Ricketts vs. Rooftops, or, The Man vs. the slightly smaller The Man
It’s pretty rare that I ever side with “The Man” in any business argument, and yet here I am, siding with Tom Ricketts when it comes to his little border war with the Rooftop association.
To be honest, however, this isn’t a case of “The Man” vs. small business. This is “The Man” pitted against a smaller “The Man” situation.
Let’s backtrack a bit.
You see, the Rooftop association is going to be presenting an ad proposal to the Cubs brass, and they decided to make a public plea for why they should be allowed to 1. Exist, I guess, and 2. sell ad space on their property.
Here’s the video of their presentation, courtesy of the always outstanding Bleacher Nation:
At least that’s what I think this is about. It’s all kind of confusing, let’s go to the Tweeterboxes:
Rooftop renderings of how more advertising could/would work lockerz.com/s/279305378
— Jesse Rogers (@ESPNChiCubs) January 25, 2013
Ehhhhh ok. Whatever. They look kinda cheap and the renderings can use some work but fine, let’s roll with it.
Cubs employee kicked out of room showing video. #Espionage
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
That’s some dirty shit right there. Clever, expected, perhaps I encourage it, but def. dirty.
Roofies plan: Let Cubs sell advertising on rooftops and let them stay in business. Say it’ll bring in $10-$20 million annually.
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
Ok…
According to written proposal habded out before presser 100 percent of revenue from this new advertising goes towards city and cubs
— Jesse Rogers (@ESPNChiCubs) January 25, 2013
In return rooftops get assurance their sight lines aren’t messed with. Presser about to start
— Jesse Rogers (@ESPNChiCubs) January 25, 2013
Ok ok, I’m liking this, this is perhaps a fight where I can hope both sides come to a peaceful and meaningful agreement that will ens-
Rooftop owner stops p.c. to show framed “welcome” letter from Andy MacPhail.
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
Uhhhhhhh
Roof top owners say Cubs will get $3.5million a year for 20 years. Sounds low.
— Bruce Levine (@ESPNBruceLevine) January 25, 2013
Word?
Loukas: “Yes, we would go to court” if their views are blocked. “We want to be treated as people who are not blind.”
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
Loukas: Cubs “might not have been here” w/o Murphy’s and Cubby Bear. Oh geez.
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
Oh you have got to be shitting me.
Loukas says he was once Ricketts’ landlord but would’ve jacked up the rent if he knew he’d eventually be Cubs owner. #ChicagoLandlord
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
I don’t know if you should be saying this during a press conference that is pleading for the PUBLIC’S APPROVAL!
Sounds like Lynch: “Without you I don’t have a job?” RT @pwsullivan Loukas: Cubs “might not have been here” w/o Murphys and CubBear. Oh geez
— Barry Rozner (@BarryRozner) January 25, 2013
Nailed it.
if you leave a card at your neighbor’s saying “thanks for sharing your vegetable garden”, do you own part of their house now? #rooftoplogic
— Harry Pavlidis (@harrypav) January 25, 2013
Nailed it some more.
Cubs to Roofies: Drop Dead
— Paul Sullivan (@PWSullivan) January 25, 2013
Now, it’s pretty clear that Paul Sullivan is being a bit facetious here, but oddly enough I have a similar sentiment towards the rooftop owners. A part of me is sympathetic towards their cause, it makes sense that they should have a nice symbiotic relationship with the Chicago Cubs. The “Roofies” completely botched this PR opportunity, however.
Oh, and if you were wonder about the letter, here it is:
Long live McPhail.