Las Vegas A's?

[Dan Druff]

I've long contended that an MLB team isn't coming to Vegas, because there are several problems:

1) The population isn't big enough to fill a baseball stadium (much bigger than a hockey/NBA area) for 81 games per year.

2) The TV market is small. Many don't realize that Vegas is incredibly isolated. There's basically no population in outlying areas for 100 miles in all directions. The closest city of any consequence is St. George, UT, which is 120 miles northeast. So your entire market is basically Vegas/Henderson/North LV/Boulder City. And that's it.

3) The number of tourists coming into town to see their home team play in Vegas will be minimal, aside from close teams such as the Dodgers, Angels, Padres, and Diamondbacks. This is different from the NFL, where there are very few games per season, so people are more likely to plan trips around their team being in Vegas.


Despite that, it looks like an MLB team might come to Vegas anyway. Presumably they're excited by the success of the Golden Knights (which Vegas people loved both because it was their first major pro team, plus the team was immediately good) and the Raiders (first "big 3" sport to come, plus it's easy to fill stadium with just 8 home games.)

The Oakland A's, long battling a lousy stadium, lousy area, and lousy fan support, are seriously considering moving to Vegas.

Team officials came to Vegas this month, and claim they will finalize a list of 10-12 potential sites for the new Las Vegas A's stadium by November: https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...ember-2442670/


So is this a done deal? Not yet. The A's want to stay in Oakland, but only if they can have a new waterfront stadium, supported by a new proposed tax which would fund major infrastructure improvements around that new stadium. If the A's get this from special tax approved, and if their new stadium gets the green light, they will stay in Oakland.

However, they claim they will likely decide by the end of 2021 if a move to Vegas is coming. It does appear that Vegas is their only desired new location, so if the Oakland ballpark falls through, you'll be saying hello to the Las Vegas A's very soon.

Sadly, being an AL team, the Dodgers won't be playing them very often. I think it would be better to move the Rockies over to the AL West, and put the Vegas A's in the NL West, given that fans from Phoenix, San Diego, and Los Angeles are all roughly 300 miles from Vegas.

1. The population has almost doubled in the last 25yrs. 660k and just cracked the top 30 metro population in the country. Plenty big enough. Oh and MLB teams don't "fill their stadiums" for regular season games. They operate at 50% capacity if they are lucky, much lower if they are not. They don't need to pack 45k into a stadium nightly to be successful. I would bet my ass this would be a smaller 35-40k stadium anyway since that is what the trend is now.

2. Most local TV markets derive their viewers from far less than 100 miles away. There aren't many fans of teams 100miles outside of market unless it is a NY or LA or Chicago.

3. Sports teams don't give a shit about tourists they get all their revenue from season tickets, the rest is just filler. And they will sell a metric ton of them right out of the gate. You seem to think that Vegas is still a desert tourist destination only when in 2023 that is not true anymore. I personally know 3 people who grew up here on East Coast and have been in Vegas for 15-20 yrs now raising a family. It's not the 90's anymore, lots of people have been laying down roots over last 20 yrs.

The metro area is not large. That's the problem. 100 miles away? You leave the immediate area of Vegas, and there's just empty desert.

The pool of people potentially going to the games and watching it on TV just simply is not large enough to justify a MLB team there. The tourists are the only ones who could make up for the attendance issue (like how the Rockies draw well when the Dodgers are in town), but for reasons already stated, I don't think that's going to make a large impact.

[TheXFactor]

It will attract hundreds of thousands of extra tourists to Las Vegas each month.

And you thought there was too many people on the Las Vegas strip already.

It's about to get much worse.

[Sloppy Joe]

Set up a trip with my dad so he can check off this dump before it's gone.

One of the few he has left on his list.

[Jayjami]

1. The population has almost doubled in the last 25yrs. 660k and just cracked the top 30 metro population in the country. Plenty big enough. Oh and MLB teams don't "fill their stadiums" for regular season games. They operate at 50% capacity if they are lucky, much lower if they are not. They don't need to pack 45k into a stadium nightly to be successful. I would bet my ass this would be a smaller 35-40k stadium anyway since that is what the trend is now.

2. Most local TV markets derive their viewers from far less than 100 miles away. There aren't many fans of teams 100miles outside of market unless it is a NY or LA or Chicago.

