The enemy of my enemy is my friend, Part Deux

Shortly after Commissioner Bud Selig convened his three-man panel to figure out what to do with the A’s, all sorts of political machinations started happening. That included then-Oakland City Attorney John Russo (now City Manager of Alameda) penning a lawsuit threat against the A’s. I wrote back then:

What recourse do the Giants have, then? They can try to go to bat for Oakland, even though they have no history of doing that previously. Even though, in moving to China Basin, they’ve actively siphoned East Bay fans away from the A’s. Even though they’ve held a regional hegemony for decades. It wouldn’t be hard to posture themselves as saviors of baseball in Oakland – no matter how strange that sounds – as it wouldn’t require much effort and could be done in a sort of stealth mode. It wouldn’t be difficult to get a few letters from prominent pols in order, so no problem there either. The best part is for the Giants is that it works. It paints Wolff as a villain and Oakland as a victim, despite the backstory’s greater complexity.

Eerie, no?

Now we have word from the Trib that Jean Quan has met with Giants ownership. That wouldn’t be the first time. Perhaps it’s completely altruistic, in that they’re instructing her on how to put together an AT&T Park-style stadium deal, the kind that Clorox CEO Don Knauss is pursuing. (Knauss also had a lengthy interview with KQED.) Then again, this is the same Giants ownership group that may have pulled a power play to kill the Piccinini-Dolich group’s chances to buy the A’s, because the Giants didn’t want an Oakland-based group owning the A’s:

More likely, Piccinini suspects the San Francisco Giants ownership had a hand in convincing Selig to make sure the deal never materialized, especially since Selig has called the A’s move from Kansas City to Oakland “a terrible mistake.”

“I can tell you there’s an executive with the Giants, who shall go unnamed,” Piccinini said. “I ran into him at a Warriors game. He said, ‘I hear you’re getting involved with the Padres. We want you in San Diego; we just didn’t want you here.’ “

Speaking of Piccinini, he’ll be available soon if he wants to deal with the struggle to be an owner again. Piccinini is part of the Moorad group who were teased the Padres, only to have the rug pulled out from under them. Moorad won’t be able go after another team, knowing that there are permanent veto votes against him within the Lodge. Much of the rest of the Central Valley base of the ownership group should be available, and they could pull in another frontman – Andy Dolich, perhaps?

If Piccinini’s right, the Giants don’t care for the A’s in Oakland or anywhere else in the Bay Area. That makes it frustrating to see Quan consult with the Giants. The Giants aren’t doing the City of Oakland any favors. Just because they may have a somewhat allied interest (keeping the A’s out of San Jose) doesn’t mean they are allied.

If Quan’s smart, she’ll ask for some of the SF sponsors that Oakland will need because as much as the East Bay wants to puff its chest out , the pickings are slim. The Chron 200 is an annual list of the Bay Area’s largest independent, publicly-traded companies by revenue. Generally these are companies with revenues over $100 million annually. Some private companies, like Bechtel, or subsidiaries, like Matson (Alexander & Baldwin), and nonprofits (Kaiser Permanente) are excluded. Distributed by region, San Francisco has 19 of 200, with 5 in Marin County and 26 in San Mateo County. Santa Clara County has 102, or 51% of the list. Oakland has 3 companies on the list, the East Bay in total has 38.

Chron 200 list by city/county-region

If you combine SF, San Mateo, and Marin Counties, you get 50 companies. That’s not significantly greater than the East Bay’s 38 – or 40 if we include Kaiser and Matson. Straight up it would appear that there’s enough corporate strength in the East Bay to make a privately financed, $500 million ballpark happen. But the Giants’ argument for years has been that they needed the South Bay to finance AT&T Park. If that’s true then there’s a logical incongruence at work. Either the South Bay was required and there’s no other way but to include them, or the South Bay wasn’t required and the strength of the West Bay is enough. So which is it?

Also, check out the imbalance of companies in the Giants’ designated territory and the A’s. The Giants have over 75% of the Chron 200. The A’s have less than 20%.

The secrecy of the mystery ownership bidder is also a bit baffling. Lew Wolff has said that no interested party has asked him directly about selling the team. Instead, whoever’s interested has chosen to use back channels to engage Wolff – once. What is the point of that? If the East Bay coalition’s goal is to first work with the current ownership group to develop a plan to keep the A’s in Oakland, why have they never directly called Wolff once? They’ve gone semi-public twice in the last several months to indicate there’s an ownership group in waiting. Seems to me it’s a lot harder to put together a press conference than to call Wolff or arrange a meeting. For whatever reason, they haven’t done the latter. In the last comments thread, a question was posed, “Why doesn’t Lew listen to what these guys have to say?” I think the answer is that they have to present something to the man first. They’ve presented a plan to MLB three years ago that went unanswered. If they want to work with Wolff, they might want to first try to, you know, work with Wolff instead of posturing. It’s somewhat embarrassing that Mayor Quan has probably spent more time talking the Giants brass than the A’s. If A’s ownership is the enemy, don’t pussyfoot around it or hedge. Declare it and get to work. Otherwise it’s just another exercise in scoring PR or political points. And the only real winner in the end is the Giants.

154 thoughts on “The enemy of my enemy is my friend, Part Deux

  1. How receptive has Wolff been to Oakland officials as of late? It would seem like his statement of “”We have no plan B,” Wolff said. “But it can’t be in Oakland,” isn’t conducive to legitimate discussion. Don’t get me wrong, Oakland has gotten a very late jump and has a lot to prove, but it should go both ways. As for the Giants meeting with Oakland, maybe they both figure this is the best strategy for the two parties. Working towards common interests doesn’t mean they’re completely in bed together (bad image of Baer and Quan, sorry) it’s like a Soviet/USA WWII partnership, their association would divert after the goal was accomplished. Lot’s of drama, that’s for sure.

  2. Wolff has made it abundantly clear he has no desire to discuss an Oakland solution further. He’s said it time and again. Quan knows her best option is to appeal to MLB and/or new ownership.

    • @Ali/eb – I concur that Wolff has dismissed Oakland unnecessarily and prematurely. My question is, Why is Oakland talking about working with ownership when they’ve never even attempted to work with ownership? All they’ve done is try to work around Wolff/Fisher and that hasn’t exactly yielded positive results. I’d prefer they go the Kings fans/media route. At least that’s honest.

  3. In reality, you could probably include Fremont and Newark in the South Bay corporate count. I know, I know…county lines, but whatever.
    So lets see: MLB committee has presented its findings to Selig/MLB, Selig says issue on the frontburner, Wolff has no intentions of being in Oakland and just a few weeks ago Selig hinted in working out a deal for San Jose. WHY AND THE HELL ARE QUAN AND THE OAKLAND BUSINESS COMMUNITY STILL FOCUSING ON THE A’S!?
    Like I mentioned in the previous thread, the Raiders WANT to stay in Oakland and at the coliseum. All of Quan’s, Clorox’s and the Oak biz efforts should be on retaining the Raiders. As a Raiders fan, WTF!
    As an A’s fan tired of The O’s treatment over the past 16 years …do you know the way to $an Jo$e!

  4. @ ML – Very impressive list of the Chron 200, I must say. The South Bay dominates no doubt. Hands down. Have you looked at segmenting these companies by revenues to see what the actual percentage would be? The reason I ask is because Chevron had revenues of $250 billion last year, which is quite massive. Likewise, some SB companies have enormous revenues as well. I would just be curious as to how the revenue breakdown would look like, percentage-wise. For instance, you mentioned Kaiser was not included (an Oakland company) yet they had over $42 billion in revenues last year. They were present at the press conference as well, leading me to believe that they’re ready to contribute something. I’m not arguing over the comparison between SB companies and EB companies because there is no comparison obviously. Let me say that I’m clearly admitting the South Bay has way more companies. I’m sort of focusing on revenues as well as number of companies. For instance, I posted a very long time ago that I have many, many clients in the East Bay who are business owners. They wouldn’t necessarily fall into the Chron 200 list but they make more than enough money to buy premium seats without question (I was relentlessly challenged for saying this though). In short, how do the 50%+ number of companies stack up to the rest in terms of revenues and how would this be applicable to revenue streams. Please don’t go to great lengths for this I’m just curious if you had an opinion.

  5. @ML Whatever came of the Quan/Wolff meeting, what was it, like 5 or 6 months back? Maybe Oakland is finally starting to get things assembled and they are just coming really late to the party. I mean, the city has had a lot on its plate, maybe the sports issue is starting to get the attention from city leaders. It’s frustrating, but the city has never really been a cohesive, dynamic unit. San Jose appears to be stalled, so why not put their best foot forward now. It hasn’t been much, but these latest showings by the Town are a start.

  6. It’s amazing to learn just how much the Giants have been underhanded in trying to cripple the A’s for years, with the Piccinini-Dolich thing falling through.
    .
    I also have absolutely zero doubt that the Giants had a hand in helping the NIMBYs shoot down the Fremont efforts.
    .
    The Giants have been systematically trying to destroy and/or force out the A’s for years.
    .
    The San Francisco Giants are the worst sports franchise in the history of all humanity, and are evil incarnate.
    .
    Also, Jean Quan is the stupidest mayor in the country. She’s like the frog giving the scorpion (the Giants) a ride across the river.
    .
    By all rights, the City of Oakland should sue the Giants for billions, because the Giants have thwarted stadium building efforts, which has been devastating for the local economy. Also, the City of San Jose should sue the Giants for billions, for the same reasons.

  7. Quan working behind Wolffs back and trying to appeal to his good friend and fraternity brother? Somehow I don’t think that would go over to well…OH WELL.

