San Jose updates

I've spent the last week in the Rockies and Plains. Compared to the weather I've experienced over the last several days, in which the temperature never went over the teens and the wind chill dropped the gauge to -40 in North Dakota, the supposedly chilly weather here is downright balmy. While I've been gone, San Jose has made a few headlines:

Two more Diridon South properties are about to be acquired by San Jose's Redevelopment Agency. Both are on the block between Autumn Street and Montgomery Street, south of San Fernando Street. That brings the tally to three properties and three acres total. The big properties west of Montgomery - the SBC/AT&T site, the old KNTV studio, and the PG&E substation - are still to be acquired. The PG&E substation has extra costs associated with because it will have to be moved to a location nearby. If the ballpark were oriented north, the substation could be moved 200 feet to the north and kept in the same configuration with the same vehicular and service access it had previously.



This orientation makes it similar to Petco Park, which also has its field opened to the north.

San Jose also just lost a lawsuit against Santa Clara County in which it sought to block the County from building a concert hall on the Fairgrounds south of downtown. Should the County proceed with building the concert hall, it would be mainly in competition with SJSU's Event Center, UC Berkeley's Greek Theatre, and SF's Bill Graham Civic Auditorium. All would have a 5,000+ capacity, but the new concert hall would presumably have better amenities and acoustics than its competitors. Personally I think the Fairgrounds is better suited for a soccer stadium/amphitheater with playing fields surrounding it, while a concert hall should be downtown as most concert halls are. There's hope that the two parties can set their differences aside, but the city is still looking to appeal and the emboldened county looks like it's moving forward with its plans.

Check out Athletics Nation

On AthleticsNation Blez just posted a fantastic interview with Lew Wolff. This is the second interview Blez has snagged with Wolff. A couple of points to consider:

• How many blogs or other fansites get real, non-fluff interviews with team owners? Blez obviously deserves credit for being regarded highly enough to merit the Q&A sessions with Wolff and Beane.
  
• Wolff also deserves credit for understanding the educated, oft-hidden hardcore fanbase that prowls the net. Even if you're a cynic, it's a fantastic PR move.
  

That said, there's something I've been wanting to get off my chest for the last few weeks. As I've learned more about the process and the complexity involved in getting a ballpark deal, it's become clear that any thoughts of a conspiracy theory are offbase. Especially in the A's case. There are too many factors and obstacles that can derail a deal for a conspiratorial plan to work. The different cities involved (including those outside the Bay Area) all have significant issues to overcome if they want to talk ballpark with the A's. If there was some real guarantee of a predetermined outcome it could make sense, but a dealmaker like Wolff knows better than to put his eggs in one basket. Too many things can go out of control as well. Example:

• Remember the big downtown LA hotel that Wolff's urban development company was building? Wolff had to pull out last month due to rising costs. The project is now being helmed by a partnership of AEG and KB Home, who plans to build condos in some of the areas where hotel rooms were planned. Wolff is still on as an advisor, but the big bucks will go elsewhere. Think about that. Over the last several months, Wolff signaled to LA pols that costs were rising on the project. Hurricane Katrina may have sent everything through the roof. Instead of killing the deal, all parties got together to work out a plan to get the project built. It meant that Wolff had to step aside, but it looks like it will get done. In the case of an A's ballpark, Wolff won't be able to step aside, but we should expect that he'll be upfront on the costs involved, even as partners or plans change.
  

I've even been guilty of fomenting conspiracy theories at times, but that's been more to promote discussion of the issues than anything else. The process is not at some advanced stage, far from it. However, things can move quickly, and that should be expected the closer we get to Opening Day.

Two more Bizjournals articles

New articles have appeared on the Bizjournals.com website. One belongs to the East Bay Business Times, the other to South Florida Business Journal. The first article calls the Bay Area "saturated," while the LA market definitely has room for more sports franchises.

It also cites the Bay Area's total personal income as $375.5 billion, a figure much higher than the numbers I listed in the previous post. I don't know how they arrived at this figure so I've lobbed a request for clarification. Even with this higher figure, there's little room for new franchises. Over the span of three weeks in February, the Bay Area will field four sporting events unrelated to the four major leagues:

• AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am (PGA Tour; Yes it's outside the Bay Area technically, but it attracts a large number of Bay Area attendees)
• SAP Open (ATP Tour; the yearly men's tour stop in the Bay Area)
• Tour of California (UCI; new cycling event with four Bay Area stages)
• US vs. Japan (pre World Cup "friendly" at AT&T/SBC Park)

That's a lot of sports for a month that's traditionally considered an off-peak period.

Even more interesting is the Florida article, which concludes that the Marlins wouldn't be automatically be destined for greener pastures if they relocated outside South Florida. The same can be assumed about the A's and their situation in the Bay Area as well.

More Market-Related Food For Thought

A report in Monday’s Charlotte Business Journal discusses the challenges facing Charlotte in its efforts to lure the Marlins. Chief among them is the a lack of financial support because of the size of the Charlotte market and the fact that two teams – the NBA’s Bobcats and the NFL’s Panthers – already occupy it.

The piece referred to an analysis by the paper’s online sibling, Bizjournals.com. In the analysis Bizjournals.com “used data on team revenue and ticket prices to estimate how much total personal income a market needs to support a pro sports team.” This was done in 179 markets, which should presumably provide a pretty good data sample. (The parent company runs the East Bay Business Times, Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, and San Francisco Business Journal.)

The overall conclusion was that the Charlotte market was $86 billion short of being able to support a baseball team, in terms of the market’s annual total personal income (TPI). The minimum amount required? $89.2 billion.

I’m trying to figure out how Bizjournals.com derived this figure, but for now let’s for the sake of discussion accept it based on their due diligence. Values were given to other leagues’ franchises as well. Here’s the breakdown:

1. MLB - $89.2 billion
2. NBA - $38.4 billion
3. NHL - $35.7 billion
4. NFL - $33 billion
5. MLS - $16.1 billion

Step back and look at that for a second. According to Bizjournals.com it takes over twice as much total personal income to successfully back a major league baseball team as it does any other sport. That makes some sense because of baseball has twice as many games as the NBA and NHL. Then again, the winter sports’ average ticket prices are usually higher. The NFL only has 10 or so home games per season and its tickets are the most expensive, but its national TV contracts are so lucrative that local support is far less necessary than with MLB (this also justifies the blackout rule).

Taking this a little further, I went over to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis and pulled the latest (2003) MSA-based economic data. Since the Bay Area is split into five different statistical areas, one has to do a little hunting to compile the information correctly. Here’s how the Bay Area looks:

While the Bay Area is high in per capita income (and the associated high costs of living), we don’t have a particularly high population at less than seven million people. Pool the required income for all six major teams, and the deficit appears above. There are obviously other factors to consider like the state of facilities, transportation, and location, but the figures point to the idea that we are somewhat oversaturated with sports. Add the various event-oriented sports like golf and tennis tournaments and motor sports, plus minor league teams and college sports, and it is clear that we have more than enough sports in the Bay Area to go around. Which is why we should get down on our knees every morning and thank whoever’s in charge that we have this luxury. Not to sound like a homer, but combine these amenities with our fabulous weather, and it’s easy to see why the Bay Area consistently ranks at the top of annual “Best Places to Live” lists.

What’s more interesting is how the Bay Area compares to other regions. Other than the three largest markets in the country (NY, LA, CHI), few regions have a substantial surplus. In fact, many operate at a sizable deficit. That doesn’t mean those cities can’t field teams, it just highlights how competitive those markets are and can help explain why some teams struggle with sagging attendance, low TV ratings, etc.

