New Mets Stadium (CitiField) - by HOK Sport [Archive]

ZippyTheChimp

January 18th, 2006, 11:54 PM

Empire State Development News

Press Office
(212) 803-3740

FOR RELEASE: IMMEDIATE
1/18/2006

CHAIRMAN GARGANO ANNOUNCES ESDC BOARD APPROVAL FOR NEW YANKEE AND SHEA STADIUMS’ INFRASTRUCTURE PLANS

Empire State Development Corporation Chairman Charles A. Gargano today announced ESDC Board approval to adopt the General Project Plans for the Yankees and Mets Redevelopment Plans. The plans call for significant infrastructure improvements for the new Mets Stadium, and the construction of new structured parking spaces for the new Yankee Stadium. The Yankees and Mets will privately finance their new facilities with the State contributing to infrastructure upgrades for Shea Stadium, including surface parking; and the construction of new parking facilities for Yankee Stadium. The City will be contributing toward necessary infrastructure improvements at both Shea and Yankee Stadiums, and toward parkland replacement for the Yankee Stadium area.

"The State and City are making an economic development investment that not only will assist with the development of new stadiums for the Yankees and Mets, but will result in significant infrastructure improvements for the surrounding communities,” said Empire State Development Chairman Charles A. Gargano. “This smart investment will create thousands of temporary and permanent jobs and yield hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue in the coming years. Gov. Pataki thanks the New York Yankees and New York Mets for their commitment to New York and its future.”

“We are very appreciative to Charles Gargano and the Empire State Development’s board for their support for this project,” said Randy Levine, president of the New York Yankees. “It’s the largest private investment in the history of sports in the United States and most certainly in the Bronx. This will be a first class destination for Yankee fans, visitors and residents of the Bronx and New York City to enjoy for the next generation.”

"We are pleased with The Empire State Development Corporation's approval of our new ballpark development plans, which will be the linchpin of the revitalization of the area surrounding current Shea Stadium," said Jeff Wilpon, COO, New York Mets. "We remain committed to our ongoing dialogue with Borough, City and State officials to build our new, privately-financed ballpark within the property lines of our current facility. We are confident the ballpark will be an entertainment destination and attraction of which Queens and all of New York City and New York State will be proud."

The ESDC Directors action does not constitute final approval for the Project. The next step is to seek public hearing and comment for the General Project Plan. After full public comment, the Project will remain subject to final Directors’ approval at a later date.

BACKGROUND

SHEA STADIUM AREA REVITALIZATION PLAN:

* An open-air, seven-level stadium with 42,500 seats, and standing room for 1,600 fans, with approximately 50-60 suites
* Approximately 1.26 million square feet of space, including food and beverage service facilities, retail space, a corporate business center, function space and facilities for the media, concourses, restaurants, back of the house spaces, players’ facilities, and other amenities; and
* 8,800 parking spaces on-site and adjacent to the Project Site.

The total project costs are estimated at $600 million. The approximately $444.4 million New Stadium will be financed by tax-exempt and taxable bonds to be issued by the City’s IDA. The City will contribute approximately $85 million in Fiscal 2006 Capital Budget funds for necessary infrastructure improvements and an additional $4.7 million in capital reserve for the new Stadium. ESDC will contribute $70 million for the construction of the infrastructure improvements and $4.7 million in capital reserve for the stadium from bond proceeds. The total infrastructure improvement costs are estimated at $177.2 million. The Mets will be responsible for the construction of the New Stadium and related infrastructure improvements.

The Mets will enter into a Non-Relocation Agreement which would require the Mets Team to play its 81 home games at the New Stadium and prohibit the Team from relocating to another city for up to 35 years. Construction will begin by spring of 2006 and be completed by 2009 for the Team’s 2009 Major League Baseball season.

The project will generate approximately 3,532 direct construction jobs. The construction fiscal benefit (sales taxes and personal income taxes) is estimated to be $17.1 million for New York City and $26.3 million New York State. Incremental permanent direct employment from stadium operations is estimated to be 453 new direct jobs. A total incremental fiscal benefit from the stadium operations and visitor spending is estimated to be $76.8 million for New York City and $86 million for New York State on a present value basis. This includes sales tax for spending by visitors, sales tax from income spending, personal income tax of direct, indirect and induced jobs plus parking tax and other miscellaneous taxes.

Scruffy88

January 21st, 2006, 07:52 PM

Looks like there is some momentum. I really thought this stadium was going to die a quiet death in the wake of the Olympics rejection.

NYguy

January 21st, 2006, 11:46 PM

Looks like there is some momentum. I really thought this stadium was going to die a quiet death in the wake of the Olympics rejection.

It was mentioned back then that the stadium was being built regardless of the olympics.

BPC

January 22nd, 2006, 12:19 AM

The thread on the new Yankee Stadium has 172 posts. The one on the new Mets' Stadium has 15. Kind of interesting.

antinimby

January 22nd, 2006, 02:39 AM

Well, you've got to figure the community resistance in the Bronx took up a few extra posts and add in the fact that the Yanks are more popular than the Mets and there you go.

Citytect

January 22nd, 2006, 01:49 PM

The Yankees thread is a year older and more information is known about their stadium project.

mkeit

January 23rd, 2006, 02:37 PM

It still isn't clear where the Mets are building.

Originally, it was on the existing parking lots.

Later, the junk yards along College Pt Blvd. The last I saw, they wated to take over fountains and soccer fields in Flushing Meadows Park.

NoyokA

February 28th, 2006, 01:28 PM

NYPOST:

February 28, 2006 -- The Mets' future ballpark will have a cozier, more old-time look — with room for 11,900 fewer fans than Shea Stadium and a red-brick façade meant to evoke "historic Ebbets Field and Hell's Gate Bridge," new documents reveal.

The triple-decker will hold 44,100 fans. Shea holds 56,000. With 42,500 seats, it will be standing room only for about 1,600 on sold-out days.

No team member was at a hearing held yesterday in Flushing by the Empire State Development Corp., the state agency helping to finance the $600 million project — but the team has promised an official unveiling within weeks.

The stadium is to go up in the parking lot beyond Shea's centerfield, and batters will face northeast. They now face east.

There will be a glass-enclosed restaurant and lounge in left field for season-ticket holders and one for all fans on the upper level behind home. Also behind home will be a 360-degree rotunda, an homage to Ebbets Field.

As for Shea, it will be razed to make way for parking. The Mets hope to begin construction this summer.

BPC

February 28th, 2006, 01:35 PM

The stadium is to go up in the parking lot beyond Shea's centerfield, and batters will face northeast. They now face east.

Is this so the setting sun won't blind batters? Ideally, it would have been nice if the outfield opened up to the Manhattan skyline, which is otherwise visible (somewhat) from Flushing Meadows Park.

antinimby

February 28th, 2006, 07:45 PM

The Mets need a new ballpark so much more desperately than the Yankees do. However, I don't believe in following the current trend of retro-nostalgia stadiums. Everyone's doing them and eventually when the next trend comes around, this stadium will once again look old quickly.

Strattonport

March 1st, 2006, 01:04 AM

I agree - mimicking past areans, like Ebbets, which has nothing to do with the Mets (but the Dodgers) makes no sense. If you want to integrate retro themes, how about making some reference to Shea stadium instead?

In any case, I'm glad this project is going through.

TranspoMan

March 1st, 2006, 09:59 PM

These are very exciting times for Mets fans - both a new stadium and a redevelopment of Willets Point. Putting two restaurants in the stadium (albeit one for season ticket holders only) adds a nice touch but I think there will be a lot of cafes, restaurants, and bars across 126th Street in Willets Point once the Iron Tringle is redeveloped. Hopefully this will entice more fans to hang out in the area before/after games. I'm not sure if we'll ever compare to Wrigleyville, but it can only get better than it is right now. As Tug McGraw would say, "Ya Gotta Believe!"

The new stadium location should be a bit more convenient for fans taking the No. 7 since the main subway entrance would be located right behind home plate (instead of right field, as it is now).

TonyO

March 1st, 2006, 11:36 PM

The seat loss threw me a bit until I read this sort-of-related article in the Times:

March 1, 2006

Stanford Shrinking Football Stadium to Boost Ticket Sales

By JONATHAN D. GLATER

PALO ALTO, Calif. — The rationale behind Stanford University's $95 million project to shrink the campus football stadium is not intuitively obvious.

But athletic department officials think it will help the university make more money.

"It looks funny, but we hope to increase our income, twice at least," said Ray M. Purpur, senior associate athletic director at Stanford and a major fund-raiser for the project, which was begun almost immediately after Stanford played its last home football game in November. The project is to be completed for the fall season.

The idea, Mr. Purpur explained, is that shrinking the supply of seats — to 50,000 from about 85,000 — will make people buy more season tickets. That way, they can be sure they can attend the games they want, like hugely popular rivalry games against the University of California.

Consultants who advise sports teams say there is method to the Stanford plan. Reducing capacity can increase sales, said Marc Ganis, president of Sportscorp Ltd., a Chicago sports consulting firm.

"When people feel like they wouldn't be able to get a ticket to any game they want to go to, they tend to get season tickets," he said, adding that it improves attendance over all.

But at Stanford, the idea of spending more than $100 million to reduce the size of the 85-year-old stadium for the team's five or six home games drew the ire of Henry E. Riggs, a 1957 Stanford graduate and a former vice president for development at the university. The alumni magazine printed a letter from him criticizing the economics of the project and in an opinion article he wrote for The Palo Alto Weekly, he asked, "Is there no end to the foolish extravagance lavished on big-time college football?"

Few graduates have joined Mr. Riggs in arguing against the project, which was originally budgeted for between $25 million and $85 million. One was Loren D. Smith, class of 1955, of Mountainside, N.J.

"My interest in it was why," Mr. Smith said. "It's not as though it's falling apart."

But other graduates said that the stadium was not comfortable, and that the field, separated from the stands by a running track, was too far away from spectators.

"It definitely needed to be remodeled," said Dr. Robert O. Dillman, class of 1969, the medical director of the Hoag Cancer Center in Newport Beach, Calif. "I was just surprised that in doing it they were going to downsize it that much."

The university has mounted Web cameras for Stanford football fans to monitor the renovation project (stanfordstadium.com). Construction work has proceeded for 16 hours a day, to make sure that the new stadium is ready in the fall.

The project has also stirred little controversy on campus, students and faculty members said, perhaps because not many seem to attend the home football games.

"I haven't heard any" discussion of the stadium, said Leah S. Sawyer, a junior on the school's track team. She said she had not heard the price tag attached to the renovation project, either. When told the amount, she said, "I can't imagine too many students would be excited" about spending that amount of money.

But several faculty members said graduates who donate to athletics would not have given money to rebuild any other part of the university, and so there was no downside to spending so much on the stadium.

"These people, their connection to the university is much more through athletics than through the academic" side, said Roger G. Noll, an economics professor at the university, referring to the graduates whose donations were financing the stadium project. He said he had heard few complaints from colleagues about the project, while he had heard concerns about the school's business endeavors, including real estate and intellectual property holdings.

At least one other school, Dartmouth College in Hanover, N.H., is weighing a similar plan to reduce stadium size. But for Dartmouth and Stanford, the example of Princeton, which reduced the size of its stadium to 27,800 from 45,000 in the 1990's, may offer a cautionary tale.

In the first seasons after the construction project in New Jersey, and after the price of a ticket was cut to $5, attendance soared, rising to more than 20,000 people a game from fewer than 10,000 a game in the old stadium, said Jerry Price, associate athletic director at the school.

By last season, attendance had fallen nearly to its old levels, he said.

"We had bad weather for a couple of games," he said.

A few Stanford graduates said low attendance at games — about 36,000 people attended each game last season, on average — will not be cured by a renovation. Last year the team won five games and lost six, and that is the problem, they say.

As Mr. Smith put it, "It's what's on the field that makes a difference."

lofter1

March 2nd, 2006, 12:39 AM

The seat loss threw me a bit until I read this sort-of-related article in the Times:

..."It looks funny, but we hope to increase our income, twice at least," said Ray M. Purpur, senior associate athletic director at Stanford and a major fund-raiser for the project...

The idea, Mr. Purpur explained, is that shrinking the supply of seats — to 50,000 from about 85,000 — will make people buy more season tickets.

Great for people with deep pockets .. sucks if you're one of those who only goes a few times a season.

JCMAN320

March 18th, 2006, 01:58 PM

Mets can picture this
Unveil final rendering of new park
http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/165-mets_stadium.JPG

BY ADAM RUBIN
DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITER

Latest depiction of Mets' stadium, which is slated for 2009 and will include an Ebbets Field-like rotunda at its entrance.

VERO BEACH, Fla. - The exterior will bring back memories of Ebbets Field. Capacity will be 45,000 spectators.
And now there are pictures of the new Mets stadium, too. Page 39 of the Mets' new media guide includes the first glimpses of the final version of the state-of-the-art, open-air stadium, scheduled to open in 2009.

Groundbreaking for the estimated $609 million project is planned for this summer in the parking lot behind Shea's outfield picnic area.

"It kind of looks like Camden Yards," Mets infielder Chris Woodward said.

Said outfielder Victor Diaz, who said the pictures reminded him of Cincinnati's new park: "It looks nice. I hope I'll be playing in it. The first year it opens it will give us good memories, and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark."

According to a plan submitted to the Empire State Development Corp., the exterior will be reddish-brown brick and limestone, with concrete arches and exposed steel included to resemble bridges. The stadium would open to provide a view of the northern end of Willets Point.

A restaurant in left field, enclosed with glass, will be available for season-ticket holders, while a second restaurant will be located in the upper level behind home plate. Plans also call for the three-deck stadium to include suites behind home plate, below the main concourse.

Among the other features touted by the Mets:

Wider seats angled toward the infield, and more leg room.

A main concourse that encircles the stadium.

A rotunda at the entrance reminiscent of Ebbets Field, the home of the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Shea Stadium is expected to be demolished after the new stadium's construction. It opened April 17, 1964, with the Pirates beating the Mets, 4-3. Only Fenway Park (1912), Wrigley Field (1914), Yankee Stadium (1923) and Dodger Stadium (1962) are older.

Originally published on March 18, 2006

Alonzo-ny

March 20th, 2006, 10:50 AM

Bigger image anyone?

antinimby

March 23rd, 2006, 12:09 AM

"It kind of looks like Camden Yards," Mets infielder Chris Woodward said.

Said outfielder Victor Diaz, who said the pictures reminded him of Cincinnati's new park: "It looks nice. I hope I'll be playing in it. The first year it opens it will give us good memories, and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark."I know it's just a ballpark but it really is indicative of what this city has become. From being at the forefront of everything and a trendsetter, it is now a follower and of all places, Baltimore and Cincinnati! Not only that, but also well over a decade behind as well. Just amazing. Couldn't they come up with something more innovative than another cookie-cutter retro-themed ballpark?

antinimby

March 23rd, 2006, 12:16 AM

and hopefully we can win a championship one year in the new ballpark." Such lofty aspirations. Instead of hoping for multiple championships, they'll settle for just one. Says so much about the organisation.

Bob

March 25th, 2006, 08:50 AM

Given Shea Stadium's location -- adjacent to the Fair Grounds -- I would suggest the new stadium incorporate an art deco theme based on the 1939 fair. There is a treasure trove of fascinating art deco/art moderne concepts from which to choose from that fair. This art deco stadium could also take some architectural clues from the Marine Air Terminal at nearby LGA. Personally, I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed, too, but hey -- that's just a crazy idea even though it would be (again) one heckuva icon for NYC. And the Mets.

ablarc

March 25th, 2006, 10:19 AM

^ Good thoughts.

lofter1

March 25th, 2006, 10:50 AM

I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed, too....
YES!!

TranspoMan

March 26th, 2006, 10:59 AM

Given Shea Stadium's location -- adjacent to the Fair Grounds -- I would suggest the new stadium incorporate an art deco theme based on the 1939 fair...Personally, I think the Trylon and Perisphere should be reconstructed.

Why should the Mets incorporate a theme from the 1939 World's Fair if the team didn't come into existence until 1962? If anything, the Mets have more of a connection to the Unisphere because they wore commerative uniform patches showing it in the 1964 and 1965 seasons to help promote the neighboring Fair. The Dodgers, Giants, and Yankees all wore patches with the Trylon and Perisphere in the 1938 season to promote the upcoming 1939 World's Fair.

I think it's great that the Mets are modeling the exterior of the stadium after Ebbets Field. To keep with tradition, hopefully another part of the stadium was modeled after the Polo Grounds, much like the Mets uniform is based on the colors of the Brooklyn Dodgers (blue) and New York Giants (orange).

About two years ago, the Mets redid many of the directional signs within the stadium that show original images of Mr. Met from the 1960's era. Maybe they will continue this theme in the new stadium.

antinimby

March 28th, 2006, 08:31 AM

So I guess it's safe to say that with this redesign of the Mets stadium, the chances of the city re-entering the 2016 Olympics sweepstakes is null.
What a shame. :(
What makes it so much more disappointing is the fact that the city's odds of getting awarded for 2016 would be so much better than for 2012 simply because the cycle is back to a North American city.

Teno

March 28th, 2006, 09:15 PM

There are other potential sites for a stadium.

I think another Olympic bid would have to go one or the other extreme. The US Olympic committee tells NYC to not even bother trying to bid again anytime soon.

Or the US Olympic committee feels NYC has a great change and feels our government could not possibly be that incompetent to so thoroughly screw up another bid.

antinimby

March 29th, 2006, 03:55 AM

Sadly, I don't think just having available sites is enough.
You'd really need a "partner" such as a Mets or a Jets, but those two teams now have plans of their own.
So it looks like no Olympics in the city.
Hard to imagine that 2012 was our only shot.:(

YKJ

March 29th, 2006, 06:51 PM

antinimby

March 29th, 2006, 08:03 PM

Teno

March 29th, 2006, 08:22 PM

With the information available it appears any deal with a sports team is dead for a future Olympic stadium.

The options would be to build a temporary Olympic Stadium. Not sure if the IOC would be too pleased about this, as they want venues to go on and serve the host community.

Or look to other large venue events to keep the stadium busy. Such as college football, national basketball tournaments, international soccer tournaments, international track and field, cricket, field hockey and so on. Many cities have large stadiums and don't have regular national teams in competition.

Most all large stadiums around the world are largely used for soccer.

YKJ

March 29th, 2006, 10:45 PM

Odd, on account of:

CITY MAY TOSS HAT IN OLYMPIC RINGS AGAIN
By TOM TOPOUSIS

February 2, 2006 -- New York could be going for the gold again.

Just seven months after the city's bid to host the 2012 Olympics fell flat, a key booster of the effort has opened the door to a scramble for the 2016 games — statements that fly in the face of previous comments by Mayor Bloomberg and other city officials.

"We are still giving serious thought to bidding for the games in 2016 for New York, so it's important to keep touching the IOC [International Olympic Committee] bases," Roland Betts told the Yale Daily News.

Betts, who was the White House representative to the city's bid for the 2012 Olympics, was asked to join a presidential delegation to the Winter Games, which begin Feb. 10 in Turin, Italy.

Betts will host and attend events that also will be attended by IOC officials.

Betts told the newspaper that contact with Olympic officials in Turin would be valuable for a 2016 New York bid.

News that the city could try again differs greatly from comments by Bloomberg and the city's chief Olympic booster, Deputy Mayor Daniel Doctoroff, in the aftermath of the IOC's vote last summer.

After London beat New York for the Olympics, Doctoroff said a 2016 bid was "very difficult to foresee any more."
And Bloomberg said the timing for 2012 was right, with land needed to host the games unlikely to be available four years later.

NewYork2016

March 29th, 2006, 11:18 PM

There's no official word, but that in itself tells us that the Olympics aren't in the plans since if it were, you'd hear about it. Plus, why else would they redesign it now? That's just my logic but let's hope that's not the case.

The city should try again for the 2016 Olympics with the new Mets stadium as the site. This could be a grand cap to the would-be-then rebuilt and rejuvenated Willets Point area. A win-win situation for the city.

A redesign of the new Shea Stadium wouldn't affect the a 2016 bid if the City still plans to use Shea as the Olympic Stadium. Since the proposal for 2012 was to build the new Shea, then reconstruct it to be used for the Olympics, then reconstruct it again to baseball configuration, it won't be hard for them to that.

Add to that, they still have the stadium facing Northeast. Meaning, that if you're looking at the stadium from the top, it's on an L shape. So it will be easy to retrofit the stadium.

There have been a lot of positive developments to think that NYC would bid again. Continuing the construction of the facilities proposed for the games, plus Roland Betts (NYC2012 Board Member) and Mayor Guilianni's appointments to the Presidential Delegation, together with what I've heard, a strong New York contingent in the Turin Games (I believe it's not just a tour of the sites and snow there). Then Mayor Guilianni added after he represented the President, that NYC is perfect for the 2016 Summer Games.

If some of you would remember Mayor Bloomberg's remarks on his radio program on WABC last year after the loss, he said that we should try to maintain the momentum in reconstructing a lot of facilities in the city which we are doing now. And then hopefully, next time, our bid will work.

If all goes through, we could have almost all of our facilities in the city, with the new Meadowlands Stadium, and the Nassau Coliseum, the ones outside the city. Even soccer events, which are usually held in stadiums scattered miles away from the host city, an NYC games would have it only 20 miles away from the olympic stadium, and less than 10 miles from Times Square.

Contrary to what many may think, an 2016 NYC bid is in a perfect timing as we're still continuing our momentum in building, and hopefully, will get the support of most New Yorkers now than before. The signs are everywhere. The questions that need to be answered now will be if the City Government is willing to pursue another bid and who'll lead it. And if the USOC will put forward a bid for 2016.

antinimby

March 29th, 2006, 11:33 PM

NewYork2016

March 29th, 2006, 11:45 PM

I hope you're right.

But I have a few questions.

- What necessitated them to do this latest redesign of the new Mets Stadium (I don't think calling it the new Shea is appropriate since it'll probably be called something else)?

- And did HOK (the design firm) redesigned it with a possible Olympics stadium conversion in mind?

- I read somewhere that the site in LIC where the Olympics Village was supposed to be built, have now gone on with proposals for residentials. With that in mind, where would they build the Olympics Village this time around?
I'm thinking Willets Point, which would be so ideal because it would be right there!

I'm not so familiar with the redesign but from what I've heard, they want to evoke Ebbets Field which was on the original proposed design. And when Mets Officials recently visited PNC Park in Pittsburgh, they want to incorporate the fan friendly atmosphere of the said park into the new Mets Stadium. But still, the positioning and shape of the stadium is perfectly fit for a reconstruction to an athletics stadium. And, the Yankees and the Mets had an MOU (A Memo of Understanding), that they'll share Yankee Stadium when the Mets Stadium is reconstructed for the games. The MOU doesn't have a date specified on when will NYC host the olympics, which could very well open it up for 2016.

The LIC site for the Olympic Village is too small in the first place. Since the Ceremonies would be in the new Mets, when NYC gets the games, it would be perfect to put it in Willet Point, or maybe the old Flushing Airport complex. The Airport complex is owned by the city and approvals for financing and using the land won't be as hard when you will need State approvals.

antinimby

March 29th, 2006, 11:53 PM

NewYork2016

March 30th, 2006, 12:55 AM

Willets Point would be a good place for the Village and since it'll take a few years just to clean it up, the extra four years might actually be a good thing, but that means the city has to get working on it ASAP. Btw, welcome to the site and are you involved with the NYC2012 in some form or another? Because it would be nice if we had an "insider" to keep us informed.

Thanks for the welcome :) . I've been trying to look for sites that where I could find some of New Yorkers that would support another Summer Games bid from NYC. I've been lurking on this site for a while now and I've been a regular on GamesBids.com. I'm not an NYC2012 insider though and I've never worked with them. I was a registered volunteer though, but I wasn't able to go to most of the events for the bid. :(

We have lots of time on our hands. And since construction for most of the venues would start in a few months or years, most venues would either be brand new or faily new or recently renovated well ahead for the 2016 Summer Games. I really believe our biggest problem would be the Olympic Village site.

And there were news for redeveloping Willets Point. They've actually chosen some developers already to submit proposals for the site, and one of them is Bruce Ratner! Most of them are proposing building office buildings in the area, perfect for the games' international press center. Brian Hatch of newyorkgames.org has been suggesting the Old Flushing Airport complex for the Olympic Village, which IMO, he's right. It's perfect as it's less than 2 miles away from the Flushing Meadows Sports Complex (Shea, National Tennis Center, etc).

I think Mayor Bloomberg broke ground already for a new olympic-sized pool in the same sports park, in replacement of the ice skating rink or adjacent to it, I just can't remember where it would be exactly built, but it will be in the same complex.

The signs are really everywhere. New facilities being built everywhere. All we're waiting is the decision from the USOC if they'll pursue 2016. Then NYC can decide if we'll bid. But IMO, it's perfect timing as Guilianni had put it too.

And with some big cities from different countries like Tokyo, Rome, Rio, New Delhi, Madrid, Moscow, Capetown etc, the USOC must not choose another 2nd city for the USA like LA, Chicago or SF. They have to go with their best, and right now, IMO, the most prepared in the US to host is either LA or NYC. Now, which one are you going to choose? :)

antinimby

March 30th, 2006, 01:18 AM

Hey, I was thinking we should continue this discussion on the Olympics thread (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2896&page=19). In fact, I'm going to quote your post above and put it in there. :)

NewYork2016

March 30th, 2006, 01:29 AM

Hey, I was thinking we should continue this discussion on the Olympics thread (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=2896&page=18). In fact, I'm going to quote your post above and put it in there. :)

Yeah. Let's do that. I think we, New Yorkers, should push through for another bid from NYC. It's the best for NYC.

lofter1

March 30th, 2006, 01:34 AM

And with some big cities from different countries like Tokyo, Rome, Rio, New Delhi, Madrid, Moscow, Capetown etc, the USOC must not choose another 2nd city for the USA like LA, Chicago or SF. They have to go with their best, and right now, IMO, the most prepared in the US to host is either LA or NYC. Now, which one are you going to choose? :)
NYC doesn't stand a chance unless is really ups its design game ...

Take a look at the London plan: MILES + YEARS ahead of NYC's proposal.

Start HERE (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=69590) and enjoy!

NewYork2016

March 30th, 2006, 01:39 AM

NYC doesn't stand a chance unless is really ups its design game ...

Take a look at the London plan: MILES + YEARS ahead of NYC's proposal.

Start HERE (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=69590) and enjoy!

Its the way the US builds its stadiums. No city in the United States would build a stadium without any use after the games (white-elephant). NYC would build a stadium that would be used by the Mets after an Olympic Reconfiguration. It will work in other countries as the government will spend their money on building stadiums, most of the time, even without a firm commitments on its after-use, the USA is not the same case. We don't want "white-elephants".

Granting we'll have a better chance if we apply the same thing or at least emulate the London plan, which city interested in bidding for 2016, do you think has a plan like London's at least similar to it when it comes to its design?

Ninjahedge

March 30th, 2006, 01:15 PM

Well the DD bid set (a weird combination) is due out the end of next month, so we will see what happens.

lofter1

March 30th, 2006, 01:30 PM

Its the way the US builds its stadiums.
Show me an uglier, less intriguing new stadium (comparable to the 80' high "shoe box" that NYC2012 was trying to foist upon the city) and maybe we can talk more on this subject ...

NewYork2016

March 30th, 2006, 06:32 PM

Show me an uglier, less intriguing new stadium (comparable to the 80' high "shoe box" that NYC2012 was trying to foist upon the city) and maybe we can talk more on this subject ...

Better way, show me a stadium proposed by the interested cities for 2016, that's going to be better than the one proposed by NYC2012 for the new Shea in Queens.

I think you're dwelling on the ugliness of the shoebox stadium on the West Side of Manhattan. Wake up, it's dead!

lofter1

March 30th, 2006, 07:15 PM

NYC2012 is dead as well.

If there is a proposal for a new stadium at the "new" Shea I haven't seen it.

A link from you would be great ...

Teno

March 30th, 2006, 10:04 PM

For the new Mets stadium to work it would have to be designed from the beginning for the conversion. The design of seating, concourses, entryways, sightlines. One half of the park would have to be temporary and bare of permanent amenities.

Even though this was done with the Turner Field in Atlanta. There have been significant renovations to the stadium that make it a better baseball park and conversion back to an Olympic stadium is impossible without major demolition of several of the parks amenities.

NewYork2016

March 31st, 2006, 02:02 AM

NYC2012 is dead as well.

If there is a proposal for a new stadium at the "new" Shea I haven't seen it.

A link from you would be great ...

As of now, we don't have anything cemented from the city officials and everything is pure speculation. But, which city has a cemented plan for 2016 anyway? At least, we have something to look back and base our speculations upon.

But showing how you dislike a possible bid from NYC again just shows how pessimistic you are on NYC's chances. I respect that and I welcome that. I just believe you're on the wrong side of the history NYC is trying to write for itself.

Alonzo-ny

March 31st, 2006, 06:11 AM

Kris

April 2nd, 2006, 07:15 AM

April 2, 2006
Urban Tactics
Home, Sweet Homer: The New Mets Stadium
By JEFF VANDAM

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/04/02/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/mets450.jpg
The planned Mets stadium.

WITH all the rancor in the City Council last week over plans for a new Yankee Stadium, New Yorkers may forget that the city actually has two baseball teams that intend to open new ballparks by 2009.

Last week at City Hall, Mr. October himself, the former Yankee Reggie Jackson, defended the Yankees' plans to Councilwoman Helen Diane Foster of the Bronx, among other critics. Yet very little attention has been paid to the details of the planned Mets stadium, which were disclosed last month in the team's media guide and have been reprinted in at least one newspaper, The Queens Chronicle. Construction of Shea II is slated to start in a few months.

