Oakland A's Owner Lewis Wolff Discusses Stadium, Team Future
The Oakland A's have stumbled out of the gate in 2009, dealing with injuries, youthful inexperience and players who aren't performing anywhere near their career norms. And to make matters worse, the A's also recently had to pull the plug on their significant investment and efforts in moving to Fremont.
I wanted to figure out what happened and what was next for our beloved green and gold. Will there ever be a new stadium? Is Oakland still an option?
I decided now would be a good time to catch up with A's managing partner Lew Wolff and while there are many issues he can't answer just now because so much is now up in the air, I think you'll find this very interesting.
Enjoy.
Blez: Hi Lew, how are you? What have you been up to?
Lew Wolff: I'm good. I've been up to nothing, absolutely nothing. (laughs)
Blez: Not working hard on anything at all?
Wolff: Watching 14-inning losses.
Blez: That was brutal, huh?
Wolff: I also saw one in New York a week ago. In the rain, I sat there and watched it.
Blez: And you stayed for the whole thing.
Wolff: The. Whole. Thing.
Blez: There's the type of owner that I want for my team.
Wolff: I had to duck in and out. When they comped us those seats at the time they were $2,500 a seat. Of course I could move anywhere I wanted.
Blez: The park didn't look very full that day either.
Wolff: It actually was. The interesting thing is they had very inclement weather and still had about 42,000 people even though those seats that were right on camera looked a little vacant. But it was a big crowd there and I'm sure at a higher volume of revenue than they had the prior year. Now whether they can cover their expenses, I don't know (laughs).
Blez: They're got plenty of them, that's for sure.
Wolff: It's gorgeous though. And huge. It's probably the highest quality ballpark I've ever seen.
Blez: Were you out there doing a reconnaissance mission?
Wolff: No, I happened to be there for a Major League Soccer meeting, but it got so boring that I left to go to the ball game. Well, not boring, but I left (Mike) Crowley there (laughs). He went to the game the night before. I didn't get a chance to tour the park but what I saw was unbelievable. The materials were unbelievable. But it wasn't as intimate as we're shooting for if we can ever build one.
Blez: I'll get into that effort in a minute, but I wanted to first thank you for taking the time to talk to me. I don't have a lot of questions...
Wolff: I hope not because I don't have a whole lot of answers as we're in the middle of this stuff, but I'm happy to answer where I can.
Blez: That's what I figured. It's my responsibility to at least ask the questions even if you can't answer them.
Wolff: Go ahead.
Blez: Before we get into what's next for the A's ballpark search, back up and tell me about what happened with Fremont. The last time we met and did an interview, I know you were pretty frustrated with the whole process because I could see it on your face. You seemed pretty perturbed with what had been going on.
Wolff: I'll be happy to give you the details but they're a little complicated. Basically my frustration was not with the city council. It wasn't with Fremont. It was more with two different groups, which I'll explain in a minute, and the process in California where having the elected officials on board isn't enough. The process has become the end product in California. So many people live off the process and there's so many ways to stretch the process and thwart it that I wasn't just worried about our ballpark but how you can get things done in California. We'll find out. I hope the stimulus package where they're saying things are "shovel ready," which they're going to need to be to create jobs, but if they have to go through the process every time of constant review and consultants and stuff then I'm concerned. And some of that stuff is very necessary. Well we could've been under construction next year and had a private stimulus package of our own but that isn't the way it turned out.
Blez: So then what happened?
Wolff: Here's what happened. Most fans really don't care about the process, I don't think. They just want to know if we can win games. But my job is to figure out how we get a facility that will work for us and retain players and so on. In the area called Pacific Commons, the land that we were buying from Cisco, the adjacent retailers and the actual owner of the site, Cisco, had an option and we were taking their option, on which they had spent a lot of money already. The company was called Catellus, which is now called ProLogis. OK so you have a land owner there and Cisco was originally going to do a campus there. There were some clauses in the transaction before it started that said that if we were proposing something that could be very detrimental to the retailers they could protest it. Since at that moment, we thought we would be adding potentially 9,000 people living there who could walk to Costco and Lowe's and Kohl's and others we didn't feel that issue was ever going to be a big problem and neither did Cisco.
Blez: Because you were going to be bringing them new customers.
Wolff: Well at the time the market was different. We were planning on having townhouses and things of that nature. You have to remember the timing of this because it's very important because that market doesn't exist today. I don't know how many retail users there are in this area called Pacific Commons, but there are probably about 30-50. We went out and checked and I don't have the information at my fingertips, but the vast majority couldn't wait for us to do the ballpark. One of the three larger retailers, and they weren't that large in my opinion, but I think it was Kohl's or Lowe's, I can't recall. But one of them started to protest our development and we couldn't figure out why they would care if we were there because it would only operate 22 percent of the time that a normal business would. That on a few days we would have more traffic there than other days, but why would that be terrible for these retailers? For reasons that only they know, and they claim that they would've accommodated that if the A's had moved the ballpark left or right or so on, they threw a roadblock in front of us, and it wasn't the majority of the retailers, just a couple of them. But we finally realized that we couldn't go ahead because the clause is in there that if we had deteriorated their business, that there was unlimited liability in there that no one was going to take on. We had probably thought a little bit naively, although I don't think so, that we were adding to their value and adding to the community and that they'd want to see more revenue and jobs for the city created. I guess they do, but they wanted to do it their way and we couldn't figure out how to do it. So we really had to give up. The EIR (Environmental Impact Report) was still under process. Then the city or someone suggested that we move over to Warm Springs. That's where they're going to have the funded rapid transit station. By the way, BART and others were opposing us being at Pacific Commons because it was a mile and half or so from rapid transit. And obviously it's better to be right at rapid transit but if you're not, we thought we had a bus arrangement and a bunch of other details worked out. I think the city thought so too. So we then moved over to Warm Springs which is pretty much a vacant area. And it's an elevated freeway right there. Then when it gets to the top, it's one of the widest freeways in California and then drops to the other side. So if we built the ballpark there or even two or three of them, there would no lights or noise or anything that would bother anybody. At least we felt that way. The neighbors on the other side of the elevated freeway, for reasons of their own, did not like the idea and came out in mass against it. Six or seven hundred of them. So we went from meeting to meeting trying to explain or at least give it a fair evaluation and so on. And whether we're right or they're right, it doesn't make any difference. The issue then came about that even if we got the approval of the city council, in California, an individual or a group with any kind of staying power can file a CEQA (California Environment Quality Act) lawsuit to try and find something wrong with the EIR. And it can't cost much to do that and there are many attorneys who will take these things. Even if we won the lawsuit, we could be tied up for two years. And then there could be an appeal. I'm not denying their right or desire to protest anything they want. But if their lawsuit didn't work, and they indicated they would file a lawsuit if they could find reasons to, and it's sort of easy to do that with CEQA in environmental areas, then they would ask for a referendum, and it was sort of a never-ending process. So on one side we had this threat of unlimited liability which they could have just said forget about it, we'll do something great for the community and the other one was the legitimate threat of these lawsuits, whether they were nuisance lawsuits or valid, they still happen. We had to give up. For sure we lost $24 million doing it. We were so confident that what were doing was right, we bought some ancillary real estate around it so that we could make sure we had a controlled environment. We spent a total of $80 million but we may sell that real estate one of these days. Course it's probably gone down now. We made a sincere effort is what I'm saying. And we we're not hearing people say that we didn't do that in Fremont. That's the story. Is that clear?
Blez: You said you spent $80 million total.
Wolff: $80 million in real dollars. I'd be happy to show the chart. I just want to make sure that you understand that's non-recoverable, that what we can't recover was $24 million. Not that that's cheap. The rest of it is in real estate that probably isn't worth what we paid for it today, but maybe. So I'm not counting that as lost money.
Blez: The $24 million, what was that spent on?
Wolff: Studies, consultants, lawyers and we have a list of that. If somebody wants to come into our office and see where our expenditures were, we would be happy to run down a list for you.
Blez: When you started talking about the process, you spoke about California more as a whole and how difficult it is to get anything done here.
Wolff: Yes, it's very difficult. That's probably true throughout the United States, but I just don't operate in other states. I want to make it clear to the fans that we're not against the environmental process. We're against it being used as a lever. It's sort of like someone who moves close to an airport and then wants to stop the airplanes from flying. I don't want to look like the mean developer trying to hurt the environment, but if the environmental studies, which they used to have a one-year time limit on, would after one year say yes or no, that would've been great. But today you can take these suits and this process and string it out long enough so the developer finally tires and says the hell with it. Either that or the market changes. We have a project in Fresno where we've been delayed almost two years, with nothing to do with us, but next door a theater owner sued under CEQA and he may have sued for other things, but a six-month delay turned into two years. We just couldn't continue.
Blez: Yeah and at some point being a business person you have to realize that it's a lost cause and you need to start looking elsewhere.
Wolff: I thought we were going to be under construction next year. No matter what anyone tells you, we are not asking for any public money. Yet blog after blog said don't believe him, but we really weren't. Ask the city. That's the best people to ask. They were adamant that there wouldn't be any.
Blez: You told me that from the very beginning that you weren't going to be asking for any public money.
Wolff: But what's happened is that if we can't have a site that we can get to, and there is a huge amount of what they call off-site expenditures, that pretty much ruins a ballpark too. That's the best capsule version. We spent a lot of time trying to figure out what we could do in Oakland and after we couldn't do that, we looked at Alameda County. I'm sorry we went as far as we did.
Blez: Fremont falling through does a few things. For people who love the Oakland area and the idea of the Oakland A's, they suddenly have renewed hope that the A's have a chance to be back in Oakland now and maybe that door is open again. You've got the blue ribbon panel from MLB meeting with Mayor Dellums. It seems like there is a re-investigation of that option publicly.
Wolff: Are you asking a question or making a speech? (laughs)
Blez: (laughing) Is that where you go from here?
