Category Archives: Coliseum

09.16.11
by

You mess with the bull, you get the horns

Update 9/18 3:00 PM: According to the Keep the Bleachers General Admission Facebook page, the A’s have done a 180 and reverted back to all General Admission seating in the Bleachers. Huzzah!

It seems as though I’m always in transit when news breaks. Anyway…

Word spread quickly today that, come 2012, the A’s are converting the Bleachers from general admission (no assigned seating) to assigned seating. As a guy who has taken in over 500 games in the Bleachers over the last 20 years, I have to say that I’m in shock. According to conversations with the ticketing office, the change was made because some season ticket holders in the Bleachers were upset that their seats were taken after family members briefly left the game action for a trip to the restroom. While this has happened occasionally for some of the higher attendance dates, I rarely saw this occur. Personally, I have to admit that I usually sat a few rows up instead of taking the prime “front row” seats on the rail in part to avoid the possibility, no matter how remote the chances.

I suppose it’s fitting that tonight’s fireworks show is Star Wars themed, making the bleacher creatures the rebel alliance and Lew Wolff, well, Emperor Palpatine. A few minutes ago I asked David Rinetti to comment on this via email. I’ll post a response if I get one. Update: response at the end of this post.

The obvious theory at this point has many already begrudged fans thinking that Wolff has done this out of spite in response to the at times numerous anti-Wolff posters along the RF rail. I can’t discount it. If the purpose is to motivate some of the protesters (many of whom are season ticket holders) to give up and stop going to A’s games (and thus stop the protests inside the Coliseum), it just might work. He and his staff must have calculated the bad PR they’d get from this and went with it anyway. Like the tarping of the upper deck, this may be a sort of ticketing experiment to see what the response from the fanbase will be. And when the outcry happens, they can point to it and say, “See, we can’t even make a change from a very outdated business model – general admission seating. How can the franchise survive like that?”

Of course, that ignores the decades of tradition of consumer-friendly general admission tickets, even though they are more expensive ($13) than both the Plaza Outfield ($9) and Value Deck ($12). It’s all about the freedom of GA. I could get there on a weeknight after work and sit in the 4th row above the 362′ mark just before the seating bowl bends into a very baseball-unfriendly angle. If not the 4th row, then the 5th. Or 6th. Chances are it was available, with no hassle from the ushers. Now that’s gone, just like my carefree youth.

One thing I never understood about the tarping change was the conversion of the Plaza Bleachers to assigned Plaza Outfield seating, while the regular Bleachers stayed GA. It would’ve made more sense then to convert the Bleachers to Outfield Reserved seating, while the Plaza Bleachers remained GA. Sure, it would have punished the old die-hards even earlier, but it would’ve at least retained GA elsewhere in the park. A better way to make the change would be to have either the left field or right field area remain general admission, while the other side could be converted into “family” assigned seating, sort of like what the Giants did when they remade the Pavilion stands at the ‘Stick almost 20 years ago. I’ve added myself to supporters of the new Keep the Bleachers General Admission Facebook group, and I hope others will too. This move seems drastic and unnecessary, especially at this stage of the A’s tenure in Oakland. If the A’s are going to move to San Jose eventually, why not let Oakland-only fans have at least a few of their beloved institutions? Better that than the continued scorched earth campaign.

P.S. I got Rinetti’s response just after I hit the Publish button. Here it is:

Thanks for your letter.  We are encountering significant ticketing issue on our premium games in which over 200 fans per game have bleacher seats and can’t find seats together or seats at all.  We have come up with a plan to take care of the regular bleacher guests and even provide them with a discount as long as they purchase their seats in advance.  The regular games that have plenty of open seating will not be an issue.  It will be the games vs. the Yankees, Giants, Red Sox and some of the fireworks shows.  If you would like to call me after Tuesday of next week, I can explain further. 

I think I’ll give Rinetti a call next week.

08.30.11
by

News for 8/30/11

There’s a little back-and-forth between the Chargers and a LA-based blogger who has concluded that AEG is buying 96% of the team from the Spanos family, with the intent of moving the franchise to a new downtown LA stadium. Chargers spokesperson Mark Fabiani has said unequivocally that the team will not be sold.

Tim Kawakami has done some back-of-the-envelope numbers on financing for the 49ers stadium and has come up with many of the same conclusions written here a year ago.

Chron sports editor Al Saracevic reports on a new parking study commissioned by a SF Planning Commissioner takes issue with the 49ers stadium EIR’s assessment that parking inventory will be “equal to or superior to any in the NFL.” Considering the way this new study was derived, the results have to be taken with a grain of salt. However, that’s not to say that there aren’t good points. I’m absolutely certain that tailgating, of the kind Niner fans currently experience at the ‘Stick, will be practically extinct. It’ll be largely replaced by team-sponsored fan zones and other tailgating facsimiles.

BANG is asking fans to submit suggestions as to how the Raiders can increase attendance in Oakland. Send responses to turn2@angnewspapers.com or ccnsports@bayareanewsgroup.com.

A fan fell down a stairwell at Rangers Ballpark on Saturday. The unidentified 24 year-old man was knocked unconscious by the fall and remains in a local hospital.

I want take this opportunity to address something discussed in the last comments thread. There’s an opinion – generally espoused by Rick Tittle – that the A’s should spend money on the Coliseum to make things a little more fan friendly. Tittle frequently cites the investment made by Peter Magowan when he assumed control of the Giants as a good example. It sounds good in theory, but it doesn’t explain how this would work. Let’s get a few facts out of the way regarding what the Giants did:

  • The Giants spent $5 million in 1994 to add new LF bleachers, field boxes, the outfield fence, and the out-of-town scoreboard above the RF pavilion.
  • The money also went toward replacing the dirt warning track with the rubberized “tartan” surface. After all, you can’t have high rollers in field boxes stepping on dirt to reach their seats, or have wind-blown dust in their eyes.
  • In 2011 dollars, the inflation-adjusted value would be $8 million or less.

