KCRag Forum

KC-wildcat wrote: In any event, we go back out there at 1:45pm.  Bring a cooler up to the line.  In our minds, the only logical way to administer the dry-duck seats is first come first serve, one ticket per person.  First 425 in line get tickets.  Reward people for standing in line for 2 hours.  This is how a lot of concerts do it.  You've gotta be in line to get a ticket. 

Nope.  Not at the K

People were walking away from the ticket office with stacks of 20-30 tickets.  Many of them turned right around and started scalping them for $20.      

So dry-duck tickets go for sale at 3:00pm, but you went there at 1:45 to get in line and somebody was already getting them..stacks of them...to scalp (presumably)?  Was that the case...that's pretty shitty.

How much are the "dry duck" tickets at the window?  ..and how the hell are you supposed to get them then, stand in line?  That's crappy, I want some, but don't want to wait in line all day...they should be available ahead-of-time, online, like every other ticket in the damn stadium.  And people wonder why we're looked upon as a minor league town...What a joke.

im2kull wrote: So dry-duck tickets go for sale at 3:00pm, but you went there at 1:45 to get in line and somebody was already getting them..stacks of them...to scalp (presumably)?  Was that the case...that's pretty shitty.

How much are the "dry duck" tickets at the window?  ..and how the hell are you supposed to get them then, stand in line?  That's crappy, I want some, but don't want to wait in line all day...they should be available ahead-of-time, online, like every other ticket in the damn stadium.  And people wonder why we're looked upon as a minor league town...What a joke.

Why does that make them "minor league"?  Lots of MLB parks have similar seating and same day sales practices.

Great game tonight.

Yup, I finally got to see a win.  I was worried early.

Food update:  I was reading on the Royals.com forum that there were many food complaints so they have changed up many menus....I didn't eat anything last night but tonight got a regular hot dog...pretty standard stuff....little too much bun for the dog but can't complain about the hot dog itself (considering what it is).

How many years before the Royals need a new stadium? 10 years? 20? 100% serious question.

In 10 years, Kauffman will be 46 years old and the financial investment would've been $25 M/year in subsidies for the facility.

In 20 years, Kauffman will be 56 years old and the financial investment would've been $12.5 M/year in subsidies for the facility.

How much will a brand new stadium cost in 10 years vs. the cost 2-3 years ago?

KCPowercat wrote: I appreciate you keeping it front in center. Without constant reminders in royals topics I would completely forget royals stadium wasn't downtown being a dead space 284 days a year.

But it would replace one of many, many spaces that is currently dead 365/year. Not a bad trade IMHO. 

trailerkid wrote: But it would replace one of many, many spaces that is currently dead 365/year. Not a bad trade IMHO. 

Yeah Right! Get a grip!  It would be a giant development blockage for the next 40 Years!  Put a stadium downtown and you effectively turn 4-8 square blocks into a development "Dead Zone", for the LONG term!  I would take surface lots with SOME possibility of future high density usage, versus a DT stadium with an overall Low Density usage for the next 4 decades (at least!).

How hard is it for people to understand that a DT stadium is about the lowest density structure you can build, besides surface lots.  Its not like the ballpark magically turns into an open-to-the-public outdoor park during the off days!

im2kull wrote: Yeah Right! Get a grip!  It would be a giant development blockage for the next 40 Years!  Put a stadium downtown and you effectively turn 4-8 square blocks into a development "Dead Zone", for the LONG term!  I would take surface lots with SOME possibility of future high density usage, versus a DT stadium with an overall Low Density usage for the next 4 decades (at least!).

How hard is it for people to understand that a DT stadium is about the lowest density structure you can build, besides surface lots.  Its not like the ballpark magically turns into an open-to-the-public outdoor park during the off days!

You forgot the &&&.

And you didn't answer the question about how long the renovations will last. I'm hoping longer than the millions that were flushed with the Kemper parking and redo.

trailerkid wrote: How much will a brand new stadium cost in 10 years vs. the cost 2-3 years ago?

