corta765 Posted September 29, 2021 Posted September 29, 2021 3 hours ago, nucci said: Logistics would be difficult for London and guessing players wouldn't want to live that far from home Eh it be like any other city where most players do not care but some do not care. The financial piece with the exchange is whats tough and taxes. My understanding is the NFL would need to consider an adjusted cap for London so they had a more fair chance.
wppete Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 Good for the Bears, can’t blame them. Does anyone take that woman seriously?
Motorin' Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 9 hours ago, Don Otreply said: Only if it is a good business deal for the municipalities / taxpayers, which it has yet to shown to be a good deal for the locality, anywhere. One can spin it in many ways, but the local municipalities are hog tied with the current way of doing business with the NFL, and that can’t be argued otherwise. Santa Clara paid like 150M of the cost for Levi Stadium. They own it, and charge the 49ers 25M per year on a 30 year lease... That's called profit. 1
HardyBoy Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 9 minutes ago, Motorin' said: Santa Clara paid like 150M of the cost for Levi Stadium. They own it, and charge the 49ers 25M per year on a 30 year lease... That's called profit. How much is the total cost a $150m loan over 30 years? You think Santa Clara had that just sitting in the bank?
Don Otreply Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 11 minutes ago, Motorin' said: Santa Clara paid like 150M of the cost for Levi Stadium. They own it, and charge the 49ers 25M per year on a 30 year lease... That's called profit. That stadium cost more than $150 million, are you saying that the other investors are just charitable donors? Sounds like Santa Clara has a minority interest in the stadium, does the county own the land that the stadium sits on, on top of that $150 million you speak of, or is that property the $150 million they put into the entire investment??? Doesn’t stack up from what you describe, 1
HardyBoy Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 2 minutes ago, Don Otreply said: That stadium cost more than $150 million, are you saying that the other investors are just charitable donors? Sounds like Santa Clara has a minority interest in the stadium, does the county own the land that the stadium sits on, on top of that $150 million you speak of, or is that property the $150 million they put into the entire investment??? Doesn’t stack up from what you describe, I just looked it up...the stadium authority took out a loan for $850m. After they refinanced, the overall cost of the loan went down by $100m alone. Doubt that tops the Miami Marlins stadium mess in terms of cost to a city, and at least the stadium will be used vs Marlins Park (still not sure that an NFL stadium would draw as many people as an MLB stadium just based on number of games, but Marlins Park has awful attendance). 1
Motorin' Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 30 minutes ago, Don Otreply said: That stadium cost more than $150 million, are you saying that the other investors are just charitable donors? Sounds like Santa Clara has a minority interest in the stadium, does the county own the land that the stadium sits on, on top of that $150 million you speak of, or is that property the $150 million they put into the entire investment??? Doesn’t stack up from what you describe, Yeah, I confused the total amount of the loan the stadium authority took out with something else I was reading... The main reason the 9ers wanted the stadium authority to own Levi Stadium was so that it would have no property taxes assessed. Just reading a little more in their recent financial records, the city has lost 8 mil over the last 3 years. They blame the 9ers for booking large scale non-NFL events that lost considerable monies for the lost revenue... 1
Saxum Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 14 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said: Nobody, except for 5 million or so people. Also Soldier Field was not renovated. They built a completely new stadium but left the old columns outside up. 13 hours ago, Motorin' said: 9.5 million in Chicago the metro area... And a damn hot real estate market. 4.5 million of them are Green Bay Packers fans.
Nextmanup Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 Awesome comments from the mayor of Chicago!
Saxum Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 13 hours ago, nucci said: as soon as we change to the New York Bills I'd agree since city of Buffalo does not contribute to Bills. But before the changes Giants and Jets would need to change names to NJ Jiants and NJ Jests so Bills would be only New York team. Splitting off NYC and adjoining counties and being split between NJ and Connecticut is also acceptable alternate. Never was a southern wall fan since the rodents are going under the wall but Escape from New York had some good ideas.
