pending reelection is getting closer. Am I off base here?

 

Emmanuel's office has been behind the Cubs pretty much the whole way since the Cubs said they'd be paying for it themselves.

 

The big thing that changed here is the Cubs have ended negotiations with the RTO's, and rather than go forward with the previous plan which was scaled back to help out the rooftops, they're going back to something larger scale (with more potential revenue) because the rooftops aren't going to make it easy either way.

 

That said, they still will need Rahm's help getting the new plan approved and the pending re-election campaign nearing shouldn't hurt.

[Guest]

I hate Beth Murphy and the rest of those clowns so much at this point that I really hope they get this approved and go through with this instead of just scaring the rooftop owners into agreeing not to sue on the old plan.

 

That and it's a cooler plan.

[Guest]

For whatever reason, I'm still up. Just went on Twitter and saw this. Ecker has seemed to be the best for this whole ordeal.

 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140522/BLOGS04/140529939/wrigley-rumble-cubs-break-off-rooftop-talks

[Guest]

From the other Crain's blog linked in that Ecker article:

 

Eventually, insiders say, conversation moved to a buy-out — something the Cubs probably should have done two decades ago. But there was no agreement, with one source telling me the rooftops wanted $250 million, but the Ricketts prepared to pay only $50 million.

[davell]

If there's THAT big of a gap between the two, it was never getting reached. After a few months of negotiating, that should have been clear. If THIS is a negotiating tactic itself, THIS should have been done a long time ago.

 

It's nice pub and all(which is sad in its own right, due to length) but if it leads to anything other than a lawsuit in the near future, I'll be surprised. Ricketts is way too careful monetarily to actually do much here. The early stages aren't anything that the rooftops care about, if I'm not mistaken. It's possible, I guess this could play out in court before the signage and other real issues are messed with. Or still come to an agreement prior to anyway. They won't be spending 100+mill worth of additions if there is even a slight chance a ruling goes against them.

[Wilson A2000]

Just pay the rooftop owners already. Give them $100 million if that is a fair deal. Between litigation costs, losing all of this extra revenue that could have been made, and the possibility that Tom loses in court, it would just be so much easier.

[davell]

Just pay the rooftop owners already. Give them $100 million if that is a fair deal. Between litigation costs, losing all of this extra revenue that could have been made, and the possibility that Tom loses in court, it would just be so much easier.

 

If they're looking for 250, 100 isn't fair for them, as its been broached unless our negotiators are even worse than I can possibly imagine.

[Wilson A2000]

What do the rooftops do in revenue on average per year the last 5 years?