The Washington-Baltimore market provides the best comparison to the Bay Area. It has six teams (the Nats’ stadium problems not withstanding), a fair amount of geographic spread, and differing TV markets, just like the Bay Area. Though it has one million more people than the Bay Area, it pulls in only slightly more TPI, just enough to put it “in the black” relative to having six teams. Add the region’s MLS team, and suddenly the market is in the red. Philly appears to be in good shape even though it is stuck between two larger markets. Boston has the pull of the entire New England market to compensate for its slight deficit. San Diego has its hands full with two teams. Portland has a $27 billion surplus, but that’s not nearly enough to handle the burden of a MLB team added to its portfolio. Sacramento faces a similar situation. Even Las Vegas, which has no teams currently, falls over $40 billion short when trying to accommodate a MLB team. Again, this concept of TPI is only one of many factors that determine a market’s fitness. Markets like Green Bay, WI, are anomalies due to the sheer size of their rabid regional fanbase and intangibles like legacy and tradition.

Now go back to the first table. In an ideal situation where income levels are equal throughout the Bay Area, it may serve the individual teams best if they were distributed throughout the region instead of concentrated in primarily two places: San Francisco and Oakland. For instance, San Jose has a single major league team, but in the Sharks’ wake numerous minor league teams (baseball, arena football, lacrosse) have stepped in to claim some of the South Bay’s surplus ($44 million). It might make more sense to move a NFL franchise south to even things out. Or it might make sense to move the Sharks to the North Bay and the A’s or Giants to the South Bay. Obviously, this is not realistic of the venue situation and the fact that Bay Area residents by in large have little trouble driving wherever they need to go, including sporting events. Nor does it take into account preferences, since the individual sports don’t substitute for each other equally among hardcore fans. It does show a more mechanical way the teams could service the market based on each micropolitan area’s individual wealth, similar to the way Starbucks places its stores by using census-based income information.

However, these figures highlight one issue in particular: there is little room for failure. There is so much entertainment variety that it’s easy for the casual fan to substitute other entertainment for a game. Many outsiders and the Bay Area’s own media blame the market’s fickle, fair-weather fans for attendance woes. In the end, does this have more to do with simple market dynamics? It’s true that when teams do poorly on the field/court/ice, their marketing departments have to do quite a bit of “circle the wagons” strategizing to hold onto their season ticket holders and suite lessees. They are, after all, competing with each other for the same limited fanbase. Just as it’s easy to find a Giants fan in Danville or an A’s fan in Novato, a corporation can switch allegiances once their lease is up.

A team can turn its fortunes around, making itself more attractive to the casual fan. This should be viewed as a virtue since competitive drive should keep all teams active to make their respective products as attractive to Bay Area denizens as possible (the 49ers are about to find this out the hard way, the Raiders have been suffering the last few seasons). With the market as limited and competitive as it is, teams have to place incentives for fans to go. The best incentive is a championship of some sort. A sparkling new venue with new amenities is another. When Lew Wolff talks about the A’s being competitive, he’s not just talking about the American League. He’s talking about the Bay Area as well. So far with the increased season ticket subscriptions that are being reported, the Bay Area is responding to the A’s offseason changes on and off the field. Isn’t that the way things should be?

The final radio picture

Greetings from Odessa, TX, where I am on an unusual business trip. No meetings, no appointments, just a lot of driving around for testing purposes. Believe it or not, I encountered a tumbleweed 30 seconds after I exited the parking lot this morning. West Texas really is like that.

The rental was already tuned to a local ESPN radio affiliate, which was a relief. As my route took me further and further away from the bustling Midland-Odessa market, the station became more difficult to receive. I had my iPod with me just in case, but I decided to flip through the dial first to see what was out there.

I hit the SCAN button on the radio, and to my dismay, every single time the radio stopped the same thing came out of the speakers:

• Rush Limbaugh

This happened six times, on six different frequencies. Since I tend to avoid any kind of talk radio outside of sports (regardless of political bent or content), I plugged in the iPod and kept driving until I found an area with more variety. That didn't happen until I got back to Odessa a few hours ago.

The lesson, besides the fact that no one should get stuck in Eunice, NM? Talk radio rules. Especially the conservative flavor. Christian radio is gaining a stronger foothold in the Bay Area with each passing year. That's what the A's are up against, even on the stations they currently inhabit. Let's take a look at the three stations that will carry A's games in the Bay Area for the next three years:

• KYCY-1550 (San Francisco/Belmont) - I would say that CBS/Infinity should be lauded for taking a chance with the podcast format on "KYouRadio", but I have to temper that with the thought that the format could change overnight to more talk, or some other overplayed concoction. To me, the curious thing about KYCY is that they had an application to relocate to San Jose and become a 50,000-watt station. That application was rescinded in November without a peep. It's not realistic to think the A's will push any of its affiliates in one direction or another because of the historically low ratings. But if you're looking for a Exodus-to-San Jose angle in the radio dealings, Infinity's retraction doesn't help the case.
• KNTS-1220 (Menlo Park) - The station's parent company, Salem Communications, has until now had a mixture of conservative talk and college sports. Salem has apparently taken a stance that gives their talk programming a priority over the A's. Since their weekday/weeknight schedule does repeats after 6, it's quite convenient for them to shoehorn the A's into repeat time. It's possible that if the A's do spectacularly well on KNTS, they could add full Eastern Time Zone broadcasts to the schedule, though the producers of Dennis Prager's daily show wouldn't be too pleased with their show being preempted on a semi-regular basis. The problem with the KNTS situation is that the current nighttime signal is so weak, many listeners will be turned off by the static and tune in to KYCY, XM, or the MLB.com streaming feed instead. Ratings won't look impressive on KNTS as a result, which means the A's wouldn't be able to truly prove themselves on weeknights on KNTS. I asked A's VP of Broadcasting and Communications Ken Pries if Salem had told him when KNTS plans to build that 50 kW facility in Hayward. He said they didn't.
• KVON-1440 (Napa) - One of few independently-run stations in the market, KVON has a somewhat center-left talk lineup rounded out by more eclectic programming. KVON has been carrying the A's for some time, but their role becomes significant because KYCY doesn't reach the North Bay.
  

Obviously, there's room for growth. Pries indicated that the team is working to add more affiliates. Hopefully, the targets will be Sacramento and the Central Coast, the two remaining (and gaping) holes for the A's to cover. With radio dominated by certain types of programming, it's a tough sell. Maybe there's a station willing to do an equity exchange the way KNBR and the Giants work with each other, but even then, there have to be ratings to back the A's placement on any station. The new setup is problematic in that the three stations could cannibalize each other to a degree.

P.S. The new affiliate list is now up.

P.P.S. I'm going to take a peek at Midland's quaint Citibank Park while I'm here. The Midland Rockhounds are the A's AA affiliate.

One Coliseum, Two Teams

As 2010 approaches, Oakland, the A's, and the Raiders will have some very difficult decisions to make. Oakland is severely cash-strapped and still stings from the 1995 Coliseum renovation, which brought back the Raiders but has put the JPA in deep for the next two decades.

The Raiders have settled most of their issues with Oakland, but their lease ends after the end of the 2010 season. That would appear to pave the way for the Raiders to leave, but there aren't that many cities capable of building a NFL-sized stadium, and NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue holds the keys to the Los Angeles market, where Al Davis is most interested in relocating.

The A's, who had felt neglected because of the way the Coliseum was renovated, aren't getting too warm fuzzies from Oakland in their desire to build a ballpark village. Their final year in Oakland, if they don't leave early or extend the lease, will be 2010.

Today an article in the Trib discusses how the Bay Area could attract a Super Bowl. The 49ers have an ambitious multi-use development plan in the works with housing giant Lennar and the city of San Francisco. Despite the strained relationship between the Raiders and Oakland/Alameda County, the Raiders came up with a way to keep the 2003 Super Bowl in the Bay Area (where it was originally meant for a revamped Candlestick Park): add 7,500 seats to the Coliseum. That idea fizzled and the 2003 Super Bowl ended up in a more familiar locale, San Diego. The article notes that a Bay Area Super Bowl would be bolstered by a joint 49ers-Raiders effort, but doesn't elaborate on how the competing interests (49ers vs. Raiders, SF vs. Oakland) could make it work.

