Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-29-2023, 10:29 AM
 
Location: West coast
5,281 posts, read 3,069,759 times
Reputation: 12270

Advertisements

I’ve been going there since opening day in Reggie Jackson’s rookie year.
I’ve seen lots of good events there and have had great times.
I think the tailgating tradition even started there.
This is a really nice location and it just burns my hide that this place where I had so many great times turned into what it is now.

The Bay Area has millions and millions of people.
This is the best centrally located facility bar none and yet just look at it now .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-29-2023, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Free State of Florida
25,693 posts, read 12,772,161 times
Reputation: 19266
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle19125 View Post
Wrong.

Greedy ownership and TV media revenue were the motivating factors, for the Raiders at least.

The goal of corporations is to maximize profit for its shareholders.

The teams are corporations.

That is what they are doing....maximizing profits. Its our free enterprise system at its finest.

If anyone would like to buy the teams, & keep them in Oakland, and make less profit than they would elsewhere, they can.

They would have to find a lot of investors willing to make sub-optimal profits...good luck with that.

Everyone reading this would like to make as much of a return on their investments as possible...just like the teams owners.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2023, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
14,669 posts, read 14,631,326 times
Reputation: 15379
Quote:
Originally Posted by beach43ofus View Post
The goal of corporations is to maximize profit for its shareholders.

The teams are corporations.

That is what they are doing....maximizing profits. Its our free enterprise system at its finest.

If anyone would like to buy the teams, & keep them in Oakland, and make less profit than they would elsewhere, they can.

They would have to find a lot of investors willing to make sub-optimal profits...good luck with that.

Everyone reading this would like to make as much of a return on their investments as possible...just like the teams owners.
That’s all well and good if they weren’t constantly begging taxpayers to fund their playhouses, which for some reason need to be replaced every few decades. Pac Bell Park (or whatever they call it now) and Chase Center were done right…100% privately funded. The other pro sports teams seem to think they’re owed something by the public for free, unlike all those other corporations you’re referring.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-29-2023, 05:19 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA>Tijuana, BC>San Antonio, TX
6,498 posts, read 7,525,332 times
Reputation: 6873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
That’s all well and good if they weren’t constantly begging taxpayers to fund their playhouses, which for some reason need to be replaced every few decades. Pac Bell Park (or whatever they call it now) and Chase Center were done right…100% privately funded. The other pro sports teams seem to think they’re owed something by the public for free, unlike all those other corporations you’re referring.
...As was So Fi stadium and the Clippers soon to be Intuit Dome.

Publicly funded arenas and stadiums don't fly in California like they do say in Texas. Same reason the Chargers left San Diego, despite SD not being undesirable like Oakland and having alot of wealth/expendable income compared to other cities.

California is big on welfare, but not when it comes to corporate welfare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2023, 03:08 AM
 
Location: Austin Metroplex, SF Bay Area
3,429 posts, read 1,558,536 times
Reputation: 3303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
That’s all well and good if they weren’t constantly begging taxpayers to fund their playhouses, which for some reason need to be replaced every few decades. Pac Bell Park (or whatever they call it now) and Chase Center were done right…100% privately funded. The other pro sports teams seem to think they’re owed something by the public for free, unlike all those other corporations you’re referring.
So you expect a private group of buyers to come in and build a stadium for a city that really doesn't support a team (at least in the case of the A's and the Raiders after their return)? Why would anyone do that when there are better venues?

You actually should be happy if you believe the city shouldn't fund it as they didn't. What's the problem? Now they can use the land to beautify Oakland

Last edited by blameyourself; 08-30-2023 at 04:04 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2023, 08:45 AM
 
Location: SF/Mill Valley
8,659 posts, read 3,853,671 times
Reputation: 5947
Quote:
Originally Posted by ParaguaneroSwag View Post
Why did Oakland lose all of its sports teams?
A lack of investment, poor attendance and its struggle to compete with wealthier cities that provide state-of-the-art facilities. Ticket sales, broadcast rights, marketing and merchandise (or lack thereof) contribute to the value of a franchise - particularly relative to direct competition i.e. Raiders/Niners (in the past) and A’s/Giants. That said, questions as to whether the Bay Area could continue to support two MLB teams has been the discussion for years; it’s the smallest market to do so. That the A’s will be leaving is no surprise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2023, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Free State of Florida
25,693 posts, read 12,772,161 times
Reputation: 19266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natural510 View Post
That’s all well and good if they weren’t constantly begging taxpayers to fund their playhouses, which for some reason need to be replaced every few decades. Pac Bell Park (or whatever they call it now) and Chase Center were done right…100% privately funded. The other pro sports teams seem to think they’re owed something by the public for free, unlike all those other corporations you’re referring.
They beg for free money because local politicians give it to them. And who voted for those local politicians?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2023, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Springfield, Ohio
14,669 posts, read 14,631,326 times
Reputation: 15379
Quote:
Originally Posted by blameyourself View Post
So you expect a private group of buyers to come in and build a stadium for a city that really doesn't support a team (at least in the case of the A's and the Raiders after their return)? Why would anyone do that when there are better venues?

You actually should be happy if you believe the city shouldn't fund it as they didn't. What's the problem? Now they can use the land to beautify Oakland
The question was why Oakland lost its sports teams, and yes I’d rather they leave than tax payers give them a free. Ownership found a place which will find their stadium through casino taxes so yes, good for them. Those hotel taxes keep climbing in Vegas though, so they’d better be careful with the increased competition from all the other states where gambling is legal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2023, 12:17 AM
 
Location: Metropolis
4,413 posts, read 5,145,849 times
Reputation: 3041
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer View Post
The only people who voluntarily live in Oakland are in the Federal Witness Relocation Program.
Haha.

In reality, much of Oakland north of the 580 is decent to down right posh.

Even south of the 580 has some decent areas.

It’s way better than Newark, NJ, for example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2023, 01:09 AM
 
3,098 posts, read 3,783,180 times
Reputation: 2580
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanQuest View Post
Haha.

In reality, much of Oakland north of the 580 is decent to down right posh.

Even south of the 580 has some decent areas.

It’s way better than Newark, NJ, for example.
People get really pissed off when they hear some homes in the Oakland flatlands and lower hills are selling for $3.5 million+.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top