Stadium/Arena Saga Omnibus

[BBTV]

41 minutes ago, FrutigerAero said:

SLC has no problem with corporate sponsors... some that come to mind are Delta and Vivint.  Lots of tech money there. Adobe, Discover out there to.  Small market yes but what are we asking for here?  A 'big market' like the Bay Area?  Or any of the cities in FL?  Look how that's working out...

 

Amazing how people will defend Oakland as if they deserve to keep their baseball team while a team with similar success would be selling out all season long in Salt Lake City.  Utah grew 20% in the last decade.  Youngest state in the US (demographic MLB supposedly cares about).  Sport-obsessed state... literally women's soccer and gymnastics sell out there folks.  And a sports-obsessed state with a hole in the summer.  Football hasn't started yet, basketball is over.  It's a good option.

 

 

Thanks for the laugh.  "Selling out all season long in SLC"?  You're telling me that a small-ass place like SLC is going to sell out 81 games a year?  Games where they'll sell that low-alcohol beer?  Getting to games isn't exactly convenient in a place as sparse and sprawling as the SLC area, and... 81 games.

 

It's a complete joke.It will never happen.  If you'll excuse me, I'm gong to half for a few minutes.

[Sec19Row53]

10 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

Thanks for the laugh.  "Selling out all season long in SLC"?  You're telling me that a small-ass place like SLC is going to sell out 81 games a year?  Games where they'll sell that low-alcohol beer?  Getting to games isn't exactly convenient in a place as sparse and sprawling as the SLC area, and... 81 games.

 

It's a complete joke.It will never happen.  If you'll excuse me, I'm gong to half for a few minutes.

This should be the new 'I'm in phone'

[LMU]

17 minutes ago, BBTV said:

 

Thanks for the laugh.  "Selling out all season long in SLC"?  You're telling me that a small-ass place like SLC is going to sell out 81 games a year?  Games where they'll sell that low-alcohol beer?  Getting to games isn't exactly convenient in a place as sparse and sprawling as the SLC area, and... 81 games.

 

It's a complete joke.It will never happen.  If you'll excuse me, I'm gong to half for a few minutes.

 

6 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

This should be the new 'I'm in phone'

[infrared41]

1 hour ago, BBTV said:

 

Thanks for the laugh.  "Selling out all season long in SLC"?  You're telling me that a small-ass place like SLC is going to sell out 81 games a year?  Games where they'll sell that low-alcohol beer?  Getting to games isn't exactly convenient in a place as sparse and sprawling as the SLC area, and... 81 games.

 

It's a complete joke.It will never happen.  If you'll excuse me, I'm gong to half for a few minutes.

 

Not to mention, it's all hot in Salt Lake City in the summer. Best I can tell, there are no plans for a dome for the new Mormon Municipal Temple Field.

[FiddySicks]

5 hours ago, FrutigerAero said:

SLC has no problem with corporate sponsors... some that come to mind are Delta and Vivint.  Lots of tech money there. Adobe, Discover out there to.  Small market yes but what are we asking for here?  A 'big market' like the Bay Area?  Or any of the cities in FL?  Look how that's working out...

 

Amazing how people will defend Oakland as if they deserve to keep their baseball team while a team with similar success would be selling out all season long in Salt Lake City.  Utah grew 20% in the last decade.  Youngest state in the US (demographic MLB supposedly cares about).  Sport-obsessed state... literally women's soccer and gymnastics sell out there folks.  And a sports-obsessed state with a hole in the summer.  Football hasn't started yet, basketball is over.  It's a good option.

 

[FiddySicks]

5 hours ago, FrutigerAero said:

SLC has no problem with corporate sponsors... some that come to mind are Delta and Vivint.  Lots of tech money there. Adobe, Discover out there to.  Small market yes but what are we asking for here?  A 'big market' like the Bay Area?  Or any of the cities in FL?  Look how that's working out...

 

Amazing how people will defend Oakland as if they deserve to keep their baseball team while a team with similar success would be selling out all season long in Salt Lake City.  Utah grew 20% in the last decade.  Youngest state in the US (demographic MLB supposedly cares about).  Sport-obsessed state... literally women's soccer and gymnastics sell out there folks.  And a sports-obsessed state with a hole in the summer.  Football hasn't started yet, basketball is over.  It's a good option.

