PDA

View Full Version : How much are you being screwed by MLSE?



Pookie
06-09-2009, 10:06 AM
I started this comparison thinking that the numbers would be huge. I was really surprised at the end result. Here are the numbers.

Is MLSE screwing you(us) vs fans in Seattle?

If you bought season tickets in Seattle in their cheapest section, you'd be paying $288US which at a 1.1 exchange rate is about $317/seat.

You'd get 2 Friendlies and tickets to the MLS Cup included in that price.

If you bought season tickets in Toronto in their cheapest section, you'd be paying $280. You'd get 1 friendly and 2 Canadian Championship games and in theory, 1 preliminary CONCACAF Game.

If you wanted to attend the RM Friendly and attend the MLS Cup, you'd need to shell out an additional $125 for the RM game and $30US ($33) for the MLS Cup, bringing your total price to $438.

The difference in total packages is $121.

For that $121 you get get 3 additional games (2 Canadian Championship and 1 Preliminary CONCACAF game (if we made it, refund if not). Those 3 games are worth $23 each or $69 total. If they were removed from the equation to compare apples to apples with Seattle, the net difference is ($121-$69) $52.

Therefore, the "Screw Factor" of MLSE vs Seattle is essentially between $52-$121.

Of course, Seattle has a Designated Player and marketed their product in a way that was inclusive. It "feels like" the better deal and the fans do not end up feeling used in the process.

There have been no promises left unfullfilled, the team is doing the best it can and fans are excited about the team (including ownership).

Seriously, MLSE, for that kind of difference is it really worth all the negativity you've brought on yourself??

Parkdale
06-09-2009, 10:07 AM
another day, another angry thread, another lesson in economics

billyfly
06-09-2009, 10:11 AM
I like Pookie's posts. They have a lot more info and thought than most.

Parkdale
06-09-2009, 10:13 AM
yeah, I suppose into is important. I wish more people put the work into it that he does. carry on.

don't let my apathy drag you down.

Wagner
06-09-2009, 10:15 AM
it's funny,
after seeing the numbers...it does make a difference.
it takes the edge off the frustration.
I'm still mad...and disappointed.

it's all about the perception.
the whole RM thing has been bunged up from the beginning.

My understanding is that RM called with a take it or leave it offer, leaving TFC to scramble...
but if they weren't ready for it, they shouldn't have taken it.
River Plate looks like a runner-up, and that's not fair to them or TFC supporters.

how much better would this whole situation be if they announced River Plate, and then a week or two later....
"you won't believe it, we also landed Real Madrid, we just keep trying for more for our fans"

billyfly
06-09-2009, 10:17 AM
STH's aren't the targeted market for RM. Its the "others". Eurosnobs, etc...

That's how I think of it and have been able to keep my coolness on the matter. Now, the results on the field are another matter....

Roogsy
06-09-2009, 10:18 AM
it's funny,
after seeing the numbers...it does make a difference.
it takes the edge off the frustration.
I'm still mad...and disappointed.

it's all about the perception.
the whole RM thing has been bunged up from the beginning.

My understanding is that RM called with a take it or leave it offer, leaving TFC to scramble...
but if they weren't ready for it, they shouldn't have taken it.
River Plate looks like a runner-up, and that's not fair to them or TFC supporters.

how much better would this whole situation be if they announced River Plate, and then a week or two later....
"you won't believe it, we also landed Real Madrid, we just keep trying for more for our fans"

You should work for their marketing or their PR departments...because this is EXACTLY how it should have happened. I personally would still be upset about some of the issues (moving a date, grass, 2 friendlies) but at the very least they would look competent in the FO. Right now, I'd have to question Paul's hiring practices, especially on the PR side.

Pookie
06-09-2009, 12:59 PM
Definitely seems like a PR screw up.

I mean this much fuss over such a small dollar amount seems way out of proportion. In the end, it's all about perception and they've clearly failed in that regard.

BFin
06-09-2009, 01:10 PM
Great post Pookie.

Pachuco
06-09-2009, 01:13 PM
You should work for their marketing or their PR departments...because this is EXACTLY how it should have happened. I personally would still be upset about some of the issues (moving a date, grass, 2 friendlies) but at the very least they would look competent in the FO. Right now, I'd have to question Paul's hiring practices, especially on the PR side.

