dave mcbride Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Buffalo, despite being in the bottom half of capacity (90.1) is ranked sixth overall. The metro area size (1.5 million) is second to last, but the Bills are essentially tied with Jacksonville (1.6 million). There are a number of teams more likely to move than the Bills, as this makes clear: the Raiders, the Chargers, the Jaguars, the Vikings, and (to a lesser extent now) the Saints. You need to click through this to see all of the profiles: http://www.bizjournals.com/specials/slideshow/13.html?page=1 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process, and TV ratings are significantly more important than metro area size (my sense is that the Bills are a more popular TV draw nationally when they're fielding a good team than many teams with larger metro areas). From this, I see the current rhetoric as the beginning rumblings of a drive for a new stadium, a drive that will most likely be successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process, and TV ratings are significantly more important than metro area size (my sense is that the Bills are a more popular TV draw nationally when they're fielding a good team than many teams with larger metro areas). From this, I see the current rhetoric as the beginning rumblings of a drive for a new stadium, a drive that will most likely be successful. 865288[/snapback] I'd love to see the Bills build a new stadium. That would mean they're in Buffalo for the long haul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheZone78 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 I'd love to see the Bills build a new stadium. That would mean they're in Buffalo for the long haul. 865292[/snapback] What about building a new stadium around the Niagara Falls area just across the border? That's a booming economical area and will likely increase fans coming in from the Hamilton and Toronto area? Just a thought and you could still of course call them the Buffalo Bills and get some Canadian funding to build it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Building the stadium on the far side of the border would create a traffic nightmare before and after the games - 70,000 fans clearing customs? While I think marketing the team to Toronto and Hamilton is going to be important to the long-term viability of the franchise, it's never going to make up the support of Buffalo/Rochester. We should play and annual preseason game in Toronto and another one at the Carrier Dome. That'd save the season ticket holders money and expand the regional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Building the stadium on the far side of the border would create a traffic nightmare before and after the games - 70,000 fans clearing customs? While I think marketing the team to Toronto and Hamilton is going to be important to the long-term viability of the franchise, it's never going to make up the support of Buffalo/Rochester. We should play and annual preseason game in Toronto and another one at the Carrier Dome. That'd save the season ticket holders money and expand the regional. 865311[/snapback] How about building the stadium in Niagara Falls, NY? Closer to RaChaCha and the Canadians as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 What about building a new stadium around the Niagara Falls area just across the border? That's a booming economical area and will likely increase fans coming in from the Hamilton and Toronto area? Just a thought and you could still of course call them the Buffalo Bills and get some Canadian funding to build it? 865306[/snapback] Abso inglutely NOT!!! The Bills will not go to Canada...Niagara Falls isn't a terrible idea, the American side is where they need to be.... Dowtown Buffalo wouldn't be open enough for the tailgating experince.... There is nothing like the drive up Abbot road though....they should stay in OP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phlegm Alley Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 I like the idea of having a new, state of the art facility built in Buffalo, with city landsca[e as the backdrop. The best way to eliminate this talk of moving would be to field a playoff contending team. We still have the lowest ticket prices in the league, I think fan interest has dwindled because of the fact that we have not been winning football games and we don't have a team leader ala Jim Kelly, Brett Favre. If we re-sign the core of this team (Losman, Evans, and to a lesser extent, McGahee) the fans will stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Buffalo, despite being in the bottom half of capacity (90.1) is ranked sixth overall. The metro area size (1.5 million) is second to last, but the Bills are essentially tied with Jacksonville (1.6 million). There are a number of teams more likely to move than the Bills, as this makes clear: the Raiders, the Chargers, the Jaguars, the Vikings, and (to a lesser extent now) the Saints. You need to click through this to see all of the profiles: http://www.bizjournals.com/specials/slideshow/13.html?page=1 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process, and TV ratings are significantly more important than metro area size (my sense is that the Bills are a more popular TV draw nationally when they're fielding a good team than many teams with larger metro areas). From this, I see the current rhetoric as the beginning rumblings of a drive for a new stadium, a drive that will most likely be successful. 