We’ve talked a lot about what it would take to spruce up the Coli, even to the point of fans initiating the effort since we can’t expect the A’s, Raiders, or Coliseum Authority to do it. We’ve heard that the Coliseum Authority may be replacing the obsolete scoreboard system, which is a good and necessary move. However, there aren’t many other changes that could be made that wouldn’t adversely impact either the A’s or the Raiders. Consider this:

  • I’ve suggested in the past that the best way to expand the lower concourse is to take out the last 3-4 rows of the field level seats and make new platforms for wheelchair seating areas and standing room sections. Doing this would remove 3,000+ seats, which would drop the Coliseum’s capacity below 60,000, below NFL guidelines. I can’t imagine either the Raiders or the NFL going for that, even if the Raiders don’t routinely sell out the joint.
  • The A’s can’t add more seats on the field because space is taken by the dugouts, the existing field boxes, the rolled up field tarp, and the bullpens.
  • The A’s can’t reduce foul territory by reconfiguring the lower deck without major engineering and construction challenges.
  • The Coliseum does actually have some modern amenities, such as the West Side Club and the Diamond Level seats.
  • As much as people complain about the troughs in the men’s restrooms, the decision to keep those in place was made in 1995. Have you ever noticed that the troughs have those sensors above that can tell when you’re finished and then flush? That’s the extent of change in the original restrooms.
  • It’s possible that the A’s could invest in expanding the clubhouse facilities, but I don’t know what complexities lie in attempting that.

Now let’s say that you own the A’s, and like what Magowan did 17 years ago, you’d like to spend $8 million, no, up to $10 million on the Coliseum to improve the experience. Take the scoreboards off the table. What would you improve? Do you have any idea how much it would cost? Is there a decent chance you’d recoup that investment? One thing to keep in mind is that when Wally Haas sunk money into the Coliseum, he was eventually paid back by the Coliseum Commission. He eventually saw greater revenues during the Bash Brothers era, but was unable to sustain that in the long run. Many of the current deficiencies with the Coliseum can’t and won’t be addressed by quick fixes.

Before you chime in, read this ESPN article about the A’s and their relationship with the Coliseum by Mark Kreidler, one of the “Rise Guys” brought in from Sacramento a month ago. Then look at the date. Some things never change.

08.16.11
by

Sprucing up the girl

.

A blank wall fronting one of the restrooms on the Coliseum's lower concourse

If you’ve visited the Coliseum so far this (highly unsuccessful) homestand, you may have noticed a series of new signs on the lower concourse which resemble the directionals used at airports. Apparently these were installed prior to the first Raiders preseason game, which was played last Thursday. Though the signs could stand to be larger, they should prove effective at directing fans to the right locations, as opposed to the disparate signage used until now.

I bring this up because it was one of the first things mentioned by Bryan Cauwels when I ran into him on the lower concourse on Sunday. He mentioned that it was not only effective signage, it helped provide a little extra color in a place that so badly needs it. Later, when I hung out with Bryan, Nina, and Mark in 206 after the A’s tied the game, we talked a little about what could be done to improve things at the Coliseum. Bryan suggested a massive paint job, similar to what was done to Tropicana Field a few years ago. Nina remarked that it might be difficult to accomplish due to potential bureaucratic and union-related issues.

Yet this is a place that, despite its obvious structural deficiencies, is absolutely begging for makeover of some sort. So what if it’s a Target makeover instead of a Nordstrom makeover? It can still be good. And yes, I’ve used the term “lipstick on a pig” before, but here’s the thing: she’s our pig. She’s all we have for at least the next three seasons, maybe more. Why not make the most of it? And when it does come time to tear the girl down, we’ll have a ton of really awesome souvenirs to commemorate our years at the venerable Coliseum.

Here’s the catch. We can’t expect the A’s to do it. We can’t expect the Raiders to lift a finger. Not even the Coliseum Authority will do it due to a lack of funds (plus the labor stuff). If you looked up their Relationship statuses on Facebook they’d all say, “It’s complicated.” I get that. Knowing that, why can’t we do it? It’s not just their place. It’s our place, our second home. If these organizations won’t do it, we’ll have to take it up ourselves. Now that will take a large volunteer effort and some fundraising for supplies. It doesn’t have to carry a huge price tag. All it needs is some will and skill, a vision (probably crowdsourced), and someone to coordinate the effort.

First up is the picture at the top of this post. It’s a big, blank, white wall. Wouldn’t that be a great place for a mural, similar to the other murals we’ve seen in the past? Here’s one at Gate B.

Correct me if I'm wrong - this mural came with the 1995 renovations.

Wouldn’t more murals that celebrate the teams, fans, and yes, employees at the Coliseum be better than gray or white concrete? And here’s another idea. You know when you’re walking along the lower concourse, you look up and see a bunch of pipes and conduits along the cinder block wall? Why not cover that up with something colorful, like vinyl banners? Or painted canvas or plywood? To make it work, metal frames would have to be constructed that would pop out of the wall, leaving the conduits unaffected.

Conduits on the upper walls can be covered with something more aesthetically pleasing. Rollup doors could be painted green.

Then you’d have a few touches here and there, such as:

  • Painted signs or vinyl banners hanging down from the supports
  • Painted rollup doors for the concession stands.
  • LED lighting to brighten the concourses.

The thing is, for this to happen we collectively have to get past this constant blame game of why doesn’t ownership or the authority do it. The answer as to why is simple – there is no money in it. It’s not going to cause a significant increase in attendance for either team, and the costs to contract it out professionally make it a poor value proposition. For those of us who make the effort to watch the team game in, game out, a volunteer effort would be akin to citizens taking their neighborhood back. If the man won’t do it, why not us? Rally the resources, sign a few waiver forms, and raise some bucks. No one ever displayed will by whining. They did it by doing. We can do this, A’s fans.

Got ideas on how to do this? You know where the comments section is.

08.04.11
by

The Big Lew Wolff Interview, Part 4

Part 4 of 5 (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

ML: Now lets move onto everyone’s favorite topic – tarps. They’ve been a bone of contention ever since they’ve been up there. What have you learned from having them up there, whether they were an experiment or another initiative, do they help? Hurt? Does it even matter?

Actually, I want to go to your site. The doubleheader the other day. It was interesting. Somebody caught me the other day at the soccer game, he said, “Oh, I went to the doubleheader, I’m a Giant fan but it was so much fun.” But in your own blog, there were a whole lot of comments saying, “Gee the (Coliseum crowd) looked great because the tarps were there.”

ML: A lot of people said that.