Well it was a leak that revealed the RM game though. Not so much Public Relations. I suspect if the RM thing never gets leaked then we could've seen the announcement the way Waggner described it. I think they had to officially announce the RM thing was it leaked because people were asking alot of questions.

flatpicker
06-09-2009, 01:22 PM
didn't I also pay for 2 playoff tickets when I bought my season tickets???

so shouldn't that be factored into these numbers?

rocker
06-09-2009, 01:23 PM
Nope.

flatpicker
06-09-2009, 01:24 PM
^ nope what? No I didn't pay for playoff tickets... or no they don't factor into the equation?

Pookie
06-09-2009, 01:27 PM
didn't I also pay for 2 playoff tickets when I bought my season tickets???

so shouldn't that be factored into these numbers?

I don't think you did pay for 2 playoffs.

There are 10 Regular MLS Games, 5 Premium MLS Games, 1 International Friendly, 2 Canadian Championship and 1 Preliminary CONCACAF Champions League game in the STH package.

I factored in the CONCACAF one which will likely be a $23 refund bringing the net difference even lower.

Dbl_D
06-09-2009, 01:38 PM
I started this comparison thinking that the numbers would be huge. I was really surprised at the end result. Here are the numbers.

Is MLSE screwing you(us) vs fans in Seattle?


and Seattle will make the playoffs...

JonO
06-09-2009, 01:41 PM
^ nope what? No I didn't pay for playoff tickets... or no they don't factor into the equation?
No you didn't pay for playoff tickets. I think you authorized them to charge the tickets to your account in case they made the playoffs...

Dave67
06-09-2009, 01:42 PM
Lets be fair in the evaluation. The two 'free friendlies' for Seattle are Chelsea and Barcelona. If we are doing a comparison vs TFC prices better figure these in at $150 a pop for us also. The other 'free' game they get is the 2009 MLS cup. Essentially the premier event in the MLS schedule. So do we assume Toronto FC would give us the premier game in the MLS calendar for free too?

Wagner
06-09-2009, 01:43 PM
didn't i pay a playoff handling charge last year?
was that refunded this year???

JonO
06-09-2009, 01:48 PM
Lets be fair in the evaluation. The two 'free friendlies' for Seattle are Chelsea and Barcelona. If we are doing a comparison vs TFC prices better figure these in at $150 a pop for us also. The other 'free' game they get is the 2009 MLS cup. Essentially the premier event in the MLS schedule. So do we assume Toronto FC would give us the premier game in the MLS calendar for free too?
Is that really true??? 'cause that sounds like a really really really bad idea from a league perspective...

Dave67
06-09-2009, 01:52 PM
Is that really true??? 'cause that sounds like a really really really bad idea from a league perspective...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sounders/2008841069_sounders12.html

The Chelsea game and MLS Cup are two of the three extra games included in the full 18-game season-ticket package for fans.
"This is a tremendous honor and reward for our season-ticket holders and an added incentive for our coaches and players," Sounders FC majority owner Joe Roth said

Barcelona announcement - included in price

http://www.soundersfc.com/News/Articles/2009/05-May/Sounders-FC-to-host-FC-Barcelona.aspx?print=true

Pookie
06-09-2009, 01:56 PM
^ To do what you are suggesting above we'd also have to factor in additional cost for Seattle to compete for CONCACAF qualifying.

This was a simple comparison to say that if if were a fan in Seattle, what do I get and how much do I pay to get it in 2009?

If I am a fan in Toronto and I wanted to see the same "types" of games that fans in Seattle get, how much am I paying in 2009?

That's why I included the Toronto fan buying an MLS Cup ticket at Seattle's prices.

Yeah, they get Chelsea and Barcelona and we get Real Madrid and River Plate. I factored in the cost to see RM. You could argue that they get better sides but maybe fans from Argentina would disagree.

Anyways, the net difference is that the Toronto fan has to pay $121 more to see the same number of Friendlies and the MLS Cup.

For that $121 they also get 3 additional games that the Seattle fan doesn't get (Canadian Championship and CONCACAF). Those have a value of $69. Take those out of the mix and the Toronto fan ends up paying $52 more for the same comparable package that the Seattle fan gets.

I didn't expect this result. I had thought that the difference would be in the hundreds of dollars. It didn't turn out that way.

