Posts: 11,808
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83111:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:18 PM:name=Scarey)-->QUOTE (Scarey @ Mar 17 2010, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83108:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:07 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 03:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If I could access it on my phone, then it's up to me when I want to look at it, instead of having a giant, glowing rectangle invading my field of vision at all times.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Come on Butcher, it's not as if you're going to have Budweiser advertisements burned into your retinas by the end of the game. You're being just a little bit dramatic.
I honestly see some possible concerns with the jumbotron. I understand some people may be concerned that the jumbotron will take away from the "Wrigley field atmosphere". Everyone says that when you go to Wrigley, you're forced to sit there, watch and enjoy the game, and talk with the person sitting next to you. You're not evertained like an 8 year old much like other ball parks. I don't think a jumbotron takes away from that atmosphere. I guess it could eventually lead to dancing cartoon characters between innings and the organ being supplanted by a disc jockey, but I think you worry about those things when they come. You can be pissed off at the dancing jockstrap when it rears it's ugly head.
Until then, do you really honestly believe that a jumbotron is going to take away from the game that much? I would say it takes away about as much as streaming stats/replays on smart phones would.
For the record, I'm in favor of both streaming phone stats/replays too. Just not exclusively.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Like I said -- I'm not going to stage a demonstration if they decide to put one up. I'd just rather not have one. I like the idea of every individual having the option (your own, personal handheld device, for example) instead.
I suppose if the revenue from a Jumbotron would lead to the Cubs adding an All-Star player once every couple of seasons, then sign me up.
Posts: 8,024
Threads: 100
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
When they announce a jumbotron the PR noise will all be positives about "fan experience" with none of the negatives mentioned. But the bottom line is that this is an untapped revenue stream and the Ricketts' aren't going to leave many revenue streams untapped. They know better than to cut down the ivy and plaster ads on the outfield walls. We're going to have to live with this.
I really hope this is a long term play toward negotiating with the owners of the Horseshoe building but it may not be.
Face it, one day you're gonna get to watch a cartoon Bartman racing a goat and the ghost of Harry Caray up Seminary, over on Waveland, along Sheffield and back up Addison.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)-->QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
Posts: 3,710
Threads: 119
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
There ways around the lack of smartphones in fan base issue. e.g. A fan puts down a $200-$500 deposit and the Cubs provide a limited access smartphone-type device for the day. If device isn't turned back in, the Cubs make money on the device.
Network issues would probably be greater obstacle.
Now, another big question is how the device adds to the Wrigley experience.
Posts: 11,808
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83117:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
Posts: 3,745
Threads: 78
Joined: Apr 2022
Reputation:
0
The MLB app also doesn't have the replays available instantly either. A jumbotron would have the replay immediately after each play.
Posts: 1,276
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
I really don't want to spend my time looking down on my phone searching for a replay taking my attention away from the game. I would much rather look up and see the replay instantly on the jumbotron.
Posts: 11,808
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83129:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM:name=stevestonescigar)-->QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't want to spend my time looking down on my phone searching for a replay taking my attention away from the game. I would much rather look up and see the replay instantly on the jumbotron.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What if Wrigley Field was a giant hotspot and there was an application on your phone that enabled you to see the replay immediately -- at nearly the same speed as the jumbotron?
Have Cubs Wrigley app launched already. Press the "instant replay" button. Boom.
That isn't available now, of course, but neither is a jumbrotron.
That 15 seconds of getting my phone out of my pocket would suck, but so would having a giant eyesore invading the purity of the ballpark all game long. At least with the phone you have the option of putting it away.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83123:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83117:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For the most part, people going to Wrigley don't go there on a regular basis, so that point isn't even valid.
Secondly, if it took the US as a whole, 18 years from the inception of the smartphone to get 30% of the people to own one, it'll take probably that long again to get the rest of the population to do the same.
Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.
Fourth, it's just a dumb idea.
Posts: 1,440
Threads: 63
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83134:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:35 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 05:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83123:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83117:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For the most part, people going to Wrigley don't go there on a regular basis, so that point isn't even valid.
Secondly, if it took the US as a whole, 18 years from the inception of the smartphone to get 30% of the people to own one, it'll take probably that long again to get the rest of the population to do the same.
Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.
Fourth, it's just a dumb idea.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whatever planet you're living on needs a hot dog stand...and a REALLY qualified therapist.
Posts: 1,276
Threads: 24
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83131:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83129:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM:name=stevestonescigar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't want to spend my time looking down on my phone searching for a replay taking my attention away from the game. I would much rather look up and see the replay instantly on the jumbotron.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What if Wrigley Field was a giant hotspot and there was an application on your phone that enabled you to see the replay immediately -- at nearly the same speed as the jumbotron?
Have Cubs Wrigley app launched already. Press the "instant replay" button. Boom.
That isn't available now, of course, but neither is a jumbrotron.
That 15 seconds of getting my phone out of my pocket would suck, but so would having a giant eyesore invading the purity of the ballpark all game long. At least with the phone you have the option of putting it away.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would rather watch it on a gigantic screen than watch it on my tiny iPhone screen. Plus I would have the pleasure of watching it with other people instead of everyone around me trying to look over my shoulder at my phone.
