That title is a little ambitious. My real intention is just to give a kind of impressionistic overview of the team's latest iteration so far, first in relation to the new owners, then, in a subsequent post, in relation to Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer and their strategy in building a baseball team.
As far as Ricketts goes, we seem to have concluded a new campaign to convince everyone that it is necessary to provide some financial incentives to the Cubs franchise so that Ricketts can make needed as well as cosmetic changes to the ballpark environment that most people think he ought to finance on his own or that he doesn't actually need in the first place.
Ricketts's initial plans were based on the notion that the city would kick back all or most of the amusement tax revenues the ballpark generates. When that unfortunate gambit didn't fly, he moved toward a kind of neighborhood reconstruction program modeled on the Fenway Park rehabilitation.
This is still the model, but on a more ambitious scale. Although a good deal more money is involved, it seems to be predicated on putting the screws to the rooftop owners by threatening to build signs and scoreboards that will impede their sight lines.
The existence and relative success of the rooftop enterprises has always rankled a bit with Cubs management. Rightly so from any fair-minded approach. Their development is a fairly recent phenomenon. Although they try to portray themselves as just a bunch of neighborhood guys who provide a valuable service to baseball-starved fans, they are in fact a big business.
This is not Mom and Pop dragging a couple of deck chairs up to their rooftop to catch a game and get some sun. This is a set of cantilevered stadium seating perched on top of a bunch of three flats and six flats that line Waveland and Sheffield across from the park. For years they operated without regulation and sold a product they did not produce.
That is, until Cubs former ownership, the Tribune, finally forced a crisis and entered into an arrangement that required the rooftop owners to kick back a portion of their profits to the Cubs, more or less in exchange for some implicit understandings that the Cubs would take no actions that would impact the rooftop owners fundamental interest. This interest boils down to one thing of paramount importance: that their patrons can actually see something of the game going on in the stadium.
I've actually been to one of the rooftop venues. They are pretty much of a joke as far as watching a ball game. The seats are what would be the fourth or fifth storey of their buildings and 500 to 600 feet from home plate. You cannot really follow the game from this vantage point.
When the Cubs were good, they provided a form of auxiliary seating that gave you the illusion of being at a game. Now that the Cubs stink, you can get cheaper tickets from Stub Hub and other legal scalpers on game day and enjoy the real thing. For the last two seasons, whenever I have gone to the park, I have looked up at the rooftops and found them virtually deserted.
What they really provide is a place to get drunk and stuff yourself with brats while pretending to watch an irrelevant spectacle take place too far away to actually involve you in its process. Plus the seating itself is an architectural eyesore that contributes nothing to the neighborhood ambiance, such as it is, despite protests to the contrary.
So judging from the latest reports, Ricketts has been successful and the rooftop owners were marginalized. I suppose this is, in general, a good thing, especially since it clears the table of at least one controversy and allows the team management to concentrate on maybe building a decent team for a change.
That is, if they are of a mind to do so. So far they seem to be obsessed with maximizing profits and minimizing expenses. This is OK. All businesses do so, but, according to Forbes anyway, the Cubs are the fourth most valuable baseball franchise and were the most profitable one last season. Pretty good for a team that has provided virtually no fan entertainment for four plus seasons.
Gordon Wittenmeyer claims a lot of the Cubs behavior can be explained by the high debt service costs that resulted from their purchase by the Ricketts family. Maybe that is true, but many sports franchises have been able to reconcile their business imperatives with building a successful product.
Their continuing act of crying poor and cutting costs is getting a little old to most fans, at least to this fan. Lets face it, these guys are going to reap another windfall when they renew or renegotiate their media contracts. It is about time they start thinking about fielding a winning team.
About which more in a subsequent post.
No comments:
Post a Comment