There you are, I win, they (the critics) lose. Move on.

ML: [laughs] And it wasn’t even a sellout. 27,000.

I know, but it would be better if the seats weren’t there. Look, we have $2 Wednesday and a $1 hot dog. You personally have a problem with that. There’s a limit of ten (hot dogs). [laughs]

ML: It’s true. [Ed.: Years ago I once ate six dollar dogs in one sitting. I am no Joey Chestnut.]

I want to see the person who eats that. All kidding aside. Everybody’s saying you have to open this or do that, make it cheaper and cheaper. We need revenue, yet nobody says, “Look how reasonable the A’s game is compared to the Giants.” Which is fine, they have a better environment to go to. You should pay more there.

ML: That actually gets me to something I’ve been thinking about for a while. All the discounts that are available. They’re great and they allow families to come in (more frequently), but sometimes I wonder if there are too many discounts, that it devalues the product.

It definitely does. If everything is product – I’m not saying gouge people – but everything is product. I sort of get a kick out of Groupon. It’s a big problem all sports and concerts, Stubhub and others. Somebody wrote an article in the LA Times where the people went to a Dodgers game for $2.95, they got three seats. It’s also in the hotel business – you’ve got all these sites like Expedia. I don’t know where it’s going but a lot of people go on StubHub. Sometimes they’ll buy seats for triple. Sometimes they’ll buy seats for a third. It’s a very good point. Baseball’s looking at it. The hotel is looking at it in a different way. Who owns the content and controls the price? We own the content. I’m not sure we control the price.

ML: The Tuesday free parking promotion that you’ve had for couple years. Monday’s attendance was 11,000. Tuesday’s was 12,000. 

In the house Monday was 5,500. Tuesday was 8,000. I don’t know if the parking was a factor.

ML: It doesn’t seem like it has a lot of traction.

One of the problems is that we don’t have (much to work with). I think our marketing group may be one of the best in baseball because they have such a challenge. It’s fun to be at the Coliseum, but I don’t know (beyond that). We try everything. The critics say, “Lew’s trying to discourage fans.” That’s really not true. If they want to believe that it’s fine.

Our revenues are around $140-150 million. Our payroll is $75 million. That’s about right. I could name another team or two teams whose payroll is around $40 million. We’d make a lot of money if we did that. I will not do that.

ML: The team you’re playing right now (Tampa Bay).

They run pretty well. I was thinking of a different team.

[Ed. – Wolff demurred on naming the team.]

Over a time period, because of where they were in the standings, all of a sudden they got some terrific young players through the minors. Billy has kept us competitive, and he doesn’t get as much credit as he should, but that leaves us in the middle of the draft. So where other teams get higher picks –

ML: Top ten pick.

That’s never been my goal. I’m convinced that we will have a new stadium in 4-5 years. I hope it’s here. I can’t keep asking Billy and his guys to (deal with being a low revenue, low payroll team).

ML: In the past two years regarding player development, it seems you have gone in a different direction of going after international players, whether it’s Michael Ynoa or Hisashi Iwakuma. Outside the draft. Is that some sort of new targeted strategy?

It’s a strategy but it’s not new. The big money teams. I don’t have the exact figure, but in the last few months the Rangers have spent some $20+ million in the Dominican Republic. [Ed. – Technically this was $23 million for three players, two from D.R. and one from Cuba.]

If the new CBA has draft pick slotting and an international draft it’ll be better for us. We can’t go after free agents and pay somebody six years [trails off]. Last year we thought we had the makings of a pretty good team. We sat down with – and I personally was involved with Billy and David and Scott Boras – and we sat down with Adrian Beltre. We went down to Orange County and met with him. At the end of the day we offered somewhere over $70 million for however many years, pretty much equal to what the Angels offered. Scott said, “No he’s gonna get $90 million.” And Adrian was wonderful. We left and thought, “That’s not what he’s getting.” And then Texas paid him.

We went after Lance Berkman, the (National) league leader in home runs. I didn’t do that. Billy literally flew to his home and talked to him. We offered him 2 years at $8 million (per year), I don’t remember the exact figure. St. Louis only offered him one year at that. I don’t like to blame on Oakland. For reasons of his own choosing, he decided to go to St. Louis. Those two players would’ve been very important to us. We went out and got other terrific players, free agents – DeJesus, Willingham, and so forth. It’s a little disappointing that the hitting (hasn’t panned out). We’re starting to look at our air conditioning (the marine layer). Why do they hit .280 (somewhere else) and then come here (and not hit)? We’re starting to hit now, hitting’s a little contagious.

So when fans say that we’re trying to discourage and we’re trying to make the product bad, they’re wrong. We’re doing the best we can. We send in a report every year about how we use revenue sharing. We don’t put it in our pocket. Our best approach is to build through the minor leagues, drafting, and (hopefully) the international draft.  That’s our best chance of competing.

ML: Do you think that slotting and the international draft will be part of the next CBA?

I don’t know. I hope so, I think it’s good for everybody.

ML: I sure hope so. It’s crazy that given all the reporting about big money payrolls being 2x, 3x, 4x the A’s, it’s sort of underreported how much development budgets make expenditures that much higher.

Well, we have no choice. So we have to use our money efficiently. So it isn’t a matter of lowering your payroll for a major league team. In fact you have to use that extra money in the minor leagues – on the draft and so on.

ML: Could the A’s to land a top tier free agent – say a slugger – next year or the year after that regardless of the ballpark situation? Would you take a shot at it?

We took a shot at Beltre. That was a six or five year deal. The answer is yes, but that isn’t where we’re going to get (that productivity). First of all, the probabilities of our being successful are limited. Boston, Texas, the Yankees – they can just offer another this or another that. We will not intentionally lose money because it’s not good for baseball. It’s not good for the team. We’ve tried everything. We got lucky once with Frank Thomas (in 2006).

The year we went to the playoffs, this is what scared me the most. My people told me, “Just you watch.” Going into 2007, after we got to the ALCS, all we needed was another this or that (player). We had less season ticket sales going into 2007 (than in 2006). How is that possible? It’s just a function of our market is shared. When all of these columnists report this and remember that, when we were playing in the Coliseum and the Giants were playing in Candlestick. That’s a lot different today than it was then. They’ve got a beautiful new ballpark. We don’t.