Wolff: No. This is the part where the fans get mad at me and I wish they wouldn't. We spent almost two and a half years trying to stay in Oakland. Remember when I bought the team from Schott and Hofmann? I had had almost two years negotiating with just one of them and then the whole team became available. I don't know what it is and there's been a lot of talk about this and I haven't really answered it until now and I'm not really even answering it now. But the one thing I will say is that we spent a great deal of time and energy, more than anybody on any other side, investigating every site that we thought was available in Oakland. It takes me almost an hour and 45 minutes to go through what we did. We haven't had that opportunity with certain officials so they can understand what we think we've done to stay in Oakland. And the door is open there for them to tell me about something that I missed which is not impossible. But when there were sort of these comments that I overstated my scrutiny of the proposed stadium sites, no one asked me what my scrutiny was. Not one person. We finally engaged that recently, people finally said, "Oh I see what you've done here." So we looked at the sites by the Coliseum. Downtown was pretty much gone by the time I got there. Although one of the press articles said I resisted going downtown, but it was already committed to housing by the time I got here. Oakland is a built-up area. There aren't a lot of pieces of land that don't have a big expensive component to them to make them work. I think we analyzed them better than anyone and the only way to determine that is to sit down with me and say, "Lew, what did you do?" One day if you want to sit down with me, I'll go through it with you. I believe we've explored everything we could possibly do. That doesn't mean we haven't missed something, but I can't figure out what it is. Therefore when someone says you didn't do that, I had to say the truth. The truth is we explored everything for almost seven years there.
Blez: Then how are you viewing the press around Mayor Dellums and the blue ribbon panel and some of the other stuff? Do you think they're just trying to make noise to put public pressure on you or what do you think is going on there?
Wolff: Mayor Dellums, at least I consider him, a very direct and understanding individual when it comes to the A's. He's got a very good staff. Whether or not he does other things in Oakland that people like or don't like is not my business. They have been engaged with us recently and just what I'm telling you, we presented what we've done and we're open to hearing anything else. It should be a two-way street and I'm trying to make it that way, but it's sort of like somebody saying I didn't read the book, but I did read the book. I'm not sure if that answers your question, but all I'm asking for is for anyone who thinks that we haven't taken a good long look at this for a chance to sit down with me and let me show them what we've done. Maybe that will open the door for somebody, but we haven't seen it. We need a new ballpark. That's all we need.
Blez: There's already been a lot of discussion and speculation about San Jose. San Jose remains closed off right now via the MLB territorial rights. Is that something you're trying to look at right now?
Wolff: The answer is that we want to stay in Northern California. When we went to Fremont, there was hardly a word said. The Oakland people realized we were trying to stay. The territorial issues are really determined by Major League Baseball, not by me. Major League Baseball and probably the blue ribbon committee, though I'm not sure if that's accurate...
Blez: That was how it was reported.
Wolff: Well they all deserve a blue ribbon because they're all good guys. But the committee is looking to see if we missed something that we could live with and that's what they're doing. I applaud them doing it. So far I think they're working hard on it.
Blez: Then how are you going about the process then? Do you have a priority list of places that might have been right there when you decided to try for Fremont?
Wolff: In Oakland you mean?
Blez: No, just in Northern California in general.
Wolff: That's the problem. In the district we're assigned, it's either Oakland or Fremont. The ideal location probably would've been, when I got here, not today, downtown Oakland. When you go downtown you don't have the same issues of parking and traffic and a lot of single family people being concerned. So most of the ballparks have been built in non-residential areas; San Francisco, San Diego, Denver. When we couldn't figure out how to do it, we were sort of our own risk of creating a downtown a little bit in Fremont which would've been great but then the market changed a lot for residential and retail. I don't know if that answers your question.
Blez: Well you say Northern California that can include a lot of places, places like Sacramento...
Wolff: I heard they have a pretty nice new ballpark in Omaha but I don't want to have to fly to Omaha to see our games. The one thing we haven't done no matter what anyone will tell you is that I have never threatened to go to another city outside the state. Every ballpark effort that I've seen the owner has always threatened to take the team elsewhere if he didn't get this or that. We haven't done any of that.
Blez: So do you feel handcuffed right now?
Wolff: I feel Major League Baseball has to give us some direction.
Blez: So you're waiting on Major League Baseball?
Wolff: I'm meeting with very nice people at the city of Oakland or anyone who has a legitimate idea and anyone who wants to find out if we were legitimate. What I didn't want to do is raise the expectation that I couldn't deliver on and for that people jump on you. But I'm not in the business of not delivering and I haven't been able to deliver. And I'll take the full responsibility but I want people to at least be charitable enough to find out what we did or didn't do.
Blez: I imagine you have to be feeling pretty pessimistic after all of this.
Wolff: In my world, you can't be a pessimist. If I'm a pessimist then everyone around me is. I have to look at these injuries as opportunity. I'm not sure what the opportunity is except maybe to buy an MRI machine. I believe the cost of indecision is greater than the cost of making a decision in California and I'm hoping it turns out to be that way. But the sad part is that if we get going somewhere, we can get this done. But people don't realize the details you have to look at when they say, "Why don't you just go to X?" Then you go to X and you find out that underneath X is some sewer lines and things that can't be moved that you can't see when you drive by. I'm just using that as an example. The depth that we went into, and we had a study done in Oakland with various sites downtown. Everything from Howard Terminal to the Coliseum itself, and a couple of the sites they recommended were outside Oakland. One of them was in Fremont and I'm quoted in one of the news articles saying, "No we can't go to a suburb like that." (laughs) We need and Major League Baseball wants us to have a modern facility and we're going to be the only ones to not have one soon. I don't have an answer for you except that blue ribbon committee, that they probably like that (name). They're hard at work. I want to keep an open mind, but I honestly think I've done all the work I can do. But if there's more, someone just has to tell me. Don't tell me that I didn't do any.
Blez: Is there any sort of timetable you have in mind right now, or are you just sort of at the mercy of MLB?
Wolff: We're always at the mercy of MLB. (laughs) MLB has to tell us what our next move is and they'll tell us sometime. Maybe this committee will find something that I didn't notice. I don't believe they will. All I want is a ballpark.
Blez: Is it tough to have this out in the public eye so much? Speaking as an A's fan, it was good to know that we're secure in the team's future because I know we're moving to Fremont. I know that's going to happen and we're going to be able to hold onto up-and-coming talent like Cahill and Anderson when their free agent years come. You get excited about those things as a fan.
Wolff: I was excited about those things too. That's the survival of any team. Part of it, not all of it, deals with the venue. I forgot the exact date but the Raider deal, I don't remember exactly when that was, but a comment by the elected official said they were spending $38 million on the ballpark to make it a baseball-only ballpark and it seemed like overnight the city was spending $200 million to attract the Raiders back. I think they gave the A's for their inconvenience $11 million. This was long before me. So all of a sudden when it looked like it was improving a facility for baseball was no longer. I never really saw the ballpark without Mount Davis in it but I heard the view was beautiful and there was supposed to be $36 or $38 million spent and then all of a sudden it turned around and it was $200 million for a different direction. It's stuff like that that the average fan doesn't think about, and why should they? I didn't even know that myself. So we're sitting in a 43-year-old place and in August, the Raiders start their preseason and it's just not good. And more important is getting a sense of enough revenue that I don't have to depend on the revenue sharing. There are just 100 different issues, many of which would be resolved if we had a new venue.
Blez: My point that I was getting to is that is it tough to sell the fans on the idea of the team right now?
Wolff: That's a fair question. I don't know. We appreciate the fans that come. I don't want to say something just for the sake of getting someone there. I'm not the world's leading advocate for transparency, but I am transparent when it comes to the public trust which is what baseball is. The answer is that I'm not going to say we're going to be there for a long time if we're not and I'm not going to say we're not going to be there for a long time if we are. Right now I just don't know.
Blez: It puts you in a tough position.
Wolff: It's not a tough position in that every owner who needs a new venue goes through this. I think as long as we're in Oakland and we'll be there for a while, we're a good corporate citizen and we'll be there for a while. I really resent the fact that people accuse us of not being. And that's their prerogative. It's not the fans so much.
Blez: Who is accusing you of not being a good corporate citizen?
Wolff: Well when they say that we didn't do this and whatnot. That's depressing to us. But that's part of life and isn't a big deal. I love the fans. The ones who will still talk to me. I love baseball. I'm a fan. I wish I was just sitting there watching the game and not thinking about this stuff. Billy (Beane) stayed committed for a long period of time. Mike (Crowley) as well. Putting me out of the picture for a moment. I think other ownership that I look at and not so much the owners, but the management. I think if Billy didn't have the guys we have, we'd really have a struggle both on and off the playing field. And we're thankful for those people in the East Bay and Oakland that come to the game but we're not the largest draw. I hate to talk about our attendance because the people who come are the only ones who have to hear about it. The other ones who don't come don't really care. The main thing is that we're trying to do the right thing and if somebody feels we're not, well, that's their prerogative.
Blez: One last question and it's more baseball related...
Wolff: Yay!
Blez: (laughs) so you'll probably enjoy answering it more. How do you feel about the team stumbling out of the gate this year and how do you feel about it moving forward for the rest of 2009?
Wolff: I think we played eight or nine one run games, and we've only won two of them. We should break even or so, and if we did we would be in a lot different position. Yesterday I went into a fit of depression. I spent all day in my house watching the game and we lost. A lot of this has to do with injuries. We have a lot of injuries and every team has injuries, but we have Duchscherer...our opening day starter and our closer injured. Then you've got...
Blez: Casilla...
Wolff: Yeah, Casilla is hurt.
Blez: Bullpen is a bit in shambles right now.
Wolff: I thought they were going to have Geren pitch in the last inning. I felt sorry for him. That's a game we should've won. And Ziegler was really under the weather. In fact all three games in Seattle we should've won.
Blez: I agree with you on that one.
Wolff: One thing that is about a positive about injuries is that you have to rely on guys who might have been one or two years off and no one is an expert on that. So we got to bring up Petit. I like that guy and think he's very good. All of sudden he gets more playing experience. You have to admit that we have some threats in the lineup. Or at least we appear to whereas last year we didn't have any. Billy and Bob are really doing their best with a whole lot of issues. And if I thought it was diet, training or something I'd do something. It's just unrelated events that befell us. Our run differential is very narrow, and the sooner the better that should even out a bit.
Blez: As usual, I appreciate you taking the time out to speak to me, Lew and clarifying some of the stadium issues. I know a lot of the fans care a lot about that.
Wolff: Well I care a lot about them even though they might not think I do. Thank you, Tyler.
2 recs |
194 comments
|
Comments
i hate lew wolff
he just sits there and laughs at all this shit…..
by mango315 on May 6, 2009 7:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I can tell you that
in my opinion, Lew is extreme sincere about what he says. His frustration with all of this is palpable and all he wants is to strengthen the franchise by getting a new stadium.
