Riding The Green Monster

[Max Power]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2002/0604/1390891.html

In an effort to remain competitive in the American League, the Red Sox might tinker with their most famous landmark.
A Baltimore architect told the Boston Globe on Tuesday that Boston might add 500 seats on top of the Green Monster in an effort to boost capacity at the 34,000-seat Fenway Park.

Still not sure on this - - could be cool, could be just a bad idea. Your thoughts?

[Skip]

They could cantilever the seats out over the field. Shades of Mr. Maier. ... uh, I am opposed.

[SmedIndy]

Ads I don't mind. There's tradition and precidence.

This, this isn't right. This is no good.

[Skip]

Mrs. Shrek says go for it.

[LeGrandOrange]

Seats "on" the green monster? Wow, that's...dizzying. The idea of that makes me acrophobic. (Which I already am but that's irrelevant)
It's only going to be 500 seats, and it's not a given that they're going to sell, how is it necessarily going to increase attendance?
BTW, I have no problem with ads on the green monster. They've put the all-star game logo on the wall and that 100th anniversary logo on the wall...so they've already covered the wall recently and Bahston fans are used to it. Just as long as there's not a lot of white, Manny Ramirez and friends may have trouble playing wall-ball D that way.

[TimmyB]

Cool idea.

DON'T DO IT!!!

The trouble is this -- Boston (with new ownership leveraged up to their eyeballs) needs money to stay competitive (with the Yankees -- or does this go without saying?).

There are really mixed feelings -- sentimental, financial and political -- about keeping Fenway. The new ownership group has already added seats near the dugouts in order to bring in some extra dough.

They could certainly sell the Wall seats at a premium, but, does the damage it does to our classic ballpark get offset by enough revenue? I doubt it.

So, unless you're going to go whole-hog and add an upper-deck, let me repeat... DON'T DO IT!!!

[cubfan33]

It WOULD be a cool seat - kinda like watching a game from the houses across the street from Wrigley, just closer. Actually, about 150 feet closer and lower. Wow. I don't think it would look right and to increase revenue, those seats would end up like a suite. Maybe they could put a "party deck" up there. Let people lean on a railing that was even with the monster. It would be barely noticeable except for the people standing up there. They'd catch home runs, you put some equivalent of Boog's BBQ up there, and bam! Im still theoretically opposed, but its better than just raising ticket prices or something.

[ChrisCary]

You know those buses whose windows have ads on them?
From the outside the windows look like a billboard from the inside it looks clear.


What if they added seats but made it to look like they just raised the wall?


Either way it doesn't seem like 500 seats is a whole lot in the larger scheme of things

[KCBOOMER]

Can you imagine how expensive it will be to build those seats???

[satchel]

I'm not opposed to the idea, but frankly I don't understand it. As Boomer points out, it could cost a bloody fortune to do, and only adds 500 seats. Even if they are sold at luxury box prices - doubtful, unless they want to cut it to 100 instead of 500 and actually make them luxury boxes - it adds negligible revenue and does nothing to relieve the real problem. Fenway still has only 33,000 seats and they are still too darn expensive.

[Rajah]

I think they sell very well. Who wouldn't want to say, "I sat on the green monster!"

I think it'd be cool to sit there if they did it, but I don't think they should. I think ads on the monster would be better. But those seats will make a ton. And they could still put ads up.

If you do anything, I like cubsfans idea best, make it into a party deck. Charge like 10 grand a game. With the size of that wall, you could easily have 2 sections. 50 to 100 people per section, charge extra for catering. Say, with catering they net 11 grand per deck, with 2 decks, and say they sell the decks 150 times a year (each 75 times). Thats almost $1.6 million in extra revenues. I don't know how that will compare to 500 extra seats. May still be better to just put in extra seats.

[Rajah]

Originally posted by TimmyB
Cool idea.

DON'T DO IT!!!

There are really mixed feelings -- sentimental, financial and political -- about keeping Fenway. The new ownership group has already added seats near the dugouts in order to bring in some extra dough.
DON'T DO IT!!!

I heard the new owners want to renovate fenway rather than build a new park. and seats on the monster seems to me to be better than those gawd awful privacy screens they put up at wrigley when they declared war on the rooftop owners. Uglier than sin, and next year they'll all say budweiser.

[calexpat]

Interesting idea Rajah. Me, I'm willing to leave the business plan to the owners. If the numbers work, I have no objection. It would have to pay for itself pretty quick, though, because Fenway won't be around long in its current form.

[hmrsf]

The new owners of the Red Sox are brilliant. They have added new seats and dressed up the place a bit. They have floated ideas on how to save Fenway while hiring the architect who built Camden Yards.

People are very split about the Fenway issue. The new owners are bright enough to make every attempt to save Fenway but preparing for the inevitable.