  8. @eb,
    San Jose stalled? How so? Even if true, San Jose is light hears ahead of Oakland in terms of being ready for MLB (land, EIR, Real naming rights sponsor, SVBiz support, etc). Not that being “stalled” would matter as it relates to Oakland’s recent “effort.”

  9. I’m not the biggest Quan supporter, but in her defense, she came into the situation at a disadvantage. Gerry and Dellums had already mucked up the situation tremendously and eliminated any sliver of hope that Wolff would listen to Oakland’s proposals

  10. Meant light years, not “hears.”

  11. @Tony Stalled in the way of not being able to build in San Jose. I’m finding it extremely unlikely that the Giants will give up the rights and I don’t think Bud/owners will forcibly take it from them. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s what it looks like as of now.

  12. Yep, it’s quite obvious what is going on. Wolff has been as forward as possible that he will never consider Oakland as a home for the A’s. I’m not sure why Marine Layer even poses this question as he said that he spoke with Wolff on the phone this afternoon . And I quote – “I just got off the phone with Lew Wolff. He confirmed that the team is not for sale and that ownership has explored all options in Oakland.” It doesn’t get much clearer than that.

    If you are 100% for keeping the A’s in Oakland, why not explore all allies? I commend Quan for meeting with the Giants, whatever their motives might be. Oakland needs all the supporters they can get in keeping their team. Getting major businesses (commenters can downplay all they want, but getting these corporations to voice their support is a big deal) on the record and in public is a big step. This is a shot across the bow to Wolff and yet another issue Selig will have to address in his decision.

    OK San Jose shills, rail away.

  13. @ ML – One last question. If the Giants don’t want an Oakland-based group to build a new stadium, likely in JLS, and they don’t want the A’s in SJ, well then it’s obvious their preference is for the A’s to leave the area obviously, or “rot” in the Coliseum. However, what if MLB said “no way, no how” the A’s are staying in the Bay Area. In your opinion what would be the lesser of two evils for the Giants? I’m assuming your response will be Oakland but I’m just curious. The reason I ask is because of Piccinini’s statement about the Giants executive telling him they didn’t want him in Oakland, i.e. it would have been detrimental to the Giants business. I can’t imagine the Giants ownership being thrilled about a downtown Oakland stadium based on this quote from Bob. Aside from the obvious, ie. the Giants want the A’s gone, what in the world would they do if MLB says the A’s stay in the Bay? Would they then embrace Oakland (in JLS) vs San Jose?

  14. @Columbo – I just ran the numbers. In terms of revenue, the West Bay has 30.5%, East Bay 25.9%, South Bay 42.7%. In terms of market cap it’s West Bay 28.8%, East Bay 13.6%, South Bay 56.3%.

    I had to designate three companies as N/A because they were acquired in 2011. Those companies are National Semi (Texas Instruments), Atheros (Qualcomm), and Celera (Quest Diagnostics). The first two are South Bay concerns, the last East Bay.

    Chevron’s an unusual animal because of its position. It’s a key sponsor to both teams so it probably doesn’t want to get involved in this mess. Yet if the East Bay coalition were to get Chevron’s support it would be the biggest gesture by far from the East Bay’s largest company, by far.

    To answer your final question, they Giants would grin and bear it until MLB ultimately decided what to do with the A’s. They’d have no choice and can’t manipulate things anymore than they already have.

    @eb – Nothing happened at the Wolff-Quan meeting.

  15. eb- I couldnt agree more….Giants are not giving up those rights and mlb ain’t taking them so can we please stop bleeding fans with a mediocre team and come up with a solution that can actually happen in this decade

  16. now lets hear the typical tony d.and other san jose homers attack if you disagree with them or their belief that A’s will be in san jose soon, which is a big part of the reason I dont read this blog much anymore

  17. Publicly, all we know is that Oakland continues to posture.
    .
    These folks really annoy the hell out of me. There are real tangible steps they can be taking to make something happen but they keep holding press conferences instead.
    .
    Why isn’t Let’s Go Oakland proving there is a premium ticket market in Oakland by getting people to buy premium seats now? The A’s play there now. What’s stopping them?
    .
    Why aren’t they getting the folks on their Facebook page to buy season tickets? Let’s assume that the A’s current 9k season ticket holders are all in that group. If they got the reaming portion to combine for partial ticket packages and that was equivalent to 25% of them buying full season ticket packages there is another 8k full season equivalents. That would mean there wouldn’t be a night with less than 17k and a much higher average.
    .
    Instead they play PR games. People who want to “get shit done” don’t call press conferences, they actually make shit happen.

  18. I just can’t understand how that idiot Jean Quan could lure Directors and CEOs of companies like Safeway, Cost Plus, Kaiser-Permanente, and Clorox onto a podium with her to try and foist her hair-brain Coliseum City scheme onto the public. Don’t those dummies read this blog and realize how pathetic Oakland and it’s leaders are, and how completely hopeless their situation is?

  19. @jon campbell – So far it looks like there are more pro-Oakland commenters in this thread than pro-San Jose. Stop crying victim and debate the points.

  20. Jon… Respectfully, you have zero idea how to build a better than mediocre baseball team. While I disagree with your logic, and I am not a San Jose or bust type, I’d add that one other thing isn’t happening. A new baseball only facility in Oakland.

  21. Wow TPS is back…

  22. @tps – There are these things called political favors…

  23. Columbo, are you posing the question under the assumption that it is better to have a smaller number of large revenue companies? That seems odd to me… You want have more companies in the high revenue bracket than fewer very large companies. My logic here is that any single company is only going to buy so many luxury boxes… Thus, the more companies you have capable of contributing to that premium base the better.
    .
    TPS, so when Fred Blackwell said that Victory Court was a go because Redevelopment wasn’t going to go away about a week before Redevelopment went away that built some serious credibility for the City? Or when Jean Quan said that she would do everything she could to make Victory Court happen but the City didn’t even move on an authorized EIR that built some credibility? And now, without Redevelopment these are the same folks you are believing are going to pull off a $2B mega development? Yep, it’s ML who is delirious.

  24. @eb,
    You are wrong (that was easy).
    @jcampbell,
    You shouldn’t read this blog if reality doesn’t sit well in your stomach.
    @Jeffrey,
    My thoughts exactly ;)
    Good night all!

  25. JGMJ, these supporters voiced their support right here about 3 years ago. This isn’t new. This is the PR cycle replaying itself in a different form.

  26. Okay, ML. I guess these folks might actually be indifferent to the loss of the A’s and merely paying Jean back for some favors…. But how far will they go for her now? Are they just standing up there for yet another dog and pony face saving charade for her, so they can now join her as targets of verbal assaults from the gurus in these forums as she crashes and burns? Or are they going to actually go to the mat for her to try and get a stadium built for her?

  27. @tps – I don’t know. Talk is cheap.

  28. Jeffrey, it wasn’t Jean Quan’s credibility on display today. It’s this guy’s credibility you need to impugn to get out of the starting gate with this topic:

    “Clorox strongly and enthusiastically endorses the efforts of the East Bay business community and City of Oakland to keep the Oakland A’s here in a new, world-class stadium. As former president and CEO of the Minute Maid Company, I was actively involved in the design of the new Houston Astros downtown ballpark and subsequently secured naming rights to change the name to Minute Maid Park. From that experience, I can speak first-hand to the revitalization a world-class ballpark can bring to a city. Certainly, Oakland would benefit greatly from the jobs, tourism and vitality a new stadium would bring.

    “The business community is committed to helping drive an effort to support the current ownership group in their quest for a new stadium so long as they are committed to staying in Oakland,” Knauss went on to say. “However, if the current ownership group is not committed to Oakland, we want to make clear that Oakland and the East Bay business community are ready to step up to the plate to help ensure the A’s stay home where they belong in Oakland. We’re confident we have identified an ownership group with the financial wherewithal to buy the team, keep them here and get a new stadium built.”

  29. Obviously there are the normal thoughts of where are the facts and numbers if there is any real plan…
    But my question is for these companies that are saying they would support the team is they stayed, why aren’t they now? for the companies listed hardly any of them have any sponsorship going on at the Coliseum. If your saying you’re are fully behind it, why aren’t you now? Stop talking and start doing.

    the question of who the mystery ownership group is (did the second secret group already drop out?) People have said there staying quiet to not ruffle Selig feathers. Well if there is a group that has already let Selig know they would buy the A’s. It doesn’t matter if they said publicly who they are, just letting this all go to the media would piss off Selig just the same. Especially since he would know who the group is. They don’t save much face by staying secretive.
    ….
    For the comments why doesn’t lew at least meet with Oakland and act like he’s trying is obvious. He did try and he finally got Selig to say there is a chance because everything else had failed. Sop right now he needs to show San Jose is the only option for his team. If he meets with Oakland and say let’s see what you have. It would show Selig Lew thinks Oakland might be possible. So yes he does need to take the current hardline stance.
    ..
    The random commenters that say San Jose is not an option and and never will be. MLB has already said so makes no sense. Selig said for years no to San Jose, then before the blue ribbon committee he finally came out and said ok we can take a look. He would never had made this committee if they weren’t considering the letting the A’s have San Jose. Then after the blue ribbon, Selig made3 comments that it’s not easy trying to get a deal done between A’s and Giants which proves what they have decided and that’s to try and get A’s to San Jose. The reason it’s not done yet is because Selig likes trying to make everyone happy as can be, which means this will take time. But the longer the Giants don’t give at all the ore likely they lose out big time
    ..
    The fact the Mayor Quan even mentions she met with the giants discusts me. It’s one thing to do it and another to bring it up in this fasion. She is being played and doesnt know it. @ML, I blame you for this… with your comment in the past that the Giants should take this route, obviously planted the idea in their heads. I’m kidding or at least half, ha. …
    ….
    And I’m not some San Jose booster. I’m a season ticket holder for the last 13 years that lives a lot closer to Oakland than San Jose. But looking at the plans, one looks a lot more realistic to me of happening. If it needs to be privately financed, the owners need to know there is some backing to their investment. The history in Oakland shows little hope for that. What banks would even jump on board to that plan? Plus with no salary cap in baseball the game has changed and the corp money is what’s needed to compete these days.

