Stop crying. They are closing it to save money. Fans get better seats in the process. Just...stop.

 

 

But the amount of money they will be saving is probably just a drop in the bucket. Concession workers, ushers, janitors etc, make pennies. I can't imagine that the other operating expenses are that astronomical, either.

 

They'll be saving some money in the end but probably not enough to make them immune to the negative PR this is generating. You generally don't see other teams do this kind of thing.

Pretty funny stuff. The complainers will continue to complain and probably don't go to the games anyway.

Stop crying. They are closing it to save money. Fans get better seats in the process. Just...stop.

 

 

But the amount of money they will be saving is probably just a drop in the bucket. Concession workers, ushers, janitors etc, make pennies.

 

 

the Herald article said no workers would be cut

Before somebody asks me for my scientific poll evidence again, I did not take a poll. The following is an assumption of mine.

 

I assume that the majority of people who buy upper deck tickets do so because they are cheaper. Yes, some may buy them for the extra space around them with less fans. Most though, it's expense so the Marlins would be giving them more for their money with the upgrade to lower bowl.

How about just giving the few fans in the upper deck the option to move to "better" seats in the lower deck if they prefer?

 

 

 

So they should staff the upper deck in case a few fans would prefer to turn down the upgrade?

 

 

 

That's not the season ticket holders' problem. They entered into that agreement with the Marlins. Now unless there's something in the contract they signed that allows them to change their seats at will (which I hope there isn't...) then people have a reason to complain. If I were one of those people, I'd complain just to give this front office some trouble lol.

 

 

They could always allow those 4 upper deck season ticket holders to sit there, but leave the AC off and keep all the concessions closed.

 

 

 

They had most of the concessions upstairs closed last year by midseason anyway.

Before somebody asks me for my scientific poll evidence again, I did not take a poll. The following is an assumption of mine.

 

I assume that the majority of people who buy upper deck tickets do so because they are cheaper. Yes, some may buy them for the extra space around them with less fans. Most though, it's expense so the Marlins would be giving them more for their money with the upgrade to lower bowl.

 

Or some people buy upper deck seats just to get in an sneak down closer

Before somebody asks me for my scientific poll evidence again, I did not take a poll. The following is an assumption of mine.

 

I assume that the majority of people who buy upper deck tickets do so because they are cheaper. Yes, some may buy them for the extra space around them with less fans. Most though, it's expense so the Marlins would be giving them more for their money with the upgrade to lower bowl.

 

Or some people buy upper deck seats just to get in an sneak down closer

 

 

NO f***ING WAY WHO WOULD DO THAT??!#@$?

 

 

 

Yes WAY!! Buy high sit low!!!!!!

Here's the story that aired on NBC National News yesterday, reaching in one felt swoop more viewers than a season worth of all the other stories put together.

.

.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3032619/#51823504

Stop crying. They are closing it to save money. Fans get better seats in the process. Just...stop.

 

 

But the amount of money they will be saving is probably just a drop in the bucket. Concession workers, ushers, janitors etc, make pennies.

 

 

the Herald article said no workers would be cut

 

 

 

 

I never said otherwise. However, the hours of some workers will likely be cut in nearly in half. Presumably those employees would be able to work weekend games but far less weekdays.

Even if its a small amount it makes sense. Saves bit of money and make it look more full while giving fans better seats. Why is this a bad thing again?

 

 

Because the amount of money they will be saving is so small that it makes the FO look cheap. In this decision the Marlins are basically playing into the stigmas plaguing this organization and giving it a bad name. It draws attention to the FO's financial pettiness and the fact that attendance this season is awful.

 

I don't really have a problem with fans being moved to better seats (unless they are being moved to the lower bowl outfield seats--I'd rather be in the upper deck close to the infield), but I think this is a dumb decision because they will be saving little money and will suffer more negative PR because of it. It doesn't look very flattering to close the upper deck in order to provide their minimum wage workers with less hours.

Before somebody asks me for my scientific poll evidence again, I did not take a poll. The following is an assumption of mine.

 

I assume that the majority of people who buy upper deck tickets do so because they are cheaper. Yes, some may buy them for the extra space around them with less fans. Most though, it's expense so the Marlins would be giving them more for their money with the upgrade to lower bowl.

 

 

I think it's definitely true that people sit in the upper deck because it's cheaper. I don't think you need to support that with scientific evidence.

 

However, I think there are also many people (like myself) who hate sitting far away from the infield and would rather sit in the upper deck behind home plate than sit in the lower bowl way out in RF. Obviously we don't know where these fans are being moved yet, but if I were a fan being relocated to the outfield seats, I'd be pretty pissed and consider it a downgrade.

