SF ousted for Americas cup

[savoir]

There would have been gridlock around The Marina if those grandstands had been full. Traffic and parking are always bad around there even if no events are on.

[colemj]

Originally Posted by savoir

There would have been gridlock around The Marina if those grandstands had been full. Traffic and parking are always bad around there even if no events are on.

What would it be like if an event other than the AC was being held? For example, there were large concerts given at the same venue during the AC - were there problems with those?

If so, would SF itself be for the better if no events, movie filming, conventions, etc were ever held in its limits?

Mark

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by savoir

There would have been gridlock around The Marina if those grandstands had been full. Traffic and parking are always bad around there even if no events are on.

So now we're arguing how bad it would have been if a situation that didn't occur, did occur? Plus, name a major American city where traffic and parking aren't an issue every day, events or no.

[savoir]

Big events such as 20,000+ person conventions are not held in The Marina. No room. The people go to Fisherman's Wharf but few go further.

[deluxe68]

Originally Posted by savoir

Traffic issues were minor because hardly anyone showed up to watch. The stands in The Marina by the start were never even half full. Every grade of private box had vacancies for every race. The finish area was crowded.

The price for some of the seating was insane. We paid "only" $100 for a spot on the WW2 ship (cannot remember the name). Sad to see that the bay is out of it, they don't seem to want to be a sailing mecca. We met more people from New Zealand than from S.F. while at the race.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by deluxe68

...they don't seem to want to be a sailing mecca.

It already is a sailing mecca, and the truth is the City does not need the revenues the AC brings, as it is one of the top tourist destinations in the world. And the "they" you refer to are city officials, not the general public at large and certainly not the Bay Area sailing community.

[savoir]

For sure.

I made a pile of phantom reservations for boxes and was never rejected. The cheapest seat was $80 and they ranged up to $150. I do feel sorry for those who paid for a box and filled it on days when racing was abandoned. Sure there was a refund but getting everyone together on an alternate day is rarely possible.

[BandB]

I ask the sailing community this. If you were given $11-12 million dollars to spend on sailing in the San Francisco area, is this how you'd choose to spend it or might there be another way that would involve more people, maybe bring more revenues?

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by colemj

1. What would it be like if an event other than the AC was being held? For example, there were large concerts given at the same venue during the AC - were there problems with those?

2. If so, would SF itself be for the better if no events, movie filming, conventions, etc were ever held in its limits?

fastbottoms was right.

1. SF hosts lots of simultaneous events without issues. Downtown conventions are going on all the time. Literally. We have a huge convention center with large hotels. Lots of things happening in Golden Gate Park, miles further west from downtown. And, uhm, there's a pretty popular baseball park just south of downtown which holds 42,000 people and is always packed, even for weekday day games. This "crowded" crap is just nonsense.

2. There actually are some people who live here who think that. Why? I dunno, 'cuz they seem to miss the entire point that the ONLY "business" left in The City IS tourism and conventions. That's a reality,too. See also the jockeying going on related to George Lucas' museum. Here's a guy who "made it" in Marin and benefited the entire Bay Area, but his neighbors near his ranch gave him nothing but grief for decades, even though his building were out of sight, out of mind on his vast acreage (I did work up there). Now he want to donate art and they've already pushed him out of popular Crissy field near the GG Bridge (gee, too many people ALREADY there having fun in the park and the shoreline..). A former mayor is resisting development on the waterfront, which unfortunately really needs it due to all the rotting piers, decades of neglect...

SF is a town with altogether too many really, really, really provincial folks, NIMBY folks on steroids, who want this place to be just like it was in 1940 (or earlier). They push their agendas only in off-year elections, so 2% of the people get to choose what doesn't happen. NOTHING would ever happen if these folks got their way all the time.

It's also a city that has turned its back on its own waterfront. Even NYC does better!

[colemj]

Originally Posted by BandB

I ask the sailing community this. If you were given $11-12 million dollars to spend on sailing in the San Francisco area, is this how you'd choose to spend it or might there be another way that would involve more people, maybe bring more revenues?

I don't understand this line of reasoning. For example, would you ask the people of Baltimore the same question regarding their Grand Prix?

