|
Post by SD Johnny on May 18, 2015 12:19:00 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:20:08 GMT -8
This sounds a little like a fifth-grade speech for student-body president.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on May 18, 2015 12:20:19 GMT -8
"[The] financing plan, created by Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s stadium task force, includes $200 million from the NFL, $300 million from the Chargers and another $300 million in rent payments from the team over the next 30 years — $10 million per year."
There is so much wrong with this plan I don't know where to begin -- but the things that stand out for me:
How similar this is to the Petco deal in that the General Fund will be used both to guarantee the bonds and to backstop shortfalls in revenue (this time for much more than $275M).
The Sale of 75 acres for $225M to developers based on the preposition of relaxed zoning seems problematic as well as the creation of an infrastructure enhancement zone to capture additional taxes to pay for highway and street improvements that have not been included in this estimate. They are trying to avoid a public vote by trying to keep the sale below 80 acres ... not sure that will be successful.
I see they did not include the repayment costs of the present stadium bond obligations and back rent owed to the Water Authority or the cost to purchase Water Authority property from that agency in order to be included in a sale to the developers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:21:06 GMT -8
Where does the $225 million from the land sale go?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:23:51 GMT -8
We sound like such a cow-town.
|
|
|
Post by Ambivalent_Fan on May 18, 2015 12:26:05 GMT -8
Now all the task force needs to do is to find 50,000 people willing to put up $2,400 in PSL money plus play an extra $27.10 per game (or $271 per season)
This will cover:
$16.67 per game per seat Chargers rent (based on 60,000 tickets sold) $7.93 per game per seat in seat surcharges $2.50 per game per seat in parking surcharges
But I don't know how they are going to get the parking money as they are reducing the parking by 75 acres being sold to developers at an estimated $3M /acre (that had better be some REALLY high density housing to support that type of land cost...)
Oh yeah...and who exactly would own the stadium...since the Chargers and the NFL are adding $500M to the project...AND paying rent to the city...is it like a condominium type ownership?...does the Charger's contribution come in the way of prepaid rent?...if so...then the numbers look like double dipping...
Where does the $7M / year come from to pay back the coffers of the city and County?...or does that just get absorbed by the general fund?
and there is that line item of "other revenue" of $50M...is that concerts and monster truck shows?
It all looks like they just made up a bunch of numbers and put them down in order to justify why this won't need a public vote...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:27:41 GMT -8
Now all the task force needs to do is to find 50,000 people willing to put up $2,400 in PSL money plus play an extra $27.10 per game (or $325 per season) This will cover: $16.67 per game per seat Chargers rent (based on 60,000 tickets sold) $7.93 per game per seat in seat surcharges $2.50 per game per seat in parking surcharges But I don't know how they are going to get the parking money as they are reducing the parking by 75 acres being sold to developers at an estimated $3M /acre (that had better be some REALLY high density housing to support that type of land cost...) Oh yeah...and who exactly would own the stadium...since the Chargers and the NFL are adding $500M to the project...AND paying rent to the city...is it like a condominium type ownership?...does the Charger's contribution come in the way of prepaid rent?...if so...then the numbers look like double dipping... Where does the $7M / year come from to pay back the coffers of the city and County?...or does that just get absorbed by the general fund? and there is that line item of "other revenue" of $50M...is that concerts and monster truck shows? It all looks like they just made up a bunch of numbers and put them down in order to justify why this won't need a public vote... 49,999
|
|
|
Post by Ambivalent_Fan on May 18, 2015 12:29:10 GMT -8
Now all the task force needs to do is to find 50,000 people willing to put up $2,400 in PSL money plus play an extra $27.10 per game (or $325 per season) This will cover: $16.67 per game per seat Chargers rent (based on 60,000 tickets sold) $7.93 per game per seat in seat surcharges $2.50 per game per seat in parking surcharges But I don't know how they are going to get the parking money as they are reducing the parking by 75 acres being sold to developers at an estimated $3M /acre (that had better be some REALLY high density housing to support that type of land cost...) Oh yeah...and who exactly would own the stadium...since the Chargers and the NFL are adding $500M to the project...AND paying rent to the city...is it like a condominium type ownership?...does the Charger's contribution come in the way of prepaid rent?...if so...then the numbers look like double dipping... Where does the $7M / year come from to pay back the coffers of the city and County?...or does that just get absorbed by the general fund? and there is that line item of "other revenue" of $50M...is that concerts and monster truck shows? It all looks like they just made up a bunch of numbers and put them down in order to justify why this won't need a public vote... 49,999 Just one ticket?...I had you down for at least 4
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on May 18, 2015 12:36:27 GMT -8
Just one ticket?...I had you down for at least 4 1 X $2,671 = $2,671 4 X $2,671 = $10,684 Considering all the Super Bowls the Chargers have won, it's a bargain.