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 7:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really doubt Wolff finds this whole thing as amusing as you think he does
Why do you have that impression?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 8:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
this interview
makes him sound pretty forthright. even as a propoenent of the a’s in oakland, i can see how he’s frustrated. it’s got to be difficult to sidestep the countless obstacles and constantly defend yourself against misconceptions.
i was wrong to do that stuff
by jaylikewise on May 6, 2009 8:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
"Misconceptions",
would be one thing. The worst aspect has to be people who demonize him for personal advantage. Pols love to muddy the water, especially if they’re risk adverse.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on May 6, 2009 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The pols and the press
Both have taken things he’s said out of context and taken moments of fustration by the guy and twisted it to their advantage.
by athletics68 on May 6, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Gallows humor
learn it, invest in it – it’s a growth industry as an A’s fan
by MobiusKlein on May 6, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why would you say you hate someone when you don't really know them?
He may be a great guy, he may be an awful guy, but why pronounce your hate with no foundation?
He seems fairly sincere in this interview. I think one issue that may have affected the ballpark plan is (as he admitted) the timing of the building project and the lack of a market for housing and retail. It’s my understanding the A’s financing of the ballpark depended strongly on being able to sell homes/condos/and retail and in this economy this wasn’t going to happen. That may have made the project cost prohibitive.
As for the CEQA lawsuit thing, there is some truth to that as anyone who has followed Cal’s Stadium improvement project will know. A small group of residents and (IMO) a handful of misdirected hippies stalled that project for more than 2 years! However, that’s part of building any project in California and is not guaranteed to be absent in SanJo or anywhere else, so I don’t find much credibility to that claim.
Thanks for the interview Blez.
"Stanford has no fear of losing versus Cal, as they have done so every year but one for the last 20 years. They are, however, very afraid to get injured and indeed fear for their safety." - Furd Rugby Coach on forfeiting 2001 Rugby game vs. Cal
by oaktownmario on May 6, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hippies have never been misdirected. Sometimes they have no specific direction but never misdirected
That of course is only from my point of view and from the hippies I knew when I was growing up in the 60s.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's not just the CEQA
California’s laws are bordering on draconian these days, and with more on the way economists are wondering if this state can ever recover. Particularly when some of our neighboring states like Nevada are the complete opposite.
by athletics68 on May 6, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and things are going wonderfully in Nevada...
Ellis for President
by tosk on May 6, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, no, you've got it wrong.
That’s the manager’s job, not the owner’s.
Geren is the one who should be faulted for failing to vicariously express your emotions for you.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I Have Mixed Feelings About This Guy
I want to believe him, but part me isn’t sure that he is just selling a line of b.s.
by KCa's on May 6, 2009 7:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you, Blez and Lew
I really appreciate reading the interview. I hope this season will at least end with a new ballpark on the horizon somewhere in the Bay Area…
I am Ray Fosse's infatuations with Clay Wood and high-definition television.
by franks a lot on May 6, 2009 7:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the interiew Blez and Wolff
Well it seemed to be the proverbial I’ll not really answer anything with my answers interview. It could be worse and be a Raiders exec who will say something and then deny it a few lines later.
"-i never said half the things i said." --Yogi Berra
by Ovale Fan on May 6, 2009 7:27 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting reading - thank you
The A’s really got screwed in Fremont. but I’m surprised that the only plan B is to wait around for MLB to give them rights to San Jose.
I don’t dislike the guy. I just wonder why he didn’t have staff working on contingency planning during the Fremont debacle.
by coffee roaster on May 6, 2009 7:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think because he honestly believed that it was going to happen
And like he said, it basically felt like the only two places they could look at were Oakland and Fremont and he basically found that there wasn’t really any viable locations in Oakland.
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who is to say they didn't have staff working on a contingency plan?
They can’t come out and say they want to move to San Jose since they still lack the territorial rights. All it would do is rile up the Giants more than they already are. I think the ‘waiting for MLB’ part is true. Sometime this year, MLB will come out and say “It looks like you did your best to stay within your area, but it didn’t work out. Here, we want to help you, try Santa Clara county.” Before MLB can do that though, they must wait out some of Oakland’s last ditch effort to avoid egg on their face.
And then the pursuit of San Jose can officially begin and be carried out in the open.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 9:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I can't blame him
When you look a lot of options, as it sounds like he/they did, and determine which is best you must commit your energy to making it happen. The entire project has so many aspects to it that I doubt that many of us can wrap our heads around the complexity of it. It is a giant project and to split your time between Option #1 and contingencies would be counterproductive to accomplishing the end goal.
"I'm more into going home and being horizontal" - Lew Wolff
by bvank on May 6, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great interview, thanks Blez
I don’t understand the negativity towards Wolff, does everyone expect to run the A’s as a charity?
It’s his business and I think he’s pretty straight forward about that and what his goals are…
by Keze on May 6, 2009 7:51 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Hey I look at it like the team could still be owned by Schott and Hofmann
And they were no picnic, IMO. Wolff is a much better owner.
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Now don't go dissing them.
They’re the whole reason we’re not watching the Vegas A’s right now.
Define "succeed." --Poppy
by Leopold Bloom on May 6, 2009 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was kind of hoping for the Cancun A's and then get my job transferred there ;-)
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice interview.
Seems to me that Lew is putting forth good effort, and that his goals are in line with my hopes: keep the A’s in Northern California, get them a sweet ballpark, and make them more financially competitive.
Save Rajai Davis
by oakinboston on May 6, 2009 8:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe Lew
and I also would love for them to move to Sacramento. I think it would be the ideal location.
by Sacpike on May 6, 2009 8:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thank you, Blez
and thank you, Lew Wolff, for being as transparent as you were. I would not expect utter transparency of any business owner. What was all that about Kohl’s and Lowe’s? Why did they protest the Fremont proposal?
by LibrariAN on May 6, 2009 8:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The impression I got from what Wolff said...
…was that one of them apparently thought the A’s would detract from their business somehow, in spite of only having games in the area for 22% of the entire year, most of it spaced out over the course of a few months.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Being a bit of a cynic,
I’m thinking that the two retailers may have tried to use their liability clause as a lever to force some kind of concession out of the A’s.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on May 6, 2009 8:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it were that though,
I would have expected them to reduce their demands a little when they realized they weren’t going to get squat if the A’s didn’t move there.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
people here know that I support keeping the A's in Oakland
but I’ve never looked at Wolff as “the” or even “a” villain in this whole story. There is plenty of blame to go around for the problems of the team and the ballpark situation.
I appreciate the interview, Blez. Actually, when you mentioned it in the game wrap thread last night I simply thought you were writing that there would be an interview with Wolff somewhere at 7 am today — it’s wasn’t clear to me that the interview would be here.
For those of you who are interested in a bit more about the money that the A’s received when the Raiders returned, it’s discussed in this interview with John Russo.
Oh, by the way, Lew, that was a 15 inning loss we suffered through on Sunday.
by OaklandSi on May 6, 2009 8:44 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i'm glad
an interview like this is available to us, the fans. wolff seemed to be aware he was speaking to us and wanted to set the record straight.
bottom line: his interests as an an owner will never be enirely congruent with the interests of a diverse and evolving fan base. there are just too many perspectives. as long as he wants to secure a future for the A’s in the bay area, he’s OK with me. it seems like he does.
thanks Blez and thanks Lew Wolff.
i was wrong to do that stuff
by jaylikewise on May 6, 2009 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
15 inning loss...
:)
"Where's the beef?"
by MMunoz33 on May 6, 2009 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
I heard that and it basically ruined the whole interview for me… He didn’t even know it was Mt. Davis?!?!?!?! I’ll go back a rewatch (although I watched it on TV when ti was broadcast) later and not pay attention to that part so I can pay attention to the rest :)
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
In his defense
Mt. Davidson is a real hill in San Francisco – actually the tallest in SF – so probably making a pun off that, independently.
by MobiusKlein on May 6, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Or being San Francisco centric
And making a Freudian slip.
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to take him up
On his offer to go through the charts and process.
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 8:54 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Not a joke.
I was thinking the same thing. If I were local and didn’t have a full-time job, I’d totally go down to the office and see what sort of data they have to offer. I hope someone does so and the info finds its way online somewhere.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wasn't joking
I’ll take a vacation day to do it.
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Best Interview I've Ever Seen on AN
terrific, terrific job, Blez.
Interesting, and heartening, that we have an owner that knows about run differential.
Very interesting that he essentially kicks it all back to his former college roommate, Selig. That was obviously a clear reference to the Santa Clara County rights situation. And I for one appreciate all the detail- depressing as it was— about Fremont. He was obviously prepared to do the same about Oakland, and while I know it pains a lot of people around here to say, a new ballpark in Oakland wasn’t, isn’t and won’t ever be in the cards.
by jasonthea on May 6, 2009 9:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"we are not asking for any public money"
Tax breaks don’t count as public money, apparently.
by rageon on May 6, 2009 9:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
They are, and they aren't.
Tax breaks are given when the city or county feels that the money they lose on taxes from that business or organization or project can be recouped by having that project in the area.
Maybe they don’t get all the taxes they would normally get from the stadium, but they get increased taxes from the surrounding stores and businesses and restaurants who get increased revenues due to more people visiting and property values going up.
It’s a way for the city to invest in the project, from a certain point of view.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A tax break isn't the same as forcing a county to pay, say, an extra 1% sales tax...
…to provide funding for the ballpark, is it?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Tax Breaks for Businesses
This is really commonplace. My job involves working through these sort of issues and identifying the best place to build things. Tax breaks in the form of property tax abatement, sales tax exemptions and corporate income tax exemptions have, by far, the greatest weight in deciding where to build.
In most cases, the municipalities (whether it is City or County or State Government) have a “bottom line” number in mind when authorizing these sort of tax breaks and that number is based on really accurate projections for revenue created for the municipality via job creation, ancillary sales tax revenue boosts, etc.
Then there is also TIF, which is a different bird altogether and something I rarely deal with. It is a similar concept, where the city spends money today that it will recoup in future tax revenue increases.
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My own personal feeling
is that as A’s fans, we are very fortunate to have Lew as an owner. After dropping 80 million on a lost cause, he’s still standing at the plate trying to deliver. It’s rather obvious to me that he’s impatient with the blue ribbon process trying to identify a site in Oakland. I can’t blame him for that either. He’s spent a lot of his own time and resources during the last five years trying to do the same thing. To him it must appear to be a gigantic waste of time and effort, albeit one that is necessary for P.R. purposes. Also there’s the little matter of the Giants. The owners are going to require independent “proof” that it is beneficial to the league as a whole to put the A’s in SJ over the protestations of the Giants. Lew was careful to remain nuetral when SJ was mentioned in the interview, despite the fact that it’s obvious to even a casual observer that SJ is the superior option between the two.