The Mets say they will not discuss the new stadium until they make an official announcement, which they say will be soon. But at least as described in the media guide, the new Shea, which will be built in the eastern parking lot of the current stadium, will depart sharply from the giant blue bowl that Mets loyalists have filled since 1964.

For example, Shea II features a clear tip of the hat to Brooklyn's late beloved Ebbets Field in its exterior brick facade. According to the Mets media guide, there will also be a ring of steel supports around the proposed stadium that are meant to evoke the city's bridges as well as the team's connection to the five boroughs.

The team promises that the new arena will include more bathrooms and more hot-dog stands than does Shea (exactly how many more is not clear), as well as wider seats and more legroom.

The stadium is scheduled to be ready for Opening Day 2009, and it will take shape as the Mets play their next three seasons. Although parking may be a concern during construction, one other potential worry can be put to rest. With the new stadium, which will benefit from subsidies from New York City and New York State, the Mets will agree to stay in Queens for at least 35 more years.

'Polo Grounds,' Perhaps?

For Mets fans, Shea II offers many topics to ponder, from field dimensions to seating capacity. High feelings surround one issue in particular — its name.

"Let's name the stadium appropriately either after the team or after an individual," Andrew Cardona, a lifelong Flushing resident, said at a public hearing about the plan held in Flushing this year. "But I hope it's not going to be called the Citigroup Field."

Edward Kennedy, a computer operator and Mets season-ticket holder who lives in Rockaway Beach, Queens, likes the old name just fine. "Look at all those fields — 'Tropicana Field?' " he said as he wandered around the Mets store near Bryant Park last week. "I don't think they should change the name Shea."

On the Mets Web site, some fans suggested that Met Life, the insurance company, would surely be an apt stadium sponsor, but when other fans suggested naming the field for Jackie Robinson, reaction was swift.

"The Mets have their own history," wrote a user named izzygone, who pointed out that Robinson, the Dodger, never wore the blue and orange. "I'd rather name it Gil Hodges Stadium."

Another online fan, named caliboi, added a dose of reality. "Face it, guys," he wrote. "The stadium will not be named after a person." But he acknowledged that there was one person — and a son of Queens at that — who could pull it off. "Trump Field, or Trump Park," caliboi wrote. "His name is everywhere."

Pray for Sun

Most fans seem to approve of the field's overall design — most of it, anyway.

John Pasterick, wearing a Mets windbreaker as he made his way home to Old Bridge, N.J., from Midtown last week, said he was too young to remember Ebbets Field and could not compare it with designs for the new park. But what he liked about earlier plans for the new Shea, he said, was its retractable roof, a detail missing from the current renderings. "You can get all excited about the weather on Opening Day," he said, "but the next week it could be 40 degrees and raining."

Others chafed at the fact that the new Shea will have 11,500 fewer seats than the old one. "If they intend to build a franchise that will compete every year," asked donmorf1, on the fan forum, "why are they going to provide fewer seats in the largest and probably most baseball-intense metropolitan area in the country?"

Gene Kelty, chairman of Community Board 7 in Flushing, questioned the accuracy of the plan's estimated 8,800 parking spots, and the reasonableness of their location. A lot at the Van Wyck Expressway Viaduct, Mr. Kelty said, is "so far remote that the people parking there should go instead shopping at the Home Depot. They are a lot closer to that site than the stadium."

Eric Okurowski, a resident of Babylon, N.Y., who operates a stadium-analysis site, www.stadiumpage.com, favors a bay view beyond the outfield instead of the scene of Willets Point and Northern Boulevard that fans of the new stadium will see.

But he knows this is a pipe dream. "My two favorites are PNC Park in Pittsburgh and AT&T Park in San Francisco partially because of the view of the water beyond the outfield fences," he wrote in an e-mail message. "Sadly, that's just about impossible in Flushing unless they move the Whitestone Expressway!"

More practically, Mr. Kennedy of Rockaway Beach noted that the orientation of the new park's outfield and the opening behind it could have another drawback: fans without tickets will no longer be able to glimpse the games from the exit platform of the No. 7 train.

Goodbye and Good Luck

Most fans were willing to say goodbye to, and even to deride, the Mets' longtime home.

"It's a dump," said Mr. Pasterick, the fan from Old Bridge. Asked if the old park should be torn down, he gave a sympathetic smile. "It's time," he said, as if bidding a last farewell to a friend.

Others were more descriptive. "Today, Shea's interior is a dark, damp, smelly dungeon full of confusing ramps and escalators that don't work half the time," mitchesq, another online user, wrote last week.

Some admitted to the prospect of shedding a tear when Shea meets the wrecking ball. Others were already thinking of what they might claim.

"I'd want a seat," Mr. Pasterick said, with a smile. "I'd put it in my backyard." Is there a color he would prefer? "Either orange or blue," he said, perhaps not coincidentally picking some of the best seats in the house.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

antinimby

April 2nd, 2006, 07:48 AM

It's clearer now. The stadium doesn't appear to be expandable to accommodate an Olympics.

TranspoMan

April 2nd, 2006, 12:36 PM

It's a bit easier to see some of the architectural details in the photo from the Times. The design of the steel lattice below the upper deck roof definitely resembles a suspension bridge, a prominent element in the Mets' logo. This adds a nice feature, much like the Yankee Stadium frieze.

ramvid01

April 2nd, 2006, 08:49 PM

I must say that this rendering of the new Shea looks very nice.

ablarc

April 2nd, 2006, 09:27 PM

Can you believe the riot of wheelchair spaces at the left of the rendering? Is there any way to keep from wasting land on parking lots? Worse still: parking lots that are empty most of the time.

BrooklynRider

April 3rd, 2006, 04:06 PM

It ought to all go underground. Give the land to people and recraational uses and reduce the parking footprint all together.

ramvid01

April 3rd, 2006, 08:05 PM

Can you believe the riot of wheelchair spaces at the left of the rendering? Is there any way to keep from wasting land on parking lots? Worse still: parking lots that are empty most of the time.

Underground parking wouldn't be a bad idea, but it would probably make the cost of the stadium skyrocket, just consider the security risk of having undergournd parking. I think a better solution would be a parking garage, but of course these things tend to be ugly looking, so that wouldnt happen either.

ablarc

April 3rd, 2006, 08:16 PM

Where I live in Sunbelt Suburbia, a new building type is emerging. It's an aboveground multistory parking deck wrapped on two, three or four sides by some other function (usually residential, office or retail, or a combination of these).

To get efficiently shared parking for a stadium you'd have to wrap the deck in something that has no need for parking during games, and that's a taller order for baseball than it would be for football. If there were no weekday daytime games, office space would work. Or you could wrap the deck in retail that had a lease provision mandating hours that excluded times when there was a game. I think something like this was proposed for Xanadu/Meadowlands, right?

Teno

April 3rd, 2006, 09:00 PM

Its the way the US builds its stadiums. No city in the United States would build a stadium without any use after the games (white-elephant).

So you plan uses for the stadium after the Olympics. A city of over 8 million people in a 303 square mile area can support a large venue stadium. New York is the only city of its size and world stature that does not have its own large venue stadium.

Los Angeles county spreads out over 4000 square miles and has nearly 10 million people, Los Angeles city has just under 4 million people. Los Angeles has a much less diverse immigrant population than New York with the overwhelming majority being Mexican or South American. The Los Angeles metro area has three major stadiums: The Home Depot Center in Carson California which seats 27,000, The Rose Bowl in Pasadena with 92,500 seating capacity, and the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum near downtown which seats 92,000. There is also talk of building another 70,000 seat stadium for a possible expansion NFL team in Anaheim California.

The Home Depot Center is primarily used for Soccer and home for the US national soccer team. The Center has played host to the women's World Cup, major league Lacrosse, and various US major league soccer events. The center is also used for motor-cross and X Games.

The Rose Bowl is used primarily as home for UCLA Bruins Football and the Rose Bowl Football Tournament. But has also been host to the men's and women's World Cup, The US Major League Soccer Cup, and The Super Bowl.

The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum today is primarily used as the home of the USC Trojan Football and mostly sits empty the rest of the year. In the past the Coliseum has been used for widely various events: pro NFL teams, The 1934 and 1984 Olympics, The 1959 World Series that drew 92,000 fans, The Super Bowl, and a mass by Pope John Paul II. The Coliseum has plans for a major renovation. The renovation is largely targeted at luring a new NFL team but could happen even with no NFL team.

At this point Los Angeles has no major NFL teams, three large outdoor stadiums with two of the largest stadiums in the country. All three stadiums are at some point functioning and busy enough to at least pay for themselves. From what I could tell none are a major money drain on their communities.

New York City currently has nothing that can accommodate most of the events these stadiums have hosted. A 80,000 seat retractable dome stadium at Willets Point could attract The World Cup, The Super Bowl, The Final Four, annual College Football Bowl, Final Four regional tournaments, International Soccer tournaments, International Track and Field meets. Amongst other events that require a large venue for an audience of tens of thousands.

City leaders can look at the option of building college football in New York. College sports in many ways are bigger than pro sports and can earn pro level media contracts. College football has a much more rabid fan base and college football games require much larger stadiums to accommodate that fan base.

The city could look into negotiating with NYU and Columbia in building division 1A college football programs if the city provides a state of the art stadium. Both schools certainly have the economic resources to do such.

Columbia has a football team, but doesn't put much into the program or recruiting good players. I suppose what would be looked at as Columbia's weakness is its academic focus and its post graduate class is three times larger than its undergraduate class. Post graduates are less likely to be as interested in school sports than undergrads. In reality though a big college football game is filled more with alumni and local city residents than actual students from the school.

NYU has no football team but does have a 39,000 strong student body. NYU has probably never really had the option of a football team. Where could they build a stadium in the village.

czsz

April 3rd, 2006, 10:18 PM

NYU had a football team until the 50s I believe. It used to have a large campus in the Bronx.

Columbia built a new stadium in the 1980s. It's in quite an inconvenient location for students, which explains why so few attend games, and hence why the football program is so undersupported...a giant New York municipal stadium in an outer borough would be even worse for attendance and alumni participation.

Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools. It's in giant Big 10 state schools, the closest of which to New York are Syracuse or Penn State...

Teno

April 3rd, 2006, 10:33 PM

A google search shows you are right NYU did have a football team for 69 years.

They played at Yankee Stadium from the 20's through the 40's.

NYU and Fordham were rivals and nationally top ranked teams. The two schools had an annual Manhattan subway classic.

Looks like the program was cancelled in 1942 because it was costing the school too much money. Long before multimillion dollar television contracts.

STT757

April 3rd, 2006, 11:01 PM

This would be awesome if it were in Coney Island, and incorporated in the area's entertainment.

In the middle of Queens it's just alright, nothing like Camden Yards or 3Com Park (or whatever it's called today).

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/04/02/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/mets450.jpg

vc10

April 4th, 2006, 11:24 AM

Syracuse is a private university, not a state school. New York's state university is unusual in that it was widely dispersed, so to date it has yet to result in stereotypical giant state campus/football team units.

http://www.suny.edu/student/campuses_map.cfm

Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools. It's in giant Big 10 state schools, the closest of which to New York are Syracuse or Penn State...

NY_Yankees_1979

April 4th, 2006, 12:39 PM

I like the Ebbets Field replica but I think they should also consider combining the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field replica that would be the best ballpark for the Mets. For the Yankees, the pre-renovation Yankee Stadium would be great. It's too bad that the Yankees can't play at Shea for a few seasons while a new stadium was being built on the same exact site where current Yankee Stadium stands now.

JCMAN320

April 4th, 2006, 01:11 PM

I agree with you NYYankee, I'm a hug Yankee fan. While the new stadium will look great and harkin back to the old one, I just wish it was still being built on the same site as the current one.

With regards to the Mets, I love this new stadium, big improvement over Shea. I love how it stll will have the chincee Home Run Big Apple coming out of the hat in center field. Now the Mets were brought to NY actually to replace the Dodgers, even though they use the NY Giants old interlocking NY on the hat to represent the Giants, the hat being blue represent the Dodgers cap. Look at the Mets home uniforms with the cursive script of the word "Mets" is very similar to the style the Dodgers used for their home uniform with the word "Dodgers" in cursive script along with the number on the lower right of the jersey is a Dodger feature. The Mets away uniforms were style after that of the old New York Giants away uniform. So you can take your pick because the team used elements in their unifrom of both teams, but they were given to us to replace the Dodgers. Lol sorry guys I just love history.

http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1667145reg.jpg http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1847509reg.jpg
http://www.mitchellandness.com/images/productimages/GI51R24_W.jpg http://mlb.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/pMLB2-1847529reg.jpg

Scruffy88

April 4th, 2006, 02:09 PM

thats a hot stadium for the mets. its it sill going to be built over the iron triangle or is going to take out part of flushing meadows?

Teno

April 4th, 2006, 02:39 PM

Anyway, the real money in college football isn't in the Ivy League or NYU-type schools.

USC is a private research University much like NYU and has a successful football team.

TranspoMan

April 4th, 2006, 09:48 PM

Now the Mets were brought to NY actually to replace the Dodgers, even though they use the NY Giants old interlocking NY on the hat to represent the Giants, the hat being blue represent the Dodgers cap. Look at the Mets home uniforms with the cursive script of the word "Mets" is very similar to the style the Dodgers used for their home uniform with the word "Dodgers" in cursive script along with the number on the lower right of the jersey is a Dodger feature. The Mets away uniforms were style after that of the old New York Giants away uniform. So you can take your pick because the team used elements in their unifrom of both teams, but they were given to us to replace the Dodgers.

The Mets weren't just meant to replace the Dodgers, they were meant to return the National League to New York after the loss of both the Dodgers and Giants (see official club history below). The beginnings of the Mets franchise can really be traced back to William Shea, the attorney who the stadium is named after. Shea wanted to return baseball back to New York, and proposed the formation of a new league (the Continental League) with franchises in Atlanta, Buffalo, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, Minneapolis, New York, and Toronto. This league was dissolved without ever playing a game under the promise that two teams would be accepted into the American League and two teams would be accepted into the National League (effectively pressuring Major League Baseball into expansion.)

from: http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/history/timeline1.jsp
November 16, 1961 - The circular Mets logo, designed by sports cartoonist Ray Gatto, was unveiled. It has gone virtually unchanged throughout the history of the club. The shape of the insignia, with its orange stitching, represents a baseball, and the bridge in the foreground symbolizes that the Mets, in bringing back the National League to New York, represent all five boroughs. It's not just a skyline in the background, but has a special meaning. At the left is a church spire, symbolic of Brooklyn, the borough of churches. The second building from the left is the Williamsburg Savings Bank, the tallest building in Brooklyn. Next is the Woolworth Building. After a general skyline view of midtown comes the Empire State Building. At the far right is the United Nations Building. The Mets' colors are Dodger blue and Giant orange, symbolic of the return of National League baseball to New York after the Dodgers and Giants moved to California. Blue and Orange are also the official colors of New York State.

Bob

April 4th, 2006, 09:52 PM

At first glance, this new park looks pleasant, but it's nothing to WOW over. I've seen this kind of corporate fun elsewhere, and it's just as corporately boring after about 15 minutes. I guess it will be better than Shea, but with LESS seats? I don't see how that is an "improvement." As for Shea, with its allegedly broken escalators and dingy restrooms, I have to wonder if Shea wouldn't have lived up to its potential if it were properly managed and maintained. And I suspect I'll miss Shea Stadium, too, if nothing else than for the fact that the Beatles played there (for about 25 minutes or so). OK, so my art deco/world's fair theme for the new park (earlier post this thread) underwhelmed just about everybody. I can live with that. I guess I can also live with the pending corporate fun...even though it's closer to LGA and the departure routes off runway 13. I don't suspect the FAA will be changing the Standard Instrument Departure off that runway to accommodate the new stadium. Alas.

NY_Yankees_1979

April 4th, 2006, 09:57 PM

Exactly I love where Yankee Stadium is now, the sights outside the old stadium such as the courthouse and some of the other south Bronx buildings will have different views and thats what I'm worried about, to me the courthouse is a Yankee Stadium landmark as far as the view goes.

Getting back to the Mets, taking the Polo Grounds and Ebbets Field would revoke not only the first ballpark the Mets called home but also there awesome Ebbets Field stadium.

If the Mets are building this new ballpark in the east parking lot of Shea Stadium, I would like to see a redeveloped Willets Point with a mix of shopping, residential and parks. As well as redoing the area between the 7 train and the tennis stadium.

TranspoMan

April 4th, 2006, 10:29 PM

If the Mets are building this new ballpark in the east parking lot of Shea Stadium, I would like to see a redeveloped Willets Point with a mix of shopping, residential and parks. As well as redoing the area between the 7 train and the tennis stadium.

The City has a plan to redevelop the Willets Point area to the east of the proposed stadium into a new mixed-use development. Most people appear to be very much in support of this idea, except some elected officials have expressed concerns about providing a relocation plan for the existing junkyard and auto body businesses.

The area between the No. 7 train and the National Tennis Center is currently occupied by a Shea parking lot, the Corona subway yard, a MTA bus depot, and the LIRR station. I would have to imagine that anything built here would have to be built on a deck and would have a very expensive price tag. Therefore, don't expect to see anything happening here.

NY_Yankees_1979

April 5th, 2006, 07:20 AM

The City has a plan to redevelop the Willets Point area to the east of the proposed stadium into a new mixed-use development. Most people appear to be very much in support of this idea, except some elected officials have expressed concerns about providing a relocation plan for the existing junkyard and auto body businesses.

The area between the No. 7 train and the National Tennis Center is currently occupied by a Shea parking lot, the Corona subway yard, a MTA bus depot, and the LIRR station. I would have to imagine that anything built here would have to be built on a deck and would have a very expensive price tag. Therefore, don't expect to see anything happening here. Redeveloping Willets Point would be awesome, there are several areas where the junkyard could relocate most likely somewhere else in Queens or Brooklyn I would say.

As for the area between the 7 train and the Nationals Tennis Center, a deck would be nice but the problem like you said is the price tag. Maybe they have something in plan.

Derek2k3

April 7th, 2006, 12:53 AM

New Mets Ballpark (http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/ballpark/newpark_overview.jsp)

BronxBoy

April 7th, 2006, 01:26 AM

New York's state university is unusual in that it was widely dispersed, so to date it has yet to result in stereotypical giant state campus/football team units.

http://www.suny.edu/student/campuses_map.cfm

I go to the University at Buffalo which has 27,000 students, two campuses, and a Division 1 football team (which just so happens to lose every game they place).

Maybe if our football team was better UB would have more recognition.

http://www.buffalo.edu

Kris

April 7th, 2006, 07:55 AM

April 7, 2006
Wilpon Is Walking Again Through Ebbets Rotunda
By RICHARD SANDOMIR

Slide Show: The Mets' New Home (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2006/04/06/sports/20060407_STADIUM_SS_1.html)

Eight years after they displayed a model of a stadium that echoed the look of Ebbets Field, the Mets showed off a 21st-century version of the design yesterday amid hopes that they can start building in June and take the field in the corporate-named ballpark at the start of the 2009 season.

The new version of the 45,000-seat stadium has fewer seats and luxury suites (58, down from 78) than the first plan and lacks a retractable roof that was jettisoned because of the $150 million to $200 million price tag.

But the alterations have done nothing to reduce the vivid emotional attachment of Fred Wilpon, the Mets' principal owner and a Brooklyn native, to the now-sainted Ebbets, the Brooklyn Dodgers' long-dead home. In the current design, fans will enter the ballpark through an Ebbets-like rotunda with 65-foot-high ceilings.

"When I look at the designs, as I often do," Wilpon said during a news conference at 42-year-old Shea Stadium, which, when it is demolished, is not likely to evoke architectural reveries, "I almost feel like I'm walking through the rotunda, 8 or 9 years old, holding my dad's hand."

Here, his voice broke, before he was able to speak again.

The estimated $765 million project — up to $600 million from the team for the stadium and $165 million from the city and state for infrastructure, site preparation and other costs — has prompted little of the community opposition that the Yankees have encountered.

The Mets have avoided major resistance because they are building their new stadium east of Shea, in their parking lot, not displacing parkland, as the Yankees are by building on 22 acres in Macomb's Dam and Mullaly Parks.

The City Council approved construction of the Yankees' new stadium on Wednesday, a product of the team's agreement with Bronx officials to contribute $50 million over 20 years to local community groups. The Council was expected to review the Mets' stadium financing plan on Monday along with the financing plan for the Yankees' new stadium.

But Councilman Hiram Monserrate, whose district includes Shea, persuaded Council members to delay the review of the Mets' plan until the team agrees to provide benefits to the local community.

"If the residents of the Bronx benefited from an agreement with the New York Yankees, why shouldn't the residents of Queens benefit from an agreement with the New York Mets?" Monserrate said.

The prospect of community groups demanding a Yankee-like benefits deal from the Mets angered Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. "Every development project in this city is not just going to be a horn of plenty for everybody that wants to grab something," he said at the news conference. New development, he said, should not be a rush to "line up to get some ransom."

The deal was put together last June after plans to construct an Olympic stadium on Manhattan's West Side were killed. Bloomberg made a commitment to help the Mets build a ballpark that would have been the centerpiece for the 2012 Games in an 11th-hour plan to salvage the city's bid.

In planning a smaller stadium than the one they are leaving, the Mets are following a baseball trend. The 45,000 seats is 12,000 fewer than capacity at Shea, which only occasionally sells out. The baseball-only design (Shea was built for the Mets and the Jets) and seating angled toward the infield are intended to increase the intimacy of attending a game.

The design reflects Ebbets's grip on Wilpon and the ballparks built since the 1990's like Oriole Park at Camden Yards, PNC Park in Pittsburgh and Keyspan Park, where the Brooklyn Cyclones, the Mets' Class A team, play.

It will have a brick and limestone exterior, accented with archways and exposed steel; a section of the right-field seats will hang over the field (at Ebbets Field, the outfield seats were in left and center); and its wide concourses will let fans circle the stadium without obstacles to watching the game. Like Shea, it will have pitcher-friendly dimensions.

"I happen to like Pittsburgh a lot," said Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' chief operating officer, whose love of bridges, like Hell Gate Bridge over the East River, is seen in the design. "I've seen things in San Diego that are very nice. Then you take something at Cleveland and Camden."

The architect, HOK Sport, has designed many of the new stadiums in baseball, including the new Yankee ballpark. "Fred's passion is the rotunda and the experience," said Mike Sabatini, the HOK designer of the Mets' park. "Jeff is more in tune with what's going on in other ballparks."

There was a time when the Mets and the Yankees believed public money should pay for most or all of their stadiums. In 2001, former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani made a nonbinding agreement with the teams to finance half the cost of two $800 million ballparks, a deal that Bloomberg scotched as unaffordable soon after he took office early the next year.

Now, both teams are paying to build their stadiums, with the city and state helping with associated costs.

The Mets will pay no rent at the new stadium and will have their rent reduced by $15 million until they leave Shea, as part of their state deal. The Yankees also have a rent-free deal. The teams now pay rent, but the city absorbs the costs of maintaining their stadiums.

The Mets and Yankees will also be able to reduce the revenues they share with other major league teams by the amount of debt payments they are making.

The stadiums are expected to generate substantially more revenues from tickets, luxury suites, club seats and naming rights like the $6 million that Minute Maid pays each year to be attached to the Houston Astro's ballpark.

Winnie Hu contributed reporting for this article.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

Teno

April 10th, 2006, 05:02 PM

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.

Transic

April 26th, 2006, 01:14 AM

http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/Mets_make_a_deal/2255.html

Mets make a deal
by patrick arden / metro new york
APR 26, 2006

MANHATTAN — An 11th hour deal with the Mets yesterday clears the way for the City Council to approve more than $528 million in tax-exempt financing today for the team’s new ballpark.

Queens Council members had threatened to thwart the Mets’ plans unless the team came up with a community partnership agreement similar to the one Bronx officials hammered out with the Yankees.

“Three weeks ago, when we began this debate, there was nothing on the table,” said Councilman Hiram Monserrate, D-Queens, who represents the area around Shea Stadium. “Today we have a community partnership agreement, and we have commitments from the administration. We’re getting it from both ends.”

The pact with the Mets — negotiated by Monserrate, City Council Queens delegation chair Leroy Comrie and Speaker Christine Quinn — calls for 25 percent of all construction contracts to be awarded to Queens firms and 25 percent to go to minority- or women-owned firms.
“It’s the same for construction jobs, 25 percent for Queens residents and 25 percent for minorities and women,” Monserrate said. “A pre-apprenticeship program is part of a project labor agreement. And when the stadium is built, Queens residents will make up 25 percent of the workforce.”

The Mets will also fund the “beautification” of Roosevelt Avenue between 114th and 126th streets and Northern Boulevard between 114th Street and Willets Point Boulevard. The plan calls for new lighting, sidewalks, trees and trashcans.

In a letter to Comrie, deputy mayor Daniel Doctoroff promised the city will work on traffic mitigation, road repair and landscaping, as well as provide shuttle bus service from the Long Island Rail Road. The city will also ask the MTA to fund the rehabilitation of the Willets Point LIRR station and the Roosevelt Avenue El. The Parks Dept. will hire four new officers in June and expand parking lots in Flushing Meadows Corona Park. The city will start a Business Improvement District on Junction Boulevard and spend $50 million to replace the Roosevelt Avenue Bridge in 2009.

The final provision calls for the Mets to set aside 25 percent of its charitable giving for Queens, including local scholarships, senior citizen programs and Little League and high school teams. “The Mets claims they gave $2 million last year,” Monserrate said. “If you do the math, that’s $500,000 a year. If their donations go up in the future, that could go higher. We want them to be good neighbor.”

Waiting on the IRS

• Today the City Council is also expected to approve $866 million in tax-exempt bonds for a new Yankee Stadium. The Independent Budget Office concluded the financing schemes for both stadiums depend on “an aggressive interpretation” of the law. The city has asked the IRS to rule on the plans. In a letter yesterday, Good Jobs New York asked Finance Committee Chair David Weprin, D-Queens, to postpone the vote.

BPC

April 26th, 2006, 02:24 AM

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.

Your average Met fan has no idea who William Shea was. Even the man's law firm, Shea & Gould, is now defunct. I doubt a revolution is forthcoming.

ZippyTheChimp

April 26th, 2006, 09:02 AM

It's not the same thing.

Shea Stadium is not named after the law firm. The original name Flushing Meadow Park was changed to Shea to honor the man who was instrumental in bringing NL baseball back to New York.

Enron paid for naming rights to the Houston stadium. The issue had to go to court when Enron went bankrupt. It is now called Minute Maid Park. How lame is that? Let's hope there is never a juice scandal.

I'm sure many Cubs fans don't realize that their field isn't named after gum.

Thethinkingman

April 26th, 2006, 10:47 AM

Corporate naming rights are a travesty.

NY fans are going to totally revolt against calling the new Mets stadium AT&T Park or what ever it may be.

I suppose though Met Life Field could work.

Yeah I'm not crazy about having the corporate naming rights. Giants fans must not really care what thei stadium is called. Since it opened it's doors in 2000 the SanFran Giants stadium has changed names 3 times. It opened as PacBell, then it became SBC, and now it's AT&T.

Transic

May 18th, 2006, 05:40 AM

http://www.qgazette.com/news/2006/0517/features/018.html

Council Aids Board 7 With New Mets Stadium
BY RICHARD GENTILVISO

With new ballparks for the Mets and Yankees by 2009 a reality, it's easy to forget this all came about when just a year ago New York City was trying hard to lock up a bid for the 2012 summer Olympic Games and Mayor Michael Bloomberg was lobbying hard to build a new football stadium for the Jets in Manhattan.

But when the West Side Stadium, which was also the centerpiece for the 2012 Olympics was sacked late in the game by the opposition, the mayor turned to his bullpen to try to save the day (to use a mixed sports metaphor).

After spending years and millions saying an Olympic Stadium couldn't be built in Queens, the mayor brought in the Mets, who quickly agreed to build a new ballpark just to the east of Shea Stadium that could be retrofitted into an 80,000-seat facility for the Olympics.

A new Yankee Stadium, to be built in Macombs Dam Park, just north of the current Yankee Stadium, would also be approved as long as the Yankees agreed to double up with the Mets in their park for the 2012 season.

But less than a month later, in July 2005, the city lost its bid for the 2012 Olympic Games. Even so, the Mets and Yankees had both won their long desired new homes and the Jets are permanently moving to New Jersey.

"The city moved very, very quickly," Councilmember John Liu said at the May 8 meeting of Community Board 7 in Flushing. By votes of 48 to 1 for the Mets' Stadium and 46 to 3 (one abstention) for the Yankees' Stadium, the city council approved the financing plans on April 26. The city will issue taxexempt bonds in the amount of $632 million for the Mets and $930 million for the Yankees, to be paid back to the city by the teams.

Liu said there was concern by members of the Queens City Council delegation that the local community had been left out of the process. "That's why many of my colleagues, and I stepped up and said although we all want a new stadium, something has to be given to the community."

In response, the Mets have agreed to designate at least 25 percent of construction jobs to companies from Queens, 25 percent of jobs to Queens residents and 25 percent of all contracts to women and minority businesses and workers. The Mets will also donate $500,000 to community groups and Little League teams in the borough.

There is also a commitment by the Bloomberg administration to improve infrastructure around the stadium, including the complete reconstruction of the Roosevelt Avenue Bridge, Liu said.

"We appreciate the work that went in from the council," said Board 7 First Vice Chair Chuck Apelian. Citing failed efforts to reach out to the Mets, Apelian said a lapse in communication between the team and the board had occurred. With high hopes the Mets will resume their place as a good neighbor, Apelian said the team would be an organization "we can be even prouder of than we are now." Apelian said the Mets intend to begin construction soon, after the current home stand.