ML: That’s really what it comes down to, doesn’t it?

It’s not totally that. I think our management talent is as good as anybody’s. I tell you I’ve got owners all over the place who laughed I when I gave Billy and Mike (Crowley) long term contracts and shares of ownership. Now they’re saying how smart (the deals) are. I don’t know two other people, plus David (Forst) and Farhan (Zaidi), who could operate under the conditions that we have – which I’m not complaining about, they’re just what they are – any better than those guys.

ML: Yeah. I’m not sure what else you can do other than hoping a lot of high draft picks all of sudden drop in your lap. That’s not happening.

We’ll be okay. We’ve got the trade deadline coming up. We’re not looking to acquire anybody. We’re not going to give away people just to reduce salary. We want to get something for that. I don’t know how many teams are – so many teams have $100+ million payroll that even if they’re on the cusp of getting to the playoffs they may not be that interested. All of that accelerates from now until Sunday.

ML: If you get a really great offer that you can’t refuse…

We’ll look at it, but I like the way the team is playing now. Plus we’ll get draft choices if we don’t keep certain players. We’re not in a panic position.

ML: No fire sale.

No fire sale. The nice thing about us, and you have to give Billy a lot of credit, one of my favorite all time keepers, not just a player, a keeper, is Mark Ellis. We have a young guy in Jemile Weeks who we hope to be our future. The only thing that we did was – Billy did this, I didn’t even think about it – we wanted Mark to be in a position where he was playing all the time. [Ed. – Ellis to Colorado trade]

ML: Which he is now.

So that was sort of a below market deal, but it was good for him and we owed it to him.

ML: I think it had near universal praise for the way it was handled.

Selig told me never to fall in love with a player because they always move.

ML: Naw, we all loved Ellie.

That guy is so sweet and so decent. We’ve got quite a few but he’s special.

ML: It’s the great legacy of A’s second basemen from Rapid City, SD. Like this stadium business, the radio saga dragged on much longer than it should have? What did you learn from that experience?

Again, the Giants have a better situation (because of KNBR). We didn’t learn much. We learned that sometimes the people who administer bankruptcy, sometimes they get fees for that. Sometimes they don’t operate in the best interest of the very people they’re working for. The situation that came along in the middle of that (95.7 KBWF) was fine and we did it. It’s not perfect but it’s working out better than we thought. I was getting tired of listening to country music, and then the ballgame, and then a religious channel.

ML: Those were trying times. Let’s go back to territorial rights. What is the best way you think this should be resolved?

Good. I always say that if I had a magic wand, we should share the territory.

ML: Flat out.

Just like all the other two-team markets. Your article is right. Santa Clara County was nobody’s territory at one point. That’s good information, it’s true. I have seen the minutes of those meetings, and the Haases were complemented for being cooperative. The reason that happened was to build a ballpark in San Jose. I was even active in that as a businessman. I had no thoughts in ever being involved in baseball. For the Giants to say they have the territory but they didn’t mean to – I just think we should share the market like the other teams. Theoretically the Angels could move right next to the Dodgers if they want.

ML: They could but it’d be crazy.

The Mets could move next to Yankee Stadium. The White Sox could move across town. They’re not going to but it’s allowed. And we’re further from the other team than any other. [Ed. – Again, not including DC/BAL] The whole thing in an academic sense, I can’t imagine the debate.

ML: Do you think the owners understand this? Do you have to talk to them or lobby them about this?

I made up my mind not to lobby them. Over this long period of time they’ll tease me a little bit about it. In fact several have told me, “I’ll talk to Bud for you.” I say no. It’s being done the way it’s supposed to be and let’s just see what happens. Running around and lobbying, I just don’t do that. It’s just not worth it. First of all, everyone’s going to go along pretty much with the commissioner’s decision.

ML: What’s your confidence level right now that this will get done by the end of the year?

In your lifetime? I have a lot of confidence that it’ll be done this year, but I said that last year too.

ML: Right.

Who knew that baseball would explode in two or three other areas? I still have a high degree of confidence that we’ll get an answer one way or the other. That’s all I’m asking for. I mean, I want a yes for sharing. In lieu of that I’ll take a no.

ML: Do you have a hard stop or a deadline for getting this done?

Yes. We missed it by two years. [laughs]

ML: There you go.

The answer is no, not now I don’t. As I say, I’ll pass the baton to those who are working on it. We’re working on this everyday. We’re talking about sight lines and everything. We just haven’t pulled the trigger to spend because we want to know it’s there (first).

ML: Okay.

08.03.11
by

The Big Lew Wolff Interview, Part 3

[Ed. – Before I start again I have to mention that there are some blogs out there who are cutting and pasting huge chunks of this interview for further commentary. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with the fact that I haven’t received a single request to use this interview for any kind of reuse of large chunks of it. I mean, really, it’s not like I’ve spent a lot of time on this. It’s not like people care about professionalism or common courtesy anymore. How about a heads up? Maybe a link to the original interview? It’s the least you can do. The very least. We may not agree on much, but we can at least show courtesy and respect others’ work. That’s all.]

Part 3 of 5 (Part 1, Part 2)

ML: You’ve frequently said here and everywhere that it’s all about keeping the A’s in the Bay Area, in this market –

For our ownership.

ML: Right. Recently, Giants president Larry Baer has hinted that while he supports the A’s looking in their territory – Alameda and Contra Costa counties – but if they can’t they’re welcome to try somewhere else such as Sacramento. How do you respond to that “hint” by Baer and the Giants?

If tomorrow you had the only McDonald’s in San Francisco, and fourteen miles away there was another location in Oakland. And your SF McDonald’s is worth $10 million and the Oakland McDonald’s is worth $100,000. That was fine for you (SF). Now the Oakland location says they’re closing up and they’re moving outside of the territory. What happens to the only McDonald’s then? Larry and the Giants would benefit hugely, I guess, in their minds. They dominate the market now, they may want to dominate it totally. Their market value might jump a huge amount.

However, I don’t get it. I don’t get why they’re so adamant about this. It’s just a difference of opinion.

ML: Do you think the Giants have a motive for protecting their territorial rights other than what they’ve stated publicly? Which is – they just want to pay off the ballpark.