"You may glory in a team triumphant, but you fall in love with a team in defeat."--The Boys of Summer
by alox on May 6, 2009 9:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Isn't San Jose..
The 10th Largest City in the Nation + Silicon Valley? Seems like MLB could make a lot of money by having an MLB team in San Jose. Isn’t that “Proof”?
by Colorado Fan on May 6, 2009 9:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
San Jose is the best option for the A's. Having a ballpark close to downtown with big business make it a win / win option.
San Jose also is close to many freeways and Bart (eventually) and cal trans. The A’s fanbase will grow because of this.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
problem with San jose
While San Jose is a larger city and has more large corporations than Oakland it also has one of the most cyclical employment markets in the USA. When times get tough in the tech sector then investment in A’s tickets will grind to a screeching halt, all at once. Also I don’t expect BART into San Jose until 2030 at the earliest and that is way to far out for the A’s to count on BART to help them out. I also wonder how much San Jose will support the A’s long term. It take a fairly large surrounding area to support a baseball team and IIRC the Alameda/Contra Costa counties have more population than Santa Clara and south.
by skwid on May 6, 2009 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Info to back up this statement?
My company…a high tech, Fortune 500 company, based in San Jose still has a luxury box for Oakland A’s game. Don’t confuse marketing money with standard business operations…totally different budget line…
"Twenty minutes," says Jack Sr. "Thank god for Billy Beane."
"Any fan that wants us to do that is going to be disappointed because that just isn’t us." - Wolff
"Joe Morgan's going to think Beane wrote the movie too..." -whitshoes40
"What am I going to do, seriously? Maybe be a bouncer at strip joints. That's about all I'm qualified to do." -Giambi
by ST on May 6, 2009 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sure this has been beat like a dead horse...
but why can’t Wolff build a New Shiny Baseball Stadium in the Oakland Coliseum Parking Lot? Because he and the ownership can’t afford it? Parking Issues? It seems like you could get some pretty smart engineers together to solve the Parking situation. Is it because it’s a terrible location and he can’t combine building Townhomes & Shopping w/ a new Stadium? I mean if it’s all about get a New Stadium, maybe you should take what you can get.
by Colorado Fan on May 6, 2009 9:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think the idea is to build a place that's going to be a destination for more than just a baseball game
I don’t think they should settle for “take what you can get” when we’re talking about a long-term stadium for the team and development around it.
I think having residential and commercial nearby is a great idea.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And no, I don't think the Coliseum site is workable
It’s already got an arena and a multipurpose stadium there and parking is a mess. You can’t put a third facility on the place and have a reasonable parking option without high-rise garages, which will only make it harder to get in and out when talking about 20-30K people (or more, for Raiders games). As it is, when two events overlap (the rare A’s/Warriors combo), overflow parking has to go on the other side of the freeway and people have complained about the mess that causes.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The townhomes/shopping is what was going to pay for the stadium ...
and why he was going to be able to do it with minimal public support.
If the Raiders left Oakland, I think the parking lot could become a viable option, using the new stadium and new parking structures as a buffer between the more pleasant west side of the coliseum and the more peasant east side … Without the Raiders leaving, there simply is not room for three venues, parking and the developments to pay for the stadium and make the area a nicer destination.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on May 6, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Guy loves his baseball
And I think is very sincere.
Just give us a ballpark (eventually) anywhere that the fans will go to so we can have a higher payroll and not have a 1/3 of a team full of below average players.
I don’t care where it is as long as it helps the team.
by Trainman on May 6, 2009 9:57 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Better attendance does not necessarily yield higher payroll.
Higher payroll doesn’t necessarily yield a better team, either.
If the stadium is nice enough that attendance becomes less dependent on how well the team performs it could result in a worse team.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 3:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the interview Blez
These kinds of interviews are what originally brought me to AN and they remain one of my favorite parts of the site.
At several points Lew mentioned that he was willing to describe in depth the process and all the measures he (the A’s) went through investigating and evaluating potential sites. I’d be interesting in reading about that if you or someone else had the time to follow up on it.
I like important stuff just as much as the next guy, but please, for a little while, deliver us from meaning, baseball. That's your greatest glory, and we thank you for it very, very much. -- Craig Calcaterra
by JLeverenz on May 6, 2009 10:12 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think jeffro volunteered too.
I’d do it, but then my eyes might glaze over and I’d have nothing to report back… except for maybe drool.
"No matter what I talk about, I always get back to baseball." -- Connie Mack
by GreenSocks on May 6, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd like to volunteer MarineLayer/vertig0
for the job …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on May 6, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Many Have Felt Alienated By Wolf...
…but I remember clearly his attempts at finding a site in Oakland prior to owning the team. I would love the A’s to stay in Oakland but am truly sick of the generations of politicians out of Oakland dating back to Lionel Wilson who have postured and proclaimed all sorts of statements about our professional franchises and have miserably failed at delivering very much. Some would look at the return of the Raiders as a success story but at what cost?
I think if Mr. Wolf can find a viable spot in Santa Clara County, it is good for MLB, the A’s (obviously) and for the entire Bay Area. Let’s hope the Blue Ribbon Committee is as generous with the A’s, as the A’s were with the Giants when they were threatening to leave the Bay area and move to Tampa by allowing them to potentially expand to Santa Clara which ultimately didn’t happen.
"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King
by Gerard on May 6, 2009 10:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The certainly did look at some possibilities in Oakland
The primary one being the industrial area on the other side of 66th Ave, opposite the Coliseum parking lot. There’d been talk of possibly building another BART stop between the Coliseum and Fruitvale ones. Wolff didn’t want to use eminent domain to force the business owners out and the naysayers and conspiracy pushers took that as Wolff knowing they’d never agree anyway, so he could say “Hey, we tried” when he wasn’t serious about really trying. There had also been talk about building a new stadium on the Coliseum complex.
I also recall a waterfront site proposed but I don’t remember if that was before or after Wolff became involved. The downtown location, the one Brown set aside for condos, was most certainly before Wolff.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Downtown site was the...
…“Either Or” location for a stadium when Wolf headed the committee put together by Schott. At that time, Brown was in the process of comiting that downtown site to the developers for the public housing deal and felt that was a better use of the land.
There was also the Jack London Square site that was used to tempt the gullible A’s fans into thinking it was a realistic possibility but there were zoning issues with that site. It would have faced from what I understand, toward San Francisco and with JL Square within walking distance would have been a great location but the port authorities, I believe wouldn’t have given up its location.
Anyway, this has been all a great tease for the last 25 years and I’m frankly tired of all of the rhetoric which has gotten the A’s nowhere they need to be in terms of financial competitiveness.
"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King
by Gerard on May 6, 2009 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just got Marine Layer to put up my idea for a Fruitvale stadium
http://newballpark.blogspot.com/2009/05/jingletown-stadium-fruitvale.html
suck on that, Uncle Lew.
by cityplANner on May 6, 2009 10:31 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I asked Blez to forward your comment in yesterday's DLD to Wolff
Hopefully this will reach his eyes as well.
Though saying “suck on that” isn’t really going to help.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you never know.
He seems like the type of guy who would take it in stride.
Define "succeed." --Poppy
by Leopold Bloom on May 6, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Granted, a few biting comments are probably very low on Wolff's list of concerns right now
If something can be done with that site, I’m sure it will be seriously considered.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it's all in good fun
you know I love you, Mr. Woff.
by cityplANner on May 6, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
26 acres seems small.
and certainly not “comparable” to the Howard Terminal which is nearly double the size.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks, Blez. Good interview~
It’s nice, BTW, to have an owner who obviously pays attention to his team.
I’ll chose to believe him.
Define "succeed." --Poppy
by Leopold Bloom on May 6, 2009 10:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Mr.Wolff
I appreciate Blez getting this interview but I just couldn’t finish it. There is just too much water under the bridge for me when it comes to Mr. Wolff. I really wish he and the real owner John Fisher would sell the team to someone who sees the A’s a something more than a real-estate deal.
by sirbed on May 6, 2009 10:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
well,
unless they can sell to a wealthy A’s fan willing to lose as much money as it takes to make this team championship caliber, I kinda like the guys we’ve got…
REVISED- The magical goblins that live in the Reverend Billy Lard's shower just told him that actually, Crosby's not gonna improve this year and he'll be released by June... Sorry, kids...
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 6, 2009 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolff
All Mr. Wolff has done since becoming part of the A’s is bad mouth Oakland and this has not helped fans feel good about their A’s. I always wonder about these fans that think the A’s should move. Where should they go?
Well all know San Jose is going to be difficult and Portland,Sacramento,Las Vegas,Charlotte and San Antonio are smaller markets than Oakland. I’ve heard Mexico City mentioned but with their unstable goverment and drug crime that seems unlikely.
With an economy going through it’s worst stretch in over 30 years no one is going to build the A’s a stadium. The A’s need to make lemonade here and they need a booster for the club not a Southern California real-estate developer. I don’t hate Lew Wolff I’ve never met the man but he’s the wrong man for the job. The A’s need someone whose positive not grumpy.
by sirbed on May 6, 2009 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you think all he's done is badmouth Oakland, I think you have blinders on
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
Ya my blinders are bit snug around the ears. Listen If you read this post you can see Mr. Wolff has his defenders and like I’ve said I don’t dislike him but I think he’s a lousy salesman for the Oakland A’s and he get’s ripped by a lot of us and we don’t think we’re wrong.
by sirbed on May 6, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
grumpy?
I’ve never seen him not smiling!
Ellis for President
by tosk on May 6, 2009 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is a big fan and you can always see him at games.
He wants a new stadium for his A’s. He wants a place where fans, like himself and you and I can go and enjoy our time and watch a good team play. So far the City of Oakland has not been on his side. I think he is tired of the hassel he has had to go through the last few years trying to get a new stadium. I also believe that the city of San Jose is working hard to make it possible for the A’s to have that state of the art stadium. As soon as this MLB review is done I think things will start happening.
Now, before you or anyone else gets on my back. I was born and raised in Oakland and Alameda. I have been a big fan since they came out here and would love to have them stay in Oakland or at least up in this area. The problem is that a big league club needs to be around people and money to survive. That is why the Giants are doing better in their new downtown park then they were in Candlestick.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Matt Holliday doesn't look like he cares
He must not!
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is hard for players to remain excited when there are no fans at the game.