  30. tps, I love how quickly you shift from reactionary argument to reactionary argument. Or was your sarcastic post about Jean Quan meant to support someone else?
    .
    Don Knauss could step up right now and say “I will pledge $100M for naming rights for a new Baseball only facility in Oakland.” But he hasn’t. Just like he didn’t at the time Houston originally built Enron Field (I visited this place on Tuesday, and whoever designed it did an awesome job).
    .
    If he is willing to match the $170M over 28 years that Minute Maid paid the Disastros that would go a long way towards making somersetting happen. In fact, if he did I am pretty sure a new stadium in Oakland would be a lot more likely to happen.
    .
    Of course, $170M for naming rights is really just a small part (less than 10%) of a much larger puzzle that would need be put together to pay for a $2B mega development. Coliseum City isn’t “hair-brained” it is unrealisitic.

  31. Just curious, but wouldn’t the fact that the Giants are meeting with Quan like this likely piss Selig off? Especially repeating that hardline stance? Selig isn’t the type to like obstinate owners. He’s not necessarily thrilled with Wolff trying to push it through, I seriously doubt he’s thrilled with Giants doing the opposite along with Quan.

  32. @ Jeffrey – “You want have more companies in the high revenue bracket than fewer very large companies.” Quite the contrary. I probably did a less-than-stellar job of communicating my point succinctly. Awhile back I was trying to make a point on this blog how the East Bay has a large amount of small to mid-size companies, depending on your definition. I know this firsthand because of the business I am in. I was continuously shot down because of the mere fact that the South Bay had larger companies and small businesses wouldn’t be a consistent source of revenue. I cited examples of clients who have owned businesses ranging from machinery to extremely successful restaurants to importing nurses from the Orient (believe it or not). So, to answer your question, I actually believe wholeheartedly in a large number of small businesses that are capable of contributing to an effort like this. However, I do concede that there must big boys in there as well. One other point that you mentioned to someone else regarding Knauss. I read an interview today where he was asked point-blank what the financial plans were and his response was that he wants to respect the MLB process and felt it was premature to give details at this time. Is this posturing? Is he full of shit? Who the hell knows…all I know is that is what his response was and that’s all I can utilize for my own opinion. Everything else is speculation as to what he really was saying.

  33. For what it’s worth I reached out to a person within the Oakland camp about the Giants meeting with Jean Quan about three weeks ago and I was told it was hogwash, that Oakland doesn’t need the Giants help. This person mentioned that Oakland was working with Forest City to come up with a financing plan for Coliseum City. I hadn’t read that (about Forest City), but I have also been on a brutal travel schedule (I have been in Houston, San Antonio and Denver over the past three days for example) so missing such an article isn’t exactly outside the realm of possibilities.
    .
    All in all, the Oakland plan is still a very fluid thing. The one thing I feel is smart about Coliseum City is that a large portion of the land is already publicly owned. The land acquisition/business relocation costs are what really sunk Victory Court… Even with Redevelopment it was a stretch to put $250M toward that project before a single shovel hit the ground.
    .
    It is still hard to imagine all of the moving pieces coming together for all three franchises and the other components of the development in the next 4-5 years. As I understand it, for the project to pencil out 2 of the sports teams will have to privately finance construction on new stadiums at the site. There seems to be one that thinks it is a good idea to have stadium there (the Raiders) but they aren’t so committed to it that they aren’t talking to LA and thinking about Dublin.

  34. While this makes for great discussion — it’s a largely academic discussion. Eager and proactive city leaders along with bigger $$$ await LW/A’s in San Jose. This is where the A’s leadership want to go and they have made that point plainly clear. They have also made it clear that all options in Oakland have been exhausted. And while this is admirable of Clorox they, like the Oakland pols, are a day late and a dollar short (to say the least). And while some may feel the A’s have not been receptive enough to Oakland recently (you are right, they have not been receptive), you really have to turn a ‘Giant’ blind eye to a long track record of what the Oakland pols did to cause the A’s to close the door on Oakland. The A’s would have to be soft in the head to waste time and go down this road yet again – especially considering at best the end result would be a new stadium far down the timeline that will still lack big $$$ spenders, be an also ran to the Giants and solidify themselves as a bottom feeder revenue team. Sounds great, not. The A’s are looking to move significantly up the food chain and that isn’t in Oakland. However, if somehow, someway the A’s were forced to look back to Oakland, they would be foolish to do so unless the biz/pol players, land/ER/etc and funding were in plain view. For the A’s to engage Oakland again and have a fruitless process drag out with incompetent leaders would be a travesty for any real A’s fan.

  35. Columbo, it takes businesses of all stripes (huge, semi huge, medium and small). That’s the challenge in the East Bay. You need a good mix of all of the above. Santa Clara County has that (the same sort of businesses you are talking about)… Alameda and Contra Costa don’t have as many at the upper end of the spectrum… That’s why I asked the question… I think of it like cars. Back in the day Daimler Chrysler forged a partnership with Hyundai to create revenue streams across all the different segments of the car market. A similar principle applies here. You need businesses that can buy the tricked out Mercedes of sponsorship (namig rights), the tricked out, but sightly less tricked out version (signage and puring, etc), the top of the line Chrysler (boxes), the Sebring (club seats) all the way on down the the Elantra (plaza level infield)… Again this is just sponsorship and premium seats… The things corporations buy. The East Bay is slim in some of these areas, flush in others.

  36. “However, if somehow, someway the A’s were forced to look back to Oakland, they would be foolish to do so unless the biz/pol players, land/ER/etc and funding were in plain view. For the A’s to engage Oakland again and have a fruitless process drag out with incompetent leaders would be a travesty for any real A’s fan.” -TW

    I’m pretty sure if I thought any of the above, I could not possibly be an A’s fan (real or imagined), since my mind would be so advanced and clear thinking and unfailing, that I’d have to devote all my time to contemplating the miracle of the first 1 billionth of a second after the big bang when energy was infinite.

  37. Karma oh Karma, pretty soon the G’s will run out of players bcuz all will be hurt…..

    Baseball gods will punish the arrogant types.

  38. I find it ever harder to believe that the Giants would be fucking the A’s this harshly if the Commissioner didn’t want the A’s fucked. Selig would have put a stop to this victimization of one team by another long ago if this wasn’t fine with him. The drain this franchise finds itself circling is fashioned in equal parts by Selig and the Giants, with current A’s ownership not far behind in terms of failing to call out both parties on their sociopathic orientation — especially the Giants, who are clearly driven out of their minds with fear of what the A’s could become in Silicon Valley or even in Oakland with the proper attention and investment — to what is happening. This whole situation is like an Ingmar Bergman film with more idiotic posturing and I am sick to death of it… ML you ought to write a book about it all. Working title: “Fear and Loathing in Larry Baer’s Twisted Psyche”.

  39. Supplementing Jeffrey’s very valid points:
    .
    In addition to considering the overall size of the company it’s important to consider how much of the company is actually based here. Chevron is gigantic, but they are an oil company, and must operate where the oil is. I’m guessing the vast majority of their company is scattered around the world.
    .
    The corporate HQ of a $250 billion company may not be that much bigger than the HQ of a $50 billion company; administrative functions don’t scale that way. Although I don’t know how many Chevron employees are in San Ramon, I’m guessing companies like HP, Apple, Cisco, Facebook, Google, etc. may actually have a larger local presence because more of their actual operations are at HQ.
    .
    Also: Some of the biggest customers for premium seating are service businesses like big law firms and financial companies. These tend to be located near the corporate headquarters of their customers, meaning the vast majority of them in the Bay Area are in SF and the Peninsula/South Bay.
    .
    Finally, I think lists like the Chron 200 or BANG’s SV 150 actually understate the edge the South Bay has in corporate base, because they are HQ focused. There are a ton of large companies that are not headquartered in the South Bay that still maintain a significant presence here (e.g. Microsoft, Raytheon).

  40. Chevron has 62,000 employees worldwide and 10,000 in California. 2,700 employees are in Richmond with another 850 contract workers.

  41. I wish there was an edit feature..Kaiser has 21,000 Bay Area employees, Clorox 7,600 (don’t know if that’s all in the Bay Area).

  42. If Oakland and East Bay Businesses are so eager to support the A’s, why wait until there’s a new ballpark? Start now.

  43. That’s a good point Briggs. Even though we all should give a free pass and cheer for Cisco and the SV teams that won’t support the A’s unless they relocate to the South Bay, there’s no reason East Bay companies shouldn’t be bigger than that and invest in a team officially, steadfastly working to leave. So what if Lew took 5 minutes to respond that “Oakland just ain’t gonna happen, not ever.” They can still take that NO as a YES and fork over some bucks anyway if they were really serious. Fans and businesses alike should be ashamed of themselves for not digging down deep to help finance the club’s move south.

  44. Oops that should be ‘SV companies’ :/

  45. I didn’t realize Alviso was a separate city.

  46. @Briggs
    “If Oakland and East Bay Businesses are so eager to support the A’s, why wait until there’s a new ballpark? Start now.”
    Bingo. Hit nail on head. Hit it out of the ballpark. etc etc.
    .
    That’s just it. It’s a “show me the money” proposition. Bring real money to the table NOW, and spare the press conferences/posturing, and Wolff/Selig will most likely listen.
    .
    Money talks, bullshit walks.

