Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic

I don't think I am stirring the pot, just putting some light on the pot. Reinsdorf is stirring the pot.

While every owner uses the same case of 'We supply jobs" to an area, so do many other businesses and most of them dont get new buildings built. They get tax breaks and incentives, but they dont get new buildings built and then leased back to them so the business is not responsible for even a lightbulb! and get ongoing capital improvements on the State $$$$

However, my favorite part of all this is that Reinsdorf tried to buy the Phoenix Coyotes this summer and he asked for the City to build him a $184 million stadium! lol

And to use the Reinsdorf logic, the teams are not paying for it, it's the fans who are paying for the tickets.

This might be good enough for my first WHO YA CRAPPIN

Jerry gets shit for threatning to up and move the Sox to Florida if he didn't get a new stadium.

Yet the Cubs threaten to do the same for thier spring training home and nobody says a word.

If MLB imposed a $1 surcharge on every ticket in order to pay for the new Yankees Stadium would the Cubs support it? I doubt it.

If it can be successfully argued that the Cubs' presence in the Phoenix 'burbs through the month of March is so important to the other Cactus League teams that their revenues would drop precipitously without them, then maybe the surcharge can be justified.

Curious Hair wrote:

If that is true why not just put a larger surcharge on the Cubs games? If the entire league only survives because of this that only makes sense. The revenue has to be so small from the other teams in the league because of the above argument that it's stupid to charge everyone. Why charge the 2% of everyone else when we could just charge the Cubs fans who obviously make up 98% of total tickets sold in the Cactus League?

The illustrious Crane Kenny has said because HoHoKam is lacking, Cubs fans will go to the other facilities (Goodyear, Glendale, etc.) and watch the Cubs play. Following that line of thinking, if just the Cubs/Mesa charged the surcharge, no one would pay it and just go to the Cubs road ST games.

I believe each team is allowed to completely keep their entire gate in Spring Training, unlike in MLB.

Jerry has Cubs envy.

mel junior wrote:

Plane Ticket: ok
Rental Car: ok
Tickets to 5 exhibition games: ok
$10 surcharge total on those 5 games: F%@# THAT! I'm going to Glendale!
:lol:

Plane Ticket: ok
Rental Car: ok
Tickets to 5 exhibition games: ok
$10 surcharge total on those 5 games: F%@# THAT! I'm going to Glendale!
:lol:

The White Sox are an unerring model organization.

Scorehead wrote:

Jerry has Cubs envy.

Does this mean that Jerry wants to go 100+ years without a championship,spend money like a drunken sailor, sell beer to underage frat boys? Not sure what's to envy here.

No Jerry prefers to go 87 years without a title..

Yes the white sox are less pathetic than the cubs.

They are still pathetic.

rogers park bryan wrote:

No Jerry prefers to go 87 years without a title..

Yes the white sox are less pathetic than the cubs.

They are still pathetic.

I wasn't aware Jerry has owned the Sox for 87 years.

And if it wasn't for Wrigley Field, the Cubs would be on par with the Nationals or Pirates.

And you blame Jerry for 87 years? He is a part of that, not all of that.

Division title in 2000, 2005, and 2008.
World Series in 2005
The only teams that had a better overall record than the Sox in the 1990s were the Braves and Yankees.

Sure, not much in the way of Titles over the last 80 years, but you certainly cannot say that this team has been a pushover under Reinsdorf.

And the biggest difference about the World Series drought is that the White Sox was 87 years. The Cubs are 101 years and still counting. One streak is still current and one was ended.

Yes the streak ended but still overall they win very few championships. Again, forget the cubs, just look at the white sox as an MLB team and tell me they are a successful franchise.

Author:	bigfan [ Fri Feb 05, 2010 10:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Anti Cubs Jerry
I only heard THE KING report the story, so correct my misunderstanding. 1. The City of Mesa is going to spend $84 million to build the Cubs a new training complex. 2. They will do this by tagging an entertainment tax on all other spring training tickets sold? 3. Jerry R. has oppossed a city implementing entertainment taxes to build a new facility for a team? Any Sox fans see the Irony here?

Author:	suckers playground [ Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:06 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Yeah, it's totally ridiculous, though I think you're just stirring shit up with the thread title. I like the opposition from a meatball Die Sax White Fan perspective, but in reality the Cubs fans fill up the stadiums down there in AZ and it only makes sense to levy a tax if the municipality's going to be on the hook for construction. From what I've read, there's been a bit of controversy over the fact that other entertainments (primarily lodging) have seen taxes go up in order to fund other parks on opposite or adjacent parts of town. One thing I wonder, though, is why do major league teams continue to ask for public funds to build stadiums?

