Comments on: The friendly con-fines of Wrigley Field? http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/ What is seen and what is unseen. Mon, 23 Jan 2012 16:26:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: kevin persick http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-16316 kevin persick Wed, 13 May 2009 03:41:45 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-16316 I believe that nothing in life is free and when someone is taking a free ride from someone who is honestly working for there share of the pie I think that is wrong and some type of block should be build up to obstruct the view of any nonpaying eye because the players,owners, and most importantly the paying fan should be defended against these crime to baseball. I believe that nothing in life is free and when someone is taking a free ride from someone who is honestly working for there share of the pie I think that is wrong and some type of block should be build up to obstruct the view of any nonpaying eye because the players,owners, and most importantly the paying fan should be defended against these crime to baseball.

]]> By: kevin persick http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-16314 kevin persick Wed, 13 May 2009 03:40:33 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-16314 I believe that nothing in life is free and when someone is taking a free ride from someone who is honestly working for there share of the pie I think that is wrong and some type of block should be build up to obstruct the view of any nonpaying eye because the players,owners, and most importantly the paying fan should be defended against these crime to justice. I believe that nothing in life is free and when someone is taking a free ride from someone who is honestly working for there share of the pie I think that is wrong and some type of block should be build up to obstruct the view of any nonpaying eye because the players,owners, and most importantly the paying fan should be defended against these crime to justice.

]]> By: morris.coats http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-12260 morris.coats Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:13:23 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-12260 Brooke, You should see that the Cubs are fighting against a possibility that we raised in class, the issue of free-riding. To me, putting up selective screens is a clever way of reducing free riding. One issue is that if one allows free riding, then those who do pay may begin to question why they have to pay when others are allowed to view the game for free. Pretty soon, the club has a hard time surviving, except for TV revenues. -MC Brooke,

You should see that the Cubs are fighting against a possibility that we raised in class, the issue of free-riding. To me, putting up selective screens is a clever way of reducing free riding. One issue is that if one allows free riding, then those who do pay may begin to question why they have to pay when others are allowed to view the game for free. Pretty soon, the club has a hard time surviving, except for TV revenues.

-MC

]]> By: Brooke Hochstetler http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-12220 Brooke Hochstetler Fri, 27 Jun 2008 03:48:08 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-12220 Harry Keary must be rolling over in his grave. I am sure he is thinking has the Chicago Cubs organization lost their minds. Have the Cubs over looked marketing good will to their fans and the positive effect of continuing a long Cub tradition. Sure there is obviously a small of revenue being lost by the Cubs organization from the rental of the nearby roof tops. Question: Is this small amount of revenue worth the ill will the Cub organization is creating? I believe that it is virtually impossible to totally eliminate non paying spectators from a ball park such as Wrigley Field due to the openness of the park. I also believe that the Cub organization should take a positive marketing approach to this situation to promote good will and enhance team loyalty through this long standing tradition of people watching the games from the nearby roof tops. Why not use the revenue collected from the building owners and donate these funds to enhance the neighborhood surrounding Wrigley Field in creating a positive community image for the Cub organization. It would be interesting to hear how the Cubs organization plans to collect revenue from the city of Chicago for the non paying fans who pass by the ball park as the game is being played from those individuals who are riding the L-train. Brooke Hochstetler Morris Coats 211 Econ Class M-F 9:40-11:40 Harry Keary must be rolling over in his grave. I am sure he is thinking has the Chicago Cubs organization lost their minds. Have the Cubs over looked marketing good will to their fans and the positive effect of continuing a long Cub tradition. Sure there is obviously a small of revenue being lost by the Cubs organization from the rental of the nearby roof tops. Question: Is this small amount of revenue worth the ill will the Cub organization is creating? I believe that it is virtually impossible to totally eliminate non paying spectators from a ball park such as Wrigley Field due to the openness of the park. I also believe that the Cub organization should take a positive marketing approach to this situation to promote good will and enhance team loyalty through this long standing tradition of people watching the games from the nearby roof tops. Why not use the revenue collected from the building owners and donate these funds to enhance the neighborhood surrounding Wrigley Field in creating a positive community image for the Cub organization. It would be interesting to hear how the Cubs organization plans to collect revenue from the city of Chicago for the non paying fans who pass by the ball park as the game is being played from those individuals who are riding the L-train.