The Raiders haven't released any plans for a another Coliseum redo, but it stands to reason that with the newly friendly relationship they have with Oakland, along with the team's inability to relocate as easily as they did eleven years ago, they could try to work a deal to "complete" the renovation in Oakland. The Raiders could take advantage of the NFL's G3 loan program, which provides $150 million for new construction or expansion. Myriad problems await, including financing the rest of it ($150 million won't cover it all) and getting pols to sign off on the deal. The sales pitch would involve getting the Super Bowl in Oakland (and its oft-overstated positive economic impact) sometime in the next 20 years, a carrot that has been the main selling point in getting new stadia built or upgraded (San Diego, Dallas, Kansas City).

Should the Raiders and Oakland venture down this path, the A's would once again be on the outside looking in. For how would Oakland and Alameda County be able to invest in multiple new facilities again? Therein lies the rub. Oakland's going to be forced to decide who it wants to support. And I doubt that anyone's looking forward to making that decision.

San Jose soccer deal dead

San Jose officials nixed an $80 million deal to build a soccer stadium near the Diridon South ballpark site. The controversial deal, which received little public scrutiny before it initially passed last month, involved a commitment from the city to build a SSS (soccer specific stadium) on city-owned land that currently houses a fire training site. Operating subsidies were included for the years in which the new San Jose Earthquakes expansion team were forced to play in Spartan Stadium while the SSS was being built. The plan also called for funds earmarked for public recreation facilities and parks to be rerouted to the stadium. MLS commissioner Don Garber visited San Jose two weeks ago and had meetings with the city.

This could affect the A's interest in the team, since it is unclear whether there would be any public share for a SSS, and that's what attracted Lew Wolff to the idea in the first place. After the $80 million plan was announced in December, Wolff expressed his interest and has been in touch ever since. The article states that the city still plans to meet with Wolff in the next 45 days, which could mean any number of things.

Does this mean that all hope of getting the Quakes back is lost? Hardly. I wouldn't be surprise if a different plan came out of the woodwork. It may even be *gasp* a multi-purpose facility, though it wouldn't be anything like the multi-purpose stadiums of decades past. Neither MLB nor MLS wants to share stadia with other tenants, but if it is a single ownership entity that owned both franchises, it might make more sense, especially from the construction standpoint. The difficulty lies in building a stadium that can capably handle both sports without compromising size, sightlines, or amenities in either configuration.

KNTS, not KTRB

According to Chron's Steve Kroner, the new A's radio station combo will include KYCY-1550 and KNTS-1220, not KTRB-860. There is one particular huge catch. KNTS will not carry weekday day games, and games that start between 4 and 6 will be picked up in progress at 6 PM.

Another downside is the station's signal. During the day, KNTS broadcasts at 5,000 watts, but at night it ekes out a mere 145 watts. That's right, folks, your desktop computer and microwave oven are more powerful. The point of having KNTS is supposedly to increase the A's presence in the South Bay, but as you can see from the maps below, that just isn't the case right now, at least not at night.

Day Coverage


Night Coverage


There is hope in the future should KNTS and A's decide to pursue a long-term deal (and drop the join-in-progress-at-6 policy). KNTS has a construction permit to build a 50,000-watt, 24/7 transmitter in Hayward. The transmitter would be just south of the San Mateo Bridge, close to the KTCT/KNBR-1050 transmitter. There are interference issues that need to be worked out, but should the A's be able to broadcast on the new KNTS, they'll be able to cover virtually all of the Bay Area with a single 50 kW station.

Day Coverage (Future)


Night Coverage (Future)


In the short term, this is cold comfort. The KNTS construction permit expires in 2008, so they don't have to be in any real hurry to get it built, as is the case with KTRB.

Giants ballpark renamed again

As expected, that ballpark in China Basin, SBC Park, which was formerly named Pacific Bell Park or Pac Bell Park, is switching names once again to "AT&T Park". Last year's SBC-AT&T merger resulted in the new conglomerate taking on the older, more familiar moniker. The change has also been accompanied by a relentless marketing and ad campaign launched at the beginning of the year. (Speaking of which - Oasis? Puh-leeze. Damon Albarn of Blur/Gorillaz has more talent in his right pinky than Liam "The Rawk Stah" and Noel "One Scale" Gallagher combined. I know Oasis is Billy Beane's fave band, but it's the truth.)

"AT&T Park" doesn't really roll off the tongue and is probably worse than "SBC Park", but "Pac Bell Park" didn't elicit a velvety, dulcet pronunciation either and was given far too much credit for not being a set of initials.

There was the ill-fated attempt by SF Supervisors Chris Daly and Matt Gonzalez to force the edifice to be named after Willie Mays. There's still a petition effort, but contracts are contracts, so don't expect the place to be renamed out of kindness. Fans could force "Mays Field" to stick by consciously incorporating it into their vernacular, nevermind what the tickets and signage says. No offense to the Sey Hey Kid, I'm going to call it what it should be, reflective of another era when baseball wasn't the sole notable monopoly in the States:

• Ma Bell

On the other side, supposedly Lew Wolff already has a naming rights partner in mind, and it's not a company that makes consumer products. A bank or financial services company? B2B? Whatever it is, it's probably not going to roll off the tongue easily either.

Fremont Stadium Task Force Meeting + Announcement

Tonight's Fremont Stadium Task Force Meeting was quite illuminating. So much so, that I can't really share much of it with you. I can tell you that the process for Fremont is going forward, though it needs to accelerate so that if Fremont and the Tri-City area get the opportunity, they can strike while the iron is hot.

All who were present introduced themselves, including me. I mentioned that I run this site on the side, while my day job is in Fremont. Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, who was seated across the table from me, was taken aback and when it was his turn to speak, prefaced his comments accordingly. I consciously made the decision not to post anything I considered inside information or hearsay. He spoke at length and conjectured about Fremont's standing in the pursuit of the A's.

Later, I offered my services to run the Fremont campaign website. It will probably have a blog-style format with comments, though unlike this news-oriented site, the Fremont site will be advocacy-based. In concert with the decision I made at the meeting, any information I receive from here on out regarding the Fremont campaign will not be published on this blog unless it has been approved for public consumption. I don't have much inside information on the San Jose or Oakland efforts either, so I expect to be treating all three on equal terms. When the Fremont campaign site is up, I'll make a single post on it and place a link on the sidebar, but that's it. I realize there's an obvious conflict-of-interest that could easily be exploited, so I'm exercising editorial restraint to make sure that thin line isn't crossed. This blog will remain dedicated to tracking and compiling news about the A's ballpark plans, and that will not change as long as I run it. I don't expect to ask for help running this site - posts are infrequent enough that I should be able to handle it.

Now, onto the actually newsworthy items...

• The ballpark village concept continues to be key to the A's plans. The difficulty, as Lew Wolff noted, is in finding available land to make it happen.
  
• People may be focusing on the third deck closure, but corporate support may be the most important thing for a new ballpark wherever it's built. That means suites and signage, two things that are not selling terribly well currently.
• As for the third deck closure, the intended effect has been felt. Season ticket sales are up 150% over last season, and opening night is virtually sold out. Sales are so good that going forward, potentially new season ticket plan purchasers (including yours truly) may not be able to include opening night in their plans, even though it's supposed to be included in all packages.
• The A's are still working primarily with Oakland and the Coliseum JPA at least through opening day. After that, it could be fair game.
• Fremont has some work to do, including rallying local civic groups and neighbors Newark and Union City. Expect some news about events designed to raise publicity for the Fremont campaign shortly. (No, the team will not be called the "Tri-City A's".)
  

You know where the comments link is.

