It is currently Tue Nov 26, 2024 5:37 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Wrigley Field rooftop owners filed a legal brushback pitch of sorts yesterday in the continuing battle over expanded signage at the ballpark, suing a noted Chicago sports consultant for alleged defamation.

In an action filed in Cook County Circuit Court, 17 owners of rooftop clubs adjoining Wrigley allege that Marc Ganis made false statements in a January 2013 Sun-Times story as saying the rooftop owners are Stealing the product.

This is what they get for having a simpleton bar owner "Mary Murphy" be the spokesperson for this group.

These people went from being somewhat likeable to a group you want to see go away.

I guess when you are mortgaged to the hilt you do what you can to survive.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
holy shit, I fucking hate the non baseball side of all this fuckery


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38695
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Its amazing they even have a seat at the table in these proceedings. What a clusterfuck.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:29 am
Posts: 8116
Location: South Elgin
pizza_Place: Ian's Pizza
badrogue17 wrote:
Its amazing they even have a seat at the table in these proceedings. What a clusterfuck.


That is sort of the Cubs fault, though. They have a contract with them to get revenue out of the Rooftop Owners. Gives the rooftops certain rights.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Bucky Chris wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
Its amazing they even have a seat at the table in these proceedings. What a clusterfuck.


That is sort of the Cubs fault, though. They have a contract with them to get revenue out of the Rooftop Owners. Gives the rooftops certain rights.

Specifically, Crane Kenney's fault IIRC


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
I get Groupon and Living Social e-mails everyday and a few of these guys are on there with a bunch of dates. Do they depend on corporate outings and party events as their basis of revenue and then try to fill in with single game tickets for fans? I wonder how much the just the team sucking has hurt them financially? Not much?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 4:29 pm
Posts: 38695
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
Bucky Chris wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
Its amazing they even have a seat at the table in these proceedings. What a clusterfuck.


That is sort of the Cubs fault, though. They have a contract with them to get revenue out of the Rooftop Owners. Gives the rooftops certain rights.

Specifically, Crane Kenney's fault IIRC

They should've not got into bed with the owners in the first place. Very short sighted.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 9:07 pm
Posts: 3705
Just asking...

10 years in the business world is not a long time at all. Doesn't current agreement/contract with the rooftop owners expire in 10 or 11 years?? Now, given all the recent "approvals" that the Cubs have received from the city....doesn't that put the Cubs in a better position of power with each passing year? Fast forward 10 years from now....what then?? Could the Cubs potentially "completely" block the views?? I don't know.

I think I've read that rooftop owners are looking for extensions to their current deal....and I don't blame them. They are probably worried about 10,11, 12 years and beyond.

I realize 10 years is 10 years...and fans and cubs want "stuff" done yesterday....but from a pure business to business stare down.....10 years isn't shit.

Quick comment - this all what is sooo frustrating about chicago. Soldier Field, Wrigley Field...etc...a city with wealth and potential and its all so "broken" a majority of the time with politics and power and general BS! It's a great city despite itself sometimes.

_________________
Proud to be UNVERIFIED.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
I guess if the previous ownership had really smart lawyers that rooftop agreement would have had outs for ownership change or renovations etc.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:29 am
Posts: 8116
Location: South Elgin
pizza_Place: Ian's Pizza
badrogue17 wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Bucky Chris wrote:
badrogue17 wrote:
Its amazing they even have a seat at the table in these proceedings. What a clusterfuck.


That is sort of the Cubs fault, though. They have a contract with them to get revenue out of the Rooftop Owners. Gives the rooftops certain rights.

Specifically, Crane Kenney's fault IIRC

They should've not got into bed with the owners in the first place. Very short sighted.


I think they should have, they just didn't construct the contracts in their favor. Remember, they hung those black tarps as a negotiating tactic... so that kind of made them look bad. They definitely wanted an agreement, but my feeling (without having all the details of course), is they just didn't do the agreement right.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 9:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
walkrman5 wrote:
Just asking...

10 years in the business world is not a long time at all. Doesn't current agreement/contract with the rooftop owners expire in 10 or 11 years?? Now, given all the recent "approvals" that the Cubs have received from the city....doesn't that put the Cubs in a better position of power with each passing year? Fast forward 10 years from now....what then?? Could the Cubs potentially "completely" block the views?? I don't know.

I think I've read that rooftop owners are looking for extensions to their current deal....and I don't blame them. They are probably worried about 10,11, 12 years and beyond.

I realize 10 years is 10 years...and fans and cubs want "stuff" done yesterday....but from a pure business to business stare down.....10 years isn't shit.