One week after the final approval for the new Mets' and Yankees' ballparks, Bloomberg said the city had no plans to bid for another Olympics. "I do not believe that the opportunities that we had when the 2012 bid was put together will exist for a 2016 bid", according to a report in the May 5 New York Times.

Noting the recent passing of long-time board member and Transportation Committee Chair Victor Ross, Apelian said Ross was a terrific human being who always looked out for the community. "Victor, we're going to miss you," he said.

Transic

June 9th, 2006, 10:05 PM

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/ny-sphokweb0609,0,7719527.story?coll=ny-sports-mezz

Brains behind new Mets, Yanks stadiums

BY NEIL BEST
Newsday Staff Correspondent

June 9, 2006

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- By the end of the decade, baseball fans in New York should be munching on peanuts and CrackerJack in two new ballparks full of modern amenities as well as nostalgic nods to the past.

It will be a seminal moment in Big Town for the sport still closest to its collective heart.

Strangely, though, the buildings took shape a half-continent away from Times Square, in this town that sees itself – not rival St. Louis – as the easternmost edge of the American West. It happened at the offices of HOK Sport, the biggest name in a field it helped invent.

Why Kansas City? It's a long, mostly serendipitous story of a group of young architects in Kansas City who fell into the specialty because of a love of sports and struck gold in the form of a building boom that continues to this day.

HOK's corporate roots go back to the 1970s and Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City and later to Giants Stadium. But the firm in its current form opened for business in 1983 as a sports branch of a large St. Louis outfit. Quickly, the partners noted the era of the previous generation of stadiums, many of them multi-use and hideous, was coming to an end.

The firm designed Joe Robbie Stadium in south Florida, which opened in 1987, in the process inventing club seats. But its most influential innovation came with the 1988 opening of minor league Pilot Field in Buffalo, the first of the throwback, downtown, new baseball stadiums.

That, in turn, begat Baltimore's Camden Yards in 1992, which solidified HOK's status.

Later, its list of new or renovated buildings grew to include baseball stadiums in Anaheim, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Diego and San Francisco and football facilities in Baltimore, Charlotte, Cleveland, Foxboro, Houston, Jacksonville, Landover, Md., Nashville, Pittsburgh, St. Louis and Tampa.

The firm also has designed numerous basketball, hockey, soccer, collegiate, minor league and spring training facilities.

For more than a year, HOK has been working on two of its most high profile jobs yet – new buildings for each of New York's baseball teams.

Why HOK? Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' senior executive vice president, said the team initially was attracted by its work on the Norfolk stadium that houses the Mets' farm team there.

"It's the vast experience they have," he said. "Other companies have sort of broken off or splintered off over the years, but HOK is the only one that's really stayed together."

Some have accused HOK of being overly traditional and risk-averse, but both the Mets and Yankees sought traditional looks with modern twists, and believe HOK has provided that.

A few years ago, HOK designed the Staten Island Yankees' home, and it designed the Devils' arena in Newark, currently under construction.

The Giants and Jets are not using the firm for their new jointly owned stadium, set to open in 2010. They are using 360Architecture, one of two other major firms in Kansas City that have done sports work.

Dennis Wellner, one of HOK's founders, said a Midwestern ethos helped shape the company as it has evolved. "There is a work ethic we see in our people and a commitment to projects that has overridden the business issues," he said.

Indeed, a day spent at HOK's downtown Kansas City headquarters – it recently moved to a glistening new building that, naturally, it designed itself – was a study in mid-American industriousness.

Designers work in pods under signs indicating various stadium projects, miniature versions of future behemoths gradually taking shape on their computer screens.

The possibilities are endless, and the market is in no danger of dwindling.

"It amazes me every day," Wellner said. "We thought when we were sitting there (after first opening) and that if we ever got to 25 employees, wouldn't that be phenomenal? It didn't take long."

They are up to about 350 now.

Steve Carver, another founder, recalled that in 1983, he participated in a study of New York-area sports facilities that identified a need for new venues.

"I look back at that and very little has been done," he said. "While the rest of the country has gone crazy in building these facilities, New York has kind of stood still."

Not anymore.

Transic

June 25th, 2006, 06:07 PM

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-limets0625,0,6433070.story?coll=ny-top-headlines

MTA pressed to create shortcut to Shea

BY SAMUEL BRUCHEY
Newsday Staff Writer

June 24, 2006, 6:59 PM EDT

With the sizzling Mets drawing big summer crowds to home games and construction set to begin on a new ballpark for the team, transit officials are urging the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to explore new ways for Long Islanders to get to Shea Stadium without having to drive.

MTA spokesman Tim O'Brien said over the last two months the agency has been looking into the feasibility of building a Long Island Rail Road station on the main line at Shea and could announce its findings as soon as June 28 when the MTA board meets.

Right now, Mets fans who take the railroad to Shea -- about 25 percent of Mets tickets are purchased by Long Islanders -- must get off at Woodside, Queens. From there, they take the Port Washington LIRR train, which goes to the stadium, or the number 7 subway.

"It shouldn't be so difficult to see a game," said MTA board member Mitchell Pally.

It is not lost on Mets fans that the MTA has said it will spend $40 million on a new Metro-North station at Yankee Stadium in the Bronx. In April, Pally wrote a letter to MTA Executive Director Katherine Lapp asking that the Mets receive equal treatment to their crosstown rivals.

"The lack of direct rail services [to Shea] for a large portion of the Long Island population forces them to use their automobiles to and from the stadium, causing substantial traffic congestion," Pally's letter states.

Complicating access to Shea via train is that parking at every stop along the Port Washington line is reserved for residents only. So a fan who wants to drive to a stop along that line and take the train directly to Shea isn't able to park.

Mets fan Helen Germanakos, 44, said her husband, Lou, and sons, Peter, 15, and Dean, 19, drive to several games each season, always leaving homes several hours before the first pitch.

"I would be more willing to put my younger son on the train if I knew he didn't have to take the subway," said Germanakos, of Syosset. "It would make life much easier, just to get on and be able to go directly there."

The Mets are in first place in the National League East and attendance at Shea is up about 15 percent, with the team on pace to draw more than 3 million fans this season. Last year's attendance was 2.8 million. Approximately 4 to 5 percent of those fans take the LIRR.

When construction begins this summer on the new stadium, parking will become an even bigger problem. By August, as many as 2,000 parking spots -- about 25 percent of the available ones -- will be lost, said Dave Howard, executive vice president of business operations for the Mets. The new stadium is scheduled to open in 2009.

Many of the lost spots will be temporarily replaced, Howard said. But the replacement spots will be farther from the stadium, requiring fans to walk several minutes or take a free shuttle service provided by the Mets organization, Howard said.

"We're going to try to minimize most of the inconvenience," Howard said.
For some fans, that inconvenience is well worth a new stadium -- not to mention having a winning team.

"Who cares if there's no place to park, we're getting a new stadium!" said Scott Resnik, 32, of Mastic. "And, we're in first place. It's all fine by me."

lofter1

June 26th, 2006, 08:45 PM

Total BS ^^

Take the 7 train.

Quit crying ;)

TranspoMan

June 26th, 2006, 11:31 PM

MTA spokesman Tim O'Brien said over the last two months the agency has been looking into the feasibility of building a Long Island Rail Road station on the main line at Shea and could announce its findings as soon as June 28 when the MTA board meets.
Is anyone else puzzled by this sentence? I don't see how a new station could be built near Shea because the main line doesn't run anywhere close to the stadium. I'm thinking maybe this was meant to say that the MTA was looking into running trains from the main line (say Jamaica) to the Port Washington branch (Shea Stadium) without passengers having to switch trains, although I'm not sure how this could be accomplished without trains reversing directions and switching tracks.

By the way, SportsNet New York has been running promos during Mets telecasts all season long urging fans to take mass transit (possibly hinting at the traffic and parking mess that will soon unfold). This video clip can be also viewed on the Mets' website:
http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/nym/ballpark/directions.jsp

Transic

July 7th, 2006, 12:26 AM

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16885789&BRD=2731&PAG=461&dept_id=574902&rfi=6

http://img483.imageshack.us/img483/3581/24997f1575tw.jpg
(Liz Rhoades) Preliminary test pilings occupy part of the Shea Stadium parking lot prior to starting construction on the new ballfield.

Early Stadium Work Removes 800 Spots
by Liz Rhoades (LizR@qchron.com), Managing Editor
07/06/2006

Groundbreaking for the new Mets stadium hasn’t even begun and fans have already lost 800 parking spots.

But once work gets in full swing, that number will jump to a total of 2,000 fewer parking spaces. And fans shouldn’t expect any relief until the new facility is finished in time for the 2009 season.

That’s the latest word from David Newman, senior vice president of marketing for the Mets, who spoke at a breakfast last Thursday in Flushing. He would not be pinned down on when the official groundbreaking marking the beginning of construction would begin.

Originally, plans called for work to begin in late spring, then it was moved to summer. Whenever it actually does start, Newman said the 2009 completion date would hold.

He urged game goers to take public transportation and added that a ferry might be added as another way for fans to get to Shea Stadium.

The Mets have held meetings with the city and Parks Department to provide some replacement parking on the perimeters of the park, such as is done during the yearly U.S. Open at the nearby USTA Tennis Center in Flushing Meadows Park. But it will be farther away from the stadium and not as convenient.

The Mets organization will provide $550 million for the project, with the city and state contributing another $150 million for infrastructure improvements.

“We are excited about the ballpark,” Newman said. “It bridges the glorious past with the future.”

The stadium has been designed to reflect Ebbets Field where the Brooklyn Dodgers played. It is expected to create over 6,000 construction jobs and maintain the 1,000 full time jobs currently at Shea.

There will be 45,000 seats, a decrease from the current 57,333, but officials say they will be roomier and offer better views of the playing field. The new stadium will feature an open main concourse and two restaurants.

The current Shea Stadium is considered outdated. It was built in 1964 and opened the same time as the adjacent World’s Fair in Flushing Meadows. It was named after William Shea, an attorney who was instrumental in the city acquiring the new baseball team. The new stadium is expected to have a corporate name.

nycla3

July 8th, 2006, 05:41 PM

Anarchy77

July 8th, 2006, 06:26 PM

I know that a lot of people consider shea to be a dump, but if you started watching Met baseball back in the days of Seaver, Koosman, Jones, Agee, Staub:), etc, it's hard to block out the memorable associations. I'll also miss those old bread and cupcake factories in the brick buildings near the park-a slice of old nyc. Have they been knocked down? Last ball game I saw at shea--2003--It looked like they were done away with:(.

nycla3

July 8th, 2006, 07:06 PM

This is the Shea to be nostalgic about...with kitschy orange and blue squares and rectangles, bright and shiny exterior...."...at 3:17 o'clock on a cool and often sunny afternoon..." that ended it's 6th year of existence. :) (thanks to Joseph Durso) http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2045&stc=1&d=1152396188 (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2045&stc=1&d=1152396188)

Strattonport

July 8th, 2006, 10:59 PM

If a ferry is indeed run to the area, where would it dock?

As for the surrounding area, the city is pursuing firms to develop general plans for how they'd redevelop Willets Point. Unsurprisingly, local businesses in the area are crying out, saying their businesses are at stake (nevermind the massive environmental damage...).

ramvid01

July 9th, 2006, 02:13 AM

the ferry would probably dock to the north of shea, since there is a waterway there (flushing basin/river?).

Transic

July 10th, 2006, 04:15 AM

While all Met fans rejoice at a long awaited and desperately needed new venue, I am still dogged by it's location...still within eye and earsore of Laguardia's traffic. We've all lived with it for so long that it became part of the "experience" and taken for granted that it was what it was. But now that there is an opportunity to start anew, it seems like a waste not to be able to move the stadium away from the air traffic pollution.

Yes, the area of the parking surface lot by Shea is the worst possible location to build the new Mets ballpark in Queens...except for all the other possible locations in the borough. It isn't just a political problem from the Mets' standpoint. Any realistic locations in Queens would either: not be as accessible as the current Shea location; would require purchasing several private lots; owned by a quasi-governmental agency or entity for functions deemed too important to discontinue (i.e. JFK and LaGuardia); located in areas zoned for only residential; be located in areas not served well by subway/bus. At least one of those factors come into play the minute you start looking away from Shea.

It may look like an eyesore but it's the best place available, unless they'd be willing to entertain locations outside the borough. Sunnyside railyards has the space but you need to build a platform over it, which makes it too expensive. Long Island City near the 59th Street Bridge could work but I don't think that area could handle the traffic and it's hard to get there, anyway. Also, the city wants residential development there. And forget about taking away any more parkland from Flushing Meadows. The Shea area is convenient in terms of access from different areas of the city, with roads on its perimeters, NYC Transit and LIRR. Finally and, perhaps most importantly, the city set aside that space there for the very purpose of attracting major league sporting events into the city. It just so happens that it's inconveniently located underneath a designated flight path (except for when the U.S. Open is in town - I marvel at how these people can make that happen ;)).

peterd

July 14th, 2006, 11:49 AM

Normally I'm a big fan of the retro look in stadiums - Coors Field, Camden Yards, and whatever the name of where the SF Giants play are all delightful places to watch a game.

However, I think it's all wrong for the new Mets stadium. It's all context. The other examples I mentioned are well-integrated into the surrounding neighborhoods. If the new Mets stadium were in downtown Flushing or downtown Jamaica or downtown Long Island City (or heaven forbid, downtown Brooklyn :-) , then I'd say the Ebbets-field design would be perfect. As it is, it's surrounded by highways - people don't walk up to it, people drive by at 50 miles an hour (or fly over it at 150 miles an hour). *That's* the place for a grand Gehry or Calatrava statement.

But that's just my probably minority opinion. And I think downtown Jamaica would be a better place for the stadium, too.

Transic

July 14th, 2006, 04:23 PM

http://www.queenstribune.com/news/1152869169.html

Mets Stadium Finances Get OK From City IDA

By JEFF FEINMAN

The New York Mets had their city funded financial assistance approved on Tuesday by the New York City Industrial Development Agency, and the beginning of construction on their new stadium came a step closer.

Both the Mets and Yankees new stadium projects are expected to bring in more than $1.5 billion in private investment to the Bronx and Flushing, and will relieve the city from very high maintenance and capital repair costs.

“The new stadium for the Mets will give a tremendous boost to the local economy of Flushing and will be a major New York City attraction for a long time to come,” said Interim IDA Chairman Joshua Sirefman. “I’m pleased that today’s board approval set the stage for this project to move forward so the team can start building the stadium.”

For the Mets $600 million stadium, the IDA will issue about $528 million in tax-exempt bonds and $104 million in taxable bonds. The taxable bonds will be payable through the team’s rent payments.

According to City Council Finance Committee Chairman David Weprin (D-Hollis), the new stadium is expected to create more than 3,500 direct jobs and a total of more than 6,000 jobs through direct and indirect employment.
The new 44,000 seat stadium, slated to open in 2009, will mimic the brick façade of the legendary Ebbets Field and will offer many state-of-the-art amenities, such as a left-field restaurant and a spacious interactive media center.

The deal is now contingent upon the Internal Revenue Service approving the issuance of tax-exempt bonds for most of the financing, considered by insiders to merely be a formality. Site preparation has already begun in Shea Stadium’s parking lot.

nycla3

July 15th, 2006, 08:47 AM

So the Mets are going to be stuck with it's current location within a foul ball of the LaGuardia flightpaths. Then why turn the stadium on its homeplate-centerfield axis 45 degrees to the north so the open face in the outfield provides even more invasive views and sounds of take-off's?

I'm going to presume that someone has thought this through and made a concious decision to do this, but there has got to be a better way to limit the air traffic's intrusion to players and fans alike.http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2067&stc=1&d=1152963393

Strattonport

July 15th, 2006, 12:17 PM

Hmm, the new stadium is closer to the junkyards. They better get rid of them by the time construction is complete.

BPC

July 15th, 2006, 12:44 PM

Ninjahedge

July 17th, 2006, 10:35 AM

I agree. Love it or hate it, contextualism is all about CONTEXT. The context here is a bunch of highways. Retro does not work on this site.

So you are suggesting a mini-mall motif? :rolleyes:

lofter1

July 17th, 2006, 10:39 AM

pianoman11686

July 17th, 2006, 10:49 AM

This is why a stadium like that could never be built here in the states:

Calculated on a construction cost of $325 million, which is in itself about a tenth of what it would cost if it was built in the West...

Could you imagine the kind of uproar that would be caused if a city wanted to build a 3.25 billion-dollar stadium? I don't know any team that would be able to afford even half of that. And that's probably still far less than what it would cost to build in New York. Think closer to 4 billion.

mkeit

July 17th, 2006, 01:21 PM

Foundation work is well under way-over a hundred piles have been driven with a lot more located on site.

Ninjahedge

July 17th, 2006, 03:09 PM

Forget "retro" ... I'd say let's go for something more along these lines ...

LINK (http://www.danda.be/outdata/?dreview=96&category)

THREAD (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3756&highlight=herzog+beijing)

http://www.danda.be/data/reviews/96/1.jpg

There are engineers here at the office that are wincing at that design even as we speak Loft...

To me, it reminds me of that orange 1969 spun glass lamp my grandmother used to have in teh living room.... :P

(sorry, just not my pref!)

TallGuy

July 17th, 2006, 03:45 PM

Forget "retro" ... I'd say let's go for something more along these lines ...

LINK (http://www.danda.be/outdata/?dreview=96&category)

THREAD (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3756&highlight=herzog+beijing)

http://www.danda.be/data/reviews/96/1.jpg

What a piece of crap. I am a huge baseball fan, and when I go to a park, I want a true baseball park experience, not something designed by some drunken frenchman or Daniel Libeskind. The shadows that would be cast by the birdsnest roof upon the field would also be unnacceptable.

Ninjahedge

July 17th, 2006, 03:51 PM

TG, it's a soccer stadium..... ;)

TallGuy

July 17th, 2006, 05:01 PM

TG, it's a soccer stadium..... ;)

AHA! More reasons to prefer baseball! :)

nycla3

July 19th, 2006, 08:36 AM

The comments about the stadium being put into the context of the site were very interesting (I was at Wrigley on Sunday for the first time in ages....talk about context...one of the best places on earth!), and I've already squawked about the air traffic at the Shea site, but since I'm a glass-half-full sorta guy, I'll take anything over that dog-food bowl we play in now.

I'll ask for one contextual item, though:

I hope the architects and engineeers are paying close attention to the...ya know...little things...like enough square footage in the restrooms to accomodate a stadium full...I was delighted by Wrigley's very conventional and traditional solution...troughs instead of individual urinals...made for a very agreeable and quick "event"....ya know...in context. :)

ablarc

July 19th, 2006, 08:46 AM

I was delighted by Wrigley's very conventional and traditional solution...troughs instead of individual urinals...made for a very agreeable and quick "event"....ya know...in context. :)
Not everyone's cup of tea...er, I mean, pee...

Transic

July 19th, 2006, 09:53 PM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601089&sid=akwbRqfxcDeM&refer=home

New York Gets IRS Approval on Baseball Stadium Bonds (Update1)

July 19 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Internal Revenue Service ruled in favor of New York City's plan to issue $1.5 billion of tax-exempt bonds for baseball's Yankees and Mets to build new stadiums.

The long-anticipated ruling follows the approval of the financing package by the New York City Industrial Development Agency July 11 and clears the way for the city to sell the debt next month.

"I'm glad the IRS confirmed we could help make these projects happen by authorizing tax-exempt bonds, the result of which actually will mean increased tax revenue for New York City,'' Joshua J. Sirefman, the development agency's interim chairman said in a statement.

The U.S. tax code limits the amount of tax-exempt bonds states and local governments may issue for private purposes. In its ruling, the IRS permitted the teams to pay off the bonds by making payments in lieu of taxes, or PILOT's, which are structured to resemble a city property tax.

The Yankees will get about $920 million in low-interest tax-exempt bonds and $25 million in taxable bonds to build its new stadium in the Bronx just north of the existing Yankee Stadium. The project will create about 9,700 construction jobs and 615 permanent jobs, according to the development agency.

August Sales

For the new Mets stadium, the development authority will issue about $528 million in tax-exempt bonds and $104 million in taxable bonds. The new Mets stadium, to be built in Flushing, Queens, just beyond the centerfield fence at Shea Stadium where the Mets now play, will create about 6,100 construction jobs and 970 permanent jobs, the agency said.

The development authority plans to issue the bonds on behalf of the Yankees in mid-August, said spokesman Andrew Brent. The team tapped Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Bank of America to manage the bond issue. Citigroup Inc. will manage the Mets bond sale, which is planned for mid-to-late August, Brent said.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://ny.metro.us/metro/local/article/Mets_get_transit_money/3522.html

Mets get transit money

by patrick arden / metro new york
JUL 20, 2006

QUEENS — The Long Island Rail Road approved an $8 million study yesterday to develop better train and subway service to the new Mets’ stadium. The proposed improvements — including rehabilitating the LIRR station, replacing the stairs at the Willets Point-Shea Stadium station and building a parking platform — are meant to improve fan access.

The study will also consider long-range transit improvements, including directing LIRR service from lines other than the Port Washington branch. Such suggestions come after the MTA’s decision to spend $40 million on a new Metro-North station at Yankee Stadium, with the money coming from an abandoned project to extend the N train to LaGuardia Airport. The Mets and the city have asked the MTA for “a similar level of commitment.”

City Councilman John Liu, D-Queens, has called the LaGuardia money, now at $212 million, a “slush fund.”

“I like what they’re planning to do around Shea Stadium, and I support the new Metro-North station,” Liu said yesterday. “What continues to disturb me is that the MTA still has hundreds of millions sitting around. How long are they expecting to keep this lying around?”

Liu wonders why the MTA can spend on new projects after abandoning plans to renovate 12 subway stations. “They canceled these because they were short a few hundred million,” he said.

LIRR Chairman David Mack said the Mets’ study was an “important” and appropriate use of funds.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/20/nyregion/20station.htm

After Rail Station Promise to Yankees, M.T.A. to Give Equal Treatment to Mets

By THOMAS J. LUECK (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/l/thomas_j_lueck/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: July 20, 2006

Three months after committing $40 million to a new Metro-North rail station at Yankee Stadium, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority yesterday signaled its intent to spend as much for improvements on subway and rail links to Shea Stadium.

The plan for Shea, which the authority has said is needed to extend equal treatment to the city’s two major league baseball clubs, won preliminary approval from the Long Island Rail Road committee of the authority’s board. At a meeting yesterday, the committee recommended that $8 million be spent over the next two years to study long-term transit improvements for Shea, and to undertake minor improvements to the stadium’s existing subway and commuter rail platforms.

The committee also voted to make a “similar level of commitment” to Shea that it had made with the $40 million authorized for a Bronx rail station near Yankee Stadium. The recommendations need the approval of other committees, including one of New York City Transit’s, which operates the subways, as well as the authority’s full board.

But approval is widely anticipated when the full board meets on Wednesday, since Peter Kalikow, the authority’s chairman, has implied publicly that he supports the plan. The Yankees and Mets, both planning new stadiums next to their current ballfields, have said that they need better links to public transportation.

Yesterday’s vote, although expected, provoked a fresh round of questions about the authority’s spending from some transit advocates, since neither the Yankees nor the Mets have committed any of their own money to the transit projects.
“The M.T.A. is starved for bucks,” said Gene Russianoff, staff attorney for the Straphangers Campaign. “If the Yankees and Mets want these improvements, they should participate financially.”

Timothy O’Brien, a spokesman for the authority, declined to say whether the Mets had been asked by the authority to help defray the cost of the proposed Shea Stadium transit improvements. He said any such request would “depend on the feasibility study and what it calls for.” A spokesman for the Mets, Jay Horowitz, declined to comment.

The transit projects planned for the stadiums would be paid for, at least in part, by what is left of $645 million that the authority set aside in the 1990’s to extend subway access to La Guardia Airport. That project, championed by former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, never got off the ground, and the authority has used about half of the leftover money to buy several private bus lines and build a new bus depot on Staten Island.

John C. Liu, chairman of the City Council’s Transportation Committee and a frequent critic of the authority, called the money left over from the 1990’s “a slush fund” that should be spent more aggressively on transit improvements.
Yesterday, he said that the plan for Shea was “good news for Mets fans,” but that the authority’s management of its own finances “still leaves a lot to be desired.”

Mr. Liu’s district in Flushing lies just east of Shea Stadium, and his constituents would benefit from improved subway and Long Island Rail Road stations. While he did not directly criticize the preliminary transit plan for Shea, he admonished the authority to pay for other improvements.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/ny-lishea0720,0,7027467.story?coll=ny-linews-headlines

MTA to spend $8M on subway and LIRR to Shea

BY SAMUEL BRUCHEY
Newsday Staff Writer

July 19, 2006, 8:38 PM EDT

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is stepping up to the plate for the first-place Mets, offering to spend $8 million on subway and commuter rail enhancements to Shea Stadium.

In addition to the $8 million, the MTA pledges that the Mets will be treated as equals to their crosstown rivals. In April, the MTA committed to shelling out $40 million on a Metro-North station at Yankee Stadium.

"A similar level of commitment is anticipated for access improvements for Shea Stadium and the surrounding area," according to an internal MTA summary outlining the proposed Shea Stadium access enhancements.

The offer comes three months after one MTA board member raised concerns about transit options to the ballpark. It was unanimously approved Wednesday by the MTA's Long Island Rail Road Committee and will be voted on by the full MTA board next week.

"I'm very pleased," said board member Mitchell Pally, who in April wrote a letter to MTA executive director Katherine Lapp about public transit for home games.

"Access to the stadium, especially for Long Island fans, has been intolerable," Pally said.

With the ballclub surging, attendance at home games has soared 15 percent over last year. Meanwhile, construction on a new stadium has reduced the number of available parking spaces.

In the short term, improvements would be largely cosmetic, the MTA said. Part of the money would be used to paint the No. 7 train subway stop at Shea Stadium and repair a wooden staircase leading to Roosevelt Avenue.

Repairs also would be made to the canopy over the LIRR Shea Stadium station, and to refurbish its staircases and install additional lighting.

Currently, the LIRR has a Shea Stadium stop only on its Port Washington branch. But parking along that line is resident-restricted.

Passengers on other LIRR branches, which funnel through the main line between Jamaica and Penn Station, must pass the stadium, get off at Woodside, then take the No. 7 train back to Shea.

At least $500,000 of the $8 million would go to studying the feasibility of a new LIRR stop on the main line. No time frame on the study was given.

Apart from the $8-million proposal, the MTA is also talking with the Mets and New York about additional improvements at Shea, including refurbishing a pedestrian bridge over Roosevelt Avenue and the entrance leading to both the subway and LIRR station.

Outerbanks Lookout

July 20th, 2006, 05:16 PM

I can't believe the triple threat we're witnessing...No matter what your opinion is on the three proposed/UC stadiums, this is definitely a positive thing for NYC, as a whole.

lofter1

July 20th, 2006, 05:39 PM

Let's wait and see how much the stadiums / extras cost the tax-paying citizens before we start jumping for joy ...

pianoman11686

July 20th, 2006, 05:48 PM

We already know how much they're costing. It may seem like a lot, nominally, but when you factor in how much larger New York City's tax base is relative to other cities, as well as how much smaller the fraction of taxpayer's total cost is for each of these stadiums relative to most other stadiums, then I'd say they're pretty fair.

Outerbanks Lookout

July 20th, 2006, 05:57 PM

I thought the tax abatement, or 'break', was supposed to be equal btw shea and yankee stadium???

lofter1

July 20th, 2006, 07:07 PM

They may have put numbers on paper, but you know how that can change...

Plus they haven't figured out the real costs for things like the new train stations ... MTA says $40M / $8M but no way are those the final costs.

Transic

July 27th, 2006, 11:50 PM

http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/060727/b072760.html

Structal gets $70-million contract for the New York Mets new ballpark
12:47:07 EDT Jul 27, 2006

BOUCHERVILLE, Que. (CP) - Canam Group Inc. (TSX:CAM.A) says its Structal steel division in the United States has won a contract to fabricate and erect steel for the new stadium being built for the New York Mets baseball team.

Canam said that Structal, based in Point of Rocks, Md., had won a contract from the HuntBovis Strategic Alliance joint venture to fabricate and erect the new stadium for the Mets, who have played in Shea Stadium since the mid-1960s.

The ballpark construction costs are estimated at around $600 million US, about $700 million Cdn, with Structal's contract worth about $70 million.

"We are confident this contract will allow Structal to strengthen its position as leader in the construction of complex sports facilities and convention centres," said Luc Pelland, president of Structal.

"The recognition of our expertise and our commitment to the satisfaction of our customers are the key elements which enabled us to secure this contract," added Charlie Watson, president of Structal's U.S. division.

Fabrication of the steel structure will begin this fall at several of Canam Group's plants, including one in St-Gedeon, Que.. Steel erection is scheduled to begin next January and will be completed in the 2007 fourth quarter.

Hunt Construction Group, a U.S. builder of sports stadiums and convention centres and Bovis Lend Lease, a construction management and consulting firm, formed a strategic alliance to build sports stadiums in the New York area.

The open-air ballpark will be built in the outfield parking lot between Shea Stadium and 126th Street and the stadium will have capacity for about 45,000 fans.

Construction is expected to be completed by the beginning of the 2009 season.

Structal and Canam Group have been associated with other large construction projects, including NFL football stadiums for the New England Patriots and Philadelphia Eagles, convention centres in Boston and Connecticut, the Niagara Falls Casino, airports in Toronto and Montreal and a number of aluminum smelters.

Canam Group Inc. is an industrial company which operates 11 plants specializing in the design and fabrication of construction products. The company employs close to 3,000 people, has operations in Canada, the United States, Romania and India as well as partnerships around the world. Canam shares were halted pending news of the contract at $10.46, down five cents on the day, on the Toronto Stock Exchange.

