HuskyCaucasian Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 The Score just said in a news report that a consulting firm said Wrigley could cost..... $100 million over the next ten years to maintain. DAMN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jul 7, 2009 -> 02:34 PM) They would play The Cell (schedules alternate Sox and Cubs at home anyway with only a few exceptions, and The Cell doesn't have other events to cater to), probably also sprinkle in a few games at Milwaukee or maybe even some minor league parks for the novelty of it (Cubs marketing is all about novelty). You could totally add 10,000 temporary seats out at Flyers Stadium in Schaumburg in the outfield. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted July 7, 2009 Share Posted July 7, 2009 Deal not done? Tribune Co has agreed to terms for the sale of the Chicago Cubs to a group led by private equity investor Marc Utay, giving the company two offers to submit to the bankruptcy court, two sources familiar with the sale process said on Tuesday. It is the latest twist in a long-running effort by the bankrupt media company to sell the baseball team famous for its "lovable losers" image. On Monday, a source said the Ricketts family had agreed to terms for the purchase of the team and other assets for slightly less than the $900 million it offered in January. The source called it a "handshake" agreement and not a signed document. One of the sources reporting the Utay group's deal said the new offer is "a higher price but less cash upfront" than the Ricketts bid. "I don't think it's completely over yet," said the source, who asked not to be identified because the sale process is continuing. "By the same token, Ricketts has a real edge here." Tribune, which has been trying to sell the team for more than two years to reduce the company's debt burden, said no agreements are in place. "We have not reached an agreement on terms with either party," Tribune spokesman Gary Weitman said. Utay declined to comment and a spokesman for the Ricketts family was not immediately available to comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Jul 7, 2009 -> 03:20 PM) Deal not done? I think the Trib is giving the bankruptcy court a choice. They just want the Cubs off their plate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 QUOTE (BearSox @ Jul 7, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) So, they will rebuild Wrigley? You gotta go with the opposite of what Bruce says. Also, lets say the Cubs do rebuild wrigley in the same spot and have to play a year in the cell... wouldn't we make a good profit off of that? Wouldn't the revenue drawn into the stadium when the Cubs play come to JR and the sox? Or at least a portion of it? Or at the very least, you'd think we'd make the cubs at least pay to play there. Sox get nothing they have a nice lease with the ISA but do not own the park they pay rent based on hitting an attendence figure. I do think JR owns the parking lots though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted July 8, 2009 Share Posted July 8, 2009 Cubs fans often defend themselves by saying their fans don't go to games just for Wrigley and they could sell out anywhere. We'll I'd like to see them build a 100,000 seat stadium in the Northern suburbs nowhere near a neighborhood bar and see if they continue to march the sheep in. If they were "true" fans, wouldn't they not care what their home stadium was like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.