Mark

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by savoir

Big events such as 20,000+ person conventions are not held in The Marina. No room. The people go to Fisherman's Wharf but few go further.

Silly reasoning really. The event is sailing. The draw would be people interested in sailing. The AC is known world wide and has a following for it. A second one in SF would grow larger.
You keep saying no room and projecting on what ifs. SF as a venue is a perfect place with perfect winds and conditions. What "they" are not saying is the revenue that was brought to other tourist attractions around SF. You think people coming to SF for two weeks to see the Ac are just going to twiddle their thumbs between races?

Originally Posted by savoir

For sure.


I made a pile of phantom reservations for boxes and was never rejected.

Ok...that was a little strange...

Originally Posted by BandB

I ask the sailing community this. If you were given $11-12 million dollars to spend on sailing in the San Francisco area, is this how you'd choose to spend it or might there be another way that would involve more people, maybe bring more revenues?

You talk like this is the only thing that goes on in SF. There are hundreds of events each year. And again...it's not always about money. You can have an event, just because it's the right thing to do for a group enthusiasts who live and play on one of the best sailing areas in the world.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by colemj

I don't understand this line of reasoning. For example, would you ask the people of Baltimore the same question regarding their Grand Prix?

Mark

I would if the city is spending that amount on it. I think it's perfectly fair to ask how best a city should spend their money and that's really what is being done here. As of now, San Francisco isn't willing to pay what Ellison wants paid. They feel this isn't the best use for it.

I would ask that question when cities are funding stadiums as well.

I feel that while America's Cup generates a lot of television attention, it didn't appeal (at least at it's prices of attendance) to the people of San Francisco and didn't bring in large amounts of tourists. Perhaps with more years, it would. I don't know. Perhaps San Francisco got enough publicity on television as a great recreational and beautiful city. I'm not at taxpayer in San Francisco so I don't have a vote on this.

I'm just saying I can understand why they said no. I'm not saying that I would have said yes or no in the same position. But it's certainly not automatic to me.

Near me, the city of Miami built a baseball stadium that is a disaster so far. The Marlins weren't drawing fans before, certainly aren't now, and the team owner has done some pretty disgraceful things. Miami residents today regret that use of their money.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

You talk like this is the only thing that goes on in SF. There are hundreds of events each year. And again...it's not always about money. You can have an event, just because it's the right thing to do for a group enthusiasts who live and play on one of the best sailing areas in the world.

I didn't mean to sound like that. I know there are tons of events. I'm just saying I do understand why they said "no." I also wonder if with that amount of money they could do something better for the group of enthusasts who live and play on one of the best sailing areas in the world.

That's why I asked the question I did.

Did you watch the event live? How many others did?

[Stu Jackson]

This whole conversation about the amount of $$ the City "lost" is really ridiculous. The politicians didn't give a hoot about the event itself, they had their own projections. Whatever those were, they "claim" they "lost" money. I admit I have not reead the nice link sc provided about the accounting, but one can almost guarantee it was cut the way the bean counter's bosses, the politicians, wanted it to be for negotiating purposes.

The overpriced grandstands were indeed mostly empty. But watching them from the water wasn't all that much better, although it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. I originally said I wasn't going to bother, but ened up out there for a bunch of races, at the start, at the first/third mark and at the finish on the last day and ended up sailing under the Bay Bridge after the last win right next to them. Awesome.

Except for NZ and France, most country's populations could give a squat about sailboats.

Follow the $$. Thanks to Deep Throat.

[BandB]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

The overpriced grandstands were indeed mostly empty. But watching them from the water wasn't all that much better, although it was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. I originally said I wasn't going to bother, but ened up out there for a bunch of races, at the start, at the first/third mark and at the finish on the last day and ended up sailing under the Bay Bridge after the last win right next to them. Awesome.
.

I would think what you did would have been very exciting. I can assure you that if I'd been there, I would have tried to get somewhere on the water to see. Just because it would have been a once in a lifetime thing.

But also what you're indicating is that not a lot of people did view it. So very exciting for a very few people. That's the problem. Now I have no idea how many people actually viewed it.