Now, the TV side

A small blurb about Fox Sports Net ratings was in Monday's Merc. If nothing else, it shows that the Giants' hegemony over the Bay Area market continues. But a closer look reveals that the Giants' top ten games came at the beginning and end of the 2005 season, when the Giants were either contending or had Barry Bonds back, or both. I wonder what the ratings were like when the Gigantes were horrifically bad last June?

Nevertheless, the A's best numbers show that they pull in about half the audience of the Giants. Even the pennant race with the Angels in August and September didn't garner a 3 rating. But a look at other two-team markets shows that this pattern is repeated elsewhere. The Yanks often triple the Mets in cable ratings. The Mets have responded by starting up their own cable network, Sportsnet New York, in hopes of boosting ratings and revenue the way the YES network has helped the Yanks. The Cubs have dominated the Chicago market, though the White Sox World Series win should make them more competitive. LA is the notable exception. Arte Moreno's renaming move and aggressive LA marketing have paid off. Combine that with the Halos' on-field success, and the Angels have pulled even with the Dodgers on cable (and at times even pulled ahead).

Since the A's are locked into a cable deal with Fox Sports Net through at least 2010, the only chance the A's have to expand their audience is through its over-the-air contract, currently with KICU. It would make sense for the A's to leave KICU, which has limited range beyond the South Bay, for a San Francisco-based station such as KRON-4 or the soon-to-be-orphaned KBWB-20. Sooner or later all those Frasier reruns on KRON are going to get old and stale, right? Even if it meant getting slightly lower TV revenue for a couple years, it might be worth it because of the much larger potential audience.

The New A's Radio World Order

The A's haven't yet officially announced which stations will carry games for the 2006 season. Based on A's-related programming emerging recently on KYCY-1550, and information fans are picking up from tickets, it looks like KTRB-860 will also carry the A's. Assuming this is correct, here's how the radio landscape will look like when the season starts.

KYCY-1550 (KYOU-Radio) is the "Podcast" station out of Belmont. It has a directional signal which is aimed up the Peninsula towards San Francisco. That means the South Bay and non-Marin North Bay won't be covered well by KYCY's signal. KYCY previously had an application to relocate to the San Jose area, but the station's parent, radio giant CBS Infinity, pulled the request last fall. To understand your relationship to the station's transmitter, take a look at the two links below from radio-locator.com:

• Daytime Coverage Map
• Nighttime Coverage Map

KTRB-860 is a little more complicated. For the last ten years, the Pappas-owned newstalk station was based out of the Modesto area with a 50,000-watt signal during the day and 10,000-watt signal at night. Last year Pappas announced its intention to invade the Bay Area, and so they did. When construction is complete, it will essentially be a 50,000-watt station day and night. However, it will have three different transmitter locations. During the day KTRB will transmit from the area just south of Sears Point/Infineon Raceway. At night, the transmitter will be in the hills south of Livermore. KTRB will also have a critical hours transmitter that operates only during the dawn and dusk hours at 40,000 watts. That transmitter will be located near Bethel Island.

• Daytime Coverage Map (Sears Point)
• Nighttime Coverage Map (Livermore)
• Critical Hours Coverage Map (Bethel Island/Antioch)

I tried calling the KTRB offices to check on the status of transmitter construction, but all I get is a busy signal. E-mail is next. KTRB's construction permit expires on May 27, so there should be some urgency for them to build everything quickly. As for the old Modesto station, Pappas is planning to replace its old 860-Modesto station with KPMP-840, also based out of Modesto. Here's hoping that the A's managed to work a deal in which KPMP also becomes a station on the network so that at least a portion of the Central Valley is covered.

---

To see how these changes can affect listeners, I've created a table showing the start times for the 2006 season.

The twilight period (4-8 PM based on the season) could be tricky as the KTRB critical hours transmitter kicks in. I'm not sure if a 4:05 PM broadcast from the Eastern Time Zone will switch transmitters midstream or not until the after the game is completed; some clarification from radio technical folks would be appreciated.

Based on the footprint represented by combining the coverage maps, here's where I expect listeners to dial in based on the schedule:

• East Bay 880 Corridor: KTRB-860 or KYCY-1550 for both day and night games
• Tri-Valley, 680 Corridor, and further inland: KTRB-860 for both day and night games
• Sonoma/Napa/Solano Counties: KTRB-860 for both day and night games
• SF/Peninsula: KYCY-1550 for both day and night games
• Marin: KTRB-860 for day games, KYCY-1550 or KTRB-860 for night games
• South Bay: KTRB-860 for both day and night games

Of course, this is dependent on the new KTRB transmitters being operational before the start of the season, which AFAIK isn't the case yet. Who's left out? Portions of Santa Cruz County, all of Monterey and San Benito Counties, and southern Santa Clara County (south San Jose, Morgan Hill, Gilroy). Sacramento's also in the dark at night, while it should be able to get day games on KTRB.

Stadia news from elsewhere

There are other sites that chronicle the daily happenings in the stadia world, but to put the A's situation in perspective, here's a short recap of what other teams and cities are doing.

• DC - The lease deal should have been done months ago, but MLB decided to get greedy and not announce the winning ownership group until after the lease agreement was completed. Meanwhile, cost estimates continued to escalate dangerously close to the approved limit even though major features were being stripped away. Stuck at an impasse, MLB decided to go through arbitration. A mediator was brought in and got MLB and the District on the same pages on many issues. Among the issues that remain: who pays for cost overruns. A new lease is due this Friday, after which the District council will deliberate and vote on it. The District is also asking for permission to exercise its eminent domain powers and push out current landowners on the ballpark site by February 7.
• Florida - The David Samson Nationwide Tour continues. The Marlins president has already visited San Antonio, Las Vegas, and Portland, while keeping options open in Miami-Dade county. Hialeah has jumped into the fray with site candidates, including the now closed Hialeah Race Track. Hialeah is intriguing because it compares in size and stature/recognition with our own Fremont. Both cities would pursue their respective local teams to get on the map. After meeting with Hialeah, Charlotte is next.
• St. Louis - The new Busch Stadium is scheduled to open April 10. Though no updates have been posted to the Cards' website in several months, the ballpark should be largely complete, with testing of things like plumbing (the "flush every toilet at the same time" test) and electrical (scoreboards) needed before the place opens up. Busch will not have trouble selling out any seats or any of its 60 luxury suites or 45 (!) party suites. The latter number has to be a record of sorts, and St. Louis native Lew Wolff and his committee almost certainly cribbed some ideas when they visited Busch last year. Based on the drawings that 360 architecture made for Wolff's August presentation, the party suite concept is merely one resplendent course of a lavish meal, with condos or a hotel being the dessert. My major critique from looking at the renderings - those upper (fourth) deck seats are both quite high and far away from the action. To be fair, it appears that HOK followed a new design convention by splitting a large upper deck into two smaller decks to accommodate more ADA/wheelchair spaces. Still, the place looks utterly enormous.
• NY Yankees - The pinstripers continue to clash with neighborhood activists crying foul over the temporary and permanent loss of parkland at the site where the new, $800 million Yankee Stadium is to be built. The Yanks claim that the net result will be a gain in parkland in the area, but at least one park facility will be on top of a multilevel parking garage. Unfortunately for the community activists, they appear to be fighting an uphill battle, since the Yanks have all necessary political power behind the stadium effort, and even noted baseball economist Andrew Zimbalist has come out in favor of the new stadium.
• NY Mets - That other New York team's plans have been overshadowed by the hullabaloo surrounding the Yankees. The Mets' new digs will cost around $444 million, and since there's a large parking lot surrounding Shea Stadium instead of existing parkland or residential/commercial buildings, the ballpark will cost far less to construct since it will be located right next to Shea.
• Kansas City - The Royals, Chiefs, and Jackson County (MO) have announced a plan for renovations to Kauffman Stadium and Arrowhead Stadium. Still refreshingly modern even after three decades, both stadia will get a single gigantic rolling roof which could cover either facility in the event of inclement weather. The roof structure resembles an oversized bus stop shelter or airplane hangar (thank goodness we live in California). Wider concourses and updated clubs/restaurants will be part of the package. Funding comes from two separate taxes that face an April referendum. Should the plan go forward after voter approval, Kansas City will be awarded a Super Bowl to occur sometime between 2012 and 2021.
• San Diego - Little tweaks to Petco Park are due this season. Chief among them is the right-centerfield fence (a.k.a. "Death Valley"), which will be brought in 11 feet (to 400')and hopefully prevent Ryan Klesko from having early season nervous breakdowns.
• Philadelphia - Homer-happy Citizens Bank Park is having its leftfield fences moved back a few feet with the wall extended to 10'6" high in hopes of cutting down on home runs.
• Chicago Cubs - Expansion of the venerable bleacher section (1,702 seats) should be completed before the season starts. The most important feature is the fact that bleacher fans will be allowed to venture into the rest of the stadium, though fans in the grandstand won't be able to enter the bleacher sections.
• Boston - The .406 Club at Fenway will finally have its hideous Plexiglas windows removed for the 2006 season, so that all of the wealthy people who can afford Red Sox tickets will have the pleasure of an open air game in Fenway. Roughly 1,100 seats will be added in all.
• Tampa Bay - The D-Rays are spending $10 million on mostly cosmetic changes, such as cleaning and repainting of walls and seats. They're trying to do the seemingly impossible task of capturing an outdoor game feel in a dome.

