Quick notes from Wolff-Townsend interview
- 06.29.11, 18:09
- 171 Comments
Update 11:45 PM – Mark Purdy asks questions of both Wolff and Reed.
Wolff’s reactions to Townsend’s questions:
- Not critical about Selig. Is resigned to the length of the process.
- T-rights isn’t “us against the Giants.” It’s a baseball matter.
- Washington-Baltimore is not comparable to Santa Clara County, and has not been discussed as comparable.
- Acknowledges cities’ financial problems. Emphasizes ballpark will be built with private funds (does not talk about public land or infrastructure).
- Continues to be in touch with San Jose and Mayor Reed.
- Considers real estate transactions for Diridon small in cost relative to ballpark investment.
- Maintains there is no Plan B, Plan A being San Jose.
- Says that there is no financial plan for building in Oakland. Infrastructure costs in Oakland and Fremont are “not in the cards anymore.”
- Oakland Mayor Quan and Wolff have been talking, will meet next month.
- OT – Feels that 49ers and Raiders should share a stadium.
- San Jose site is the only that appears to be ready (EIR, land acquisition).
- Considers being an owner a privilege.
- Says the A’s have a good fanbase, could be bigger.
- Likes the challenge of figuring the plan out, but he’s getting older.
- Hints for the first time that if situation drags past the point where he can see it through, his son (Keith) and staff will do it.
Not much from the interview, but the Quan and succession stuff is revealing.
Why is it Pro-Oak fans always blame the owners?? First Schott and now Wolff?
Blame the City and County for the disdain they have shown to the team over the years. They lost a lawsuit for 16M to Schott when they built Mt. Davis.
The relationship between the team and the City/County is beyond repair. New owners will not change that, even a new Mayor and City Council cannot change that.
Like a curse the “ghost” will show up and stop the A’s in their tracks in Oakland.
The Raiders are the team the City/County is going to work with and that is 100% clear. I am sorry but Oakland is finished and the answer is not a new owner…
@eb “You’re defending the tarps? First off they are viewed as a joke by other fans across the country and Giant fans here.”
.
What is your evidence of this? The vast majority of people I talk to are completely indifferent to the question of the tarps. If there’s something that is viewed as a joke by “other fans across the country and Giants fans” (like I care what they think), it’s the pitiful attendance that makes the tarps necessary, not the tarps themselves. Do you really think spreading those 10,000 people across 55,000 seats instead of 35,000 is going to make the situation look better on TV? If anything, removing the tarps will increase the derision of “fans across the country.”
.
“Our fans don’t seem to like them.”
.
Again, based on what? You’re functioning in a little bit of an echo chamber. AN posters are made up primarily of hardcore, East Bay fans who hate Lew because of the impending move, period. Everything else is “confirmation bias” (you can Google this).
.
“They help deflate your attendance numbers”
.
They have an extremely minimal effect on attendance numbers, because the A’s will be lucky if they sell out more than five games this year with the tarps on. That modest decrease in attendance does not necessarily translate to reduced revenue, because the unavailability of unlimited cheap seats helps sell more of the more expensive seats. Meanwhile, the tarps save the team money on staffing and cleanup all 81 home games a year.
.
“and do nothing in terms of making tickets a more lucrative proposition for fans.”
.
I have no idea what this means. However, as noted above, the modest affect on attendance is offset by the increased revenue from selling more expensive seats and the savings on not staffing cleaning the entire upper deck.
“Bottom line, your own fans dislike them, get rid of them.”
.
There is no evidence significant numbers of fans dislike them; as I explain below, they improve the atmosphere at lightly attended games (which is most of them). And they are certainly helping the bottom line.
.
“They offer nothing positive and help add to the image that you run a second rate organization.”
.
I strongly disagree. For the fifty or so games when attendance is below 15,000, they make the place feel less empty and depressing. And they add no more to the image of running a “second rate organization” than sprinkling a handful of fans across a cavernous football stadium would.
@eb “Wolff and co. have put a shoddy product on the field,”
.
Not for lack of trying. Look, baseball is cyclical. You’re going to have some good years and some bad years. If you are a low revenue team, chances are you’re going to have more bad years.
.
“have a minor league system that as of 2011 is repeatedly rated mid to low by MLB experts,”
.
OK, and how was it rated the five years before that? Wolff doesn’t actually draft talent, he relies on his baseball minds (i.e. Billy Beane) for that. Billy Beane was widely considered one of the best GMs in the game, and Wolff gave him equity to make sure he stuck around. How is that inconsistent with a commitment to winning? You can’t put the fact that Beane’s decisions haven’t panned out as well the past few years on Wolff.
