Actual attendance up 45 percent last season, city says

While Tampa Bay Rays ticket sales increased 30 percent last season, the number of people actually attending games shot up even more, according to the city.

City of St. Petersburg officials on Wednesday said the number of people attending baseball games last season increased 45 percent when compared to 2007. The city tracks actual attendance records because it receives a small percentage from each ticket used.

City senior development administrator Rick Mussett said attendance at Tropicana Field improved even more near the end of the season. From July through September, actual attendance increased 59 percent when compared with 2007.

The figures were released at a meeting of A Baseball Coalition, a community group studying stadium options for the Rays.

Comments

It's all about winning!

[Paul]

Once again, sounds like that Trop works pretty good. Lets keep it for awhile. We can find much better things to spend a billion on rather than a stadium. I'm not even sure we'd need to spend a billion to make an impact on our local job base... which is what really needs attention.

[ken]

Paul: Even if a new stadium was approved tomorrow, we would still have the Trop "for awhile", like about another 6 or 7 years while the new stadium is built. By then, the Trop -- which is by far the worst venue for any major sports team in the U.S. -- will be over 20 years old, and the debt will be paid off. Also, it would cost half as much as you say -- nobody has estimated the cost at any more than $450 million. And, that would be financed with bonds that would be paid off by rent and tax revenues generated by the stadium development itself -- in other words, it would pay for itself. And a stadium project would be an excellent way to create jobs -- temporary jobs for our hardest-hit sector, construction, and permanent jobs when it and the accompanying development are completed. Moreover, if you don't build it, the Rays are likely to leave St. Pete. That would cost thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions in business for local merchants, including hotels, restaurants, bars, etc., and correspondingly reduce tax revenues to the city, county, and local schools. Keeping the Trop does not mean that the Rays would continue playing there; they've already said that, as a business, they cannot remain viable if they continue to play at the Trop. That means they will leave if no new stadium is planned for the relatively near future. Your comment, frankly, is short-sighted and ill-informed.

[Paul]

Thanks Ken, but I've been reading this stadium nonsense in very great detail for over a year now. So... I don't consider myself ill-informed. I consider myself well opinionated. How is it that other ballparks that are old are considered nice places with character? Yet, the Trop, which is a very very young 18 years old, is considered 'old'? I own buildings here in St Pete that were built in the 1920's. Those are old. So the Trop is the worse stadium (very qualitative statement there) in the league. I personally don't care. Fix it up, build some things around it, I don't own the Rays, I only pay their bills through my taxes and am quite frankly, ready for my cost of living to go down, not up, by those wonderfully higher property values you mention that a new stadium would bring. Our taxes are significantly higher than I think they should be. I may yell that out to Charlie tonight if I'm by his wedding downtown, not that he'll hear me.

I personally don't believe everything you've typed... namely the implication that St Pete will suffer if the Rays move. If they move, that would give us at least a few million more in the coffers that we don't have to spend (like that insurance and other City costs of the Trop), and could spend on something that creates alot of jobs that pay a living wage. I don't see working at the Trop as a job. Maybe for someone school kid or retiree, but you ain't paying your bills off a Trop job, not around here in St Pete.

I thought I had read that the Rays aren't allowed to play in another city for the remainder of their lease on the Trop... and once again I ask, does anyone have a link to a copy of the Trop lease with the Rays? I'd really like to read it over and we could quickly clear up a few points.

By the way, what's our City budget short this year? Something like 27 million... ? not sure, but I know we are making cuts to save.

[Rick K]

Paul would benefit from some basic economics.

First, the "budget" shortfall is the result of the City spending more than it should, based upon tax collections.

Second, the best near term and long term strategy to enhance the health of the City budget is to pursue projects which would create immediate disproportinate tax benefits in the near term, while also growign the local tax base over the longer term. For example, the City could borrow a few hundred million to be paid back over a number of future years, while a Billion dollars will be spent in downtown in a 30 month period with the (now dormant) paired redevelopment proposals. Those investments would also grow the local tax base, resulting in greater tax collections (government revenue) in future years.

[Thomas]

Bigfoot, UFOs, and the "Billion Dollars that would be spent downtown in a 30 month span"

Rick, you might want to look at the Powerpoint presentation Aaron posted. You know, the one that the Rays themselves referred to. According to the numbers there is never going to be enough population, spending power, or tourists to come close to that spending forecast.

It's ironic, because it's the same Powerpoint where they complain about attendance problems due to low population percentage around the Trop, but then proposed a solution where they moved the stadium to Al Lang... where there is even a smaller population percentage.