What I'm trying to highlight is that for something that is worth just $52-$121, this is a major PR nightmare that MLSE should have been able to avoid. Speaks to the ineptness of the FO and definitely something they should consider for the future.

I'm also hoping that the data will help some people put their frustrations in perspective. Yes, it was handled poorly but you aren't being bilked for your kid's college funds. The difference comes down to a few beers over the course of a season.

Dave67
06-09-2009, 02:05 PM
I think your numbers are off (I think).
Them = $317 CDN a seat. 15 MLS games + 2 friendlies + cup final = 18 games
Us = $280 CDN. 15 MLS + 2 V Cup + 1 Friendly + 1 CONCACAF + $125 Barca = $405 20 Games

Then remove 2 x $23 = $46 in value for our two extra games to get us both to 18. So $405 - $46 = $359

In that scenario we pay a smidge more. You would then need to believe that MLSE would give us Chelsea for a free friendly (Real Madrid or Barca lets just call it a wash for the sake of debate finacially) then you would need to believe that Chelsea = River in value? then you need to believe CONCACAF prelim = MLS Cup final in value.

Seattle are getting a great deal. *** Edit - to be fair though giving deals to a year one team to gain more interest makes sense. ***

Pookie
06-09-2009, 03:00 PM
^ skint,

We are both getting at the same picture, I think, just differently.

I factored in a Toronto fan buying a ticket to the MLS Cup as an additional expense for them. I then noted that we'd get an additional game for the CONCACAF in our package that a Seattle fan wouldn't. Essentially, I subtracted the value of this game from the comparison to make things equal.

Yes, the one assumption here is that Chelsea is equal to River in this comparison. I think they are getting the better club but then again I watch the EPL and rarely anything from South America so have little to compare that on.

I think the Seattle fan gets the better deal and they also have a DP.

Now in fairness, they also seat about 12,000 more fans than we do which gives their FO an advantage over ours.

Mikey
06-09-2009, 03:51 PM
another day, another angry thread, another lesson in economics

No powerpoint or Excel....?

james
06-09-2009, 05:18 PM
im not sure what the exact prices are, but seems we pay maybe $50-$120 more then seattle fans. But really its worse then that because we also charge $125 at the cheapest for Real Madrid game while they get to see Barcelona and Chelsea for free.

So really we are getting screwed alot more then just paying $50 more.

james
06-09-2009, 05:22 PM
^ skint,

We are both getting at the same picture, I think, just differently.

I factored in a Toronto fan buying a ticket to the MLS Cup as an additional expense for them. I then noted that we'd get an additional game for the CONCACAF in our package that a Seattle fan wouldn't. Essentially, I subtracted the value of this game from the comparison to make things equal.

Yes, the one assumption here is that Chelsea is equal to River in this comparison. I think they are getting the better club but then again I watch the EPL and rarely anything from South America so have little to compare that on.

I think the Seattle fan gets the better deal and they also have a DP.

Now in fairness, they also seat about 12,000 more fans than we do which gives their FO an advantage over ours.

Seattle stadium sits 67,000 seats, they sell 28,000 tickets a game tho. We sell 20,000, so its a 8,000 difference.

For big games Seattle said they will sell 67,000 tickets, in which im guessing they will for Barcelona and Chelsea match and maybe MLS final to.

If TFC were gonna bring over big exspensive Real Madrid then they really should of had it played at the 53,000 seat sky dome and sold tickets at a much lower price then at the small BMO field.

ensco
06-09-2009, 11:27 PM
Love this thread. Great kickoff based on real thinking. Each post adding something. Wow. Like the old days.

My 2 cents: the difference is quite a bit bigger than $59-121.

There is a huge qualitative difference in what Seattle gave its SSH. "Chelsea plus Barca plus MLS Cup", three huge games, far exceeds one huge game, one OK game, and two USL games, "RM plus River plus Montreal plus Vancouver".

Plus the TFC package has an extra game, which makes the total dollars higher. This is important. TFC has used its SSH plan structure to reach deeper into your pocket than Seattle has.

billyfly
06-10-2009, 10:47 AM
Seattle stadium sits 67,000 seats, they sell 28,000 tickets a game tho. We sell 20,000, so its a 8,000 difference.

For big games Seattle said they will sell 67,000 tickets, in which im guessing they will for Barcelona and Chelsea match and maybe MLS final to.

