Wrigley rooftop owners seek restraining order to halt new Cubs scoreboard

Toggle sidebar
Claude Greiner said:
Lets face it, the Cubs suck. They haven't won a World Series in 108 years.

The only reason why people love the Cubs is because of Wrigley Field.

The White Sux made the mistake of tearing down Cominsky park and building that piece of garbage they call US cellular field.

Everyone loves the Cubs, but build then a fancy new stadium and they are just a loosing team.

My feeling is that the Rickets family wants a new stadium, but can't tear down Wrigley field so they are just rebuilding it piece by piece so nobody notices. Notice the bleachers got torn down and replaced. I don't see nobody crying that they just tore down 99 year old bleachers.

Tear down Wrigley or even Fenway park your going to have an outrage to deal with nationwide.

As far as the roof top owners, they are leaches. They need to understand they are nothing without the Cubs.

If this thing goes to court, they can't win. The Cubs have more money, and will just drag it out until the roof top owners agree to sell out.

But I can see the issue with Ticket prices. You got these roof top guys undercutting ticket prices, and then making revenue off food and beer sales.

You got the roof top guys lowering their ticket prices just to get people in the door to buy food and drinks.

Meanwhile they are in competition with the bleacher ticket sales.

Do the math there are 16 roof top bars. If each one of them sells 150 tickets each game that's like 2000 tickets Wrigley field is not selling per game.

Project that out over 81 games and figure an average of $50 revenue per person, it adds up to some serious money.

If your lowering the value of the ticket just to get people in the door, because after all it's all pure profit for these guys, your taking away a potential customer who would have gone to Wrigley instead
Click to expand...

Wait a minute ... these rooftop guys are Not selling Cubs tickets ... the Cubs don't get anything from them ....
This is just a business that boomed because of location to ballpark.

I had No idea that there were that many bars and seats up there.

Your right, the Roof toppers have no chance to win a lawsuit, they are probably lucky that the Cubs offered the original commitment to them.

These roof tops must be huge.

Has anyone been to these rooftops, can you actually see the game and follow it, or is it just the atmosphere like many other locations, including being In Wrigley ?

I could barely see the game sitting in the Red seats at Riverfront, needed seatbelts for the seats.
 
cosmo_kramer said:
It's physically impossible to play baseball in a 'football-only' stadium like Soldier Field.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Thank you. I did not know it was a "pig ball" only place. Kinda cuts down on options.

Speaking of options, can the Cubs move to another city entirety? Requires Commission permission? And other hurdles?
 
"...Your right, the Roof toppers have no chance to win a lawsuit, they are probably lucky that the Cubs offered the original commitment to them..."

Why did the Cubs agree to such a thing in the first place?
 
Cubs should move to a better area of Chicago and build an updated version of Wrigley .... unfortunately that would probably remove the lake being right there and change the way the game is played due to the air current change.

Here's wondering if there is land close available that could expand the Wrigley villa experience instead of moving elsewhere.

Some of these teams were able to build next door or across the street.
 
According to the Tribune article, Cubs ownership has already purchased 2 of the rooftop properties and is looking to buy more. That's probably their best option at this point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
navychop said:
Can't get to the article via the link. Goes to "front page" and an overlay asking to register or subscribe. Clicking a story link does the same.
Click to expand...
Strange,because I got to read it without having to go through hoops,but I used Google Chrome with cookie & tracking blocks enacted. Just now on my Kindle Fire I got the notices that you were talking about. Basically it was a pretty long article & the important gist of the article was that the Cubs owner was basically buying up the businesses surrounding Wrigley Field,INCLUDING the roof top clubs,& he was going to incorporate them all into part of the Wrigley Field upgrades. He was buying out owners & picking up the mortgages from the banks on rooftop businesses in foreclosure. These last two apparently are the last two holdouts,& if he can't buy them out,he's going to block their view with the scoreboard & signage until they do sale their property to him. His total ownership of the rooftop properties will be in his name,& any money made by them WILL NOT be subject to(my mind is blank on the exact wording or definition of this right now) redistribution to other mlb teams via the MLB. I cannot think of the official term for that,the NFL does the same thing.
 
Jimbo said:
Cubs should move to a better area of Chicago and build an updated version of Wrigley .... unfortunately that would probably remove the lake being right there and change the way the game is played due to the air current change.

Here's wondering if there is land close available that could expand the Wrigley villa experience instead of moving elsewhere.

Some of these teams were able to build next door or across the street.
Click to expand...
From what I've read in that article I posted,that now seems to have a pay block on it,Cubs ownership have heavily invested in the neighborhood to make it part of the upgrades for Wrigley Field,that includes total ownership of all the rooftop club seats. They are modeling their upgrade plans on what the Red Sox did with Fenway Park & surrounding area,& what the Cardinals did with the area surrounding New Busch Stadium.
 