  47. “Even though we all should give a free pass and cheer for Cisco and the SV teams that won’t support the A’s unless they relocate to the South Bay,”
    .
    Yes, because there’s no difference between: (a) companies supporting a team twenty minutes away that they are trying to retain out of local pride and/or marketing, and (b) companies committing to send clients and execs through two hours of brutal traffic to support another city’s team and reduce the chance of the team moving closer by. Your logic is unassailable, as always.

  48. @John – It’s not. It’s part of San Jose. I probably should’ve separated Redwood Shores from Redwood City using the same rule.

  49. “Money talks, bullshit walks.” Pure Gospel! Just keep on walking Quan and company…

  50. Tony D. Any particular reason why you must be so immature and condescending to people, facts or other discussion items that don’t agree with your particular line of thinking?

  51. “Selig would have put a stop to this victimization of one team by another long ago if this wasn’t fine with him.”
    .
    @emperor nobody: there is no evidence that the Giants are behind the current Oakland efforts (CEOs of Clorox and Kaiser are not getting involved in order to provide cover for the Giants). There is also no evidence that the Giants were involved in spiking the Dolich group’s bid in 1999, other than Piccini’s grumbling about what he suspects.
    .
    That said, the Giants’ owners have an obvious Machiavellian interest in restoring their pre-1968 sole control of the entire Bay Area. If the A’s moved to Sacramento or Portland, I’m sure the Giants would eagerly chip in for the cost of the moving vans.
    .
    So you make a good point that — if it were true that MLB has been doing the Giants’ bidding all these years on the A’s ballpark situation — then logically that would mean MLB is not really interested in keeping the A’s in the Bay Area. I hope and think that’s not the reality, but Piccini’s claim were true it might be.

  52. @daniel
    “Karma oh Karma, pretty soon the G’s will run out of players bcuz all will be hurt…..

    Baseball gods will punish the arrogant types.”
    .
    I really really really really hope you’re right.
    .
    The Giants may very well have pissed off Selig, many of the other owners, local business’ and city/county governments, etc, to have have some huge comeuppance served to them.
    .
    I do know, from his recent comments, that Selig is totally, completely fed up and disgusted with the Giants. He didn’t say it in such harsh terms, but it was more singing the praises of the late Walter Haas for doing what was for the good of baseball, and that the rights were not meant to be in perpetuity. That is a clear shot across the brow of the Giants (since they are adamantly fighting against the good of baseball), and a clear indicator that he’s fed up with them.

  53. John, it’s not. Alviso is a neighborhood of San Jose and has been so for decades.

  54. “Finally, I think lists like the Chron 200 or BANG’s SV 150 actually understate the edge the South Bay has in corporate base, because they are HQ focused. There are a ton of large companies that are not headquartered in the South Bay that still maintain a significant presence here (e.g. Microsoft, Raytheon).”
    .
    I think Raytheon is a SV-based company. Anyway, SF and the East Bay have their own lengthy list of significant “asterisk” companies like Pixar, Genentech, Dreyer’s, Bechtel, Kaiser-Permanente, AT&T, International Paper, etc. I just find the concept that anything about Silicon Valley is “understated” quite humorous. I’m pretty sure nothing in human history has ever been as over-hyped and over-stated as the miracle of High Technology and the ascendancy of Silicon Valley atop the world’s economic dogpile. I know as I go through my daily life working, cooking, eating, sleeping, driving, reading, talking, typing, listening, daydreaming, I am constantly thinking about how just a few decades ago, none of this was even possible! How our lives have changed!

  55. @DJr,
    Immature and condescending? Talk about pot calling kettle black. And what “facts” are you talking about? You want facts (again) here it is: the A’s/Wolff are DONE with Oakland and Selig (as we type) is working out a deal to get the A’s to San Jose. That’s all that matters, not press conferences that happen every couple of months spouting BS. If reality sounds harsh and “immature,” than I apologize.

  56. http://www.knbr.com/portals/3/podcasts/murphmac/050412donknauss.mp3

    Knauss went on KNBR, not The Game.

    Explicitly he says he knows Wolff doesn’t want to explore Oakland anymore and that his group is an alternative. I think basically they are NOT going to proactively approach Wolff, they want Wolff to come to them. Which fits the MO. If you want to buy the team, why not actually ask for a meeting with Wolff/Fisher. Which I think is to say that I think this is all predicated on MLB deciding not to pursue SJ, forcing them to sell. But Selig has been clear, Oakland is not an option. Nothing new, nothing real about this unless they become actually serious and actually have the likely $900 million they would need for a stadium and the team, which will still not please Bud.

  57. @tps,
    WOW! keeping ones head in the sand re the economic strength of $ilicon Valley…amazing! BTW, all that SF/East Bay corporate strength you mention belongs to the Giants/AT&T Park, and MLB is not stupid to place a new ballpark only a few miles east of AT&T (thus watering down the relatively measley corporate support of said region). Again, the big picture from MLB’s perspective: two franchises strategically located 35 miles from each other in the regions two largest cities, taking full advantage of the economic strength of the entire region. I rest my case…

  58. Bartleby, if traffic issues for corporate clients were the be all end all of baseball economics, you’d have made a valid contribution to these forums all these years. As it stands though, you are an unconstructive and impertinent one trick troll (okay two tricks when you count the consistent falsifying of demographics data to try and save every lost argument).

  59. I personally don’t wish the Giants organization, and especially the players, any ill will (including injuries as some have suggested above). And I understand wanting to protect one’s business and be as profitable as possible. However, the reality of the situation is that they are protecting their business and profits at the greater expense to MLB. They need to be realistic and flexible for the good of the game. My opinion is that the Giants organization will be forced to be more realistic and flexible by Selig and the owners rather than come to that conclusion on their own. Too bad.

  60. “But Selig has been clear, Oakland is not an option.”

    @Nicosan: Bud has been clear that staying in the Colisseum is not an option. If Oakland or any other East Bay city had a viable ballpark plan, they would keep the team. All they really need is the bare minimum — dedicated ballpark site and credible financing plan.
    .
    Unfortunately, there is no sign of either from the East Bay.

  61. I love how people here act like the city of Oakland should just roll over and die. They may lose a MLB team, don’t you expect them to do something? Posturing my ass. How can Oakland do anything when ownership constantly says that they’ve exhausted all options, they bash the city of Oakland, and refuse to go back and take another look? You guys are making it seem like Oakland is the sole reason a stadium isn’t being built there. I’ve always been the first to stand up and say the city has fucked up pretty bad over the years, but don’t sit there and act like ownership is completely blameless, or that Jean Quan isn’t doing enough when she inherited a fucked up situation from Moonbeam Brown and Dellums. People say it’s just press conferences, but what else can Oakland do right now with Lew Wolff constantly saying, “We’re done with Oakland.” I mean seriously, what the fuck do you expect the city to do right now when the team won’t even listen? They’re trying to do SOMETHING, but as of this moment the A’s want absolutely no part of it. They need to work TOGETHER, but apparently most of you think it’s all on the municipality.

    By the way Tony D, that post yesterday about annoying people was directly squarely at you. It’s not that you have a different opinion, you’re just a little smug fuck about expressing it.

    /end rant

  62. tonyd, let me point out to you that all the companies I mentioned are either based in the East Bay or have a much bigger employee and customer presence there than in SF, with the one exception of Bechtel. I’m still not clear if you are actually the ignoramous you come across as, or like Bartleby, you feel compelled to drop deceptive and falsified information in these forums, as it will somehow make your dreams of major league sports in the South Bay come true.

  63. @TPS, I know for a fact that Cisco Systems supports the Athletics now. I just don’t know to what extent. My wife works there and we were able to attend a game last week on their dime.

  64. @booster,
    I’ll take that as a compliment ;). Who are you anyway? Amazing how these story’s bring trolls out of the woodwork? Go A’s and Go SJ!

  65. “However, the reality of the situation is that they are protecting their business and profits at the greater expense to MLB. They need to be realistic and flexible for the good of the game. ”
    .
    @Dan – most likely their argument behind closed doors is that the good of the game = one franchise in Northern California, in order to compete effectively long term with the two financial superpowers in LA/Orange County. Much like the Red Sox are able to hold their own against the Yankees only because they control all of New England, while the Yankees’ financial advantage is partially reduced by the fact that they share the NY metro area with the Mets. The Giants position is presumably that one very strong franchise is better for MLB than two mediocre/weak ones.
    .
    It’s not a totally ridiculous argument: the Giants could certainly achieve Red Sox-level financial strength with sole control of Northern California. But while I believe the Bay Area can support two healthy franchises today (which was not true in the 1970s), it is still the smallest and weakest two team market in MLB.

  66. Whatever you say TPS (lol!). You’re more than entitled to your opinion, but the only ones that really matter are Wolffs, Seligs and MLB’s. Based solely on reality, they obviously feel differently about San Jose and Silicon Valley than you do. Hope you guys (and gals) stick around this blog, because the future of the A’s is awesome! Talk to you all soon…

  67. See Tony, thats what I’m talking about. What about my post was trollish? I presented a valid opinion, and it wasn’t merely to solict an angry response, which is what trolling is about. Stop acting like anybody who supports Oakland is unintelligent, because it really just makes you look foolish.

  68. It’s funny, I find these comment threads to be somewhat indicitive of the larger situation:
    the longer Bud Selig waits to act, the more he hurts, *more than any other constituency*, the A’s fan base.

    Bud: hear our plea. Please put an end to this melodrama. It gets uglier every day, and it’s starting to feel like a slow death.

    • the longer Bud Selig waits to act, the more he hurts, *more than any other constituency*, the A’s fan base.

      .

      MLB/Selig have had 24 hrs to respond since yesterday’s press release. In the mean time, A’s fans have their emotions toyed with while rich old men decide how to divide money they will never spend. I know I’m over simplifying this, so sue me… if you can afford it.