It's right about now that any sane person would realize the whole "paired redevelopment projects" were a big lie. That's why after being subject to even mild scrutiny the planners quickly pulled the proposal off the table. It was a mega-loser.

But if dude wants to continue reading line-by-line from the propaganda pamphlets of that dead horse, that's cool. Whatever makes you happier Rick.

[Paul]

Rick, I need to learn some basic economics? You are a funny man. I like your solution though, as magical and imaginary as it it:

'For example, the City could borrow a few hundred million to be paid back over a number of future years, while a Billion dollars will be spent in downtown in a 30 month period... '

I can't stop laughing, seriously, Rick, what stage are you doing your comedy act on? I have to come see your show. You must be hilarious in person. Can you throw me comp tickets? Just leave them at the will call window.

[Rick K]

You guys crack the rest of us up, in the way you repeat the same narrow, outdated, never accurate claims and applaud each other. It must be like a Klan rally, or a meeting of the "he man woman haters club."

I know no sane person who disagrees with this claim.

Had the questions from this past summer lived on and made their way on this (Past) November's ballot, the voters of St. Pete, flush with excitement of the Rays resurgence and World Series appearance, would have overwhelmingly approved the plans for a new stadium on the waterfront.

Pretend all you want.

Offer posts for each other's congratulatory consideration.

You have convinced no one.

Nor will you.

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

Rick,

You say, "I know no sane person who disagrees with this claim"

I say this is a reflection of your friends and your OWN sanity.

To call Economists from ACROSS THE SPECTRUM...members of a LARGE number of a VARIETY of institutions of higher education insane says more about you than it does about them or the majority of us who disagree with your pie in the sky pipedreams. What we'd really like to know Rick is what you're smoking.

Now before you make one more ad hominem attack about our sanity or anything else...please explain the doubletalk (nice word for lies) from Kalt and the Rays. How can they possibly whine to ABC about the population within a 30 minute drive at the Trop when they opted to try and take the most valuable waterfront property in all of Tampa Bay which had 13% LESS population than the current Trop site...and LESS THAN HALF the population of the Toytown site. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT RICK? WHY WOULD THEY GRIPE ABOUT POPULATION LOCATION OF THE TROP YET SHOOT FOR SOMETHING
....WORSE...!!!!!! PLEASE EXPLAIN CLEARLY FOR THOSE OF US LACKING SANITY.

Ken...for you to try and use Kalt's claim of a 450 million dollar cost for the stadium shows YOUR lack of information in your criticism of Paul's projections. This is REAL SIMPLE KEN...NOBODY BELIEVES THE 450 million figure. THOSE WHO DON'T LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT IT!!! Thomas can quote far more than I on past stadia overruns I will simply direct you to KALT'S LAST PROJECTS IN NEW YORK. If you take the cost overruns on Yankee stadium..by percentage..apply them to his 450 million dollar figure you will see the accuracy of Paul's statement and the ill informed response you posted.
OHHHH I get it..this time will be DIFFERENT. As Jon Lovitz used to say...yeah that's the ticket...THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT!!!!

[Thomas]

I'm in the spirit today - and I'd like to present my Ballpark Frankness Holiday Gift List:

To Aaron Sharockman: Case of Scandinavian beer

To Michael Kalt: Pinoochio Doll

To Stuart Sternberg: Arena Football League team

To Rick K: TinyTots Build-It-Yourself "Paired Redevelopment" Model

To Ken: A Tin Foil Hat

To Mayor Rick Baker: Campaign contributions from the Rays

To POWW: 2009 Entertainment Book full of money saving coupons!

To Paul: A bigger whiteboard

It's the season of giving! Happy Holidays All!

[Rick K]

NO economist has been quoted anywhere I have seen disagreeing with the notion that had the citizens of St. Pete voted on the ballot question this past November, they would have overwhelmingly approved a new stadium.

What sane person disagrees with this?

[Scaramouche]

One of the most annoying things to me at least about the Great Stadium Scam is the "freeloader" aspect of the "deal." People who favor the flavor of a pleasant night at the ballpark want EVERYBODY in the County to pay for their pleasure. Businesses that think they might benefit from a "paired Baywalk-level renaissance revival Halleluyah" Downtown Stadium also want the public at large to pay the freight for their profits.

Haven't we just about seen enough of this kind of wealth transfer? Every taxpayer in the US is already on the hook for a future paydown of maybe a trillion or two to make up for freeloading by big finance (including the stage-setting by our very own set of carpetbaggers in the Rays Team offices -- which we are supposed to give them a $10-15 million new one of, as part of the "redevelopment") and incompetent or grotesquely venial "business" people whos only business savvy seems to be "giving the business" to everyone else.