At least $1,000,000,000 (That's One Billion Dollars), and that's not a joke.  I wouldn't be surprised if a new stadium in 10 years would tip the 1.5 Billion mark, and if my math is correct, that 12.5 - 14 Million a year in subsidiarys for the current K doesn't come close to touching the bare minimum (purely construction - No Infrastructure/Parking/Sewers/Electrical) costs of a new stadium.  Going by your math, I'd say we got a pretty good deal, and that its much more cost effective to renovate the K and expand its lifetime by a few more decades, than build another stadium downtown as many other cities are now regretting.  You know, there was a time that cookie cutter stadiums were all the rave, in every american city, and look how that turned out!  How many of those have been demolished now....1...2...10?  Not to mention how many cities still owe money on them....Houston...Seattle...Cincy.  Oh and how the list goes on!

trailerkid wrote: How many years before the Royals need a new stadium? 10 years? 20? 100% serious question.

At least 20 years.


PS - I was too busy typing up that last response, take a chill pill..

trailerkid wrote: How many years before the Royals need a new stadium? 10 years? 20? 100% serious question.
How much will a brand new stadium cost in 10 years vs. the cost 2-3 years ago?
But it would replace one of many, many spaces that is currently dead 365/year. Not a bad trade IMHO. 

Serious answers:

(1) Who knows but it really doesn't matter?  Even if a new stadium was built instead of the rehab you would still be looking at improvements/repairs 10 and 20 years from now.  Plus the chances were that if the Royals got a new stadium the taxpayers would have been forking over more funds for a new Chiefs stadium instead of a Arrowhead rehab.

(2) Again, who knows and does it really matter?  The decision was made by the voters years ago and cannot be changed so why discuss?  There are many factors that determine the cost (such as land and infrastructure upgrades) that would still might make a new stadium at TSC more favorable than a dt location.

(3) I don't think there is a 4 block area dt that is a dead space right now.  A stadium will create a deadspace that is the size of 4 blocks that will be dead over 280 days a year.  That same four block area that would be covered by three story office buildings/residences would have a greater impact that a baseball stadium over a year's time, IMHO.


PS
Has MD taken over your postings?  

aknowledgeableperson wrote: PS
Has MD taken over your postings?  

TheBigChuckbowski wrote: Wow. Is this Maitre D?

That seems to be the popular question as of late...


*Sock Puppet*

AKP...I pretty much agree with everything you posted, for once.  Especially about the dead space.  I used to be a huge DT stadium supporter, untill one day when I realized what a future development roadblock it would be, and how incredibly dead it is in Seattle, Denver, and STL when there isn't a game going on.

im2kull wrote: AKP...I pretty much agree with everything you posted, for once.  Especially about the dead space.  I used to be a huge DT stadium supporter, untill one day when I realized what a future development roadblock it would be, and how incredibly dead it is in Seattle, Denver, and STL when there isn't a game going on.

I have always said that.  I wanted a downtown because I thought if would be a great way to expose downtown to locals, as well as the rest of the country.

But stadiums are horrible in urban areas when it comes to urban fabric and development.  The only way land gets developed around stadiums is when it's extremely subsidized.  Something like the P&L district.  The idea that stadiums create economic development is totally false. Stadiums create mass demand for parking.  That's it.

Having said that, I would take a downtown stadium in a heartbeat because I like them and would love to have the KC skyline as a backdrop of our baseball stadium instead of what we have now.  But we didn't hurt our downtown by not building a new stadium down there.  I think we will be fine with the arena and arts center.  Those fit into the urban fabric downtown much better than a stadium would and neither of them will create mass demand for parking lots nearby that a large stadium would.

KCPowercat wrote: Yup, I finally got to see a win.  I was worried early.

Food update:  I was reading on the Royals.com forum that there were many food complaints so they have changed up many menus....I didn't eat anything last night but tonight got a regular hot dog...pretty standard stuff....little too much bun for the dog but can't complain about the hot dog itself (considering what it is).

Tried the Chicken Tenders based on GRID's (and someone else's) recommendation. They were very good. Hard to mess up a chicken tender, but these seemed pretty high quality. And the fries were good.

My Lancer also mentioned they had received tons of complaints. Hopefully all the food starts being decent quality.

Also enjoyed Smithwicks Irish Ale throughout the game from the Irish Pub (behind 236 or so). $8 a pop - but I think they're larger cups than the 12 oz domestic bottles they bring to your seats for $7.25/per. Not a bad deal - relatively speaking.

im2kull wrote: And people wonder why we're looked upon as a minor league town...What a joke.

Way to confirm that you don't get out much. 

Its funny, when the Royals got rid of their game-day general admission seats, people complained. Now they bring back game-day general admission seats....and people complain.