I’ll have to say that going back to – forget that it’s Oakland or San Jose – there are four two-team markets. [Ed.: Note exclusion of DC-Baltimore] Three already have the same boundaries. I think this one should too. I think we would have a great rivalry with them. Why shouldn’t we have a beautiful ballpark? In fact, one of the backers and instigators is my partner and his family, the Fishers. I think if you actually went to a lot of the passive investors in the Giants – these are people who want to support the Bay Area, not just one team. What is it gonna hurt? In fact I think it’s gonna be better for them too. Everybody has their own views.

ML: There’s been some talk from fans and media about challenging baseball’s antitrust exemption. Knowing what you know, being in what they call “The Lodge”, is there anything realistic about that?

Well, today we live in a litigious society. If you want to sue over this chair you’re sitting on you can sue the manufacturer because you’re not feeling well. We are not of that ilk. We are a partner. Maybe this is an odd view, but I believe that we’ve entered a partnership. This is what the commissioner chose. As I said before, we’re not even thinking about it (suing). It’s not right based on being part of a partnership. Therefore it’s not a lever for us, it might be for someone else. If the reverse is true, maybe a smart attorney running a baseball team might say, “We can do this, we can do that.” [Ed.: I chuckled] We’re not going to do it, that’s all there is to it. It’s just not right.

ML: This seems to be something very consistent that you’ve said, even going back a couple of years ago. The partnership idea that all of the owners are in one boat and they’re all supposed to be rowing in the same direction.

I know I’m a little naïve when it comes to that, in the world that we live it, but that’s how I’m gonna run it.

ML: Okay. When it comes to making a decision, is it really all up to the commissioner?

Yep. Well – that’s a good question – he would need a vote of the owners [Ed.: 3/4 of owners]. Since I’ve been there, there haven’t been a lot of votes. Maybe the Giants wouldn’t vote for it or a couple of teams. Again, it’s a collaborative thing. With all the work that’s gone into this, whatever the decision is, it’ll have a lot of backing. I think if he decides to let us move to San Jose that he’ll get a lot of votes. I don’t think the voting will be an issue. He even has the power to go beyond that if it’s for the good of baseball. I really don’t sit there and analyze this from a legal point of view. If the decision is “you can’t” or “you can” the support will be to follow the commissioner’s lead.

ML: And that’s really all you’re looking for. Yes or no.

Yeah.

ML: You mentioned the Dodgers and Mets offhand. Are they on the front burner and the A’s on the back burner, or does it not work like that?

You’d have to ask the commissioner. No, I don’t think we’re on the back burner. I really think the Mets and the Dodgers are two different situations. But they’re both important (teams), important markets, important to us. The Mets aren’t suing baseball. They’re just trying to survive – and maybe they made some errors with this Madoff thing – I don’t know that much about it. The Dodgers are attacking, they put their team in bankruptcy. If they follow the constitution of baseball that’s cause for taking over the team. I’ve got my own stuff I worry about every day. We need those markets to have ownerships that are committed and capable of not getting into these issues.

ML: Commissioner Selig, when asked about what’s happening with the A’s a couple of times this year has said, “We’re working on it,” in nice, vague terms. Are they really still working on it? Seriously.

[laughs] I think what he’s working on – and I don’t know – is unless Oakland knows something that I don’t know. I answer is I think he’s contemplative. Way beyond where I am. We talk several times a week, not on this issue but on others I’m involved in. I’m having a – I enjoy the commissioner. We’ve known each other a very long time, longer than I’ve known my wife – and we’ve been married 54 years. I think he’s got enough information to make a decision. He may be trying to figure out a good way that the Giants are happy and we’re happy. He tends to do that. And right now, what choice do I have? Last night we won a game. That’s more fun than worrying about this crap.

ML: I agree, I agree. Now let’s talk a little about the Coliseum. I’m sure you’re aware that attendance is up this year as opposed to last year, and over 2009 as well. 

When Russia went from communism to capitalism they had a huge jump in economics, but that’s from a very low base. [laughs] When I talk to the commish he’ll say to me, “You know, you’re up 4.5%.” The one thing he follows is attendance. Now I follow paid attendance, I’m not sure that he does.

ML: Fair enough.

Attendance is up (league-wide) according to my last conversation. They’re up a little bit in the American League.

ML: Yeah, I think it turned around after the weather. 

Now I don’t know if it means in the ballpark. I look at Dodger Stadium and it looks almost empty sometimes.

ML: I believe that it’s paid attendance and it’s somehow withstood the drop for the Mets and Dodgers. 

What happens is that some people are afraid to give up their tickets. I was hesitant to give up my Laker tickets. But then I look back and ask how many games did I go to since my kids all moved out of L.A. Do I really need these tickets? And then a year later I decide to do one more year. I worry about the impact of that.

ML: I see.

I just wish the Dodger thing was settled and we could move on.

ML: In the past you’ve mentioned the Coliseum’s defects and its chronic state of decay. Could a ballpark be built alongside or replace the existing Coliseum? For now let’s put aside the financing – well no, we can’t put it aside.

No, let’s put it aside for the moment. First I looked at the Coliseum, because there was nothing downtown. We’re talking about the physical stadium. This is where I read the older (sports) writers, they’re living in the past. A lot has changed for Oakland since then. The last year the Haases owned the team they had the highest payroll in baseball and drew 1.2 million. You might want to check that out.

ML: They were. [Ed. – 1.2 million in the strike-shortened 1994 season, 1.1 million in each of the following two seasons.]

[Ed. – At this point Lew’s son-in-law, Dean Rossi, comes by with his son, Arthur. It’s mostly a personal conversation so I’ll leave this out. Lew will drop Arthur off at the Coliseum to run around the clubhouse – every kid’s dream – before heading up to City Hall to meet with Mayor Quan. Note: Two partners in Rossi’s law firm help run Baseball San Jose.]

So where were we? Coliseum.

ML: So is it possible?

Let’s talk about it. Aside from the market being – Oakland used to have several major corporations, doesn’t have them any longer. The whole thing with the Raider thing, Mt. Davis, we had nothing to do with that. You can never get sight lines that satisfy two sports in one venue anymore. Even inside it’s not good to have hockey and basketball. You can do it but, you know.

