Obstruted Views at New Bombers Stadium?

[jval07]

This from Sun article just posted on Twitter by @pentonkirk

Now that the 2012 season is all over for the Bombers but for the analysis of another year gone wrong, it’s time to look forward to the move into the new stadium.

Or is it?

At least one Bomber season-ticket holder believes the organization is about to suffer its latest black eye when it comes to Investors Group Field. The new park has seats with obstructed views, and season-ticket holders are getting discounts or moved to new seats because of it.

The season-ticket holder who spoke to the Sun on Sunday night didn’t want to be identified because the club has treated him well through the process of switching seats earlier in the day. He just can’t believe a brand new stadium would have obstructed views like he witnessed on Sunday.

“There’s going to be one heck of a lot of disappointed people. I know that for a fact,” he said. “It’s a beautiful looking stadium. Beautiful. Everything’s nice, but I’m going from a stadium that’s 58 years old that I can see the field perfectly to a building that was built in 2011 that you can’t see the field perfectly.

“I don’t know what they’re going to do. I actually feel sorry for (Bombers president) Garth Buchko, I really do.”

The Bombers refused comment on the matter Sunday because Buchko is going to be part of a photo op at the new stadium on Monday afternoon. The media is being invited to view the Field Turf and goal posts that have been installed at the $190 million facility.

The season-ticket holder on Sunday was moved from a P6 seat in the upper deck worth $324 to a P4 one — also in the upper deck — worth $452, but he will pay the P6 price. Some patrons are receiving 50% discounts to stay in their original seats with obstructed views.

“I’m wondering who’s going to be paying for all of this,” he said. “There’s going to be a small riot next spring when they get into their seats.”

The problem with some of the upper-deck seats is the sideline closest to them is not visible due to railings. It is also difficult to see the corners of the end zones, which are extremely close to the concrete wall that surrounds the field. The season-ticket holder, who has owned Bomber seats for 30 years, was told he could watch the large video screens to see anything he missed.

“I thought, ‘I could see it at home,’ ” said the ticket holder, who seriously wonders if the stadium was built for an American-sized field. “And this is a building that was built in 2011. I’m flabbergasted.”

Since the Bombers wouldn’t comment on Sunday, how many seats are affected or how much the obstructed views will end up costing is unknown.

“I sat in a $548 seat today and I couldn’t see the whole sideline. You can’t see any of it,” the ticket holder said. “They’re gonna have issues. I feel sorry for them. I really do.

“It’s almost like a storm’s going to be brewing. That’s the feeling I get.”

[donwood]

This isn't new, I believe it was CKND that reported on this over a week ago, It has to do with the handicapped area and making the railings higher in that area ONLY, 150 seats so not good but lets not make this bigger then it is.
The part about being built for a U.S. sized field is total BS.

[grumpy]

There are a lot of comments an other sites about this as well. It is much ado about nothing. There were links to other brand new stadiums that discussed obstructed view seats as well. I don't imagine there is much that can be done about obstructed view other than trying to minimize them.

Just remember, this is a report from the Sun. Not worth the paper it is written on.

[phillymike]

The CBC is also reporting this.

The obstructed view situation, is just one more issue that tells me how horrible this project is.

How far behind schedual?
The insistence that it would be ready by this season. (That was idiotic/arrogant and unnecessary)
The excuses for being behind schedule.( Wind/structural steel? Which is it)
Collapsing walls. (2 that I've heard of)
And now obstructed views? Sure it may not be many seats, but it should be 0 seats.
The builder expecting to lose 3.5 million on this fiasco.

I'm hoping this is the last embarrassment with this project, but I don't think it will be.

[donwood]

150 seats or less then .005% and as has been pointed out almost all sports arena and stadiums have obstructed view. How many times have people complained about sight problems in the upper deck when someone in front sits forward.

The Bomber management deserve to take criticism for a wide variety of things but this is just an attempt to make a lot out of a little.

[jval07]

While I agree that most arenas/stadium will have some kind of obstructed view, usually from railings, this line makes me wonder why the original design just didn't allow for more space between the sideline to stands:
"I sat in a $548 seat today and I couldn’t see the whole sideline. You can’t see any of it"
I have no idea if that's an exaggeration as I have been to the new stadium, but that's seems to be a pretty pricey ticket to not be able to see ANY of the sideline.

