quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

"So who derives the benefits from building this new stadium? And it comes as no surprise to anyone: the primary beneficiaries are owners and players It means an increased value for the franchise. It means more money for the owners and players."

---

Well no ****. Great analysis by some JUCO professor in Illinois. Quality source there

---

FWIW, Lake Forest College is a small, 4-year, liberal arts university with a $100 million endowment and Professor Baade has a post-doctorate from Berkeley and doctorate from Wisconsin. He's a pretty bright fellow.

I think the implication of his comment is that the benefits are disproportionately in favor of the owners (and players).

And while you might say that's obvious, that's the question. When do we stop allowing that and make owners pay their fair share?

---

Well that's just it. Owners have the leverage due to our society's obsession with sports. Until a few cities call the owners' bluff and deal with the consequences, this will continue to happen. Each city acts as a buyer in an open market with a very limited number of sports franchises being the supply. There are way more prospective buyers than the supply will allow, so cities end up over-paying to keep their teams.

If the current residents don't vote for it, the owner just takes his ball and goes home (relocates to another town/city/state) - just see any number of NFL or NBA teams over the years for examples. Then the city ends up spending even more to get another team to relocate to their city or get an expansion team, because the people want their sports and they want them close. It's irrational in a fiscal sense but it is what it is.

The only real option to move the team is to an out of market city

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

"So who derives the benefits from building this new stadium? And it comes as no surprise to anyone: the primary beneficiaries are owners and players It means an increased value for the franchise. It means more money for the owners and players."

---

Well no ****. Great analysis by some JUCO professor in Illinois. Quality source there

---

FWIW, Lake Forest College is a small, 4-year, liberal arts university with a $100 million endowment and Professor Baade has a post-doctorate from Berkeley and doctorate from Wisconsin. He's a pretty bright fellow.

I think the implication of his comment is that the benefits are disproportionately in favor of the owners (and players).

And while you might say that's obvious, that's the question. When do we stop allowing that and make owners pay their fair share?

---

When the citizens aren't happy with the results. Arlington is 2-0 on stadium deals so far.

Arlington might be "2 for 2", but as a Arlington voter I can confidently say that'd we'd be even better off had Jerry Jones and the old Rangers ownership took on more of the bill.

My point is something of an rhetorical one, as we the voters of Arlington can't singularly change the way stadium deals happen. As long as some other nearby municipality is willing to "play ball", there isn't much we can really do in Arlington but accept the deal as is.

Owners do have a lot of leverage but DFW (not necessarily Arlington) at least has some on its own right. I know Fox Sports negotiated a large local TV deal with the Rangers because it is in such a large market. Any move outside of DFW means they have gone to a smaller market. It seems logical that would mean a loss of revenue. I'm not sure who Arlington is competing with right now. If I were an Arlington resident I would vote against this.

So does the existing ball park just get bulldozed? What happens with that land, who owns it?

They aren't allowed to have Sunday night games unless it's the ESPN game? Is that it? Or because it's usually a travel day for the visitor?

The former due to national game blackout rules. They'll occassionally grant an exception due to the heat, but it is an exception.

I'd also add that that i'm sure the capacity crowd last night was pounding a lot more $8 beers per person than this afternoon.

quote:

---

Was the technology not in place to build a roof back in the early 90's? Why didn't we get a roof the last time? Was it lack of funds? What a waste.

---

No cause the Rogers Centre in Toronto was built in 89 and it has a retractable roof.

The technology has evolved quite a bit. I'm hoping they can build this one in a manner that it could open in the 2 minutes or so between innings, so they could start closed and then open about sunset

quote:

---

For those saying the heat isn't really a factor... one of the most popular teams in baseball in town this weekend. Night games on Friday and Saturday sold out... Day game today and the entire upper level of the left field is empty, with about 25% of the second level in the left field empty.

---

The heat definitely matters. Those who don't think it does are kidding themselves. But the serious discussion has mostly been how much it matters.

To be more complete and to give us a better idea of how much it matters, lets look at all 5 series the Rangers have played a Sunday game at home...

LA Angels: 25,859-->41,751-->39,401. Sunday was the second highest attended game.
Toronto: 40,344-->47,7115-->41,327. Sunday was the second highest attended game.
Pittsburgh: 37,645-->46,950-->44,613. Sunday was the second highest attended game.
Seattle: 32,395-->34,317-->37,616. Sunday was the highest attended game.
Boston: 46,881-->47,559-->36,312. Sunday was the third highest attended game.


So far, Sunday has drawn more fans than Friday in these weekend series. Its certainly not been the middle of the day and hot every one of those Sundays, but it gives us a better idea of how often its a problem. They only play something like 11 or 12 or 13 of those games a year, and some will be at night and some days will have nice weather. So we're talking about, I dunno, 7 or 8 of those hot Sunday games a year at most?

They have 7 more Sunday home games left, for 12 total. We can keep tabs as the season goes on.to give us a complete look at a season.


I can look into attendance on Wednesday/Thursday later but I gotta run.