There are so many physical issues. Right now if we wanted to move the fans closer, I don’t know what to do. The field is 22 feet below sea level so there’s no way to move forward without tearing down all the seats. You’d understand that better than most.

ML: Yeah.

The field is great until football. The field is great because we have a great groundskeeper, Clay Wood. As soon as the Raiders come in – it’s just not good.

About the site. You can make all the drawings you want on that site. This is what really bothered me. The Coliseum wasn’t even the #1 site in the HOK study. Even Fremont was in the study. The Coliseum had a little line about some kind of utility thing. I asked if there was a title report ordered for the Coliseum. In my world that’s one of the first things you do. Nobody knew, the city didn’t know, it was just a bunch of bureaucratic nothing. So we ordered the title report, which is just about this thick [fingers spread an inch apart]. There is an easement.

[Ed. – The Coliseum Authority recently bought the land in question as part of its new Raiders stadium effort. Oakland Councilman Larry Reid envisions an ancillary development project similar to L.A. Live in downtown Los Angeles, next to Staples Center. The Authority is also proposing $4 million in additional expenditures related to project study costs.]

ML: You mentioned this. It was the sewer interceptor.

It’s not an easement you can move. So any architect who wants to build over the freeway or whatever, needs to sit down and determine what easement does relative to placing a football stadium or arena. That kind of even minor detail, we could say, “oh we’ll do it” but never do it. None of that’s done. The average fan shouldn’t have to bother with that. But that site isn’t as simple as we thought.

One time I thought it would be a good idea to buy the triangle that heads out to Hegenberger (Malibu/HomeBase lots). I said, “Look, we don’t know if we’re gonna stay here, but we need that piece to do parking or mitigate, otherwise it’s chaos if you’re trying to develop that site.” All of a sudden another architect comes up with an idea for these multistory garages. Well, who’s gonna pay for those? And if you’re on the fifth floor of a garage for a baseball team, you might as well stay home. So it was just a hundred inhibitions.

Now, we recently had someone come up to me, a legitimate guy. I didn’t ask who it was as it came through someone else. He said, “Gee whiz, we think there’s a way to remain in Oakland and live with the Coliseum” and so on. Well, tell me what it is. “If you guys want to sell the team” and all that stuff. I’d like to know what you’re talking about before I would even contemplate that. Other owners haven’t been able to do anything in Oakland (build stadia) either. We’re not the only one. The Coliseum’s an over 40-year old facility. Dodger Stadium is too. Dodger Stadium, I believe, would take a minimum of $100 million to keep it going – and they keep it pretty well maintained. So you tell me what this would cost.

ML: I have no idea.

I don’t either. They (Coliseum Authority) don’t have any money. We’re constantly making repairs that are not our obligation.

ML: Really? Like what?

Leaks and things. The scoreboard. There are two of them because of football. I think they’re finally going to replace them, but if they don’t there are no more parts. If a light goes out we borrow it from another one. It’s aggravating. But they basically say they don’t have any money. They still have bonds to pay off. The place is old and this is not the time for cities to write a check for sports.

ML: Yet they’re going forward with a study for the Raiders.

All these studies. If I were an investigative reporter I’d like to know how much is spent. Supposedly that study is done. And that’s fine, they should, the Raiders are fine. Where are all these things? Who’s doing them? If it’s a six month study what happened to the first two months? We have heard nothing. And we’ve been more tolerant than the other two teams (as tenants). We’ve never affected our rights there. If we win (legally), what do we win if they don’t have any money? It was a baseball park once. I wasn’t around when any of that happened, but the amount put into that sure seems strange to me. That was before my time.

ML: The litigious part kind of speaks for itself at least for the other two teams.

Look, I’m just not litigious. I think our legal system is killing us, so much initiative. I’ve been in business almost 50 years. I’m a real estate developer. Most of my contemporaries are suing someone every three months. I’ve had two lawsuits my entire career. I think everything can be settled. But you can’t do it if someone’s not willing to cooperate.

07.20.11
by

49ers, Raiders put heads together on stadium

The Chronicle’s Raiders beat writer Vittorio Tafur has a pretty big scoop: the Raiders and 49ers have been in talks about sharing a future Bay Area stadium. Tafur goes on to mention where the Niners are regarding the Santa Clara stadium concept, but mentions nothing about the new Coliseum proposal for the Raiders. At this point it makes the most sense to consider Santa Clara Plan A simply due to the work that has already been done to date. The Coliseum is still in its initial study phase. Speaking of which, as much as I harp on Oakland rushing through the Victory Court EIR process, the new Coliseum was supposed to have its EIR completed in as little as 15 months. Yet here we are, about 9-10 months in, and not a peep.

Fortunately for both teams, the NFL has taken their situations into account and may be ready to lend them a hand. Tim Kawakami notes that as part of the new CBA, the Bay Area has been identified as a place that could receive a loan from the NFL for stadium building.

It’s complicated, though. The CBA designates “stadium credits” for three locations — Los Angeles and presumably the Bay Area are two of them — but not specific teams, the source said.

The “credits” are a precursor to the NFL setting up a formal stadium-loan program, another league source said Tuesday. So, yes, the Raiders could be involved in anything the 49ers try to do, possibly in a shared-stadium venture, as the NFL has encouraged for years.

That isn’t ideal for the Yorks, of course. But at least they know the money could be there, and that means they can keep churning toward their end goal.

Without the NFL loan option, the churning would have been mostly over right here and now.

Initially, a big sticking point in the CBA negotiations was the NFL’s protection of funds for stadia, previously known as the G-3 loan program. The players wanted a piece of the entire pie. While ratification hasn’t been completed, it looks like the players will get a piece of the entire revenue pie, albeit a smaller percentage than what was prescribed in previous CBAs (60% of a smaller pie). Now that it appears that a successor to G-3 is part of the possibly 10-year deal, the prospects should be looking up for the 49ers in terms of getting their funding.