Also, losing is difficult to get excited about.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What???
What does Matt Holliday have to do with this discussion. If your going to use sarcasm try harder.
by sirbed on May 6, 2009 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's a point to it
You think Wolff is negative and grumpy. Why?
It’s no different from the people who watch Holliday look emotionless, leading them to say he doesn’t give a crap.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because
Almost everything the man says is grumpy or negative. Whether it was enviromental studies or a city in Oakland that’s having to lay off cops so how can they justify money for the A’s. The A’s aren’t getting a new stadium anytime soon and Mr. Wolff needs to be a booster for what the A’s have not for some fantasy.
by sirbed on May 6, 2009 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I spent years and years and $80 million on a project
that came to a crashing end because of people on the outside putting up roadblocks I would be a little grumpy and negative when interviewed about it. Plus, after answering the same questions for the 100th time I wouldn’t be excited about answering it again.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
by micdog2001 on May 6, 2009 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good interview, Thanks!
But what exactly is it that made so many fans so vocally hate this guy?
He was very popular in ’06, but then, almost overnight, all this negativity. Is it because people suddenly realized that he wants to make some money with this team?
From the interview, it seems as if he thinks we all hate him.
I don’t hate you, Lew.
Ellis for President
by tosk on May 6, 2009 10:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think it's because he's come in out of essentially nowhere and Oakland fans don't believe he is interested in keeping the team in Oakland
I get the feeling some fans are more Oakland fans than A’s fans. To me, as long as they stay in the Bay Area, it’s enough.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's also because
the team has had a losing record two years in a row. All kinds of things are now coming into question. Not necessarily fair, just reality.
by jasonthea on May 6, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's tough, but good owners figure out how to market lousy teams.
That’s the Bill Veeck story in a nutshell.
And my feeling about Wolff is that everything is on hold until he solves the stadium problem. Don’t get me wrong. He has to solve the stadium problem. But he can’t afford to wait on everything else until that’s resolved. Even if a new stadium is a magic bean (Bean?) that will transform the A’s into a large market team that can afford big name free agents who’ll win them a Series or two (and there are a lot of untested assumption in that chain of reasoning), a new stadium is still a ways away.
So what else is Lew Wolff doing? Nothing much, so far as I can see.
Good owners need to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
by GreenNGoldSooner on May 6, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is a very good point.
In all these interviews, Lew Wolff has come across to me as very sincere. He also spoke at an event I planned for my work and came across the same way. He’s not going to show you all his cards, ever, because he’s a businessman and he’s trying to get deals done, and I really think he’s doing his best to get the A’s a new ballpark.
That being said, and as much as I wish it would happen, I just don’t see them staying in Oakland. Even if there was a site that was workable/acceptable, the corporate sponor dollars just don’t exist here like they do in San Jose, aside from Oakland’s messy politics and numerous other issues. It might not have been true 15 or 20 years ago, but today, corporate dollars are what makes new ballparks work.
But what Lew & Co. have fully missed the boat on, and what I think most of the diehard/current fans feel burned about, is the complete lack of marketing love for their team the last few years. Marketing doesn’t always cost a lot of money, so it shouldn’t have just been about the cash. I don’t understand why more hasn’t been and isn’t being done to keep the fans that do come out faithfully to the ballpark happy (despite wins and losses), and why more isn’t being done to make coming to the ballpark a more attractive offer for the casual fan.
I certainly don’t think that just by moving to Fremont, or San Jose, or wherever they end up is going to guarantee them a fan base, even if it affords them more payroll flexibility and a prettier park. They could have been (and still could be) setting the stage for that this whole time.
Nico: Okay. We have twelve hours to make a really big pickle.
by pam5981 on May 6, 2009 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do agree that they need to be doing a better job marketing,
but I think once the shovel is in the ground, things should start to really pick up, if they aren’t already before that.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree, but I don't think it's a given.
Marketing needs to happen, period. New ballpark or not.
Nico: Okay. We have twelve hours to make a really big pickle.
by pam5981 on May 6, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
by pam5981 on May 6, 2009 12:14 PM PDT wrote:
But what Lew & Co. have fully missed the boat on, and what I think most of the diehard/current fans feel burned about, is the complete lack of marketing love for their team the last few years. Marketing doesn’t always cost a lot of money, so it shouldn’t have just been about the cash. I don’t understand why more hasn’t been and isn’t being done to keep the fans that do come out faithfully to the ballpark happy (despite wins and losses), and why more isn’t being done to make coming to the ballpark a more attractive offer for the casual fan.
Amen!
And, I’d add that other than on AN, it appears as if the only press the A’s get lately is negative press, with little or no counter from A’s officials…Wolff, Beane, someone, anyone?!? Yeah, I realize the A’s are struggling right now, but for Pete’s sake, sometimes it seems like everyone has just given up on them – including the Oakland Athletics organization as a *whole.
*Not talking about the players, but about whomever is the decision maker when it comes to rallying the troops for all things PR & Marketing for the A’s.
Wolff is depressed?!?
How about the fans who love their A’s…some who have held season tickets since the A’s moved to Oakland, and have been feeling like their undying loyalty & love of/for their A’s is neither cared about or reciprocated by the A’s organization.
"You spend a good piece of your life gripping a baseball and in the end it
turns out that it was the other way around all the time." ~~~ Jim Bouton
by Sweet Spot on May 8, 2009 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the interview, Blez
but nothing in it convinces me that Wolff remains, at best, tone-deaf to his fans, and at worst, actively alienating toward them, simply because of his continuing policies of closing off the third deck and the half-hearted, chintzy small production runs of their promotion days. Jersey days, looking at you.
You want an owner who appreciates his fans? And not just the “ones who come”, but the ones who could be attending? Read Bill Veeck, a guy who knew how to promote a team and build up box office.
You want one who actively seeks to drive down attendance and claim small pockets afterward? Well, look abvove.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
So there was enough attendance to justify keeping the third deck open?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that's a case of the tail wagging the dog.
In Wolff’s eyes, the fans have to come to the games to justify his paying attention to them.
In reality, the obligation is his to make attending the ballgame an appealing choice. Denying attractive, lower-priced seats to the segment of his potential customers that would find such seats attractive only serves to create the self-perpetuating myth that there’s not enough of a market to run things “like you’d want them to be run.”
You create your own attendance. Don’t forget that Wolff has played his part in doing just that.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are still a whole shitload of seats available for less than 20 dollars.
Sorry, I don’t buy it.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're missing my point.
If you haven’t read “Veeck as in Wreck,” I urge you to do so.
Here’s my point: as far as owners go, we could be doing a HELL of a lot better.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We could also be doing a hell of a lot worse.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The A's have had owners who were a lot worse.
As far as the third deck, when you only get a few thousand fans to a game it costs too much to keep the upper deck open. Also, like mikev said above. There are plenty of $20 dollar or less seats available.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
by Eastbayjim on May 6, 2009 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And they would be?
I know you’re not talking about the Haas family. Were Schott and Hoffman appreciably worse? Or are you talking about the Finley years?
I’m talking about solutions, and all I’m hearing is “Oh, stop complaining; don’t mess with the status quo.”
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I find that people are complaining about the wrong things
Yes he closed the third deck, but he also got the A’s a much better TV deal than they’ve had in years. He also secured a pretty good radio deal too.
I personally think Wolff is attacking most of these issues, but the major overarching one is the Coliseum and how it really is not a viable stadium for baseball any more if this team ever wants to truly compete with how MLB has evolved. There’s only so many rabbits in Billy Beane’s hat as evidenced by the team’s struggles over the last couple of seasons.
The team needs a new stadium and as far as I can tell he researched Oakland pretty thoroughly.
I don’t understand what he’s done that so terrible. What is so awful that he’s done as an owner? He’s gotten lots more A’s games on a dedicated channel as opposed to the split TV schedule they had before. He’s gotten a better radio deal, albeit not ideal. He closed the third deck to try and create scarcity of tickets to no success, I think in large part because the team has gotten worse, but there isn’t the attendance there to justify reopening those seats now.
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I kinda disagree on the radio deal.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Their contract might be better,
but our reception currently isn’t.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I think it continues to be a work in progress
Lew has expressed to me in past interviews the fact that they’re kind of hamstrung by the lack of available stations.
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I believe I read on ML's site that there was supposed to be another antenna added sometime this year.
I’d have to go back and look to see where exactly I read that.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
AGREED with EMPHASIS
We now have a dedicated channel and a better radio option than in previous years. More HD and ON Demand as well.
Enjoy the game
by DCinWC on May 6, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better radio is debatable.
Baseball isn't magic.
by rebus on May 6, 2009 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's no point in paying attention to someone who isn't going to the games
They don’t make you money and they don’t fill the stadium.
I’d bet if the A’s were averaging 30K a game (something they haven’t done since 1992), the third deck would still be open. The percentage of people who actually used the third deck was extremely small.
Granted, if the team is poor attendance is going to drop. The problem – and aside from the World Series years of the late 80s – is the A’s have CONSTANTLY been below league average, even when they’ve been good. In the early 2000s the team was actually close to it and in 2003 they went over the AL average, but in recent years while attendance around the AL has increased it’s gone down in Oakland.
Yes, you have to give fans a reason to want to see the games, but when they’re not going to the ballpark even when you are competitive, I can’t blame them for closing off a section and trying to get people closer together.
In other words, the tarp issue is a non-issue to me. There are more important things to focus on than that.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The tarps are just a symptom
I think the very word has enough associations now that just saying “tarp” causes people here to go into some kind of brainlock.
Whether or not you agree with the decision, and I’m actually curious to see if you agreed with closing them off, but to get back on point, look above: our ownership could be doing a whole lot more to sell their product.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
how would someone agree or disagree when there is not enough info?
We don’t know what it costs to run the third deck, or the expected revenues. We also don’t have the same agenda.
As a fan, the more seating choices the better, so I disagree. BUt as with Flashfire, it really doesn’t matter much to me.
AS an owner, well, its more complicated. I suspect I would agree, but that is based on info I am guessing at.
I also don’t think Bill Veeck is a valid comparison. He is not marketing in 2009.
by Future Ed on May 6, 2009 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I do agree with closing them off
There wasn’t the demand to justify leaving them all open. Ultimately though, I don’t care. There are MORE than enough good, available seats at an affordable price, especially compared to so many other ballparks in the league. Look it up and you’ll see that. Some of it will naturally change with a new ballpark, but the A’s are still very affordable right now.