Rochesterfan Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 7 hours ago, Motorin' said: Yeah, I confused the total amount of the loan the stadium authority took out with something else I was reading... The main reason the 9ers wanted the stadium authority to own Levi Stadium was so that it would have no property taxes assessed. Just reading a little more in their recent financial records, the city has lost 8 mil over the last 3 years. They blame the 9ers for booking large scale non-NFL events that lost considerable monies for the lost revenue... Plus since the city owns the stadium - they will be forking out needed money every 5-10 years here in the future for needed upgrades and maintenance. The initial deal looked palatable, but it will not be profitable. 1
machine gun kelly Posted September 30, 2021 Posted September 30, 2021 I really could care less about Chicago, and sounds like a lot of posturing for down the road. There aren’t a lot of stadiums in the heart of their cities. Sounds like they are there for 12 years anyway, so to me it’s a big so what.
dpberr Posted October 4, 2021 Posted October 4, 2021 On 9/29/2021 at 8:09 AM, PromoTheRobot said: Nobody, except for 5 million or so people. Also Soldier Field was not renovated. They built a completely new stadium but left the old columns outside up. Ehh. Illinois population loss is increasing and a significant problem that will be factored into the decision. The state lost population for the first time in the history of the Census in the 2020 Census, and was one of the three states in the 2020 Census to lose population (Mississippi and West Virginia) between 2010 and 2020. There are 102 counties in the state and 87 of them lost population between during the time period. The state used to be the 5th most populous, and now it's 6th behind PA. Chicago is the 3rd most populated city in the US but it had sub 2% growth in population between 10-20, the lowest of the top 25 cities in the US by population. San Antonio, which would be an attractive city for a team, is the 7th largest, with nearly 9% growth. Austin is 11th with 22% growth. If you're a new owner, do you invest your money in a state that's on the decline and a city that's marginally growing? If you're Illinois, do you use your strained, but improved credit (the state's bond ratings just moved to BBB, in comparison NYS is usually AA+) to go all in on the Bears or do you use it to fix why people are leaving the state?
PromoTheRobot Posted October 4, 2021 Posted October 4, 2021 1 hour ago, dpberr said: Ehh. Illinois population loss is increasing and a significant problem that will be factored into the decision. The state lost population for the first time in the history of the Census in the 2020 Census, and was one of the three states in the 2020 Census to lose population (Mississippi and West Virginia) between 2010 and 2020. There are 102 counties in the state and 87 of them lost population between during the time period. The state used to be the 5th most populous, and now it's 6th behind PA. Chicago is the 3rd most populated city in the US but it had sub 2% growth in population between 10-20, the lowest of the top 25 cities in the US by population. San Antonio, which would be an attractive city for a team, is the 7th largest, with nearly 9% growth. Austin is 11th with 22% growth. If you're a new owner, do you invest your money in a state that's on the decline and a city that's marginally growing? If you're Illinois, do you use your strained, but improved credit (the state's bond ratings just moved to BBB, in comparison NYS is usually AA+) to go all in on the Bears or do you use it to fix why people are leaving the state? I think the 2020 Census deserves an asterisk since they half-assed it.
dpberr Posted October 4, 2021 Posted October 4, 2021 2 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said: I think the 2020 Census deserves an asterisk since they half-assed it. My point was that a new owner may take the team to what's perceived as "greener pastures." Not much different in Detroit. The only reason the Lions are there is because of the Fords. A new owner without any legacy allegiance to the city would have moved it out of town years ago.
HurlyBurly51 Posted October 4, 2021 Posted October 4, 2021 5 hours ago, dpberr said: If you're Illinois, do you use your strained, but improved credit (the state's bond ratings just moved to BBB, in comparison NYS is usually AA+) to go all in on the Bears or do you use it to fix why people are leaving the state? Good analysis. Unfortunately, they don't have the desire or political will to fix the reasons why.
Recommended Posts