Quick comment - this all what is sooo frustrating about chicago. Soldier Field, Wrigley Field...etc...a city with wealth and potential and its all so "broken" a majority of the time with politics and power and general BS! It's a great city despite itself sometimes.


Actually, I thought it was a 3 year agreement with some Crane Kenny spineless legal language about willing to discuss future deals.

Ricketts should have cleaned house when he "CLEANED HOUSE"

Could have kept the real backroom accountants to help a new CFO do the right thing.

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 10:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:02 pm
Posts: 11735
pizza_Place: Angelo's Pizza in Downers Grove
Why don't the Cubs just buy them all out? Take their Tanaka money and buy all of the buildings, then turn them into some sort of Cubs luxury box bullshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
I have often wondered that.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43572
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Why don't the Cubs just buy them all out? Take their Tanaka money and buy all of the buildings, then turn them into some sort of Cubs luxury box bullshit.

Make them hotels.

MONETIZE EVERYTHING!!

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Why don't the Cubs just buy them all out? Take their Tanaka money and buy all of the buildings, then turn them into some sort of Cubs luxury box bullshit.

Why would the rooftop owners sell?


They have a product that is going to be around as long as the Cubs play there. Similar to the NBA TV deal, they have no reason to sell.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40650
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Rahm can use eminent domain in some perverted way. He is the boss. :lol:

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 4:54 am
Posts: 22704
pizza_Place: A few...
Dear Rooftop Owners,

STFU.

Sincerely,

Everyone


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Quote:
A rooftop club beyond Wrigley Field's left-field pole has gone up for sale, even as a dispute between the rooftop owners and the Chicago Cubs remains in extra innings.

Aidan Dunican, who operates Wrigley View Rooftop Inc. at 1050 W. Waveland Ave., confirmed he hired Conlon Commercial to seek a buyer. Listed without an asking price, the three-story building includes three leased apartments topped by a rooftop bar, mezzanine, bleachers and rooftop deck with room for 220 customers, according to Chicago-based Conlon Commercial.

It is the first rooftop put up for sale since 2011 and comes at a time of uncertainty for the 16-property Wrigleyville Rooftops Association, a group that includes Wrigley View.

The association is engaged in a protracted battle with Cubs owner Tom Ricketts regarding the baseball team's plans for a $500 million redevelopment of the ballpark and neighborhood.

The dispute with the rooftops hinges on the Ricketts family's plans for a video board in left field and an advertising sign in right field, which the rooftop group maintains will block their customers' views of games. Rooftop owners have threatened to sue, saying blocked views would violate an agreement in which rooftop clubs share 17 percent of their revenue with the Cubs. The agreement runs through 2023.

Despite the often-heated public battle, Mr. Ricketts will be approached as a potential buyer, said Marcus Cook, a managing director at Conlon Commercial.

“We'd certainly welcome an offer from the Ricketts family,” Mr. Cook said. “They're no strangers to real estate.”

A spokesman for Mr. Ricketts said he is not interested in owning the building and described talks with the rooftop owners as ongoing. He declined to comment further.

Unless a resolution is imminent, the dispute is likely to give pause to potential buyers, said apartment investment sales broker Lee Kiser, principal at Chicago-based Kiser Group, who is not involved in the deal.

“All of the questions in the market about the interaction with the Rickettses adds a risk factor that will have an impact on the value,” Mr. Kiser said.

Mr. Dunican, who has owned the property since the 1990s and built the current structure there in 2001, did not explain his timing or specify a target sale price. “It's a business decision. I just want to move on,” he said.

Bids will be accepted until March 14, Mr. Cook said.

“The seller is confident they'll reach an agreement with the Cubs that will have a positive impact on the value of the building,” Mr. Cook said.

Wrigley View is the westernmost building of the Waveland rooftops, next door to the Chicago Fire Department's Engine 78 firehouse.

It is believed to be the first Wrigley rooftop formally placed on the for-sale market since the Lakeview Baseball Club, 3633 N. Sheffield Ave., sold out of bankruptcy for $4.8 million in early 2012.

The pricing of any rooftop building is difficult for traditional real estate investors to gauge, Mr. Kiser said.

“The value is determined much more by the concessions operations than the real estate,” he said.

The rooftop association's members paid the Cubs $3.5 million in 2011, meaning their total revenue for that season was just over $20 million. More current numbers were not available from a spokesman for the association, who declined to comment on the 1050 W. Waveland listing.