Now let’s take this a step further. Should Santa Clara be the final site for both teams (with the Raiders signing a long-term lease), that should presumably open up the Coliseum for the A’s, right? Yes and No. True, the tenant that destroyed the Coliseum for the A’s would be gone, but they’d be leaving behind $100 million in debt service for Oakland and Alameda County to pay for. There’s no chance that the A’s or MLB will bite on paying off that debt, yet the city and county would need to figure out a way to service it somehow. That could pave the way for the reuse option I drew up last year, but that’s a risky proposition in and of itself. Any reuse of the old Coliseum would require new revenue bonds from the Authority, and I doubt it would politically popular unless it was true slam dunk proposal. Plus there’d be the stink of the Raiders coming back less than 20 years earlier, not selling the place out as advertised, destroying the Coliseum for the A’s, successfully suing Oakland/Alameda County, then negotiating an early end to their stay and finally leaving again.

Finally, there’s A’s ownership’s role in this. Surely, they’d much rather be in control of their situation instead of picking up other teams’ scraps. Revenue generation will be limited at the Coliseum, and the market for ancillary development around the Coliseum is weak. Moreover, redevelopment’s death takes with it any project money for the area, as noted in Oakland’s declaration of support for the Monday lawsuit. The A’s will be funding a greater percentage of their venue privately than either football team, so they should have more say in where they go. As we’ve seen over the last couple of years, you can’t always get what you want.

07.17.11
by

Notes from the true doubleheader

Saturday’s double-dip truly had an event feel. It’s hard for the A’s to wring value out of a game when tickets are so cheap and frequently discounted. There were no bobbleheads or fireworks today, which made the game itself the real attraction. When the preliminary schedule was released, there was no doubleheader and the series was a typical post-ASB four-gamer. Even though combined attendance for typical Thursday and Saturday games would have eclipsed the 27,379 posted today, today’s number was a better number. From the look of the crowd and the parking lot, 27,379 is more reflective of the actual attendance than the regular paid figure. That feeling of fullness multiplies the sense of energy within the crowd and the venue.

Despite the good vibes, the day was not without hiccups. I didn’t arrive until the bottom of the first inning, which means that I didn’t experience the service debacle that Bryan Cauwels (Hey Bud, PleA’se stop the TeA’se) did. According to Cauwels, many of the concession stands were not fully staffed or ready to serve until 1:30 PM. If this was a strategic plan by the A’s and Aramark to work with a late-arriving crowd, it backfired as many were left standing at concessionaires that normally would’ve been open at that time. Cauwels also went to the West Side Club, where he tried to get sandwich, only to be turned down because the sandwich vendor ran out of bread. I’m not sure how a vendor runs out of bread before a game starts, but it doesn’t make much sense.

By the second and third innings, the lines cleared up and nearly every stand along the original concourses was open. Both stands in the value deck were also open. Lines were short or non-existent, except in the West Side Club. That’s where, in between games, I hung out with a bunch of AN regulars. While in the Club I got an impassioned plea from Josh “emperor nobody” Chase Fields, which was centered on protecting the A’s legacy and progressing to something better (a new ballpark), then an assault on baseball’s antitrust exemption, and finally, a polemic. Since I don’t do polemicizing on the blog, I’m going to try to distill what he said into something with a little less heightened rhetoric. That’ll take some time, so that’s for later in the week.

Once the second game started, I roamed around the Coliseum as I’m wont to do from time to time. Seagulls hovered over the seats, confused about the crowd that was not abandoning the birds’ rightful dinner (their Pavlovian cue is the seventh inning stretch). After taking in the sun for several innings in Section 205, I walked around to the other side of the Coli and met up again with the ANers in 229.

All the while, I was keeping tabs on something statistical. I have a passing interest in the Bay Area’s microclimates, hence my nom de plume (partly). Since we were guaranteed at least six hours of baseball from first pitch to last, I figured I’d jot down the temperatures in both Oakland and San Jose during the game. These are according to AccuWeather, which has in its data a statistic called Real Feel. Real Feel is a trademarked, not publicly codified measure containing a composite of ambient temperature, humidity, sunlight, wind, and other factors combined to approximate the actual feeling on skin. For the period when the sun broke through, there were times when the sun brought the temperature inside the stadium well above 70. When the low clouds reformed, temperatures felt as though they dropped considerably. Saturday was unseasonably cool, so to compare the two cities properly I’ll run this again next month, when the region hits its seasonal highs.

Dew point - which is closely tied to humidity - in the region is usually between 50 and 58 degrees Fahrenheit, which is one reason why the Bay Area is so comfortable year round.

In future comparisons, I’ll probably use data from both AccuWeather and Weather Underground for greater granularity and accuracy. Let me know what you’d like to see in this. What I’m most curious about is the effect of humidity on a baseball’s flight. We on the West Coast have a good idea of what the marine layer can do to a fly ball, especially at night, but there hasn’t been much written or said about why. I think it’s really important to understand this, so that we can know what the right-sized ballpark is in Oakland, San Jose, etc. As much as I love 1-0 pitching matchups, I also don’t want our developing hitters in the farm system to feel that they’re condemned to a life of singles and doubles if they don an A’s uniform. There’s a lot more coming on weather and climate throughout the second half of the season.

07.15.11
by

Coliseum Authority to allow open bids for facility management

Yesterday, the EBX’s Robert Gammon reported on how the Coliseum Authority was set to vote today on whether to allow current operator SMG to continue running the complex. The alternative would be to allow open bids, presumably from several other powerhouse companies such as AEG, Global Spectrum, and Live Nation.

The good news, according to the Trib’s Angela Woodall, is that that open bidding is happening. It won’t improve the experience much at team sports events, but it should help for concerts and other team sports, plus it should make those dates when events are occurring at both facilities much smoother. SMG has been notorious for not promoting Oracle Arena for concerts in order to reduce costs, though they have improved over the last few years.

In other news, Alameda County has chosen to bite the bullet and pay to continue operating its redevelopment agency. That doesn’t necessarily help Oakland, since Alameda County can only influence projects done on unincorporated land or land partly owned via a joint powers authority. It’s another sign that the legal threats being floated by various cities are just a bunch of talk, with the cities truly being forced to pay to play.

07.12.11
by

News for 7/12/11

Back from a much-needed camping trip, and I’m ready to deal with the anger and frustration. And boy, is there a lot of it. Wouldn’t you be frustrated if the man who holds your future in his hands answers questions in this manner?