3. Sports teams don't give a shit about tourists they get all their revenue from season tickets, the rest is just filler. And they will sell a metric ton of them right out of the gate. You seem to think that Vegas is still a desert tourist destination only when in 2023 that is not true anymore. I personally know 3 people who grew up here on East Coast and have been in Vegas for 15-20 yrs now raising a family. It's not the 90's anymore, lots of people have been laying down roots over last 20 yrs.

The metro area is not large. That's the problem. 100 miles away? You leave the immediate area of Vegas, and there's just empty desert.

The pool of people potentially going to the games and watching it on TV just simply is not large enough to justify a MLB team there. The tourists are the only ones who could make up for the attendance issue (like how the Rockies draw well when the Dodgers are in town), but for reasons already stated, I don't think that's going to make a large impact.

Sacramento would be a better location. Stockton, Modesto, and the East Bay are only an hour away. That’s about 3 million people and they’d be able to keep some of their fan base.

[NaturalBornHustler]

1. The population has almost doubled in the last 25yrs. 660k and just cracked the top 30 metro population in the country. Plenty big enough. Oh and MLB teams don't "fill their stadiums" for regular season games. They operate at 50% capacity if they are lucky, much lower if they are not. They don't need to pack 45k into a stadium nightly to be successful. I would bet my ass this would be a smaller 35-40k stadium anyway since that is what the trend is now.

2. Most local TV markets derive their viewers from far less than 100 miles away. There aren't many fans of teams 100miles outside of market unless it is a NY or LA or Chicago.

3. Sports teams don't give a shit about tourists they get all their revenue from season tickets, the rest is just filler. And they will sell a metric ton of them right out of the gate. You seem to think that Vegas is still a desert tourist destination only when in 2023 that is not true anymore. I personally know 3 people who grew up here on East Coast and have been in Vegas for 15-20 yrs now raising a family. It's not the 90's anymore, lots of people have been laying down roots over last 20 yrs.

The metro area is not large. That's the problem. 100 miles away? You leave the immediate area of Vegas, and there's just empty desert.

The pool of people potentially going to the games and watching it on TV just simply is not large enough to justify a MLB team there. The tourists are the only ones who could make up for the attendance issue (like how the Rockies draw well when the Dodgers are in town), but for reasons already stated, I don't think that's going to make a large impact.

What in the actual fuck are you talking about? The Las Vegas metro area ranks 31st with 2.9m people. In MLB 8 other teams would have same or smaller metro population to draw from. None of them have a shiny new state of the art brand new stadium at their disposal either.


Milwaukee - 1.6m
Cleveland - 2.1m
Cincinnati - 2.25m
Kansas City - 2.4m
Pittsburgh - 2.4m
Baltimore - 2.7m
Denver - 2.9
St Louis - 2.9

[Dan Druff]

The metro area is not large. That's the problem. 100 miles away? You leave the immediate area of Vegas, and there's just empty desert.

The pool of people potentially going to the games and watching it on TV just simply is not large enough to justify a MLB team there. The tourists are the only ones who could make up for the attendance issue (like how the Rockies draw well when the Dodgers are in town), but for reasons already stated, I don't think that's going to make a large impact.

What in the actual fuck are you talking about? The Las Vegas metro area ranks 31st with 2.9m people. In MLB 8 other teams would have same or smaller metro population to draw from. None of them have a shiny new state of the art brand new stadium at their disposal either.


Milwaukee - 1.6m
Cleveland - 2.1m
Cincinnati - 2.25m
Kansas City - 2.4m
Pittsburgh - 2.4m
Baltimore - 2.7m
Denver - 2.9
St Louis - 2.9

31st is a lousy ranking for a new MLB team.

But it's even worse because, again, as I said, there are no outlying areas to also join the fan base. For example, take Denver. Not only do they have fans from the entire state of Colorado, but they also have fans in Utah, Idaho, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, and New Mexico.

Pittsburgh, for as small of a market as it is, also has a fanbase from many of the outlying areas.

Vegas does not have that. It's Vegas, surrounded by desolate desert everywhere. Once you do get to something, you're already in the territory of existing fanbases of other teams.

How many Golden Knights fans are there outside of Vegas? The Raiders are a different story because they still have fans from their years in LA, but the Vegas A's are not likely to inherit many legacy fans, and they are not likely to get many new fans out of the Vegas area.

You need to stop looking at raw numbers and look beyond that. I agree with Jayjami that perhaps Sacramento would be better, as they would still be able to maintain some existing fans who live between Oakland and Sac. New Orleans and Memphis would also be decent choices for relocation.