[Tim]

Just sell the seats with the obstructed view to people that don't want to se Buck get hurt again! ;D

[Steve]

Oct 29, 2012 9:48:37 GMT -6 donwood said:

150 seats or less then .005% and as has been pointed out almost all sports arena and stadiums have obstructed view. How many times have people complained about sight problems in the upper deck when someone in front sits forward.

The Bomber management deserve to take criticism for a wide variety of things but this is just an attempt to make a lot out of a little.

Actually it's not 0.005%, it's 0.5%. At 30,000/150, that's one in two hundred seats which are obscured.

[ediger]

someone on the Our Bombers forums posted some pics from his obstructed seats. Not much of an obstruction at all. A little corner of the endzones, that's about it. Pretty much everyone I've heard from that has been through the new stadium has said the obstruction isn't nearly as bad as they expected.

[grumpy]

Oct 29, 2012 10:16:00 GMT -6 Steve said:

Oct 29, 2012 9:48:37 GMT -6 donwood said:

150 seats or less then .005% and as has been pointed out almost all sports arena and stadiums have obstructed view. How many times have people complained about sight problems in the upper deck when someone in front sits forward.

The Bomber management deserve to take criticism for a wide variety of things but this is just an attempt to make a lot out of a little.

Actually it's not 0.005%, it's 0.5%. At 30,000/150, that's one in two hundred seats which are obscured.

Check the math...

There are 33,000 seats in the new stadium.

150 of which are reported to have a (very minor) obstructed view.

150/33,000 = 0.004545

Any way it is spun the number is still 150 seats with an obstructed view. Name a single stadium, including the billion dollar stadiums, that don't have some seats with some obstruction.

[donwood]

Oct 29, 2012 11:23:26 GMT -6 grumpy said:

Oct 29, 2012 10:16:00 GMT -6 Steve said:

Actually it's not 0.005%, it's 0.5%. At 30,000/150, that's one in two hundred seats which are obscured.

Check the math...

There are 33,000 seats in the new stadium.

150 of which are reported to have a (very minor) obstructed view.

150/33,000 = 0.004545

Any way it is spun the number is still 150 seats with an obstructed view. Name a single stadium, including the billion dollar stadiums, that don't have some seats with some obstruction.

Karma for you.

[jval07]

While 150/33000 is 0.004545... It's not a percentage until you multiply by 100. Just wanted to clear that up. Carry on.

[Steve]

Oct 29, 2012 17:01:20 GMT -6 jval07 said:

While 150/33000 is 0.004545... It's not a percentage until you multiply by 100. Just wanted to clear that up. Carry on.

Thanks for supporting my ability to do simple arithmetic. Karma for you.

Note that I chose 30,000 (instead of 33,000) in my calculations just to make the math simpler (15 divides into 30 evenly). Still it seems there are some who think 1/100 works out to 0.01% when it's really 1%.

If you listen to the YouTube video here you'll hear them say that there are about 0.45% obstructed view seats.

[Steve]

Oct 29, 2012 11:23:26 GMT -6 grumpy said:

Oct 29, 2012 10:16:00 GMT -6 Steve said:

Actually it's not 0.005%, it's 0.5%. At 30,000/150, that's one in two hundred seats which are obscured.

Check the math...

There are 33,000 seats in the new stadium.

150 of which are reported to have a (very minor) obstructed view.

150/33,000 = 0.004545

Any way it is spun the number is still 150 seats with an obstructed view. Name a single stadium, including the billion dollar stadiums, that don't have some seats with some obstruction.

Hey Grumpz, 0.004545 is 0.4545%. YOU check the math.

I have no problem with there being some obstructed view seating and agree that it's a very small number. In face, from the YouTube video , it sounds like a great majority of those affected chose to KEEP their obstructed view seats. And at half price, why not? ;D

The only part that bothers me is that they always said there would be no obstructed seats.

[donwood]

The Bombers deserve to take flak both for on and off the field problems this year but it some of the silly things being said on the comments of the newspapers etc are downright ridiculous.
One person was all bent out of shape that there is a wall not far beyond the end zone.

Well gee isn't there in almost EVERY stadium? It's a stadium not a park.