Why isn't downtown San Jose better? (San Francisco, Sacramento: transplants, 2014, credit)

[Billy Millennium]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

It's primarily a business and residential city. Tourists are annoying, and we have enough people around here that don't know how to drive already.

If one wishes to cavort with rich snobs, there's always Los Gatos, Los Altos, Saratoga, and Satanic Row. Plastic people have plenty of options to preen and strut about; San Jose is better known for a more down-to-earth, real vibe. Sharks fans, concert-goers, and convention attendees spend a good deal downtown as it is. Lew Wolff building a baseball park for the A's would improve that quite a bit.

The drivers in SJ are actually pretty docile compared to many other cities.

Tourists bring money and energy to a city. They are there to have fun and enjoy themselves so they add liveliness. Also increase the demand for amenities and thus increasing competition among-st businesses. Bring in tax revenue and support businesses.

Tourism would do San Jose a lot more good then bad. But it's neither here nor there cause they ain't coming anyways to SJ anyways.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Billy Millennium

Tourism would do San Jose a lot more good then bad. But it's neither here nor there cause they ain't coming anyways to SJ anyways.

That's why they're expanding the convention center. Those are the people that fill the hotels and dine out downtown.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by Billy Millennium

Tourists bring money and energy to a city. They are there to have fun and enjoy themselves so they add liveliness. Also increase the demand for amenities and thus increasing competition among-st businesses. Bring in tax revenue and support businesses.

They bring money, not liveliness. Residents looking to build community and culture bring liveliness. That is where SJ is headed right now. After that, tourists may come to see what has been made. Too many cities try to put the cart before the horse.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

They bring money, not liveliness. Residents looking to build community and culture bring liveliness. That is where SJ is headed right now. After that, tourists may come to see what has been made. Too many cities try to put the cart before the horse.

Great point! After all, tourists just come and go. Locals will support businesses and institutions long term and sustain them.

[JohnSoCal]

Originally Posted by Billy Millennium

San Jose will likely never have tourists, so it's not worth the time and resources on the part of the city. So it's a good thing they're not pushing that agenda, just unrealistic and Reed knows this.

Tourism, in my opinion, is the greatest indicator of how interesting/entertaining a city or area is. For people to spend money visiting your city from out-of-town speaks volumes. San Jose will need a monumental tidal wave sized splash to ever get any measurable amount of tourists. I guess anything is possible... I mean we put a man on the moon. But that big splash needs to happen.

I totally disagree. Tourism is not any indication of the liveability of a city. Las Vegas gets over 40 million tourists a year yet I would never want to live there. There are some cities like San Diego that are both tourist destinations and great cities to live in but there are many cities that aren't good for both.

I would much rather live in San Jose than San Francisco which is a major international tourist destination. If I want to play tourist, I will go to San Francisco.

[JohnSoCal]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

...Lew Wolff building a baseball park for the A's would improve that quite a bit.

Is that going to happen? I thought I read where it was going to take place. I used to go to the A's games as well as the Giants.

It will be great for San Jose and great for the A's. They will probably get more than a few hundred attendance like they do in Oakland. Even in the 70's, when the A's were a dynasty, they were lucky to get more than a few hundred.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by JohnSoCal

Is that going to happen?

Who knows, it's been stalled so long by the greedy Giants and gutless MLB, but there was just this development:
Purdy: Will San Jose sue the San Francisco Giants to allow the Oakland A's to move south? - San Jose Mercury News

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

Who knows, it's been stalled so long by the greedy Giants and gutless MLB, but there was just this development:
Purdy: Will San Jose sue the San Francisco Giants to allow the Oakland A's to move south? - San Jose Mercury News

Sam's got it right. SJ has to do something that gets an answer to this, one way or another, since all that land and it's revenue-generating potential has been held in limbo for years because of this. Some people are saying it's Wolff's responsibility to engage in legal action, but...

MLB teams can’t sue each other or baseball due to a clause in the sport’s constitution.

A’s break out their own legal heavyweights | Newballpark

So Sam is getting the ball rolling. Or this may never be resolved, since there is no evidence a "blue ribbon panel" ever existed, and there appears to be no motivation by Selig to proceed. Selig and MLB prefer to conduct business deep in dark, damp caves, where no info escapes. Meanwhile, DTSJ stagnates in anticipation. The ballpark would make a rather dramatic change in the area (see: Pac Bell Park).

[JohnSoCal]

I can't understand MLB not being in favor of moving the A's to San Jose. The attendance in Oakland is terrible and always has been. The move would be great for both San Jose and the A's.

[tsx39]

Agreed on the A's moving to San Jose being good for the club. I watched Ken Burns' baseball documentary recently and even in that they mentioned the lack of support in Oakland when the team was on a roll.