865288[/snapback] cool list, interesting study- I don't know how I feel about Pittsburgh being number 21 though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Building the stadium on the far side of the border would create a traffic nightmare before and after the games - 70,000 fans clearing customs? While I think marketing the team to Toronto and Hamilton is going to be important to the long-term viability of the franchise, it's never going to make up the support of Buffalo/Rochester. We should play and annual preseason game in Toronto and another one at the Carrier Dome. That'd save the season ticket holders money and expand the regional. 865311[/snapback] And you will need a valid US passport to return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 cool list, interesting study- I don't know how I feel about Pittsburgh being number 21 though 865354[/snapback] Same here. I lived there 1978 - end of 1989, and their tix were more prized than diamonds or gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammered a Lot Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 What about building a new stadium around the Niagara Falls area just across the border? That's a booming economical area and will likely increase fans coming in from the Hamilton and Toronto area? Just a thought and you could still of course call them the Buffalo Bills and get some Canadian funding to build it? 865306[/snapback] Why not just rebuild the Ralph the Right Way. They could do half of the stadium a year. You already have, the road system setup, the land so no one has their land stole from them for pennies on the dollar, electric, sewers, water drainage already, no environmental studies needed, no goverment where to put stadium decisions (which takes forever) Enviromental friendly. If new stadium is built off site than what do you do with current property which pays no taxes, and new stadium site will pay no taxes. Re-habed stadiums, Packers, Bears, and now Chiefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESPeculatioN Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 How about moving the team more east along the thruway between Buffalo and Rochester? You will more then likely get more people from the Rochester/Syracuse region to get to the games and not lose much of those from the Buffalo area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VRWC Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 How about UB Amherst Campus. New Stadium for both Bulls & Bills. Closer to Rochester, Nig. Falls, Thruway and lots or room for tailgating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 How about building the stadium in Niagara Falls, NY? Closer to RaChaCha and the Canadians as well. 865315[/snapback] It is actually a few miles farther from Rochester than OP , but Niagara Falls NY is an armpit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 A new stadium would be fantastic, and I agree that this might be what all the posturing is about. I'm sure the league, and some of the larger market owners, would love to see it as well. The main reason is that new stadiums bring greater revenue -- mostly due to the luxury suites, though. That's where the argument suffers, I think. Buffalo has never been able to sell it's luxury suites easily, whereas it's much easier in larger markets. I do think that a new stadium which seats more in the 60,000-70,000 range would benefit the Bills in terms of sellouts, but the problem is that ticket prices are bound to go up, and even at the current bargain prices (relatively speaking) we still can't guarantee sellouts. So I think there are a many good things that could come from a new stadium, but a lot of question marks remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process865288[/snapback] It's not fan enthusiasam - look at who's #1 on the list - the Cleveland Browns. It's been years since the team was good, the winter temp is cold, the metro area is small and still they support their team like nobody's business. This would be the same football-crazy place that had its team yanked from under them and move to Baltimore some years ago. I think Buffalo is much like Cleveland in terms of a smaller metro area, blue collar fans and serious dedication to their long-historied team, so it scares me when the league could let the Browns move - they could easily let that happen in Buffalo regardless of the great fan support the team has had. I think the "fan enthusiasam" factor comes into play when you talk about how many people nationwide follow a given team - the Packers are a great example - they have fans everywhere who are crazy for them - they are popular. Look at the Browns on the other hand - how many Brows fans do you see in Texas? Ever go to Los Angeles and see someone wearing Browns gear? They aren't popular nationwide even though they have great support at home - reminds me of the Bills again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 If a new stadium were to be built, and the team were to generate more revenue, I think the stadium should be built off of the Thruway near Batavia. This would essentially double the size of the metro area to draw from (Buffalo and Rochester), making it much easier to sell suites, and would draw additional fans from Syracuse as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 If a new stadium were to be built, and the team were to generate more revenue, I