Author:	Drop In [ Fri Feb 05, 2010 11:13 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
One thing I wonder, though, is why do major league teams continue to ask for public funds to build stadiums?[/quote] YES, THIS! I guess the answer in this case would be Florida would pony up if Mesa didn't. Much like many things in life, these business models need to be changed.

Author:	bigfan [ Sat Feb 06, 2010 9:25 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
I don't think I am stirring the pot, just putting some light on the pot. Reinsdorf is stirring the pot. While every owner uses the same case of 'We supply jobs" to an area, so do many other businesses and most of them dont get new buildings built. They get tax breaks and incentives, but they dont get new buildings built and then leased back to them so the business is not responsible for even a lightbulb! and get ongoing capital improvements on the State $$$$ However, my favorite part of all this is that Reinsdorf tried to buy the Phoenix Coyotes this summer and he asked for the City to build him a $184 million stadium! lol And to use the Reinsdorf logic, the teams are not paying for it, it's the fans who are paying for the tickets. This might be good enough for my first WHO YA CRAPPIN

Author:	Aggravated Sox Fan Bob [ Sat Feb 06, 2010 11:44 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
bigfan wrote: I don't think I am stirring the pot, just putting some light on the pot. Reinsdorf is stirring the pot. While every owner uses the same case of 'We supply jobs" to an area, so do many other businesses and most of them dont get new buildings built. They get tax breaks and incentives, but they dont get new buildings built and then leased back to them so the business is not responsible for even a lightbulb! and get ongoing capital improvements on the State $$$$ However, my favorite part of all this is that Reinsdorf tried to buy the Phoenix Coyotes this summer and he asked for the City to build him a $184 million stadium! lol And to use the Reinsdorf logic, the teams are not paying for it, it's the fans who are paying for the tickets. This might be good enough for my first WHO YA CRAPPIN This Reinsdorf is concerned with just about anything but the damned performance of the White Sox on the field....He is a financial one way street...all about him.... Does he really think he is benefitting Sox fans who would go to a game in Glendale NOT GIVING A DAMN about an extra few cents paid in a tax to rebuild a ballpark the Cubs use? He ought to concern himself with his season ticket base HERE....his Farm system or lack thereof HERE....His awful miserly image HERE....his baseball operation HERE.....THE TAXPAYERS OWE JERRY REINSDORF NOT ONE MORE CENT IN ANY STATE OR NATION!!!! Christ.....he has the State of Illinois build him a Stadium where HE fucked up the design himself and he beefs about the Cubs Spring Training place in Mesa? What a petty two faced prick who doesn't own a mirror.

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Anti Cubs Jerry https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=42627	Page 1 of 2

Author:	Curious Hair [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:41 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
People make it sound like the presence of the Cubs subsidizes the entire Cactus League. Maybe the surcharge should only apply to Cubs games. I don't really think it's fair for Cubs stadium funding to come from a White Sox-Royals tilt in Glendale. I'd have more support for Reinsdorf here--which is saying something, because I loathe Reinsdorf--if he hadn't tried to buy the Phoenix Coyotes with no money down and taxpayer assistance.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:48 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
If MLB imposed a $1 surcharge on every ticket in order to pay for the new Yankees Stadium would the Cubs support it? I doubt it.

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Jerry gets shit for threatning to up and move the Sox to Florida if he didn't get a new stadium. Yet the Cubs threaten to do the same for thier spring training home and nobody says a word.

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Frank Coztansa wrote: Jerry gets shit for threatning to up and move the Sox to Florida if he didn't get a new stadium. Yet the Cubs threaten to do the same for thier spring training home and nobody says a word. Not really the same thing.

Author:	mel junior [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:12 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Boilermaker Rick wrote: If MLB imposed a $1 surcharge on every ticket in order to pay for the new Yankees Stadium would the Cubs support it? I doubt it. This.

Author:	Curious Hair [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
That's operating under the premise that a new Yankee Stadium was necessary to keep attendance up throughout not just the American League but both major leagues, which it wasn't. If it can be successfully argued that the Cubs' presence in the Phoenix 'burbs through the month of March is so important to the other Cactus League teams that their revenues would drop precipitously without them, then maybe the surcharge can be justified. I don't know how spring training revenue works, if it's shared or what, but from spring training and regular season Diamondbacks home games, one gets the impression that the Cubs are a pretty big deal in Arizona, with more transplants and tourists than any other team doing spring training out there. The difference between threatening to move preseason exhibition games to Florida and threatening to move the White Sox themselves to St. Petersburg is as wide as a canyon and you're insulting our intelligence by positing that they're remotely similar. Congratulations, in a roundabout way you've defended Jerry Reinsdorf hypothetically stuffing the White Sox in Tropicana Field just to make a "Cubs suck" point.

