Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2015 14:43:40 GMT -8
This argument has been done over and over but the benefits of having a pro sports team in your city goes beyond dollars and cents. ab is correct. Subsidies go to big companies all the time and that includes sports teams. They don't have a impact like a Qualcomm does in terms of jobs here but they have an impact to the city in other ways. Why is it that we only have two fortune 500 companies if this city is so wonderful?Well, in the spirit of the type of circular logic (maybe just misguided logic?) that seems to happen around here all the time, it must be because the city does not subsidize major corporations enough... it certainly isn't because we don't have an NFL team in SD because we have for the last 50 years.
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jun 22, 2015 17:53:11 GMT -8
I didn't prove your bull about limited capability of manufacturing. but, the cost of transportation could very well be higher ... and so is the cost of any facilities, property, and housing. I guess our Craft Brew Manufacturers haven't been scared about the cost of shipping have they? LOL ...we're talking about fortune 500 and you want to talk about craft brew that factors the cost of limited production and transportation into the price point? Do you know how much San Diego craft beer costs in NYC? I very rarely buy SD craft beer on the east coast because it's 20-30% more expensive than other, terrific beer. Take that as an anecdote about supply chain costs for SD.
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Jun 22, 2015 18:03:52 GMT -8
LOL ...we're talking about fortune 500 and you want to talk about craft brew that factors the cost of limited production and transportation into the price point? Do you know how much San Diego craft beer costs in NYC? I very rarely buy SD craft beer on the east coast because it's 20-30% more expensive than other, terrific beer. Take that as an anecdote about supply chain costs for SD. The more you ship, the lower the unit cost of what you ship. As for retail, New Yorkers are used to paying higher prices due to their COL.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 22, 2015 18:12:16 GMT -8
I very rarely buy SD craft beer on the east coast because it's 20-30% more expensive than other, terrific beer. Take that as an anecdote about supply chain costs for SD. The more you ship, the lower the unit cost of what you ship. As for retail, New Yorkers are used to paying higher prices due to their COL. I guess that brings to the forefront an interesting question ... if you can produce enough product to substantially reduce the cost of shipping, could you still call it "Craft Beer" or "Micro Brew"? I believe there is a debate going on about this in terms of Miller-Coors labeling of their Blue Moon line as a "Craft Beer". Lawsuit: Blue Moon is no 'craft beer'
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Jun 22, 2015 18:59:01 GMT -8
I very rarely buy SD craft beer on the east coast because it's 20-30% more expensive than other, terrific beer. Take that as an anecdote about supply chain costs for SD. The more you ship, the lower the unit cost of what you ship. As for retail, New Yorkers are used to paying higher prices due to their COL. Of course, totally true. I was trying (in my mind, at least) to try and make a direct comparison to other similar-sized breweries that appear to ship a similar amount of product (based on my totally scientific eye-ball test of what I see on shelves) to my region (Washington DC / Northern Virginia). Ballast Point is ridiculously expensive, even when compared to other CA breweries. Stone ships a lot more out here, but is still a little more expensive than others. This has clearly gone off on a bit of a tangent...
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 22, 2015 19:05:34 GMT -8
I have no idea where that number came from but if it's correct, then yeah that's still too much. I'm sick of taxes getting progressively higher and higher. If politicians keep adding new things to pay for (which they have) and each of them costs a little bit each year, it adds up quickly. San Diego shouldn't be desperate enough to build the Chargers a stadium. If the Chargers want to stay in San Diego then they can build one themselves, and if not then we don't need them and they can leave. There are lots of ways for that land to be used that would help the economy and city of SD more than a Charger stadium. The Chargers don't make or break San Diego IMO $121 Million over 30 years divided by 1.3 million people in the City of San Diego. What part of a multi-purpose, multi-use Stadium for Concerts, etc.... don't you get? It's not just for the Chargers. Bruce--Every stadium is a multi-purpose facility.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 22, 2015 19:11:11 GMT -8
The more you ship, the lower the unit cost of what you ship. As for retail, New Yorkers are used to paying higher prices due to their COL. Of course, totally true. I was trying (in my mind, at least) to try and make a direct comparison to other similar-sized breweries that appear to ship a similar amount of product (based on my totally scientific eye-ball test of what I see on shelves) to my region (Washington DC / Northern Virginia). Ballast Point is ridiculously expensive, even when compared to other CA breweries. Stone ships a lot more out here, but is still a little more expensive than others. This has clearly gone off on a bit of a tangent... Beer is never off-topic.
