Angels focused on staying in Anaheim.

[Brandon]

1 minute ago, totdprods said:

It’s still doable, if even just a small portion of the parking. Either make it one of the  cheapest places to park and build for a higher volume - if you have to wait, so be it, it’s the payoff for cheaper parking. Might just take a hybrid approach, leaning on public transportation (whatever is available) to pick up a bit of slack, shuttling from the arena, an improved ride-sharing lane or lot, more walking from further lots, maybe a VIP leveled parking with valet, etc., or built into any new entertainment facilities that develop concurrently, places to hang before/after game to help stagger traffic flow.

With what they seem to be building around there it seems viable to just go across the street and kill time for traffic to die down, but these damn games are 4-5 hours which means on a Tuesday night game that is a worse night you are looking at 11-12 just to leave and commute home. That just doesn't seem feasible for a family with kids or even the normal 9-5 working types.

I have always wanted a valet system though.

[Lou]

if what you guys say is true and only 15,000 people are showing up to games, why is parking going to be a problem?

[angelsnationtalk]

21 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Those days are pretty much over in baseball. The Astros averaged well under 40k this year. The Yankees averaged under 41,000. The Dodgers did average almost 50k tho. 

But for a smaller market team like the Angels they aren’t averaging more than 35k no matter how successful they are given baseball’s consistent decline in popularity. The new normal for baseball stadiums is going to be 35k max. I think that would be a great number for the Angels if they’re ever good again. 

Focus only on home attendance, not overall. Numbers were just fine. 

[Taylor]

5 hours ago, eaterfan said:

25-30k seats will lead to a "Chargers problem." People think the problem with the Chargers is that they don't have the fanbase to support themselves. But I think the major issue is that the price of tickets is too high because the stadium has too few seats and all the seats are premium. Part of my evidence for this is the Chargers draw quite well when they play in the Coliseum. Going off the crowd noise when they've played there it's been about 30-40% Chargers fans and 60-70% Rams fans. Chargers have the highest average ticket prices in the league (or second). The home games are taken over because season ticket holders can pay for half their season selling tickets to the Packers game this Sunday. I'm not saying that's the only issue, but having too small a stadium with too high of ticket prices hurt a lot. 

I could see the Angels running into a lot of those issues if they cut the stadium size down by 30%. No more cheap seats, ticket prices double. Food obviously won't be coming down in price. It's now 3 times more expensive to go to the game. The only time it's affordable to go is a weeknight game against a cellar dwelling KC team and who wants to go to that now that it costs twice as much? The stadium is a quarter empty and it didn't solve the problem reducing the number of seats sought to solve. The Red Sox, Yankees, or Cubs are in town and the season ticket holders sell their seats to pay for half their season. The crowd is 70% fans of the opposition.

Aren't the Chargers and Rams moving into their brand-new stadium next year? SoFi Stadium will seat 70,000.

Edited October 29, 2019 by Taylor

[Tank]

58 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Those days are pretty much over in baseball. The Astros averaged well under 40k this year. The Yankees averaged under 41,000. The Dodgers did average almost 50k tho. 

But for a smaller market team like the Angels they aren’t averaging more than 35k no matter how successful they are given baseball’s consistent decline in popularity. The new normal for baseball stadiums is going to be 35k max. I think that would be a great number for the Angels if they’re ever good again. 

the angels averaged 37,000 per game (3,000,000/81).

[ettin]

8 hours ago, True Grich said:

Chuck.

Of course they'd have to rename the stadium to Chucka Chucka Field.

Scotch and Cigar Progressive Field

[eligrba4ever]

The present location is the most logical location. Build new in the existing neighborhood like the White Sox and Rangers did. Both of those stadiums and Oracle Park in San Francisco took 2 or 3 years to build, not the 8 to 10 years someone else here guessed it would take to build new. The extra 5 or 6 years would only be political debating time. The games would continue in the present stadium until it is time to demolish it. The Roman Colosseum was once a wonderful sports and entertainment venue. But it eventually became time to move on.

[Dtwncbad]

10 hours ago, Blarg said:

It would cost over a billion to build a new one. Who picks up that tab?

Elizabeth Warren has a plan for that.