|
|
|
Post by Den60 on May 18, 2015 12:49:24 GMT -8
"[The] financing plan, created by Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s stadium task force, includes $200 million from the NFL, $300 million from the Chargers and another $300 million in rent payments from the team over the next 30 years — $10 million per year." There is so much wrong with this plan I don't know where to begin -- but the things that stand out for me: How similar this is to the Petco deal in that the General Fund will be used both to guarantee the bonds and to backstop shortfalls in revenue (this time for much more than $275M). The Sale of 75 acres for $225M to developers based on the preposition of relaxed zoning seems problematic as well as the creation of an infrastructure enhancement zone to capture additional taxes to pay for highway and street improvements that have not been included in this estimate. They are trying to avoid a public vote by trying to keep the sale below 80 acres ... not sure that will be successful. I see they did not include the repayment costs of the present stadium bond obligations and back rent owed to the Water Authority or the cost to purchase Water Authority property from that agency in order to be included in a sale to the developers. Day did say they were conservative in their estimates, overstating costs and understating revenue. The deal isn't a bad one for the city or county. It doesn't, on the surface, look as good for the team as other cities have done.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:53:58 GMT -8
Just one ticket?...I had you down for at least 4 1 X $2,671 = $2,671 4 X $2,671 = $10,684 Considering all the Super Bowls the Chargers have won, it's a bargain. Good thing...for the Aztecs... I don't predicate how much I'm willing to spend on my entertainment based upon on the field success. Glass houses dude... BIG FRAGILE glass houses.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on May 18, 2015 12:55:41 GMT -8
Just my thought--it appears that Oakland is more concerned about keeping the A's than they are the Raiders. Oakland is very concerned about the A's moving down to Santa Clara county near the 49ers. Although the Giants are opposed and claim that Santa Clara is within their sphere of influence or whatever the MLB term is, there is apparently considerable political support for it in Santa Clara. Ultimately the biggest problem all around in Oakland is money. That is, it is not a wealthy area as California cities go plus the owners of the A's and the Raiders are relatively impoverished. If I owned the A's, I would seriously consider moving to Montreal. Montreal? Interesting idea. Perhaps now that the idiot Selig is no longer baseball commissioner, the A's might get the chance to move to San Jose or somewhere in that vicinity.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on May 18, 2015 12:58:17 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on May 18, 2015 12:58:42 GMT -8
No surprise that Charger fan groups are in favor, except for the part where they have to pay more. "Fan groups generally embraced the proposal on Monday, but there was some concern about the ticket and parking surcharges and the personal seat licenses." U-T article. What the hell did they expect? Cheaper tickets and parking? If it's built I can't wait to see the concession prices as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 12:58:53 GMT -8
1 X $2,671 = $2,671 4 X $2,671 = $10,684 Considering all the Super Bowls the Chargers have won, it's a bargain. Good thing...for the Aztecs... I don't predicate how much I'm willing to spend on my entertainment based upon on the field success. Glass houses dude... BIG FRAGILE glass houses. college sports v. pro sports dude, maybe a little different
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 13:01:23 GMT -8
Good thing...for the Aztecs... I don't predicate how much I'm willing to spend on my entertainment based upon on the field success. Glass houses dude... BIG FRAGILE glass houses. college sports v. pro sports dude, maybe a little different Not really. Why? It's all money. It's all entertainment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 13:02:08 GMT -8
I'm not sure how may people went to the University of the San Diego Chargers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 13:06:18 GMT -8
college sports v. pro sports dude, maybe a little different Not really. Why? It's all money. It's all entertainment. Comments like this demonstrate your lack of emotional connection to the school (your Alma Mater?) You were never a Charger...but your an Aztec for life... college sports offer a connection that no pro sports team will ever be able to provide...unless you have no connection to the school.
|
|
|
Post by ab on May 18, 2015 13:08:04 GMT -8
Did everybody who commented above LISTEN to the press conference?
Love the Cow town reference. Can't be closer to the truth.
Higher rent for the Aztecs and Bowl games.
Who knows, maybe they'll be the ones to buy the portion that is to be sold. Makes sense.
and as Adam Day stated, this is a fair proposal and starting point.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on May 18, 2015 13:08:49 GMT -8
1 X $2,671 = $2,671 4 X $2,671 = $10,684 Considering all the Super Bowls the Chargers have won, it's a bargain. Good thing...for the Aztecs... I don't predicate how much I'm willing to spend on my entertainment based upon on the field success. Glass houses dude... BIG FRAGILE glass houses. There is absolutely no doubt about SDSU's football underachievement. It's been even worse than that of the Chargers the last 35 years. OTOH, Chargers' tickets cost how much more than Aztecs' tickets? Five times more? Ten times more? And now CSAG is advocating that the price of Chargers tickets be increased substantially.
|
|