Transic

August 10th, 2006, 12:39 AM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a2uoXKCRvK4w&refer=news

Yankees, Mets Bonds Get Investment-Grade Ratings (Update1)

Aug. 9 (Bloomberg) -- Some $1.6 billion of bonds to be sold by a New York City agency this month to pay for new stadiums for Major League Baseball's Yankees and Mets won investment-grade ratings from Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's.

Ballpark ticket sales and luxury suite rentals at both stadiums -- and in the Mets' case, concessions, merchandise, naming rights and parking -- should provide enough revenue to back the bonds with a combination of payments in lieu of real estate taxes and rent, the rating companies said. The bonds are rated Baa3 and BBB- by Moody's and S&P, respectively, the lowest investment-grade rank, with a stable outlook.

"Everything at the end of the day is fairly equal'' with regard to the two projects' creditworthiness, said S&P analyst Jodi Hecht. "One project may have more strengths than others, which is offset by other weaknesses, and vice versa. The legal provisions are very similar.''

Hecht described the investment-grade rating "a difficult threshold'' for a publicly funded stadium to obtain. The teams' fan bases and their location in the largest U.S. media market, as well as the structure of the bonds, makes it likely the debt will be repaid, she said.

The Yankees were granted about $930 million in tax-exempt bond financing and $25 million in taxable bonds from the New York City Industrial Development Agency to build a stadium in the Bronx just north of the existing Yankee Stadium. For the new Mets stadium, to be located in Flushing, Queens, near the team's current home at Shea Stadium, the agency will issue about $548 million in tax-exempt bonds and $65 million in taxable debt.

Insured

Both bond issues will be insured, which will raise the debt's creditworthiness to the highest rating of AAA, S&P and Moody's said in separate reports. The new Yankee Stadium bonds will be insured by MBIA Insurance Corp. and Federal Guaranty Insurance Co., while Ambac Assurance Corp. will insure the bond issue for the Mets' ballpark, S&P said.

In giving the Yankee Stadium bonds a stable outlook, S&P said it reflects the company's belief that stadium "construction will be completed as scheduled and within budget and that the project will perform in line with the forecast.''

"This project is strong because it's a very strong market, it's a popular team with historically strong attendance,'' Hecht said.

Both stadiums' debt-payment structure gives bondholders more security because they will have a tax lien on the stadiums, giving the city the right to foreclose on the property, in the event of a default, Hecht said. In addition, both teams have agreed not to relocate during the 40-year term of the bonds.

Risks

Risks to both projects, which are to be completed in time for a 2009 opening, include the possibility of construction delays and cost overruns, competition within the entertainment and leisure market and a poor team performance that could lower attendance. This year Yankee executives have said the team's ticket sales are on course to attract a record-breaking attendance of 4.5 million.

The transactions, which depend upon payments in lieu of taxes, known as PILOTS, to back the bonds, contain a small degree of risk in the "unlikely event the city's property valuations or assessment ratios decrease,'' Hecht said, because the amount paid by each team to the city is limited to how much their property tax liability would be if they owned the land upon which the stadiums are situated.

Both teams will set up private companies that will pay back the bonds through PILOTs.

"The financing company is legally separate from the team'' in both cases, Hecht said. ``In both cases, the team is rated below the projects and this is typical of all financings of this type for stadiums.''

Naming Rights

The new Mets stadium will seat about 45,000 people, fewer than the 56,000-capacity Shea Stadium, and is being designed to look something like Ebbets Field, former home of the Brooklyn Dodgers, according to bond sale documents. The Mets are searching for a naming-rights sponsor for the new stadium, which analysts have said could bring in $10 million a year.

The new Yankees ballpark, which will break ground next week, is to seat about 53,000 people, and is to maintain the same playing field dimensions of the existing stadium while expanding space for restaurants, concourses and media facilities. From the outside, the stadium is intended to be reminiscent of the original 1923 Yankee Stadium before it was renovated in the 1970s, with a limestone-based exterior, arches, a grand entrance and a roof-top frieze, bond documents say.

In the Yankee Stadium transaction, which is scheduled to price next week, $930 million of the bond issue would be tax exempt and paid back through PILOTs. Another $25 million in bonds would be taxable, and would carry higher interest rates, to be paid back by the Yankees in the form of rent to the city.

Moody's cited the 2 1/2-year construction period as creating "the most risk to the credit rating.'' Some of the construction costs have already been fixed by contracts that have been signed, mitigating the risk to the transaction. Incentives for completing the Yankee Stadium project on time, and the penalty of foreclosure in the event the team defaulted on its payments reduced the risks to the transaction, the credit-rating company said.

In the event of a baseball strike, the Yankees have no obligation to refund ticket or luxury suite sales, Moody's analysts noted, which is another risk-mitigating provision in the transaction. At the same time, the Moody's analysts said, "lower-than-projected ticket sales could pressure the finances of the team.''

To contact the reporter on this story:
Henry Goldman in New York City Hall at
hgoldman@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 9, 2006 17:05 EDT

LeCom

August 10th, 2006, 09:30 PM

I'm pretty sure it just officially broke ground today.

Ninjahedge

August 11th, 2006, 09:59 AM

YS did just break ground yesterday, so I hear.

The mets are already driving piles.

Transic

August 11th, 2006, 11:23 PM

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=e3ccaff4-55d2-4f42-bed2-91018609ae66&k=54469

Canam Group scores with new stadium projects, including New York Mets ballpark

Luann Lasalle, Canadian Press
Published: Friday, August 11, 2006

BOUCHERVILLE, Que. (CP) - From baseball players to shoppers, they're hitting homeruns in stadiums or hunting for bargains in big-box stores made of steel fabricated by Quebec's Canam Group Inc. (TSX:CAM.A).

Canam scored again when it recently won a $70-million contract to fabricate steel for the New York Mets new baseball stadium, a 45,000-seat stadium set to open in 2009 in suburban New York.

"We've done dozens of stadiums in the last 15 years, whether it's where the Boston Bruins, Boston Celtics, Otttawa Senators, Toronto Raptors, or the Foxborough stadium where the New England Patriots play," said president and chief operating officer Marc Dutil.

Canam has also fabricated steel for stadiums where the NFL's Philadelphia Eagles, baseball's Philadelphia Phillies and the NBA's Miami Heat and NFL's Miami Panthers all play, he said.

"Over the years, we have accumulated a very large portfolio of stadiums," Dutil said in an interview with The Canadian Press at Canam headquarters in Boucherville, near Montreal.

Big-box stores are also part of Canam's work.

The steel in the roofs of Canada's Home Depot, Wal-Mart and Canadian Tire stores is manufactured by Canam.

"It's not sexy, OK, but if there's an earthquake, a storm, a tornado and there's four feet of snow on that roof, you want it to hold," Dutil said.

"We actually have a market share of about 70 per cent in Canada for those structures. So everyday you're under a Canam roof, you're over a Canam bridge, you're in a Canam building. We have the capacity to supply approximately one million square-feet of construction per day."

Canam also fabricated the steel, 33,000 U.S. tons, for the Boston Convention and Exhibition Centre, which Dutil said is "the largest job we've ever done."

Analyst Frederic Bastien said the stadium-arena market is a tough one.

"Typically, these contracts are very fiercely competed for and margins are not necessarily the most attractive," said Bastien of Raymond James Ltd. in Vancouver.

"But we think with this project (Mets stadium) just the fact that the environment is much better that they're going to be able to make good money out of it. They have a long track record of building stadiums."

Canam's first foray into sports stadiums was the arena for the Boston Bruins - originally called the Fleet Centre but now named the TD Banknorth Garden.

"My father in 1992 was given the opportunity to bid on the Boston Bruins arena - it was the closest large American city to the plant in St-Gedeon (Quebec). We all told him including myself, 'You're crazy. We've never done that,' but we built it."

Father Marcel is CEO and chairman of the board of the publicly traded industrial company, which has about 3,000 employees at 11 plants in Canada, the United States, India and Romania.

The company, formerly known as Canam Manac Group Inc. began operations as Canam Steel Works in 1960 and made industrial steel and equipment for the construction, forestry and transportation industries, including semi-trailers for trucks.

However, the company completed a strategic restructuring in 2004 that led to the sale of its Canam truck trailer division and Tanguay Industries unit.

Earlier, Canam sold its joist and steel deck operations in the United States and Mexico as it streamlined to focus on steel for construction projects, inclunding convention centres and stadiums.

Dutil said his father "didn't hire any analysts to tell him that the stadium market will be great in the next 20 years."

"I think he thought it was the right thing to do and then he worked hard to prove it right."

For the Mets stadium, 700 trucks will haul steel from the Canam plant in St-Gedeon where its workers will "assemble the pieces for erection on site."

"They all go together like Lego blocks."

Canam, which once generated annual sales of more than $1 billion before its streamlining a few years ago, earned a net profit of $38.7 million on sales of $713 million last year.

In trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange on Thursday, Canam shares fell 11 cents to close at $9.89, a drop of about one per cent.

pianoman11686

August 12th, 2006, 12:41 AM

This has to be one of the poorest examples of accurate journalism I've ever read. And this is supposed to be a major newspaper in Canada? Just a few of the glaring errors:

"...the New York Mets new baseball stadium, a 45,000-seat stadium set to open in 2009 in suburban New York."

Last time I checked, Queens was considered an urban county, and a physical part of New York City.

"We've done dozens of stadiums in the last 15 years, whether it's where the Boston Bruins, Boston Celtics, Otttawa Senators, Toronto Raptors, or the Foxborough stadium where the New England Patriots play," said president and chief operating officer Marc Dutil."

The Boston Bruins and Celtics both play in the same stadium. And the Patriots play at the Gillette Stadium, in Foxboro, Massachusetts.

"Canam has also fabricated steel for stadiums where the NFL's Philadelphia Eagles, baseball's Philadelphia Phillies and the NBA's Miami Heat and NFL's Miami Panthers all play, he said."

There's no such thing as the Miami Panthers. It's either the Miami Dolphins, or the Carolina Panthers.

Hmm. Three consecutive sentences in an article, and at least one error in each one. I think that deserves a firing. Did the author of this article do any research at all?

Citytect

August 12th, 2006, 02:31 AM

Well, the second one really doesn't have an error other than the misspelling of Foxboro. It's a quote. The quote may be a little disingenuous, but it's technically correct. He said they've fabricated the steel for stadiums where those teams play. Which is true. And I don't think he was calling Gillette Stadium, Foxboro Stadium - just using the location for descriptive purpose (probably because he forget the stadium's official name).

But yeah, Queens isn't suburban - No team called Miami Panthers: Stupid mistakes.

ablarc

August 12th, 2006, 09:21 AM

yeah, Queens isn't suburban
I dunno...

ramvid01

August 12th, 2006, 01:18 PM

I dunno...

ablarc, may I ask what part of Queens you have been in?

ablarc

August 12th, 2006, 04:25 PM

ablarc, may I ask what part of Queens you have been in?
Long Island City, Astoria, Sunnyside, Woodside, Jackson Heights, Corona, Forest Hills, Kew Gardens, Jamaica, Bayside, Ozone Park, Breezy Point, Queens Village, Far Rockaway. I lived in New York for years, and my girlfriend's folks lived in Huntington. We used to detour through different parts of Queens getting back and forth on long, lazy weekend trips.

ramvid, I think of places as suburban where you're at a disadvantage without a car. That's true of Staten Island and all parts of Queens I've seen --starting with Long Island City. Some parts are very nice, most parts have some urban characteristics (places where significant numbers of people walk), but I never saw a place in Queens where I would want to live without a car.

The exact opposite is true of Manhattan; I wouldn't dream of owning a car if I lived there, even if I were wealthy. I could rent a car any time I wanted to go out of town or to the suburbs --such as Queens.

ramvid01

August 12th, 2006, 05:35 PM

Long Island City, Astoria, Sunnyside, Woodside, Jackson Heights, Corona, Forest Hills, Kew Gardens, Jamaica, Bayside, Ozone Park, Breezy Point, Queens Village, Far Rockaway. I lived in New York for years, and my girlfriend's folks lived in Huntington. We used to detour through different parts of Queens getting back and forth on long, lazy weekend trips.

ramvid, I think of places as suburban where you're at a disadvantage without a car. That's true of Staten Island and all parts of Queens I've seen --starting with Long Island City. Some parts are very nice, most parts have some urban characteristics (places where significant numbers of people walk), but I never saw a place in Queens where I would want to live without a car.

The exact opposite is true of Manhattan; I wouldn't dream of owning a car if I lived there, even if I were wealthy. I could rent a car any time I wanted to go out of town or to the suburbs --such as Queens.

Oh? I live in Woodside and I don't own a car and i never found myself at a disadvantage. In fact I can feel the same way for most of Queens west of Flushing Meadows, can't say the same for some places east (except Flushing and Jamaica).

ablarc

August 12th, 2006, 06:52 PM

I don't own a car and i never found myself at a disadvantage.
We have different standards for personal convenience. ;)

Dynamicdezzy

August 12th, 2006, 07:19 PM

I would say Forest Hills is ideal for public transportation and auto usage. Not only do you get the urban feel by standing on queens blvd or on austin street but once you cross the LIRR tracks its completely suburban. Its the best of both worlds.

ablarc

August 12th, 2006, 08:08 PM

Not only do you get the urban feel by standing on queens blvd or on austin street but once you cross the LIRR tracks its completely suburban. Its the best of both worlds.
You said it, Queens at its best. Forest Hills just might be the country's best suburb --and precisely because of its urbanity.

pianoman11686

August 12th, 2006, 11:23 PM

There may be certain sections of Queens that resemble suburbs, but for the most part it's a fairly crowded and urban place. I don't think any county with a population density of >20,000 people per sqaure mile, that's served by 12 different subway lines, should qualify as being "suburban." You don't ever see anything like this in Queens:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Cincinnati-suburbs-tract-housing.jpg/800px-Cincinnati-suburbs-tract-housing.jpg

sfenn1117

August 13th, 2006, 12:07 AM

Not at all. But amazingly, you don't have to go far into Nassau to see something very similar to that photo. Seeing as Queens has several subway lines, and of course bus lines, there are plenty of areas where cars aren't necessary.

pianoman11686

August 13th, 2006, 12:35 AM

Yeah, it's all relative. There are very few real "cities" in the US, at least, where most people don't need a car. And I'm not just talking about cities like Los Angeles or Houston, which are more like suburbs with a small, dense commercial core surrounded by freeways. I'd say most of us here would consider San Francisco an "urban" city, but when I was there, I saw that almost every residential neighborhood within the city limits had single-family homes, each with its own driveway and garage.

When I used to live in Bayside, Queens, which is probably one of, if not the most, "suburban" area in the borough, my parents each had a car. My dad needed it to get to work in Bensonhurst, and my mom needed it to get to the train station to get to work in Great Neck, and later, Manhattan, and to take me to school (although I also walked to and from school on several occasions). But, we hardly ever used a car to get groceries. A commercial street was only a 5 minute walk away, and everything was there - Post office, pharmacy, grocery store, barber, bank, restaurants, fast food, Blockbuster (you get the picture). Basically, everything that we have to hop in the car to get to in New Jersey was a short walk away in Queens. I think that, more than anything, is symbolic of a suburb.

Transic

August 14th, 2006, 03:01 PM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=albSXz4RiXsE&refer=us

New York Mets, Yankees Vie for Fans in Municipal Bond Market

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The Yankees and Mets will take turns at bat in the municipal bond market this week as the two New York City baseball teams sell about $1.57 billion of bonds to finance the construction of new stadiums.

Both teams' bonds, which are being offered in two separate sales, are to be repaid by stadium revenue with similar legal provisions through the same city agency. Both were assigned the same credit ratings, and are to be insured against default.

"It may be a referendum on how many Mets fans we have in the municipal market and how many Yankee fans,'' said Joseph Darcy, who manages about $4 billion in municipal bonds for Dreyfus Corp. in New York, including a $1.3 billion New York mutual fund.

The Mets will lead things off tomorrow when they are to issue $547.5 million of tax-exempt bonds and $65.5 million of taxable debt. Citigroup Inc. is leading a group of seven banks managing the sale. Joseph Christinat, a spokesman for the New York-based bank, declined to comment.

The Yankees will begin offering $955 million of stadium bonds to individual investors Aug. 16, and then will sell the debt to mutual funds and other institutions the next day. New York-based Goldman Sachs Group Inc. is leading a group of five investment banks managing the sale.

"We are anticipating a tremendous amount of interest,'' said Gregory Carey, Goldman's lead banker on the sale. "There aren't a lot of Yankee Stadiums around.''

Darcy, a Long Island native who backs the Yankees although he said he is more of a football fan, also predicted interest will be high.

Fan Appeal

Die-hard fans and people piqued by the chance to invest in the stadiums may drive down yields, even though the bonds carry the lowest investment-grade credit ratings of Baa3 by Moody's Investors Service and BBB- by Standard & Poor's, Darcy said. That may lead to lower borrowing costs for the teams, and less interest income for investors.

"The reception of this thing is going to be stronger than the credit fundamentals,'' Darcy said. "And I think the pricing will reflect that, much to my own consternation.''

Both Darcy and municipal bond analyst Richard Larkin of J.B. Hanauer & Co. in Parsippany, New Jersey, said the additional demand means yields on the debt may be comparable, or even below, yields on higher-rated insured New York bonds.

Known Quantity

The Municipal Market Data index of yields for top-rated debt last week stood at 3.93 percent for 10-year debt and 4.39 percent for 30-year debt. Darcy said insured New York bonds generally trade at about 0.10 percentage point above those levels, meaning bonds due in 2016 would yield 4.03 percent and bonds due 2036 would yield 4.49 percent.

"It'll do as good or better than that,'' said Larkin, a fan of the Yankees since growing up in Queens in the 1960s. "It's not like a bond salesman calling to sell school district bonds from Punxsutawney, PA. Everybody's an expert on the Yankees or Mets.''

The sales follow an offering in May of $456.4 million of bonds to finance a new ballpark for baseball's Washington Nationals. The $354.9 million of tax-exempt debt sold as part of the issue priced at yields ranging from 3.6 percent on bonds due in 2007 to 4.87 percent for debt due 2036.

The Washington bonds, like those being sold this week, are insured, though their underlying ratings are two levels higher by Moody's and one rank higher by S&P.

Nostalgic Designs

The ballparks in New York are to open in 2009, and are being built next to the existing stadiums.

The Mets new park in Queens is to seat 45,000 people and is designed to be reminiscent of Ebbets Field, former home of the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Mets plan to re-name the stadium and are searching for a naming-rights sponsor.

The new Yankee Stadium, which is to break ground this week in the Bronx, is to seat about 53,000 people. The playing field is to maintain the same dimensions as the existing ballpark, while expanding the area for restaurants and concourses. From the outside, the new park is to look like the original 1923 Yankee Stadium, before it was renovated in the 1970s, with a limestone- based exterior, arches and a roof-top frieze.

Litigation by a group of residents suing to block the new stadium because it is displacing a park is cited in the bond-sale prospectus as a potential risk, along with possible construction delays, cost overruns, declining ticket sales, player strikes and terrorist attacks. A New York state supreme court judge is to consider the group's arguments at a hearing scheduled for this morning in Manhattan.

Long Time Coming

The stadiums were sought by both teams prior to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the sales are being issued through the New York City Industrial Development Agency. Goldman's Carey said the firm has been putting the Yankee financing together since November 2004.

"For once, New York City is going to get phenomenal facilities to go watch baseball games at,'' Carey said.

New York is tapping the bond market along with other U.S. states and local governments that are scheduled to sell a combined $7.47 billion of municipal bonds this week, an increase of 20.7 percent from last week.

Other big sales include $500 million of Massachusetts general obligation bonds to be issued Aug. 17 in a sale managed by UBS AG. The Massachusetts bonds will be sold the same day as the $955 million Yankee bonds, all but $25 million of which will be tax-exempt debt.

Massachusetts' assistant treasurer Patrick Landers said he doubts the Yankee sale will draw investors away from the state's deal, noting many of his buyers are residents of "Red Sox Nation'' -- and fans of the Yankees' archrivals in Boston.

"They'd have to offer some pretty high yields,'' Landers said.

To contact the reporter on this story:Eddie Baeb in Chicago at ebaeb@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 14, 2006 07:44 EDT

OmegaNYC

August 14th, 2006, 07:28 PM

NoyokA

August 16th, 2006, 04:20 PM

Construction photos have been posted here:

http://www.stadiumpage.com/

Transic

August 17th, 2006, 03:51 PM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=absOisGImeOc&refer=home

Yankees Get Lower Rate Than Mets on Stadium Municipal Bonds

Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- The New York Yankees and the New York Mets have almost identical records, leading their divisions in Major League Baseball. In the municipal bond market, the Yanks are beating their crosstown rivals.

The teams raised $1.57 billion this week to pay for new stadiums. The biggest portion of each sale was a 40-year bond with the same credit ratings, interest coupons and insurance against default. The Yankees, leaders in the American League's eastern division, will pay a yield of 4.51 percent, better than the 4.57 percent the Mets, also at the top of their group in the National League, obtained in a sale the day before.

Timing helped the Yankees. The team and its underwriters led by Goldman Sachs Group Inc. pushed the sale up a day to yesterday to take advantage of a rally in Treasuries after government reports this week signaled tame inflation and slowing economic growth.

"In that regard, the Yankees won,'' said Joseph Darcy, who manages about $4 billion in municipal bonds for Dreyfus Corp. in New York, and who put in orders to buy both teams' bonds. "But the cause of the victory was not their performance on the field, it was the condition of the field onto which they stepped.''

The savings may provide bragging rights for the teams' underwriters rather than financial benefits. The difference in yields amounts to about $142,000 a year in interest, which is less than the $154,320.99 that Yankees third-baseman Alex Rodriguez earns in a game. The Yanks, who have a 70-47 record, get paid $199 million this year, compared with the $101 million payroll of the Mets, which won 71 ballgames and lost 48.

Blankfein, Steinbrenner, Berra

Goldman bankers and team officials decided to move up the sale following yesterday morning's groundbreaking ceremonies for the new ballpark in the Bronx, according to Gregory Carey, Goldman's lead banker on the sale.

Goldman Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein attended the ceremony, as did Yankee owner George Steinbrenner and Hall-of- Famer Yogi Berra.

"As always, the sun shines on the Yankees,'' Carey said of the team with a record 26 World Series championships, including a win over the Mets in 2000. "We got two strong moves in the marketplace, and figured we'd take advantage of the wind at our back.''

There were almost $3.5 billion of orders for the roughly $955 million of bonds sold, Carey said. That let the banks lower yields on the debt by as much as 3 basis points, or 0.03 percentage point.

New Stadiums

The new Yankee Stadium may seat about 53,000 people, keeping the same dimensions as the existing ballpark, while expanding the area for restaurants and concourses. The new park will resemble the original 1923 Yankee Stadium, before it was renovated in the 1970s, with a limestone-based exterior, arches and a roof-top frieze.

The Mets new park in Queens should seat 45,000 people and is designed to be reminiscent of Ebbets Field, former home of the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Mets are searching for a naming-rights sponsor.

Citigroup Inc. led the banks that underwrote the Mets sale on Aug. 15, which attracted about $3.2 billion of orders for $613 million of bonds, enabling the banks to cut yields by 6 basis points.

"From a timing perspective, obviously the Yankees won because they got a lower net interest cost,'' said John Flahive, who manages $13 billion in municipal bonds as director of fixed- income at Mellon Private Wealth Management in Boston. "From a demand perspective, I can't tell you the last time I saw a bump of 5 to 6 basis points. The Mets have nothing to be embarrassed about.''

More Fans

Citigroup spokesman Joseph Christinat declined to comment. Bankers and the Mets' chief operating officer Jeff Wilpon on Aug. 15 said strong demand led to lower borrowing costs for the stadium, whose groundbreaking is scheduled by the end of next month. Both the Mets and Yankees sold their bonds through New York City's Industrial Development Agency.

The new stadiums are to open in 2009 in the Bronx and Queens.

Last year, the Yankees drew 4.09 million fans, their most ever, and the Mets attracted 2.83 million, 226,000 shy of their best season in 1988. The combined 2005 attendance for both teams -- 6.92 million -- was 80 percent higher than in 1996.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Eddie Baeb in Chicago at ebaeb@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 17, 2006 06:57 EDT

Transic

August 18th, 2006, 11:01 PM

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aB5npEX4G0fU&refer=home

Yankees Go for Swaps and Bonds; Mets Seek 'Stability' (Update1)

Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Major League Baseball's Yankees and Mets, New York City's hometown teams, led U.S. municipal borrowers this week with a combined $1.6 billion of bonds to help pay for new ballparks.

The two debt issues look almost identical to investors -- with similar ratings, insurance and backing -- yet the teams took different financing approaches. The Yankees arranged two interest- rate swap agreements as it sold bonds, while the Mets stuck with traditional debt that pays a fixed rate.

The Mets sale, managed by Citigroup Inc., allows the team to know, to the penny, its financing costs over the next 40 years. The swaps in the Yankees sale, led by Goldman Sachs Group Inc., may create savings or extra costs depending on future events such as possible changes in federal tax policy.

"We wanted the long-term stability,'' said Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' chief operating officer. "There are costs associated with swaps, and we didn't see the value. I'm very happy locking in 40-year money at these rates.''

Goldman's lead banker on the sale, Gregory Carey, said after fees the two swaps may lead to more than $75 million in present-value savings on the $942.6 million of tax-exempt stadium bonds. The Yankee's public relations firm referred calls to Goldman.

The two bond deals, which featured similar 40-year debt sold with yields of 4.51 percent for the American League Yankees and 4.57 percent for the National League Mets, illustrate the growing choices available to borrowers in the $2 trillion municipal bond market.

Widely Used

U.S. state and local borrowers are increasingly relying on swaps to help lower debt expense, although the contracts aren't subject to regulation and are arranged without the detailed disclosure found in bond offerings. That leaves taxpayers unable to determine the costs and risks of the agreements, which are a type of derivative, or private financial contract whose value is determined by a security, index or commodity.

In a swap, two parties agree to exchange payments over a period of time. Usually one party pays a fixed rate, while the other pays a rate that changes with a benchmark index or formula.

That was the case in one of the Yankee's swaps, where the team sold $198 million of bonds that pay investors a variable rate pegged to the U.S. consumer price index, an inflation gauge. The Yankees agreed to pay an undisclosed fixed rate to New York- based Goldman in exchange for floating-rate payments that are also linked to the consumer price index.

Savings

The floating-rate payments from Goldman are designed to equal the variable-rate bond payments, leaving the Yankees with a fixed payment as if the team had sold fixed-rate bonds.

Goldman's Carey said the swap, which involves bonds due from 2016 to 2027, saved about 0.10 percentage point, or 10 basis points, for the Yankees, amounting to $5 million to $10 million in present-value savings.

In the larger of the two derivatives, known as a "fixed annuity basis swap,'' the Yankees agreed to a swap of more than $900 million divided among four counterparties: Goldman, Bank of America Corp., Wachovia Corp. and Societe Generale SA.

This swap calls for the Yankees to pay a floating rate pegged to one-week tax-exempt note yields, called the BMA index. In exchange, the Yankees receive a floating rate that is 68 percent of the one-month London interbank offered rate. Libor, as it is known, is the rate the world's largest banks pay for deposits from each other.

Risks

The Yankees also receive an annuity, or regular cash payments of a fixed amount, as part of the swap of about 45 basis points on that $900 million. That means the team stands to be paid more than $4 million a year on the swap, Carey said, with present-value savings over 40 years of $68.6 million.

The money for the annuity payments comes from the difference between the 68 percent of Libor Goldman pays the Yankees, and the higher percentages of Libor it can get in the swaps market. Brokers currently quote 70 percent of Libor as the midpoint of bids and offers for a five-year swap of the BMA index, rising to 72.625 percent in 10 years and 77.625 percent in 30 years.

Based on current market conditions, the Yankees can expect that their payments will be less than their receipts. For that hoped-for gain, they bear the risk that the two indexes diverge from their historic relationship.

"There is tax risk,'' said Peter Shapiro, managing director at Swap Financial Group, a South Orange, New Jersey-based adviser to local governments. Shapiro's firm in June advised the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico on a $1.7-billion annuity basis swap.

Changes in the U.S. tax code, such as the introduction of a flat tax at a lower rate than existing levels, might cause the BMA rate to rise relative to Libor, Shapiro said. A lower tax rate would lead to higher yields on new municipal securities because there would be less benefit to investors from municipal bonds' exemption from federal taxes.

Ideas

Another risk assumed by the Yankees is the chance that one of the four swap counterparties would deteriorate financially to the point where they defaulted on their payments to the Yankees.

Goldman's Carey said the Yankees took such risks into consideration, and that the swaps are insured. He said the annuity basis swap was an alternative to issuing all variable- rate debt, and that Goldman calculated it would generate more savings than issuing all floating-rate bonds and swapping to fixed-rate payments.

"We presented many, many different ideas and structures,'' Carey said. "We believe this was the most efficient from a cost- saving, risk and total-cost standpoint.''

Different Choice

The Mets and Citigroup reached a different conclusion on their sale, which included $547.4 million of tax-exempt bonds and $65.6 million of taxable debt.

"Given the nature of the financing, the fixed-rate structure fit well,'' said Bill Corrado, a Citigroup director who helped arrange the Mets sale. "We presented them a host of financing options and tools, and delivered the structure they chose.''

Both baseball teams and their bankers benefited this week as the Municipal Market Advisors index of yields on top-rated municipal bonds fell after government reports pointed to tame inflation and slowing economic growth. The index for 10-year municipal debt stood at 3.95 percent yesterday, down from 4.01 percent at the end of last week.