Some changes are major, others incremental. Expect this cycle to continue as stadium operators continue to work to differentiate their game experience from other sports and entertainment.

Vegas deadline is real

As mentioned in my post on the Vegas situation, Sin City Mayor Oscar Goodman has set a 12-month window in which 18 acres of Union Park development will be available for a sports facility. Goodman clearly wants a MLB team to relocate to Vegas, but this deadline makes it awfully inconvenient for MLB and other sports who want to use Vegas as a pawn in negotiations with other cities. Would a team suddenly announce a relocation in only a year? It doesn't sound likely given the often glacial pace of venue negotiations.

Chronicle interview with Lew Wolff

Sunday's Chronicle has the most in-depth interview with Lew Wolff seen since Wolff officially became managing partner last April. I'm not going to recap it or attempt to read between the lines this time. Read it and if you feel the need to comment, the link is below.

Oakland at a crossroads

Wednesday's Trib had an article on rezoning in Oakland. While the A's and Wolff's August plan weren't mentioned, it's possible that an A's ballpark and village concept could be developed with the help of the city's recent changes.

The proposed guidelines offer a new zone classification — CIX-2 — that allows some form of residential development along Mandela Parkway in West Oakland, the central estuary and large parcels straddling San Leandro Street near the Coliseum complex and San Leandro border.
All of those areas are currently zoned for industrial and commercial uses, but the city is under severe market pressures to convert large swaths of industrially zoned lands to housing.

Wolff's August plan would have pushed this change to occur much faster in East Oakland than current plans would dictate. Wolff's new proposal would involve a smaller amount of land, but it would also call for the City/County to acquire the land first. That would force the City/County to issue bonds to purchase the land, which at this point has to be considered a non-starter because of the past Raiders' shenanigans.
If Wolff is actually serious about building in Oakland, it may be possible with these zoning changes acting as a catalyst. That's probably the only entitlement he'd be able to get, however. Infrastructure - not likely. Below-market price land - nope. We're only two months away from Opening Day, and it looks like everyone's back to square one.

As usual, Mayor Brown doesn't help

At a business forum in San Francisco yesterday, Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown continued his hardline against public funding and stadia, while his counterpart across the bay, SF Mayor Gavin Newsom, talked up a stadium and development deal with the 49ers, who have looking for a replacement home for the better part of the last decade.

Brown went so far as to suggest that the 49ers and Raiders share the Coliseum instead of the City investing in the 49ers' stadium plans with homebuilding giant Lennar Corp. An excerpt from the Chronicle article about the forum:

"We've already got a stadium and we have a nice BART system, so why don't the people of San Francisco just come on over and the 49ers play at the Coliseum? ... Maybe we could call it the 49ers-Raiders Wonderland.''

Brown's suggestion wasn't really serious, but he wanted to make a point: The business of building ballparks and sports arenas, he said, is more wrapped up in ego and emotion than good business sense. Given that football teams play at home less than a dozen times a year each, sharing a site would be economically prudent, he said.

"I think the conversation about sports stadiums is one of the most strange and imaginary kind of thinking,'' Brown said at the South of Market forum sponsored by San Francisco Business Times. "Serious business people all of a sudden revert to some childish fantasizing.''

Of course, this bluster is easy to show when the mayor is a lame duck with no constituency to answer to regarding this issue in 11 months. Brown, however, has been very consistent with his stance, so he at least deserves credit for not bending to the political winds. If the A's leave Oakland, principles won't matter much, and Brown will be long gone from his uptown loft.

Don't skimp on the seats

At the Reds' home, Great American Ball Park, some 20,000 seat pans (bottoms) will have to be replaced due to failing brackets. Since the ballpark opened in 2003, Hussey has had to replace seat hardware multiple times. Hamilton County (owner of the stadium) and Hussey have agreed to have any further issues resolved through nonbinding mediation.

This might not have been a problem at all if Hamilton County hadn't gone cheap on the seats in the first place. While $4.1 million was budgeted for the seating contract, Hussey submitted the lowest bid, $3.4 million. With the cheaper bid comes cheaper hardware. This is also not the first time Hussey has had issues. Hussey recently settled with the Tampa Stadium Authority over the fading color in the seats in Raymond James Stadium. The intense Florida sun had turned the seats pink in ionly 3 years, and a Hussey subcontractor failed to put proper UV protection in the seats. Hussey has its products installed at dozens of other stadiums nationwide without incident so it shouldn't be a reflection of Hussey seats as a whole. But the Cincinnati problem amounts to a black eye, something Hussey can't afford as the stadium-building boom slows down and opportunities become scarce.

SJ's Grand Prix Subsidy

In the midst of the chaos at San Jose City Hall, the City Council approved a $4 million subsidy for the San Jose Grand Prix. For those of you wondering how this was done, the explanation is quite simple. It was a backroom deal. Even with the mayor's censure and removal from four important committees, it would appear as though it was business as usual. The $4 million being granted to race organizers does not require a vote, as a stadium would, because it's for operational costs, not money being spent on venue development.

Uh oh, now the Twins want out

Upset over the lack of progress in getting a new Minneapolis ballpark built, the Twins asked a Hennepin County judge to relieve them of their remaining lease at the Metrodome after the 2006 season. There are many issues at play including revenue sharing from new premium seats, but it really comes down to the Twins' new digs in the end. This promises to only get uglier.

What I don't understand is why Selig would allow both the Marlins and Twins to proceed in this manner simultaneously. If they want to get the most leverage out of negotiations with their existing home cities and their prospective relocation cities, it would make the most sense to let them work on different schedules so that they don't appear to be competing with each other.

Stone hints at SJ ballot measure?

In today's Merc, it was revealed that the Quakes' soccer stadium initiative will be pushed back a couple of weeks due to a heavy agenda. Later in the article is a quote from Baseball San Jose leader and Santa Clara County Assessor Larry Stone regarding a joint soccer/baseball facility initiative:

"I wouldn't mind frankly having them go jointly to ballot at the same time and capture two professional sports franchises,'' said Santa Clara County Assessor Larry Stone, a leader with Baseball San Jose. "But if the lower-priced soccer ballot measure preceded a baseball measure, it would doom major league baseball in this area for a long time."

The interesting thing about the separate soccer and baseball efforts is that they both have a smaller chance of passing if they remain separate than if they're combined. It's hard to conceive of voters approving funds for an expansion MLS team after one just skipped town. It's also difficult to understand why voters would vote for a ballpark when the A's haven't officially declared their interest.