[Max Power]

Maybe they should take up the grass and dirt on the field and replace it with glass, so they can sell seating under the field too? :stinker:

[ChrisCary]

Originally posted by Rajah
Who wouldn't want to say, "I sat on the green monster!"

.

Would their be a restroom up there?



Just kidding Joce
*ducks*

[KCBOOMER]

Time the Sox ponied up and built a new stadium. $1.6M in annual revenue is chump change.

[Rajah]

I ran some numbers if they put in 500 seats. Assuming they get a premium price for the tickets, and they probably will, and considering that the last time I checked, Sox tix were the priciest in the league, I figure 500 seats, 82 games, 50 bucks a pop, over $2 million in additional revenue. Better than what I ran for the "party deck", then again, maybe I underprojected the party deck.

[SmedIndy]

Originally posted by Rajah
I ran some numbers if they put in 500 seats. Assuming they get a premium price for the tickets, and they probably will, and considering that the last time I checked, Sox tix were the priciest in the league, I figure 500 seats, 82 games, 50 bucks a pop, over $2 million in additional revenue. Better than what I ran for the "party deck", then again, maybe I underprojected the party deck.

$2 million pays for Garces' clubhouse spread...

[moose]

Originally posted by SmedIndy


$2 million pays for Garces' clubhouse spread... :loud: (all the more :loud: because I read your posts in Milhouse's voice)

[satchel]

:warn: getting back to the topic ...

I don't see how $2M per year is worth it for those seats, that could easily cost 10-20 times that to install. The idea doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Or am I way off base with that cost estimate that I admittedly just pulled out of my ear?

[Pilgrim]

The appeal of the seats is intriguing, but probably only for the very first row....after that, I think it'd be a visibility issue. I can imagine sitting in the last row of seats and not being able to see anything hit out of the infield on the left side unless it was going out.

I've never been to Fenway. And I don't mind the ads. They've been there before, better they put some ads in than raise ticket prices. I couldn't believe it when somebody told me that the upper-deck tickets in Fenway are what, $60? Zsheesh.

[NCFella19]

Well if they DO decide to add seats there, they should hold off for one year and block off a bleacher section at Fenway to sell tickets strictly to people who have never been there before, so baseball fans like myself could say they made a pilgrimage to Fenway BEFORE they added those silly seats on top of the Mahnstah.

Then they could add something like a hot tub behind the fence for scantily clad beautiful people. Oh......that's been done before.

[TGwynn19]

Originally posted by satchel
:warn: getting back to the topic ...

I don't see how $2M per year is worth it for those seats, that could easily cost 10-20 times that to install. The idea doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Or am I way off base with that cost estimate that I admittedly just pulled out of my ear?

$40 mil to install seats on the monster. Doubt it would cost that much.

[hmrsf]

Originally posted by TGwynn19


$40 mil to install seats on the monster. Doubt it would cost that much.

No probably more. Trust me! If the park is going to change that much, it won't be Fenway. So build a new one......end of story.

[Skip]

Originally posted by hmrsf
No probably more. Trust me! If the park is going to change that much, it won't be Fenway. So build a new one......end of story. Particularly if the Boston politicos are involved ... or so I understand.

[satchel]

Originally posted by TGwynn19

$40 mil to install seats on the monster. Doubt it would cost that much.

Why? I don't know whether you've seen it up close; it's really just a slim wall adjacent to a narrow sidewalk on a tiny street. There's no structural support there for seats, and no way for folks sitting up there to access the top of the wall. That's why I thought it would cost a lot to do.

[calexpat]

This is Boston. Take however much you think it ought to cost and double it. Then take that number and multiply it by three.
That's how much it will have cost by the time they have to scale it back, five years after the estimated time of completion.

[hmrsf]

Originally posted by satchel


Why? I don't know whether you've seen it up close; it's really just a slim wall adjacent to a narrow sidewalk on a tiny street. There's no structural support there for seats, and no way for folks sitting up there to access the top of the wall. That's why I thought it would cost a lot to do.

Thanks. That was my point. Can be done but it would be so expensive due to structual limitations.

If they do that type of remodle, why not rebuild a new park. That type of remodle would not be Fenway, it would be something else.

[BuzzBuzzard]

Say it aint so. No way should they put seats up there. Although, I wouldn't mind being up there when the Yanks are in town. Could be great heckling location.

[Rajah]

Do we have any engineers out there?

500 seats really isn't that many. My very limited understanding of physics would lead me to believe that All you'd really need are a row of I-Beams planted a few yards into the ground, then use a flying buttress style diagonal columns for the remaining support. Its basically a few rows. Then for access, maybe a bridge from the upper deck?

bet it would cost half a million to a million all together. of course, if it fell...