The index for 30-year municipals was 4.59 percent Aug. 15, when the Mets paid 4.47 percent for insured bonds due in 30 years. The index fell to 4.56 percent Aug. 16 as the Yankees sold insured 30-year bonds yielding 4.4 percent.

To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Quint in Albany at mquint@bloomberg.net; Eddie Baeb in Chicago at ebaeb@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: August 18, 2006 09:09 EDT

Transic

August 22nd, 2006, 08:46 PM

http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20060822&content_id=1623039&vkey=pr_nym&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym

08/22/2006 12:38 PM ET
Mets finalize new ballpark agreements

The New York Mets announced today that they have completed and signed all agreements related to the financing, development and construction for their new ballpark. The ballpark will open on Opening Day in 2009.

Today's news follows last week's announcement regarding the successful offering of bonds to support the ballpark project. The $613 Million bond offering was oversubscribed by a ratio of 5 to 1.

"Today's announcement makes our dream of building a new ballpark for our team and fans a definitive reality," said Mets' COO, Jeff Wilpon. "We will now move forward from site logistics work to an aggressive construction schedule. Already in our parking lot at Shea Stadium, piles are being driven and excavation and foundation work is beginning.

"We greatly appreciate the support of the City and State of New York and our local elected officials as well as our new bondholders, who all helped make the development of this privately financed ballpark a reality," added Wilpon. "We will have an announcement about our ceremonial groundbreaking event in the coming weeks."

----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.cpnonline.com/cpn/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003020726

Fulbright Arranges Final Funding of New Mets Stadium

Law firm Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., the finance counsel for the New York Mets, has arranged the final financing of the team's new stadium (pictured), due to open in 2009. The firm developed a financing mechanism featuring payment in lieu of tax. This "PILOT" structure--which was approved by the IRS last month--includes $547 million in tax-exempt bonds and $7 million of taxable privately placed lease revenue bonds. The city and state of New York provided infrastructure funding.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=1&aid=62012

Mets Finalize Plans For New Stadium

August 22, 2006

The Mets announced Tuesday that they have signed all agreements related to the financing and construction of a new ballpark that is scheduled to be completed by Opening Day in 2009.

The team says excavation and construction work has already started on the new site.

They have received $613 million worth of bonds to help fund the project.

The new stadium will seat 45,000 fans, and will feature several restaurants and have wider concourses.

The stadium's exterior is designed to evoke the old Ebbets Field.

Transic

August 24th, 2006, 02:43 PM

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/a_park_for_champions_editorials_.htm

A PARK FOR CHAMPIONS

August 24, 2006 -- The New York Mets have been firing on all cylinders from Opening Day.

The Amazin's have held a double- digit lead in the National League East for months.

David Wright, Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes are having MVP-caliber seasons.

And on Tuesday, the Mets announced that they had dotted the I's and crossed the T's on the paperwork that will let them start construction of a new $800 million, 45,000-seat stadium.

With the major monetary decisions basically out of the way, what matters now is getting the rest of it right.

The state-of-the-art facility designed to evoke memories of fabled Ebbets Field still needs an official name.

And the Mets still have their minds set on finding an appropriate - that is, deep-pocketed - "corporate partner" willing to pony up for naming rights.

What a pity.

Last week, the new billion-dollar, 53,000-seat Yankee Stadium - to be built in the parking lot across from the current one - had its official groundbreaking.

Numerous marketing schemes will be attached to that project, too.

But Yankee Stadium, home to a unique franchise, will keep its sacrosanct name because the team knows what's important for New Yorkers.

The Mets still can do the right thing, too: The team's new ballpark should be named for the man who transformed the game - right here in New York.

That man was Jackie Robinson.

No, he never played for the team, but the Mets are New York's National League successors to Jackie's Dodgers.

More importantly, he opened baseball's door to black ballplayers - his courage boosting the larger civil-rights movement that transformed, and redeemed, the nation.

Wouldn't it be great, at the upcoming official groundbreaking for the venue, that it be for Jackie Robinson Stadium?

Sure it would.

Transic

August 29th, 2006, 03:38 PM

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060828005491&newsLang=en

August 28, 2006 09:43 AM US Eastern Timezone
Stroock Represents The Mets In New Stadium Deal

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 28, 2006--Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, a national law firm with offices in New York, Los Angeles and Miami, announced its client Sterling Mets L.P., owners of the New York Mets baseball franchise, has secured and closed the public-private financing and real estate transactions to begin construction on the new Mets stadium. The new stadium is slated to open in time for the 2009 season on a site adjacent to the current Shea Stadium in Flushing Meadows Corona Park.

Stroock was involved in various aspects of the multifaceted deal with direct negotiations with New York City and New York State. The stadium will be financed with bonds issued by the NYC Industrial Development Agency; capital contributions for infrastructure improvements are being provided by New York City and New York State. Stroock's involvement included negotiation of the lease for the Stadium to be used by the Mets baseball team, leases for multiple parking lots, a development agreement between an affiliate of Sterling Mets L.P. and the general contractor and the funding agreement with the City of New York and New York State.

"It was a privilege to work with the Mets and help make this important landmark a reality. For this deal Stroock drew upon legal and business skills from across the firm including real estate, insurance and corporate to bring it to fruition," said Ross F. Moskowitz, Stroock Real Estate Partner and lead real estate attorney on this project.

Key Stroock attorneys working on the deal included: Real Estate Partners Leonard Boxer (Chairman), Jacob Bart, Karen Scanna, Special Counsel Jonathan D. Blum and Associates Diana Brummer and Ann Marie Folan. Several Stroock Corporate and Insurance Partners provided assistance on the deal including, Hillel M. Bennett, Melvin Epstein, William D. Latza, William W. Rosenblatt and Special Counsel David W. Lowden.

Stroock has served as lead counsel to some of the top sports facility deals, including the U.S. Open's USTA Center in Flushing Meadows Corona Park in Queens, N.Y. and Joe Robbie Stadium, home of the Florida Marlins.

Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP is a law firm providing transactional and litigation guidance to leading multinational corporations, investment banks, and venture capital firms in the U.S. and abroad. Stroock is one of the country's preeminent real estate firms and offers clients experience in development, acquisition, investment advisory services, leasing, joint ventures, financing and litigation. Stroock's emphasis on client service and innovation has made it one of the nation's leading law firms for 125 years. Stroock's practice areas include corporate finance, legal services to financial institutions, energy, financial restructuring, insurance, intellectual property, litigation and real estate. For more information, please visit Stroock's website at www.stroock.com (http://www.stroock.com)

Transic

August 30th, 2006, 03:54 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/story/447756p-376995c.html

Pitch for jobs
at Mets stadium a home run

BY DONALD BERTRAND
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

If you put out a call for them to help build it, they will come.

That's what New York Mets officials learned Monday when about 200 people attended a jobs forum for minorities, women and local businesses interested in working on the construction of the new Mets stadium.

Club officials billed the event, held at Shea Stadium, as an example of the team's commitment to provide stadium jobs and contracts to local workers and businesses.

"This is symbolic of our commitment to reach out to our community and to attract as many local and minority and women-based businesses as we can to benefit from this project," said Mets Executive Vice President David Howard, speaking in the Shea picnic area above the din of construction noise from nearby pile drivers.

As part of a financing deal with the city for a new stadium, the Mets agreed in April to devote 25% of their construction jobs and contracts for goods and services to Queens residents and firms. The club also agreed that an additional 25% of the jobs and contracts will be aimed citywide at minority and female residents, and firms that are minority- or female-owned.

Those attending the event, hosted by the Mets and stadium developer Hunt/Bovis Lend Lease, received a nine-page listing of the jobs that will become available for them to bid on.

The contracts included providing welding equipment, nuts and bolts, brick supply, glass and mirrors, electrical work and plumbing. Playing field installation also was on the list.

"This is the largest private investment in a project in the history of Queens," Howard said. "The Mets organization and ownership have committed over $600 million in private investment in this project and we are well underway."

Hunt/Bovis is "committed to providing equal opportunity in all phases of the bidding process," said Brenda Scott, the minority, women and local business diversity program manager for the Mets stadium project. "We are going to actively seek qualified minority, women and local business firms and make certain they are aware of the projects' requirements and thus are able to bid appropriately."

A construction advisory committee comprised of the borough president, Queens City Council members, local community, and minority and women's organizations was created to offer support. Borough President Helen Marshall and Councilman Leroy Comrie are heading the committee.

The Mets "are ready to work with the community and we are there to help them do that," said Marshall. After a few meetings with the Mets, Comrie (D-St. Albans) said, "they understood and now are really embracing this opportunity to make sure that New York City-based businesses and Queens-based businesses and Queens residents [are] a part of this project."

Originally published on August 30, 2006

Transic

September 2nd, 2006, 10:02 PM

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2006/sep/01/mets-new-ballpark/

Mets' new ballpark

Honor brave man by naming it Jackie Robinson Stadium

MARTIN SCHRAM, Scripps Howard
Friday, September 1, 2006

As America watches the end of another night of U.S. Open tennis, televised from Arthur Ashe Stadium in the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, a camera follows the crowd as it files out to the vast parking lot that serves the New York Mets' cavernous Shea Stadium.

The picture is a reminder: One final naming tribute remains unfulfilled. The New York Mets will soon break ground for a new baseball park.

Our task is clear: We must come together to convince the Mets to forgo the urge to name their new baseball park after some corporate deep-pockets.

We must request that the Mets honor America by naming their new ballpark the Jackie Robinson Stadium.

Time out: While Jackie Robinson was famous for stealing bases, a case could be made that I have just slid in with a successfully stolen column. Almost a decade or so ago, two of my former colleagues, The New York Times sports columnist George Vecsey and Newsday sports columnist Steve Jacobson, urged Mets owner Fred Wilpon to name his new park Jackie Robinson Stadium. Vecsey wrote about it again this week. It turns out we both were waiting for the tennis to start so we could do a riff on the Arthur Ashe/Billie Jean King tennis to set up our Robinson stadium refrain.

To understand why the idea of a Jackie Robinson Stadium is a national concern and not a local one, we need only to consult the records. Not those in Cooperstown, N.Y., but those in Washington, home of the FBI.

The FBI's 131-page dossier on Jackie Robinson was stamped "SECRET" and "CONFIDENTIAL" until 1984. It contains the death threats that were part of Robinson's daily life as the first African-American permitted in baseball's major leagues.

But the Robinson file is also replete with notations of agents focused on the hateful and fearful communist-hunting days of the Cold War. One note said Robinson was on the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People board of directors and was New York chairman of United Negro and Allied Veterans of America, which was labeled a "communist front."

In 1949, Robinson was summoned to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee. He spoke tough truths with courage and candor: "The fact that it is a communist who denounces injustice in the courts, police brutality, and lynching when it happens doesn't change the truth of his charges. Just because communists kick up a big fuss over racial discrimination when it suits their purposes, a lot of people try to pretend that the whole issue is a creation of communist imagination. But they are not fooling anyone with this kind of pretense, and talk about communists stirring up Negroes to protest only makes present misunderstanding worse than ever. Negroes were stirred up long before there was a Communist Party, and they'll stay stirred up long after the party has disappeared - unless Jim Crow has disappeared by then as well."

That is why the naming of this baseball stadium is a matter of America putting to rest its national demons.

Jackie Robinson Stadium will honor a man who allowed us all to be safe at home.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/1597/laborday74azz8.jpg

Construction has already begun directly on the other side of the job fair.

http://www.queenstribune.com/news/1157228739.html

Mets Ask Minorities To Enter Stadium

By JEFF FEINMAN

The New York Mets and Hunt-Bovis Lend Lease Alliance are affording a great number of businesses owned by minorities and women the opportunity to obtain contracts for the construction of the new Mets new stadium, which is already undergoing initial work.

On Monday morning, before the team took to the Shea Stadium field for a makeup game with the Philadelphia Phillies, the Mets held a business forum underneath a tent next to the KeySpan sign in the left field. The forum allowed a great number of minority business owners to network with other business people.

“It is very important for owners to meet face to face like this,” said Greg Singh, an officer with Fine Painting, a company that is looking to obtain a contract with Bovis, the corporation in charge of the new stadium’s construction. Singh said his company specializes in commercial painting, and is seeking to paint a portion, if not all, of the new stadium. “Many minority companies may not have the resources to meet other business owners in their area. This was a very good opportunity to get to know people.”

The Mets have created a Minority and Woman-Owned Business Enterprise, a company commitment to ensuring that all contractors and subcontractors are not chosen on the grounds of race or gender. “The Mets agree, as an element of the performance of its new ballpark project in Queens, to take all necessary and reasonable affirmative action steps to assure that Queens- and all New York City-based minority group members and women are provided equal opportunity to compete for and perform contracts for construction work, construction-related goods and supplies and professional services,” the team said in a statement.

The Minority and Woman-Owned Business Enterprise will offer a number of services, including meetings at various colleges around Queens providing technical assistance, a mentor/protégé program that encourages majority-owned companies to provide advice and assistance, and bidding strategy sessions. Additionally, the enterprise will have an internship program involving local high schools and colleges, and host career day events as well. Some of those events may even take place at Shea Stadium.

Organizations such as the Queens Economic Development Corporation, the Jamaica Business Resource Center, and the Queens One Stop Center will all assist in outreach efforts.

“It’s a good step to ensure that New York City minority and women business owners have an equal shot at getting work on this stadium,” Councilman Leroy Comrie (D-St. Albans), who is part of an Advisory Committee that will provide input to the enterprise, said at the event. Other officials on the committee include Borough President Helen Marshall, U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-Jamaica), Assembly members Jeffrion Aubry (D-Corona) and Toby Stavisky (D-Flushing), and Councilman Hiram Monserrate (D-Corona).

“I’m proud that the Mets have embraced the minority business community,” Comrie added, “and I think they’re going to going to do even more for the community than everyone expected.”

Though contracts have already been reached with Canam Steel for structural steel and High Concrete Products for precast stadia and stairs, there are still a very large number of contracts for stadium amenities that have yet to be given. Subcontractor opportunities will include lighting, roofing, fire protection, signage, ornamental metals, and food services. Businesses will have the opportunity to obtain contracts for every thinkable facet of construction on the new stadium.

“I’m very encouraged by it. The Mets have the opportunity to see that there are some very reputable businesses here in Queens,” Marshall said. “A lot of talk has been about how the Mets don’t do a lot for the community. I asked them to compile a list for me of everything they give to Queens organizations. I would say that the amount of money they give to the community per year is around $2 million.”

Many of the different businessmen and women attending the event were appreciative of the opportunity to network. “This event is very important,” said Career Education International Group Specialist Denise Freeman, whose organization helps find temporary and permanent employment for people. “Right now, I search on the Internet for placement opportunities and it’s very hard, but I’ve met with a lot of people today who are willing to help me.”

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/4193/laborday74bqh4.jpg

Potential contractors mingle with Mets staff and the general contractor of the event.

BigMac

September 28th, 2006, 01:06 PM

BillOReilly.com
September 28, 2006

Jackie Robinson Stadium

By: Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com

Next week the baseball playoffs begin, and millions of Americans will turn their attention to the National Pastime. But there is one baseball story every American should know. On the wall of my office hangs a cover of "Sport Magazine" signed by Hall of Fame baseball legend Jackie Robinson. It pictures Robinson, playing second base for the Brooklyn Dodgers, pivoting on a double play throw. Shortstop Pee Wee Reese is pictured behind him.

Jackie Robinson is one of America's great civil rights heroes, yet his story is fading from public view. Born in racially segregated Georgia in 1919, Robinson's father abandoned the family leading his mother, Mallie, to move the five Robinson children to Pasadena, California in search of a better life.

Jackie excelled at sports and won a scholarship to UCLA where he was an All American halfback and a superstar baseball player. Upon leaving school, he enlisted in the Army to fight in World War II. But after refusing to go to the back of the bus while training in Texas, the Army charged him with insubordination. Subsequently, he was acquitted of all charges and honorably discharged.

After playing baseball in the Negro League, Brooklyn Dodger General Manager Branch Rickey brought him to the Major Leagues in 1947. Robinson was then 27 years old, and was the first black front line player ever.

Predictably, all hell broke loose when Robinson hit the diamond that year. He was vilified on and off the field, called obscene names non-stop, and some opposing pitchers even threw at his head. Only once did he lose his cool in public. An umpire actually said to him, "Go back to the jungle, you little n-----."

Robinson punched the ump in the mouth.

The Philadelphia Phillies and Cincinnati Redlegs were particularly nasty to Robinson. In one incident, the Cincinnati players were screaming at the Dodgers, stuff like "how can you play with that n-----?"

Having heard enough, Pee Wee Reese, from Louisville, Kentucky, walked over to Robinson and put his arm around him.

Jackie Robinson played in the big leagues for nine years and, while things improved a bit over time, he was constantly demeaned and humiliated by fellow Americans. Yet Robinson prevailed. He compiled Hall of Fame statistics and was the National League's Most Valuable Player in 1949, the year I was born.

Try to imagine what Jackie Robinson endured in the land of the free. Just for a moment, put yourself in his cleats. Hatred is a brutal thing; personal attacks can cut right to the heart of a human being. For Robinson, they were non-stop.

How brave was this man? Because of him, the face of American society changed quickly and decisively. Opportunities for millions of black and Hispanic athletes opened up, and that changed attitudes everywhere. Suddenly, Willie Mays was a hero, and Bill Russell a role model.

Jackie Robinson died young at 52 from diabetes complications. His suffering, triumph and legacy must be remembered. In a couple of years, The New York Mets will unveil a new stadium just a few miles from where Jackie Robinson played in Brooklyn. The Mets are now considering what to name their opulent new home.

But, really, there is only one name that should be attached to that building. In bold letters, forever, in Queens, New York, the name "Jackie Robinson Stadium" should stand as a monument to one of the most courageous Americans of all time.

Number 42 deserves no less.

Copyright © 2002-2006 BillOReilly.com

antinimby

September 28th, 2006, 01:48 PM

Probably more likely to be something like this: Jackie Robinson Stadium at Google.com Park.

Transic

September 30th, 2006, 06:56 AM

From September 23:

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/4567/92301bj3.jpg

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/7628/923lakejeffeyac2.jpg

http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/3756/2923ho6.jpg

Credit Stadiumpage (http://www.stadiumpage.com/) for the latest images.

NYguy

September 30th, 2006, 05:51 PM

Those are good photos. Nice to see something actually getting built as planned.

Transic

October 4th, 2006, 05:00 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/story/458271p-385662c.html

Monument-al indignation

Marker damage spurs call to curb Flushing park traffic

By NICHOLAS HIRSHON

Stop that car! And that one, and that one ...

A Queens civic group leader is threatening to sue the city for turning Flushing Meadows- Corona Park into "a congested and hazardous landscape of speeding automobiles and buses" during the U.S. Open and Mets games.

David Oats, president of the Flushing Meadows-Corona Park World's Fair Association, said he wrote a letter to Mayor Bloomberg and city Parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe demanding changes after a speeding minibus knocked over a historic monument in the park last month.
In the letter, Oats asks Bloomberg and Benepe to stop letting vehicles park on the grass at Flushing Meadows and speed on the roads there.

"It's silly to say, 'No cars,' but we want it regulated," Oats told the Queens News.

Parks Department spokesman Warner Johnston said the city is seeking damages against the bus company and working to fix the monument.

Johnston also said that the city considers Flushing Meadows one of its "main attractions" and relies on park visitors to drive responsibly.

"We of course have posted speed limits," Johnston said. "We do ask the public to abide by them."

The civic association's vice president, Greg Godfrey, said he noticed the fallen monument during his daily bike ride through the park last month. A minibus hit it between Sept. 10 and Sept. 20, he said.

"I couldn't believe it because it's probably about 7 feet high," Godfrey said.

The monument, erected about 40 years ago, is engraved with the names of U.S. Presidents and other heads of state who visited Flushing Meadows during the 1939-40 and 1964-65 World's Fairs.

Among the dignitaries listed are Pope Paul VI and Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy.

"While the downfall of this monument is terrible in itself, it is a symbol of the downfall of municipal respect and care for this park and its users," Oats says in the letter.

He also notes that if a large piece of granite "could be toppled in this manner, just imagine if it had been a human being."

Oats said he worried that the parking situation will get worse in the next few years as workers construct the new Mets stadium in the current Shea Stadium parking lot.

Shea will eventually be leveled to make way for a new parking lot. But because the Mets will continue to play at Shea through October 2008 then start in the new stadium only six months later, there will be a shortage of spaces for an extended period, Oats said.

Originally published on October 4, 2006

Transic

October 26th, 2006, 11:33 PM

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061024/2061464.asp

Dynasty? Mets building only a stadium
By WALLACE MATTHEWS
Newsday
10/24/2006

With all due respect to Omar Minaya, the only sure thing they are building in Flushing is a new stadium.

It will be a beauty, too, with plenty of luxury boxes, 10,000 fewer cheap seats that just get in the way of the rich, ticket prices twice as high as those in dumpy old Shea Stadium, and a newcomer to the New York sports marketplace, a concept not even the money-grubbing Yankees have dared to adopt, the personal seat license.

As for the ballclub, well . . . you just may have seen the best of it in Game Six of the NLCS.

What you saw the next night in Game Seven was none too good, and clearly, not good enough. The $119-million slugger couldn't pull the trigger with the season on the line, the $44-million closer never got out of the bullpen and the manager who described himself as "a winner" before the game finished up a loser.

There was nothing to be happy about in Game Seven, unless it was the realization that Oliver Perez might well be your No. 2 starter next season, right behind the ace, John Maine. How's that for an encouraging start on 2007?

The Mets thinking they can "build off this experience" makes as much sense as fighters who claim they somehow benefited from being knocked unconscious in a title fight.

Teams don't build off collapses like the one the Mets suffered against the Cardinals. Often, they get buried under them. And the way the game is now played, often the first chance is the only one a team gets. The Mets probably will never get another chance as good as the one they had this year.

Whichever team wins the World Series between the Detroit Tigers and the St. Louis Cardinals will represent the sixth team to win it all in the last six years, and four of the previous five did not even make the playoffs the following year.

There is a lesson to be learned in that, but clearly, nobody at Shea has been paying much attention.

More and more, Major League Baseball is turning into the NFL, with revenue-sharing closing the gap between the haves and the have-nots, creating widespread parity and installing a revolving door on its championship through which just about any team now can pass once.

In the post-Yankee Dynasty era, they are taking turns at the World Series now, the way each NFL team not named New York Jets seems to get its turn in the Super Bowl.

If the Mets think they are laying the foundation for a dynasty of their own, and multiple trips to the World Series, they are fooling only themselves.

Because this was their shot, their perfect storm, and they blew it. This year, they got a chance to dominate a weak National League and roll over two mediocre playoff opponents, one of which managed to win only 83 games all season. But they couldn't do it.

How Minaya or his boss, Fred Wilpon, can truly believe the baseball planets will align this way for them again next year, only they know.

How do they know the Braves will continue to play like bottom-feeders, or that the Phillies will continue to underachieve, or that Jeffrey Loria, whose largesse gifted the Mets with Paul Lo Duca and Carlos Delgado, suddenly won't decide he would like the Marlins to win again?

It looks and sounds as if the Mets don't fully grasp the magnitude of the opportunity they squandered. They are looking at the loss of the 2006 season as if it were nothing more than stranding runners on base early in a game, and thinking they will get another chance.

Dan Marino went to the Super Bowl in his second season and spent the next 15 seasons waiting in vain for another chance. Delgado waited 14 years for his first chance. In 19 seasons, Ernie Banks never got a chance at all.

The Mets, and their owners, their GM and their manager, are acting as if this were just the first of many, that the careers of Jose Reyes and David Wright will mirror that of Derek Jeter, who has never known an October without baseball. In reality, this might have been their one and only.

If so, there's nothing happy about the way it ended, nothing satisfying in it, nothing to say that next year will be better but plenty to indicate that it could well be worse.

If you believe otherwise, I have an old ballpark in Flushing to sell you.

Transic

November 8th, 2006, 09:37 PM

http://www.nysun.com/article/43153

Groundbreaking Imminent for New Mets Ballpark in Queens

By DAVID LOMBINO (http://www.nysun.com/authors/David+Lombino)
Staff Reporter of the Sun
November 8, 2006

Mets fans, some of whom likely have yet to fully dry their eyes after a heartbreaking loss in the seventh game of the National League Championship Series, will get to celebrate on Monday, at a ceremonial groundbreaking for their new 45,000-seat ballpark.

In April, the Mets announced details of plans to build an $800 million stadium in a parking lot adjacent to their current home in Flushing. Preliminary construction has already begun, and the Mets hope to complete it in time for the 2009 season, the same time the Yankees are scheduled to begin playing in a new stadium.

The Yankees broke ground on their new $1 billion stadium in the Bronx (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=The+Bronx) with an elaborate ceremony in August.

The new Mets ballpark will contain 12,000 fewer seats than Shea Stadium (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Shea+Stadium) and will carry a different moniker, most likely the name of a corporate sponsor. The stadium design, by the firm HOK Sport, is expected to evoke Ebbets Field, the home of the Brooklyn Dodgers (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Brooklyn+Dodgers) before they were moved to Los Angeles (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Los+Angeles) in the 1950s.

The city's support for a new Mets ballpark was announced in June 2005, just days after Mayor Bloomberg (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Michael+Bloomberg)'s plan for a football and Olympic stadium on the West Side of Manhattan (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=Manhattan) was rejected. Originally, the new Mets stadium also was to serve as an Olympic stadium, but New York City (http://www.nysun.com/related_results.php?term=New+York+City) failed to win its bid for the 2012 Olympics.

The city is planning to contribute about $90 million and the state about $75 million toward infrastructure improvements. In May, the City Council gave final approval for the city to issue $632 million in tax-exempt and taxable bonds, which the team will pay back over time.

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=23306

Chicago Contractor Scores Homerun For New Mets Stadium

Coast-to-Coast Pressure Grouting
11/7/2006 1:00:19 PM

Flushing, NY, Oct. 27, 2006 - The Mets hopes for a World Series appearance may be postponed until next season, but dreams of a new stadium are right on schedule thanks to Coast-to-Coast Pressure Grouting.

Coast-to-Coast is a nationwide contractor specializing in lightweight cellular concrete solutions for geotechnical and underground construction problems. These are just the kind of problems that stadium builders ran into when they began constructing the new building just a few feet away in the parking lot of the old Shea Stadium.

Since the new stadium design calls for the playing field to be elevated 5 to 6 feet above the level of the current parking lot, the required fill would add about 700 pounds per square foot, causing the weak native soils in the area to be subject to substantial settlement. Many of the proposed solutions to the problem were costly and would delay completion of the stadium

Coast to Coast Pressure Grouting, together with Urban Foundation, offered Geofill “Open Cell” Cellular Concrete as the best solution to the problem. This type of concrete weighs only about 22-25 pounds per cubic foot once in place, reducing the total load to the existing field by over 66% as compared to other fills.

Geofill “Open Cell” is a pervious product allowing full drainage directly through the material similar to aggregate backfill but at a fraction of the weight. It installs without need to compact or otherwise work the product.

This type of product has been used on other stadiums such as Soldier’s Field in Chicago and will also be used at the new Yankee Stadium being constructed over a subway tunnel for the same reasons.

Coast-to-Coast’s use of Geofill cellular concrete has scored a homerun for the Mets, who’s stadium is currently set for completion in 2009.

NoyokA

November 10th, 2006, 06:48 PM

Newsday:

Mets stadium: CitiField?

BY KEN DAVIDOFF

November 10, 2006, 4:18 PM EST

The Mets are very close to striking a deal for the naming rights to their new stadium, and Citigroup is the likely winner, Newsday has learned.

The web site hotfootblog.com reports that a sign on the grounds of the new stadium reads, "CitiField: Coming in 2009."

The Mets will officially break ground on their new ballpark, set to open in 2009, on Monday. The new name of the ballpark will likely be announced at that time.

The Mets have long indicated that they would sell the naming rights to their new ballpark. It is believed that they have also discussed those rights with Verizon and Pepsi.

Citigroup has conducted market research to determine the best name for their new stadium. Among the names proposed were: Citigroup Ballpark, Citi Ballpark, Citibank Ballpark, Citibank Yard, Citibank Coliseum, Citibank Diamond, Citibank Field.

NoyokA

November 10th, 2006, 07:08 PM

While I am not a fan of corporate sponsorship I have no problem with the naming Citifield for the new Mets Stadium. First Citifield is somewhat analogous to the term metropolitian, and the Metropolitians are a big part of the city, as NYC is a baseball city. Second I have always liked Citigroup since they are the largest private employer in NYC and have a strong presence throughout the city and especially in Queens.

lofter1

November 10th, 2006, 10:17 PM

Everybody will still call it SHEA

Only the media guys will call it some new name

Who's going to say, "I'm going out to Citifield to see the Mets and Giants" ????

macreator

November 11th, 2006, 01:20 AM

Who's going to say, "I'm going out to Citifield to see the Mets and Giants" ????

Chuck Prince?

Citytect

November 11th, 2006, 01:27 AM

NYguy

November 11th, 2006, 08:32 AM

I'm not a baseball fanatic, but I think the name will eventually catch on. I kind of like it despite the corporate sponsorship. Shea stadium will be demolished. New park; new name. Though I'm sure some die-hard fans will prefer the nostalgia of calling it Shea.

Maybe some diehards, but as the years go by and after constant references (by tv or radio broadcast) to "Citifield", Shea will become a thing of memory. As well it should be. (Although I can already hear the taunts of "sissy field"...)

The situation is a little different with Yankee Stadium. Yankee(s) must be a part of any new name the stadium is to get. I demand so.