[Zap_the_Fractions_Giraffe]

the Indianapolis Indians are still called the Indians but I've been trying to get the name changed to the Indianapolis Savages

[DJ_Chaps]

the Indianapolis Indians are still called the Indians but I've been trying to get the name changed to the Indianapolis Savages

DROP THAT AND JOIN ME IN GETTING THE HOOSIERS CHANGED TO THE HOOVERS. GET IT? THEY FUCKING SUCK.

[country978]

the Indianapolis Indians are still called the Indians but I've been trying to get the name changed to the Indianapolis Savages

DROP THAT AND JOIN ME IN GETTING THE HOOSIERS CHANGED TO THE HOOVERS. GET IT? THEY FUCKING SUCK.

A's is a dumb name for a team. Athletics just as bad or worse. They should change the name of the team when they move to the gamblers or something.

[Daly]

Right - this isnt moneyball. This is a game of money. The plan has been to be a AAAA team and spend next to nothng for now and get to Vegas.


Here is the problem.

Locals will go to one of 40 hockey games. They also get first team advantage.

NFL will sell to everyone and they can count on 10K if not more people flying in as an awaycation. I went to the pats game with that retarded lateral last year and I already have plans to book the moment I find out what weekend the Patriots play again this coming season (schedule is out but we font have dates until next month).

The “problem” is the same as we have here in Miami. Too much other shit to do and its hot as balls in the summer. 81 dates is a lot of dates. They wont get the same numbers of “fly in” business that the NFL gets. Maybe the LAD or SF SD but that wont help a AL team. Boston/NY fans will fly in. Doubt Toronto or Baltimore will.

It wont be a fail and they will be better than they generaly would be in Oakland.


How long until a deranged Oakland fan blows up Las Vegas for taking his/her sports teams from them

The stadium has a planned retractable roof, so that should take care of the issue of attending games in July when it's 113 degrees outside.

However, I agree with the rest. Getting a nice home crowd 81 times per year isn't going to be easy, especially since they'll presumably be starting with a failteam and trying to build it from there. It's not like the Astros are moving to Vegas.

And maybe they can subsist on that sweet TV money? Ummm.... see the Bally Sports bankruptcy thread.

The A's have a shitty situation in Oakland. The area is horrendous, the team sucks, the locals have tuned out, the stadium is lousy, and too many people are satisfied with just being fans of the Giants down the road. So moving out to Vegas is an upgrade, but if they think they're gonna draw big in this super-isolated small market, they need to think again.

As I said earlier in the thread, the best thing MLB could do for the A's would be to swap the A's and Rockies in their divisions once the A's move. This would put the A's driving distance from 3 division rivals -- the Dodgers, the Padres, and the Diamondbacks, and only an hour flight from the Giants. That's what they need if they want any kind of decent gate from tourists. But the Rockies would probably object to this, especially since the Dodgers road games tend to draw pretty well there (I know, as I was at one of them in July 2021).

Still have to get to and fro the stadium in 1,000 degree heat. Its the same issue here in south florida and despite the booger green stadium its a nice place with well working air conditioning. If im in vegas in July there are 100 things id rather do then go to a baseball game. Ill find time for a football game if its decent.

I dont think the “fail team” will be an issue once they get to Vegas, maybe even for the last season in Oakland while they ramp it back up. Even the Raiders went on a bit of a buying spree in free agency so they would be ready for vegas and the baseball team wont have salary cap issues to deal with. I bet they will be decent in year one, if i had to guess now.

Swapping from AL to NL might be a decent Idea.

[Jayjami]

The Coliseum is shit, but I had a lot of fun there in the late 80s. The A’s had a hell of a team. Candlestick was even worse, and I hate the Giants, so I adopted the A’s as my AL team. My ex and I would bbq in the parking lot, sit in right field bleachers for $3.50, drink beers all night and watch Canseco play horrible defense. It was less crowded because the Hendersons were in left and center. They attracted baseball fans. Jose attracted 16 yo females who screamed at him like he was a Beatle. Then they built Mt. Davis and fucked up it up royally by shutting out the view of the hills.

[Dan Druff]

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/LasVegasLocally/status/1656135167583608834



Looks like the land parcel they bought is just one option. I guess the A's figure they'll just sell it if they choose to go somewhere else in the city (or not leave Oakland at all). Nobody thought of that!

