07-07-2009, 04:12 PM
<!--quoteo(post=48542:date=Jul 7 2009, 12:48 PM:name=KBwsb)-->QUOTE (KBwsb @ Jul 7 2009, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Destined, I agree with you on some of those things. Instead of Long Beach, it'd be better to put a new team near Venice Beach, which is definitely a long ways from either stadium, is a highly populated area, and has its own identity...it could be the beach/Hollywood team.
I disagree with you about packing the park. Californians, especially in the L.A. area, just plain like to go to baseball games. As you mentioned, Angel fans are intense and plentiful. And Dodger Stadium consistently draws as many fans as any team in baseball.
And it's not because "Dodger Stadium is huge." For instance, Cleveland's old stadium (before Jacobs) held 80,000, but curiously, they never once beat the Dodgers in attendance.
You're telling me a new team, (call 'em the Hollywood Stars,) with a park near that Beverly Hills/Santa Monica power corridor couldn't make money? I'm gonna have to disagree with you.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Granted, I would love to see a team there, and I would definitely support them. They would make money, don't get me wrong. I just think that it would take away from the Dodger's fan base in terms of money.
They wouldn't hurt the Angels one bit, but at some point they have to take away that Hollywood appeal that the Dodgers already have. The Dodger's are Hollywood's team.
But you're right KB, they would make money. Give them a 35,000 seater in Santa Monica and they couldn't really do too bad at all, put them in the AL West, although a rivalry with the Dodgers would be more of a intra-division rivalry goldmine than with the Halos. I'm just skeptical.
EDIT: About the Cleveland thing, Dodger Stadium sells sooo many corporate seats, that every game is 45,000+ in ticket sales, but the physical attendance is much less. You're right about the Mistake by the Lake, but Cleveland isn't the market that LA is on many levels, not just population. They sold out the Jake for years when they were good, but they lack the corporate stranglehold.
I disagree with you about packing the park. Californians, especially in the L.A. area, just plain like to go to baseball games. As you mentioned, Angel fans are intense and plentiful. And Dodger Stadium consistently draws as many fans as any team in baseball.
And it's not because "Dodger Stadium is huge." For instance, Cleveland's old stadium (before Jacobs) held 80,000, but curiously, they never once beat the Dodgers in attendance.
You're telling me a new team, (call 'em the Hollywood Stars,) with a park near that Beverly Hills/Santa Monica power corridor couldn't make money? I'm gonna have to disagree with you.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Granted, I would love to see a team there, and I would definitely support them. They would make money, don't get me wrong. I just think that it would take away from the Dodger's fan base in terms of money.
They wouldn't hurt the Angels one bit, but at some point they have to take away that Hollywood appeal that the Dodgers already have. The Dodger's are Hollywood's team.
But you're right KB, they would make money. Give them a 35,000 seater in Santa Monica and they couldn't really do too bad at all, put them in the AL West, although a rivalry with the Dodgers would be more of a intra-division rivalry goldmine than with the Halos. I'm just skeptical.
EDIT: About the Cleveland thing, Dodger Stadium sells sooo many corporate seats, that every game is 45,000+ in ticket sales, but the physical attendance is much less. You're right about the Mistake by the Lake, but Cleveland isn't the market that LA is on many levels, not just population. They sold out the Jake for years when they were good, but they lack the corporate stranglehold.
I hate my pretentious sounding username too.