Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735346)

I want a stadium in the middle of nowhere so that only hardcore baseball fans will want to make the trip.

The gates will lock two hours prior to the game so that only serious tailgaters will come, and they won't unlock until after the game ends so that nobody can leave early.

We won't sell beer nor even have a scoreboard. If you aren't noting every pitch on your scorecard, **** you.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735303)

Let's say you need help moving from noon to three o'clock, and you call two friends. Both have to be somewhere at 2:30, but one shows up and helps out until 2:15, and the other guy doesn't come at all. Which one is the better friend?

I have taken my five year old to games and had to leave early to get him in bed before 11:00. I guess I'm a shitty fan.

Originally Posted by mr. tegu (Post 8735334)

Of course I could but that isn't what you said. You made it sound like we were all just getting off work and could step out of the office be there. Is it really that big of a deal to go to a restaraunt and then drive to the game? But the point remains that the vast majority of people that go to a Royals game, wherever the stadium is located, get there by driving. I don't think people in KC consider driving to places to be much of an inconvenience.

I can't help but notice you have begun arguing with yourself. Earlier you were saying the stadium would get more money because if it were downtown more people would come and spend more money on food and beverages in the stadium. But now you are saying people are going to go to the bar/restaraunts before and after the game if it were primely located, thus removing a significant amount of business from the vendors in the stadium.

Originally Posted by Dartgod (Post 8735169)

Wrigley Field is not downtown.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735360)

I said that the the team would make more money. If more people attend games, that seems pretty reasonable. The local economy would also prosper by having people spend money around the stadium rather than eating at the 810 zone, driving straight to the stadium, and driving home.

Tailgating, fun though it may be, provides little to no economic benefit to the team nor to the local economy.

Originally Posted by Swanman (Post 8735368)

I learned upon moving to Chicago that there are a couple perceptions of "downtown". The first one I had was basically just the loop and the area for a mile or so around (where all the tall buildings are). However, people also call Wrigleyville downtown.

Under Saul's definition of "downtown", Wrigleyville is not downtown. His definition seems to imply lots of office buildings and tons of people working right nearby, which isn't Wrigleyville. While many people that live in the neighborhood can just "walk across the street" and attend a game, most commute from other areas of the city or the suburbs to attend and have a much longer trip time-wise than people driving to the K.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735360)

I said that the the team would make more money. If more people attend games, that seems pretty reasonable. The local economy would also prosper by having people spend money around the stadium rather than eating at the 810 zone, driving straight to the stadium, and driving home.

Tailgating, fun though it may be, provides little to no economic benefit to the team nor to the local economy.

Originally Posted by mr. tegu (Post 8735383)

But if people are not purchasing from inside the stadium AND they aren't paying the stadium for parking it sounds like it would result in a loss of income for the team. I am not saying that it is bad for the team to lose money or that it is bad for the local economy to gain money, just saying I don't really see an increase for the team.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 8735000)

For one it would cost hundreds of millions the city already has spent too much.

Secondly to build anything you'll need to tear down houses. That would be a messy public domain issue. Good luck getting a politician to touch that.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735397)

WTF? They buy tickets to the games, and they buy the same concessions that the tailgaters buy once inside.

Originally Posted by blaise (Post 8735390)

I don't think having the stadium downtown really means more people will go. Winning games makes people go. When the Orioles won, people went to the games. When they didn't, they didn't. Same for Houston. Both downtown stadiums. People fill Yankee stadium and there's nothing there, not unless you think the Bronx is fun.

Originally Posted by mr. tegu (Post 8735421)

I don't see an increase in attendance. To me it is that simple. Would some people go that otherwise wouldn't? Sure. Would some people not go that otherwise would? You bet. Do you agree or disagree?

IMO the difference results in the same attendance. A winning team will increase attendance, not a downtown stadium.

You keep saying how much people would love to hit the bars and restaraunts, which will certainly drive down purchases in the stadium. People tailgate but tailgating is a lot cheaper than going out to a bar or restaraunt before the game, therefore leaving more room for purchases on the inside.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735360)

I said that the the team would make more money. If more people attend games, that seems pretty reasonable. The local economy would also prosper by having people spend money around the stadium rather than eating at the 810 zone, driving straight to the stadium, and driving home.

Tailgating, fun though it may be, provides little to no economic benefit to the team nor to the local economy.

Originally Posted by Saul Good (Post 8735453)

So I buy my food from hen house in johnson county, cook it in the parking lot, money in the stadium. That helps the johnson county economy, and it helps david glass, but how does it help the community that paid hundreds of millions of dollars for the stadium?