I don’t really care about Bill Veeck, though. Times change. You talk about marketing the team better, but what would YOU do? How would YOU bring more people out to the ballpark? More promotions? More discounted tickets? The money made on concessions and the rest isn’t always enough to make up for the costs of some of the promotions, and flooding the market with a lot of discounted seats can also cheapen the value of tickets bought by season ticket holders, which are comparable to gold to any pro franchise.
Just look at what’s going on with the Warriors. They overpriced their “Club 200” seats and are dropping the prices big time while leaving most of the lower bowl higher after capitalizing on the playoff run a couple years ago. The lower bowl seats are their gold, but they’re trying to bring more people into the upper bowl. Problem is, by doing so many promotions through places like Best Buy or doing “buy four games and get the fifth free,” it almost makes it better for the casual fan to forget about buying season tickets and just wait for a promotion so they can go to a handful of games instead of being stuck with a season’s worth of tickets they may not even be able to resell to others.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Glad you asked...
Lessons from Veeck (09 edition)
1) Pretty up the park. Yes, sometimes you’re dealt crap hands in cards, and the Coliseum is no beauty. But you make the park attractive as best you can. Replace the urinal troughs in the men’s room. If someone claims that doing so violates the lease, turn it into the PR bonanza that it is (Uptight landlord complains about better bathrooms!) Heck, add a few different tarps with picture of stars from the 80s and 70s or even the 30s for variety. If it makes it look better, do it.
2) Sell your team to the region by making yourself available. Veeck would drive around the state giving free speeches to whatever group asked, over 300 days a year, several times a day. Bring along guest stars: the GM, former players, whomever you feel can captivate your audience (assuming you can’t).
In this day and age, that may not mean as many public speeches. But it does mean Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter. Definitely Twitter. You want to show how hard you’re working to keep your product in the Bay Area? Tweet about it while you’re meeting all the people you claim to be meeting. Yes, it turns your personal life into something of a public spectacle, but when you own a ballclub, you’re a public figure.
3) Make the promotions feel worthwhile. Whatever you’re going to do, do it wholeheartedly. If you order product for a game, make sure people don’t go home empty-handed. In response to “that’s not how others do it,” that’s not the rationale here. The rationale is to bring more paying customers to the ballpark.
3b) Do NOT give away tickets. They were the one thing Veeck wouldn’t give away, because they were the lifeblood of his product. Make people want to pay for the tickets, because the experience at the ballpark will be worthwhile.
I have to run for now, but those are at the top of my list.
I didn’t come here expecting to spend most of my morning talking about Why Lou Wolff sucks. It just surprised me that so many people were so adulatory about him after the interview. Yes, it’s great that he allowed Tyler to interview him and ask so many specific questions.
But let me ask a counter-question to everyone who’s been questioning me here: what has Wolff done that makes him such a great owner? Because I’m not seeing it.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
1. Who gives a shit about troughs (pun intended lol). It’s a damn bathroom, not social hour. Go in, go pee, get back to the game. It’s absolutely amazing to me that people bring this up as some kind of issue.
2. You mean like having players answer phones for season ticket sales, or having players visit people, or having the closer meet fans at a suburb 30 minutes away from the park, or what?
3. If you have to give away something for free to get people to come to the stadium, what the hell point is there in trying to keep the team there?
3b. Tickets don’t get given away. Even when they are, the stadium isn’t full. What is so hard to understand about this?
In response to your last question, I don’t see anybody saying that Wolff has been “such a great owner”. It’s mostly people saying how much he sucks, and then other people being rational and saying “No, not really.”
However, this debate is about as likely to change a person’s mind as a debate about politics on the internet, so… oh well.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What mikev said
1) I couldn’t care less whether I pee in a trough or a regular urinal.
2) Wolff has more important things to focus on than running around playing PR man. That’s not his job, not his department. I know Facebook, Twitter and so on are becoming mega-popular these days but I hate feeling like I have to have an account on some social networking site in order to see something, and on top of that I especially don’t want to be getting bombarded with ads all over the place. That’s one of the things I hate most about Facebook as it is. Half the time it looks like there’s an update, it’s some thing about the latest movies or this poll or that thing. I just want to see when my friends said something!
3) ‘nuff said, mikev. And if you set aside enough promo items for a full house, you’re going to have a LOT of stuff left over. Sure, some of it could be donated to places, but then it defeats the purpose of trying to get people to come to the ballpark.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Golden Gate Fields does a giveaway near the end of the season
that is basically a way to get rid of the extra stock of giveaways they didn’t give out on that specific day.
The Sharks have a Fan Appreciation Day where they do a lot of section/row/seat giveaways on things. That would work with extra stock as well.
by LoneStranger on May 6, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You and Mikev may not care...
But believe it or not, a lot of people do. The point is to bring in more casual fans to boost attendance. And having bathrooms which are up to par with 99% of other public venues is a good start to that.
I offer suggestions, and people counter with “I don’t care about your suggestions.” Fine. But that doesn’t exactly debunk my point.
by sarchasmic on May 7, 2009 1:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am wondering if people are aware
That the A’s have a Facebook profile and a Twitter account and both are updated regularly?
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Big Lew not being Bill Veeck
Doesn’t necessarily make him a bad owner..
You have spent a lot of time writing about how awesome Veeck is and then concluding that Wolff is dumb for not being Bill Veeck.
Ellis for President
by tosk on May 6, 2009 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some truth to that...
but I do maintain that Wolff could stand to take a page or 10 out of that playbook to get the A’s away from having 10,000 attendance days.
Of course, the more cynical among us would say that that’s what he wants, but that’s an entirely different argument.
by sarchasmic on May 7, 2009 1:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Let's talk about what has been done
First… I agree on the bathroom thing. It’s 2009 for crying out loud, urinals please.
Second… making the team available has been done and is continuing. There has been the Holiday caravan. There has been Home Run Readers appearances. Players answered the phones for season ticket sales. Players make appearances throughout the East Bay (Brad Ziegler at the Dublin Hooter’s, Travis Buck at the Saloon in Pleasanton, Ryan Sweeney and Travis Buck at Stoneridge Mall, Nick Swisher at a credit union in Pleasanton, etc.) I think this is an invalid criticism.
Third… I am not sure how to really analyze the team’s performance in regards to give aways. There is the jersey days and bobblehead days that truly bring in large crowds even when most people don’t get one. I think most teams need to do give aways to attract crowds at times, though I hate them. The recent Manny Pacquiao bobble head attracted 11,000 more fans than average at AT&T Park. Though I hate that a team actually had a bobblehead for a guy that doesn’t even play the sport… so you may have a point here but my blind bias for hating give away days blocks me from embracing it. :) Even if I do own 30 something Oakland A’s bobbleheads.
There have been other suggestions in the past about things that the A’s should be doing… Scout Days is one that comes to mind (which they did 2 last season). In general, these are things the A’s do and people don’t realize… so perhaps the Promotion (one of the 4 P’s of marketing strategy) is at fault.
by jeffro on May 7, 2009 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
light it, they will see
just lighting up the halls would make the coliseum 50% more attractive. i know it’s a cement walkway on your way to the beer line, but does it have to be a dark, dreary alley you’d avoid if it wasn’t that you paid to walk through it?
troughs are gross. behind the bleachers, there’s urinals. go bleachers! (that’s a hilarious intended pun too. get it? you “go” and then you “go…” i kill me.)
don't care if i ever get back.
by AV on May 6, 2009 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think adding light in the walkways is probably a good idea.
Personally, I sort of enjoy the dusky ambience, but then again personally I wish baseball stadiums were as quiet as libraries.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 4:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolff is a bad owner because
he doesn’t take the time to send out Twitter messages while attending business meetings.
Wow. Just wow.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 4:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Talk about cherrypicking out of context
I was asked how I’d improve things, and you turn that into “Wolff is a bad owner because he doesn’t Twitter”?
Wow right back at you, because the comprehension and summarization skills need work.
by sarchasmic on May 7, 2009 1:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Use of third deck
The percentage of people who actually used the third deck was extremely small.
By “used” do you mean people who sit there? Because that’s not the point.
The people who are pissed off about the tarps don’t want to actually sit in the third deck. They want to buy cheap tickets for seats in the third deck, and then they want to “upgrade” by finding an unsold seat in a better section. These people have a vested interest not only in removing the tarps but also in keeping ticket sales low. So they’re opposed to Lew on both counts.
"Go ahead and overachieve, you scrappy Brett-Favre-colored walk-takers." —Rev Halofan
by iglew on May 6, 2009 4:03 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Good point
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Um, unless they're getting 45K people per game
The third deck being tarped off means precisely squat.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It amazes me how bent out of shape people get over tarping off the third deck
Where were all the people trying to sit there on a consistent basis to begin with? Oh, they only showed up for the Giants, Yankees, Red Sox, or a fireworks night?
Not enough, sorry.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And are the days of easily topping 2 million fans in a season in this very same stadium so long gone?
See above.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All it takes to reach 2 million is an average of 24,691 per game
The A’s haven’t done that in three consecutive years. They did it from 2001-2005 but not once did they do it from 1994-1999.
To be fair, at least in the AL (as I’m pulling this from Baseball Almanac), since the A’s came to Oakland there have been 19 seasons in which the league has averaged 2 million or more fans. This began in 1988 and was only below that figure in 1994 and 1995, the strike days.
Attendance reached a high-water mark in 2007 (2,527,968). That year the A’s attendance was 76% of that number (1,921,844). It dropped further last year (1,578,922/2,464,986, or 64%). The quality of play on the field certainly had to do with that.
But back to the point: in those 19 seasons of 2 million or more, the A’s also averaged 2 million or more just 11 times. Since coming to Oakland, they’ve been over the AL average only 8 times. As you’d probably expect, those came mostly when the team was good, though they were below AL average (which was around 1.1 million at the time) in their three straight World Series-winning years in the 70s.
The A’s drew great crowds in the Canseco/McGwire/Stewart/Eckersley/Rickey/etc. years, but they had legitimate star power that drew tons of people and that was in the days before Mt. Davis. Now the team is a collection of mostly nobodies that plays in an ugly facility and they’re struggling. Of course that’s going to hurt attendance.
Still, even when they went to the ALCS in 2006, they only pulled 80.4% of the AL average, failing to reach 2 million fans. That was also the first year with the tarp. Capacity was 34,077 and the A’s averaged 24,402, just 71.6% of that capacity. Prior to that, official capacity was listed at 43,662. Even averaging the total to reach 2 million fans (24,691), that’s just 56.6%. Of course, for the really big dates they let people sit in Mt. Davis and that increased capacity up to near 60,000.
