[TOareaFan]

Would you make less money?

You got to remember a giant chunk of tickets are sold in the offseason. Dynamic pricing is more to get people to buy tickets near gameday from the box office instead of say stubhub or scalpers.

In the offseason they can sell a August night game against the Twins for 30 dollars, but maybe a month into the season if demand is low the price is 20 dollars and maybe on game day if they have only sold 15K seats they can reduce the price of the same ticket to like 15 dollars.

It is still worth it to the team if the fan buys the 15 dollar ticket from them instead of from a season ticket holder or a scalper.

Pretty much all the MLB now has dynamic pricing and some NHL teams and NFL teams have jumped aboard. I have to imagine they all know what makes more money.

If that (the bolded thing) is what they are looking at....pretty sure it will negatively impact how many of the tickets for that august game against the twins is sold in the offseason...why buy something in advance when you can get it for less later?

You have to be careful how all this impacts your season ticket sales....MLSE, as an example, has a policy that no matter what deals you come up with, the basic premise is that no one gets a seat for less than a season ticket holder's price.

 

[Translude15]

There is a lot of room below the stands behind home plate. There are the seats that are used for football below those stands (the stands rotate outwards to exposes the stands below) those seats will not longer be needed. A premium lower level section could include the addition of a lounge or bar behind home plate once the football stands are removed. Take the current "in the action seats, expand it from dugout to dugout, add a few extra rows + the lounge in back and charge $250+ per seat.

Yup that is exactly what the Jays/Rogers are gunning for.

This is anecdotal I know, but I went to a few games post trade deadline this year and all the suits were making their rounds at the Dome and you could just see how out of place they felt being away from the friendly confines of the ACC's Platinum Lounge. Ultimately, what it comes down to is the RC has very limited opportunities to justify charging $250 per seat outside of "In the Action" seating never mind actually luring that corporate ticket base back into the fold.

 

[asdda]

If that (the bolded thing) is what they are looking at....pretty sure it will negatively impact how many of the tickets for that august game against the twins is sold in the offseason...why buy something in advance when you can get it for less later?

You have to be careful how all this impacts your season ticket sales....MLSE, as an example, has a policy that no matter what deals you come up with, the basic premise is that no one gets a seat for less than a season ticket holder's price.

For sure, no team that has dynamic pricing will sell their tickets for less than what a season holder would pay for that game.

Would it change buying habits? That I can't say for sure but again every other team has jumped on the dynamic pricing bandwagon, so I have to imagine it is making money. One thing I never question is the ability of sports teams to extract every last dollar out of their fans.

 

[junior43]

Yup that is exactly what the Jays/Rogers are gunning for.

This is anecdotal I know, but I went to a few games post trade deadline this year and all the suits were making their rounds at the Dome and you could just see how out of place they felt being away from the friendly confines of the ACC's Platinum Lounge. Ultimately, what it comes down to is the RC has very limited opportunities to justify charging $250 per seat outside of "In the Action" seating never mind actually luring that corporate ticket base back into the fold.

BUT, the corporate suites won't sell out if the product on the field is garbage (only the Leafs can defy gravity and pull that off in this town). So unless Shapiro puts a winning product on the field every year, this is just shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Hoping for the best, but expecting the worst. There will be a purge (Bautista and/or Encarnacion) in late July if the Jays aren't in the running.

 

[Translude15]

BUT, the corporate suites won't sell out if the product on the field is garbage (only the Leafs can defy gravity and pull that off in this town). So unless Shapiro puts a winning product on the field every year, this is just shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Hoping for the best, but expecting the worst. There will be a purge (Bautista and/or Encarnacion) in late July if the Jays aren't in the running.

The advantage of having such a large corporate ticket base, like the Leafs, is the trickle down effect. You see this whenever the Leafs are doing poorly. Corporate groups or clients of corporate groups don't bother going to games and the tickets are handed down to other employees or friends of employees, etc. Sure, the Leafs may stink, but there's a certain allure about sitting in "such expensive seats" or "hanging out in the Platinum Lounge" that most people simply won't pass up. That's also the main reason why the majority of people don't actually BUY Leaf tickets themselves. Corporations buy Leaf tickets and distribute them accordingly. The ACC in particular is also a destination beyond the on-ice or on-court product. It's a place to be "seen" in many ways.