My bet going forward through the heat of the season, you will see Sunday numbers more reflective of this last series than the other 4. You have to admit, April and May are typically damned fine months to be outdoors watching a game here in Texas. June -September not so much.

The Pittsburgh series was the only other one of the 4 you listed that was even remotely hot... 92 degrees. Compared to 99 yesterday.

Also worth noting that there actually was another April Sunday game... and it was rained out.

Yeah. I'm not predicting Sunday games won't suffer some during the middle of the summer But my expectation from a cursory look at attendance figures is the "problem" isn't so much a problem by September, if not earlier.

7 of the 9 September Sunday games the past three seasons were not the lowest attended game of the season.

In fact, Sunday was as likely if not more likely to be the highest attended game than the lowest attended game.


I'll look at more numbers when I have more time.

quote:

---

The Pittsburgh series was the only other one of the 4 you listed that was even remotely hot... 92 degrees. Compared to 99 yesterday.

---

quote:

---

Also worth noting that there actually was another April Sunday game... and it was rained out.

---

Like I said, it wasn't hot at all 5 games. But its probably not typically super hot every Sunday in Arlington. Its a look at how often attendance tanks on Sundays.

As far as the rain out, I'm aware of it. I don't remember how hot it was at the time but unless it was going to be the lowest attended game of the series, it doesn't really promote the "heat matters" argument. The average high in April is 77.

We don't have an attendance number so its not of much use.

Box office attendance #'s won't show the complete picture either. I'd wager that the biggest impact the heat has is on walk-up sales... Had more than a few friends that went out to the game Sunday because "so and so bought tickets a while back" or someone came in from out of town or whatever... Not realizing just how overbearing the heat can be.

quote:

---

They completely underestimated their tax growth.

---

BS -- at least to the tax growth related to the BiA. There was no measurable economic impact from the Ballpark in Arlington when built and through the year 2000.

From an actual study done in 2000:

quote:

---

Based on sales tax rebate data obtains from the Texas Comptroller's Office, the study found no significant increase in sales tax receipts for Arlington during the baseball season.

---

http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc2601/

Whether they paid the bonds off faster than expected isn't an issue. I once made capital investments in my firm that I reluctantly financed. After I successfully handled a matter (nothing to do with my asset purchase), I got a LOT of referrals for similar matters and used the resulting increased revenue to pay off what I bought. If the City of Arlington paid off notes early, it was likely due to the economy in the late '90s, not the BiA. Plus, the bonds getting paid off early only probably just covered Arlington's initial investment which they paid interest on. They borrowed money to give to the Rangers to build the park, got their principal amount borrowed paid back and you are acting as if it were a good deal for the city.

Hell, there isn't anything around the Ballpark and wouldn't be had Jerry not set up shop. How many restaurants were in that original Friday's front row grill place? I don't think anyone is in there now, or if they are, it isn't a restaurant. Check that, but I think we drove by there recently when looking for a place to eat.

The main reason I don't go to a game there is the heat. Used to live by old Arlington Stadium, and it needed to be replaced. Reggie Jackson called it, "Triple A atmosphere". Had an apartment in what is now the parking lot to Cowboys Stadium. And a comment on that, June 6, 2015, went to The Rolling Stones show there, roof was open.

Recently saw a story about the HVAC system is designed to flow downward over the seating, and not work overtime to cool all the air inside.

It's hot, and IMO, put a roof on it. The only enclosed MLB facility I've been to the Astrodome. I've been to a World Series game in 1984 in San Diego, and Wrigley several times. Also went to four Chargers football games at Jack Murphey, two in the day, against Denver and the Oilers, a late afternoon preseaon game against Dallas, one Monday night game against Seattle. Even there, sitting in the sun wasn't that much fun.

Former Cowboys season ticket holder, Texas Stadium was horrible for preseason. We had 5 seats the years they lost all three NFC Championship games. We usually skipped the exhibition games.

Not really a ReaRangers fan, (old pun), but would consider going to the new ballpark

Air conditioned baseball!

Im all for a roof, it just shouldn't be paid for by the city and its residents. The Rangers are going to get a billion dollar stadium but only have to shell out about $200 million.

That seems to be the nature of the beast for professional stadiums. Owners will always be making money - attendance, parking, concessions, hotels, bars, restaurants, etc. But, I would think that the city of Arlington will also get theirs as well, in more tourism.

It's mostly more tourism with respect to if the Rangers were to move to another city.

quote:

---

It's mostly more tourism with respect to if the Rangers were to move to another city.

---

Which is so unlikely unless they leave the metroplex

They are anticipating a higher percentage of attendance over the course of the season due to the roof/air conditioning. They are also counting on tying the new ballpark into the Texas Live music venue to increase tourism to the area

quote:

---

That seems to be the nature of the beast for professional stadiums. Owners will always be making money - attendance, parking, concessions, hotels, bars, restaurants, etc. But, I would think that the city of Arlington will also get theirs as well, in more tourism.

---

Actually, it will be tied for the worst deal in American history for public financing of a pro stadium. The one it will be tied with is next door.

Wow. Must be making too much money.