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.
This post pretty much shows your ignorance of the situation. IT MATTERS VERY MUCH THAT THE PAWSOX ARE AFFILIATED WITH THE BOSTON RED SOX. Anyone that thinks otherwise really doesn't have a good understanding of the situation. The connection to the parent helps drive interest and attendance. It is especially important in attracting fans from outside the immediate Pawtucket-Providence area, especially in MA.
Lol.....you are the ignorant one because you think it's a bigger deal then it is. The numbers don't lie. The attendance has been going down for 10 years. Nobody is coming out to see these guys because of that. Period. They have been adding fireworks shows like it's going out of style for the past few years just to get asses in seats and sitting there until the game is over. I cringe to think what their attendance numbers would be without them lol. Pitiful.
IT MATTERS VERY MUCH THAT THE PAWSOX ARE AFFILIATED WITH THE BOSTON RED SOX.
It seems like common sense, but at long as we're talking numbers, here are some annual AA Eastern League attendance figures (unfortunately I don't have the number of home openers each year):
1966 Pawtucket Indians 74,479 (#2 in league)
1967 Pawtucket Indians 61,401 (#2)
1970 Pawtucket Red Sox 105,027 (#1)
1971 Pawtucket Red Sox 75,159 (#4)
1972 Pawtucket Red Sox 66,650 (#4)
There was definitely a bump in 1970, but 1971-72 Red Sox numbers weren't appreciably better than 1966-67 Indians numbers, especially when looking at rank within the league. I can't readily find International League attendance numbers prior to 1990, but we all know the pre-Mondor AAA years were abysmal, leading up to a threatened move after the 1976 season to - where else? - Worcester.
They have been adding fireworks shows like it's going out of style for the past few years just to get asses in seats and sitting there until the game is over.
Frequent fireworks shows have been going on for as long as I can remember. We can see them from the back windows of our house; when my kids were little bedtime was after the fireworks on those nights. We would watch the July 4 fireworks from the Varieur School parking lot along with most of the neighborhood. Honestly, though, if people are only showing up to watch the fireworks, they can just park at Jenks or on the street and see them just as well, if not better, than from inside the stadium without having to buy a ticket and sit through a baseball game (in 90 degree heat like we did last Tuesday - ugh). It also doesn't explain the high attendance numbers on Friday and Sunday when there aren't fireworks.
Always interesting to compare the Pawsox stadium issue to the Dunkin Donuts Center. Both are sports and entertainment venues that mainly benefit private sports teams (Pawsox, P-Bruins, PC Friars) yet the state's support for them is starkly different. The State of RI has passed a bill where it proposes contributing just 23M toward a new baseball stadium in Pawtucket (in addition = Pawsox 45M + Pawtucket 15M). The state however spent some 100M to purchase and renovate the Dunkin Donuts Center some ten years ago without any other financial help from non-state sources. The state, through its agencies, still continues to spend large amounts on the DDC venue as it is currently spending 700K to put in new video boards and a climate control system. The spending of this amount comes with little public discussion (politicians or taxpayers), just as was the case with DDC purchase/reno and cost overruns (which required more state funds) ten years ago.
Location: Earth, a nice neighborhood in the Milky Way
3,778 posts, read 2,693,466 times
Reputation: 1609
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMS02760
Always interesting to compare the Pawsox stadium issue to the Dunkin Donuts Center. Both are sports and entertainment venues that mainly benefit private sports teams (Pawsox, P-Bruins, PC Friars) yet the state's support for them is starkly different. The State of RI has passed a bill where it proposes contributing just 23M toward a new baseball stadium in Pawtucket (in addition = Pawsox 45M + Pawtucket 15M). The state however spent some 100M to purchase and renovate the Dunkin Donuts Center some ten years ago without any other financial help from non-state sources. The state, through its agencies, still continues to spend large amounts on the DDC venue as it is currently spending 700K to put in new video boards and a climate control system. The spending of this amount comes with little public discussion (politicians or taxpayers), just as was the case with DDC purchase/reno and cost overruns (which required more state funds) ten years ago.
An obvious difference is that the Dunk serves as a facility for multiple corporate entities. Another obvious difference is that we have already built the Dunk, so we're already in up to our neck.
Does that state contribution really capture the whole number by the time the financing costs are dealt with? I don't think so.
Your observation that additional spending at the Dunk has not been subject to scrutiny suggests that the state would likely have further expenditures at the Slater Mill Ballpark. This type of hidden cost is one of the things many taxpayers fear.
An obvious difference is that the Dunk serves as a facility for multiple corporate entities. Another obvious difference is that we have already built the Dunk, so we're already in up to our neck.
Does that state contribution really capture the whole number by the time the financing costs are dealt with? I don't think so.
Your observation that additional spending at the Dunk has not been subject to scrutiny suggests that the state would likely have further expenditures at the Slater Mill Ballpark. This type of hidden cost is one of the things many taxpayers fear.
My observation point is that the two venues have been treated far differently by vastly marked standards. One project (DDC), requiring more than 4x the investment from the state, sailed through with little political and public discussion. The other far less costly project (baseball stadium proposal) for state taxpayers was held hostage and put through extreme vetting.
Location: Earth, a nice neighborhood in the Milky Way
3,778 posts, read 2,693,466 times
Reputation: 1609
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMS02760
My observation point is that the two venues have been treated far differently by vastly marked standards. One project (DDC), requiring more than 4x the investment from the state, sailed through with little political and public discussion. The other far less costly project (baseball stadium proposal) for state taxpayers was held hostage and put through extreme vetting.
Sure, because it is the straw that broke the camel's back.
The main difference, I believe, is that one is considered an investment (perhaps even a loss leader) in the overall revitalization of Providence whereas the other is viewed as a potentially risky investment in a failing city.
The main difference, I believe, is that one is considered an investment (perhaps even a loss leader) in the overall revitalization of Providence whereas the other is viewed as a potentially risky investment in a failing city.
At a cost of 100M in state taxpayer monies versus 23M? With no matching private money (45M for baseball stadium)? How can that be justified? As I have noted before, the number of bookings at the venues is fairly close. I get the feeling that many in state government will typically only invest public monies for projects located in Providence and could care less about revitalization anywhere else. Interesting that Speaker Mattiello was all for the new baseball stadium when it was to be in downtown Providence despite it being a far worse deal for state taxpayers.
Last edited by MMS02760; 07-20-2018 at 01:19 PM..
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.
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.