So I hear that a new model for other stadia scams is the "seat license," where people who want to attend games buy a condo-style interest in seats in the park. Not a skybox, just the regular seats. And one Cal college football team is expecting to get $250,000 from each licensee for each seat or maybe set of seats. The folks who want to use the $200 million they think this will generate, from people who are rich enough to indulge this whim even in the down economy will be used to rebuild an existing stadium. The money is not all up-front, apparently, but is paid out over time, the license lasts maybe 50 years and is freely (it is said) transferrable to another fan.

So let the folks who think they will benefit from the new stadiium by being "rich enough" to "go to the stadium to be seen," and the businesses who anticipate some increased income from the presence of a stadium, toss their dollars in the hat. And leave the rest of us alone.

This should be right up the alley for the Rays owners, who have demonstrated their skills at "securitizing" and "monetizing" income streams like these.

How's that for thinking a little outside the trick-box that the Rays owners want the rest of us to sit in?

[Paul]

So are you signing your forms and mailing them in Rick, so you can have a say on the matter? (fourth time i'm asking this of Rick)

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

Rick,

The Economist claim was in response to your "billion dollar benefit" from the failed paired proposals.

As to how the vote would have gone if it remained on the ballot, rather than call you "insane" or any other name let's just look at the facts.

1.) The RAYS PULLED THE PROPOSAL!!! Do you not suppose they continually performed their own internal polling on the matter? Do you REALLY BELIEVE the Rays are that incompetent as business people? If they thought they could have passed their proposal they would have gone for it!!! Like Jerry Jones well documented strategy in obtaining the Cowboys new stadium..it is ALWAYS better when the greedy franchise owners can slip their blackmail in during the distraction of a Presidential election year. This is why the Rays had to rush their proposal to begin with. They pulled it because any politician in this community..Mayor..Council members..County commissioners were unanimous in their opinion IT WOULD HAVE FAILED!!! IF IT COULD HAVE PASSED THE RAYS WOULD HAVE GONE TO THE POLLS TO SECURE WHAT THEY WANTED AND NOT WASTED ALL THE MONEY ON THE ARTIST RENDERINGS...KALT ETC.

2.)The Rays pulled this when they had their best chance...the team had already started winning and the economy had yet to collapse. By the November elections the economy was so deeply in the toilet NOBODY would have believed that the Trop redevelopment would have come out of the ground. The winning developer had already gone bankrupt!!!! The New York money people suffered horrible reputations in the wake of the Wall Street bailout...can you say Sternberg?

But the fact that no politician in this community...the Rays themselves believed this didn't have a chance shouldn't deter you Rick. Let me join Paul in inviting you to sign the petitions to let us ALL vote on any stadium or waterfront proposals. Paul has asked you four times for a response...I'll make it five. Are you going to let your actions back up your false bravado? Are you going to sign the petitions and help the citizens of St. Pete secure the simple right to VOTE!!!??? IF YOU ARE SOOOOO CERTAIN OF YOUR POSITION GIVE US ALL THE RIGHT TO VOTE!!!!

[atrulyconcernedcitizen]

Rick,

One more thought...NO investment is a certainity. CCIM's define profit as the reward for risk. Just as Baywalk is struggling...just as Centro Ybor has failed..just as Thomas has pointed out the attendance figures at numerous NEW MLB parks which almost universally match original figures after the 2-3 year honeymoon...ANY INVESTMENT HAS RISK ATTACHED TO IT.

And so what we should be doing is trying to quantify as well as qualify that risk. When the owners of a business express strong doubt as to the viability of that business in our marketplace that INCREASES the risk!!!
Not just the Ray's management..but MLB Commissioner, President and others have questioned whether TAMPA BAY..not simply St. Petersburg is REALLY a viable business market. That implies a LARGE AMOUNT OF RISK when spoken by the owners themselves.

When these same management people went all out to secure our community's MOST VALUABLE piece of real estate...NEVER ONCE MENTIONING THESE DOUBTS...when they complain about a lack of population within a 30 minute drive at their current location and they try for a location with 13% LESS POPULATION..when they could have tried for a location that would have DOUBLED that population...somebody is simply FULL OF MANURE!!! Or out of respect for Stu who is obviously a brilliant businessman...he was prepared to do just like the Balimore Owner...get the stadium...inflate the value...and then DUMP the franchise..especially since as they have expressed frequently since...this market may not be a solid choice for MLB.