[satchel]

Originally posted by Rajah
Do we have any engineers out there?

500 seats really isn't that many. My very limited understanding of physics would lead me to believe that All you'd really need are a row of I-Beams planted a few yards into the ground, then use a flying buttress style diagonal columns for the remaining support. Its basically a few rows. Then for access, maybe a bridge from the upper deck?

bet it would cost half a million to a million all together. of course, if it fell...

yes, that's probably enough structural support; it wouldn't so much be on top of the wall as on a kind of porch over the Lansdowne street sidewalk. (This is where the net is over the monster; when you walk down Lansdowne street you walk right under the net.) It's a pretty narrow sidewalk and heavily used (on game days) so they can't block with diagonal buttresses all the way down to street level but it might work.

The trouble with access is that there really is no upper deck at Fenway to run a bridge from. You might be able to have steps up from somewhere in the LF granstand. I suppose that the owners group had something specific in mind when they made the proposal.

[soxfan121]

My understanding on the "how-to" part of the discussion is that they are planning to use the light-tower supports as the "foundation" (above Lansdowne St. - can't block the street -yet) and that there would be a seperate admission gate to get to the seats.

As to whether this should/would/could happen in the first place... I can assure you that Fenway is a masterpiece - a shrine to all that is wonderful and poetic and historic about baseball. It is a place filled with wonder, memories and emotion. That said, it is also the most uncomfortable, irritating, dirty, nasty, flithy, no-leg-room-having ballpark in the majors. Replace it. Sooner rather than later.

Until then, the ownership needs to do anything they can to maximize revenues. The new field boxes (which I got lucky enough to score for the Patriot's Day tilt v. the Yanquis) are fantastic. There is not a seat in Fenway that would not sell-out. So, if they can get a few more seats in a novel location that provides a view of the field (and there's very few non-obstructed view seats at the Fens) it will sell-out, the team will have additional revenue and the fans will be pleased.

Unless of course, they think they can renovate the place. Then god help them - what a nightmare.

[Fenway Frank]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by soxfan121
it is also the most uncomfortable, irritating, dirty, nasty, flithy, no-leg-room-having ballpark in the majors. Replace it. Sooner rather than later.

As someone who has attended hundreds of Sox games over the past 35+ years, I agree with all the "lyric little bandbox" stuff that John Updike started when Ted retired. But I also agree with soxfan121. The place is a dump and it has to go.

I was parked outside the park on Friday morning to pick up some tickets. I saw a beer truck squeezed up against the building to offload kegs. It was tight. There is no staging area for storage, deliveries, no refrigeration units, etc. All the concessions have to be delivered every day. Fresh is nice, but the cost of that process must be brutal.

Also, next time you're watching a game at Fenway and a yanked pitcher or an eejected manager starts to go down the runway to the clubhouse, check out the plywood on the floor. It's always wet down there. There's nothing they can do about it because the entire Back Bay of Boston is build on landfill, hence the "Bay" part of the name.

That's why they can't add a traditional upper deck. The current foundation can't support it.

Now on to the idea of sitting on the Wall. I'm all for it. As another poster said, who wouldn't want to say they sat on the Wall. I too will leave the "how" to the experts.

But I believe the seats would command a premium price, a la the new $200 dugout seats they added this year. They probably can't do anything luxurious, because of space, access, etc. But that's OK. It would be a unique view that would blow away the now-blocked Wrigley rooftop seats.

Since this is Boston and any new Fenway will take several years to happen, at the very least, any iomprovements the new owners make will have time to pay for themselves and generate profit. Fear not about selling the seats, the park is virtually sold out already for the entire season. Only the crappy seats behind poles and facing away from the plate linger. But they usually go too for everyone with the possible exception of the Tampa Bay Double A's,

I don't even mind ads on the Wall. It was good enough when Ted played in front of it, so why not Manny.

Overall, I'm rooting for a new Fenway. Thankfully, this is not 1970 when they build those concrete toilet bowls with astro turf in Philly, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati. A new Fenway will most likely be the most old-time stadium ever built. It will undoubtedly have a Wall, close seats, various nooks and crannies, etc. But it needs to have more leg room, more luxury suites for the high rollers who help pay the bills, better concessions, concourses, bathrooms etc.

The only things I would change about a new park would be moving some of the shallow outfield dimensions out several feet and adding a few more yards of foul space. Whether it's nutrition, steroids, weights or what have you, today's 21st century athletes hit the ball farther than those born in the 19th century who first played in Fenway. Adjust the dimensions a bit for the times and keep all the other quirks and you'll have a hell of a park that most real Sox fans will love.

Your thoughts, anyone?