  69. @Booster
    For my part, I definitely don’t want the City of Oakland, and the local business’, to just roll over and die. I want them to stand up and make a substantive proposal, that involves real money right now, and real action right now. I don’t want them to have press conferences making vague promises of supposed money and plans and desires.
    So, I agree with you. Oakland should stand up. But they should do it in a substantive way (i.e. real money and real action NOW). This is what they’ve lacked over the last two decades. They’ve had plenty of opportunity to stand up and partner with the A’s, but they have, to date, totally, utterly, failed.

  70. Juan, that’s great. We also know that Chevron, Kaiser, Dreyers, Ross Stores, Wells Fargo, and many others sponsor the A’s, yet no one ever gets challenged in these forums for saying, “Why aren’t these companies supporting the A’s right now?” I’m just trying to maintain some balance. With the number of San Jose Only whack jobs in here, it’s a pretty big chore.

    • @tps – As opposed to the Oakland-only “whack jobs” elsewhere? You know, the ones that want Lew Wolff to fall into a coma or die?

      @Booster – I want a real, substantive, detailed plan. A’s fans deserve that from Oakland at the very least, let alone Oakland and Alameda County residents.

  71. @Simon,
    You’re argument makes sense if this was all about JUST the Giants. Thankfully, it isn’t. As Selig noted just a few weeks ago in describing Walter Haas…doing things in the best interest of baseball. ALL OF BASEBALL, not just the Giants. As A’s fans we should all be thankful for that one.
    BTW, I would say the Bay Area as a two-team market is on par with Washington/Baltimore in terms of population, and perhaps has greater economic strength than the metro. In short, the Bay is fine as a two-team market.

  72. @booster,
    “Valid opinion” with an F-BOMB thrown in? YEAH, REAL CLASSY! I fight fire with fire boost! Don’t like it, leave.

  73. @dan
    I wish no ill will to Giants players, coaches, fans, or even Brian Sabean, for that matter. Those are just the baseball people and the fans. Heck, I come from a family of Giants fans, and have friends and work with people who are Giants fans. No ill will to any of them.
    .
    However, I very strongly wish ill will to Giants business people and ownership – Larry Baer, Randy Johnson, and all the other cronies. They are the ones who are screwing the A’s, the A’s fans, all of Major League Baseball, and San Jose, bay area sports fans, and the local economy.
    .
    It’s these people that deserve extreme financial consequences for their sneaky, underhanded, greedy, selfish, dishonorable actions. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for a business looking out for it’s own best financial interests. But I’m not in favor of it if it’s to the determent of everyone else, and flies in the face of open competition, a market driven economy, and the American way.
    .
    Whew. I’ll get off my soapbox now. ;-)

  74. Jeff that’s my biggest problem with this whole press conference thing. I don’t see anything substantive. I’d have no problem with Oakland actually doing something substantive to keep the team. Getting an owner to put in an actual bid for the team. Putting a chunk of money in toward a real stadium option in downtown Oakland. Something like that. Something that actually has a chance of putting a ballpark in Oakland and securing the team’s future in the Bay Area.
    .
    But these half measures of the DOA Coliseum City plan and press conferences with Clorox windbags who’ve made no actual effort to own the team just sicken me. They’re nothing but glorified cock blocking of the only plan thus far that has a half decent chance of occurring in San Jose.

  75. Also jeff and Simon, remember there are two Dans. Dan and dan. Caps are important.

  76. Where are the details for Wolff’s plan to build in SJ? He’s got a pledge from Cisco, but what else? Which bank is going to give him a loan? How much money did the SVLG commit to in their letter? None.
    .
    Wolff doesn’t even have all the land where he wants to build. His “plan” is respected by so many on this blog, but where are the details? You want all the cards on the table from the Oakland/Quan block, but Wolff has not put his whole finance plan on the table. Why should I believe his plan?

  77. ML, yes exactly. Some forums are dominated by Oakland-Only types and some by SJ-Only types.

  78. Chris Townsend made a great point, “where were these corporate sponsors when the A’s were winning 100 games?”

  79. “However, I very strongly wish ill will to Giants business people and ownership – Larry Baer, Randy Johnson, and all the other cronies. They are the ones who are screwing the A’s, the A’s fans, all of Major League Baseball, and San Jose, bay area sports fans, and the local economy.”

    Not defending anything that they’ve done, or things a lot of people are assuming they’ve done, but it’s very much a perspective kind of thing. One person’s “screwing the A’s” is another person’s “defending the Giants.”

    I’m still of the opinion that in the end, the Giants will be forced into making the “right” decision that puts MLB above their own organization’s interests. I just wish they (the Giants) would come to that realization on their own so we can all move on earlier rather than later.

  80. 95.7 says they’ll have Don Knauss on sometime in the 12PM hour.

  81. the anti-Giants sentiment on this blog is, as I heard a smart guy once put it tactfully, unlovely. No one in the Giants front office forced the heirs to the Levis fortune to stop subsidizing the A’s. The A’s decline started with the 94 strike. The Giants resurgence started just a bit earlier. The (then) new owners of the Giants took a franchise playing in a crappy multi-use stadium through the bad years, rebuilt the fan base and the team, and then moved into one of the best ballparks in the country at just the right time. Meanwhile, the A’s owners screwed the pooch.
    .
    So now you A’s fans are left with Lew Wolff and an heir to the Gap fortune, and they just won’t step into the box for you. It’s San Jose or nothing. Meanwhile, the park at China Basin continues to sell out, game after game. I think so long as you continue to kiss Lew Wolff’s ass you’re going to continue wonder why you have that bad taste in your mouth. But maybe I’m being as unfair to Lew as I think some of you guys are being to the Giants owners and front office. We all have our biases.
    .
    btw, the Chronicle biz breakdown is pretty opaque. For example, isn’t that one company listed out in San Ramon Chevron? And including Palo Alto in the “south bay” because it’s in Santa Clara County is telling, too. Palo Alto has much more affinity with San Francisco than with San Jose.
    .
    These quibbles aside, once again this is a website to turn to when I want a lot of solid information and smart commentary. You may hate the Giants, but you put up one helluva blog.

  82. xoot – The Giants are not defending anything. They are trying to keep something that is not rightfully theirs, and they are systematically, deliberately, trying to either keep the A’s crippled, or force them out, so they can have the market to themselves. If you knew anything about the history, Lew Wolff, and previous ownership, have tried for years to make something work in Oakland and Fremont, to no avail. The only currently viable option left is San Jose. The reason the Giants are fighting so hard to stop SJ is not that the A’s in SJ would so much hurt them, it’s that the A’s being crippled or forced out helps the Giants. And this flies in the face of the BEST INTEREST OF BASEBALL. Baseball does not want to keep a team in a decrepit stadium and on revenue sharing. They want a healthy, profitable (on it’s own) team in a state of the art stadium. And the Giants are getting in the way of that. Apparently you see things through orange and black tinted glasses, and the Giants are saints. But the rest of the world, including non-A’s fans who know anything about the situation, noes better.

  83. @tps “if traffic issues for corporate clients were the be all end all of baseball economics, you’d have made a valid contribution to these forums all these years.”
    .
    I’ll try to use small words:
    .
    1. Ballparks can be built with public funds or private funds. It seems apparent a Bay Area ballpark will need to be built with private funds.
    2. The only mostly-privately-funded ballpark built in decades was built on the back of long term charter and premium seat commitments, largely from corporate customers. Whatever financing mechanism is used for an A’s ballpark, it is clear these revenues will be needed to service the debt.
    3. A quick scan of the pricing map for AT&T Park, plus a back of the envelope calculation of estimated suite pricing, suggests that premium seat revenue is a huge percentage of the overall gate. Almost certainly no less than 30%; more likely as much as 50% or more.
    4. Corporate premium seat customers are the most casual of casual fans. I’ve been in those suites enough times to believe that most of the people in them are barely paying attention to the game, and many are lucky if they can name the top two star players on the team. They go because it’s a party, its an exclusive experience they wouldn’t pay for themselves, and it’s on somebody elses dime.
    5. Proximity matters. For the purposes premium seat customers use their tickets, two hours of traffic is a virtual non-starter, particularly in the face of a more convenient alternative.
    6. No reasonable person can argue that San Jose has a massive advantage in terms of proximity to corporate customers over Oakland.

    In how ever many years you’ve been blathering on here, you’ve yet to offer a convincing rebuttal to any of the above points. What, exactly, has been your contribution?

    “As it stands though, you are an unconstructive and impertinent one trick troll (okay two tricks when you count the consistent falsifying of demographics data to try and save every lost argument).”
    .
    This from the guy most of whose posts have consisted of regurgitating the following argument: “If you compare Santa Clara County to the other eight Bay Area Counties combined, and ignore traffic patterns, and ignore the fact that there’s another team already serving almost the exact same geographical area, Oakland is a great place to put an MLB team.”
    .
    Truly the world is not made for those with an ounce of self awareness.

  84. @tps By the way, Raytheon is headquartered in Massachusetts, oh great god of facts.

  85. @ David – wait, so you’re now comparing Oakland’s stadium effort to SJ’s stadium effort directly? Are you f&*$ing kidding me?

    Who has an EIR in place, now?!

    Who has bought the parcels of land necessary?

    Who has negotiated with city on the option to buy it?

    Who has a committment up front of more money to the A’s?

    If this were a horse race, SJ is on the home straight, while Oakland is still stuck trying to understand how to get out of the gate (VC anyone?). Tell me again, at what phase of Oakland’s effort is even remotely concrete at this point?