Even if its a small amount it makes sense. Saves bit of money and make it look more full while giving fans better seats. Why is this a bad thing again?

 

 

Because the amount of money they will be saving is so small that it makes the FO look cheap. In this decision the Marlins are basically playing into the stigmas plaguing this organization and giving it a bad name. It draws attention to the FO's financial pettiness and the fact that attendance this season is awful.

 

I don't really have a problem with fans being moved to better seats (unless they are being moved to the lower bowl outfield seats--I'd rather be in the upper deck close to the infield), but I think this is a dumb decision because they will be saving little money and will suffer more negative PR because of it. It doesn't look very flattering to close the upper deck in order to provide their minimum wage workers with less hours.

 

 

I don't think the marlins have ever operated in any way to avoid playing into any of their stigmas. Why change now?

 

 

 

 

This isn't really a logically sound statement. You can't justify this decision on account of the fact that the Marlins have made a whole bunch of petty financial moves in the past.

 

 

At some point the Marlins need to start rebuilding their image and dispelling these stigmas.

Even if its a small amount it makes sense. Saves bit of money and make it look more full while giving fans better seats. Why is this a bad thing again?

 

 

Because the amount of money they will be saving is so small that it makes the FO look cheap. In this decision the Marlins are basically playing into the stigmas plaguing this organization and giving it a bad name. It draws attention to the FO's financial pettiness and the fact that attendance this season is awful.

 

I don't really have a problem with fans being moved to better seats (unless they are being moved to the lower bowl outfield seats--I'd rather be in the upper deck close to the infield), but I think this is a dumb decision because they will be saving little money and will suffer more negative PR because of it. It doesn't look very flattering to close the upper deck in order to provide their minimum wage workers with less hours.

 

 

 

I don't think the marlins have ever operated in any way to avoid playing into any of their stigmas. Why change now?

 

 

 

 

 

This isn't really a logically sound statement. You can't justify this decision on account of the fact that the Marlins have made a whole bunch of petty financial moves in the past.

 

 

At some point the Marlins need to start rebuilding their image and dispelling these stigmas.

 

 

Explain how it is not logically sound.

 

I agree they need to make changes but I hope you aren't holding your breath. I'm not.

 

 

 

 

I already explained--it's because you are attempting to justify a bad PR move simply on account of the fact that they've made other similar bad PR moves. That doesn't really make sense.

This is making national headlines. Is the money they will be saving by providing minimum wage workers with less hours really worth it?

Even if its a small amount it makes sense. Saves bit of money and make it look more full while giving fans better seats. Why is this a bad thing again?

 

 

Because the amount of money they will be saving is so small that it makes the FO look cheap. In this decision the Marlins are basically playing into the stigmas plaguing this organization and giving it a bad name. It draws attention to the FO's financial pettiness and the fact that attendance this season is awful.

 

I don't really have a problem with fans being moved to better seats (unless they are being moved to the lower bowl outfield seats--I'd rather be in the upper deck close to the infield), but I think this is a dumb decision because they will be saving little money and will suffer more negative PR because of it. It doesn't look very flattering to close the upper deck in order to provide their minimum wage workers with less hours.

 

 

I don't think the marlins have ever operated in any way to avoid playing into any of their stigmas. Why change now?

 

 

 

 

This isn't really a logically sound statement. You can't justify this decision on account of the fact that the Marlins have made a whole bunch of petty financial moves in the past.

 

 

At some point the Marlins need to start rebuilding their image and dispelling these stigmas.

 

 

 

The issue is that the new place was the stigma breaker, that all the transgressions of the past, be they true, false or in between, were wiped clean and a commitment to consistency in payroll was the proof. Loria had a rare opportunity that not many people with a reputation get- a do over. I doubt he can rebuild this image and that it will take new ownership for any substantial improvement to the image. Too many will only assume that anything he does is short term, be it free agents or signing the young players to long term deals but backloaded to dump them.

They operate the same way they always have. They cut costs as much as possible without a care to how their image will be changed. How is this move not a perfect example of how the marlins operate? Pretty sure you are misinterpreting what I'm saying.

 

I'm not justifying the move. I think its dumb and only hurts them more. But I also think fans complaining about better seats for the same cost as sh*tty ones is dumb. Its complaining just to complain because, hey, its the marlins.

 

 

I can't tell if you are agreeing with me or not.

 

Yes, this is a classic Marlins move and indicative of how the Loria FO runs things. I'm saying that doesn't make this new policy defensible.