Wall Street Journal: Loyal Fans Are Batting Cleanup

A visit to Kansas City, Mo., illustrates the depth of the recession, as well as the tenacity of some of baseball's most-devoted -- some would say masochistic -- fans.

After making the playoffs seven times during its first 17 years, Kansas City hasn't entered the post-season since winning the World Series in 1985. Only the Florida Marlins had weaker attendance last year. Even so, the Royals had 9,200 season-ticket holders last year, many of them baseball nuts such as Ralph Sauceda, a 58-year-old former high-school slugger whose brother-in-law and nephew -- Diego and David Segui -- had stellar major-league careers.

For 2009, the Royals hoped for an increase in season-ticket holders. A $250 million remodeling of Kauffman Stadium, financed 90% by taxpayers, added a giant new scoreboard, seats near the outfield water fountains, greater spaciousness throughout the park and expanded food offerings. Moreover, after three consecutive seasons of improvement -- from 56 wins in 2005 to 75 in 2008 -- the club made some off-season acquisitions that boosted its payroll 20% to a team record of $70 million.

But last fall, the economy started wreaking havoc. The club had expected to retain 90% of its season-ticket holders, up from 87% last year. But as it turned out, that number dropped to 75%. "I've never seen so many longtime customers -- some with season tickets dating back to 1969 -- saying they have no choice but to bow out this year," says Mark Tilson, Royals vice president of marketing and sales. Adds Terry Loose, a season-ticket salesman for the team, "I've literally had my customers say it came down to buying the tickets or feeding their families. I told them to feed their families."...

Like a few other teams, the Royals are bending the golden rule of season-ticket sales, which awards the best seats to those with unbroken longevity. Long-time holders who bowed out of Kauffman Stadium this year can retain their priority status for 2010 by going to as few as 12 games in 2009. Should the Royals make the playoffs this year -- as many prognosticators expect -- holders who dropped out can reclaim their seats for the post-season by committing to season tickets next year.

Does anybody know where to find a list of season tickets per MLB club?  Is KC the lowest?

If we didn't redo the stadium, the team would be gone by 2010-11.  I still believe that and now I believe it even more.  I wanted a downtown stadium, but couldn’t take a chance on losing the team and I’m not sure a downtown stadium would have increased attendance much anyway.

If we didn’t redo Kauffman, Glass would not have spent more on payroll and the stadium would not have produced any more reasons to go to a game.

We would be averaging 5k a game during the week right now and maybe 10-15k on Fridays and Saturdays.  The economy combined with the decades of fan erosion and a dated stadium would have destroyed the Royals ability to compete within the MLB.

They would be the absolute joke of MLB and MLB would do everything they could to get them relocated or contracted.

Let’s hope for a good year and better attendance.  It would suck to be a competitive team all year, with a very updated ballpark and still be dead last in attendance and that is very much a possibility.  I am hoping to hell the Royals make the playoffs.  That and a better economy should make the Royals attendance respectable again.

GRID wrote: If we didn't redo the stadium, the team would be gone by 2010-11.  I still believe that and now I believe it even more. 

Indeed, gone to the KS side.

Grid, no offense meant but what is your post even about?  What's the point?  It is renovated, move on. We all understand you are disappointed with the attendance numbers.

kcmetro wrote: Indeed, gone to the KS side.

That Kansas side was going to pay for and build a 400 million dollar baseball stadium for the Royals?  That’s some funny shit.  Would they have STAR bonded the entire state to pay for it?  If they did, where it would it go?  Speedway, K-7 corridor?  Kauffman stadium’s location sucks, but it’s still within 20 minutes of 1.2 million people.  A location on the far west side of town would have cut that in half.  Bottom line is it would not have helped the Royals to build a stadium in Kansas and I don’t think that was ever even a possibility anyway.  Besides, if this community wanted a new park, which the overwhelming majority didn’t, it would have been built downtown and not in Kansas.

If this town had a clue, it would have built a downtown stadium and kept the Chiefs at the TSC, which our without the help of the Kansas side.  That didn’t happen.

Had nothing happened, both teams would be in serious trouble today.  Far more serious than I could have imagined back when the city was debating this topic.

KCPowercat wrote: Grid, no offense meant but what is your post even about?  What's the point?  It is renovated, move on. We all understand you are disappointed with the attendance numbers.

I’m fine with the renovations, I’m just saying that if we didn’t renovate, we would be in MUCH worse shape today.  I don’t think the Royals would have made it through this.