If TFC were gonna bring over big exspensive Real Madrid then they really should of had it played at the 53,000 seat sky dome and sold tickets at a much lower price then at the small BMO field.


But is this where the real grass comes in. Did RM refuse to play on artificial turf and is the Rogers Centre capable of accommodating the temp real grass pitch (?).

james
06-10-2009, 10:58 AM
But is this where the real grass comes in. Did RM refuse to play on artificial turf and is the Rogers Centre capable of accommodating the temp real grass pitch (?).

Ya Real Madrid refused to play on artificial grass. And ya they brought in real grass in the sky dome back in 2004 (or was that 2003?) when Liverpool played Porto and Roma played Celtic the following night. They then threw the grass out, just like they are doing at BMO.

Carts
06-10-2009, 11:00 AM
I started this comparison thinking that the numbers would be huge. I was really surprised at the end result. Here are the numbers.

Is MLSE screwing you(us) vs fans in Seattle?

If you bought season tickets in Seattle in their cheapest section, you'd be paying $288US which at a 1.1 exchange rate is about $317/seat.

You'd get 2 Friendlies and tickets to the MLS Cup included in that price.

If you bought season tickets in Toronto in their cheapest section, you'd be paying $280. You'd get 1 friendly and 2 Canadian Championship games and in theory, 1 preliminary CONCACAF Game.

If you wanted to attend the RM Friendly and attend the MLS Cup, you'd need to shell out an additional $125 for the RM game and $30US ($33) for the MLS Cup, bringing your total price to $438.

The difference in total packages is $121.

For that $121 you get get 3 additional games (2 Canadian Championship and 1 Preliminary CONCACAF game (if we made it, refund if not). Those 3 games are worth $23 each or $69 total. If they were removed from the equation to compare apples to apples with Seattle, the net difference is ($121-$69) $52.

Therefore, the "Screw Factor" of MLSE vs Seattle is essentially between $52-$121.

Of course, Seattle has a Designated Player and marketed their product in a way that was inclusive. It "feels like" the better deal and the fans do not end up feeling used in the process.

There have been no promises left unfullfilled, the team is doing the best it can and fans are excited about the team (including ownership).

Seriously, MLSE, for that kind of difference is it really worth all the negativity you've brought on yourself??

The only thing I disagree with here is that when the MLS Cup is in Toronto, the cheapest ticket won't be $30 - it'll be much more...

Carts...

Beach_Red
06-10-2009, 11:01 AM
There is a huge qualitative difference in what Seattle gave its SSH. "Chelsea plus Barca plus MLS Cup", three huge games, far exceeds one huge game, one OK game, and two USL games, "RM plus River plus Montreal plus Vancouver".


I may not understand what you mean by "qualitative difference," so I apologize upfront if I'm not living up to this thread, but the "three huge games" you talk about are two friendlies and a game in which Seattle will likely not even be in, right? The "USL" games are meaningful games that could (there's still a chance ;)) get us into CONCACAF Champions League, right?

billyfly
06-10-2009, 11:02 AM
Ya Real Madrid refused to play on artificial grass. And ya they brought in real grass in the sky dome back in 2004 (or was that 2003?) when Liverpool played Porto and Roma played Celtic the following night. They then threw the grass out, just like they are doing at BMO.

I didn't know that.

Southender
06-10-2009, 11:02 AM
Way too much irrational anger. I know MLSE aren't angels, but I don't think they're exactly out to "screw" us. Way too many Fan590 callin candidates around here.

james
06-10-2009, 11:10 AM
I may not understand what you mean by "qualitative difference," so I apologize upfront if I'm not living up to this thread, but the "three huge games" you talk about are two friendlies and a game in which Seattle will likely not even be in, right? The "USL" games are meaningful games that could (there's still a chance ;)) get us into CONCACAF Champions League, right?

to me Canada Championship games are big, more inportant then friendlies. But in the Canada Championship, to probably the majority fans consider USL clubs 2nd rate, and the Canada Championship is just early qualifying rounds into the Concacaf League.

Its like in England say 1st round in Carling Cup match Everton vs Cheltham or somethin, and only the diehard Everton fans show up for the match cause they condsider Cheltham a bottom rate team even tho it is a meanningful Carling Cup match.