So, what need is there to keep the third deck open these days? None I can see. People can sit somewhere else if they want to go there. Like I said, I doubt the third deck gets tarped off if attendance is consistently higher.
Part of this also had to do with reducing capacity to get fans used to a new ballpark that’d be smaller, but that’s another story.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
All right, since you keep coming back to need, let me tell you...
The need is in showing the fans who aren’t coming that you want them there.
You say that there’s no point in paying attention to fans who don’t show. I say that that is exactly why you court them.
And again, it’s not just the tarps. It’s the way you run things to make the product as a whole appealing: order enough promotional product so that more than a fraction of your expected weekend crowd can get them. Make the bathrooms remotely appealing (troughs in this day and age? Really?) Overstaff your place. If you make the visit an attractive experience, the crowds will come.
Part of that has to do with winning, definitely. Winning trumps all, but the product off the diamond counts, too.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
First off, troughs kick ass.
However,
I went to the Holliday jersey giveaway. I got there 25 minutes before the game started and they still had PLENTY.
We’re talking about a 1:05 Saturday game, and they were only giving out 10,000 jerseys.
"I’m Joey Devine, I’m what Joba Chamberlain would be if he was good and nobody had ever heard of him."
by mikev on May 6, 2009 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And I went to the Dave Stewart game last season...
and I camped out three hours in advance because they were gone well before game time at the entrances I saw.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 12:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I'm sure the thought of a Stewart jersey is a little more appealing than one of...
…Holliday, who probably won’t even be here a full season.
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 12:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, I doubt the promo items really cost the team
You do notice they all have a corporate sponsor printed somewhere easily seen, right?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmm, Troughs Kick Ass...
My horse thinks so, but my donkey isn’t very happy right now.
"I've been accused of using too many words...I suppose that's like accusing Mozart of using too many notes." Bill King
by Gerard on May 7, 2009 9:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It sounds like you're saying that on a promo day, every fan should get the item
That’s not how it works for almost every promotion in every ballpark/arena/whatever. It also encourages people to get there early if they want the item. But, it shouldn’t take a free item to get people to come to the game. If you have to entice them with a blanket, a cheap jersey, a hat or whatever, you’re missing the bigger problem: the team itself. For good teams, the promo items are a little more of a reward for coming to the games. For bad teams, they’re an excuse to get more people to show up. Just look at how many people come for bobblehead days, get multiple ones, then leave to go list them on eBay.
The A’s have had dollar days for a while. They’ve done other promos. They’ve offered discounts to certain groups of people. To go much past that, I don’t really see the point. Again, improve the team and you’ll improve the attendance. Get a better facility and you’ll improve the attendance. A few free things are nice, but they’re not what gets people coming back to the ballpark.
As for the bathrooms, don’t hold your breath (or maybe do, if you’re in them). The A’s have no control over that part. Overstaff the place? Okay, and pay more money that doesn’t need to be? This goes back to the third deck issue. What’s the use of having an usher in section 333 if six people are sitting in the area? What’s the point of having a concession stand open behind section 305 if a couple dozen people are in the area?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
winning trumps all, yes
I think it was in Moneyball that Lewis mentioned that was really fans cared about, and moreover, if you win with a bunch of nobodys they become stars by default. I’m not saying it’s the bible, but there is truth to that.
That said, the operative word there is FANS. You can do all the promotions and cheap tickets, food, entertainment, whatever but that’s only what brings PEOPLE to the Coliseum maybe three times a year if you’re lucky. Those people aren’t fans — they’re just looking for an outing with the kids or an every once in awhile thing. It’s no different than the zoo to them, and they have no interest in going to the zoo more than three times a year. The real value is in having season tickets, or at least people that attend games 15 times or so a year, and then bring some buddies and building from there.
If you can’t get either, then you have a systemic problem as mentioned above.
p.s. – the upper deck was for kids who smoked pot in the last row. It was a good value yes, but the A’s aren’t the Neiman Marcus of teams here; plenty of affordbale options exist.
Roy Steele is the voice of God
by cuppingmaster on May 6, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
true, and...
…as one of those kids now (sort-of) grown up, I want to suggest that if pot ever gets legalized, they take some of the tarps off and have an all-you-can-smoke section!
REVISED- The magical goblins that live in the Reverend Billy Lard's shower just told him that actually, Crosby's not gonna improve this year and he'll be released by June... Sorry, kids...
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 6, 2009 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
untapped revenue stream
Medicial mj section.
by Future Ed on May 6, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you need fans and people
hey, i love going to the current park, i don’t care about all the other stuff… OK, i don’t go often. but maybe i’d go more and perhaps we’d go as a family if it was more fun to be there for my wife and little kids. they could care less about whether the A’s win or lose. better food, nicer facilities, more stuff for little kids to do would all help.
steal ideas from the Giants: have an amusement area for little kids. then trump it: have a mind blowing 6 Flags type ride somehow within the stadium that teens want to go on. install a free fall off of Mt. Davis, a wild ride up in the upper deck.
bring back the drummers… have a “bring a drum, get in free” day.. “bring a banjo, get a free beer”..
support other Oakland institutions: work out promos like “buy an admission to the oakland zoo/chabot space center/fox theater concert/etc, get a discounted or free cheap seat at an A’s game”
Hi ho.
by danh on May 6, 2009 11:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has a point, but this is the wrong crowd
Hopefully those who read this site and are locals actually go to games. Most of us here could give a crap about things he brings up, we go anyway. It’s the casual fan who needs extra incentive to spend their hard earned money at the OACC. They care about all the garbage we don’t. I want green grass and baseball. But listen to the people sitting near you who comment on the surroundings; these are the people you need to wow, so they go home and say what a swell place the OACC is; the variety of foods, the helpful staff, the things they could do there – watching a baseball game may not be on top of the list. I know I would suck at being an owner because I’d give them Hot Dogs, Beer and Baseball.
Enjoy the game
by DCinWC on May 6, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
even when there were 12K at a game, the third deck was the home of the A's Hardware guys.
where are they now, i ask you? where?

don't care if i ever get back.
by AV on May 6, 2009 2:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i've wondered that too
"It's like déjà vu all over again." -yogi berra
by Cheezombie on May 6, 2009 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did they graduate Berkeley?
And go on to be corporate attorneys?
by Tyler Bleszinski on May 6, 2009 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great Interview, Blez!
I’ve never been moved to question Wolff’s sincerity, but I do question his skills and creativity as a team owner and to a certain extent his priorities (beyond his evident desire to keep team in Northern California, which I truly appreciate).
I understand that getting a new stadium built is a long and complicated process (just look across the Bay at the years the Giants spent getting themselves out of Candlestick, which was a truly horrible place to watch a baseball game). But Lew Wolff has so far not shown himself to be very good at closing this deal.
And he seems to have put 100% of his improve-the-team eggs into the new stadium basket. Obviously this team needs a new stadium. But that could clearly take awhile. And my sense is that ownership is in a holding pattern until that gets done. Add to that Wolff’s apparent tendency to pursue one attempt at a time (there seems to have been no Plan B while Fremont was going forward), and it’s hard to expect much positive from ownership.
Beyond working unsuccessfully for a stadium deal, what new initiatives has this owner accomplished? Tarping over the upper deck of the Coliseum?
I don’t hate Lew Wolff in the least. Having lived through the firesale-and-trainwreck end of the Finley years, I know what bad ownership looks like (and if you’re not that old, two words: Al Davis). But having also lived through the Haas era, I know what really good ownership looks like. Lew Wolff is not a bad owner, but he’s yet to prove himself to be a good one. And nothing in this excellent interview changes my opinion of him.
by GreenNGoldSooner on May 6, 2009 11:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks...
That last paragraph pretty much sums up what I’ve been trying to say above.
by sarchasmic on May 6, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this ownership has devoted most of its time and resources to the failed Fremont deal
which apparently fell through because of outside pressure.
“They” also went out and got an expected star player in Holliday, which hasn’t completly worked out yet but was IMO an attempt at drawing interest in the team.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
by micdog2001 on May 6, 2009 1:00 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If we take him at his word
It doesn’t sound like the closing the deal part is really his fault. Indeed, as evidenced by the money spent on Fremont, it appears he kept up his end of the bargain.
I guess he could have sweetened the deal for Kohl’s et al, but that doesn’t sound like his style. Why should he, either way? They would probably have given him some crock revenue estimate for a store that hadn’t even been built yet.
Roy Steele is the voice of God
by cuppingmaster on May 6, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm Taking Him At His Word
What spoiled the deal?
1) California laws, which he surely must have known about.
2) A clause in the agreement that Wolff signed that gave retailers the right to protest, which he claims he simply assumed they would not do.
Wolff is not responsible for the way things turned out. But he is responsible for planning for the contingency that residents/retailers could take advantage of California regulations. And he is definitely responsible for clauses in agreement he signed.
This deal apparently wasn’t killed by an utterly unexpected act of God (e.g. the financial crisis of last fall).
And I do find it troubling that there was no Plan B in place given the development environment that Wolff knew he was operating in.
by GreenNGoldSooner on May 6, 2009 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder about this too
I’ve lived in California since 1992, and it seems to me that from the day I moved here I’ve heard both homeowners and business complain about how difficult it is to build anything without reams of paperwork and the unanimous consent of everyone within miles. Did this get worse recently?
by Englishmajor on May 6, 2009 4:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's always getting worse
The latest round is the Greenhouse gas laws. But they’re adding things constantly.
by athletics68 on May 6, 2009 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent interview Blez
serious as a fart in a spacesuit - spectr17
by adragon on May 6, 2009 12:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great interview
I was surprised at the detail that Lew went into about the failed Fremont stadium.
You have to include smiley faces - Poppy
;- ) :- ) :-O : -> : -] : -}
by micdog2001 on May 6, 2009 1:01 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for getting this for us, Blez
I live in Reno, so I haven’t been paying strict attention to the talk of the new location. What I had gathered is that many folks thought that the city was dragging its feet and blaming it on the Environmental Impact Study. It is interesting to learn that the large retailers were the ones making a fuss. Although it is unfortunate, I can see their point of view. Can you imagine trying to run to Lowes for something and running into the traffic created by a sold out 35,000 seat stadium? That would be enough to get me to find an alternative option. But, maybe as a person who is concious of my surroundings, I should be able to recognize when the A’s are home and plan my shopping accordingly.