Revenue sharing,that's the word I was looking for. If the Cubs owner can buy out all of the rooftop clubs,the money made by them will go directly to him & not be subject to revenue sharing with the MLB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimbo
Here are the websites of the two rooftop clubs suing the Cubs over the scoreboard blocking their view. This will give you an idea just how sophisticated those rooftop clubs are.
Skybox on Sheffield
http://www.skyboxonsheffield.com/

2015_0126_5264_1924.png


Lakeview Baseball Club
http://www.lakeviewbaseballclub.com/Menu

2015_0120_5263_1845.jpeg
 
I'll admit,after reading that (paywall blocked) article,I've cooled my jets on the Cubs moving their team out of Wrigley as a punitive measure against the roof top owners. It obviously would be cheaper for the Cubs to remain where they are,especially with their plans for the neighborhood. It would probably cost them twice as much(over a billion dollars) to build from scratch what they are trying to do with Wrigley Field & surrounding areas. They also have their work cut out for them as far as buying up all of the roof top clubs,besides these two hold outs suing them.
wrigley-outline.jpg


The important part of this picture are the 3 red dots,those are the properties that the Cubs owner owns right now. the X's mean that there is nothing there. He has 12 more properties to buy up.
 
royrdsjr said:
Revenue sharing,that's the word I was looking for. If the Cubs owner can buy out all of the rooftop clubs,the money made by them will go directly to him & not be subject to revenue sharing with the MLB.
Click to expand...
I'm confused. Isn't his goal of buying those rooftop properties to be able to do whatever renovations he wants, without worry of litigation? If he's successful, blocking the views will essentially shut down the rooftop businesses, but Cubs ownership won't care because they're not buying them to make any revenue from them.
 
It's all about control. They want to control all the seating to their games and they want complete control over the ticket prices.

The score boards are not necessary but rather to put the roof top clubs out of business.

Most of the roof top places probably have huge mortgages or loans out on the property. Take 1 season with no revenue it will put these guys in the red and they will have no choice but to sell
 
Claude Greiner said:
It's all about control. They want to control all the seating to their games and they want complete control over the ticket prices.

The score boards are not necessary but rather to put the roof top clubs out of business.

Most of the roof top places probably have huge mortgages or loans out on the property. Take 1 season with no revenue it will put these guys in the red and they will have no choice but to sell
Click to expand...
You are aware that the Cubs have a contract with the rooftop owners, correct?? The Cubs are receiving revenues from the rooftop owners and there are stipulations in the contract regarding expansion of the ballpark, and the damages they could receive if they win a lawsuit. Simply putting them OOB may not be the best solution...

http://www.csnchicago.com/cubs/kaplan-key-points-cubs-wrigley-field-rooftop-contract
 
cosmo_kramer said:
You are aware that the Cubs have a contract with the rooftop owners, correct?? The Cubs are receiving revenues from the rooftop owners and there are stipulations in the contract regarding expansion of the ballpark, and the damages they could receive if they win a lawsuit. Simply putting them OOB may not be the best solution...

http://www.csnchicago.com/cubs/kaplan-key-points-cubs-wrigley-field-rooftop-contract
Click to expand...

I'm aware of the contract. Just like the contract I had with Dish.

How much money do you want to spend to enforce the terms and conditions of the contract?
 
Why do you think these guys are asking for an injunction to prevent the score boards from going up?

The score boards go up, these roof top owners can't sell Tickets, they got bills to pay every month and there will be no money to pay an attorney to fight it.

These owners can't afford to loose revenue from a single game.

The roof top people have been a tolerated annoyance from when the stadium was built. It's at the point right now where the Cubs are at a point to fight it.
 
The Cubs can pay back 50% of the royalties and be done with them? Sounds cheap.

Loser pays. How confident are the rooftop owners?

Why do the Cubs owe them a livelihood like this, absent the contract? They don't.
 
cosmo_kramer said:
You are aware that the Cubs have a contract with the rooftop owners, correct?? The Cubs are receiving revenues from the rooftop owners and there are stipulations in the contract regarding expansion of the ballpark, and the damages they could receive if they win a lawsuit. Simply putting them OOB may not be the best solution...

http://www.csnchicago.com/cubs/kaplan-key-points-cubs-wrigley-field-rooftop-contract
Click to expand...
Well, this is more good info ...
I didn't kn ow that the Cubs were already making a profit from the rooftop seating ....
With that in mind, the Cubs probably are more willing to lean a bit to make both sides happy.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Share this page

Share this page
Top