The key, then, is Lew Wolff. Wolff is supposedly going to meet with MLS commissioner Don Garber sometime this month to discuss Wolff's interest in Earthquakes 4.0. Wolff isn't interested in building the soccer stadium on the Diridon South site; he wants to make the fire training site work. To refresh your memory as to how it would work, he's the graphic I drew up 3 weeks ago:

As much as Wolff isn't going to officially say that San Jose is a potential A's site, it would be crazy for him to interfere with the ballpark process and eliminate San Jose prematurely, especially if Oakland doesn't work out. I'm not going to say that it's been Wolff's grand plan all along - there are too many variables at play - but it's a potentially compelling option to explore for numerous reasons.

Courting Vegas

I've put off writing much about Las Vegas since this blog's inception. This is not because of any opinion about whether Vegas is a viable relocation candidate or not. Instead, real information about Sin City's plans has been scarce. Now that the Marlins are in active discussions with potential relocation candidates including Vegas, some details are starting to come out that give a better picture of what's happening inside the head of flamboyant Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman.

Political Landscape
Before I get into the details, it's important to understand the relationship between the City of Las Vegas and Clark County. The City is the county seat and all of the county's administration offices are downtown. However, most of what visitors see when they visit Las Vegas isn't technically within Vegas city limits. The section of the Strip that holds all of the enormous new casinos is part of an unincorporated section of Clark County called Paradise. Despite this, all of the businesses within this section have Las Vegas addresses. This is due to rules set up decades ago to encourage development on the Strip without the taxation associated with setting up in the City. In return, Clark County funded and built some impressive amounts of infrastructure for that area and has tons of cash to build and maintain its schools and other services.

Goodman officially presides over the City's portion of the Strip, which includes older casinos such Binion's, where the World Series of Poker is played. This is considered downtown Las Vegas, and in the past it has suffered, living in the shadow of its glitzier neighbor to the south. Tens of millions have been poured into redevelopment over the past two decades to improve the image of downtown. The biggest project so far has been the Fremont Street Experience, a huge overhead light show that serves to visually connect numerous businesses along the street. The area has managed to lose its dingy reputation, but it's difficult to keep up with billions of private dollars being invested in the construction and renovation of the big casinos down the street.

Inside the city limits, downtown is basically defined by a redevelopment zone, first created in 1986 and expanded twice since then. The creation of such a zone is crucial to raising funds for various public works and public-private projects. Public funds for such projects can be raised without a referendum, and in some cases eminent domain can be used. Below are an aerial view of downtown and a map of the redevelopment zone (in tan/brown), with the dotted line at the bottom representing the southern city limit.





The green section above is a 61-acre parcel called Union Park. It isn't actually a park. Instead, it's an empty tract of land that fills Goodman's dreams. There are various models of what this blank slate will look like throughout City Hall. Plans currently call for an Alzheimer's research center, which will break ground in a month or so. City Hall may move there. High-rise condominium development is scheduled for the block in conjunction with ground-level retail, a performing arts center, and public space in a sort of self-contained village concept. The new World Market Center furniture showcase and exhibition space had its first phase opened last year to resounding success. It sits kitty corner to the southwest, and expansion is planned for the area just to the west of Union Park.

Goodman's vision wouldn't be complete without a ballpark. One variant of his plan has the ballpark on 18 acres of Union Park. Goodman hasn't revealed how exactly the ballpark would be financed except to say that it has to be done creatively. Some redevelopment funds can be made available, but probably not for an entire ballpark. Since Las Vegas is not known for its pleasant desert summers, any ballpark would have to have a retractable dome, adding $100 million to its cost. That could push the cost to $400-500 million even if the land were thrown in for free. It's possible that a ballpark could be an extension of the World Market Center or some other flexible convention space, now that technology is available to move a natural grass field either on rollers (Arizona Cardinals new Glendale, AZ stadium) or in pieces (Millenium Stadium in Cardiff, Wales). A typical field covers nearly 4 acres (160,000 square feet), making it a potentially compelling, wide open (no columns) exhibition space with plenty of amenities attached (clubs, restaurants, suites). This is all speculation, of course, but it makes sense for a city bent on dominating the convention market. Having the space available would also help pay the bills during the baseball offseason.

In September a large national developer, Related Cos., backed out of a deal to build condos at Union Park. Related is focusing on the Las Ramblas project, which is fronted by George Clooney among others. Vegas is experiencing a high-rise condo-building boom, so it wasn't long before numerous other builders stepped to the plate. The eventual "winner" was Newland Communities of San Diego. Newland has an option to buy up to 7.6 acres of land at Union Park, with the ballpark's 18 acres potentially available for other development if a pro sports team is not negotiating with Vegas on a stadium deal in one year. This is all contingent upon Newland breaking ground in the next year on its development work. Other land in the area could be made available outside Union Park, but that may require more complex dealing, especially if casinos become directly involved by providing land near the Strip. This development is extremely important because it's the first time that Goodman has played the deadline card. Over the past several years MLB frequently used Vegas as its #1 relocation target. Vegas was considering a compelling candidate for the Expos until it became clear that moving to DC would provide MLB significantly more money than a move to Vegas or Portland. Goodman's tired of allowing Vegas to play the mistress; he evidently wants a real commitment from MLB. We'll see if MLB responds in kind or is a mere tease.

Casino Paradox
The table below shows Clark County's 35 largest employers as of Q2 2005. It should come as no surprise that casinos make up almost 70% of the list. Public entities cover almost all of the rest.



The State of Nevada has been pushing hard to bring in other industries with mixed degrees of success. Nevada has several advantages over California when it comes to taxes and incorporation, but so far the corporate exodus from California predicted when the dot-com crash and recession hit hasn't really happened. Southern Nevada's explosive growth means that it's just a matter of time before it starts to innovate and land other industries. Casinos still have the lion's share of potential corporate interest for a ballpark, and judging from the number of San Diego-area casinos that had suites at Petco Park (all of them), selling suites and club seats to casinos would be like shooting fish in a barrel. The casinos would in turn comp their high rollers and dignitaries in their suites, writing it off as the cost of doing business and adding it to their portfolio of available entertainment.

As interested as the casinos may be, some major gaming interests have expressed displeasure at the idea of a ballpark being built with public money. Their argument is that they invest their own money in their facilities without expecting handouts. They also pay taxes, an idea that has been lost in the recent era of stadium building, with PILOTs (payments in lieu of taxes) often used as a method to help finance construction. Goodman said in a recent USA Today article, "Major League Baseball needs us more than we need them." That's only half of the story. While the Marlins, A's, and Twins are less moneymaking franchises than some others with new ballparks, it's not as if MLB is hemorrhaging red ink by allowing them to operate. The other half of the Vegas story is this: The casinos don't need baseball, but baseball in Vegas definitely needs casinos. Goodman's posturing aside; it's obvious that he wants to get a MLB team to earn Vegas its Major League City merit badge.

Sports Betting
The argument about gambling poisoning pro sports may have made sense twenty years ago, but it doesn't today. Professional players and teams make such astronomical amounts of money that it doesn't make sense for them to risk their livelihoods to shave points or throw games. Still, MLB reeks of the stench of the nearly century-old Black Sox scandal and Pete Rose's addictions. It would make sense for MLB to distance itself as much as possible to avoid the appearance of impropriety. However, a gray area already exists by virtue of Indian casinos buying suites in states where they operate. Who actually operates those casinos? The big corporate gaming interests, of course. Sure, the jobs and some money go to the tribes, but it's the gaming industry that provides the know-how and capital. It wouldn't be too difficult to connect the dots.
Nevada is the only state in the union with legalized betting on sports. With all of the intertwined money and the encroachment of gaming interests closer to major metropolitan areas, at some point the bellyaching may all become moot. The pro sports each want the casinos to take their respective leagues off the sports books to eliminate any concern about impropriety. That's a hard sell considering that the industry makes billions every year on sports betting. Would they simply agree to kill a revenue source just to improve the image of their hometown? The casinos already provide image to spare and Vegas really doesn't need any help in that department.