"I'm more into going home and being horizontal" - Lew Wolff
by bvank on May 6, 2009 1:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hey, Reno...
how do you like YOUR new stadium?
REVISED- The magical goblins that live in the Reverend Billy Lard's shower just told him that actually, Crosby's not gonna improve this year and he'll be released by June... Sorry, kids...
by Gaijin_Suketto on May 6, 2009 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's quite nice, actually
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is very nice!
It’s really similar to Sacramento – with the hill, single level of seating, one row of boxes above, open concourse, etc. You can make a complete loop of the field here, which you can’t at Raley Field – and that is cool. There is a drink rail from the left field foul pole to centerfield, similar to Seattle. Tickets and food are reasonable. I encourage everyone to make a trip to check it out.
It was completed in a year, which goes to show that a project of considerable size can be pulled off, but it is only a ballpark at this point. Shopping and dining are to come – likely next year or the year after. Not to mention that the cities of Reno and Sparks were fighting over who would get it.
"I'm more into going home and being horizontal" - Lew Wolff
by bvank on May 6, 2009 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good deal
He kinda sounds like a country boy in some ways, but he did make a few things clear that weren’t exactly spelled out:
1. He won’t lose money on the team itself. Whereas Walter Haas lost money in his final years as A’s owner in the running of the team, Wolff won’t. Which is fine, you shouldn’t have to lose money to put up a decent team.
2. Dream on, Oakland. I believe him when he says the team has done its homework on AVAILABLE sites. As to the ones that may not be available now, that remains to be seen.
3. For anyone that didn’t think San Jose is a foregone conclusion, this tells you all you need to know. The other owners will soon vote to give SJ to the A’s, because they have obviously taken their data from Wolff.
Roy Steele is the voice of God
by cuppingmaster on May 6, 2009 1:11 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Wolff
I feel much differently about Lew after I read that interview. Still makes me wonder about other things tho…
Hey, I'm Matt Holliday, I can hit the ball a ton above 5280 ft. Otherwise, I can't hit shit.
by slkierley on May 6, 2009 1:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Good job Lew and Blez!
Even with SJ being farther away for me than Oakland (E. Contra Costa County) I’m pulling big time for SJ. It would be the best by far for the team and it is still the Bay Area!
Good Luck Lew!
by calas on May 6, 2009 2:15 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Fine work, Tyler.
I enjoyed the read, and the convo it spurned.
I'm here to talk about the past.
by 67MARQUEZ on May 6, 2009 3:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Where's Free Seat Upgrade when you need him?
"I'm disappointed Ziggy didn't pump his fist towards the sky 100 times and scream like a hooker." ~Nico.
by LAXile on May 6, 2009 3:28 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lew Wolff is actually
a Vulcan
"It's like déjà vu all over again." -yogi berra
by Cheezombie on May 6, 2009 3:29 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I believe Wolff 100% when he says this...
The process has become the end product in California. So many people live off the process and there’s so many ways to stretch the process and thwart it…
I work in the commercial and residential development industry in California and I can attest to this. The process itself has become an industry unto itself.
Now I’ll finish reading the interview.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on May 6, 2009 4:19 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
although it's quite long
Zennie Abraham’s blog entry responding to Guy Saperstein’t response to John Russo is well worth reading.
by OaklandSi on May 6, 2009 4:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Why?
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What exactly are his accomplishments?
by Pucking Insane on May 6, 2009 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm asking him what he means by "Epic fail"
Don’t just say “He hasn’t done anything!”
Last of the Ninth - Photography Site / jamesvenes.com - Blog
by Flashfire on May 6, 2009 7:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The way Lew puts it
you’d think nothing ever got built in California ever.
by cityplANner on May 6, 2009 4:48 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
There is a pattern
It’s no coincidence that 8 of the 15 teams in the 4 major sports are playing in old, outdated venues. Take away hockey, and it’s 8 out of 12.
MLB
SF – new
OAK – old
LAD – old
LAA – old
SD – new
NFL
SF – old
OAK – old
SD – old
NBA
GS – old
SAC – old
LAL – new
LAC – new
NHL
SJ – new
LA – new
ANA – new
The process does have something to do with it. How much isn’t entirely clear.
by vertig0 on May 6, 2009 5:15 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair ...
LAA and GSW are playing in fairly newly renovated venues … it’s not really fair to call them old … The Raiders are somewhere in between …
The Dodgers, to the best of my knowledge, don’t want a new park — they just want some renovations to their current, historical park …
The Kings, while desperately in want of a new Arena, have yet to really get to the “process” part because they have never identified a funding source to move forward with. The Raiders, too, have not moved to the point where the process matters.
The A’s and Niners have had process issues … don’t know about the Chargers … but there’s plenty to explain away the bulk of the list.
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on May 6, 2009 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
How does renovating a building
differ from building a new one? From a process perspective? Anyone know?
by jeffro on May 6, 2009 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Money and time
Renovating a building doesn’t require much in terms of EIR/CEQA work. A new building does.
Not saying that the environmental process is the only factor. It’s just one of many factors that makes doing this type of business in California difficult. Plenty of other large markets are able to ram the process through because of the presence of large influential political machines, state help, and other assistance that the individual California teams and cities don’t have.
A few years ago, I devoted a series of posts on the ballpark blog to CA Senate Bill 4, which would’ve set up an enormous state infrastructure authority that would’ve provided billions of dollars for new sports and entertainment facilities. The bill died after being tossed back and forth among committees. For California to be on par with other states and cities, something like would have to have been available. Thankfully, it didn’t pass because it would’ve added even more monstrous debt to the state.
by vertig0 on May 6, 2009 7:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's also a lot less room for NIMBY activities, which, according to Lew is what killed both Fremont sites ...
It’s also a lot cheaper, since you don’t need to acquire land, develop (as much) infrastructure, etc … which is kind of a big deal …
"It's for your own good. Big strong Devo knows whats best for Poppy" -- Mossback
by devo on May 6, 2009 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
re: CEQA
CEQA attracts unnecessary lawsuits for high-profile projects like shit attracts flies, and this is well known, and should have been anticipated and built into the original planning (including timing). In that regard I’m having a hard time believing this caught him off-guard.
IIRC, Raley Field in West Sacramento faced similar issues and eventually a judged ruled them all to stop.
I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - the chances that all the functions of an individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity.
~George Gallup
by UncleLeo on May 6, 2009 5:16 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Most excellent interview, Blez!
Very much appreciated. You too, Lew.
by lynnzgal on May 6, 2009 6:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Great Interview
It’s really a shame the A’s don’t have a new stadium. It’s hard to fault Mr. Wolf and management’s desire to try and build one. On top of that, the patience displayed by Mr. Wolf is beyond commendable. I guarantee any other owner in any major sport would have had a fit over the issues that have come up during the ‘process’. Bravo to you Mr. Wolf for your patience and commitment to Oakland and the East Bay community in trying to keep the A’s here.
by 916baller on May 7, 2009 11:20 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
A’s Marketing 101
Blez – thanks for the long interview with Lew Wolf. Much to my dismay I am not an A’s executive and can’t really say what Lew’s real motives are. My issue with Lew’s ownership group is very straight forward – convince me that you WANT my business as an A’s fan – regardless of where they play.
Some basic marketing – At least some of the problem with low attendance might be that many A’s fans (especially those of us that support the team by showing up at games) feel un-appreciated. Marketing is not about flashy commercials or Bill Veeck style gimmicks. Real marketing is about having a message and making sure that fans (AKA customers) hear it through the actions of your company.
So Lew – how about doing some things to let the fans (sorry – customers) know you want to make A’s games a more enjoyable place to spend our money while the team is still in Oakland. One of the things I love about A’s games is that the 15,000 fans that show up are real baseball fans. But that won’t keep our young players from jumping ship because the team can’t make them a competitive offer after their 5th year with the team. Think of it as an expansion of dot racing (and I really hatedot racing). It has absolutely nothing to do with baseball – but it’s popular – the fans love it and it’s one of the few endearing (to some people) Coliseum traditions.
Some of you die-hards out there many find much of this stupid (yes – I hate the urinal troughs too mostly because it’s really hard to hold my 4-year old daughter backwards while she tries not to pee on you guys), but here are a few more marketing ideas for Lew to get more fans in the seats for the 3-5 years that the A’s will need to stay in Oakland:
- Put pressure on the city to get Aramark out of the Coliseum. The positive press alone from taking on this battle might win you a few more fans (sorry – customers). Aramark serves crappy food, sells single beers that cost more than a six pack, and hires slow, surely and incompetent vendors. If the Aramark monopoly is too powerful, how about lobbying for more than one stand that sells chicken strips so I can get my kids to our seats without having to file a missing person’s report every time we navigate through the crowds at the Heineken stand. What’s not to love about a guy that takes this on as an issue?
- Make the Coliseum more family friendly. I have 4 year old twins (oh man you guys that like the urinal troughs will really hate this) – Stomper Zone is a disaster. Maybe you could move a few of the 50" flat screens from the empty 2nd deck hallways and replace the vintage 1970’s TV’s so us parents can watch the game while we watch our kids. Better yet – how about moving Stomper Zone to one of the outfield plazas where we could get some sun and actually see the game! This may be pushing it but how about some updated play structures and dare I ask - new popping lawnmower push toys.
- How about some outreach to the Latino and Asian communities of the East-Bay. On Cinco de Mayo you sponsored blanket night and a Margarita Bar in the Westside Club – please!
- Try to say at least a few nice things about the people that live in Oakland and Alameda County. Hundreds of thousands of us, work here, raise families here and are still A’s fans. I understand that Oakland may not be a viable home for the A’s given the economics of baseball in the 21st century (although I’m still not convinced of that). You’re a commercial real estate guy and know more than most people that ALL urban areas are in a constant state of change. The realities for a new ball park in _________ (pick a city) are different than they were just a year ago. You’ll do whatever you need to do to find your team a home. No hard feelings about that after all it’s actually Lew Wolf’s A’s not Oakland’s A’s. But for the next few years you’re stuck with us here in Oakland.
- So, last point for A’s Marketing 101 – Some of us actually like spending our money supporting your company (sorry our team – or is it our company, whatever…). There is still time to get more people out to the games if your marketing message is that you want our business. Unless Mayor Dellums cares about the toys you buy for Stomper Zone – you don’t need a city council resolution or an ecological impact statement for that
by sleeper cell on May 11, 2009 10:58 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

