Author:	Brick [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:15 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Curious Hair wrote: If it can be successfully argued that the Cubs' presence in the Phoenix 'burbs through the month of March is so important to the other Cactus League teams that their revenues would drop precipitously without them, then maybe the surcharge can be justified. If that is true why not just put a larger surcharge on the Cubs games? If the entire league only survives because of this that only makes sense. The revenue has to be so small from the other teams in the league because of the above argument that it's stupid to charge everyone. Why charge the 2% of everyone else when we could just charge the Cubs fans who obviously make up 98% of total tickets sold in the Cactus League?

Author:	mel junior [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:21 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Curious Hair wrote: If it can be successfully argued that the Cubs' presence in the Phoenix 'burbs through the month of March is so important to the other Cactus League teams that their revenues would drop precipitously without them, then maybe the surcharge can be justified. If that is true why not just put a larger surcharge on the Cubs games? If the entire league only survives because of this that only makes sense. The revenue has to be so small from the other teams in the league because of the above argument that it's stupid to charge everyone. Why charge the 2% of everyone else when we could just charge the Cubs fans who obviously make up 98% of total tickets sold in the Cactus League? The illustrious Crane Kenny has said because HoHoKam is lacking, Cubs fans are just going to other facilities (Goodyear, Glendale, etc.) and watch the Cubs play. Following that line of thinking, if just the Cubs/Mesa charged the surcharge, no one would pay it and just go to the Cubs road ST games. I believe each team is allowed to completely keep their entire gate in Spring Training, unlike in MLB.

Author:	Curious Hair [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:23 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
That's probably what I would do. The current situation is a bit of a reach to me, but a tenuous argument can still be made for contributions from other teams. After all, people go to Cubs "road games" throughout metro Phoenix, too. It's not just Mesa.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Brick [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:25 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
mel junior wrote: The illustrious Crane Kenny has said because HoHoKam is lacking, Cubs fans will go to the other facilities (Goodyear, Glendale, etc.) and watch the Cubs play. Following that line of thinking, if just the Cubs/Mesa charged the surcharge, no one would pay it and just go to the Cubs road ST games. I believe each team is allowed to completely keep their entire gate in Spring Training, unlike in MLB. Plane Ticket: ok Rental Car: ok Tickets to 5 exhibition games: ok $10 surcharge total on those 5 games: F%@# THAT! I'm going to Glendale!

Author:	Scorehead [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Jerry has Cubs envy.

Author:	Chilli Palmer [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:14 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Scorehead wrote: Jerry has Cubs envy. Does this mean that Jerry wants to go 100+ years without a championship,spend money like a drunken sailor, sell beer to underage frat boys? Not sure what's to envy here.

Author:	Curious Hair [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:55 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
The White Sox are an unerring model organization and I love Jerry Reinsdorf like he is my uncle.

Author:	suckers playground [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:00 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Boilermaker Rick wrote: mel junior wrote: The illustrious Crane Kenny has said because HoHoKam is lacking, Cubs fans will go to the other facilities (Goodyear, Glendale, etc.) and watch the Cubs play. Following that line of thinking, if just the Cubs/Mesa charged the surcharge, no one would pay it and just go to the Cubs road ST games. I believe each team is allowed to completely keep their entire gate in Spring Training, unlike in MLB. Plane Ticket: ok Rental Car: ok Tickets to 5 exhibition games: ok $10 surcharge total on those 5 games: F%@# THAT! I'm going to Glendale! True enough

Author:	Regular Reader [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Plane Ticket: ok Rental Car: ok Tickets to 5 exhibition games: ok $10 surcharge total on those 5 games: F%@# THAT! I'm going to Glendale! What's next to come from your accursed lips Mr. Andersen? That the Emperor has no clothes???

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:11 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Curious Hair wrote: The White Sox are an unerring model organization. That is correct. They win a world series at least once every 90 years.

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 9:18 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
rogers park bryan wrote: No Jerry prefers to go 87 years without a title.. Yes the white sox are less pathetic than the cubs. They are still pathetic. I wasn't aware Jerry has owned the Sox for 87 years. And if it wasn't for Wrigley Field, the Cubs would be on par with the Nationals or Pirates.

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:10 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
Division title in 2000, 2005, and 2008. World Series in 2005 The only teams that had a better overall record than the Sox in the 1990s were the Braves and Yankees. Sure, not much in the way of Titles over the last 80 years, but you certainly cannot say that this team has been a pushover under Reinsdorf. And the biggest difference about the World Series drought is that the White Sox was 87 years. The Cubs are 101 years and still counting. One streak is still current and one was ended.

Author:	Regular Reader [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Anti Cubs Jerry
rogers park bryan wrote: Yes the streak ended but still overall they win very few championships. Again, forget the cubs, just look at the white sox as an MLB team and tell me they are a successful franchise. Aside from the last 6 years for the BoSox & perhaps the Cardinals, does baseball really HAVE a successful franchise(on the field) other than the Yankees?