Where are the fans?
We know that Oscar Goodman is a fan. An influential fan, too, as the recent visits by Marlins officials to Vegas indicate. But where are the prospective seat fillers - the hardcore and casual fans who are expected to regularly go to games by buying season tickets? The answer to this question isn't clear. Vegas's growth puts the metro at 1.8 million residents and climbing. That's not exactly huge since it's only as big as Santa Clara County and smaller than the combined East Bay (Alameda/Contra Costa Counties). Many of the area's transplants work in the gaming industry, which presents two problems. Many of the jobs are low-paying, leaving a large part of the population out of the preferred demographic. Since Vegas is a 24/7 city, one-third of the place is working at all times, further reducing the pool of potential fans. Sparse attendance at AAA Las Vegas 51’s games is cited as a negative, but the experience there is nothing compared to a game in an air-conditioned, retractable dome stadium.

Goodman's argument is that some percentage of his city's 40 million visitors will see a baseball game there. How much? One percent? Five? It sounds like a flawed premise, especially when you consider that the vast majority of visitors already come from markets with major league baseball. The argument may have worked a decade ago, when Vegas was still in its "family" phase and trying to attract everyone regardless of income level. These days, Vegas has decidedly gone with a more upmarket approach with the ultra-lux casinos like Wynn Las Vegas, with higher-class entertainment and restaurants. Many visitors come from Southern California (27% according to some estimates), the Bay Area, New York, and Chicago. Those markets are already saturated with major league baseball. There's a potential niche in Goodman's approach in that for instance, a Chicago-based businessman and lifelong Cubs fan might be attending a convention in Vegas while the Cubs are in town for the weekend, prompting him to grab tickets. Even that is a crapshoot because of schedule incompatibilities. Some stadium junkies like me would go just to check out the ballpark, but that's typically a one-shot deal and the novelty will fade very quickly.

My biggest concern for Vegas is that it lacks a grassroots organization, like the Oregon Stadium Campaign or Baseball San Jose. These groups are vital for many reasons, including the fact that they automatically gauge and foster support. By conducting petition drives and surveys, they can quickly assess the public's interest in baseball from hardcore and casual fans, families and corporations. They can raise money for pro-stadium ad campaigns should a stadium come to a vote. They often are comprised of numerous local civic and business leaders who can put their considerable weight behind a campaign by supporting it. Most importantly, these groups can keep the issue in the forefront of the region's consciousness. It could be argued that Goodman is filling this role now, but what if he runs for Nevada's available U.S. Senate seat or for the governorship this spring? Suddenly there will be a vacuum with little in place to fill it as Goodman spends much of his time campaigning for a different office. Perhaps Hall-of-Famer Reggie Jackson, who lives in Vegas and has long advocated bringing a team to Sin City, could become the face of the effort. That could work in terms of rallying public support, but it may backfire when dealing with MLB, whose club-like mentality may not have any interest in making room for an outspoken maverick like Reggie.

Conclusion
The clock is ticking for Vegas. If it's going to happen, MLB will have to do the proverbial "sh*t or get off the pot." The mayor isn't messing around anymore. He's playing for keeps. That should concern fans of the A's and Marlins, since both of their leases are going to end soon and there's no telling what Goodman will do to make a deal with MLB. There are major challenges with the MLB-to-Vegas effort, but as I've said before, it's all about the deal. Wolff's aborted baseball village concept may not be feasible in the Bay Area due to its size, but could it be done in Vegas? We can argue until we're blue in the face about one the viability of baseball in Las Vegas, but if something were to occur to give a team and MLB a sweetheart deal, it may be impossible for baseball to say no. That would prove that the more things change in Sin City, the more they stay the same, eh? Then again, there's little reason to believe that Vegas has a ton of cash lying around somewhere just waiting to be spent on a stadium. Once real financial details are available, look for an analysis here. Until then, the mayor has some pretty models to play with.

Plan B: Two new sites and a different financing plan

From the Chronicle: Chip Johnson's Friday column substantiates the rumor from a couple of weeks ago in which Wolff scrapped his original vision for something smaller. That's the good news. The bad news? He's not funding the project entirely himself.

The City of Oakland came up with the two site alternatives, both of which amount to 30 acres each.

The sites:

• Coliseum North Jr.: Between 50th and 66th Avenues along I-880/San Leandro St. I am coining it Coliseum North II because it essentially is a smaller version of Wolff's original site. It may be pieced together from land in which the City found willing sellers. What's not known is how the site is situated along that industrial stretch. Its proximity to Coliseum BART will be key. The site is in the lower right quadrant of the picture below.
  
• Tidewater/Oakport/High St. Estuary: This is essentially across the Nimitz (I-880) from Coliseum North. It's an industrial area with one intriguing fact: 11 acres of it is owned by the East Bay Regional Parks District. PG&E has a 15-acre facility across the street. The site is obviously not very close to BART. The site is in the upper left quadrant of the picture below.
  

The financing:

Here's where it gets tricky. These two sites' size makes the idea of private development being used to completely foot the bill for stadium construction not feasible. Wolff has proposed that the City/County/Coliseum Authority acquire the land, while the A's would put at least $25 per square foot towards the cost. That equates to $1 million per acre, which is below market value for industrial land in the Bay Area. The hope is that surrounding development could help pay for land acquisition and construction, but there's no illusion that it will provide all of the necessary funds.

Wolff's new plan sounds reminiscent of the DC ballpark plan, in which the District acquired the site, designated a portion of it for the ballpark and the rest for developers. In its haste the District controversially went the eminent domain route, which I wouldn't expect for this effort, especially during an election year. The hard part is figuring out how much public money has to be raised for it, which someone at the City Center will have to figure out. Having local pols back the plan is another issue altogether.

Of the two sites, the Tidewater site looks the most intriguing. It's waterfront, there are fewer property owners, and one large piece is already owned by a public agency. The EBParks land won't be free - Oakland/Alameda County/Coliseum Authority would have to buy it - but if a deal could be worked out that provides open space or parkland, it could be beneficial to all parties. The PG&E site's a different story. It's not a substation like the situation in San Jose. It's a local operations center, complete with a vehicle yard, dispatch, and customer service. If the City can find a large, suitable piece of land on which PG&E can relocate, it could work, but the costs associated with that land acquisition/swap and relocation costs have to be factored into the total cost of the plan.

One last interesting factoid: Coliseum North is in Larry Reid's district, while Tidewater is in Ignacio De La Fuente's district.

Oakland: Let's try Plan B

Not surprisingly, the City of Oakland and Coliseum Authority officials have admitted that efforts to get the land deal for Wolff's 100-acre Coliseum North development are going nowhere. And for the first time, Wolff has become upset over the process.

So what's Plan B? Building on the existing Coliseum parking lot, of course. As indicated in Trib reporter Paul Rosynsky's article, there are several issues with that arrangement, starting with the elimination of parking for the other tenants (Raiders, Warriors). The kind of aggressive development strategy that Wolff is considering to finance the stadium may not be feasible with a Coliseum-based ballpark. Coliseum South appears to be available, if anyone's interested, though it's not nearly as large as Wolff's plan.

Wolff has made comments to the effect that he is willing to consider other sites. If it comes down to the Coliseum parking lot being the only alternative, someone's going to have to get extremely creative about the financing plan. Since the Raiders are able to leave cleanly after 2010, Oakland/Alameda County may find themselves in the extremely uncomfortable position of being forced to choose between the Raiders and A's.

As for Wolff's request for a three-year extension to the existing Coliseum lease? Don't be surprised if it comes with a price tag - perhaps a MOU or letter of intent, something that indicates that "everyone's on the same page." Same goes for the Raiders.