think the stadium should be built off of the Thruway near Batavia. This would essentially double the size of the metro area to draw from (Buffalo and Rochester), making it much easier to sell suites, and would draw additional fans from Syracuse as well. 865674[/snapback] Yep...that argument took place before Paul Brown Stadium in Cincy was constructed. Put it north of the city, get a bigger regional draw, and so forth. And that was all true, but the Hamilton County and City of Cincy politicos hated the ideas...an attack on their kingmaker power, so it ended up as an amazing sweetheart deal for owner Brown. There is zero promised area development - can't have folks not be captive to Brown's overpriced stadium food, etc. There used to be several eateries and bars within normal walking distance of the old stadium - but no more. Latest insult...the deal had a clause that owner Brown would get taxpayer $$$ for any and all construction if any of the other 31 teams made improvements. He just got a million taxpayer bucks for replacing his original crappy natural turf 3 or so years ago. Two months ago, the County had to re-finance the bond issue for Mikie's free palace. The way it works here is if you are over 18, you can vote to peel money off of everybody even if you don't pay a lick of tax yourself. The politicians have won and the current generation is too thick and self-centered to figure out the long term consequences. Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 The way it works here is if you are over 18, you can vote to peel money off of everybody even if you don't pay a lick of tax yourself. The politicians have won... 865712[/snapback] I remember hearing about what a sweetheart deal that the Brown family got. Especially since the team was not winning, attendance was still down and he was not doing anything to improve the team (i.e. they were still well below the salary cap.) The politicians and the extremely wealthy always win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 It's not fan enthusiasam - look at who's #1 on the list - the Cleveland Browns. It's been years since the team was good, the winter temp is cold, the metro area is small and still they support their team like nobody's business. This would be the same football-crazy place that had its team yanked from under them and move to Baltimore some years ago. I think Buffalo is much like Cleveland in terms of a smaller metro area, blue collar fans and serious dedication to their long-historied team, so it scares me when the league could let the Browns move - they could easily let that happen in Buffalo regardless of the great fan support the team has had. I think the "fan enthusiasam" factor comes into play when you talk about how many people nationwide follow a given team - the Packers are a great example - they have fans everywhere who are crazy for them - they are popular. Look at the Browns on the other hand - how many Brows fans do you see in Texas? Ever go to Los Angeles and see someone wearing Browns gear? They aren't popular nationwide even though they have great support at home - reminds me of the Bills again. 865601[/snapback] It's all about winning. If we win we will create new fans from the TV exposure. Some will be bastardized bandwagon jumpers, and some will stay for the long term. I became a fan under those circumstances following the 1989 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 I remember hearing about what a sweetheart deal that the Brown family got. Especially since the team was not winning, attendance was still down and he was not doing anything to improve the team (i.e. they were still well below the salary cap.) The politicians and the extremely wealthy always win. 865726[/snapback] The extremely stupid are the ones that allow that. I say raising the voting age to 30, when the wetness behind the ears that defines youth is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 The extremely stupid are the ones that allow that. I say raising the voting age to 30, when the wetness behind the ears that defines youth is a good idea. 865753[/snapback] You are probably right. Voting rights should also be limited to taxpayers, but unfortunately, that will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 You are probably right. Voting rights should also be limited to taxpayers, but unfortunately, that will never happen. 865769[/snapback] Actually, voting rights should be restricted to veterans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundy249 Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Keep in mind this takes into account average attendance figure not % to capacity. Bills are 8th from the bottom in terms of % full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 It's all about winning. If we win we will create new fans from the TV exposure. Some will be bastardized bandwagon jumpers, and some will stay for the long term. I became a fan under those circumstances following the 1989 season. 