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jun 22, 2015 19:32:09 GMT -8
I guess you just want to forget about the $225M of Qualcomm land the CSAG report wants to sell to fund the stadium as well? How about the additional $121M that the county would be kicking in?...you realize the residents of the City make up 42% of the counties population right so each of the Cities residents would be double dipped. $225M Q site land sale $121M from City of SD $51M (42% of $121M of Counties portion) That's $51 per year for a family of five for 30 freaking years. That's a lot of money genius. Doesn't matter as the Chargers think whats currently proposed is crap and Spanos has been using the pages of the CSAG report to wipe his A$$ for the last couple weeks. . $51/year is a lot of money? Wow! How sad are you? Shall I write you a check now? Oh that's right, you don't live in San Diego city or county so it's a moot point to you. A sports package broker in the era of stubhub and Expedia is calling me out. Lol.
|
|
|
Post by jpaztec on Jun 22, 2015 19:49:56 GMT -8
I'm a native San Diegan, therefore I root for SD sports teams, so of course I want the Chargers to stay. As somebody else said, I wouldn't mind watching the Spanos family go on down the road, but the Chargers are MY team, along with the Aztecs and Padres. It's embarrassing that this city ad it's residents can't pull their head out of their collective asses and figure this thing out.
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Jun 22, 2015 19:51:21 GMT -8
Congrats ... whether you meant to or not -- you just described the limited capability of San Diego to support manufacturing. When the freight train leaves San Diego it has to go to LA before joining a train heading East, thus MFG can save costs by locating themselves in LA where they will have access to the larger sea port, more air facilities (especially Ontario). I didn't prove your bull about limited capability of manufacturing. but, the cost of transportation could very well be higher ... and so is the cost of any facilities, property, and housing. I guess our Craft Brew Manufacturers haven't been scared about the cost of shipping have they? It has nothing to do with costs and everything to do with geograph access. San Diego is the closet port to the Dole plantations, but almost every other goos bound for the southwest US travel through LA ports, and immediately are put on trucks and taken to Riverside for storage. Same with agricultural cargo from the central valley, down the 99, up the grapevine, and then to LA ports or out to Riverside. From Riverside the raw materials and finished goods are put on trucks and trains head up the I-15 or out the I-10... everything congregates in LA and surrounding areas, so it makes sense to place a corporate headquarters there to control supply and logistics. SD will never be a manufacturing town, especially after the aerospace manufacturers left. OC and LA have finance locked up, and Stanford feeds Silicon Valley and technology. SD needs better education and more skilled workers. If SDSU does obtain the stadium land for expansion, the school, City and County need to sit down and decide a direction for growth and SDSU can build research facilities to specialize in specific industries. Biotechnology, Environmental research and sustainability, Energy and Water technology would be a great start.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 22, 2015 20:15:54 GMT -8
I didn't prove your bull about limited capability of manufacturing. but, the cost of transportation could very well be higher ... and so is the cost of any facilities, property, and housing. I guess our Craft Brew Manufacturers haven't been scared about the cost of shipping have they? It has nothing to do with costs and everything to do with geograph access. San Diego is the closet port to the Dole plantations, but almost every other goos bound for the southwest US travel through LA ports, and immediately are put on trucks and taken to Riverside for storage. Same with agricultural cargo from the central valley, down the 99, up the grapevine, and then to LA ports or out to Riverside. From Riverside the raw materials and finished goods are put on trucks and trains head up the I-15 or out the I-10... everything congregates in LA and surrounding areas, so it makes sense to place a corporate headquarters there to control supply and logistics. SD will never be a manufacturing town, especially after the aerospace manufacturers left. OC and LA have finance locked up, and Stanford feeds Silicon Valley and technology. SD needs better education and more skilled workers. If SDSU does obtain the stadium land for expansion, the school, City and County need to sit down and decide a direction for growth and SDSU can build research facilities to specialize in specific industries. Biotechnology, Environmental research and sustainability, Energy and Water technology would be a great start.With the River Park right at the doorstep of SDSU West Campus those would be perfect areas of study. I could also see an SDSU Law School being formed.