  86. jeff-athletic, the Giants owners bought a team that included a territory in the purchase price. So, yeah, they do own it. Interestingly, it’s Bob Lurie, a man who was told twice by San Jose to go eff himself, that walked away with the ill-gotten gains here.

  87. @anon – the land at the Coliseum is already owned.
    .
    SJ’s efforts would require public vote.
    .
    It also looks like there’s a chance that Wolff will lose his option to buy those parcels if Gov. Brown goes after the transfer schemes, some cities (like SJ) tried to pull.

  88. Exaclty…

    MLB can all approve a move to SJ, but if the SJ voters strike it down, then what?

  89. bartleby, my mistake. I’d heard people there refer to it as headquarters, so I got the wrong impression. I guess they’re just the hq for a division.

  90. @anon,
    Just leave David alone with his thoughts, will yah. ;)

  91. @Ali,
    In the end I don’t believe a referendum will be necessary in San Jose, but that’s another topic for a future thread..

  92. Tony D.
    May 4, 2012 at 11:40 AM (Quote)
    @anon,
    Just leave David alone with his thoughts, will yah. ;)
    .
    Hence.. condescending and immature.

  93. @ David – Correct me if I’m misinterpreting the grand “Coliseum City” plan, but it also includes expansion around the area to accommodate 3 teams (2 stadiums and 1 arena) while also integrated commercial and housing properties. This would necessitate additional land as well, from what i have gathered from the sparse details on the proposal that has leaked.

    Regarding the “chance” that Wolff will lose his option to buy, you do realize that if the RDA had to liquidate the land, then LW has already stated he was prepared to acquire all the parcels himself?! If he did that, the argument for a public vote would be null and void.

    Now about VC again…..:X
    @ Ali – you realize that previous polls in SJ has already favored a privately financed stadium? And that unlike dysfunctional people who run the Oakland government, SJ leaders are in agreement for the stadium including it’s present (and future) Mayor?

  94. @David, I could be wrong (so anybody correct me), but I’d assume that with Fisher’s wealth as collateral they could probably obtain loans at either Oakland and/or SJ (prob a diff in the int rate that would be attached depending on where). The challenge is servicing that debt via revenue streams (SJ or Oak, stadiums are not built through personal wealth – that would be lunacy). Those revenue streams will largely include commitments, advertising, suite & ticket packages with larger/affluent corporations.
    .
    There’s not going to be some publicly available blue print detailing the strategy for construction. It’s simply an understanding of the economics.
    .
    The argument is there’s not enough of these Corp’s/businesses in Oakland to support the needed revenue streams. Further, the argument can also be whether this Corp base is strong enough and how it stacks up against SV-based Corps. IMO, with Kaiser for example, okay they get a suite package but what does advertising at a stadium do for them as a non-profit? I’ll take the SV consulting & tech firms which are pushing for growth/exposure.
    .
    There’s a few other arguments too: Oakland hasn’t truly identified a location; if it’s anywhere besides CC (it needs to in order to be viable) then the land isn’t acquired; there’s no EIR; there’s no communication with the affected communities; there’s a myriad of other issues that can come up also.
    .
    Like it or not, SJ has taken each of those steps (and is supported by the SVLG) and it’s clear what is blocking the last of them (so you can argue they don’t have the land, but that’s merely a formality at this point) with no promise of ever getting a team. You can argue Wolff has been dis-ingenuous with Oakland pols & whatever, but nothing has really stopped Oakland from doing in the last 20 years what SJ already has in prob the last 5 or so.
    .
    It’s nice that some of Oakland’s business leaders said we want the A’s to stay, but they’ve already done that before. Wouldn’t you have wanted/expected more from an Oakland press release by this point than what we’ve already heard countless times? Most of us on here want a ballpark in Oakland too, but we’re just fed up with the PR.

  95. It shocks (and confuses) me every time the pro-Oaklanders choose to defend the Giants’ rights to SJ. There’s no proof they explicit purchased SJ, the constitution is amendable, etc. The Giants don’t care for you. They want the A’s gone.

  96. RE: 95.7, Don Knauss must’ve cancelled. They haven’t follow-up’d with having him on.

  97. The just said he’d be on at 12:45

  98. “The Giants don’t care for you. They want the A’s gone.”

    Absolutely. And since the Giants currently have a legal claim on San Jose, refusing to even look at Oakland is the surest path to the team leaving. It’s a serious gamble. With our team. And in my book, when you have civic and business leader out in the public asking you to sit down and talk about other options that could prevent that scenario, only a complete a-hole says, “Nah, no plan B, either give me what I want, or I’m blowing the whole effing thing up and screwing all of you bastards.”

  99. If San Jose was impossible (like most Oakland-only want to believe) and the Giants T-rights weren’t changeable, then 1) Fremont would have happened years ago, 2) there would have been no three year Bay Area study, 3) Selig wouldn’t be talking about working out a deal and, lastly, 3) WE WOULDN’T BE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION! That was easy…

  100. @tps,
    The complete “A-hole” has been the leaders of Oakland over the past 16 years: no baseball only renovations to the coliseum, Mt. Davis, no Uptown…NADA! Except for these once every few month press releases that don’t mean squat.
    Can’t wait for the official decision from MLB for a number of reasons: add not hearing from Oakland pols and biz leaders again (unless of course it relates to the Raiders).

  101. Again, this is debatable, but Wolff’s stance is he’s already LOOKED at Oakland with no success. The city didn’t have its shit together previously and they still can’t commit on a site. Stop saying the same things and come to the table with something tangible. It’s seems CC is a non-starter and the city abandoned VC.
    .
    On one hand, Oakland business leaders want to sit down with Wolff and talk. On the other, they’re publically pushing for new ownership. Forcing Wolff to talk and/or stating the A’s have no choice but to build in Oakland (one of the CEO’s was quoted saying that) is not conducive to creating and/or establishing a productive conversation.
    .
    Both sides are a-holes. But at least one of the a-holes has a plan they’re committed to, and once if ever the TR is resolved, has a reasonable possibility of producing upon. Oakland needs to stop telling the A’s they want them to stay. They already know that. It takes more than that.

  102. Knauss said Coliseum City isn’t their preference. I’m still listening…

  103. Knauss Interview:
    They asked the question about where the does the $800-$900 million come from. The group of owners would be some individuals from the Bay Area and from Southern California. The group has not had a conversation with Wolff. He says that he sure that A’s are going to try to bring up the issue at the owners meeting, in some fashion. He wants to sit down with Wolff and Fisher, but basically they are not going to meet with them until MLB and the Owners decree that Oakland must be considered, which is to say SJ is out. Did you try to have a conversation with Wolff? No, they were respecting the process. They thought that by sending letters to MLB that that was their signal for Wolff to meet. They didn’t ever intend to contact Wolff/Fisher directly, as in I send you letter or so. They want Howards Terminal and Victory Court, they don’t think it is impossible to fund it, using the Giants financing plan. Lund and Urbs actually asking good questions, which surprised me.

    So the basics are they aren’t going to talk to Wolff/Fisher unless they come to them before a decision on TR is made, or a decision is made and its against SJ. They say they have two groups to fund the stadium and buy the team. They want Howard Term or VC not Coliseum, which would negate Coliseum City. It seems to me a bluff at this point because its all predicated on a negative decision by MLB. Now one could say that A’s in SJ is the same, but that is a lot more firm in terms of EIR, land acquisition and building. Why? because this group doesn’t want to build at CC.

  104. Wow the Knauss interview was eye opening. I’m so glad that Coliseum City isn’t their preference- that’s just such a mediocre plan IMO. And they said that they haven’t identified their potential owner, based out of Socal, out of respect for the process LW/MLB is undergoing. Not bad. I think the pro Oakland folks have reason to be optimistic…. unfortunately, if it isn’t SJ, you are probably looking at much longer than 3 years before getting a ballpark

  105. fyi – Coliseum City EIR is preparing for 2 or 3 teams. If the A’s build in downtown Oakland, then the Raiders and Warriors will have a two team Coliseum City!

  106. Good interview, but Knauss was still using passive rhetoric. Saying a waterfront ballpark “isn’t impossible” isn’t exactly inspiring language.

  107. @David, Knauss says they aren’t looking downtown, they want Howard Terminal or Victory Court.

  108. And yeah, unfortunately, the W’s seem even more likely to leave than the A’s

  109. Yeah, I get it, it is a lot of rhetoric, but at least the backup plan for a stadium isn’t “I don’t know”, there is a chance something could be done in Oakland.

  110. @Nicosan – I consider JLS “downtown”, but point taken.

  111. Knauss said they would prefer the VC and HT sites, but he didn’t negate the idea of building a baseball stadium at CC.

  112. Will Oakland slice the baseball park segment off their Coliseum City plan? How can this East Bay business coalition and Oakland work together when they don’t even agree on the site?

  113. Dueling waterfront parks or the A’s in SJ? At this point I am for whatever hurts the Giants the most. They’ve been nothing but complete dicks and don’t have the best interests of baseball in mind. They’ll do anything to keep their boot on the A’s neck, and if the A’s fail in SJ, I’m sure that they will rile up the NIMBYs around JLS. Don’t think for a second that the Giants really want the A’s to get a new stadium in Oakland, no matter how many meetings that they have with Quan.

  114. I think that they consider CC a last resort. That’s why it’s gonna take a long time- no one even knows which of the 3 teams actually are gonna be there. I can see scenarios for anything from 0 to 3 teams building there. Think 2019.

  115. @David, Knauss :the Coliseum site is not the preference of the business group or the potential owner group. Then he moves on to say that if they could get a waterfront park at one of the two locations it would work. He didn’t say no but by speaking for 10 secs and moving on to HT or VC, he basically said that they aren’t looking to build there until a last resort. Neither of those two sites have EIRs, both would incur consider cost to buy property and do clean-up. The one that has EIR and would be on scale to cost and process with Diridon is CC, and they aren’t pleased with that site.