 

Ok, not sure we’re exactly on same page here. I’m not asking what companies have a branch presence in a particular city. I’m asking what kind of a corporate base your city has. What revenue is being created and generated specifically from that area? 
 

Of the four companies you named, only Vivant is Utah based. Delta is Atlanta, Adobe is San Jose, and Discover is, like, Chicago. It’s a pretty important part of all of this considering these teams are so heavily dependent on advertising dollars. The vast majority come from that local corporate base. 
 

If you want to know why people defend Oakland, there you go. The Bay Area is an absolute behemoth when it comes to their local corporate base. Salt Lake City? Yeah, not so much. 

[FrutigerAero]

1 minute ago, FiddySicks said:

Ok, not sure we’re exactly on same page here. I’m not asking what companies have a branch presence in a particular city. I’m asking what kind of a corporate base your city has. What revenue is being created and generated specifically from that area? 
 

Of the four companies you named, only Vivant is Utah based. Delta is Atlanta, Adobe is San Jose, and Discover is, like, Chicago. It’s a pretty important part of all of this considering these teams are so heavily dependent on advertising dollars. The vast majority come from that local corporate base. 
 

If you want to know why people defend Oakland, there you go. The Bay Area is an absolute behemoth when it comes to their local corporate base. Salt Lake City? Yeah, not so much. 

Nah you're good, I think we're agreeing more than disagreeing here. I don't think money-wise, they would be a money printer, don't misunderstand me.  Moneywise MLB should probably just put a third team in New York (New Jersey Jerseys?).  I guess I was thinking, "No corporate sponsors?  Surely they could muster as many as Milwaulkee".

 

But re: Delta, Delta's name is literally on the Utah NBA arena.  A big sponsor.  SLC is not their headquarters, but it is their western hub.

 

5 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

Thanks for the laugh.  "Selling out all season long in SLC"?  You're telling me that a small-ass place like SLC is going to sell out 81 games a year?  Games where they'll sell that low-alcohol beer?  Getting to games isn't exactly convenient in a place as sparse and sprawling as the SLC area, and... 81 games.

 

It's a complete joke.It will never happen.  If you'll excuse me, I'm gong to half for a few minutes.

 

So weirdly hostile.  From living in 6 different states in all parts of the US and observing the culture and attitudes and preferences in each, what I've seen is that Utah people love sports, more than any other place I've been to, and I do not say that lightly.  If you disagree, fine, but your experiences are not mine. 

 

I believe putting a team in Utah would mean adding MLB fans who would give a crap and if the team was competing, they would easily draw 80-90% all season long.  They wouldn't make as much money as a big city team with a big TV deal and apathetic transplants.  Definitely, but I'm not an owner counting dimes so I don't care.

 

But some of the complaints are just weird.  Hard to get to games?  Utah has a great public transportation system that can take you right downtown all the way from the south of the valley.  And the traffic is never bad.  Check out where they're ranked here.  Maybe it will make you laugh with joy at what a good transportation system it is:

 

Rankings: Transportation - Best States (usnews.com)

 

Now here is what is hard... getting to Oracle to see my Giants 

[BBTV]

That link doesn't actually mention anything about public transportation.  And making money matters.  Making money over 81 games matters.  They won't have a big TV or media rights deal, they won't be top-tier in payroll, they will have to overspend to get anyone that's not white to play there, and even in what would be one of the smallest parks in the league, they'd have to attempt to fill >30k people all summer and possibly fall long, when there's a billion other better things to do for outdoorsy types in Utah.  Not sure exactly where a ballpark would be, but assuming the light rail and buses go there, I'd have to expect that they're not equipped for that amount of use for what could be something like 10 of 11 days on a homestand.

 

 

If I'm wrong I'm wrong, and I've already put on the table what I'll do if I'm wrong.  I'm nearly confident enough to pull a Black Mirror and upload a video of myself fornicating with a pig if it happens, with the video caption reading "BBTV was wrong, must pay price".