Q. What is the latest on the possible relocation to San Jose for the A’s franchise?

COMMISSIONER SELIG: Well, the latest is, I have a small committee who has really assessed that whole situation, Oakland, San Francisco, and it is complex. You talk about complex situations; they have done a terrific job. I know there are some people who think it’s taken too long and I understand that. I’m willing to accept that. But you make decisions like this; I’ve always said, you’d better be careful. Better to get it done right than to get it done fast. But we’ll make a decision that’s based on logic and reason at the proper time.

Selig held steady on other pressing topics, such as the Dodgers, the CBA, realignment, and instant replay.

Joshua “emperor nobody” Chase and Tyler “Blez” Bleszinski have written distinctive, impassioned calls for action and change for the A’s. Both are must reads.

2009 first round pick Grant Green was named MVP of the Futures game last night. After crushing what he thought was going to be a home run against the wall, keeping him to a double, Green said this:

“I’m happy getting doubles. It’s the type of thing where I know I’m not going to be a 20-homer guy in Oakland. Not in that ballpark.”

Imagine if teams could trade draft rights in baseball the same way they could in the other three leagues. Pick signability would take yet another hit for the A’s as long as the Coliseum remained their home.

Despite the A’s struggles on the field, TV ratings at CSN California have seen a slight rise annually from 1.23 last summer to 1.33 this summer. That combined with the slight rise in attendance should mean something, shouldn’t it? If so, what?

Even as cities are looking to sue the state over the death of redevelopment, at least three cities are looking at ways to potentially work within the system. So far that includes the three most prominent cities: Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco. Both Oakland and San Jose have said initially that they can’t afford to pay the price to keep their RDA’s functioning. We’ll see about that.

The Florida Marlins are closing off the upper deck at Sun Life Stadium for the rest of the year, with the exceptions of a dog-oriented game in August and the final home game ever in the stadium. Looks like fans are holding out until the next year in the new, air-conditioned space, which is oh-so-Miami sports fan.

The funeral for fallen Rangers fan Shannon Stone was held on Monday in Brownwood, TX. The Rangers and Brownwood have set up memorial funds for Stone’s family, to which the A’s contributed $5,000.

As part of its continued correction, Cisco Systems may lay off anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 jobs before the end of the year, up to 14% of its current workforce. A reduction of 5,000 jobs would save $1 billion in costs and increase profitability 8% in 2012, according to Bloomberg.

There’s a half-serious movement emanating from SoCal to have 13 counties secede from California to form their own largely conservative state. Secession efforts have occurred in the past, mostly from the also largely conservative counties in the northernmost section of the state. It’s not really relevant to the ballpark or baseball economics discussion except that it provides an interesting “what if” scenario if it ever came to pass. Would the new state, which would include Orange and San Diego counties, be more or less friendly to potential franchise relocation candidates? How would they relate to teams who have outdated facilities?

Lastly, it appears that there’s a post-doubleheader tailgate happening on Saturday and a slew of activities before the first game. Given that those of us who are attending will be unable to leave the stadium between games, how about a mini meetup during the intermission? I’m open to suggestions as to where in the O.co Coliseum.

07.07.11
by

Bay Bridge Doubleheader By The Numbers

If you didn’t get a chance to take in today’s Bay Bridge Doubleheader (Mariners @ Athletics in the afternoon, Padres @ Giants at night), fear not! You’ll have one more shot on Labor Day weekend, Saturday, September 3 to be precise. On that day, the schedule will kickoff again with the Mariners visiting the A’s, this time a 1:05 PM game. The nightcap will be the D-backs invading the Giants, hopefully with both teams in the full throes of a pennant race. It’s also possible that the following day, the Giants game will be moved from a 1:05 start to 5:05 to accommodate ESPN’s Sunday Night telecast. Note: I was thinking that the NFL’s labor situation may have an impact, but that weekend is scheduled to be the final exhibition weekend and customarily no games are played on that Sunday. However, a compressed schedule may require games on that Sunday. Back to the original topic.

Today’s double dip was truly unforgettable, and unbeknownst to me 14 hours ago, truly epic. Here’s a breakdown of what I experienced/endured today:

  • Combined time of both games – 6:04 (A’s – 2:12, Giants – 3:52)
  • Total attendance – 61,407 (A’s – 19,491, Giants – 41,916)
  • Innings – 23
  • Pitches thrown – 612
  • Home runs – 3 (bookends – Scott Sizemore to start scoring and win the game for the A’s in 1st, Nate Schierholtz to win the game for the Giants in 14th, also Schierholtz also in 4th with two on)
  • Total cost of tickets – $28 (A’s – $12 value deck, Giants – $16 SRO)
  • Total cost of public transit – $12.15 on BART
  • Total cost of parking – $0 at Hayward station
  • Total cost of gas – Approximately $10
  • Miles driven – 68.4
  • Food/beverage cost – $18.14 (A’s $3.60 out of pocket plus $6 value in ticket for popcorn chicken and soda, Giants – $0, Red’s Java House – $12.25 for Double Cheeseburger + Fries + Anchor Steam, Bayside Market – $2.29 for 1L bottle of Diet Pepsi)
  • Time I left home – 11:00 AM
  • Time I arrived home – 12:35 AM
  • Time my phone ran out of juice – 9:30 PM

Speaking of bookends, the games were the last ones I’ll have attended until the big doubleheader on the 16th. Should we do a meetup? Tailgate? Anyone perhaps interested in the 9/3 Bay Bridge doubleheader? Despite the long day, I’d do it again in a heartbeat.

P.S. – While I was walking around I noticed a number of newly painted lines on some parts of the arcade and behind the bleachers at AT&T Park. It turns out that there are now designated areas for standing and circulation. This was mandated by the fire marshal after an inspection brought up uneasiness about the large, difficult to disperse crowds on the arcade. In retrospect, you have to wonder why it took over a decade for that action to take place. I spoke with an usher about it and he said that the number of standing room tickets had to be reduced due to the lower amount of space available for SRO.

Update 11:52 AM – I emailed A’s Stadium Ops czar David Rinetti to inquire about any special fan rules for the doubleheader. Here is his response:

We are conducting our double-header like every other game, with the following exceptions:

  • fans will be able to enter the stadium from 11:05am until around the 7th inning of the 2nd game
  • the second game will start 35 minutes after the conclusion of the first game
  • alcohol sales will continue all the way through the 5th inning of the 2nd game

Like all regular games, there will not be in and out privileges.