|
Post by The Unknown Poster on Oct 29, 2012 18:32:30 GMT -6
I blame Buchko for not installing invisible railings and floating seats. What a rip off.
|
|
|
Post by Jetsfan47 on Oct 29, 2012 19:09:00 GMT -6
I heard that the Cowboys new stadium has obstructed views as well
|
|
|
Post by donwood on Oct 29, 2012 19:40:04 GMT -6
I heard that the Cowboys new stadium has obstructed views as well I think these days with greater safety regulations due in part to some accidents with people falling out of upper decks etc. It's impossible to not have at least a few partly obstructed seats. Railings and barriers at the end of stairways have to be higher then stadiums/arenas built years ago.
|
|
|
Post by donwood on Oct 29, 2012 20:30:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Ric O. on Oct 29, 2012 20:44:59 GMT -6
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. I believe it was Grumpy Old Man and NOT Grumpz that commented on the math....
|
|
Steve
3rd Line Checker
Posts: 290
|
Post by Steve on Oct 30, 2012 0:33:38 GMT -6
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. I believe it was Grumpy Old Man and NOT Grumpz that commented on the math.... Duly noted! Too many "grumpy" people here it seems
|
|
|
Post by slippy on Oct 30, 2012 3:35:56 GMT -6
The way the Bombers play football, I'd expect a few people to offer to pay a little extra to sit in these seats... :-P
|
|
|
Post by grumpy on Oct 30, 2012 7:59:01 GMT -6
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. Without turning this into a pissing contest I did not say it was a percentage. I just corrected the actual math based on the actual number of seats. Carry on...
|
|
|
Post by donwood on Oct 30, 2012 10:44:16 GMT -6
Penton started the mess but his one sided story. There is a guy on the comments claiming 15% of the seats are obstructed. Now THAT is bad math.
|
|
|
Post by phillymike on Oct 30, 2012 11:07:51 GMT -6
The only part that bothers me is that they always said there would be no obstructed seats. It's this that irks me. Going back to the insistence that there would not be another game played at the old stadium. They come off as arrogant, and condescending, they need a new PR spokesperson. The way they shoot off when they don't have to IMO is amateurish.
|
|
|
Post by grumpy on Oct 30, 2012 11:41:16 GMT -6
The WBB marketing folks have been quite amateurish for years now. The cluster@#$% that has been the past two seasons is not totally unexpected.
|
|
kj79
2nd Line Winger
Posts: 329
|
Post by kj79 on Oct 30, 2012 17:09:07 GMT -6
i wish my Jets tix were 50% off because of the railing that blocks my view for a split second at a time
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2012 21:52:20 GMT -6
Until actual games are played there, fans are packed into the stadium, and we get the opinions of many, this article is meaningless.
|
|
|
Post by jetsv2 on Nov 1, 2012 7:43:53 GMT -6
So a railing is partailly blocking the view of 150 seats, and the people whos seats are obstructed can either choose to pay 1/2 of what thier tickets were worth, or be moved to a new section, possibly a higher priced section, without paying the difference in ticket prices. Sounds like 150 fans lucked out to me.
|
|
|
Post by jetsorbust on Nov 1, 2012 8:17:28 GMT -6
So a railing is partailly blocking the view of 150 seats, and the people whos seats are obstructed can either choose to pay 1/2 of what thier tickets were worth, or be moved to a new section, possibly a higher priced section, without paying the difference in ticket prices. Sounds like 150 fans lucked out to me. No doubt. Also the Bomber brass takes a lot of heat, but sounds like they have handled this better than would be expected.
|
|