 

 

[dont care]

21 hours ago, Walk-Off said:

 

These renderings underwhelm me mainly because of the absence of what Gaming and Leisure Properties, Inc. (the ultimate owner of that 35-acre plot of land) and Bally's might build next to the ballpark.  To me, that detail — or lack thereof — prevents the renderings from having a discernible sense of scale and thus keeps alive the big question of whether the ballpark can and does genuinely fit in a mere nine-acre corner of the plot, with a new Bally's-operated resort presumably filling the other 26 acres.

 

On another note, while some contributors to this thread have discussed the proposed ballpark's resemblance to the Sydney Opera House, it should be noted also that the head of one of the architecture firms for the project claims that (a) the shape of traditional baseball pennants inspired the roof and (b) the ballpark's overall design resembles a "spherical" armadillo.

They can say the design is based on that. That doesn’t mean it didn’t end up looking like the Sydney opera house though

[OnWis97]

On 3/7/2024 at 2:50 AM, FrutigerAero said:

Nah you're good, I think we're agreeing more than disagreeing here. I don't think money-wise, they would be a money printer, don't misunderstand me.  Moneywise MLB should probably just put a third team in New York (New Jersey Jerseys?).  I guess I was thinking, "No corporate sponsors?  Surely they could muster as many as Milwaulkee".

 

But re: Delta, Delta's name is literally on the Utah NBA arena.  A big sponsor.  SLC is not their headquarters, but it is their western hub.

 

 

So weirdly hostile.  From living in 6 different states in all parts of the US and observing the culture and attitudes and preferences in each, what I've seen is that Utah people love sports, more than any other place I've been to, and I do not say that lightly.  If you disagree, fine, but your experiences are not mine. 

 

I believe putting a team in Utah would mean adding MLB fans who would give a crap and if the team was competing, they would easily draw 80-90% all season long.  They wouldn't make as much money as a big city team with a big TV deal and apathetic transplants.  Definitely, but I'm not an owner counting dimes so I don't care.

 

But some of the complaints are just weird.  Hard to get to games?  Utah has a great public transportation system that can take you right downtown all the way from the south of the valley.  And the traffic is never bad.  Check out where they're ranked here.  Maybe it will make you laugh with joy at what a good transportation system it is:

 

Rankings: Transportation - Best States (usnews.com)

 

Now here is what is hard... getting to Oracle to see my Giants 

Based on my minimal experience in SLC, the city punches way above its weight in terms of transit.  If they located a ballpark properly, SLC residents would have an easier time getting to games than residents of almost any city in the US.

But it's a small city. Are they going to rely on people coming in from places like Provo, Ogden, etc. that are far enough away that it's going to be a problem for a weeknight game, rendering their ability to sell tickets to the majority of games insufficient?

I don't know the answer to that but that's something that occured to me.  Maybe the Jazz offer a partial answer.

[Sykotyk]

2 hours ago, OnWis97 said:

Based on my minimal experience in SLC, the city punches way above its weight in terms of transit.  If they located a ballpark properly, SLC residents would have an easier time getting to games than residents of almost any city in the US.

But it's a small city. Are they going to rely on people coming in from places like Provo, Ogden, etc. that are far enough away that it's going to be a problem for a weeknight game, rendering their ability to sell tickets to the majority of games insufficient?

I don't know the answer to that but that's something that occured to me.  Maybe the Jazz offer a partial answer.

SLC has the benefit of being a mostly laid out grid, with freeways that are all adequately sized running in north/south or east/west directions mostly. Even the 215 loop runs more in a square than a circle. Putting a venue anywhere on the west side of SLC along the 215 near 80 or 201 would work fine. Even off 201 near Bangerter, or anywhere along I-15. There isn't 'one side' of SLC that is economically better or worse for location. It's not like DFW where the northern suburbs far outweigh the south, for instance. The only real limit is the mountains to the east. Anywhere else will work.

 

The only real negative for SLC is that many of the locations around the freeways are heavily industrial or warehouses. Or heavy residential. There's not a lot of in-between.