.
“eliminated fanfest”
.
And replaced it with a very nice tailgate which serves essentially the same function.
.
“put on the god awful tarps”
.
See my above post for explanation how the tarps have improved the fan experience while increasing team revenue.
.
“have made no effort to significantly improve the Coliseum (ala Giants owners and Candlestick),”
.
Truly, this would have been a foolish way to spend money. I’d rather they applie everything they’ve got to building a new venue than try to put lipstick on that pig.
.
“alienated East Bay fans (of which make the majority or at least a huge portion of A’s backers),”.
.
Alienation of some, not all, East Bay fans was the unavoidable result of discussing moving to San Jose. The other complaints are just the result of confirmation bias (and the fact that the team’s fortunes on the field are in a cyclical downturn).
.
” ignore A’s history and make no real effort to promote it”
.
The tarps themselves celebrate the A’s many world titles. We just had Rickey Hendersen day, and signs of more involvement by Ricky with the team.
.
” shows no real passion for winning during interviews,”
.
This is an entirely subjective opinion.
.
“has made no significant free agent signings (ala Giants and Bonds),”
.
How about Mike Piazza, Frank Thomas, Matt Holliday, and Ben Sheets, to begin with,?
.
“the fact is the majority of fans and the media don’t like this ownership group.”
.
You really need to stop claiming to speak for the “majority of fans” without hard evidence to back you up. Non-scientific web polls on Athletics Nation do not count.
“Compare Wolff to the Giants owners, who would you rather have running your team?”
.
Wolff, without question. Right now, the most important thing for the future of the team is getting a new ballpark. As an experienced California real estate developer with ties to the MLB Commissioner, no one on the planet is in a better position to do that than Lew Wolff. Nothing the current Giants ownership has done even comes close to that level of accomplishment (and I include last year’s WS in that statement).
@bartleby–as posted a few days ago by OAKLANDathletics, the rankings for this ownership has been towards the bottom every year. The only positive has been low tix price. Everything else–honesty, loyalty, community, etc.. — is towards the bottom, and I don’t disagree.
http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/teamrankings/_/sport/mlb/category/own#table
ESPN takes another credibility hit. An ownership group that offers the lowest prices in pro sports nationwide and has been trying for 5+ years to privately build a Bay Area ballpark for the A’s. But ESPN rates them among the worst. OK. I strongly encourage ESPN to buy the A’s and build them a new ballpark in the Bay Area, if the network is so sure the current ownership is no good.
@pjk–would you agree on ESPN having the Sharks way up there and the Warriors and Raiders way down? They’re pretty much on target on most of the teams, including the A’s. They do have credilbilty.
@pjk–would you agree on ESPN having the Sharks way up there and the Warriors and Raiders way down? They’re pretty much on target. Credibility is intact. I wish they would buy the A’s.
Oops, i changed my post but posted both my mistake..sorry.
@jk The ESPN rankings are worthless. First of all, they’re based on the opinions of 1000 fans from around the country. That’s not a big sample, and how many fans outside the Bay Area have a clue what’s what with A’s ownership? Not informed opinions..
.
Finally, if you take a close look at the teams at the top and the teams at the bottom of that list, what is the main correlation that jumps out at you? WINNING. Yes, for some strange reason, it just so happens that fans of winning teams are happier with their owners and rate them higher than fans of losing teams. Go figure..
.
I know you love to see your own personal bias confirmed, but mark my words: If the A’s were to go deep in the playoffs this year, their “Ownership” rankings would shoot way up next year. And if Lew succeeds in building a new venue, his ratings will go through the roof.
.,..The Sharks have nothing to do with it. If ESPN thinks the owners of the most inclusive, family-friendly franchise in all of sports are amongst the worst, then ESPN should be prepared to come in and do a better job. And build for us a $500 mill privately funded ballpark like Wolff and Fischer want to do.
@bartleby–FWIW, in 2006, the deepest they’ve been into the payoffs since the Haas era, the ESPN rankings had the A’s shoot way up to an awesome 21 out of 30 MLB teams, and 74 out of 92 of the Big 3 (no NHL figured in that year). And would you agree about the Sharks, Raiders and Warriors?
Yup, it looks like the fans, including this one, know their stuff. :)
ESPN represents the dumbing-down of the American sports fan. During the 1970s, we had Howard Cosell, as annoying as he was, always presuming a reasonable level of intelligence amongst his audience. Today, it’s ESPN with Chris Berman, spewing the same schtick for decades: “He could go all the way!” or “Back back back back back!!!” Thank God for the emergence of stations like the NHL Network or NFL Network – we don’t need ESPN anymore.