(NY Post)

http://www.nypost.com/seven/11112006/photos/news003b.jpg

ZippyTheChimp

November 11th, 2006, 09:36 AM

Some advice for the Mets:

Years ago, I had a checking account at Citibank, and a problem with the local branch. In the time before I moved the account to Chemical (now Chase), my calls to the bank began with, "Hello, is this ShittyBank?"

All will be OK as long as the Mets field a competitive team.

lofter1

November 11th, 2006, 11:19 AM

They're going to have to coordinate Mets BLUE with Citi BLUE

antinimby

November 12th, 2006, 12:22 AM

They left out the red "hat."

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/cm/img/top_nav/logo.gif

NoyokA

November 12th, 2006, 12:44 AM

They left out the red "hat."

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/cm/img/top_nav/logo.gif

Also according to that rendering it'll be known as Citifieldk

lofter1

November 12th, 2006, 10:10 AM

Also according to that rendering it'll be known as Citifieldk

lol ...

Perhaps this is what they had in mind:

https://web.da-us.citibank.com/cm/img/top_nav/logo.giffieldk (http://www.webelements.com/webelements/elements/text/K/key.html)

Transic

November 14th, 2006, 05:38 AM

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spground1114,0,5116647.story?track=mostemailedlink

http://www.newsday.com/media/photo/2006-11/26398248.jpg
A computer-generated artist rendering of CitiField, which will become the new home of the Mets in 2009.
(AP Photo)

Mets break ground on Citi Field

BY DAVID LENNON AND CHAU LAM
Newsday Staff Writers

November 13, 2006, 10:31 PM EST

The entry rotunda of the Mets' new stadium will be named after Jackie Robinson and include a statue of the baseball immortal, but the ballpark itself will indeed be christened Citi Field, officials announced Monday.

News of the corporate name created a public outcry last week from those who wanted Shea Stadium's replacement to be named for Robinson, who became the first African-American player in the major leagues in 1947.

But Mayor Michael Bloomberg was unapologetic Monday for the team's decision to sell the naming rights for the stadium to Citigroup, the worldwide banking giant, to help finance a ballpark that will cost close to $800 million.

"The people who said that aren't the ones putting up the money," Bloomberg said. Mets owners "the Wilpons obviously need the money. If you're going to have private people pay for stadiums, they've got to find a way to pay for it."

Team officials were aware of the public call to name the new stadium after the Brooklyn Dodgers pioneer. In 1997, Robinson's No. 42 was retired by every team, and the on-field ceremony, attended by President Bill Clinton and Robinson's widow, Rachel, was held at Shea.

But the Mets cited the sizable financial burden of building the new ballpark as the reason for seeking a corporate sponsorship instead, and their deal with Citigroup -- the most lucrative for a professional franchise -- will stretch for 20 years and pay the team more than $20 million annually. The Mets will assume an estimated $600 million for the project, with the city kicking in $90 million and the state adding another $75 million for infrastructure costs.

The partnership will include naming rights and brand presence at the new stadium, as well as "integration" into Mets television, print, radio and online media campaigns.

The 45,000-seat ballpark, designed by HOK, is scheduled to open for the 2009 season, with Robinson's name and statue gracing the front entrance of the Ebbets Field-inspired stadium.

"It's a tribute to a great man," Mets manager Willie Randolph said. "I think more than anything, it's something that will be great for the fans, and especially the young fans, to see and experience -- to learn about Jackie and what he meant to the game, not just to baseball, but to life."

----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/13/sports/baseball/13cnd-shea.html?_r=1&hp&ex=1163480400&en=d8010e26648522bb&ei=5094&partner=homepage&oref=slogin

Mets Break Ground on New Stadium

By SEWELL CHAN (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/sewell_chan/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: November 13, 2006

A rotunda honoring the life of Jackie Robinson (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/r/jackie_robinson/index.html?inline=nyt-per), scores of Citibank A.T.M.’s, a 41 percent increase in concessions and enough restaurant capacity to feed 3,134 people are among the features that will greet Mets (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/newyorkmets/index.html?inline=nyt-org) fans when the team’s new ballpark, Citi Field, replaces Shea Stadium in 2009, the baseball franchise announced today.

Gov. George E. Pataki (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/p/george_e_pataki/index.html?inline=nyt-per), Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and other politicians joined the team’s owner, Fred Wilpon (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/fred_wilpon/index.html?inline=nyt-per), and several Mets officials and players today for a ceremonial groundbreaking on a new 42,500-seat stadium with a design inspired by Ebbets Field. The estimated cost is nearly $800 million.
“The 21st-century New York Mets deserve a home befitting an emerging baseball dynasty, and they will have that in this new field,” said Sheldon Silver (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/sheldon_silver/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the speaker of the State Assembly.

Under a 20-year sponsorship deal with Citigroup, the stadium will be named Citi Field, displacing the name of William A. Shea, the lawyer who helped bring National League baseball back to New York after the Brooklyn Dodgers and New York Giants (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/profootball/nationalfootballleague/newyorkgiants/index.html?inline=nyt-org) left in 1957. Shea Stadium opened in 1964.

The team has encountered criticism in some quarters for not naming the new stadium for Mr. Robinson, the Dodgers (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/sports/baseball/majorleague/losangelesdodgers/index.html?inline=nyt-org) legend who broke baseball’s color barrier in 1947, but Mr. Wilpon said fans will be welcomed into a soaring Jackie Robinson Rotunda inscribed with this quotation from the player: “A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.” The rotunda will have a statue — still to be designed — and an exhibition on Mr. Robinson’s life.

The Mets also pledged to help the Jackie Robinson Foundation, created in 1973, build a museum and education center in Lower Manhattan. The philanthropy, which gives college scholarships to minority students, has more than 1,100 alumni.

“It is my hope that as individuals and groups walk through the rotunda, they will begin to be inspired and begin to think about their own lives and what the meaning of their own lives is,” Mr. Robinson’s widow, Rachel Robinson, said at the ceremony. “I hope it will spread not just some joy, but some critical thinking about our society.”

Mr. Wilpon said corporate support was essential to the project. “With the economics that go along with building a stadium like this, it is imperative that we receive revenues,” he said. “But we will honor Jackie Robinson here and in other places; that honor is well-deserved. I might say also that I’ve spoken with the Shea family — with whom I’ve had a lifelong relationship — and we will honor them, Bill Shea, somewhere in this stadium as well.”

Mr. Bloomberg, who threw his support behind the new stadium in June 2005, shortly after the collapse of his plan for an Olympic-sized football stadium on the Far West Side of Manhattan, said of the critics: “The people that said that aren’t the ones putting up the money. The Wilpons obviously need the money. If you’re going to have private people pay for stadiums, then they’ve got to find a way to pay for them.”

He added, “The real world is that you have to have a naming opportunity and sell it for a lot of money if you can afford a stadium in this day and age.”

David Wright (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/david_wright/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the third baseman, called the new stadium “a thrill,” but admitted to some nostalgia for Shea. “I had a lot of firsts at Shea Stadium — my first hit, first major league game,” he said. “I had a chance to have a lot of memories at Shea.”

The Mets are financing the stadium, largely through tax-exempt bonds. The city will contribute $90 million in capital funds and the state will contribute $75 million in rent credits toward infrastructure projects related to the new stadium, which the Mets have promised to use for at least 35 years. The city estimates that the project will create 6,000 construction jobs while preserving the 1,000 jobs at Shea Stadium.

To secure City Council support for the bond financing, the Mets promised to devote 25 percent of their annual community and charitable efforts to Queens groups and to have at least 25 percent of construction contracts and jobs go to Queens companies and residents, with another 25 percent to firms owned by women or minorities.

In addition to naming rights, Citigroup agreed to buy media time on SportsNet New York, a television network the Mets launched in March. The name of the financial services company will be integrated into the team’s marketing and publicity campaigns and appear on walls, scoreboards, videos and automated teller machines throughout the new ballpark.

“We think the value the Mets express — on the field, off the field — match the values we aspire to with our employees and our customers,” said Lewis B. Kaden, vice chairman and chief administrative officer of Citigroup.

Citi Field will have 42,500 seats and standing room for 2,500, but the total capacity is smaller than that of the 57,333-seat Shea Stadium. The number of toilets will increase, to 646 from 568, as will the number of wheelchair-accessible seats (to 830 from 174), luxury suites (to 54 from 45) and public elevators (11 from 4). The new stadium store will be 7,200 square feet, compared with 2,600 square feet for the store at Shea.

There will be four restaurants with capacity to feed 3,134 people, compared with Shea Stadium’s two restaurants, which can accommodate 518. As for concessions, Citi Field will have 1 point of sale per 150 spectators, a 41 percent increase from the current ratio of 1 per 254.

Asked about ticket prices, Mr. Wilpon was noncommittal. “We’ve always been very cognizant of prices and we continue to be,” he said. “We are cognizant of having areas in our stadium now and in the future that people can afford.”

http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/11/13/sports/13cnd_mets.600.jpg
From left, Mets players Jose Reyes and David Wright, Mayor Mike Bloomberg and Jeff Wilpon, the Mets' senior executive vice president.

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/business/media/14adco.html?ref=media

Advertising
The Mets’ New Marquee Name

By STUART ELLIOTT (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/stuart_elliott/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: November 14, 2006

Experts in the realms of sports marketing, corporate identity and brand building are offering sharply divergent views of the value of the huge deal that will name the new ballpark of the New York Mets for Citigroup (http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=C).

The agreement, announced formally yesterday, will label the Mets’ new stadium, scheduled to open in spring 2009, Citi Field. The current ballpark, Shea Stadium, is named after William A. Shea, a lawyer who helped bring National League baseball back to New York after the Dodgers and Giants left for the West Coast.

To designate the new stadium Citi Field, Citigroup is agreeing to pay more than $20 million a year for at least 20 years, published reports estimate, making the deal the most lucrative one in the United States for what is known as naming rights.

The experts, however, raised questions about whether New York baseball fans, famous — or notorious, depending upon your point of view — for their feisty opinions, will welcome a sponsored name or spurn it, complaining, “Shea it ain’t so!”

Although corporate names have been familiar features of the sports landscape around the country, the Mets are becoming the first major team in New York in the big four sports (baseball, basketball, football, hockey) to name its home after a marketer.

“There are definite dangers,” said Andy Sernovitz, chief executive of an organization called the Word of Mouth Marketing Association, which seeks to help advertisers understand how consumer chat about a brand or product can affect sales and reputation.

“The risk of word-of-mouth backlash, especially among die-hard loyals, is significant,” Mr. Sernovitz said, noting the novelty of the corporate naming for the New York sports market and the fact that “there are such historic, personal feelings about Shea Stadium and the name.”

“If it’s ‘The Man has bought your stadium,’ it’s hard to get warm feelings out of that,” Mr. Sernovitz said. He added that he would recommend that Citigroup offset that by trying to “show some respect” and that it acknowledge the potential pitfalls of the naming.

Among the steps that Mr. Sernovitz suggested Citigroup should consider were “a ceremony inviting people to say goodbye to Shea” and “taking the old sign on tour, bringing it to Times Square” and other public gathering places.

Robert K. Passikoff, president at Brand Keys, a brand and customer loyalty research company in New York, also pointed out that “hard-core fans, whether it’s New York or San Diego, resent stadiums changing their names,” because “they feel it adulterates what they see as pure and clean and all-American” about baseball.

“You’ll have a portion of the consumer base that is going to be resentful,” Mr. Passikoff warned.

The Mets have played in Shea Stadium since 1964. Before that, they played for two seasons in the Polo Grounds, the former home of the New York Giants, while waiting for Shea to be completed.

The owners of the Mets, the Wilpon family, are replacing Shea with the new ballpark, being built next to Shea in Flushing, Queens, partly because of complaints that Shea is outdated.

“Mets fans, as much as they complain about Shea, have grown attached to the name,” said Jim Andrews, editorial director of IEG Sponsorship Report, a newsletter published in Chicago. So “there certainly will be some backlash” against Citi Field, he added.

A discussion about the name change on a sports blog, DeadSpin (deadspin.com (http://deadspin.com/)), reflected divided opinions among fans.

While several attacked the new name, not all the DeadSpin readers were upset, judging by some of their comments.

“I could care less about the name as long as the stadium has good sightlines,” wrote a reader who posted under the name Critic. “And beer.”
Another reader, posting under the name Brad Lee, joked that “the new musical theme for the Mets is ‘We Built This Citi.’ ”

Similarly, some experts said they saw positive aspects to the arrival of Citi Field onto the New York sports scene.

“Because it’s New York, and because Citigroup is such an enormous business in the New York area, it’s a perfect marriage for the New York Mets,” said David Bialek, president at the ANC Sports Marketing division of ANC Sports Enterprises in Purchase, N.Y.

As for the novelty of an advertiser’s name getting top billing in New York, “I think fans are accustomed to this type of commercialization,” Mr. Bialek said. “There no longer exists the anger or animosity that existed when these deals first began.”

In fact, “I would suggest Mets fans would look at the size of the deal with pride: ‘The Mets are deserving of $20 million a year,’ ” Mr. Bialek said.

John Fraser, executive vice president at Element 79 Sports in Chicago, part of the Element 79 agency owned by the Omnicom Group (http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=OMC), said the fact that the marketer’s name was being affixed to a new field may ameliorate any hard feelings about the disappearance of the Shea Stadium name.

“It’s easier to get fans and media to use a name if it’s a new entity,” Mr. Fraser said, adding, “If you’re lucky, you can get a cool nickname like the Cell or the Bob.”

His references were to the diminutives that developed over time for the ballparks of two other baseball teams: U.S. Cellular Field in Chicago, home of the White Sox, and Bank One Ballpark, home of the Arizona Diamondbacks (now Chase Field because J. P. Morgan Chase (http://www.nytimes.com/redirect/marketwatch/redirect.ctx?MW=http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/nyt-com/html-companyprofile.asp&symb=JPM) acquired Bank One).

Bob Dorfman, executive vice president and creative director at Pickett Advertising in San Francisco, who tracks the value of professional athletes as endorsers, said: “Ten years ago, it was, ‘You’re destroying the purity of the game.’ Now, they say, ‘We can afford more money to buy a better team.’ ”

“Certainly there will be die-hard Mets fans who will be up in arms” about the corporate name, he said, “but it would be more of a big deal if it were the Yankees.”

(For the record, the New York Yankees, also building a stadium to open in 2009, say they plan to reuse the Yankee Stadium name.)

At a news conference yesterday at Shea Stadium, Lewis B. Kaden, chief administrative officer at Citigroup, said the relationship with the Mets would extend beyond naming rights to other initiatives. He suggested that Citigroup might take advantage of the Mets’ popularity in Latin America and Japan, where Citigroup has bank branches and issues credit cards.

Steven J. Freiberg, co-chairman of the Citigroup global consumer group, said the company could also use Citi Field as a showcase for new technologies like contactless payments, which enable shoppers to buy merchandise using specialized bank cards or payment tags.

(Anything to reduce the length of the beer lines.)

The naming deal comes as Citigroup is doing a lengthy review of its companywide brand strategy, looking at ways to unify its image; the review includes the well-known umbrella logo. Some posters depicting Citi Field at the news conference were missing the umbrella; others showed a red curve over the “Citi” part of “Citi Field.”

No decision about the future of the umbrella has been made, Mr. Freiberg said.

Eric Dash contributed reporting.

Ninjahedge

November 14th, 2006, 10:14 AM

CitiField?

Geez that sounds dumb. Right up there with Continental AIRLINES Arena, and PNC BANK Art Center.

They should just name it Ebbetts (sp) and put a large red umbrella on the facade. EVERYONE will know what that logo means without having to plaster the name on the outside of the park!

lofter1

November 14th, 2006, 11:15 AM

"citi" doesn't seem to be a term fully-owned by citigroup, as this LINK (http://www.rentapriest.com/web/?_p=1001) shows ...

Q: What does CITI stand for?
A: "Celibacy Is the Issue" which is the original name of the organization.

Founded in 1992, CITI (Celibacy Is The Issue) Ministries is a lay organization that locates, recruits, certifies and promotes married Roman Catholic priests to fill the spiritual needs of the faithful. 21 Canons (http://www.rentapriest.com/web/?_p=1018&newsId=40) validate the ministry of married priests.

TREPYE

November 14th, 2006, 11:33 AM

^LOL. Always good for a interesting tidbit huh loft. :) I hope that its is not a bad omen on the Mets. Why couldn't they just make a deal with Metlife and call the stadium "Metfield" which sounds a lot more appropiate.:rolleyes:

Jake

November 14th, 2006, 10:04 PM

I just overheard a conversation on the 6 train today. People are already referring to it as Shitty-Field.

lmao

lofter1

November 14th, 2006, 10:42 PM

Maybe that kind of talk ^^^ is what it will take to make them win the Series for the first time in way too long (and then they can finally stop re-running all the old vids) ...

TREPYE

November 15th, 2006, 02:12 AM

Field of Honor Becomes Field of Dollars

By CLYDE HABERMAN (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/nyregion/columns/clydehaberman/?inline=nyt-per)

Published: November 14, 2006
William Alfred Shea was off by a decade and a half.
(javascript:pop_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/11/14/nyregion/14nyc.1.ready.html', '14nyc_1_ready', 'width=720,height=600,scrollbars=yes,toolbars=no,r esizable=yes'))
http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2006/11/14/nyregion/190_nyc.jpg (javascript:pop_me_up2('http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/11/14/nyregion/14nyc.1.ready.html', '14nyc_1_ready', 'width=720,height=600,scrollbars=yes,toolbars=no,r esizable=yes'))Eddie Hausner/The New York Times
William A. Shea at the 1964 ceremony naming the Mets’ stadium for him. The Mets’ new stadium is to be called Citi Field.

(http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/)

He once predicted that 15 minutes after he died, his name would be taken off the Queens stadium where the New York Mets play baseball. It took 15 years instead.
But Mr. Shea got the big picture right. Nothing lasts forever, certainly not a name on the facade of a ballpark, certainly not when huge bucks are at stake and corporate egos need nourishing.
For 42 years, the Mets’ home field has been called Shea Stadium. It is called that for a reason: to honor Mr. Shea, never mind that ever-shrinking numbers of the team’s fans have a clue who he was.
Mr. Shea, who died in 1991 at 84, was a lawyer and a power broker. He, as much as anyone, brought National League baseball back to a bereft city after the Brooklyn Dodgers and the New York Giants took a powder in 1957. The New York Metropolitan Baseball Club Inc. came into being in 1961. When it moved into a new home of its own in 1964, it made sense to many to name the home Shea Stadium.
It was an honor in the dictionary definition of the word: high regard or great respect. It is an honor that has now become a casualty of modern business.
Yesterday, the Mets made it official that their new playground, rising next to the old one in Flushing Meadows, will not be called Shea Stadium. The new name is Citi Field, in obeisance to Citigroup, the banking titan.
Citigroup has entered into a 20-year partnership with the ball club and, news reports have it, will give the team $20 million a year. That is a fair-size chunk of change (even if it would not fully cover the annual salary of New York’s highest-paid ballplayer, Alex Rodriguez of the Yankees, who proves every October that he could not hit water if he fell off a pier).
In exchange for its millions, Citigroup receives naming rights. Naming rights are not to be confused with honor. Honor is something bestowed upon you. It is not something that you can insist is your due. A company name spread above the front door on demand is a billboard.
To appreciate the concept of honor, you need look no farther than across the elevated tracks of the No. 7 train running alongside Shea Stadium. On the other side of the tracks lie a tennis center named for Billie Jean King (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/billie_jean_king/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and stadiums bearing the names of Arthur Ashe (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/a/arthur_ashe/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Louis Armstrong. In that way, those giants of sports and music are honored. They did not pay for the privilege.
Putting up money without receiving a billboard in return is an alien concept in corporate America today. You don’t like it? Well, get real, said Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michael_r_bloomberg/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who used to run an information services company that he named for himself.
“The real world is that you have to have a naming opportunity and sell it for a lot of money if you can afford a stadium in this day and age,” the mayor said yesterday after a ceremonial groundbreaking for Citi Field. Fred Wilpon (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/fred_wilpon/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the Mets’ principal owner, made a similar point. “It is imperative that we receive revenues,” he said.
None of the 10 people who spoke yesterday, mostly politicians and business executives, mentioned William Shea in their prepared remarks. Only after reporters asked later about the name change did Mr. Wilpon allow that “we will honor Bill Shea somewhere in this stadium.”
Where, exactly? Who knows? But Shea family members take Mr. Wilpon at his word. They also accept the loss of their name with equanimity.
If Citigroup money helps the team, then “it’s absolutely fantastic,” said Kathy Shea Anfuso, a daughter of William Shea. Much the same was said by a grandson, F. Scott Shea. As for the fading of the family name, so be it. “How can you be grumpy about something that’s been so fabulous for 40 years, 45 years?” Ms. Anfuso, who lives in Portland, Ore., said by phone.
Scott Shea, a real estate lawyer in Los Angeles, was less than thrilled with the name Citi Field. Sounds “like an abandoned dump site out by the airport,” he said in a telephone interview. But he added, “having said that, I truly don’t believe the name on the door or the facade really matters that much; it’s what’s inside the walls of the new ballpark that counts.”
The Mets are betting that fans will feel the same way in time, despite some inevitable grumbling now. That seems a safe bet. All that most fans want is a winning team. But it does not mean they can’t tell the difference between an honor and a billboard.

Copyright 2006 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

TREPYE

November 15th, 2006, 02:14 AM

All that most fans want is a winning team. But it does not mean they can’t tell the difference between an honor and a billboard.

Copyright 2006 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html) The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)

Touché.

Transic

November 16th, 2006, 12:34 AM

Scott Shea, a real estate lawyer in Los Angeles, was less than thrilled with the name Citi Field. Sounds “like an abandoned dump site out by the airport,” he said in a telephone interview.

Sounds exactly like the area beyond Shea...or maybe he does mean that, tongue in cheek. ;)

Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, they've already honored the man by slapping his name on the current building. I explained this by using the Comiskey example. Comiskey Park was the old place that had a certain "charm" and was identified with the owner in that era, Shoeless Joe, Bill Veeck, the pinwheels, Disco Demolition and players wearing shorts for one season. The new place will never truly be Comiskey so why keep that name?

Same with faux Ebbets. Same location. Same chopshops. Completely different building. Yes, they'll name a rotonda after Jackie Robinson but that's because the insane political correctness in this town. However, Ebbets Field will always be associated with Brooklyn and Dem Bums. Fake Ebbets or not, it must be about the Mets, Queens, the #7 and the airplanes soaring over the playing field. The old building has done its purpose. Time to move on...or, rather, move forward (or is it backward with this retro design).

Naming rights need not be crass, depending on the situation and history of the building:

a) If the stadium is in the middle of nowhere surrounded by parking spaces: sell it!
b) If the stadium is old and people know its name for 30/40/50 years: don't sell it!
c) If the stadium is getting torn down and its replacement is built in the same area: new building, new history, different name! Call it Howard Stern Park if you like!

Now take a look at old and recent names:

Minute Maid Park - anything to erase the memory of Enron
U.S. Cellular Field - Never will be Comiskey so why not?
McAfee - It'll always be the Oakland-Alameda Coliseum for me
Fenway Park - They know better than to change that name!
Wrigley Field - See Fenway Park
Monster Park - It's Candlestick Park, dummy!
Dolphin Stadium - What's wrong with Joe Robbie?!
FedEx Field - Better than Jack Kent Cooke, who was a shady fellow and it's in the middle of nowhere. So no big shake.
Dodger Stadium - Keep the name! Already an icon!
Comerica Park - If it's not on Michigan and Trumbull then it's not Tiger Stadium!
PETCO Park - Whatever!
Busch Stadium - Busch I. Busch II. Busch III. They seem to have an attachment to that name.
Yankee Stadium - 26 World Championships. 'Nuff said
faux Yankee Stadium - Hmmm...I assume they'll wear pinstripes and that there'll be a Monument Park. But new building and all. Don't be surprised if the name's sold in the next 10 years, especially if fans start comparing it unfavorably to the old one. Or at least sections of the stadium.

Citi Field - Why not CitiBank? Too many names that have "Bank" or what? But then I think most people do associate Citigroup with banking so that may be redundant. I know people wanted MetLife but I guess MetLife was not going for it. Well, at least it's not "Parque Banco Popular". Now that would rile up the anglos. :D

ShittiField? Give me a break! Shows you how myopic this town is. :rolleyes:

NoyokA

November 16th, 2006, 12:48 AM

Wrigley Field - See Fenway Park

Let's not forget that the be-loved Wrigley field is corporate sponsorhip by Wrigley Gum. The same goes for Busch Stadium in St. Louis. Both were built by corporate sponsors, and today people wouldn't think of calling their stadiums otherwise. Give Citifield some time, it might garner the same respect.

lofter1

November 16th, 2006, 01:09 AM

Banks Shouldn’t Name Ball Fields.
You Can Look It Up.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/11/15/business/190_bank.jpg
Rusty Kennedy/Associated Press
Consider the case of Citizens Bank.
Since it won the naming rights for the
Phillies’ stadium in 2003, its shares
have trailed other banks’.

nytimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/business/15place.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1163653325-1nJamM8liTKMP3hNEIKHKQ)
By FLOYD NORRIS
November 15, 2006

Market Place

Call it the curse of the ball field. If it holds, Citigroup stock is going to underperform for years to come.

Citigroup became the fifth banking company to buy naming rights to a Major League Baseball stadium when it agreed Monday to pay an amount reported at more than $400 million over 20 years to place the name Citi Field on the New York Mets stadium that will open in 2009.

Citigroup obviously thinks that the naming rights are valuable, but history does not indicate such deals have done much for other banks, or for the ball clubs that play in them. Stocks of banks with ballparks have tended to do worse than stocks of other banks, and teams in these parks have tended to lose more games than they win.

It can be argued that none of this has anything to do with reality, that teams win or lose based on the quality of their players, not the name on the park, and that bank stocks go up or down because of their profits, not because of what in most cases is a relatively small part of their merchandising budget.

Those arguments are probably correct, but things have still not gone well when banks name ballparks. It is at least possible that there is no competitive advantage for a bank in having its name on a stadium. Maybe customers would prefer better service or higher deposit rates or lower loan rates, rather than receive the prestige of having the same name that is on their checks also on the ball field of their favorite team.

Or perhaps fans of other teams are reluctant to do business with a bank with such visible ties to a team that is out to defeat their favorite club. That could be important in New York, where many Yankee fans do not like the Mets.

Bank-named ballparks have not done that well for the teams, either. Cumulatively, there have been 25 seasons played in bank-named ballparks, but the home team has managed to post winning records in only 9 of those seasons. The average record in bank-named ballparks has been 75 wins and 87 losses.

Bank teams are not unique. There seems to be a pattern that industries that name multiple baseball parks do not do very well in picking winners. The only industry with a winning record this year was the phone industry, with AT&T Park in San Francisco, Rogers Center in Toronto and U.S. Cellular Field in Chicago, where the White Sox play.

The beer business (Colorado, St. Louis and Milwaukee), the insurance industry (Seattle and Cincinnati) and the juice business (Tampa Bay and Houston) all lost more regular-season games than they won. That was true even though the St. Louis Cardinals won the World Series.

The first bank to put its name on a baseball stadium was Bank One, which named Bank One Stadium in 1998, the year the Arizona Diamondbacks began playing, with a 65-97 record. That park is now Chase Field, recognizing Bank One’s 2004 merger with J. P. Morgan Chase.

From the time that naming deal was announced through Monday, when the Citigroup deal was announced, a Bank One investor would have seen his stock rise 111 percent, a performance that seems great until it is compared with that of the KBW bank stock index, which leaped 296 percent over the period. The Diamondbacks did win a World Series in 1999, but they have a losing record for their entire franchise history.

The next up to bat was Comerica, which named the new stadium for the Detroit Tigers in 2000. The team responded by playing only four games below .500, its best record in years, but it was not until last year that it had a winning record, going all the way to the World Series. Since Comerica was granted the naming rights in 1998, its stock is down 10 percent, while the bank index is up 41 percent.

If the new stadium briefly inspired the Tigers, a similar facility did not do much for the Pittsburgh Pirates when they moved into PNC Park in 2001 and lost 100 games. The team has not done that badly since, but it has yet to post a winning season in the ballpark. PNC stock has almost matched the bank index since the bank won the naming rights, rising 38.7 percent while the index rose 39 percent.

The fourth bank ballpark is the only one owned by a non-American bank. Citizens Bank Park, in Philadelphia, is named for a subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Scotland, where baseball is not popular. Nor has the performance of the bank’s stock done much to inspire a love for the game. Since it won the naming rights in 2003, its shares have risen 7 percent in British pounds, trailing every other stock in an index of major British banks. It has also lagged the American bank index.

On the field, however, the Phillies have had winning seasons in all three years that Citizens Bank Park has been open, although the park has yet to play host to a playoff game.

Over all, someone who put $100 into each bank stock on the day the naming deal was announced would have earned $161 on the $400 investment, not counting dividends. That is not bad, but it is less than half the $377 that could have been made buying the bank stock index.

It could be worse. An investor who put $100 into Enron stock when it bought the naming rights to the new Houston Astros stadium in 1999 would have had stock worth 44 cents when the bankrupt company sold back the rights to the team in 2002.

That field has remained less than lucky for investors. It was renamed Minute Maid Park for the Coca-Cola juice subsidiary in June 2002. Since then, Coke stock is down 14 percent while the Standard & Poor’s 500 is up 30 percent.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

NoyokA

November 16th, 2006, 02:43 AM

Ninjahedge

November 16th, 2006, 10:15 AM

The bottom line is, direct corporate sponsorship of a ball field by way of naming it after a corporation is just not a very classy thing to do!