 

Perhaps I am confused by your earlier post #33 (to which I responded). There you say the move "makes sense" even if the financial benefits are marginal. That reads as if you are justifying the move.

 

I just don't see any way to justify this because the cost savings will be so small. The team doesn't need any more PR like this (even if they think otherwise). This wasn't just a story local to South Florida. It was on national NBC news and even Drudge Report covered it.

 

I guess you will have to explain to me how this "makes sense" in light of the negative response it's generating.

They would have been better off making the upper deck a promo...$10 per seat and give 'em a hot dog and soda coupon.

Move the very few season ticket holders downstairs or let them stay where they are if they choose.

How about just giving the few fans in the upper deck the option to move to "better" seats in the lower deck if they prefer?

 

 

 

So they should staff the upper deck in case a few fans would prefer to turn down the upgrade?

 

 

Like I said, simply offer to move those fans to better seats if they prefer. Unless they are offering garbage seats, you have to assume that > 90% of those ticket holders will gladly accept the upgrade. Maybe they all accept the offer and there is then no issue and nothing for anyone to complain about.

And a handful would likely not accept the upgrade as several people have correctly stated. So they'd have to staff the upper deck for a few people

How about just giving the few fans in the upper deck the option to move to "better" seats in the lower deck if they prefer?

 

 

 

So they should staff the upper deck in case a few fans would prefer to turn down the upgrade?

 

 

Like I said, simply offer to move those fans to better seats if they prefer. Unless they are offering garbage seats, you have to assume that > 90% of those ticket holders will gladly accept the upgrade. Maybe they all accept the offer and there is then no issue and nothing for anyone to complain about.

 

 

 

 

Why would anyone turn down better seats? It not like they're losing houses via eminent domain. The Marlins are giving them better seats for free.

 

However, that is not the issue at all. As Pengiuino has mentioned, any savings generated from this (probably not much at all), are not worth the embarrassment they have caused themselves. Under no circumstances was this a good move.

so any one buy ticket now will need pay lower deck price or can their buy still buy upper deck price ticket for those games?

Doesn't Levy restaurants run the concessions? Couldn't it be possible this third party doesn't find it worthwhile to sell a bag of popcorn and a souveniour soda and Employ three workers at 8.00 an hour to sell it to you?

 

I mean- to run one stand for a game it may be around 800 in expenses and payroll being thrown out the window daily.

 

Never mind the setup and prep.

The more I think about this the worse it gets. I won't blame Loria, I'll blame the people who are actually receiving a check each week being employed as the top public relations/marketing people of the franchise. Didn't someone think that it would be better to at least try for awhile to attract folks to the upper deck. Give it to the All-Star Break at least and school is out and summer heat sets in. Money-wise it seems to make sense. Even if you give em' a hot dog and soda for $10 you still make money and they are going to buy beer and other stuff. I'm thinking at least enough money to pay the extra workers and all the concession workers. Even if you break-even overall money wise, you gain fans. At least try, in a new stadium. If you don't see any progress then shut 'er down in July.

Doesn't Levy restaurants run the concessions? Couldn't it be possible this third party doesn't find it worthwhile to sell a bag of popcorn and a souveniour soda and Employ three workers at 8.00 an hour to sell it to you?

 

I mean- to run one stand for a game it may be around 800 in expenses and payroll being thrown out the window daily.

 

Never mind the setup and prep.

 

 

How many stands are we talking about in the upper level?

 

Even if it cost them $200,000 a year to keep it open, its better than the embarrassment they have caused themselves. The $200,000 also assumes that no one in the upper level makes any purchases at all. To put it into perspective, the league minimum for a player is $490,000, meaning $200,000 is peanuts in the grand scheme of things.

 

They'd be better of only operating certain concession stands in the upper level and not saying anything.

Doesn't Levy restaurants run the concessions? Couldn't it be possible this third party doesn't find it worthwhile to sell a bag of popcorn and a souveniour soda and Employ three workers at 8.00 an hour to sell it to you?

 

I mean- to run one stand for a game it may be around 800 in expenses and payroll being thrown out the window daily.

 

Never mind the setup and prep.

 

How many stands are we talking about in the upper level?

 

Even if it cost them $200,000 a year to keep it open, its better than the embarrassment they have caused themselves. The $200,000 also assumes that no one in the upper level makes any purchases at all. To put it into perspective, the league minimum for a player is $490,000, meaning $200,000 is peanuts in the grand scheme of things.

 

They'd be better of only operating certain concession stands in the upper level and not saying anything.I was saying, did the marlins shut down the stands- or did Levy say they were shutting it down and the marlins figured well close the upper deck before Levy gives them the black eye.