Brooke Hochstetler
Morris Coats 211 Econ Class
M-F 9:40-11:40

]]> By: chad http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-11300 chad Wed, 07 May 2008 05:21:36 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-11300 Score one for excludability. It turns out there were legal issues that were not clear from the first article, but it would see that excludability rules. If only the Cubs could stick Rich Hill on one of those rooftops... http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/929134,roof050208.article --CT Score one for excludability. It turns out there were legal issues that were not clear from the first article, but it would see that excludability rules.

If only the Cubs could stick Rich Hill on one of those rooftops…

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/929134,roof050208.article

–CT

]]> By: Kiley Kliebert http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-11259 Kiley Kliebert Thu, 01 May 2008 19:12:48 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-11259 Putting up the screens may be a good idea for Wrigley Field and the surrounding buildings. They will both be making money off of the deal. I also think that if one building has to pay a certian percentage to the Cubs, they should all have to pay. Making everyone pay would eliminate the thought of having free riders or any other problems people may have. With everyone paying, the rooftops would not be a public good. They would be excludable goods because they could put the screens if people do not pay to go on the roof. Putting up the screens may be a good idea for Wrigley Field and the surrounding buildings. They will both be making money off of the deal.
I also think that if one building has to pay a certian percentage to the Cubs, they should all have to pay. Making everyone pay would eliminate the thought of having free riders or any other problems people may have. With everyone paying, the rooftops would not be a public good. They would be excludable goods because they could put the screens if people do not pay to go on the roof.

]]> By: Britton Comeaux http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-11075 Britton Comeaux Sat, 19 Apr 2008 18:43:28 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-11075 I believe its a cubs traditon for their fans to sit on the surrounding rooftops. Even if this income is not shared with the cubs im sure they will still be able to maintain. Also, these people still by cubs jerseys, t-shirts, etc. If the cubs want the profit from these rooftop owners maybe the cubs should dish out some cash and buy the buildings for themselves. - Britton Comeaux I believe its a cubs traditon for their fans to sit on the surrounding rooftops. Even if this income is not shared with the cubs im sure they will still be able to maintain. Also, these people still by cubs jerseys, t-shirts, etc. If the cubs want the profit from these rooftop owners maybe the cubs should dish out some cash and buy the buildings for themselves. – Britton Comeaux

]]> By: Leah Bland http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-11004 Leah Bland Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:42:43 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-11004 I think the screens should be put up. Wrigley field is not a non-excludable good. People are allowed in and out based on payments of seats. Wrigley Field has the right to get compensations for the rooftop dwellers since there was a deal cut between the team and owners of the buildings. I agree with Mr. Martin. This is not a typical free-rider since things can be done to prevent the rooftop dwellers from enjoying the game as other may. I think the screens should be put up. Wrigley field is not a non-excludable good. People are allowed in and out based on payments of seats. Wrigley Field has the right to get compensations for the rooftop dwellers since there was a deal cut between the team and owners of the buildings. I agree with Mr. Martin. This is not a typical free-rider since things can be done to prevent the rooftop dwellers from enjoying the game as other may.

]]> By: michael martin http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/comment-page-1/#comment-10915 michael martin Wed, 09 Apr 2008 19:47:38 +0000 http://www.nicholls.edu/bastiatsbastions/2008/04/08/the-friendly-con-fines-of-wrigley-field/#comment-10915 I think that this Rogue roof top rebel will soon see the light. His actions are tampering with an agreement the other roof top owners have hashed out, and threatens more than his particular interests. The Chicago Cub fans are noted for their innovation in affecting the game off the field. Remember the poor shmuck who tried to catch a ball on the wall; I think they ran him out of town on a rail. In short this is not a case of a classic free rider; there are options that can prevent this guy from seeing the game without affecting the majority of the fans. This is a case that will be settled amongst the smaller group of roof top owners. Be it smelly water balloon barrages, fire or cash, this individual will conform his peer’s desires for the grater good of this small group. Michael Martin I think that this Rogue roof top rebel will soon see the light. His actions are tampering with an agreement the other roof top owners have hashed out, and threatens more than his particular interests. The Chicago Cub fans are noted for their innovation in affecting the game off the field. Remember the poor shmuck who tried to catch a ball on the wall; I think they ran him out of town on a rail.
In short this is not a case of a classic free rider; there are options that can prevent this guy from seeing the game without affecting the majority of the fans. This is a case that will be settled amongst the smaller group of roof top owners. Be it smelly water balloon barrages, fire or cash, this individual will conform his peer’s desires for the grater good of this small group. Michael Martin

]]>