---

The Fremont Argus is also backing a Fremont site should efforts in Oakland fail. Fremont has started up a stadium task force, of which I am a member.

MLB explains why DC isn't progressing

MLB COO Bob DuPuy wrote an opinion piece in today's Washington Post. In it he describes the trials and tribulations that the DC government has gone through in getting the Navy Yard/Anacostia ballpark project off the ground. Since it is his piece and he is representing MLB, one can assume a certain amount of bias. Once one gets past the bias, it starts to appear like DuPuy is arguing for a new deal. Take this excerpt:

Because the Nationals will generate $250 million for the District in sales taxes and rent payments generated at the stadium (large businesses pay the rest of construction costs), baseball has input into the new stadium's design and construction, but government officials make the decisions. D.C. planners chose the stadium's architect. The city government, not baseball or the Nationals, decided what the Nationals' new stadium will look like and what material will go into it, from the type of concrete used to the types of seats in the suites. Government workers selected the stadium's construction companies, and these same governmental employees will oversee the construction work.

But now, some members of the D.C. Council have asked baseball to pay for any stadium cost overruns, even though city personnel will control the variables that cause the stadium to be built on budget or run over cost. Asking baseball to pay for overruns when D.C. government officials are in charge of the stadium's design and construction is like MasterCard telling you to pay your credit card bill even though MasterCard gets to do all your shopping. No consumer would agree to such a provision, and neither will Major League Baseball.

Then juxtapose that with this (from earlier in the piece):

When teams are in charge of design and construction, any savings go to them and any cost overruns are borne by them. That's what was done with new ballparks for the Detroit Tigers and the San Francisco Giants. That's also how MCI Center was built. On the other hand, when a government agency is in charge of design and construction, the benefits and risks are covered by the city. That's what happened in Baltimore at Camden Yards and in Cleveland and Pittsburgh as well.

It's obvious that MLB is blaming DC for its inability to properly manage the project and its stakeholders. But it also appears as if MLB is suggesting that if the current agreement were torn up and one were drawn up where the District stepped aside, things would be moving along much more smoothly. The ballpark matter is bound for arbitration in the near future, and it is unlikely that an arbitrator will give MLB that kind of control. Stranger things have happened, however, and as the tide continues to turn against the existing project and its escalating costs, just about anything's possible.

We can only hope that Wolff maintains his position of privately building the ballpark, thereby controlling costs and employing more efficient methods, such as design-build.

On a related note, a DC contractor group wrote to the Post as well, arguing that cost overruns at many ballparks are to be blamed on bad labor (read: union) contracts. I'm not touching that argument.

The future of stadiums?

ESPN's sports business reporter Darren Rovell penned a neat article on the use of technology and automation in enhancing the fan experience. A single smart card with RFID could one day act as a complete ticketing and purchasing system for parking, entry, concessions, and merchandise. Not only would the system speed up transactions, it could be used for security purposes as well. There are obviously issues to work out regarding data security and encryption. It will also be a challenge to change patrons' thinking to the idea of prepaid or rechargeable smart cards instead of cash or credit/debit cards. Incentives can be given to those who subscribe, and it can be said that the "rewards card club" memberships many teams have introduced the past few years are a mere stepping stone to a more comprehensive approach. As a person who works for a company putting out leading edge technology, I wholeheartedly endorse the concept.

Petco Park tour

I've spent the last week in San Diego visiting family, and while I was there I took in a tour of Petco Park. It proved to be a highly educational experience, especially when trying to look at the venue from the perspective of a team owner such as Lew Wolff. Wolff likes several features of Petco including its "neighborhoods," or areas of regular or season ticket holders. One potential positive in the concept is that the community feel created by neighborhoods could be a factor in subscription retention in years to come, particularly when the novelty effect wears off.

As the tour guide led us through and pointed out many of the unique design elements of Petco, I made some of my own observations:

1. Revenue-generating opportunities are more diverse at Petco than at SBC Park. The Western Metal Supply building alone has a restaurant, bleachers, and several party suites. The only significant party area at SBC is the concourse behind center field, which is sometimes roped off when it's reserveed for group gatherings.
   
2. The Sony Dugout Club, which is reserved for the 150 or so ticketholders immediately behind home plate, is fantastic. It's ostentatious with its huge leather booths, granite tables, and multiple plasma televisions, but if you're a corporate guy looking to impress a client, it's a can't-miss venue. It also has a great view of the Padres' batting cage.
   
3. The bleacher concept is only flawed in the sense that the risers descend to the field with the fence partially obstructing some views. Other than that, it's fantastic. The "beach" area will be expanded slightly when the fence is pulled in before the start of the season. BTW, the individual plastic seats on the concrete risers are the Colosseum-Two model made by Dant Clayton, a highly reputable bleacher manufacturer out of Louisville, KY.
   
4. The standing room areas are brilliant, perhaps too brilliant. Since the standing room option ($5) has become so popular, seatholders immediately in front of the SRO drinkrails have gotten annoyed at the occasional spilled drink - so much that the Pads are taking out an entire row in front of the drink rail. A nice side effect for the team is that it will create a little more ticket scarcity since a couple hundred seats may be removed from inventory.
   
5. The Toyota Terrace has separate club seating and suites. The tour guide pointed out the fact that several Indian gaming interests have suites. Sycuan even holds regular tribal meetings in their suite. I'll expand on this in an article on Las Vegas that will be posted on Friday.
   
6. With 17 acres to work with, HOK and architect Antoine Predock had a large space on which they could place buildings, plants, and architectural elements. With an A's ballpark, 17 acres may not be available because of costly land acquisition (5 acres = $30+ million). The acreage was used effectively, as much of the ballpark is recessed from the street, minimizing visual impact.
7. The use of differing sizes of squarish and rectangular sandstone was a nice touch. It really softens the facade while paying homage to Aztec architecture, albeit with a modern twist.
   
8. Ramps are hidden while stairs leading up to the main concourse are prominently featured, which is reminiscent of an Aztec temple. There are 18 elevators and a few escalators, but they are also hidden away.
9. The stadium appears to be built quite high when looking at it from the field, but that's only because of the proximity of the mezzanine and upper decks, which are both cantilevered well over the lower deck. It would be lower if not for the two levels of suites and club lounges, which effectively add 25-30 feet to the height of the stadium. From the streets lining the outfield, the stadium facade is some 30 feet high when it meets the sidewalk. Look straight up and you'll see the upper two decks. The field is not significantly below the street (~6 feet).
10. The Park at the Park is a great concept. It's one I think can be integrated into an A's ballpark that could be a big community asset if executed well. It doesn't beat McCovey Cove and the Promenade, however.
    
11. The Giants went a little cheap on the video/scoreboard solution deployed at SBC Park. They signed a huge package deal with Panasonic, who not only provided the scoreboard and video board (dubbed Astrovision), but also the TV's in the suites and concourses and the distributed audio system. At Petco, the Padres partnered with Cox Cable and Sony, which meant that HDTV and Sony widescreens are everywhere. There are also little scoreboards above each concourse that have static signage attached. Of course, the Pads had a nice little financial and political delay which allowed them to get the HD stuff in house, which the Giants didn't a few years back. That just means that when it comes time for the Giants to do some upgrades, they won't be cheap. Memo to Lew: 1080p LCD! And Meyer Sound - because nobody does it better!
    
12. I counted four different Hussey Seating seat models in use at Petco. The exposed suite seats were covered with tarps. Leather rolling chairs were pulled into each suite. The first tier club seat holders got nice, wide chairs with padded inserts for both the back and seat. The high-roller Sony Dugout Club seats were a high-back variety with fold-out tablets, like those found in a university auditorium. The regular seats were the old-school looking Legend model.
    

For those who happen to be in San Diego in the near future, I fully recommend the tour. An adult ticket costs $9 with discounts for seniors and kids. The tour runs about 90 minutes.