Hell, naming any public venue that way is questionable (The epitome being PNC BANK Arts Center in NJ). Some parks named after people are questionable as well, but I ma more for naming a field about the entities that make up the town, the team that played there, or players that still live in the memories of fans, not by whoever plunked down the most cash.

CitiField should just have been called Mets Stadium and had Citibank logos unmistakably placed on any inconspicuous spot, from the number logos on chairs to the napkins at the concession stands. The idea is to get the name out, not to make a direct association with an ULTIMATE LUXURY LIKE OWNING A BALL TEAM OR SPORTING VENUE!!!!

WTF? You mean to tell me that Citi-Corp make enough money holding my money to pay $20M a year for a stadium? That may just be a drop in the bucket, but that makes it an awfully big bucket!!!!!

Also, any purchase of a team or a venue holds the risk of decreased popularity amongst the general public if that team does not do well. The two obviously have nothing to do with each other, but neither did 9-11 and Iraq and that got someone into office on public opinion.

I guess what I am trying to say is that sometimes corporate sponsorship can be a good thing for everyone involved, but you just have to be careful how hard, and how often, you smack people over the head with your red umbrella in any attempt to get their attention.

ZippyTheChimp

November 16th, 2006, 10:49 AM

That article was somewhat tongue-in-cheek, like predicting the DJIA by whether the NFC or AFC win the Super Bowl.

Corporate naming rights can lead to continuity problems, like Pacific Bell Park becomes SBC Park becomes AT&T Park. Watch out for future mergers. They all sound dumb, but at least the original had a good connection with San Fran. Continuity is important for sports franchises.

Lets not talk about Enron and Houston.

I've just grown tired of the pervasive intrusion of advertising. During the broadcast of the marathon, not a single opportunity was missed to call it the ING New York City Marathon, not just after commercial breaks where it seems natural, but during commentary such as..."last time that happened in the marathon (substitute ING, etc). I'm sure all of the commentators were prompted to do this, and there was probably an ING bean counter glued to his TV with a counter.

Let's not forget that the be-loved Wrigley field is corporate sponsorhip by Wrigley Gum. The same goes for Busch Stadium in St. Louis. Both were built by corporate sponsors, and today people wouldn't think of calling their stadiums otherwise. Give Citifield some time, it might garner the same respect.

Not really good examples. The Busch family owned the Cardinals and the original Sportsman Field from the early 50s to 1996.

Bill Wrigley gained ownership of the Cubs in 1919. The family owned the team until 1981, when it was bought by the Tribune company. They wouldn't dare change the name. Wrigley is up there with Yankee and Fenway as team and city identifiers.

The Mets should have just called it Mets Stadium, or maybe Casey Stengel Stadium. That would've been cool.

Not a big deal really, but I'm glad I'll be going to Yankee Stadium in three years, not Chase Field.

lofter1

November 16th, 2006, 10:59 AM

During the broadcast of the marathon, not a single opportunity was missed to call it the ING New York City Marathon, not just after commercial breaks where it seems natural, but during commentary such as..."last time that happened in the marathon (substitute ING, etc). I'm sure all of the commentators were prompted to do this, and there was probably an ING bean counter glued to his TV with a counter ...

Not only prompted, but contractually obligated I'm sure.

No way is ING going to plop down the cash to grab the NYC Marathon naming rights without their lawyers closing every hole that would allow the event to be mentioned on air without the name of ING attached to it.

I'm not a fan of it, but since there's nothing I can do about it ...

Jake

November 16th, 2006, 11:34 AM

sounds to me like a substantial rumor!

Shorting Citigroup stock now...:p

Ninjahedge

November 16th, 2006, 11:41 AM

Not only prompted, but contractually obligated I'm sure.

No way is ING going to plop down the cash to grab the NYC Marathon naming rights without their lawyers closing every hole that would allow the event to be mentioned on air without the name of ING attached to it.

I'm not a fan of it, but since there's nothing I can do about it ...

Yes there is. Don't watch it.

And tell the broadcast company that the reason you did NOT watch it was the over pervasiveness of the corporate logo and sponsorship on the event.

If ING really wanted to be clever, they would have called it the RunING of the NYC Marathon... :P

ZippyTheChimp

November 16th, 2006, 12:07 PM

sounds to me like a substantial rumor!

Shorting Citigroup stock now...:pI don't like to give out financial advice and cause someones life to tank, so I hesitated to mention that the Super Bowl Indicator (http://www.snopes.com/business/bank/superbowl.asp) has been a pretty good market forecaster.

I attribute its recent failings to the introduction of Parity into the NFL, a concept that's alien to the very notion of capitalism.

So if Citigroup plunges and Delgado has a lousy year, can the SEC investigate him for market manipulation?

If they wanted a good name for the marathon, there's really only one choice.

Jake

November 16th, 2006, 12:46 PM

kz1000ps

November 16th, 2006, 01:59 PM

the Super Bowl Indicator (http://www.snopes.com/business/bank/superbowl.asp) has been a pretty good market forecaster.

I guess that's all the more reason to root for the Giants. Darn, and I wanted to see Peyton go all the way..

Ninjahedge

November 16th, 2006, 03:27 PM

Wall St has a lot of these so called indicators such as the anti-Cramer and the J-Low. There's really a bunch of them that are downright hilarious.

A recent survey of a lot of world data showed that the most accurate predictor of the S&P 500 Index was the Bangladesh Butter Production Index, I kid you not.

There are a few general trends that have worked in the past, such as the January sell off theory but those became worthless the second they became publicized. As my college economics professor used to say "once you notice a trend it's no longer useful" hehe.

I also believe this was a quote.. Around the year 2000, on a special episode of "Dr. Who" of all things.

To paraphrase it:

Humans associate lots of things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

I agree with that. Just because one parallels teh other for a while does not make one control the other, or makes one a divining rod for it, known or not.

Remember, the answer to the world is easy, it's teh question that nobody knows.

42

pianoman11686

November 16th, 2006, 04:06 PM

If they wanted a good name for the marathon, there's really only one choice.

The oil company?

Transic

November 17th, 2006, 12:00 AM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/jonah_freedman/11/15/new.stadiums/index.html

No handouts here
Three clubs set example with private ballpark funding
Posted: Wednesday November 15, 2006 2:52PM; Updated: Wednesday November 15, 2006 4:17PM

As fans, we've put up with a lot over the past few years.

Our jaws dropped when Alex Rodriguez signed with the Rangers in 2000 for more than the gross domestic products of 17 countries. We cringed when the Red Sox started charging us upwards of $400 for a family of four to attend a game at Fenway Park. We shook our heads when they built premium seating in foul territory at Dodger Stadium, eliminating a hurlers' advantage at one of the premier pitcher's parks in the Majors.

We still shudder at forking over close to $30 for a beer, a Cha Cha bowl and an order of garlic fries at San Francisco's AT&T Park (or Pac Bell, or SBC, or whatever they're calling it these days).

We've been resilient. It's the game we love. No matter how jaded we've become as baseball becomes big business in America -- more so every day -- we've written off the increasingly heavy costs as the price of being a fan. It's for the good of the game, right?

But when owners want our local governments to raise our taxes to build new stadiums, well, that's where things get dodgy. We'll pay their prices to go to their games and fund their paychecks. But why should the costs of doing business fall on us as taxpayers? After all, Bill Gates wouldn't ask the residents of Redmond, Wash., to fund Microsoft's corporate campus, would he?

That's why I'm psyched about something a trio of owners, both new and old, have done over the past few months. That's right, I'm actually about to give a shoutout to George Steinbrenner. And to Fred Wilpon and Lew Wolff. These owners have laid plans to build new stadiums for the Yankees, Mets and A's, respectively, and these new projects are being financed with a majority of funding from private sources.

Why is that a big deal? Because for the most part, the way stadiums get built is something like this: Despite signing multimillion-dollar sponsorship deals with Fortune 500 companies, inking lucrative television deals that could make Ted Turner blush, raising ticket prices at an astonishing rate and selling naming rights that ranged from bizarre (3Com) to ridiculous (Enron), owners actually want us -- the fans, the taxpayers -- to fund their places of business.

Between 1962 and 1982, all but one stadium was financed entirely by or close to 100 percent public funding, according to data collected by Minnesota State University's Phillip Miller for an upcoming report in the Journal of Sports Economics. Since then, as big business made its way into the game, about half of all new stadiums were still being financed mostly by taxpayer-collected funds. That includes enormously pricey projects such as Seattle's Safeco Field and San Diego's Petco Park (built at costs of $559 million and $457 million, respectively, two-thirds of which were public money).

And the trend is continuing. Minneapolis will build a $522 million monstrosity for the Twins, with 75 percent of the burden falling on taxpayers.

Washington, D.C., is set to build a highly controversial $611 million park for the Nationals that's entirely publicly funded.

That's the ultimate in hypocrisy, and it's a slap in the face to the fan. Team owners and politicians can preach all they want about how these projects will provide jobs and promote civic pride, but there's no reason why Joe and Mary Taxpayer should be subsidizing moneymaking schemes for multimillionaire owners. That holds even truer for small-market teams, where there's less corporate money to be had and even more of the burden falling on the fans.

That's where Steinbrenner, Wilpon and Wolff are setting a good precedent. Let's not get carried away here -- these are all large-market owners and each of their respective team's planned parks are mammoth projects with price tags to match. The Mets' Citi Field will cost $600 million, and New Yankee Stadium is the new Rhodes Colossus of baseball, topping $1 billion in projected costs. (Plus, the clubs reportedly will be able to count their stadium expenses against their gross revenues, allowing them to save money on that pesky MLB revenue-sharing bill for a decade.) But in these cases, their owners are putting their money where their mouths are. They're willing to cover most of the costs of their new parks without burdening their fans.

Out in the Bay Area, it's the same story with slightly different circumstances. A's owner Wolff is a savvy hotelier and commercial developer who has a history getting deals done both using bond money and private funding, often a combination of both. That's good experience to draw from, because Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis probably made it impossible for a Bay Area sports-franchise owner to ever draw on public funds again. Contrary to the plans Davis and the Raiders drew up, the city is still paying for renovations made to McAfee Coliseum solely for the team's move back to the Bay a decade ago. That's why Oakland is unlikely to ever dip into taxpayer funds for another sports franchise, and that's partially why San Francisco gave up zero public money for the Giants' AT&T Park, built in 2000.

Wolff negotiated with the city of Oakland in good faith for a new stadium within city limits, but most politicians didn't expect him to reach a deal, especially since there wasn't enough land to be had. The agreement he struck with nearby Fremont was negotiated almost exclusively with Silicon Valley giant Cisco Systems and will involve no taxpayer money. That's something even Wolff can relate to.

"I am a taxpayer and I don't want to burden myself," he told me last week. "It's not because I'm a good guy, it's because I think there's a better way to do it."

Wolff is also tapping into a lucrative San Jose/Silicon Valley fan base, where he can grow support for his team and perhaps kiss the Moneyball era goodbye forever.

To any baseball fan's ears, that sounds like money well spent.

------------------------------------

http://www.forbes.com/business/2006/11/14/baseball-mets-citigroup-biz_cz_kb_1114naming.html

Sports Business
Mets Break The Bank
Kurt Badenhausen (http://javascript<b></b>:fdcBioWindow('kurtbadenhausen')), 11.14.06, 10:10 AM ET

After lagging its rivals in recent years, Citigroup has finally caught up. No, not its stock price. That's still at the same level it was five years ago, much to the chagrin of shareholders and CEO Chuck Price. We're talking about stadium naming rights. At a groundbreaking ceremony Monday, the New York Mets announced plans to name their new stadium Citi Field. The stadium is scheduled to open in 2009.

Citigroup (nyse: C (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=C) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=C)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=C)) follows the lead of fellow banking giants Bank of America (nyse: BAC (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=BAC) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=BAC)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=BAC)), JPMorgan Chase (nyse: JPM (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=JPM) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=JPM)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=JPM)) and Wachovia (nyse: WB (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=WB) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=WB)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=WB)), who have all splashed their names on stadiums across the country. But Citi's deal with the Mets leaves these others in the dust when it comes to its cost. The 20-year deal is the most lucrative in the history of pro sports, worth an average of $20 million a year. The biggest naming rights deal prior to this was a $300 million, 30-year deal between the National Football League's Houston Texans and Reliant Energy (nyse: RRI (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=RRI) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=RRI)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=RRI)).

The Mets deal is even more dramatic when you compare it to other baseball stadiums. Prior to this, the ten biggest naming rights deals were all at stadiums that house NFL teams or arenas that jointly host National Basketball Association and National Hockey League teams. The largest baseball deals were for Citizens Bank Park (Philadelphia Phillies) and Minute Maid Park (Houston Astros). Both deals are worth close to $100 million, about $4 million a year.

The Mets raised $613 million from a bond sale this summer to pay their share of the 45,000-seat proposed stadium. Citigroup led the banks that underwrote the sale, but apparently, that didn't include a discount on the naming rights package. So what made Citi cough up five times the annual cost of any other baseball naming rights deal?

The Mets are a strong team that tied for the best record in baseball in 2006. With the third-highest revenues in baseball (behind the Yankees and Red Sox), the club has the financial resources to ensure a competitive team going forward. Citigroup is signing on with the hope of the Mets playing meaningful playoff games beamed around the world from Citi Field. "The timing coincides well with the rise of the Mets, which has become a premier MLB franchise," says Dean Bonham, president of Bonham Group, a Denver sports marketing firm.

The Mets also have a new regional sports network, SportsNet New York, owned by the team, Time Warner (nyse: TWX (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=TWX) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=TWX)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=TWX)) and Comcast (nasdaq: CMCSA (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=CMCSA) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=CMCSA)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=CMCSA)). This channel guarantees year-end, in-depth coverage of the team.

But the biggest reason for the deal is location. In addition to New York being the financial capital of the world and Citigroup's headquarters, the new sports facility is the first built in decades (the New Jersey Devils are also in the process of building a new home). The New York area hasn't had a naming rights deal completed since Continental Airlines (nyse: CAL (http://finapps.forbes.com/finapps/jsp/finance/compinfo/CIAtAGlance.jsp?tkr=CAL) - news (http://www.forbes.com/markets/company_news.jhtml?ticker=CAL)- people (http://www.forbes.com/peopletracker/results.jhtml?startRow=0&name=&ticker=CAL)) put their name on the 15-year-old arena at the Meadowlands in East Rutherford, N.J., in 1996. The value of deals has skyrocketed in the past ten years.

The deal should lock up the lucrative financial services sponsorship category for Citigroup as well. "Citi's competitors will be shut out of promotional opportunities with the team or facility," says Bonham.

However, Citigroup and the Mets might not hold the title of biggest naming rights deal for long.

The Dallas Cowboys are building a new stadium scheduled to open in 2009, and the New York Giants and Jets are sharing the cost of a new home tentatively scheduled to open in 2010. Both of these stadiums have the potential to top the Mets' historic deal.

The brass ring of naming rights deals is for the new Yankee Stadium scheduled to open in 2009. Yankee officials are on record saying they will not sell naming rights to the new park, and that it will retain the Yankee Stadium name. But George Steinbrenner does not like to come in second place to anyone, particularly the Mets. If the right partner offers the right deal, it just might be too much money to turn down.

In Pictures: The Ten Biggest Naming Rights Deals (http://www.forbes.com/2006/11/14/baseball-mets-citigroup-biz_cz_kb_1114naming_slide_2.html)

Transic

November 22nd, 2006, 06:08 PM

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/newyork/am-shea1122,0,2735234.story?coll=ny-nycnews-headlines

MTA could sell name rights to Shea stations

Chuck Bennett
amNewYork Staff Writer

November 22, 2006

Already the namesake of the new Mets stadium, Citigroup will get first dibs on lending its name to the Long Island Rail Road and subway stops that will service the new field in Flushing, according to an MTA proposal.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority plans to approach the company with the offer of exclusive naming rights to the LIRR's Shea Stadium station as well as the Willets Point-Shea Stadium stop on the No. 7 subway line, MTA spokesman Tom Kelly said Tuesday.

Already the namesake of the new Mets stadium, Citigroup will get first dibs on lending its name to the Long Island Rail Road and subway stops that will service the new field in Flushing, according to an MTA proposal.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority plans to approach the company with the offer of exclusive naming rights to the LIRR's Shea Stadium station as well as the Willets Point-Shea Stadium stop on the No. 7 subway line, MTA spokesman Tom Kelly said Tuesday.

---------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/473454p-398245c.html

Next stop: Citi Field?

MTA may rename Shea station

BY PETE DONOHUE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

The MTA may try to cash in on the deal to name the Mets' home ballpark after Citigroup.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority plans on talking to Citigroup about changing the current names of two MTA stations: the Shea Stadium stops on the subway and commuter railroad systems, an authority spokesman confirms.

Citigroup will pay the Mets $20 million a year to call the new ballpark Citi Field, and drop the name Shea. The deal was announced last week.

"Obviously, we will be in discussions with Citigroup about naming rights," MTA spokesman Tom Kelly said.

The MTA hired a team of consultants two years ago to research new ways of raising revenues by entering into "sponsorship" deals with corporations.

MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow then ruled out renaming landmarks like Grand Central Terminal. Citigroup referred questions to Citibank officials. A spokesman said he'd look into the issue late yesterday afternoon but then couldn't be reached.

"I have no problem with the MTA doing everything it can to increase revenues from non customers so as to keep fares and tolls as level as possible," MTA board member Mitchell Pally said.

But Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign saw a danger in over-commercialization. "What's next? Will we give riders directions to take the Bayer Aspirin IRT to Walt Disney's Times Square and then switch to the McDonald's 7 line to the Citigroup stop in Queens - which also happens to be the stop for the Mets Stadium?" he asked.

Originally published on November 21, 2006

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-opcop204984075nov20,0,1352068.story?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

It's a shame Shea won't be missed

Too many people seem ready to bury the memories and move on, but that park earned respect

BY CLAUDIA GRYVATZ COPQUIN
Claudia Gryvatz Copquin, a Northport writer, is the author of the forthcoming book "The Neighborhoods of Queens."

November 20, 2006

Within all the recent chatter over Citi Field, the corporate name for the baseball stadium being built next to the Mets' current ballpark, there was next to nothing about the imminent destruction of Shea Stadium itself.

Confession: I have no appreciation for baseball. In fact, I'd rather stick a corkscrew in my ear than sit through a game. Unlike my contemporaries, I have no fond childhood memories of going to baseball games with my dad, or even watching them with him on TV. Fact is, my parents, three siblings and I were late 1960s immigrants from South America, and my father didn't know from baseball.

Still, growing up in Jackson Heights, it seemed the mammoth purple arena was always in my face - a passing fancy. Even if we tried, there was no avoiding Shea, as we'd frequently eyeball it while driving along the Grand Central Parkway or as we rode the elevated No. 7 train along Roosevelt Avenue.

So Shea became a visual fixture of my youth, as was the giant steel Unisphere in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park left over from the 1964-65 World's Fair. As was the spherical, futuristic structure that used to be Macy's in Rego Park. And the colossal, red-and-white-striped gas tanks (both then on Queens Boulevard in Elmhurst). Queens is not exactly glamorous or remotely appealing architecturally, and in every way imaginable paling in comparison with Manhattan, which has the Empire State Building, Rockefeller Center, the Chrysler Building. But, hey, these were the few familiar landmarks of my borough - and I reflect on them somewhat when passing through Queens from Long Island.

Weirdly, I am particularly wistful about Shea, and I've been trying to figure out why, since no one else I've spoken to seems to be. The general consensus is that it's an outdated, uninspired ballpark, with virtually no historical significance, especially when compared with Yankee Stadium. I suppose this is accurate, but as a kid struggling with a foreign language and perplexing cultural customs (not the least of which was Thanksgiving), to me Shea Stadium represented something unattainable but thoroughly American: leisure. My parents worked factory jobs, and we had little disposable income. But what Americans! They spent money on baseball tickets and hot dogs. That was wondrous.

Of course, there's no room for silly musings when it comes to money. Pretty soon Shea Stadium will be demolished. Millions upon millions of public and private funds will be spent on a better facility. The park's new name will not reflect a person, but the institution that helped finance it. (I suppose a bank is a tad more dignified than, say, an orange juice company.)

It matters not one iota that Shea is where the Beatles played in 1965 and 1966 for tens of thousands of crazed fans. Or that in 1969 the Mets won their first world championship against the Orioles there, or that the Yankees played in that stadium (as did the Jets and the Giants) during the 1974-75 season, when their park was undergoing renovations, or that the Mets won their second World Series there, in '86.

The fans I've spoken to, many of whom do have childhood recollections of Shea and even drag their own families to games as adults, don't seem to give the stadium's demise a second thought. They're eager for the new and improved ballpark, which will have more luxury suites, more restaurants and more bathrooms. I have no doubt it will also have more advertising billboards and that it'll cost more for tickets.

Although I'm sure I won't be among the throngs on opening day of Citi Field or any time thereafter, I do have an important message for those involved in this project: A rousing, raucous, sloppy Archie Bunker-like raspberry to one and all.

Now, play ball.

Transic

December 7th, 2006, 02:17 PM

http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/12/yankees-mets-beat-the-irs.html

Yankees, Mets Beat the IRS
FILE UNDER: Stadiums (http://therealestate.observer.com/stadiums/)

Following up on The Politicker's tip (http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2006/12/deal-of-the-year.html)that the Mets-Yankees bond issues won The Bond Buyer (http://www.bondbuyer.com/article.html?id=20061205ENIZEYAG&from=home]The Bond Buyer)'s deal of the year award at a black-tie gala on Tuesday night, we called up the editor-in-chief, Nicholas Chesla, to ask why.
There seemed to be a demonstrated degree of cooperation among different levels of government in these two transactions. We had a New York City agency, the [Industrial Development Agency (http://www.nycedc.com/nycida/)] involved, New York City itself involved, New York State making contributions, and the teams themselves. It was a really major public-private partnership. These deals had been on the drawing board for a while. We also liked the fact that all the parties involved had been able to get these private letter rulings. They had been able to chart their way through all the issues, both legislative and political, to get these deals done.The reason the private letter rulings--which are letters issued by the IRS telling an individual party whether what they plan to do is legal or not--were so important is that the tax code generally discourages municipalities from issuing tax-free bonds (http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/10/irs-haunts-stadium-deals.html) (which are significantly cheaper to pay back) to finance stadiums.

For the Mets and Yankees deals, however, the city successfully made the case (with the help of a lobbyist or two (http://therealestate.observer.com/2006/06/yankees-new-roster.html)) that using payments made by the team in lieu of taxes would not be the same thing as having those teams funnel private money through the city.

The I.D.A., which received the Bond Buyer's award, had not nominated itself for deal of the year. That nomination came from the bond underwriters (including Citigroup and Goldman Sachs) and three or four bond insurers, Chesla said. The geniuses behind the bonds are said to be two lawyers, Joel Moser (http://www.fulbright.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=attorneys.detail&site_id=301&emp_id=11292) for the Mets and Bruce Serchuk of Nixon Peabody (http://http://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_detail1.asp?ID=939) for the I.D.A.

This, of course, has everything to do with The Observer's story today about public subsidies for private entities. (http://www.observer.com/20061211/20061211_Matthew_Schuerman_pageone_financialpress. asp)

- Matthew Schuerman

NoyokA

January 24th, 2007, 12:39 AM

Construction is moving at a fast pace at Citifield. Much more than what's been done at Yankee Stadium.

You can already see the outline of the new field and even the outline for the Jackie Robinson Rotunda and future stands.

http://www.stadiumpage.com/future/127_8.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/future/127_7.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/future/127_6.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/future/127_5.jpg

Alot going on above ground aswell.

http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/12_29_05.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/12_29_04.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/12_29_03.jpg

http://www.stadiumpage.com/newmets/12_29_01.jpg

H-man

January 24th, 2007, 02:54 AM

well its easier there, they didnt need to excavate a park

Ninjahedge

January 24th, 2007, 10:01 AM

Not really, soil conditions suck.

They are pushing to try to get this up and running before the Yanks, for obvious reasons.

You should see the Administration building/offices rise in the outfeld first, then the rest of the building. They want to be able to do this with as little interruption as possible....

The design looks nice, aside from some modern commercial inclusions, and should at least remind people of the old Ebbets Stadium.

I am keeping my fingers crossed on this. I always like it when a modern building is successful in replicating some classic styles.

ZippyTheChimp

January 24th, 2007, 10:20 AM

They are pushing to try to get this up and running before the Yanks, for obvious reasons.Both are scheduled to open in April, 2009. It makes no difference if one is complete in Nov and the other is complete a month later. The schedule will determine which Opening Day is first.

I don't think they'll be any preseason ceremony which would water down the impact of Opening Day.

Alonzo-ny

January 24th, 2007, 10:53 AM

Both are scheduled to open in April, 2009. It makes no difference if one is complete in Nov and the other is complete a month later. The schedule will determine which Opening Day is first.

I don't think they'll be any preseason ceremony which would water down the impact of Opening Day.

Its obvious they would rather have their stadium completed first because they want to be better than their rivals.

TallGuy

January 24th, 2007, 11:14 AM

Its obvious they would rather have their stadium completed first because they want to be better than their rivals.

How does being first make them better? As Zippy says, the opening will be dictated by the MLB schedule.

lofter1

January 24th, 2007, 11:23 AM

Anyone know how Shea will be razed?

TallGuy

January 24th, 2007, 11:54 AM

Anyone know how Shea will be razed?

Wouldn't it be imploded? Its' proximity is so close to the new stadium I wonder how difficult and tricky that will be.

ManhattanKnight

January 24th, 2007, 12:15 PM

^Apparently not. "We haven't permitted explosives or swinging balls in at least 25 years," said Vahe Tiryakian, spokesman for the Buildings Department. Much demolition work is still handwork in New York City, with strong men wielding hammers, crowbars and chipping tools.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE6DC173FF93BA25757C0A9659582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

bigkdc

January 24th, 2007, 01:28 PM

by hand??? that will be interesting....i'd love to get some of the seats

eatabagel

January 24th, 2007, 02:44 PM

^ It's actually pretty interesting. There was a ModernMarvels episode on demolition methods and they featured demolition experts in NYC as well. I think the company's called Marzocchi. They don't do it all by hand. They actually have specialized machines that look like gigantic metal dinosaurs that CRUNCH away at steel and concrete.

TallGuy

January 24th, 2007, 02:54 PM

by hand??? that will be interesting....i'd love to get some of the seats

Prepare to pay. Last year the city sold some seats recently renovated from the current Yankee Stadium and they went for about $1,000.00 per seat.

If you get one save one for me!

Ninjahedge

January 24th, 2007, 04:58 PM

How does being first make them better? As Zippy says, the opening will be dictated by the MLB schedule.

Um, how many peopel will pay attension in the media to the Mets stadium being opened (ceremony) if Yankee Stadium is opened on teh same day?

You say it does not matter, but it really does, in a publicity sort of way. And the fact that they have been running a VERY fast paced design/construction schedule and are ahead of the Yankees (but still salte finish time to be only shortly before season start) makes me wonder if YS can actually get something completed by 2K7.

Something done right that is.

It is possible, but I think at this point it would be very difficult and/or very expensive.

We will see!

TallGuy

January 24th, 2007, 05:24 PM

I'm a Yankee fan so that is where my focus is, but I am still looking forward to checking out the new Mets Stadium. I am a baseball fan and they are not mutually exclusive, although if I had it my way I'd keep the current Yankee Stadium until it completely fell beyond repair. (I'd bet real money that it will get rebuilt within our lifetimes on it's current site once Yankee Stadium II is decalred 'outdated' in 30-35 years.)

I'll make a point of visiting both if as soon as I can buy a ticket, even with the drive up from Richmond.

ZippyTheChimp

January 24th, 2007, 06:04 PM

Um, how many peopel will pay attension in the media to the Mets stadium being opened (ceremony) if Yankee Stadium is opened on teh same day?That's never happened in my memory, and it sure won't happen in 2009. TV will have a lot to say about that.

They'll be pressure in 2008 for both teams to get to the WS.

How does a Subway Series for two closing ballparks sound?

OmegaNYC

January 24th, 2007, 06:08 PM

A last hooray for the two closing parks? Sounds good to me.

antinimby

January 24th, 2007, 08:59 PM

^Apparently not. "We haven't permitted explosives or swinging balls in at least 25 years," said Vahe Tiryakian, spokesman for the Buildings Department.That leads to a good question: which then, was the building that was last imploded, if ever, in this city?

antinimby

January 24th, 2007, 09:04 PM

All this 'who will open before who by a few days' is kind of silly to me.

Ultimately no one really remembers or cares who's ballpark opened five days ahead of the other.

In baseball, if you win or if you lose is all that matters, everything else takes a back seat.

The first minute or even before that, when the Red Sox comes in to play the Yanks, all this who opened first talk would be quickly forgotten.

eatabagel

January 24th, 2007, 09:54 PM

That leads to a good question: which then, was the building that was last imploded, if ever, in this city?

As recently as December, 2002, there was a controlled demolition in NY, conducted on Port Authority land. While the City prohibits controlled implosions, state and federal lands are not covered by city regulations.

http://www.panynj.gov/AboutthePortAuthority/PressCenter/PressReleases/PressRelease/index.php?id=287

antinimby

January 24th, 2007, 11:02 PM

Thanks, I figured it had to be in an out-of-the-way place like that.

Although one can say the same thing about the area where Shea is, the nearby elevated 7 train and the junkyards notwithstanding.

Transic

January 25th, 2007, 08:59 AM

^Apparently not. "We haven't permitted explosives or swinging balls in at least 25 years," said Vahe Tiryakian, spokesman for the Buildings Department. Much demolition work is still handwork in New York City, with strong men wielding hammers, crowbars and chipping tools.