Now they're talking about wrecking the Trop, and locating themselves there.

Laughably, the owners of the Rio (not Caesars, btw) offered to give them 22 acres for freeeeeeeeeeeeeee, but they declined because they think the traffic would snarl too badly if the stadium were located there. So apparently the Rio site is so unappealing that the A's don't even want it for free. (I assume the Rio owners were willing to give the land for free, so they would be the obvious destination for tourists who want to see a ballgame!)

[Dan Druff]

Looks like they're going to move to the Tropicana site after all, which was the original idea years ago.

Bally's Corporation, which owns the Tropicana, has agreed to sell the site to the A's, contingent upon a public funding approval.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...s-site-stadium


They would wreck the Tropicana hotel, build a new ballpark on its site, and attempt to be ready by the start of the 2027 MLB season in late March.

However, the biggest surprise comes from the announcement that the A's could be leaving Oakland as soon as 2025. They have one more year on their lease, and the tentative plans are to play in Las Vegas Ballpark for the 2025 and 2026 season.

What is Las Vegas Ballpark?

Good question. It's where the Las Vegas Aviators play -- currently a AAA team for, coincidentally, the Oakland A's.



It's located in the residential Summerlin area of Vegas.

The Aviators would still play there, and the two teams would share the stadium for 2025-2026. Artificial turf would be installed, as apparently the grass could not take the beating from 2 teams playing there.

Las Vegas Ballpark also has no roof, so it will be brutal going to games in the summer, and even more brutal for the players. Las Vegas is often over 110 degrees between mid June and late August, and it doesn't let up much in the evening, as the high temperature tends to hit around 5pm, unlike most of the country where it hits around 2pm. Even if they completely avoid day games, you will still be sitting in the 100+ degree heat throughout most of the summer.

The new proposed ballpark would have a fairly small capacity (30,000), and would have a retractable roof. Las Vegas Ballpark only holds 10,000 people. The new ballpark would have the smallest capacity of any MLB field. Presently the smallest one is Progressive Field in Cleveland, holding just 34,830. The largest is coincidentally Oakland Coliseum, which holds 56,782. Once that goes out of use for baseball, the largest will be Dodger Stadium, which holds 56,000.

The Vegas market has a small population and zero outlying areas, so the 30,000 capacity should be fine.

[Dan Druff]

Reportedly Tropicana employees were given "18-24 months notice" that their jobs will be gone after that.

[ftpjesus]

At this point the As have to move. Nobodies showing up to their games and currently they are in pace for the worst record in MLB history with potentially only 39 wins. They’re stuck at 9 right now with 34 losses I believe after tonight’s loss to the Dbacks. (At this point they may want to consider combining their AAA and MLB rosters anyway as it seems Oakland is playing a mostly minor league roster. Tonight’s starter ERA was over 8 when he took the mound.

[Dan Druff]

Long but interesting article about the Oakland A's and their problems: https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/...ns-going-fight


Among things mentioned just in the first 1/3 of the article:

- There's a possum living in the visitor's broadcasting booth

- There are about 1,000 fans in the stadium (seating almost 57,000 people) for first pitch

- The pregame YouTube show for the A's is getting about 25 live viewers, making PFA Radio look like Joe Rogan

- Even though it last was called "o.co (Overstock.com) Coliseum" in 2016, many signs still refer to it as that, and almost no one called it by its most recent name, RingCentral, which also recently terminated the naming agreement.

[Dan Druff]

Update:

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/tabitha_mueller/status/1661155111899627526

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/tabitha_mueller/status/1661155666692808705

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/tabitha_mueller/status/1661155990157557761

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/tabitha_mueller/status/1661170211159003138


Very likely a done deal.

[NaturalBornHustler]

I've long contended that an MLB team isn't coming to Vegas, because there are several problems:

1) The population isn't big enough to fill a baseball stadium (much bigger than a hockey/NBA area) for 81 games per year.

2) The TV market is small. Many don't realize that Vegas is incredibly isolated. There's basically no population in outlying areas for 100 miles in all directions. The closest city of any consequence is St. George, UT, which is 120 miles northeast. So your entire market is basically Vegas/Henderson/North LV/Boulder City. And that's it.

3) The number of tourists coming into town to see their home team play in Vegas will be minimal, aside from close teams such as the Dodgers, Angels, Padres, and Diamondbacks. This is different from the NFL, where there are very few games per season, so people are more likely to plan trips around their team being in Vegas.