@jk Well if they’re publishing these rankings in June, the playoffs hadn’t happened yet. All my other comments still apply: These are not scientific surveys, they are weighted with subjective factors and are not to be taken seriously.
.
With respect to the other teams: Sharks, consistent winners. Warriors and Raiders, consistent losers. You’re not really disproving my theory.
.
Trust me, a WS berth and a new ballpark, and Wolff will rule those rankings.
“OK, and how was it rated the five years before that? Wolff doesn’t actually draft talent, he relies on his baseball minds (i.e. Billy Beane) for that. Billy Beane was widely considered one of the best GMs in the game, and Wolff gave him equity to make sure he stuck around. How is that inconsistent with a commitment to winning? You can’t put the fact that Beane’s decisions haven’t panned out as well the past few years on Wolff.”
Can’t have it both ways bartleby, you said yourself in a previous thread that one of the reasons you liked Wolff as an owner is because of the fact that he has helped create a strong farm system (which he hasn’t really).
.
“And replaced it with a very nice tailgate which serves essentially the same function.”
Riiigghhttt. A classy tailgate,. Hmmm, I wonder if the majority of baseball franchises throw their fans a “very nice tailgate.”
.
“put on the god awful tarps”
.Hey man, defending the taps is up to you. Enjoy.
.
“Truly, this would have been a foolish way to spend money. I’d rather they applie everything they’ve got to building a new venue than try to put lipstick on that pig.”
Seemed to work well for the Giants. You know this ownership isn’t hurting for money, right? We disagree.
.
“The tarps themselves celebrate the A’s many world titles. We just had Rickey Hendersen day, and signs of more involvement by Ricky with the team.”
So they have a very nice tailgate AND decorative tarps?!
.
How about Mike Piazza, Frank Thomas, Matt Holliday, and Ben Sheets, to begin with,?
Piazza = Over the hill when signed. Thomas = Got lucky with his performance, still wasn’t a high end free agent. Holliday = A trade and then traded. Not a free agent signing. Ben Sheets = High end free agent? Hardly.
“Wolff, without question. Right now, the most important thing for the future of the team is getting a new ballpark. As an experienced California real estate developer with ties to the MLB Commissioner, no one on the planet is in a better position to do that than Lew Wolff. Nothing the current Giants ownership has done even comes close to that level of accomplishment (and I include last year’s WS in that statement).”
Wow. I’m speechless. I already know we disagree, bartleby, and maybe it’s your background in law, but you just seem to be arguing yourself into a hole and grasping for whatever “facts” that you can. Also, google condescending.
@eb “Can’t have it both ways bartleby, you said yourself in a previous thread that one of the reasons you liked Wolff as an owner is because of the fact that he has helped create a strong farm system (which he hasn’t really).”
.
Actually, I never said that, you’re confusing me with someone else. Believe it or not, not all of us who advocate for San Jose are the same person.
.
The A’s had a good farm system before Wolff got there. What he does deserve credit for is retaining Beane (i.e. not “fixing” what wasn’t broken).
.
“And replaced it with a very nice tailgate which serves essentially the same function.”
.
“Riiigghhttt. A classy tailgate,. Hmmm, I wonder if the majority of baseball franchises throw their fans a “very nice tailgate.””
.
I very much doubt you know what the majority of baseball franchises do, any more than you know what the the majority of fans think. (Of course, that doesn’t seem to stop you from claiming to speak on their behalf).
.
“put on the god awful tarps”
.
Um, that was your quote, not mine. Now you’re debating yourself?
.
“Truly, this would have been a foolish way to spend money. I’d rather they apply everything they’ve got to building a new venue than try to put lipstick on that pig.”
.
“Seemed to work well for the Giants.”
.
Show me one shred of evidence that the minimal improvements the Giants made to Candlestick improved attendance. And frankly, I went to Candlestick back in the day, and it wasn’t a game changer from a fan experience standpoint, either. So in what way did investing in Candlestick “work” for the Giants?
.
“You know this ownership isn’t hurting for money, right?”
.
They aren’t hurting for money because their partners subsidize them. Plus, they have major expenses on the horizon in the form of a mortgage on a new ballpark. So, I don’t begrudge them for actually trying to run the A’s like, y’know, a business. Which means not throwing money down ratholes.
.
“The tarps themselves celebrate the A’s many world titles. We just had Rickey Hendersen day, and signs of more involvement by Ricky with the team.”
.
“So they have a very nice tailgate AND decorative tarps?!”
.