Rogers' aim is to emulate that type of environment in the Rogers Centre. From what I've read, new seats will actually reduce capacity as will consolidating current private boxes into larger, group-friendly entities. So yeah, the Jays won't sellout every game when they're doing poorly, but making the venue more appealing to corporations will help stabilize season ticket revenues more so than the current seating and pricing layout allows.

 

[gweed123]

One of the things I hope happens if the 100L is redone is the amount of foul ground being reduced. Right now, the mid area of the 100L (around where 1st and 3rd base are) has a huge amount of foul ground, which puts the spectators quite a fair distance back from the action. With the lower bowl no longer having to physically move, hopefully they can implement more of a triangle and less of an oval. This would essentially result in two widened sections of 100L concourse, which could be used for a bar area or something (similar to the WestJet Flight Deck, only with paid-for bar stool areas or something).

As for the 500s, not really much you can do besides putting in new seats.

Personally though, if they're going to undertake any expansions in capacity, I think they should be in the form of additional standing room (either pure standing room or a bar stool type of configuration), as opposed to additional seats. If the standing room areas don't happen to sell out, it doesn't have much of a visual impact on how empty the stadium looks. Empty seats does.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

One of the things I hope happens if the 100L is redone is the amount of foul ground being reduced. Right now, the mid area of the 100L (around where 1st and 3rd base are) has a huge amount of foul ground, which puts the spectators quite a fair distance back from the action. With the lower bowl no longer having to physically move, hopefully they can implement more of a triangle and less of an oval. This would essentially result in two widened sections of 100L concourse, which could be used for a bar area or something (similar to the WestJet Flight Deck, only with paid-for bar stool areas or something).

As for the 500s, not really much you can do besides putting in new seats.

Personally though, if they're going to undertake any expansions in capacity, I think they should be in the form of additional standing room (either pure standing room or a bar stool type of configuration), as opposed to additional seats. If the standing room areas don't happen to sell out, it doesn't have much of a visual impact on how empty the stadium looks. Empty seats does.

With Football gone they could certainly fill in the foul territory with stands. The biggest complaints on the 100 level have been the slope of the stands (too shallow) and the orientation of the seats (pointing away from the field of play). By taking some room from foul territory and adding it to the stands they could probably renovate the area to have a steeper incline and have the seats oriented properly. That would be a large undertaking however so it would be dependent on the team and ownership's budget.

On 500 you could include wider seats, that would reduce capacity to something more reasonable. However you could also remove the outfield portions of the stand (503 - 507, and 539 - 543) that are in front of the hotel. That area could also be renovated to a bar/patio as well.

 

[gweed123]

With Football gone they could certainly fill in the foul territory with stands. The biggest complaints on the 100 level have been the slope of the stands (too shallow) and the orientation of the seats (pointing away from the field of play). By taking some room from foul territory and adding it to the stands they could probably renovate the area to have a steeper incline and have the seats oriented properly. That would be a large undertaking however so it would be dependent on the team and ownership's budget.

On 500 you could include wider seats, that would reduce capacity to something more reasonable. However you could also remove the outfield portions of the stand (503 - 507, and 539 - 543) that are in front of the hotel. That area could also be renovated to a bar/patio as well.

What are the possibilities of lowering the floor of the Rogers Centre? That would allow them to potentially increase the slope of the 100 level, and would allow for the necessary room to install the real grass (since if I'm not mistaken it requires quite a bit of sub-surface infrastructure).

I have to say though, I do like the idea of having 1st and 3rd base "lounge" areas in the 100s. They could even make it a semi-private thing, like the new Club Bell at Canadian Tire Centre. The lounge area is built into where the suites used to be, but if you have room between the concourse and the stands, that area could work too. They aren't the best seats in the house for view (although they are in the lower bowl), but the semi-exclusivity of them is a nice midway between regular seats and box seats.

 

[Translude15]

What are the possibilities of lowering the floor of the Rogers Centre? That would allow them to potentially increase the slope of the 100 level, and would allow for the necessary room to install the real grass (since if I'm not mistaken it requires quite a bit of sub-surface infrastructure).