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Jun 22, 2015 20:28:33 GMT -8
It has nothing to do with costs and everything to do with geograph access. San Diego is the closet port to the Dole plantations, but almost every other goos bound for the southwest US travel through LA ports, and immediately are put on trucks and taken to Riverside for storage. Same with agricultural cargo from the central valley, down the 99, up the grapevine, and then to LA ports or out to Riverside. From Riverside the raw materials and finished goods are put on trucks and trains head up the I-15 or out the I-10... everything congregates in LA and surrounding areas, so it makes sense to place a corporate headquarters there to control supply and logistics. SD will never be a manufacturing town, especially after the aerospace manufacturers left. OC and LA have finance locked up, and Stanford feeds Silicon Valley and technology. SD needs better education and more skilled workers. If SDSU does obtain the stadium land for expansion, the school, City and County need to sit down and decide a direction for growth and SDSU can build research facilities to specialize in specific industries. Biotechnology, Environmental research and sustainability, Energy and Water technology would be a great start.With the River Park right at the doorstep of SDSU West Campus those would be perfect areas of study. I could also see an SDSU Law School being formed. Definitely add other programs such as a law school, technology, and expand the engineering programs in all areas (building, chemical, mechanical, industrial, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 22, 2015 20:51:07 GMT -8
This argument has been done over and over but the benefits of having a pro sports team in your city goes beyond dollars and cents. ab is correct. Subsidies go to big companies all the time and that includes sports teams. They don't have a impact like a Qualcomm does in terms of jobs here but they have an impact to the city in other ways. Why is it that we only have two fortune 500 companies if this city is so wonderful?Well, in the spirit of the type of circular logic (maybe just misguided logic?) that seems to happen around here all the time, it must be because the city does not subsidize major corporations enough... it certainly isn't because we don't have an NFL team in SD because we have for the last 50 years. It has nothing to do with the NFL. It has to do with the mentality that exists in this city.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 22, 2015 20:57:46 GMT -8
I guess you just want to forget about the $225M of Qualcomm land the CSAG report wants to sell to fund the stadium as well? How about the additional $121M that the county would be kicking in?...you realize the residents of the City make up 42% of the counties population right so each of the Cities residents would be double dipped. $225M Q site land sale $121M from City of SD $51M (42% of $121M of Counties portion) That's $51 per year for a family of five for 30 freaking years. That's a lot of money genius. Doesn't matter as the Chargers think whats currently proposed is crap and Spanos has been using the pages of the CSAG report to wipe his A$$ for the last couple weeks. I didn't forget about any of it. Get your facts straight bozo. It's $121 million from the City and $121 millionfrom the County. I live in the City. You can figure out the remaining 1.8 million that reside in the County. As for double dipping, not sure that's every been brought out. I'd think that the $121 mill would be divided among the remaining 1.8 million people. $51/year is a lot of money? Wow! How sad are you? Shall I write you a check now? Oh that's right, you don't live in San Diego city or county so it's a moot point to you. I suspect the only major reason that Spanos will head North is the fact that Sterling sold the Clips for well over the estimated value of $700 million. Spanos sees the similar situation for his Chargers as the value of the team would probably go from $900 million to at least $3 Billion. That and the fact Goldman Sachs has said they'd cover their losses for the first couple years. If he thinks they're going to draw any sort of crowds that's a joke. They won't. Despite their contrived stat of saying that 25% of their season ticket base comes from L.A. which anybody can figure out is bull$#!+. Will he sell more suites? Sure. Will they have more sponsors? Will they sell more season tickets?...heck no. One thing to point out about Goldman Sachs. They would cover the Chargers losses initially but the Chargers of course will have to pay it back with interest. The money that is being proposed to finance the stadium in Carson would have to be paid back. Throw in the hundreds of millions in relocation fees as well that would have to be paid. They will probably make some more money selling club seats/suites but I'm still not sure the numbers would add up in their favor. It's why I don't understand the Chargers behavior right now but Fabiani is no dummy. This is probably going all according to plan for him.