Or say its like 1st round qualifying in Champions League, you often see alot of fans not taking it to serious since you see teams from much smaller leagues that are unknown to the average fan. Where as when you bring over a team like Barcelona or Chelsea who everyoneeee has herd of, even people who dont like footy herd of these teams, so it seems like a big match.

rocker
06-10-2009, 11:20 AM
Sounders have what, 22000 season ticket holders?

They have a 67000 seat stadium.

That means for Chelsea and Barcelona they have 45000 seats they can sell. That's the equivalent of more than 2 BMO fields that they can sell.

Looking at ticketmaster.com, the average price for those seats available (since the best are taken by season ticket holders) is about $50.

So that's 2.25 million in revenue not including private box revenue, and the concession sales of 67000 people. Seattle loves soccer and has filled that stadium before for big teams.

They will probably make as much, if not more, on each game than TFC will on Real Madrid.

This is simple economics, boys.

If we had a 67000 seat stadium, we'd have the same benefit.
Do people want a soccer specific stadium @ 20000 seats or a 67000 seat NFL stadium that will never have real grass?

torontocelt
06-10-2009, 11:22 AM
From what I have been able to gauge since the RM friendly announcement probably about 85% of season ticket holders on these boards have all stated that friendlies are a waste of time and money and many people have said they wouldn't attend any friendly even if they have tickets. It is difficult to argue that Seattle are getting something great with the addition of their two friendlies ie Barca and Chelsea. From what I can gather many people on these boards must be laughing at and also pitying the Seattle support for having to put up with these friendlies as part of their season ticket package?

james
06-10-2009, 11:32 AM
Sounders have what, 22000 season ticket holders?

They have a 67000 seat stadium.

That means for Chelsea and Barcelona they have 45000 seats they can sell. That's the equivalent of more than 2 BMO fields that they can sell.

Looking at ticketmaster.com, the average price for those seats available (since the best are taken by season ticket holders) is about $50.

So that's 2.25 million in revenue not including private box revenue, and the concession sales of 67000 people. Seattle loves soccer and has filled that stadium before for big teams.

They will probably make as much, if not more, on each game than TFC will on Real Madrid.

This is simple economics, boys.

If we had a 67000 seat stadium, we'd have the same benefit.
Do people want a soccer specific stadium @ 20000 seats or a 67000 seat NFL stadium that will never have real grass?


yes we all want the SSS, no one here wants to be playing on a NFL stadium. But we do have a stadium that fits 53,000 just down the road. They have used it in the passed for big friendly matches just like this. So i think there is no point on spending millions of dollars to bring over a team like Real Madrid unless you play at the Sky Dome. BMO is to small a stadium to generate that much money for 1 game.

THe only reason i believe they arent using the Sky Dome for this match is because getting Real Madrid to come over was a last minute thing, and the date the Real Madrid is available the Sky Dome is being used. So really if MLSE is gonna bring over a big club, spend some time and organize it properly, schedule it properly, otherwise dont waste your time bringing them over here. These prices are crazy and a rip off.

H Bomb
06-10-2009, 11:35 AM
But this thread asumes they've been screwing us financially and only financially. That's not the case at all.

Kevvv
06-10-2009, 11:48 AM
Lets be fair in the evaluation. The two 'free friendlies' for Seattle are Chelsea and Barcelona. If we are doing a comparison vs TFC prices better figure these in at $150 a pop for us also. The other 'free' game they get is the 2009 MLS cup. Essentially the premier event in the MLS schedule. So do we assume Toronto FC would give us the premier game in the MLS calendar for free too?


Seattle stadium sits 67,000 seats, they sell 28,000 tickets a game tho. We sell 20,000, so its a 8,000 difference.

For big games Seattle said they will sell 67,000 tickets, in which im guessing they will for Barcelona and Chelsea match and maybe MLS final to.

If TFC were gonna bring over big exspensive Real Madrid then they really should of had it played at the 53,000 seat sky dome and sold tickets at a much lower price then at the small BMO field.

This is a very important point that's being ignored entirely. Tickets for the Seattle games range from $40 to $125. They can sell around 67,000 tickets for their friendlies, and as of mid-May had already sold (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/soccer/05/14/seattle-sounders/index.html) 60,000 for the Chelsea game.

Assuming ALL seats sold at the lowest price point, Seattle takes in $2.4 million per match:

60,000 x $40 = $2.4m

To get $2.4m, BMO's 20,000 seats need to sell for an average of $120 ($2.4m / 20,000). If you want to get more precise, assume that half the Seattle seats go for $40, and the others average $60, or $75. The average BMO price climbs past $150. That's without considering the remaining 7,000 seats at Qwest.