Despite that, it looks like an MLB team might come to Vegas anyway. Presumably they're excited by the success of the Golden Knights (which Vegas people loved both because it was their first major pro team, plus the team was immediately good) and the Raiders (first "big 3" sport to come, plus it's easy to fill stadium with just 8 home games.)

The Oakland A's, long battling a lousy stadium, lousy area, and lousy fan support, are seriously considering moving to Vegas.

Team officials came to Vegas this month, and claim they will finalize a list of 10-12 potential sites for the new Las Vegas A's stadium by November: https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...ember-2442670/


So is this a done deal? Not yet. The A's want to stay in Oakland, but only if they can have a new waterfront stadium, supported by a new proposed tax which would fund major infrastructure improvements around that new stadium. If the A's get this from special tax approved, and if their new stadium gets the green light, they will stay in Oakland.

However, they claim they will likely decide by the end of 2021 if a move to Vegas is coming. It does appear that Vegas is their only desired new location, so if the Oakland ballpark falls through, you'll be saying hello to the Las Vegas A's very soon.

Sadly, being an AL team, the Dodgers won't be playing them very often. I think it would be better to move the Rockies over to the AL West, and put the Vegas A's in the NL West, given that fans from Phoenix, San Diego, and Los Angeles are all roughly 300 miles from Vegas.

They are coming because you are wrong about every single thing you think about Vegas, like it is 1996 Vegas or something. It isn't and hasn't been for decades. It is a booming mid size city that can support things that Oakland sure fucking can't. Like a baseball team. That gets it revenue from local season tickets and media compensation, not tourists.

[Texter]

Keep As or go with Aces…hmmm

[Dan Druff]

I've long contended that an MLB team isn't coming to Vegas, because there are several problems:

1) The population isn't big enough to fill a baseball stadium (much bigger than a hockey/NBA area) for 81 games per year.

2) The TV market is small. Many don't realize that Vegas is incredibly isolated. There's basically no population in outlying areas for 100 miles in all directions. The closest city of any consequence is St. George, UT, which is 120 miles northeast. So your entire market is basically Vegas/Henderson/North LV/Boulder City. And that's it.

3) The number of tourists coming into town to see their home team play in Vegas will be minimal, aside from close teams such as the Dodgers, Angels, Padres, and Diamondbacks. This is different from the NFL, where there are very few games per season, so people are more likely to plan trips around their team being in Vegas.


Despite that, it looks like an MLB team might come to Vegas anyway. Presumably they're excited by the success of the Golden Knights (which Vegas people loved both because it was their first major pro team, plus the team was immediately good) and the Raiders (first "big 3" sport to come, plus it's easy to fill stadium with just 8 home games.)

The Oakland A's, long battling a lousy stadium, lousy area, and lousy fan support, are seriously considering moving to Vegas.

Team officials came to Vegas this month, and claim they will finalize a list of 10-12 potential sites for the new Las Vegas A's stadium by November: https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports...ember-2442670/


So is this a done deal? Not yet. The A's want to stay in Oakland, but only if they can have a new waterfront stadium, supported by a new proposed tax which would fund major infrastructure improvements around that new stadium. If the A's get this from special tax approved, and if their new stadium gets the green light, they will stay in Oakland.

However, they claim they will likely decide by the end of 2021 if a move to Vegas is coming. It does appear that Vegas is their only desired new location, so if the Oakland ballpark falls through, you'll be saying hello to the Las Vegas A's very soon.

Sadly, being an AL team, the Dodgers won't be playing them very often. I think it would be better to move the Rockies over to the AL West, and put the Vegas A's in the NL West, given that fans from Phoenix, San Diego, and Los Angeles are all roughly 300 miles from Vegas.

They are coming because you are wrong about every single thing you think about Vegas, like it is 1996 Vegas or something. It isn't and hasn't been for decades. It is a booming mid size city that can support things that Oakland sure fucking can't. Like a baseball team. That gets it revenue from local season tickets and media compensation, not tourists.

Again:

- There's no outlying areas. This is the same situation as 1996.

- TV market is small and won't generate much revenue anyway, because the model of huge TV contracts has proven a failure, and thus these monster TV contracts ain't happening anymore.

- Planned stadium will have a capacity of 30,000. That shows that they know it won't be a huge crowd. Dodgers AVERAGED 48,000 last year per game.


Preferable to Oakland at this point? Sure. But nearly anywhere is.