Revenue likely was down in 2013, when Wrigley's attendance fell to its lowest point since 1998. But offseason concerts from the likes of Pearl Jam, Paul McCartney, Billy Joel, Elton John, Jimmy Buffett and the Dave Matthews Band have continued to bolster revenue in recent years, Mr. Cook said.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16489
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
"Rooftop owners have threatened to sue, saying blocked views would violate an agreement in which rooftop clubs share 17 percent of their revenue with the Cubs."

This is what I don't get...the agreement must contain more language than simply stating that the rooftops give 17% of the revenue to the Cubs. The 17% is not the issue, as the Cubs would be more than willing to receive 17% of zero if it meant they could make changes to their own product. Either the Cubs lawyers got totally schooled, or Ricketts is using the agreement as a smokescreen.

rogers park bryan wrote:
Why would the rooftop owners sell?

They have a product that is going to be around as long as the Cubs play there. Similar to the NBA TV deal, they have no reason to sell.


The owners of the Spirits of St. Louis stood to collect in perpetuity no matter which teams existed or where they played. The rooftop owners would cease to collect any revenue if the Cubs played in Schaumburg (unless the Cubs lawyers REALLY fucked up :lol: )

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Jaw Breaker wrote:
"Rooftop owners have threatened to sue, saying blocked views would violate an agreement in which rooftop clubs share 17 percent of their revenue with the Cubs."

This is what I don't get...the agreement must contain more language than simply stating that the rooftops give 17% of the revenue to the Cubs. The 17% is not the issue, as the Cubs would be more than willing to receive 17% of zero if it meant they could make changes to their own product. Either the Cubs lawyers got totally schooled, or Ricketts is using the agreement as a smokescreen.

rogers park bryan wrote:
Why would the rooftop owners sell?

They have a product that is going to be around as long as the Cubs play there. Similar to the NBA TV deal, they have no reason to sell.


The owners of the Spirits of St. Louis stood to collect in perpetuity no matter which teams existed or where they played. The rooftop owners would cease to collect any revenue if the Cubs played in Schaumburg (unless the Cubs lawyers REALLY fucked up :lol: )

Well then I guess the owner having a fetish for Wrigley as it currently stands really fucked that up


I dont think the owners see moving as a realistic option


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:24 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB

Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:29 pm
Posts: 4614
rogers park bryan wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Why don't the Cubs just buy them all out? Take their Tanaka money and buy all of the buildings, then turn them into some sort of Cubs luxury box bullshit.

Why would the rooftop owners sell?


They have a product that is going to be around as long as the Cubs play there. Similar to the NBA TV deal, they have no reason to sell.

So wrong, yet you continue to throw out uninformed bullshit. Please keep it up, it is funny.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Posts: 40983
Location: Chicago
pizza_Place: Lou Malanati's
Score is doomed wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Big Chicagoan wrote:
Why don't the Cubs just buy them all out? Take their Tanaka money and buy all of the buildings, then turn them into some sort of Cubs luxury box bullshit.

Why would the rooftop owners sell?


They have a product that is going to be around as long as the Cubs play there. Similar to the NBA TV deal, they have no reason to sell.

So wrong, yet you continue to throw out uninformed bullshit. Please keep it up, it is funny.


Mr. La MUsica De WSCR

_________________
"That's what the internet is for. Slandering others anonymously." Banky
“Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey ‘He said for you to give me your fuckin’ share.’”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 55959
pizza_Place: Barstool One Bite Frozen
I think it would be great if the Cubs bought the rooftops. Then they wouldn't have to block them. They'd own their luxury suites, they could use the buildings for office space, it would be a great solution. But I can't believe that so many people are blindly supporting the Cubs, as if they have the right to block the views with billboards and jumbotrons, as if they not only can do this but must. I just can't understand why people want to be overwhelmed with advertisements, why they'd want Wrigley Field to be made ugly. They need it to win! And when they lose?

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:51 pm 
When you get pinned into a corner, just go to the other thread on the same topic. CuriousChas ladies and gentleman. You're now added to the list of people who never gets to bitch at me for not answering a question.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Thu Jan 23, 2014 9:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65770
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
This just seems awfully shortsighted by the rooftop owners.
Their contract will be worth dogs hit in 8 years when this contract is up and with the way they're going about things the cubs will not work with them ever again and goodbye rooftop business

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ROOFTOP OWNERS
PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2014 7:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:10 pm
Posts: 32067
pizza_Place: Milano's
Baby McNown wrote:
You're now added to the list of people who never gets to bitch at me for not answering a question.




just an observation
i have no horse in this race
but it seems like 3/4 of Baby McNown posts are about someone not answering a question
seriously


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group