 

[Digby]

On 2024-03-07 at 3:50 AM, FrutigerAero said:

Rankings: Transportation - Best States (usnews.com)

 

 

Vermont is number one on this list, which is a searingly obvious tell that the methodology is too flawed to take seriously.

 

Real numbers say SLC's public transit usage is pretty anemic. Not really out of the ordinary for American cities but I'm not seeing this as a special selling point necessarily.

[The_Admiral]

There are six actual transit cities in America: New York, Chicago, DC, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia.  A seventh, Los Angeles, has deceptively high ridership numbers but would never cross anyone's mind as a transit-oriented city. Everything else is just "we actually have a surprisingly good light rail system." That goes for Atlanta, St. Louis, Dallas, Minneapolis, Denver, Miami, Seattle, apparently now Milwaukee for some reason, and yes, Salt Lake City. 

[Sec19Row53]

13 minutes ago, The_Admiral said:

There are six actual transit cities in America: New York, Chicago, DC, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia.  A seventh, Los Angeles, has deceptively high ridership numbers but would never cross anyone's mind as a transit-oriented city. Everything else is just "we actually have a surprisingly good light rail system." That goes for Atlanta, St. Louis, Dallas, Minneapolis, Denver, Miami, Seattle, apparently now Milwaukee for some reason, and yes, Salt Lake City. 

The Hop??

Hahahahahahahahaha

[B-Rich]

35 minutes ago, The_Admiral said:

There are six actual transit cities in America: New York, Chicago, DC, Boston, San Francisco, Philadelphia.  A seventh, Los Angeles, has deceptively high ridership numbers but would never cross anyone's mind as a transit-oriented city. Everything else is just "we actually have a surprisingly good light rail system." That goes for Atlanta, St. Louis, Dallas, Minneapolis, Denver, Miami, Seattle, apparently now Milwaukee for some reason, and yes, Salt Lake City. 

 

If we're talking heavy rail vs. light rail,  Atlanta has VERY little in terms of light rail-- just the 2.7 mile downtown Atlanta Streetcar loop:

 

The entire MARTA transit system is based on an extremely limited  heavy rail "hub and spoke" model, with lots of supplemental bus lines:

 

You also forgot to mention Washington DC, with its rather robust heavy rail-based METRO system.   As of 2023, it claimed to be the second-busiest rapid transit system in the United States in average daily ridership (after the New York City Subway) :

 

And they really don't have light rail, either; like Atlanta they only have the "DC Streetcar" a 2.2 mile line  

[The_Admiral]

I mentioned DC. The thing about the Metro's ridership numbers is that it acts as a de facto hybrid rapid transit/commuter-rail operation, with lines venturing out into suburbs where the Subway and L never would. MARC and VRE are relative afterthoughts compared with the enormous park-and-ride stations on the periphery. The Electric Line in Chicago has the opposite problem where it's a high-frequency line that primarily serves the city but is classified under commuter rail. If you count the L and Metra together, I think they'd have higher ridership than the DC Metro plus its semi-related commuter lines.

[SFGiants58]

56 minutes ago, The_Admiral said:

Everything else is just "we actually have a surprisingly good light rail system." That goes for Atlanta, St. Louis, Dallas, Minneapolis, Denver, Miami, Seattle, apparently now Milwaukee for some reason, and yes, Salt Lake City. 

That is very correct. It’s excellent at connecting the further reaches of suburbs to lower downtown (be it the big EMU’s or the smaller EMU’s - which I use mostly), but the actual transit system within the central part of the city is lackluster. The whole system is electrified and uses no EMD F40PH engines, which is pretty neat.

 

I should have some nostalgic attachment to the F40PH’s (as I grew up with Caltrain), but I really don’t.

[B-Rich]

1 hour ago, The_Admiral said:

I mentioned DC. 

You sure did, not sure how I missed it. Probably looking for 'Washington' instead of 'DC'.  My (old man) bad.

[McCall]

This thread has derailed.

[SFGiants58]

2 minutes ago, McCall said:

This thread has derailed.

 

As good a time as any for a Station Joke.