Oh, well. I would have liked to see the same wrecking ball used to smash down Ebbets Field and the Polo Grounds be used to (at least ceremoniously) knock over Yankee and Shea Stadiums, as a sort of way of completing the cycle. :p

ZippyTheChimp

January 25th, 2007, 09:06 AM

They would paint the wrecking ball like this:

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0002LQPM4.01-A1YS16X5YAAFUH._AA280_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

Alonzo-ny

January 25th, 2007, 10:31 AM

How does being first make them better? As Zippy says, the opening will be dictated by the MLB schedule.

Pretend you are a baseball team or anyone for that matter, if you are building something and your greatest rivals are building the same something for themselves you will obviously want to finish first. Maybe you've have never been in competition with anyone in your life but i cant explain it any simpler.

ZippyTheChimp

January 25th, 2007, 10:46 AM

You are ignoring the obvious. The stadiums will be complete in the off-season. There will be items in the media, and that's it. The big events are Opening Day.

The only thing that's important is getting them ready for Opening Day. It's like a new school. You have to target it for the beginning of the school year.

If you miss opening by a month, you miss it by a year. Because of season-ticket holders, you can't change ballparks mid-season. If either team misses it and has to wait a year, it would be an embarrassment.

That's what we're talking about.

TallGuy

January 25th, 2007, 11:36 AM

Pretend you are a baseball team or anyone for that matter, if you are building something and your greatest rivals are building the same something for themselves you will obviously want to finish first. Maybe you've have never been in competition with anyone in your life but i cant explain it any simpler.

I am a territorial sales manager for a German company and am responsible for the entire U.S. and Canada (and as a link to this forum I sold some of the equipment used in the post 9/11 search and rescue effort). I know competition.

That said, from experience being first can be useful depending on the nature of a project, it can also be the riskiest, because if you are second you have the benefits of learning from the first guy's mistakes, ride his marketing coatails, and go in and clean up after him. Just look at how well the Chinese copycat manufacturer's are doing!

The Mets and Yankees have fairly mutually exclusive fan bases. I'm a Yankees fan. I like to see the Mets do well, but I am not emotionally invested with them either way. Many Mets fans hate the Yankees. If their new stadium is complete first, then good for them. It doesn't negatively effect what the Yankees are doing.

Ninjahedge

January 25th, 2007, 12:41 PM

Question is, if the yankees finish first, will anyone but ardent Mets fans care about their stadiums opening?

We are not talking logic here guys! We are talking marketing and emotion. I definitely see the Mets getting a better reception if tehy open first, but I do not see much for teh Yankees if THEY open first.

Not only that, if you are an owner, you want your palace to be completed first AND best. Never anythnig else! ;)

TallGuy

January 25th, 2007, 01:04 PM

OR, (and throwing out the baseball schedule) let's assume 1) The new Yankee Stadium will open on time in 2009 and the Mets had the choice of opening in 2008 or 2010. Which would you choose as the best scenario for the Mets? I would choose the LATER date, because then you would have the newest stadium.

But that won't matter, because both will open in 2009 on the dates the scheduler tells them to open, and tickets will go on sale several months before then whenever either team decides to put them on sale.

NoyokA

January 25th, 2007, 01:46 PM

I think the Mets Stadium is further ahead because they are playing it safe rather than sorry, besides Wilpon, the Mets owner, and builder of buildings such as the Bear Stearns HQ in midtown Manhattan knows all about meeting a schedule.

eatabagel

January 25th, 2007, 02:51 PM

If we're talking about ballclub owners, I would think that the Yankees should be invested in completing it as soon as possible, given that George Steinbrenner isn't getting any younger. I'm sure he'd like to step onto the field of the house he built before he kicks the bucket.

(btw, hi folks. been lurking the forums for a while now. finally coming out of the woodwork. what a cool set of forums!)

NoyokA

February 8th, 2007, 10:40 PM

On the Mets homepage there is a link to a gallery with pictures of the construction.

There's a slide with the building materials. The bricks look real but the tone leaves something to be desired. The steel structure is rising and you can make out the first level of seats. One of the concrete elevator cores continues to rise, probably one of the only concrete cores you will get to see in New York City.

Transic

February 9th, 2007, 11:46 AM

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02092007/sports/mets/citi_field_rising_mets_mark_hale.htm

CITI FIELD RISING

AMAZIN'S NEW HOME BEGINS TO TAKE SHAPE

By MARK HALE

February 9, 2007 -- Once Citi Field is completed, Jeff Wilpon is optimistic about what the excitement level will be.

"I hope high," the Mets' Chief Operating Officer said yesterday. "There's no reason it's not going to be great."

Construction continues on the Mets' new ballpark, and yesterday Wilpon conducted a tour of the site for media members.

Citi Field is set to open in 2009, and while there were some dirt piles, pipes and equipment scattered about yesterday - there were rocks and wood shards in the area of what will be home plate in the new park - media members climbed a staircase and stood on the makeshift metal deck of the main concourse. The basic structure of the right field stands beyond first base is already up.

Hunt-Bovis, the company building the stadium, has also built the new Busch Stadium in St. Louis as well as PNC Park in Pittsburgh, Comerica Park in Detroit and Ford Field (the Detroit Lions' home field).

A total of approximately 6,000 workers will have worked on Citi Field by the time it's done. When it is finished, Citi Field's dimensions will be a tad bigger than Shea's - meaning it should continue to be a pitcher's park.

Beginning next week, Mets.com will feature a webcam highlighting construction updates.

*
Speaking of Busch Stadium, according to a report on the Cardinals' Web site, the Mets will have to watch the Cards get their World Series rings before their April 3 regular season game.
mark.hale@nypost.com (mark.hale@nypost.com)

__________________________________________________

http://www.nypost.com/seven/02022007/sports/mets/mets_want_all_stars_to_light_up_new_park_mets_mich ael_morrissey.htm

METS WANT ALL-STARS TO LIGHT UP NEW PARK

By MICHAEL MORRISSEY

February 2, 2007 -- The Mets have stars in their eyes - as in All-Stars - for 2012 or 2013. But no matter when they get an All-Star Game, Major League Baseball has promised them that Citi Field will host one before the Yankees' new ballpark does.

With new ballparks aplenty and the frenzy to host the Midsummer Classic at an all-time high, there is a waiting list. San Francisco has this year's game, the Yankees are on tap for 2008 and St. Louis already has been awarded 2009.

On Wednesday afternoon, commissioner Bud Selig told reporters that he likely will award the 2010 game to an American League city. (In the past, he had reportedly said Kansas City will get the game between 2010-14.)

That would leave 2011 as the earliest possible All-Star sighting in Flushing, except for a few factors. One, San Diego and Philadelphia are NL cities which already have new ballparks that have yet to host. On the other hand, both cities have hosted two games (San Diego in 1978 and '92; Philly in 1976 and '96) since the Mets last hosted theirs at Shea Stadium in 1964.

Secondly, the Mets privately say - if given a choice - they would prefer something in 2012 or 2013. They are quick to recognize that hosting an All-Star Game is a tremendous honor, and they certainly would not be picky if MLB asks them to host in 2011. But they realize, as MLB presumably does, that having two games so close together in the same city would provoke some criticism and hard feelings around the majors.

If the alternating-leagues format continues, that would leave 2012 for an AL city. The Mets could end up getting the All-Star Game in 2013. If Selig and company choose to host two straight games in AL cities in 2010 and 2011 - as they did in NL cities Pittsburgh and San Francisco - then 2012 becomes a possible All-Star year for the Mets.

Regardless, Mets fans can rest assured that their sparkling ballpark will be showcased in the Midsummer Classic before the new Yankee Stadium.

*

Mets GM Omar Minaya was part of a press conference to announce an MLB trip to Ghana yesterday. MLB luminaries Dusty Baker, Bob Watson, Reggie Smith, Dave Winfield and Al Jackson also were on hand.

"We have a world vision," Minaya said. "Our vision is not only [limited] to one country, not only to one continent."
michael.morrissey@nypost.com (michael.morrissey@nypost.com)

________________________________________

http://www.newsday.com/sports/baseball/mets/ny-spmets095086824feb09,0,7358576.story?coll=ny-mets-print

'Citi' feeling like home

It's early, but so far things on schedule as new Mets park is built

BY DAVID LENNON
Newsday Staff Writer

February 9, 2007

Standing in the middle of a windswept dirt lot, with a wind chill in the teens, it was difficult to imagine David Wright or Jose Reyes occupying this very spot on Opening Day of the 2009 season.

But that's the timetable for Citi Field, and with an iron-and-steel framework slowly rising beyond the outfield wall of Shea Stadium, Mets COO Jeff Wilpon said yesterday that the project is right on schedule.

"There's no reason it's not going to be great," said the enthusiastic Wilpon, who led a group of reporters through the construction site. "All the seats are going to be better. You're going to be closer to the field. The sight lines are going to be better. It's just so vast right now, it's barely taking shape."

The only distinguishable part of the 45,000-seat stadium, which was inspired by Ebbets Field, is the first segment of the rightfield concourse. An elevated steel framework already is in place, giving visitors who climbed the tower a feel of the eventual sight lines from that vantage point.

When the ballpark is finished, that concourse will stretch around the inside of the stadium, providing a 360-degree view of the field, much like Citizens Bank Park in Philadelphia. Wilpon also pointed out the different materials that will give the stadium its character, from the brick that will line the exterior to the faux limestone blocks and gray-accented windows.

Wilpon and a group of Mets officials visited a number of stadiums before working with HOK Sport to design Citi Field, which has borrowed various details from the firm's previous projects, such as Pittsburgh's PNC Park, Baltimore's Camden Yards and the new Busch Stadium in St. Louis.

At this point, Wilpon said the ballpark is "within one percent" of its estimated $600-million budget, and it won't be long before fans can get a better feel for the stadium itself - just by watching the construction from their seats at Shea.

"Knock on wood," Wilpon said. "Everything has gone as planned."

In the Citi

Opening Day 2009
Total Capacity 45,000

Major Seating Categories
Concourse Level 18,000
Club Level 7,800
Promenade Level 15,500

Average Concourse Width
Concourse Level 46 ft.
Promenade Level 40 ft.

Luxury Suites
54 Total
Sterling Suites 10
Empire Suites 44

Restaurants (capacity)
Ebbets Club Lounge (734)
Sterling Club Lounge (1,600)
Left Field Club Restaurant (500)
Promenade Grill (300)

Team Store 7,200 sq. ft.

Field Dimensions (feet)
Left Field 335
Left Center 379
Center 408
Right Center 383
Right Field 330

_________________________________________

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkxMDYmZmdi ZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTcwNzM3NDImeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZU VFeXk2

Citi Field of dreams starting to take shape

Friday, February 9, 2007

By STEVE POPPER
STAFF WRITER

NEW YORK -- Jeff Wilpon walked over a patch of dirt strewn with rocks and guessed this was it, home plate.

The Mets' chief operating officer led a contingent of reporters through a tour of the Citi Field construction site, now just a mostly empty lot behind the center field wall of Shea Stadium. It was hard to imagine a stadium, a field and a baseball game on this site Thursday morning, with the temperatures dipping into the teens and a frigid wind blowing across the dusty construction zone.

The shells of a few stair towers rose up above the rubble. Down the right field line -- or what will be the right field line -- a metal structure that will be the first level of the stands stood. Wilpon led the group up a rickety metal stairway that ascended almost straight up to a rickety steel platform.

Standing on what will be the main concourse, he could see Flushing Bay and into Shea Stadium.

The rest was imagination and outlines for now, but the project is on schedule for its target date of opening day 2009.

"There's no reason it's not going to be great," Wilpon said. "All the seats are going to be better. You're going to be closer to the field. The sight lines are going to be much better.

"It's hard to feel where that is right now because the rest of the seats weren't in, and you weren't exactly sure where the field wall is. It's just so vast right now, it's just barely taking shape."

Wilpon was optimistic enough -- even through the icy temperatures -- that by the home opener this season, enough of the construction will be in place for the fans to peer out of Shea and see the future.

"You should see a lot more of ... the main concourse," Wilpon said. "The steel deck will be poured with concrete. The actual steel of the stadium structure should be ... starting to go up the third base line by that point, by opening day. Some more of the office building in right field will be up. By June you'll start seeing some of the exterior of the building going up."

Wilpon said that the $600 million project was within 1 percent of budget so far. He showed off some of the architectural details that will take shape, displaying the brick and granite.

But when the pieces begin to take shape, Wilpon is confident that the new park will rival the best new stadiums in baseball. The Hunt-Bovis project is being constructed by the same group that completed the new Busch Stadium in St. Louis last year, as well as PNC Park in Pittsburgh.

The Mets' offices will be housed in a large building beyond the right field fence. The stadium will provide what Wilpon imagines someday will be a more attractive view than the auto repair shops along 126th Street now.

"You saw the bay today," Wilpon said. "You get higher up you'll be able to see pretty good views of the city on the third base side looking back out. We're hoping that the restaurant we'll have in the left field area will look out and part of the glass on the outside will look out onto the city out there, the Manhattan skyline."

The views will be available to fans -- without braving the cold -- starting next week when the team launches a time-lapse camera on mets.com that will show the job's progress.

E-mail: popper@northjersey.com

_________________________________________

http://www.nyjournalnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070209/SPORTS01/702090416/1035

Mets' stadium project on schedule

By JOHN DELCOS (JDELCOS@LOHUD.COM)
THE JOURNAL NEWS

(Original publication: February 9, 2007)

NEW YORK - Jeff Wilpon said the construction progress at Citi Field is on time and on budget, and that the Mets' new stadium is set to open in 2009.

"I am very pleased with how things are progressing," the Mets' chief operating officer said yesterday. "We are on schedule. The winter has been pretty good to us, so we might actually be ahead of schedule."

Wilpon said the project, which will cost $800 million, is currently within 1 percent of its budget.

Hunt-Bovis is the contractor, and its projects included new parks in St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Detroit.

Construction began in right field and will move clockwise. Already the framework for a stair tower has been built, and cement supports for the installation of several foundation beams have been poured.

Wilpon said by Opening Day the steel girders for the first level will be up, and by June the exterior facing on the first level will be raised.

Currently, there are about 200 construction workers on site, but when the project speeds up this summer, up to 1,000 will be working any given day, and before completion up to 6,000 will be used.

http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/7450/27813036lx2.jpg
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/7789/27813022cs7.jpg
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/1103/27813020oi9.jpg
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/9030/27813019mv4.jpg
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/9417/27813017uc9.jpg
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/6686/27813016qi4.jpg
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/297/27813151bg7.jpg
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2453/27813150cm2.jpg
http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/3414/27813149zc1.jpg
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/6171/27813148pf3.jpg

lofter1

February 9th, 2007, 01:29 PM

Wow -- all those articles on the same day. The Mets PR team are doing their job.

smackfu

February 9th, 2007, 05:14 PM

They're building this in the parking lot, right? How are they going to deal with that for the 2007 season? Just suck it up?

Ninjahedge

February 12th, 2007, 10:46 AM

Take the 7. ;)

antinimby

February 12th, 2007, 11:14 AM

The progress they're making in just a few short months as evident in those photos, is just amazing.

Some construction projects we've seen don't even get that much done in whole year. :cough: Goldman Sachs :cough:

They're building this in the parking lot, right? How are they going to deal with that for the 2007 season? Just suck it up?Good question.

This would also go for 2008 as well (and maybe even 2009 because Shea would have to be dismantled also).

According to the Mets' website (http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/nym/ballpark/faq.jsp#parking), this is what they're suggesting:

Where can I park when I come to Shea Stadium?
Construction of Citi Field (http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/nym/ballpark/citifield_overview.jsp) began during the 2006 season in the main parking lot (Lot B) of Shea Stadium (between the scoreboard and 126th Street). The new ballpark, a state-of-the-art facility built for your entertainment and comfort is expected to be completed in time for Opening Day 2009.

The construction work in the interim will significantly reduce the number of parking spaces in Lot B, affecting parking and traffic patterns around Shea Stadium.

With limited parking, we urge you to take mass transit to and from Shea Stadium on game days. The MTA and the LIRR have agreed to expand service on the #7 subway and the Port Washington branch of the LIRR (which both stop at Shea Stadium).

Should you choose to drive, mets.com will have the latest information on recommended Park-and-Ride locations along the #7 subway and the LIRR, as well as interim parking areas. When arriving at Shea Stadium, follow signs and traffic personnel directing you to designated stadium sites. You should plan to arrive early.

We are working diligently with numerous City agencies to minimize construction-related inconveniences and ask for your patience during the ballpark construction period.

TallGuy

February 12th, 2007, 11:43 AM

Hmmm. Maybe I'll forego my plans to see one last game at Shea.

jack

February 13th, 2007, 01:06 PM

Citigroup rebrands as Citi; agrees sale of umbrella logo

Citigroup today announced a corporate branding change that unites its businesses under the well-known "Citi" name and its recognizable red arc design.

This decision underscores the company's commitment to bring its businesses together to serve clients worldwide.

"Our unified brand represents the promise to serve our clients as one company, as one Citi," said Charles Prince, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. "It also speaks to our exciting future as a highly connected, responsive, and profitable global leader in financial services."

"Citi is already among the most recognized and respected brands in global financial services. Our extensive global research and analysis also confirmed Citi is a highly effective brand across many languages, markets, and technology platforms. It is how most of our clients think about us already," Prince said. "Now, through a unified brand, we will leverage this symbol to represent our commitment to providing our clients with best-in-class advice, products and service."

The company also announced that it will sell to The St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. the trademark red umbrella that a legacy company acquired with its purchase of Travelers in 1993. The sale is conditioned upon Hart-Scott-Rodino approval, and is expected to close in March. Net proceeds from the sale of the umbrella will offset the future costs of implementing the unified brand.

"Our research continued to show that the trademark red umbrella was more connected with insurance, specifically St. Paul Travelers," continued Mr. Prince. "We are pleased to have entered into this agreement."

Beginning in the second quarter of this year, the following businesses will begin using a silver Citi with the red arc logo: corporate and investment banking will use the brand name Citi; wealth management will use the brand names Citi Smith Barney, Citi Investment Research and Citi Private Bank; and alternative investments will use the brand name Citi Alternative Investments.

Citi's global consumer businesses, including the Citibank branch network, will maintain the signature blue Citi with the red arc brand name and signage. Also, there are no plans at this time to change the Banamex brand in Mexico. Primerica will also maintain its brand name, but it will use a new logo without the red umbrella.

While the company will do business as Citi, its legal name will remain Citigroup Inc. In addition, the names of its various affiliated legal entities will not change.

Company announcement Source: Citigroup

http://www.finextra.com/fullpr.asp?id=13426

Transic

February 23rd, 2007, 04:00 AM

http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/5527/219071ep9.jpg

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/1706/219072gr3.jpg

http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/3379/219073rw1.jpg

http://img101.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-27737/loc29/17323_4_122_29lo.jpg

http://img46.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-8505/loc40/17326_5_122_40lo.jpg

http://img153.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-13273/loc222/17326_6_122_222lo.jpg

http://img142.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-32703/loc153/17331_7_122_153lo.jpg

http://img158.imagevenue.com/aAfkjfp01fo1i-26002/loc254/17337_8_122_254lo.jpg

Thanks to Stadiumpage (http://www.stadiumpage.com/)

Transic

March 27th, 2007, 10:34 PM

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0713,demause,76184,2.html

Take Me Out to the Mall Game
Hey, look what you're paying for! A Voice guide to the new Mets and Yankees stadiums.

by Neil DeMause
March 27th, 2007 11:38 AM

Time is running out for Shea and Yankee stadiums: By Opening Day, the skeletons of CitiField and the new Yankee Stadium (no corporate name yet, though "Yankee Stadium at JP Morgan Chase Park" remains a possibility) should be rising from the Flushing muck and Bronx turf. With the state and city having signed off on the teams' cash subsidies and tax breaks— about $340 million for the Mets, $380 million for the Yankees—it's time to ask: What are New Yorkers getting for their money?

A: The new Yankees field features the historic dimensions of the old one: 318 and 314 feet down the lines, 399 to "Death Valley" in left-center. Of course, "historic" is relative: The current dimensions were only set in 1988, when the wall was moved in to help new slugger Jack Clark clear the fences. (It didn't work: Clark's slugging percentage fell from .597 to .433, and he was promptly exiled to San Diego.)

B: The upper deck of the new Yankee Stadium will be about the same height as the old, though with the last few rows trimmed off. (The old park holds 57,545; the new one will seat 53,000, plus 1,000 standing-room.) The new top tier, however, will be set back an extra 30 feet from the field, to keep the high-priced patrons below out of shadow. This less compact design also risks snipping a few decibels off the stadium's signature crowd roar.

C: On average, baseball teams have hiked tickets by 41 percent their first year in new homes. A city economic study projected even greater sticker shock in the Bronx, with the average ticket rising to $57, from $28 currently. At that rate of increase, Bleacher Creatures would be paying $24 a pop to chant "Box seats suck!"

D: Following the 2008 season, the current Yankee Stadium will be razed to make way for new softball fields to replace those in now obliterated Macombs Dam Park. (Plans to retain a small chunk of the grandstand have been abandoned.) The $24 million demolition tab will fall on city taxpayers, part of $195 million in city money—up from $130 million one year ago—now budgeted for stadium-related "infrastructure."

E: Three new parking garages will cost $320 million: $70 million from the state, the rest from a private developer. Unfortunately, more than a year after the city started its search, no developers have signed on—leaving the possibility that taxpayers will have to ante up more cash.

F: Several rows of box seats at the new Yankee Stadium will wrap around the front of the new bleachers. Two words: target practice.

G: Artificial scarcity is all the rage in baseball: Last year the Oakland A's covered their upper deck with a tarp, reducing capacity to a league-low 34,000. The Mets are downsizing from 55,601 seats to 42,500, with room for another couple thousand fans to stand. The goal is to re-create the "Fenway Effect": Sell out the season before Opening Day, letting your team lay off ticket staff and plan precisely how many hot dog salesfolk to hire. And, of course, jack up prices once fans realize they have to scramble to get in.

H: No one will miss Shea's circular shape— designed to accommodate football—which leaves patrons behind first and third watching the action across a vast gulf. Down the lines, CitiField will bring fans closer to the action; behind home plate, you'd be better off at Shea.

I: The Jackie Robinson Rotunda is mod- eled after the fabled entryway at Ebbets Field. If CitiField is a modern-day Ebbets, though, it's one on HGH: Where the Dodgers park stood 60 feet high and occupied a little less than six acres, CitiField will soar 116 feet above ground level and take up 11.5 acres.

J: Expect a large sign advertising Citigroup, which is paying $400 million over 20 years to use the Mets' new home as Queens' largest billboard. None of that money will be shared with the city—so the Mets, after the MLB revenue-sharing rebate for construction expenses, will end up paying less each year on stadium costs than on Shawn Green.

K: With the luxury-box market tanking, the teams will build a relatively modest 50 to 60 suites, instead opting for more premium-priced "club seats," which offer roomier seating. Their extra legroom comes at a cost, though, forcing the cheap seats behind them to be pushed skyward.

L: Like other "mallparks," these two offer a smorgasbord of upscale restaurants and food courts; Yankee fans will have to traverse a 100-foot-wide concession concourse before reaching their seats. One open question: Will the teams ban outside food at games, as others with new parks have done? (In Philadelphia, the resulting uproar was dubbed "Hoagiegate.") Fans might want to practice smuggling techniques at the Brooklyn Cyclones' KeySpan Park, where hot dogs from nearby Nathan's are deemed contraband—though you're welcome to buy them inside the gates at ballpark prices.

antinimby

March 28th, 2007, 01:20 AM

Another cookie-cutter, retro-themed ballpark.

It's gettin' to the point where it's difficult to tell one from the other.

lofter1

March 28th, 2007, 02:17 AM

the average ticket rising to $57, from $28 currently

F*ing ridiculous.

Add food + beer and you're talking near a hundred bucks each.

This and the other BS could bring a curse on both teams.

Management would deserve it.

lofter1

March 28th, 2007, 02:19 AM

OK, what's up with the quote function and the little bitty type ^^^ :confused:

I tried to re-edit 3 times and it keeps coming up like that :mad:

ramvid01

March 28th, 2007, 02:35 AM

My suggestion is always eat before the ballgame. Have a huge dinner, that way you wont spent 20 dollars on a beer and 2 hotdogs.

NoyokA

March 28th, 2007, 04:19 AM

My suggestion is always eat before the ballgame. Have a huge dinner, that way you wont spent 20 dollars on a beer and 2 hotdogs.

Good advice. I always bring in turkey sandwhiches. You can bring in whatever you want as long as its not a can.

lofter1

March 28th, 2007, 11:32 AM

That ^^^ was always an option in the past. Maybe no more ...

One open question: Will the teams ban outside food at games, as others with new parks have done? (In Philadelphia, the resulting uproar was dubbed "Hoagiegate.")

nycla3

March 28th, 2007, 07:56 PM

As sacreligious as it sounds, my buddies and I have gotten in the habit of giving ourselves enough time to hop off the 7 in Jackson Heights for a fabulously reasonable delicious meal...Indian, Mexican, whatever. Make it part of the experience.

Transic

March 31st, 2007, 06:48 PM

http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/9526/070331stadiumhmed1230prqx0.jpg

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17886836/

Baseball building boom bites Big Apple
Construction breaks ground as Yankees, Mets build competing ballparks

NEW YORK - The home plate of the New York Mets is marked with green paint in the gravel. The infield is a construction site teeming with men in hard hats. The seats of Yankee Stadium rumble not with cheers and boos, but with cement mixers and excavators.

Forty-three years after the last major league stadium was built in New York City, both the Yankees and the Mets will play their home openers against the backdrop of two huge construction sites. Fans will be able to get a look at both their teams and their future homes, which are rising alongside the familiar ballparks.

Construction of both stadiums started last year, and they are scheduled to open in 2009, joining a building boom that has remade the face of baseball over the last decade.

“It’s a long time coming,” said Jeff Wilpon, chief operating officer of the Mets. “The rest of the country’s now going to be looking at New York and saying, ’Wow, look what they just did.”’

The new $800 million Mets stadium will be called Citi Field, part of a 20-year sponsorship deal between the Mets and Citigroup Inc. that is reportedly worth more than $20 million annually. The new $1 billion Yankee Stadium is going up just north of the House that Ruth Built, which will be demolished once the new ballpark is built.

The Mets start the regular season on the road and play their home opener April 9 against the Philadelphia Phillies. Fans attending games at Shea during the 2007 and 2008 seasons will be able to watch the new ballpark rise in a former parking lot beyond the outfield — and via Webcam on the Mets’ official site.

“We thought the whole process is something that’s exciting to people,” Wilpon said.

During a visit to the Queens construction site last week, the six towers that will house Citi Field’s stairs and elevators were in various stages of completion, and two 35-ton trusses awaited being positioned for the scoreboards. Home plate was marked in green paint.

Wilpon said construction was on schedule.

At the new Yankee Stadium, 10-story cranes are visible from the street, but a wooden fence painted black shields the site from close inspection.

The best view of the new stadium is from the elevated subway platform on the No. 4 line. During a stop there last week, cement mixers churned and excavators scooped dirt as the structures that will be the stands took shape under scaffolding.

The Yankees, who open their season at home Monday against the Tampa Bay Devil Rays, declined to discuss the new stadium or to allow a reporter onto the site.

Parks advocates sued unsuccessfully to halt construction of the new Yankee Stadium because it required paving over large portions of two city parks and cutting down hundreds of trees.

“The community did not have the resources to launch an adequate legal defense for their issue,” said Geoffrey Croft, president of New York City Parks Advocates. “It’s really sad.”

The Yankees promised to pay for new parks to offset the lost green space.

Liam Kavanagh, first deputy commissioner of the city Department of Parks and Recreation, said the biggest piece of new parkland won’t be built until the existing Yankee Stadium is demolished in 2009. Ballfields, basketball courts, a soccer field and a running track will replace the historic ballpark that Babe Ruth christened with a home run. “It’ll be a real Mecca for active recreation,” he said.

A smaller park just west of the existing Yankee Stadium will open this spring, Kavanagh said.

The Mets and Yankees join a long list of teams that have built new baseball parks in the last few years.

Like other stadiums that have opened since Oriole Park at Camden Yards in Baltimore pioneered the retro look in 1992, both of New York’s ballparks will feature old-time touches designed to evoke baseball’s storied past.

Yankee Stadium’s designers have incorporated elements of the original stadium, including the frieze that hung from the roof, that were lost in a 1970s renovation.

Citi Field will have a multi-arched exterior facade recalling Ebbets Field, the Brooklyn Dodgers’ home before they left for Los Angeles after the 1957 season.

The link with the Dodgers will be made explicit with a Jackie Robinson Rotunda at the entrance. The rotunda will pay tribute to the Dodger great who broke major league baseball’s color barrier in 1947, and will include a statue of him.

Wilpon said his father, Mets owner Fred Wilpon, grew up attending games at Ebbets Field and wanted to recreate the experience for younger generations. “He really felt it was a piece of him and he wants other people to have that feeling walking through the rotunda,” he said.

Both new stadiums are supposed to be more intimate and at the same time more opulent than the ones they are replacing, with fewer seats but more luxury boxes.

Citi Field will have a capacity of 45,000 including standing room. It replaces the 57,333-seat Shea, which opened in 1964.

The new Yankee Stadium will have 53,000 seats, down from the current capacity of 57,478. The current Yankee Stadium was built in 1923 but was extensively remodeled in the 1970s. It is the third-oldest ballpark in the major leagues, trailing Boston’s Fenway Park (1912) and Chicago’s Wrigley Field (1914).

The dimensions at Yankee Stadium will not change. The playing field at Citi Field will be smaller than Shea down the lines but larger in the gaps: 335 feet to left field, 408 to center, 330 to right. Shea is 338 to left, 410 to center, 338 to right.