With a week before the supposed April 1st deadline to get a deal for the Wrigley Field renovations, we should be expecting a lot of noise being made by all 4 parties involved in these talks: The Ricketts family, the rooftop owners, Tom Tunney and City Hall.
Today, the rooftops did not let us down.
The Wrigleyville Rooftops Organization...the cartel of owners of the buildings around Wrigley Field...released a press statement to try to rebuild some of their destroyed public perception.
I do not have a copy of the press statement, but I did write the key highlights of it as it was read out loud on the radio. The statement contained five points which they claim were corrections to some of the inaccurate information they claim the Cubs have thrown out in this process. (Interestingly enough, I haven't heard the Cubs mention anything specifically about the rooftops...most of what has been said has been by the media...so take that as you may.)
Point 1: The 2004 between the Cubs and the rooftop owners is not a hindrance for the Cubs to move forward on renovation plans.
While there is some validity to this, it really is not looking at the big picture of Wrigley Field renovation. First off, the Cubs could very well do major parts of this renovation without the approval of the rooftops owners...especially the early parts of the renovations that would focus more on the player facilities. The problem with doing this without a deal in place is two-fold. First, you don't guarantee that you will actually be able to finish the renovations as needed. If the Cubs spend the first $100 million on the renovations and then are not allowed to do the rest, the team will likely be forced to move and will have wasted a lot of money in the process. Second, and most importantly, without a deal in place, the Cubs don't have a way to finance the renovations. This disagreement is not about being allowed to do the renovations...it's about financing the renovations through increased advertising around the ballpark.
Point 2: When the Ricketts family bought the club, they knew what they were getting into and knew about the agreement with the rooftop owners that runs until 2024.
There isn't much to argue about this. At the same time, I don't think the Ricketts family thought the rooftop owners were going to be such pricks about every little thing that went on around the ballpark. The Ricketts family has done a lot to earn goodwill in the neighborhood. I think they thought the rooftop owners would be as appreciative as the rest of the neighborhood has been. They were wrong.
Point 3: The Ricketts family tried to buy 5 of the rooftop buildings a few years ago with the intention of adding a video board and advertising on the rooftops, similar to what the rooftops proposed a couple months ago.
Can't deny that fact. As the same time, the Ricketts family would have had more control of all that if they had owned the buildings. On top of that, it seems to me that the Ricketts family found a more effective way of advertising...by putting the ads inside the ballpark. Why didn't the deals for those rooftops happen? Nothing has been made public as to why...but it very well could be that Ricketts family pulled out because they didn't think it was a good investment. (Considering the poor financial condition of many of the rooftops right now...it was probably a smart move.)
Point 4: The Ricketts family is about to get a ton of money with a new TV deal. At the same time, they are trying to bleed everyone else for money.
Yes and no. First off, the new TV deal has to do with the WGN contract expiring. The Cubs will still be under contract to show games on CSN. They will not be getting nearly as big of a TV contract as many other clubs have been getting...at least not until the CSN deal is over (which is not for a number of years to come). This is a gross exaggeration on the rooftop owner's part.
Point 5: Many of the rooftop owners have lived in Wrigleyville for over 30 years and entered into a fair contract with the Cubs that has made both sides a lot of money. It is unfair that the Cubs are trying to back out of that deal. And many of these rooftop owners have invested a huge amount of money in their businesses.
The business models that were created by these people starting around 20 years ago revolved around stealing another business's product. On top of that, the Cubs have been there for 100 years. No matter what you say, the Cubs were there first. Here is the thing...if the rooftop owners are so upset about the Cubs backing out of the deal...SUE THEM! Why won't they? I think because they are in a situation where they probably cannot win. On top of that, many of these rooftop owners are already in financial trouble and aren't likely to be able to adequately defend themselves. For the Cubs, the money they receive from the rooftops on a yearly basis is really minimal...probably on the order of $3 to $4 million a year (of which some rooftops have, in the past, been reluctant to pay up). The Ricketts family does not really have much incentive to continue the relationship with them...especially with the fact that a single ad sign in the outfield could probably cover the cost of breaking the deal with the rooftops.
**********************************************
This site is dedicated to getting the Cubs to move out of Wrigley Field. Wouldn't it be nice not to have to deal with these people any more? Even if a renovation deal is reached in the next week or so, the Ricketts family will have to butt heads with this group again. It's going to happen. Something new will come up.
It's not worth it.
This whole argument should be about how to allow the Cubs to win more ballgames. As long as the rooftops are out there, they will continue to distract the Cubs from this goal. The rooftops help the Cubs in no way...not even close.
Move!
Oh...and to the rooftop owners...you should probably get a different PR firm because the one you are using really is not doing a good job at making your case. Or maybe you just do not have a case to make.
No comments:
Post a Comment