  116. That interview makes me much happier. Look, if everyone can get past their city allegiances this is nothing but good news for us A’s fans. Knauss is basically saying that if Selig won’t get off his ass and do the right thing in SJ and if that leads Lew to sell, these guys have a backup plan to keep the team here. And even better, they think they can do it without hitching their wagon to this nonsensical Coliseum City pipedream. Maybe they can and maybe they can’t. Maybe SJ would provide a better revenue stream. Whatever. If Selig decides to bend over for the GIants, someone is willing to give it another try in the A’s current territory. That makes me feel much more confident in the team’s future in the Bay Area. I’ll put it this way: we have a strong option A if Selig will do his job. Failing that, we have someone willing to try a very good option B (assuming VC or waterfront). At the very least, that gives me hope.

  117. @RC because Quan is mayor of the whole city and doesn’t care where the park gets built so long as it is in Oakland, however Oakland CRA is gone, so there is no funding from City for this. CC isn’t really a plan in my view, not with the lack of housing density in that area. To build something akin to LA Live you need demand and there isn’t much there. On top of that LA Live has lost LA quite a bit of money.

  118. actually sorry, that was for @Briggs

  119. OK – wtf again?! Events for the past year:

    JQ announces plans to investigate VC

    VC is stillborn before even the EIR is completed

    JQ starts pushing for CC and starts the EIR.

    JQ does a PR campaign at HQ with Knauss supporting her

    Now, Knauss notes his preference for VC/HT

    This is NOT a coherent, concrete strategy. It’s like throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. This is the shit cycle that has been happening for the past 15 decades.
    Oakland, you’re at bat in the bottom of the ninth with 2 outs, and down by 4. The plan should not be to bunt, GDI!

  120. New ownership in a waterfront Oakland park would be beyond beautiful. I’m very curious who this potential ownership group consists of. Anyway, it’s all wishing at this point, we’ll see what the owners meeting brings.

  121. ….typo…15 years not decades. :X

  122. Anon, you forgot the steps in the 15 year process where A’s South Bay ownership groups respond, “Nah, we’re not interested… No we’ll handle it ourselves, don’t bother… No, we can’t make that meeting… No, we won’t support that… No, we won’t be at that press conference… No, that’s too small… No, we need like 100 acres… No we won’t be commenting on that… No we’re leaving, bye… No, we’re no longer interested… No, it’s impossible.. No, it can never happen…”

  123. @Dude, I’m not sure you can get terribly excited about that plan. They’re basically saying they’re using the Giant’s stadium plan. Which, in theory, sounds great and gets a lot of nods. The problem? It’s the current plan for SJ too. So if Wolff & Co. are already committed to using that funding model for a new stadium, don’t you think they have a good grasp as to how the money using that model balances out? SJ isn’t a slam dunk (far from it) both logistically and financially. And if that’s the case for a place that has a lot more money readily available to make it profitable, it stands to reason that the margins in Oakland are going to be a lot smaller.
    .
    And now we have yet someone else drawing lines on a map without any sort of plan as to how you’re going to force multiple businesses located inside those lines to move? So we’ve got smaller margins AND a more costly plan. I’m not going to say Knauss’ ideas are DOA, but it’s far from anything to get excited about. Keep in mind, having a stadium is no guarantee that they’ll be making enough money to compete. And when you look at the rest of the AL West and baseball in general, the team’s financial status quo is anything but acceptable and sadly that’s all that we’re seeing so far in Oakland stadium planning.
    .
    Can it be done in Oakland, absolutely. But let me ask the question. If the end result of a new stadium in Oakland is more people in the seats, BUT less overall revenue (because they’re using whatever gains to pay the stadium off), is the current low budget/constant player turnover worth it?

  124. dmoas
    What you said – that’s exactly why SJ is by far the best option. When looking at all the variables, it’s the only site the pencils in for paying the debt, and at the same time make the A’s profitable enough to be off revenue sharing and at the same time have enough money to develop, maintain, and acquire top MLB talent (rather than the constant rebuilding churn born out of have a rock bottom budget).
    .
    And that’s exactly why this has taken 3 years, rather than an up front “no”, and exactly why Selig is actively trying to broker a deal.

  125. @ TPS – Read more, talk less. Oaklanders keep on forgetting that Schott actually won $16 million dollars from Oakland/Alameda in court for destroying the Coliseum and impacting the A’s by the monstrosity that is Mt. Davis.

    Oakland stadium “proposal” obituaries:

    Oakland Alameda Coliseum RIP 1966-1995, Al Davis
    Uptown RIP 2001-2002, Jerry Brown
    Coliseum North RIP 2004 – 2005, Ron Dellums
    Victory Court RIP 2011-2012, Jean Quan
    Coliseum City 2012 – ????, Jean Quan

  126. San Francisco had a longer list of failed ideas before AT&T finally hit the nail on the head. They were also trying to get a new park for as long, if not longer than the A’s have.

  127. Well, one thing doesn’t seem to pencil out for the South Bay: POPULATION

    If the Giants hold on to a reasonable piece of the fanbase they already have in the South Bay, there will be fewer people to become dedicated A’s fans within 20 miles of South Diridon Station than perhaps any other ballpark in MLB. I’m not seeing much expansion to the east, west or south of San Jose, so the only fix for this problem might be significantly increased density inside San Jose proper. Is that on the agenda? Aren’t there any slow-growth, no-growth factions in the South Bay? I know there’s a faith that Lew Wolff has factored this out and can replace the tiny market size issue with big bucks from corporations, but I’ve been disappointed before by well known, convincing developers who turned out not so good at predicting how well a project will do after the doors open, so I’m not so anxious to just, “give San Jose a try” on his say so.

  128. @TPS Really? REAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLYYY???? You don’t think having a stadium right next door to Pac Bell is significantly more problematic than having one 45 miles away? 90%+ of the bay area population is a casual fan. The only thing that’ll matter to the casual fan is convenience of getting to the ball park.

  129. @TPS this is a weak theory. Last year I went to about 8 giants games, and about 3 A’s games, even though I really dislike the Giants and really like the A’s. Why? I live in San Francisco. If you build it, they will come.

  130. Could not have said it better myself dmoas. Perhaps Wolff and Selig have a better grasp of this entire situation than TPS…yah think!?

  131. dmoas – I wouldn’t say I’m terribly excited (and my calling it a plan was overstating it at this point). Just encouraged that someone is willing to be a backup if Selig screws us. The main problem with SJ is we’re reliant on Selig to make it happen. I don’t trust that guy at all. His (in)actions could very well lead Wolff to sell the team at some point. If that happens, I’m encouraged to hear about someone local who is willing to at least give it a shot. Who knows? Maybe they know someone or something that Wolff doesn’t that will make it possible in Oakland? Otherwise, we’re kissing the team goodbye. When relying on Selig, you sometimes have to really want to see any encouraging signs.

    And to answer your last question: I’d say it would be better than what we have today, but far short of what I want to see happen.

  132. dmoas, let me try to be succinct. The problem with being 45 miles from SF and Oakland, is that you are 45 miles from SF and Oakland. In terms of population proximity and transit options, San Jose will need to be a 5’8″ power hitter. And I think that is essentially the expectation of Lew Wolff and those with faith in him. As for convenience, neither China Basin, nor South Diridon will be truly convenient for as many people as Victory Court would be, Coliseum City a bit less primo, but still pretty good.
    McB, I’m not sure what your point is. I lived in San Francisco and I NEVER went to the Giants games because simply, I’m an A’s fan. But I’m not a casual fan, so either our experiences combine to prove nothing, or maybe you were making the point that you’re one of dmoas’ casual fans who will just show up any ballpark near them whether they like the team or not, and that’s just that, who needs to specifics, QED (or something like that)?

  133. RIP MCA of the legendary Beasty Boys :(

  134. “If the Giants hold on to a reasonable piece of the fanbase they already have in the South Bay,”
    .
    Obviously, they are concerned about their ability to do this, making this a shaky premise at the outset.
    .
    ” there will be fewer people to become dedicated A’s fans”
    .
    As has been discussed ad nauseum before, this is the group of fans that contributes the least to the bottom line. 5,000 premium seat sales is worth more than 10,000 “dedicated” fans. 20,000 casual fans is worth more than 10,000 “dedicated” fans. Hard core fans (and this is most of the people posting on this board) may not want to here this, but they are not the prime consideration when it comes to the financial health of the team.
    .
    “within 20 miles of South Diridon Station than perhaps any other ballpark in MLB.”
    .
    As has been shown here before, the number of fans within 20 miles of Diridon is roughly equivalent to the number of fans within 20 miles of the Coliseum. The notion that people in the South Bay won’t go to an A’s game because they are die-hard Giants fans is completely unsupported.
    .
    “I’m not seeing much expansion to the east, west or south of San Jose, so the only fix for this problem might be significantly increased density inside San Jose proper. Is that on the agenda?”
    .
    Actually, yes, especially in the downtown core and around transit stops. And the south of San Jose is part of the long term plan for growth.
    .
    “Aren’t there any slow-growth, no-growth factions in the South Bay?”
    .
    Of course, as there are everywhere. But the twenty mile radius around Oakland is just as built out as San Jose, if not more so.
    .
    “I know there’s a faith that Lew Wolff has factored this out and can replace the tiny market size issue with big bucks from corporations, but I’ve been disappointed before by well known, convincing developers who turned out not so good at predicting how well a project will do after the doors open,”
    .
    I’m guessing a lot of those developers were playing with someone elses money. In the professional sports world, that’s almost certainly the case.
    .
    “so I’m not so anxious to just, “give San Jose a try” on his say so.”
    .
    He has data you don’t, and it’s his money at risk. That makes his opinion on this a lot weightier than yours.