I have to say though, I do like the idea of having 1st and 3rd base "lounge" areas in the 100s. They could even make it a semi-private thing, like the new Club Bell at Canadian Tire Centre. The lounge area is built into where the suites used to be, but if you have room between the concourse and the stands, that area could work too. They aren't the best seats in the house for view (although they are in the lower bowl), but the semi-exclusivity of them is a nice midway between regular seats and box seats.

The Dodgers did something similar at Dodger Stadium a few years back with more private, field level seating with tables.

As most baseball fans know, Dodger Stadium is your typical pitcher's park and the foul territory was even more massive before the addition of those baseline seats. Agreed that the 500L outfield sections could use a retrofit into a bar or patio area.

 

[utwatch]

With regards to the seating in Rogers centre. I've noticed while going to games that the seats seem very small and crammed in with very little leg room and if someone leaves their seat or arrives at their seat, every one has to stand up and their still scrapping against you as you walk by.
Since I've never been to any other mlb stadium besides rc, doesn't anyone else know or experience other mlb stadiums seating arrangements in terms of roominess and size. Because to me the seating at rc seems overly crammed. Or is this the norm in mlb and other sports centers?
Imo, it would be a little more enjoyable experience with a bit more room to work with if they could ever improve that aspect of the dome.

 

[Johnny Au]

Just by looking at the Dodgers Stadium photo above your post, it looks cramped. Notice the placement of the cupholders.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Every stadium is going to be cramped. By definition they are trying to cram as many people possible into a fixed space.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Work on the dirt infield begins next month
http://echoesfrom527.mlblogs.com/2016/01/09/dirt-in-the-dome/

This February, contractors will be on site excavating the poured concrete that currently lies underneath the Rogers Center’s base paths. In essence, they will be cutting a depth of 12-inches out of the existing surface in order to create a recession deep enough to allow moisture to cycle throughout the base of gravel, sand and surface material that will make up the proposed dirt portion of the stadiums infield.
In its current configuration, the base cutouts stand a mere four inches below the playing surface, a depth that head groundskeeper, Tom Farrell says is insufficient with regards to keeping the surface moist. In turn, a dryer makes for a harder sliding surface around the bags, which can lead to both hesitation and peril.
“Ideally we want to go deeper so that our base is thick enough and deep enough to help better manage the water content” said Farrell at the fourth annual National Coaching Clinic this past weekend.
“If it’s too shallow, it dries out a lot quicker, becomes harder and cracks up during the game. We want to insure that there are enough layers built in to maintain that moisture”.
In the past, hamstring concerns have affected some of the Blue Jays most prominent players including Jose Bautista, Josh Donaldson, Edwin Encarnacion and a laundry list of others who came before them. With a new infield, those within the organization are looking to curb this unfortunate outcome before it costs the club any further ailments.
The idea in doing this is to make the playing surface more comfortable for the players” explained Farrell, who’s been an integral member of the Blue Jays grounds crew since the days of blizzard like conditions at Exhibition Stadium.
In all, the retrofit will take between three to four weeks to complete, and should be ready to go before the Jays take the field in Dunedin this March.

 

[Translude15]

Work on the dirt infield begins next month
http://echoesfrom527.mlblogs.com/2016/01/09/dirt-in-the-dome/

It may not be grass but this is a very positive step forward. Will change the aesthetics of watching a ball game that's for sure.

 

[G.L.17]

With regards to the seating in Rogers centre. I've noticed while going to games that the seats seem very small and crammed in with very little leg room and if someone leaves their seat or arrives at their seat, every one has to stand up and their still scrapping against you as you walk by.
Since I've never been to any other mlb stadium besides rc, doesn't anyone else know or experience other mlb stadiums seating arrangements in terms of roominess and size. Because to me the seating at rc seems overly crammed. Or is this the norm in mlb and other sports centers?
Imo, it would be a little more enjoyable experience with a bit more room to work with if they could ever improve that aspect of the dome.

I've gone to the relatively new park in Cleveland for 4 games; sitting once behind the Jays dugout and the rest were within the mid 100 level. Lots of leg room, nobody had to stand up to move, and no heads in front of you blocked your view of the field. The seats themselves definitely felt bigger. I feel the older stadiums really only have that issue of overcramming.