That’s right. You accused them of not celebrating their history, I’m pointing out that they do. The statues of A’s greats come later, at Cisco Field. And since you’re so enamored of the Giants owners, I’ll point out: I don’t remember any Willie Mays statues at Candlestick, either.
.
“How about Mike Piazza, Frank Thomas, Matt Holliday, and Ben Sheets, to begin with?”
Piazza = Over the hill when signed. Thomas = Got lucky with his performance, still wasn’t a high end free agent. Holliday = A trade and then traded. Not a free agent signing. Ben Sheets = High end free agent? Hardly.
.
Look, having a guy like Bonds hit the free agent market in the prime of his career doesn’t happen very often. When it does, a free agent of that caliber usually ends up on a team like the Yankees or Mets. The Giants were able to land Bonds in part because of his personal ties to the team. It’s not a reasonable benchmark.
.
Your point was that the A’s haven’t spent on players. You may not like the guys I just named, but Piazza, Holliday and Sheets were making between $8.5 and $11 million dollars per year while playing for the A’s.
.
When you’re in the A’s position, your opportunities for big name free agents are mostly going to be aging stars and/or guys coming off injuries. That’s just the reality, and that’s why the A’s need to move to San Jose.
.
“Wolff, without question. Right now, the most important thing for the future of the team is getting a new ballpark. As an experienced California real estate developer with ties to the MLB Commissioner, no one on the planet is in a better position to do that than Lew Wolff. Nothing the current Giants ownership has done even comes close to that level of accomplishment (and I include last year’s WS in that statement).”
.
“Wow. I’m speechless. I already know we disagree, bartleby, and maybe it’s your background in law, but you just seem to be arguing yourself into a hole and grasping for whatever “facts” that you can.”
.
I stand by every word of that paragraph. First, although the Giants had a decent team last year, no one thought they were a serious contender for the title, and I don’t think too many are picking them to repeat. Billy Beane is right; once you get to the playoffs, there’s a huge amount of luck. Second, the Giants were in a position to make a run last year largely because of AT&T Park. AT&T Park was a major accomplishment, to be sure, but it was an accomplishment of the previous Giants ownership group, not this one. And building a new park for the A’s is going to be much, much tougher than building AT&T Park was. Seriously, if they were to swap seats, you think Bill Neukom would have a better chance of getting it done than Wolff?
.
I’ll take the park now, and the titles later. And dude, I really don’t need a lecture on grasping for facts from the “all fans think what I think” guy.
The Giants were able to land Bonds because they offered him the richest contract in baseball history at the time. Salaries have taken off a lot since then though.
The tailgate was an adequate replacement in 2010 when it was before a weekend exhibition game though I still preferred the standard fanfest. This year when the tailgate was on a Tuesday afternoon it was very lame.
@ bartleby Wow. Hey man, I’ll end it here as you’re making it personal and name calling, usually an obvious sign of frustration. If you think Lew Wolff is the bee’s knees, go for it. Heck, I’ll even through in a “most fans” here at the end to incriminate and deflate any previous point I’ve made. Enjoy.
@bartleby–the improvements at the Stick were somewhat minimal, but McGowan tried to make a better fan experience. At least he didn’t bash the facility daily like Lurie did back then and Wolff does now with the Coliseum. How come they didn’t put tarps on at the Stick during their last years there? Cuz it’s stupid and kind of embarassing. They’re still laughing at us. They should poll all A’s fans as they come to the Coliseum and ask if they want the tarps on or off. I’ll bet you most will want them back. Gio does.
@eb–the LW apologists like bartleby and many others on here just like the guy cuz he’s trying to get a park done in SJ, but they pretty much ignore everything else this guy has said and done. He needs to go. Not you bartleby, you can stay, but your homey LW needs to step down.
–correction: most (fans) will want the tarps off, not back..sorry.
@jk-usa. What Lurie and Wolff said about their stadiums is irrelevant. You don’t have to read the newspaper or listen to his interviews to know that the Coli is a relative dump and Candlestick was, too. Put it like this: it’s not like when Wolff showed in 2005 and said the Coliseum is inadequate that people were like “Hold up, hold up — really? The Coliseum is inadequate? Well, screw it, then; I’m not going to A’s games anymore!”
Anyone who’s been to the Coli, or knows anyone who’s been to the Coli knows the deal. The bitter truth is the Coliseum is the same place that it’s been since 1996 (and many of its bowels older than that.) It didn’t go downhill right after Schott and Hoffman sold the team. It was bad in ’96, bad in 2005, and bad now.
170 comments and the thread went nowhere. You guys just can’t stop yourselves, can you? Thread closed.