Bleacher seating clarification

This came this afternoon from A’s VP of Stadium Operations David Rinetti:

Rhamesis and Jennifer,

I am hopeful that both of you will use your means to send this message to all concerned A’s Bleacher patrons:

As you are all aware, we met with a small group of A’s regular Bleacher patrons a few days ago to discuss a potential change in policy. Our goal for this meeting was to try and come up with a solution to deal with the 200 or so complaints that we receive for every premium game in the Bleachers due to guests that show up without a place for their party to sit. Our hope was that we would work with the core group of Bleacher fans to create a way for them to purchase their regular seats in advance and even offer them incentives to do so. We have heard loud and clear from many of the Bleacher patrons through the various blogs and emails that there is clear opposition to this plan. Although some blogs and emails have accused the A’s of trying to alienate their fans, or that this was an intentional ploy by ownership to make things difficult for our Bleacher guests; this is very far from the truth. We were just looking for a way to improve customer service for our fans. Based upon the feedback that we have received, we will not be changing our policy in 2012. We will, however, aggressively monitor the Bleacher area for the premium games to make sure that all fans with Bleacher tickets can be seated.

We thank you all for your continued support of the Oakland A’s.


David Rinetti
Vice President, Stadium Operations

That should settle it.

9 thoughts on “Bleacher seating clarification

  1. Not really A’s related, but it is stadium related in the Bay Area. The Yorks are part of a group that is buying Great America from Cedar Fair for $70 million dollars. The sale should be finalized by the end of the month. And thus ends the major legal obstacle to the Niners stadium in Santa Clara.

  2. Also in the Mercury News today, an editorial urging Selig to make some sort of decision on San Jose’s ballpark. If the answer is no, the editorial correctly notes Wolff will probably sell the team, to folks who would move it outside the Bay Area.

  3. @pjk,
    Most likely decision was already made months ago. If it wasn’t going to be San Jose, we would have known long ago. Heck, there wouldn’t have been a “study” if that was the case.

  4. @pjk – Wolff/Fisher can’t: “sell the team, to folks who would move it outside the bay area”. Every part of a sell and the location of any MLB team has to be approved by the other owners and the commissioner.

  5. …If the options are: stay eternally at the Coliseum since Oakland can’t pay for a new ballpark and a privately run ballpark would lose millions, or move the team out of the Bay Area, we can be certain it’ll be the latter option. Plenty of places to move the team, ranging from San Antonio to El Paso, to Vegas, Portland, Charlotte, NC, etc. I can see MLB setting up a bidding war between cities to get the A’s. MLB owners will take the money they will get in the bidding war, rather than continuing to underwrite the A’s with millions of dollars in revenue-sharing every year. Memo to people who want Wolff to sell the team: Be careful what you wish for; you may get it….A’s are in the same boat as the former Montreal Expos: dismal attendance, an inability to get a new ballpark in the host city.

  6. I don’t mean to upset the Oakland-only folks, but moving the A’s 35 miles down 880 sure beats El Paso, don’t you think? The blue ribbon committee charged with exploring ballpark options in the A’s current territory has reported nothing in 918 days. Sure sounds like the committee can’t come up with anything.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.