Posts: 11,808
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83134:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:35 PM:name=ruby23)-->QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 05:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83123:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 04:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83117:date=Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 04:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83105:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM:name=jstraw)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jstraw @ Mar 17 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83103:date=Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ Mar 17 2010, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->The first smart phone was created in 1992...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What do you consider a smartphone?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Something Blackberry-esque. Actually, when I looked it up to see when the first one was made, I was surprised to see that it was that long ago. I thought it was gonna be like 10 years, which would have been sufficient for my point, but it was 18 years making my point even more valid.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In 1992, mobile phones were as big as a brick and about 10 people in the country even had one (unless car phones count). They were also incredibly expensive to buy and make calls on. Now, you can get an iPhone for $99 and their monthly rates are relatively inexpensive. They're accessible. For the most part, anyone who can afford to go to Wrigley on a regular basis can also afford to own a smartphone.
Saying that it's easier to glance up at a jumbotron than fumble around in your pocket for your phone is a valid point. Saying that it will take 25 years for everyone in Wrigley to own a gadget that streams media is insane.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
For the most part, people going to Wrigley don't go there on a regular basis, so that point isn't even valid.
Secondly, if it took the US as a whole, 18 years from the inception of the smartphone to get 30% of the people to own one, it'll take probably that long again to get the rest of the population to do the same.
Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.
Fourth, it's just a dumb idea.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Advances in technology isn't a straight line -- it's exponential. The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. I'm not sure what qualified as a "smartphone" 18 years ago, but I'm certain it doesn't even resemble what we have today. Whatever point you're trying to make with this "smartphones are 18 years old" makes no sense. In 18 more years, we can't even imagine what gadgets we'll be carrying around will do/look like. I'm not saying every man, woman, and child that walks into Wrigley will have a smartphone, but a lot of them already do and more and more will with each year.
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->Third, there would have to be large upgrades to enable instant features to be accesible on the scale youre talking about. That could easily take 5-10 years on it's own.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't think you're right about this. Clear has already made it possible to get WiFi throughout Chicagoland. Why can't the Ricketts family take whatever potential "Jumbotron" money and sink it into making it possible for everyone inside Wrigley to get WiFi on their own devices? This isn't some magical vaporware technology I'm talking about here. We basically have it already.
Posts: 2,323
Threads: 20
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83136:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:43 PM:name=stevestonescigar)-->QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83131:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83129:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM:name=stevestonescigar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't want to spend my time looking down on my phone searching for a replay taking my attention away from the game. I would much rather look up and see the replay instantly on the jumbotron.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What if Wrigley Field was a giant hotspot and there was an application on your phone that enabled you to see the replay immediately -- at nearly the same speed as the jumbotron?
Have Cubs Wrigley app launched already. Press the "instant replay" button. Boom.
That isn't available now, of course, but neither is a jumbrotron.
That 15 seconds of getting my phone out of my pocket would suck, but so would having a giant eyesore invading the purity of the ballpark all game long. At least with the phone you have the option of putting it away.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would rather watch it on a gigantic screen than watch it on my tiny iPhone screen. Plus I would have the pleasure of watching it with other people instead of everyone around me trying to look over my shoulder at my phone.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, not to mention the audio from other people's devices would drive me nuts. I'm for the jumbotron. People on their phones is one of the worst part of a game, period. Encouraging them to be more active with their phones while at the ballpark sounds terrible. If they want to put little screens on the back of every seat, great. Hand-held devices of any kind are hard to picture working though.
Posts: 11,808
Threads: 390
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
<!--quoteo(post=83140:date=Mar 17 2010, 06:00 PM:name=MrSheps)-->QUOTE (MrSheps @ Mar 17 2010, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83136:date=Mar 17 2010, 03:43 PM:name=stevestonescigar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 03:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83131:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM:name=Butcher)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Butcher @ Mar 17 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=83129:date=Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM:name=stevestonescigar)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (stevestonescigar @ Mar 17 2010, 05:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I really don't want to spend my time looking down on my phone searching for a replay taking my attention away from the game. I would much rather look up and see the replay instantly on the jumbotron.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What if Wrigley Field was a giant hotspot and there was an application on your phone that enabled you to see the replay immediately -- at nearly the same speed as the jumbotron?
Have Cubs Wrigley app launched already. Press the "instant replay" button. Boom.
That isn't available now, of course, but neither is a jumbrotron.
That 15 seconds of getting my phone out of my pocket would suck, but so would having a giant eyesore invading the purity of the ballpark all game long. At least with the phone you have the option of putting it away.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I would rather watch it on a gigantic screen than watch it on my tiny iPhone screen. Plus I would have the pleasure of watching it with other people instead of everyone around me trying to look over my shoulder at my phone.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah, not to mention the audio from other people's devices would drive me nuts. I'm for the jumbotron. People on their phones is one of the worst part of a game, period. Encouraging them to be more active with their phones while at the ballpark sounds terrible. If they want to put little screens on the back of every seat, great. Hand-held devices of any kind are hard to picture working though.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess I'm the only person who really dislikes Jumbotrons. If the mobile device option were available, I'd probably use it a couple of times a game. But you can't escape a Jumbotron if its in your field of vision. It's really distracting. I just prefer the option to not have something in my field of vision if I don't want it there. With my iPhone, I have that option. With a Jumbrotron (depending on where you're sitting, of course), you don't really have that option.
Posts: 3,804
Threads: 111
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
0
Butch, our differing opinions on the actual timeframe it would take for something like this to be feasible really makes no difference, your idea is just a bad one. It's pretty simple, in practicality, functionality, and implementation; a videoscreen is an infinitely better idea. A stadium full of dipshits sitting on their phones is pretty much the last thing that ever needs to happen. There's already too many people sitting on their phones at Wrigley, and in the world in general. Do we really need a whole stadium of people with their heads buried in their lap watching a 3 inch screen? I just don't see one redeemable quality about the idea.
|