[W.E. Baxter Author]

Believe it or not, The Angels are an L.A. Team, and should be in L.A. County. If the old stadium were to be renovated, or a new one built, Anaheim won't do it or pay the bill unless the name were to go back to Anaheim Angels which will never happen and would not be a good idea at this point. All Anaheim will do basically is keep the place up to code, health and safety wise.

[Lou]

4 minutes ago, W.E. Baxter Author said:

Believe it or not, The Angels are an L.A. Team, and should be in L.A. County.

no

 

 

[ukyah]

11 hours ago, VariousCrap said:

It makes more sense to do a renovation of the current stadium than building a new one.

no way. it's a very old stadium.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Building in the current site would make the most sense. 

If not, why not on the west side of St College? Theres still some open land on that side.

Personally, Im fine with the stadium as is. Id be a lot happier with the parking lot built out with bars and restaurants than I would a new stadium, but thats just me.

Id rather have options for after the game or leaving early than stuff to do at the game. 

[Claude]

5 hours ago, Taylor said:

Aren't the Chargers and Rams moving into their brand-new stadium next year? SoFi Stadium will seat 70,000.

They’ll bring in Tarpy for the Chargers home games. 

[UndertheHalo]

9 hours ago, Lhalo said:

I believe it's already covered under the Platinum Triangle EIR but I could be wrong.

http://www.anaheim.net/1075/EIR-No-339

My understanding is that the Ducks and the city badly want the Angels participating in the platinum triangle thing.  I’m sure the studies for that have taken the Angels into account. 

[Docwaukee]

I'd be fine with a new stadium or a reno.  As long as it's on the same property.  Angels baseball belongs where it's at.  

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

On 10/29/2019 at 9:08 AM, angelsnationtalk said:

I think Arte would lean towards renovating the stadium since he put down $3M in video board updates. But damn I would love for them to build a new one.

Nothing prevents them from reusing the scoreboards in a new stadium. Renovating the stadium to the extent that it would be comparable to a new stadium would cost almost as much as a new one. It would take more time than the offseason to complete. With a new stadium they play at the Big A while it's under construction.

How does Texas some how find the money to build the Rangers 2 new stadiums in 25 years? Why does seem to be so hard for Anaheim and the Angels to find the money?

Edited October 31, 2019 by Ace-Of-Diamonds

[totdprods]

3 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

How does Texas some how find the money to build the Rangers 2 new stadiums in 15 years? Why does seem to be so hard for Anaheim and the Angels to find the money?

25+ years actually. Ballpark opened around ‘93.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

24 minutes ago, totdprods said:

25+ years actually. Ballpark opened around ‘93.

my bad 25:

Globe Life Park was constructed as a replacement for nearby Arlington Stadium and opened in April 1994 as The Ballpark in Arlington.

Edited October 30, 2019 by Ace-Of-Diamonds

[Dollar Bill]

7 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Nothing prevents them from reusing the scoreboards in a new stadium. Renovating the stadium to the extent that it would be comparable to a new stadium would cost almost as much as a new one. It would take more time than the offseason to complete. With a new stadium they play at the Big A while it's under construction.

How does Texas some how find the money to build the Rangers 2 new stadiums in 15 years? Why does seem to be so hard for Anaheim and the Angels to find the money?

Because people in California have realized it makes no economic sense for taxpayers to throw hundreds of million of dollars toward building a stadium, only so the team can keep practically all the money generated by that stadium.

[Taylor]

If Angel Stadium were demolished and rebuilt, where would the Angels play during construction?

[T.G.]

8 minutes ago, Taylor said:

If Angel Stadium were demolished and rebuilt, where would the Angels play during construction?

Any stadium that seats 15,000.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

48 minutes ago, Taylor said:

If Angel Stadium were demolished and rebuilt, where would the Angels play during construction?

They would build the new stadium in the parking lot and play in the old stadium until it's finished. Duh!

[Taylor]

Just now, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

They would build the new stadium in the parking lot and play in the old stadium until it's finished. Duh!

Genious!

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

1 minute ago, Taylor said:

Genious!

you asked

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, Taylor said:

If Angel Stadium were demolished and rebuilt, where would the Angels play during construction?

Jon Lovitz had that park built in under 24 hours in the benchwarmers. And it cost less than a million.