We're not getting screwed by MLSE on these matches. Specious reasoning.

You might also point out that we're being screwed in comparison to KC, where you can get 4 game tickets, 4 hot dogs, 4 pretzels, pepsi, and a blanket for $81.

Kevvv
06-10-2009, 11:51 AM
Sounders have what, 22000 season ticket holders?

They have a 67000 seat stadium.

That means for Chelsea and Barcelona they have 45000 seats they can sell. That's the equivalent of more than 2 BMO fields that they can sell.

Looking at ticketmaster.com, the average price for those seats available (since the best are taken by season ticket holders) is about $50.

So that's 2.25 million in revenue not including private box revenue, and the concession sales of 67000 people. Seattle loves soccer and has filled that stadium before for big teams.

They will probably make as much, if not more, on each game than TFC will on Real Madrid.

This is simple economics, boys.

If we had a 67000 seat stadium, we'd have the same benefit.
Do people want a soccer specific stadium @ 20000 seats or a 67000 seat NFL stadium that will never have real grass?


Damn, he beat me to it.


yes we all want the SSS, no one here wants to be playing on a NFL stadium. But we do have a stadium that fits 53,000 just down the road. They have used it in the passed for big friendly matches just like this. So i think there is no point on spending millions of dollars to bring over a team like Real Madrid unless you play at the Sky Dome. BMO is to small a stadium to generate that much money for 1 game.

THe only reason i believe they arent using the Sky Dome for this match is because getting Real Madrid to come over was a last minute thing, and the date the Real Madrid is available the Sky Dome is being used. So really if MLSE is gonna bring over a big club, spend some time and organize it properly, schedule it properly, otherwise dont waste your time bringing them over here. These prices are crazy and a rip off.

Ah, but then this would be the thread where we bash MLSE for expecting us to sit in the Skydome instead of in a proper SSS.

james
06-10-2009, 11:58 AM
Damn, he beat me to it.



Ah, but then this would be the thread where we bash MLSE for expecting us to sit in the Skydome instead of in a proper SSS.

yeah, and i remember the first 2 seasons how so many people were complainning how shitty it was seeing Aston Villa or Benifica or Pachuca come over and people were sick of getting 2nd rate teams. I was saying back then these teams are amazing for the price we paid because any team like Mancherster United we are gonna have to play at sky dome to cover the costs...well turns out we dont have to play at sky dome to cover costs, it just cost $140 and up to see them play at BMO!!!:p

People gotta realize if you want a big team to play here then you gotta either pay up or play else where.

if we ever make it to the quater finals of the Concacaf Champions League we will have to play at sky dome or some where down in the warm South.

james
06-10-2009, 12:02 PM
This is a very important point that's being ignored entirely. Tickets for the Seattle games range from $40 to $125. They can sell around 67,000 tickets for their friendlies, and as of mid-May had already sold (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/soccer/05/14/seattle-sounders/index.html) 60,000 for the Chelsea game.

Assuming ALL seats sold at the lowest price point, Seattle takes in $2.4 million per match:

60,000 x $40 = $2.4m

To get $2.4m, BMO's 20,000 seats need to sell for an average of $120 ($2.4m / 20,000). If you want to get more precise, assume that half the Seattle seats go for $40, and the others average $60, or $75. The average BMO price climbs past $150. That's without considering the remaining 7,000 seats at Qwest.

We're not getting screwed by MLSE on these matches. Specious reasoning.

You might also point out that we're being screwed in comparison to KC, where you can get 4 game tickets, 4 hot dogs, 4 pretzels, pepsi, and a blanket for $81.


ya but to see kansas play at that shitty stadium with the shitty soccer moms $81 is still a rip off on my books:D

Kevvv
06-10-2009, 12:03 PM
Almost as bad as watching the Blue Jays in a football stadium, way back when.

james
06-10-2009, 12:06 PM
Almost as bad as watching the Blue Jays in a football stadium, way back when.

i think kansas new stadium is gonna be complete sometime next summer tho. Be nice to move out the ball park. New York is getting there sweet new stadium next year as well and Philly comes in with a bran new stadium to. The league is looking up, just a few over sized NFL stadiums left.