865734[/snapback] Not sure I completely agree. It seems that some teams just have cache and others don't. Seems like there are Raider fans everywhere, even though they're not that great a team and haven't been a great team for some time. Packers fall into the same boat to some extent. On the other hand, you have teams like the Chargers, Ravens, Bucs and Colts who have been pretty good at times (Ravens and Bucs even won Super Bowls) and they don't seem to have huge nationwide popularity. If you're not one of the popular teams nationwide you can certainly gain some national support by winning, but I don't think you become an "in" team until you win consistently over a pretty long period (example is the Pats - not a popular team but probably one now due to 4 Super Bowls and numerous playoff appearances). For the Bills to be popular nationwide they would have to win multiple Super Bowls within a 5-10 year period - something that's almost impossible to do these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikie2times Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Not sure I completely agree. It seems that some teams just have cache and others don't. Seems like there are Raider fans everywhere, even though they're not that great a team and haven't been a great team for some time. Packers fall into the same boat to some extent. On the other hand, you have teams like the Chargers, Ravens, Bucs and Colts who have been pretty good at times (Ravens and Bucs even won Super Bowls) and they don't seem to have huge nationwide popularity. If you're not one of the popular teams nationwide you can certainly gain some national support by winning, but I don't think you become an "in" team until you win consistently over a pretty long period (example is the Pats - not a popular team but probably one now due to 4 Super Bowls and numerous playoff appearances). For the Bills to be popular nationwide they would have to win multiple Super Bowls within a 5-10 year period - something that's almost impossible to do these days. 865813[/snapback] We had a whole new national fan base spawn itself from the Super Bowl years. It didn't happen to the degree in which it's happening with the Patriots, or other national types, but it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 The main reason is that new stadiums bring greater revenue -- mostly due to the luxury suites, though. That's where the argument suffers, I think. Buffalo has never been able to sell it's luxury suites easily, whereas it's much easier in larger markets. I 865535[/snapback] I don't buy that argument. New stadiums were built in small markets like Cleveland, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and they have all been able to sell luxury boxes. If you put a winning product, people will come. Also I think the Bills had tough time selling those club seats, not the luxury boxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 We had a whole new national fan base spawn itself from the Super Bowl years. It didn't happen to the degree in which it's happening with the Patriots, or other national types, but it happened. 865862[/snapback] Yes, but that was a reult of multiple very good years in a row (or as the folks here in Boston like to call it, "A Dynasty" ). I would pose that the Bills would have to have a similar run to the early 90s to gain enough national support to be an "in" team, something I don't see as likely (not just for Buffalo, but for any team). And on the flip side the Raiders can continue to be terrible and they'll still have their "in" status - winning really isn't everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazykat Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 How about building the stadium in Niagara Falls, NY? Closer to RaChaCha and the Canadians as well. 865315[/snapback] Did you fail geography in school? Since when is NF closer to Rochester? I don't think we get as many Canadian fans as we'd like to think. Most come from Western New York so positioning a new stadium more in the middle of that fan base might help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazykat Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 Buffalo, despite being in the bottom half of capacity (90.1) is ranked sixth overall. The metro area size (1.5 million) is second to last, but the Bills are essentially tied with Jacksonville (1.6 million). There are a number of teams more likely to move than the Bills, as this makes clear: the Raiders, the Chargers, the Jaguars, the Vikings, and (to a lesser extent now) the Saints. You need to click through this to see all of the profiles: http://www.bizjournals.com/specials/slideshow/13.html?page=1 My read on all of this: fan enthusiasm is a major factor in the NFL's decision process, and TV ratings are significantly more important than metro area size (my sense is that the Bills are a more popular TV draw nationally when they're fielding a good team than many teams with larger metro areas). From this, I see the current rhetoric as the beginning rumblings of a drive for a new stadium, a drive that will most likely be successful. 865288[/snapback] Who knows. We have heard so many conflicting things about why the team will or won't stick around. Figure though that a mere $10 more per ticket per home game would generate about an additional $6M annually. Since our region doesn't command that kind of ticket price, maybe that's at the core of it. It's a fact though that our TV market isn't as big as the others. Remember that for TV to be appealing you need the attention of the 18-35 year old demographic and that is diminishing in the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Heck, I moved away but I still have my seasons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 One thing that is rarely mentioned in these TV ratings is that so many people have moved from places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Green Bay/Milwaukee, Detroit and other northern cities to the southern and southwestern climates in the last three decades but still watch and root for their hometeams. Don't think for a second that the NFL doesn't know, follow closely and strongly consider this. So just because the Bills have a small television market doesn't mean the Neilson's for Buffalo are the only measure of Bills games being watched. Nearly everyone that I have ever met that moved away from Buffalo are still Bills fans and watch as many games as they can. These are the vast majority of the people that buy the DirecTV package, not the locals in Dallas and New York and Miami and Chicago who follow their own teams. The NFL follows this kind of stuff very closely as they obviously should. 