[SmedIndy]

I'm going to say keep it, because we don't do enough to preserve our heritage as a nation. We foul our natural wonders, strip our forests, tear down our landmarks, and at what price progress?

[soxfan121]

Smed Indy - I am 100% behind the idea of keeping Fenway Park - with the plethora of local college, exhibition, old-timers and high school league championship games played in it - and as a historical landmark (maybe as an extension of the NE sports museum).

2002 is the 90th birthday of Fenway Park. An institution and an important part of NE history. But it needs to go as the everyday home for the major league baseball franchise known as the Red Sox. Fenway has the smallest capacity, the highest ticket prices, the most antiquated services and concessions, the worst sightlines, and the filthiest bathrooms.

The Red Sox COULD be selling out a 55,000 capacity stadium every night of the season, selling addtional concessions and merchandise, attracting a broader fan base with lower priced seats and general admission tickets, generating more revenue to add to the profits of their business, providing their players with a modern training and workout facilities, increasing the quality of the sightlines and eliminating obstructed views, AND installing clean bathrooms so my girlfriend will go with me to the pask again.

[Max Power]

Seems we've gotten away from the Q of the 500 seats and more on a debate to keep Fenway - - - but, we already have a thread on the latter:

http://www.netshrine.com/vbulletin2/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4275

So, therefore, I think this one is done.

[satchel]

Originally posted by gyb13
http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/2003/0115/1493384.html

The BoSox are looking for approval to add 3 rows of seats (priced at about $40 each) behind the Green Monster. The Boston Redevelopmental Authority must approve the change.

Here's a New York Times piece (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/29/sports/baseball/29MONS.html?8hpib) on the new seats. There's a picture of the architectural model. There are going to be three rows of metal bar stools amounting to about 280 seats up there. (And you think the grandstand seats are uncomfortable?) Price: $50 a piece. If they sell out all 81 home games (which they probably will, at least the first year, because of the gee-whiz coolness factor) it comes to $1.1M.

I guess that buys a backup infielder or something.

[Max Power]

re-opening - since this is back in the news..............

[KCBOOMER]

How much is this going to cost and who is going to pay for it??? Seems like a lot of trouble for $1M in revenue when they are going to have to build a new stadium sooner or later.

Look like cool seats, tho'.

[satchel]

Originally posted by KCBOOMER
How much is this going to cost and who is going to pay for it??? Seems like a lot of trouble for $1M in revenue when they are going to have to build a new stadium sooner or later.


I'm inclined to agree, and I probably said as much somewhere up there in this thread. I imagine it will cost at least a few million just to do this (lower than I guessed earlier in the thread) plus insurance. And if the seats are as uncomfortable as they look (bar stools?) then the novelty will wear off quick, although I imagine they'll sell out most games.

I like Fenway - I like its intimacy, its scale, its green color, its location, its history. (There are things I don't like about it too, like uncomfortable seats that face the wrong way, etc.) But its time has definitely passed. I guess the ownership group is doing this project more to show its commitment to the roots and tradition of Fenway than in any hope of making actual money on it in the near or distant future.

[TimmyB]

Well... the bar stools couldn't be much more uncomfortable than most of the seats at Fenway. I'd be willing to bet the novelty will not wear off for a number of "Wall sell-outs" (and I'd guess that number would be higher than 81.

I guess the ownership group is doing this project more to show its commitment to the roots and tradition of Fenway than in any hope of making actual money on it in the near or distant future.

As far as this goes ... it really is kind of tough to get a read on what this new group really wants to do with the park. (They are NOT the builders of the 600 Club, so they're still okay in my book on the Park front).

[hmrsf]

I just wish they would be ready for my party.

Too bad I couldn't convince my 80 year old grandmother and my uncle the priest that this would be a good idea.........:cool2:

[satchel]

Originally posted by hmrsf
I just wish they would be ready for my party.


They definitely sound like fun seats, no doubt about it. A unique perspective from which to watch a ball game - you might feel like you are floating above the field.

[hmrsf]

Originally posted by satchel
They definitely sound like fun seats, no doubt about it. A unique perspective from which to watch a ball game - you might feel like you are floating above the field.

Satch, we should take the guys and and take in a game from the wall..........how cool would that be?:D Any chance we could convert you two to Sox fans?............yeah right!;)

[hmrsf]

Originally posted by satchel
They definitely sound like fun seats, no doubt about it. A unique perspective from which to watch a ball game - you might feel like you are floating above the field.


I cut this out of the paper!


Tickets for the new seats atop the left field wall have yet to be put on sale, though the Red Sox already have indicated that The Wall seats will be available only for group sales and day-of-game purchase.


We should have a Netshrine party! Get all shriners to go and take in a game from the Green Monster! How cool is that!!:bounce: