26 minutes ago, Green Line said:

Well, he should get on it. Chicago is building far less housing than other major cities, which is why prices are exploding. Ishbia should be building something more useful on the land.

Why do you think mlb was granted an anti trust exemption?

Because it's a critical aspect of the city's identity, making it "major league" or not.

Should the Cubs just take over the entire city?

And why wasn't the 78 or current site developed for housing if that was more important than a mere baseball team?

Unless you want an authoritarian interventionist government...you're not going to be able to force entrepreneurs to build what you consider to be the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

That's just not how capitalism works.

46 minutes ago, Green Line said:

We need affordable housing, where is the plan to build that?

40 minutes ago, Green Line said:

Well, he should get on it. Chicago is building far less housing than other major cities, which is why prices are exploding. Ishbia should be building something more useful on the land.

It's literally mentioned in the Crain's article. Right now, the 80-acre Rate Field site sits unused 280 days a year. So, are you suggesting that Amtrak should move out so that the 14th St site be filled entirely with affordable housing while the Sox remain at Rate Field and those parking lots sit empty all but 81 days a year? Or should Amtrak stay put and the Sox should build a stadium district (which most definitely will NOT be affordable housing) at Rate Field? I guess I'm not following what your desired outcome is for getting more housing built - which Chicago definitely needs - by Ishbia.

“If the White Sox decided to leave — that’s a big if, not for sure — how many would love to have roughly 80 acres available for a public conversation about what to make it? Whether it’s residential homes, whether it’s a new sports facility, whether it’s a potential pro sports franchise or a football team, soccer team, or something else. I think the important part of the conversation is what’s next?”

Asked if he has been approached by others about redeveloping Rate Field and its surroundings, Ishbia said “a lot of residential developers” have reached out.

Edited Friday at 06:42 PM2 days by 77 Hitmen

When did we get to the point in this country where we all feel we are able to just laundry list our demands for other people to do? If we had a functioning federal government, you know, representing the people, this the type of thing they should be doing. But that is a whataboutism for another day.

3 hours ago, soxfan18 said:

Mat & Justin both speak the same way regarding their ownership philosophy.

"I don't own the team, it's the city of Phoenix's team"

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/s/ePk3DOFcPB

“You’ll never hear me say the word ‘owner’ of the franchise,” Ishbia told The Athletic this week. “I’m the steward of a community asset. This asset, this team, this franchise belongs to the city of Chicago

https://roundtable.io/sports/mlb/white-sox/news/why-justin-ishbia-s-words-matter-and-why-white-sox-fans-are-letting-themselves-believe

Absolutely willing to bet the fan first initiatives carry over from the Suns.

I remember when JR and Einhorn bought the White Sox. Einhorn said numerous times that the White Sox were really owned by the City of Chicago and White Sox fans. He said he was just the placeholder for the team. Einhorn was the one who wanted to move the team to Florida. He wanted out of here. He said Florida was the greatest opportunity for MLB since the Dodgers moved to the west coast. After the White Sox agreed to stay in Chicago Einhorn sold most of his White Sox shares to JR and he left the scene.

Edited Friday at 07:30 PM2 days by WBWSF

8 minutes ago, WBWSF said:

I remember when JR and Einhorn bought the White Sox. Einhorn said numerous times that the White Sox were really owned by the City of Chicago and White Sox fans. He said he was just the placeholder for the team. Einhorn was the one who wanted to move the team to Florida. He wanted out of here. He said Florida was the greatest opportunity for MLB since the Dodgers moved to the west coast. After the White agreed to stay in Chicago Einhorn sold most of his White Sox shares to JR and he left the scene.

He didn't leave the scene though he remained as part of the front office according to the Sox media guides, now he did step back and stop speaking for the organization to the media.

10 minutes ago, WBWSF said:

I remember when JR and Einhorn bought the White Sox. Einhorn said numerous times that the White Sox were really owned by the City of Chicago and White Sox fans. He said he was just the placeholder for the team. Einhorn was the one who wanted to move the team to Florida. He wanted out of here. He said Florida was the greatest opportunity for MLB since the Dodgers moved to the west coast. After the White agreed to stay in Chicago Einhorn sold most of his White Sox shares to JR and he left the scene.

Couldn't have been more wrong about TB Miami and Orlando, at least so far...

Josh gets more in depth here on Ishbia’s plans plus some other topics.

3 hours ago, Sleepy Harold said:

Josh gets more in depth here on Ishbia’s plans plus some other topics.

You’ve been killing it this week with all the breaking news/most recent info. Thank you!

Having Ishbia speak about his vision for the Railyards is so refreshing. If JR was the spokesman and said the same thing word for word, I would not feel excited about the Sox future.

7 hours ago, Mouthsider said:

You’ve been killing it this week with all the breaking news/most recent info. Thank you!

Thanks, I find it hard not to be giddy about the potential for all of this and what it could mean for the franchise with the more I see about it.

2 hours ago, Falstaff said:

Having Ishbia speak about his vision for the Railyards is so refreshing. If JR was the spokesman and said the same thing word for word, I would not feel excited about the Sox future.

Sure, but he has NEVER spoke to this fanbase in such detailed and broad facing terms. This is not only a vision, but on a scope andscale this regime has never engaged in

1 hour ago, Sleepy Harold said:

Thanks, I find it hard not to be giddy about the potential for all of this and what it could mean for the franchise with the more I see about it.

I’m going to be devastated if the new stadium plans don’t work out

12 hours ago, Sleepy Harold said:

Josh gets more in depth here on Ishbia’s plans plus some other topics.

That's a very good discussion by Josh Nelson about the current status of the South Loop, how it compares to the growth in the West Loop, and Ishbia's grand vision for the South Loop beyond just a baseball stadium.

I also found the discussion about Lot G (beginning at around 23:10) very interesting. So, ISFA might not own all of Lot G as part of it might belong to Union Pacific/Amtrak? He brings up a very good point of where Amtrak employees at the facility would park with Lot G being the most obvious answer. As he says, that could impact parking availability for Sox fans. Though, I suppose most Amtrak workers would be there during regular weekday work hours, which rarely conflicts with Sox games. It'll be a 24/7 facility, but after hours would be for emergency repairs and it wouldn't be fully staffed on weekends or at night.

Edited yesterday at 04:16 PM1 day by 77 Hitmen

On 10/16/2026 at 10:48 AM, Sleepy Harold said:

A couple summaries on Ishbia’s sit down yesterday (no paywalls) for anyone interested.

This Sox on 35th write up is rather lengthy (it says a 16 minutes read time at the top) but an interesting read.

It discusses how Shore Capital operates:

micro-cap investments: relatively small, often founder-owned companies that Ishbia felt larger investment firms were overlooking. Rather than simply buying businesses and hoping their value increased, Shore’s approach was to bring resources, technology, and experienced leadership to companies that previously may not have had access to them. That opportunity has only expanded as technology has improved.

So, it sounds like their business model is not simply to buy up businesses, suck them dry, and sell off the husk of what remains as I've heard countless times on Soxtalk. Imagine that.

This was an interesting statement:

He went as far as predicting that by the time his children reach his age, the four-day work week could be the norm.

I'm all for that! I doubt that'll ever happen in this country and the current "work until you drop dead" philosophy, but that's the first time I heard a billionaire envision that. Usually their vision of the future is people being tied in to work for even longer hours during the week thanks to technology.

Edited yesterday at 04:48 PM1 day by 77 Hitmen

So far technology has stalled the middle class who are working longer hours for lower standards of living. Capitalism doesn't reward altruism. Companies will start offering 32 hour work weeks without benefits, the Walmart model with lower and lower standards of living.

One party celebrated closing government offices and putting people out of work. Are they really going to celebrate shorter work weeks for the same pay?

5 hours ago, Sleepy Harold said:

Thanks, I find it hard not to be giddy about the potential for all of this and what it could mean for the franchise with the more I see about it.

3 hours ago, fathom said:

I’m going to be devastated if the new stadium plans don’t work out

It almost seems too good to be true that the Sox have an owner-in-waiting who is serious about building a privately-financed new ballpark and is putting many things in motion to make it happen.

It would be such a White Sox thing if this effort fails and we spend the next 30 years arguing that the existing ballpark is not that bad and that the current location is not that bad if only people would give it a chance, blah blah blah. Yeah, it'll be very disappointing.....but as a Sox fan I'm conditioned to expect that we can't have nice things. So while I'm cautiously optimistic, I won't believe it's happening until there are shovels in the ground.

The A's, Rays, and Royals are all getting new ballparks. Kroenke is buying the Angels and I expect him to either massively overhaul their stadium or build a new one at the current site. After that, if the Sox stay at Rate Field long-term, it'll likely be ranked 29th or 30th when ballpark rankings come out.

Now cue the hyperbolic outrage and personal attacks in 3....2....1.....

Edited yesterday at 07:46 PM1 day by 77 Hitmen

3 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

So, it sounds like their business model is not simply to buy up businesses, suck them dry, and sell off the husk of what remains as I've heard countless times on Soxtalk. Imagine that.

Similarly, this part about how the Ishbia brothers decided to put initial prioritization on growing the team fanbase, as opposed to maximizing funds, stood out to me:

One of the most notable examples was the decision to move Suns and Mercury games to free over-the-air television throughout Arizona. At the time, Ishbia said the team’s cable arrangement reached roughly 800,000 households in a market containing approximately 2.7 million.

For the Ishbias, that represented nearly two million households that didn’t have regular access to the team.

“You can’t love something you can’t see,” Ishbia said.

The move meant sacrificing some immediate revenue in exchange for what the brothers believed could be a much more valuable long-term relationship with fans. Get more people watching games. Give children an opportunity to grow up with the team. Create more Suns fans. Eventually, those people may attend more games, buy merchandise, and become part of the organization for decades.

So it would seem Justin is very much interested in both growing the target audience of the White Sox with a new stadium while also ensuring that us existing fans have the accessibility to continue to support the team and watch/attend games. Wonderful.

I am no longer an Illinois taxpayer so I'll keep this more general.

Taxpayers funds recreational facilities throughout their community. People fund dog parks who don't own dogs. National parks they never visit. Historic sites they don't understand. So I'm not always against tax payers funding a stadium.

Soon San Antonio will have three stadiums standing that the Spurs have all called home. They will all continue to exist and host events. The city who gladly finance a football or baseball stadium of the leagues would vote to expand to San Antonio.

46 minutes ago, Mouthsider said:

Similarly, this part about how the Ishbia brothers decided to put initial prioritization on growing the team fanbase, as opposed to maximizing funds, stood out to me:

So it would seem Justin is very much interested in both growing the target audience of the White Sox with a new stadium while also ensuring that us existing fans have the accessibility to continue to support the team and watch/attend games. Wonderful.

It's great to hear all of this, plus plans for entire neighborhoods, instead of just a ballpark.

5 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

It's great to hear all of this, plus plans for entire neighborhoods, instead of just a ballpark.

I wonder how many of the "ballpark as a center piece for development" plans have worked out. It didn't in San Antonio so they are heading back downtown.

Ishbia mentioned at the conference the other day how they took the NBA Suns off cable TV and put them on free TV. I wonder if that's the game plan for the White Sox in the future. Free TV would reach more fans than cable.

15 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I wonder how many of the "ballpark as a center piece for development" plans have worked out. It didn't in San Antonio so they are heading back downtown.

The Battery in Atlanta has been so wildly successful that other teams are racing to create their own stadium districts.

The Baseball Village in St. Louis has also been a huge success. Downtown St. Louis is pretty dead other than the Arch and the Busch Stadium/Baseball Village development as far as I could tell, but that's not the fault of the stadium development and the Baseball Village has been a big success for the Cardinals nonetheless.

11 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

The Battery in Atlanta has been so wildly successful that other teams are racing to create their own stadium districts.

The Baseball Village in St. Louis has also been a huge success. Downtown St. Louis is pretty dead other than the Arch and the Busch Stadium/Baseball Village development as far as I could tell, but that's not the fault of the stadium development and the Baseball Village has been a big success for the Cardinals nonetheless.

Interesting you bring up Atlanta. Wouldn't that be the blueprint for an Arlington Heights development in the suburbs? They left the city.

We could also mention the Rangers who went suburban.

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

I wonder how many of the "ballpark as a center piece for development" plans have worked out. It didn't in San Antonio so they are heading back downtown.

This is a way more than a ballpark village.

1 hour ago, Texsox said:

Interesting you bring up Atlanta. Wouldn't that be the blueprint for an Arlington Heights development in the suburbs? They left the city.

We could also mention the Rangers who went suburban.

Arlington is suburban?

Plus, they have the Cowboys' stadium in the same area.

Six Flags and the airport, etc.

But Plano is true suburban DFW.

The Chiefs/Royals are the only similar setup with miles of parking lots in the middle of nowhere...and both are leaving for greener, separate pastures.

Absolutely nothing to do there but tailgate for football games.

Or the Meadowlands...but they built one of the biggest malls in America not so far from there, right?

Edited 23 hours ago23 hr by caulfield12