865938[/snapback] Just like my father, who made his family's living down in Jersey...and out came a couple of 2nd generation Bills fans. You better believe he's in front of the TV every Sunday making good use of NFL Sunday Ticket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordio Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Who knows. We have heard so many conflicting things about why the team will or won't stick around. Figure though that a mere $10 more per ticket per home game would generate about an additional $6M annually. Since our region doesn't command that kind of ticket price, maybe that's at the core of it. It's a fact though that our TV market isn't as big as the others. Remember that for TV to be appealing you need the attention of the 18-35 year old demographic and that is diminishing in the region. 865883[/snapback] This arguement is actually a little flawed. You are right in a way if just consider the immediate buffalo market. However, since Toronto I believe gets the buffalo CBS, some argue that after adding in toronto for CBS games, we are like the 3rd or 4th largest tv market. Just another way of looking at it I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogbyte Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 Sorry, but there is no way that a new stadium will be built with public funds. Private and/or NFL funds maybe. 10 games a year will not make the stadium viable. They will have to re-do the Ralph. Football Stadiums do not work for revitizing areas. You have to have a plan to work with the stadium. Baseball parks work because they have 82 games plus other events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I remember hearing about what a sweetheart deal that the Brown family got. Especially since the team was not winning, attendance was still down and he was not doing anything to improve the team (i.e. they were still well below the salary cap.) The politicians and the extremely wealthy always win. 865726[/snapback] The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser. A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser.A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint... 866733[/snapback] I am suprised that someone hasn't tried to bump him off yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted December 14, 2006 Author Share Posted December 14, 2006 The county commissioner who was the big pusher of the deal was crushed in his re-election bid, and got a high six-figure job with the B'gals as some sort of team adviser.A few more Mike Brown gems... They published a false seating chart before construction. You had to buy a PSL (personal seat license) in order to buy season tix...I don't recall the exact dollars...something like $275 to $600 depending on seat location or some such. Folks forked over the cash, including up-front tix $, and found out their 40 - 50 yard seats ended up on the 10 or in the EZ. He had to be sued for people to get their PSL and high tix cost adjusted. And they sit on the 10 or in the EZ today. Brown hung on to their cash to the bitter end, though. About 3 years ago, a number of folks decided to not renew their tickets for their own personal reasons, and were willing to forfeit the non-refundable PSL. But some time previous, the club sent out a weasely mailing that said upon any cancellation of a PSL, the owner was on the hook for 10 years' worth of season tickets. And they started to file lawsuits against folks who had decided to drop their PSL's, demanding 10 years' worth of ticket price. Once again, the B'gals were hauled into court and a judge ruled that this 10-year tie-in was phony, and not part of the deal that the PSL owners signed on for. Take a look at the B'gals management staff off the field...this VP of personnel is the daughter of that VP of player development who is the aunt of the treasurer who married the brother of the son of this cousin and so forth. A study in incest... Which is why I shake my head when people imply that Ralph is a skinflint... 866733[/snapback] Yet look at who the the ownership company Ralph is keeping of late. Yeesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasoninMT Posted December 14, 2006 Share Posted December 14, 2006 I think that the Roch D&C has it right, they should move a bit closer to Rochester... The problem as I see it is abandoning all the work which has been done to RWS... what would become of it? the other Question is how it would affect those Canadian fans, moving it further from them... I did one of those Google searches to see who searches for Buffalo Bills, and the hits are most from Lancaster... Then I think was Rochester... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts