Levesque on Section 101 removal

DMZ · September 22, 2004 at 1:52 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

“M’s fans reclaim patio space“

Tags:

Comments

11 Responses to “Levesque on Section 101 removal”

  1. Jim Thomsen on September 22nd, 2004 5:54 pm

    Way to go, Levesque. Normally, he’s the among the most annoying of the local columnist cadre, but I have to give him credit for being the first to pick up on the electric current of a fans’ concerrn and riding the wave to its conclusion. He’s now free to return to months of droning irrelevance.

  2. MR. E on September 22nd, 2004 6:10 pm

    sorry if this has been posted elsewhere and I’ve overlooked it, but I emailed my complaint about the bleachers to the Mariners on Monday afternoon, before I heard about the sect. 101 “removal”. Today I received an reply from someone with the M’s who wants to call me to talk about this in person. Has anyone else received the same response? Any suggestions to what I should say if they actually call me back?

  3. DMZ on September 22nd, 2004 6:40 pm

    Sure — talk to them, and be honest about how you feel and why. Since you’ve now found out about the bleachers, mention that. Maybe they’re looking to talk directly to some fans to figure out why people are mad about this, and it’s a chance for you to make your opinion heard directly, rather than getting a form-response email from the team.

    I’d be kind of excited, honestly, if the team wanted to call me and talk about stuff.

  4. Jeff in Fremont on September 22nd, 2004 7:04 pm

    Congrats, DMZ. All your grassroots efforts have paid off. Perhaps a run for congress is the next step.

  5. MR. E on September 22nd, 2004 7:27 pm

    I am excited to talk to them, I’m just a bit shocked that the M’s “Customer Communications Manager” actually wants to talk to a fan who wrote to complain. I’ve been following the bleachers issue since the begining, but just got around to writing about it on Monday. I was pretty hard on the M’s in my email, so I have to give this person credit for wanting to talk to me about it.

    I have a contact number that he sent, but I’m going to have him call me to see if he follows through.

  6. Jon on September 23rd, 2004 6:59 am

    Same here. But I have no idea how they looked up my number (did not give it in my e-mail). They actually left a message at my parent’s house (which is probably the number I gave when I last purchased M’s tix a few years back).

  7. Lester Mann on September 23rd, 2004 9:24 am

    I heard from the Customer Communications Manager. She was really nice. I was shocked. Initially, she said she was from the Mariners, and I replied, “And why are you calling me?” My email to them was very polite, although a little bit smartass. But they obviously did the PR work on this issue, both during and after the decision.

  8. LB on September 23rd, 2004 10:30 am

    Since Safeco opened, I have had one customer service issue with the M’s. Without going into the details, I think they handled it okay. The Director of Guest Services wrote me a letter saying that their people had messed up and apologized. It took them about six weeks to clear things up, but they got it right in the end.

    I am a season ticket holder with a charter seat license. I don’t know if that made them more responsive than usual.

  9. Mel on September 23rd, 2004 11:38 am

    Of course, the M’s will continue to look for new revenue opportunities.

    Anyone else remember their brief attempt to sell standing room, with the dividing lines marked with tape (so you couldn’t stand in someone else’s space)? Their rationale at the time was “this allows us to let more people into the games” – that’s right, humanitarian reasons.

    So while Section 101 might be (mostly) abolished right now, look for a return should the sellouts increase in the future.

  10. PaulEnumclaw on September 23rd, 2004 11:41 am

    The thing that irritates me the most about the whole patio thing is that the M’s are apologizing-without-apologizing a bit, and they’re also holding on to the “right” to place the bleachers back whenever they see fit.

    Oh, they’ll say it’s just for “special events” like playoff games (ha) or the ASG (which is supposed to be back in what, 2027 or so- by when we’ll have built them yet ANOTHER stadium, I’m sure) or big sold-out games.

    But that’s a cop-out. They’re missing the point. The point is that the CF landing was a neat place to stand, and one of Safeco’s unique little spots that make it an interesting stadium.

    Are they truly that horny for the extra ticket revenue? And if they really wanted ~250 more seats in the joint, why didn’t they just design the stadium that way from the beginning?

    It reeks of desperation and greed. It stinks to high heaven of these billionaires (and that’s what the team’s ownership is- aggregate, they’re easily worth a billion bucks) saying “how can we squeeze a few more bucks out of Safeco? I know, let’s jam in a few more seats!”

    Grrr.

    Paul

  11. Paul Molitor Cocktail on September 23rd, 2004 5:28 pm

    It reeks of desperation and greed. It stinks to high heaven of these billionaires (and that’s what the team’s ownership is- aggregate, they’re easily worth a billion bucks) saying “how can we squeeze a few more bucks out of Safeco? I know, let’s jam in a few more seats!”

    There’s nothing wrong with wanting to make money, but when management puts that over putting worth a quality product and having satisfied customers, then it’s doomed.