  135. “He has data you don’t, and it’s his money at risk. That makes his opinion on this a lot weightier than yours.” DEBATE OVER! Leave it to Bartleby to yet again set another discussion straight. Next topic RM…

  136. Just the fact that AT&T (one of the best ballparks in MLB) and the Coliseum have their 20 mile radii overlap so much is exactly why Oakland is a tough spot to build, and the park should really be gorgeous to compete, like at JLS or someplace really nice, not the Coliseum parking lot. This is besides the fact that the two teams pull casual fans from almost the same population.

  137. “The problem with being 45 miles from SF and Oakland, is that you are 45 miles from SF and Oakland. In terms of population proximity and transit options, San Jose will need to be a 5’8″ power hitter.”
    .
    You persistently ignore the basic fact that Oakland must directly share its “population proximity” with another, more popular team. So you can take your “population proximity” figures, whatever you think they are, and cut them in half. At best.

  138. i lived in SD for ten years and got to see plenty of Pads games within a 4 year span before I moved back up to the Bay.

    Petco has its goods and bads. The dimensions from center-right center field are terrible and it’s definitely a pitchers park. Most of the games I attended were terribly boring, but of course drunk people acting like idiots make it fun….to a certain extent. I love the walk way area behind home plate, what me and my friends called the Peanut Gallery, because you can stand behind home plate area and keep your beer on a standing area table and have a great view behind home plate to the outfield and eat peanuts and drink beer and not have to sit down. Love the exterior sandy marble structure at Petco though.

    Western Metal is cool and the first and third base sight lines area great as well. Right field is okay, but left field is weird. Good archictecture overall though.

  139. The low fence idea they had in left fied, center field and right field for Cisco Field in Fremont is what I want to see used for Cisco Field in San Jose or if a new ballpark is built in Coliseum City in Oakland. It’s something different and visually appealing.

    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/cisco755.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/AthleticsBallpark.htm&h=378&w=679&sz=101&tbnid=zOo6sZFXPjNYPM:&tbnh=68&tbnw=122&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcisco%2Bfield%2Bin%2Bfremont%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=cisco+field+in+fremont&docid=OFlfFlrsAfc9VM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=MxejT5SELaGhiQLo_ujZDA&ved=0CFMQ9QEwBg&dur=3619

    Compared to the kinda bland design and look of the outfield walls for Cisco Field i n SJ below

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/f/f3/CiscoField3.jpg/295px-CiscoField3.jpg

    The ballpark design for Cisco Field in Fremont trumps blows the design for Cisco Field in SJ out of the water IMO.

  140. RIP MCA of the legendary Beasty Boys :(

    ^^^^^^^
    A musical and lyrical legend along with the rest of the Beasties.

  141. I guess no one bothered to tell those wealthy tech companies and thousands of Bay Area commuters that San Jose/Silicon Valley are 45 miles away from SF/OAK. Just saying…

  142. The Giants are a bunch of greedy piece of craps and they are going to suck from here on out!

    Karma is a b**ch!

    The A’s will stay in Oakland or go to San Jose and they will remain in the Bay Area and THAT is the key for me!

    Too bad Giants, the A’s will remain in the Bay Area whether they like it it not! LoL

  143. Dan says:
    May 3, 2012 at 5:56 PM
    dknight, Dublin has already said no to having the Raiders. They don’t want them in their city.

    ^^^^^^^
    Wasn’t that with the previous old short sighted lady Mayor?

    The new Mayor has vision is trying to talk to the younger City Council Members.

  144. @Tony D. – Stop declaring “next topic”. You’re not a moderator.

  145. @RM,
    my bad RM. Just being humorous, not trying to tell you what to do. I’ll stop.

  146. Hey Booster,
    Great posts, really love your take on this ongoing saga about our teams need for a new Stadium.
    But if your looking for other people to agree with you on this Blog forget it. Most of them (not all) do not like to hear any other opinion other than their own. When you explain your opinion and they don’t agree they just ask you to leave. Tony D for example…I have to give him credit for one thing, He has to be the biggest optimist when it comes to the A’s and San Jose. He will spin any news on the A,s into a San Jose move. I think the A’s could break ground in Oakland, start laying out the forms, and he would say…Wow this is great news, I heard they are going to build the Stadium in Oakland and then move it to San Jose, then promptly go kiss his poster of Wolff and Fisher Good night. Keep up the GREAT posts.

  147. I love how TonyD cheers on Bartleby purely for arguing with me. He doesn’t even care that Bartleby’s argument contradicts his own oft-repeated contention that the Giants won’t lose any significant numbers of their South Bay fans, that the A’s will simply pull a bunch of new fans out of the woodwork with plenty of others driving in from Hayward and Livermore to create TWO juggernaut baseball markets out of the Bay Area.

    “He has data you don’t, and it’s his money at risk.” Yeah, I don’t dispute that. I never have. And unlike you and your extremely dire opinions about Oakland, I’m okay with anywhere in the Bay Area. I just don’t like this particular plan from Wolff. I don’t like the way it’s evolved. I don’t like way it’s being sold. I don’t like what it’s done to the team and the fans around the Bay Area. I don’t like to see how his plan continues to give the Giants an increasing advantage over the A’s. And I’m disappointed at how little concern some fans have about a plan run by some non-baseball real estate guy from LA, seemingly fixated on a property connected to a proposed regional transit hub with billions more tax dollars set to come in there. Not being an Oakland-hater like you, I’m struggling with the why and the how. Why this plan, and nothing but this plan, now for three years running, no real end in sight. Oakland was erased from the map six years ago, can we stop blaming that City for Mr. Wolff’s decision to pursue a series of non-starter projects? It was only 9 years after Mt. Davis, and three years after beginning his “efforts” in Oakland, that he took the A’s on a new path, and that was six years ago. So here’s his list of accomplishments: 3 years of failure looking for a site in Oakland. 3 years of failure with an identified site in Fremont. 3 years of failure with an identified site in San Jose. Team descends from a powerhouse to a laughing stock.

  148. @ tps “He doesn’t even care that Bartleby’s argument contradicts his own oft-repeated contention that the Giants won’t lose any significant numbers of their South Bay fans,”
    .
    You are mischaracterizing what I’ve said. What I’ve actually said was, with respect to general attendance, the Giants WILL lose some South Bay fans, but will make up for it by picking up East Bay fans for whom they will become the most convenient option. In fact, on this part of it, I think they come out ahead, since as you keep pointing out, the East Bay/North Bay has the larger population.
    .
    On the part the Giants are really worried about, premium seat customers, I’ve said that the A’s will bring in new business increasing the size of the pie overall. However, I’ve never said this means the Giants won’t lose any South Bay premium seat business. I’ve said they may be able to make up some of this from the East Bay’s smaller but closer corporate base, and from the general fans they pick up. But I’ve also said this may not completely make up for it and the A’s move may pinch their margins.
    .
    I have repeatedly said that the Giants falling back from “insanely successful” to only “wildly successful” so that the A’s can be “wildly successful,” too, is a good trade for baseball.
    .
    Implicit in these comments is recognition that an A’s move to San Jose will result in some churn in the fanbases. None of this is inconsistent with my disagreeing with you that the South Bay is some monolithic wall of Giants fans who won’t go see a local A’s team.
    .
    “that the A’s will simply pull a bunch of new fans out of the woodwork”
    .
    They will. Of equal importance, a lot of existing South Bay fans of both teams will go to more games because of the added convenience.
    .
    “with plenty of others driving in from Hayward and Livermore”
    .
    Not what I’ve said. On the contrary, I’ve said although a fair number of East Bay fans will continue to follow the team, they are not the target market for this move.
    .
    “to create TWO juggernaut baseball markets out of the Bay Area.”
    .
    Juggernaut to me implies “Yankees.” That is a little stronger than what I have said. I said, “wildly successful,” maybe more at the “Angels/White Sox/Braves” level.

  149. “Team descends from a powerhouse to a laughing stock.”
    .
    I always find it amusing when the same folks whose Schott narrative was “cheapskate carpetbagger” when he was around now credit him for building a “powerhouse.”

  150. Bartleby, you kinda misunderstood the point I tried to make. I never said Giants fans would universally avoid A’s games in SJ, or no South Bay Giants fans will convert to A’s fans, or no casual fans who like the Giants more will become casual fans who like the A’s more, or anything like that. In fact I’ve written more or less everything you wrote above in describing how there will be a moderate merry go round effect as the fan bases shift. Only I lack your psychic ability to pre-characterize the results as “wildly successful”. Earlier in the thread I was just wondering how many Giants fans there are in the South Bay who are like me and most every A’s fan I know in SF and Marin and here on the peninsula that could mostly give a shit about going to non-Bay Bridge Series Giants games just because they are closer. You see the number of such fans that might need to be subtracted from the pool of potential A’s fans in the South Bay is probably higher near Diridon Station than in Oakland. Maybe I’m wrong. Anyway, it wasn’t all that important I was just thinking about it and threw it out there. The humorous part of this that I referenced is that when I said in the past that the Giants could be upset about going from “insanely successful” to only “wildly successful” TonyD jumped all over me “keep dishing out your ‘analysis’ it’s cracking me up tps!!!” to point out that people don’t switch teams, the Giants had no reason to fear that, that a combo of existing East Bay fans driving down, existing South Bay fans, and brand new baseball fans would show up for the SJ A’s, and all existing South Bay Giants fans would still go to Giants games, no change for them, just a big uptick for the A’s, everybody wins. And there he was patting you on the back for saying that same exact thing to me. It’s funny how people will just start arguing in knee-jerk fashion and not even hear the other guy anymore.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s