|
|
|
Post by jiggy on Jun 23, 2015 5:53:48 GMT -8
Really not that complicated. Anytime Fabiani starts whining the city goes into BOHICA mode
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 6:23:02 GMT -8
I didn't forget about any of it. Get your facts straight bozo. It's $121 million from the City and $121 millionfrom the County. I live in the City. You can figure out the remaining 1.8 million that reside in the County. As for double dipping, not sure that's every been brought out. I'd think that the $121 mill would be divided among the remaining 1.8 million people. $51/year is a lot of money? Wow! How sad are you? Shall I write you a check now? Oh that's right, you don't live in San Diego city or county so it's a moot point to you. I suspect the only major reason that Spanos will head North is the fact that Sterling sold the Clips for well over the estimated value of $700 million. Spanos sees the similar situation for his Chargers as the value of the team would probably go from $900 million to at least $3 Billion. That and the fact Goldman Sachs has said they'd cover their losses for the first couple years. If he thinks they're going to draw any sort of crowds that's a joke. They won't. Despite their contrived stat of saying that 25% of their season ticket base comes from L.A. which anybody can figure out is bull$#!+. Will he sell more suites? Sure. Will they have more sponsors? Will they sell more season tickets?...heck no. One thing to point out about Goldman Sachs. They would cover the Chargers losses initially but the Chargers of course will have to pay it back with interest. The money that is being proposed to finance the stadium in Carson would have to be paid back. Throw in the hundreds of millions in relocation fees as well that would have to be paid. They will probably make some more money selling club seats/suites but I'm still not sure the numbers would add up in their favor. It's why I don't understand the Chargers behavior right now but Fabiani is no dummy. This is probably going all according to plan for him. A relocation fee in the hundreds of millions? For the Chargers moving to what is already considered by the NFL to be their secondary market? JMO, but I think the Chargers will get off quite easily on any relocation fees.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 23, 2015 7:32:24 GMT -8
One thing to point out about Goldman Sachs. They would cover the Chargers losses initially but the Chargers of course will have to pay it back with interest. The money that is being proposed to finance the stadium in Carson would have to be paid back. Throw in the hundreds of millions in relocation fees as well that would have to be paid. They will probably make some more money selling club seats/suites but I'm still not sure the numbers would add up in their favor. It's why I don't understand the Chargers behavior right now but Fabiani is no dummy. This is probably going all according to plan for him. A relocation fee in the hundreds of millions? For the Chargers moving to what is already considered by the NFL to be their secondary market? JMO, but I think the Chargers will get off quite easily on any relocation fees. It just depends on how greedy the other owners want to be. The relocation money winds up being split between them so it's in their best interests to have a higher relocation fee, especially for giving up such a giant market like LA. I'm sure there are other owners who would love to take that market but they're in situations where they can't get out of their stadium lease right now. None of this is etched in stone so it could be very little or it could be something insane like a billion dollars. Fabiani says that the Chargers have no idea what the relocation fee is yet but I think that's a load of crap. I'm sure they have a good idea what it will be by now.
|
|
|
Post by aztecbolt on Jun 23, 2015 8:03:29 GMT -8
www.nbcsandiego.com/news/sports/Fans-Seek-Lawsuit-Against-Chargers-and-NFL-309148401.htmlNow, if this sounds like the same old in-fighting we’ve grown accustomed to in this stadium situation, let me introduce you to the Wild Card: James Quinn, partner at Weil, Gotshal & Manges. A couple of weeks ago Jauregui called Quinn to ask if he’d be interested in helping the case. “I’d be happy to represent a responsible group that wants to challenge what the NFL and the Chargers are doing,” said Quinn in an interview with NBC 7 SportsWrap. Quinn has successfully sued the NFL on anti-trust grounds multiple times. The most famous came when he served as the lead counsel for the NFL players in their successful antitrust challenge to the player restrictions in the League (a case known as McNeil v. NFL). Quinn tried the case, effectively giving NFL players the right to free agency. In fact, The New York Times labeled Mr. Quinn’s participation at trial as “instrumental in helping change the face of major professional sports.” If the NFL sees Quinn coming at them, they know they have a fight on their hands.
“We’re not always on the greatest terms,” said Quinn. Mention of Quinn’s name got Aguirre almost giddy. “Mike Aguirre can tell you what he thinks about the anti-trust laws. Jan Goldsmith can tell you what he thinks about the anti-trust laws. But you just talked to The Man,” said Aguirre. “He is the man that I would hope and pray that we can get him here to save our team.” Quinn looked at what is going on in San Diego. Now that the local government has provided a legitimate plan for a new stadium, or at least a good starting point for good-faith negotiations, he believes winning an anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL and Chargers is a real possibility. “The league is made up of separate companies, which is why you can bring a Sherman Act case, because they are acting collusively together to benefit the Chargers and the league and all of its members,” said Quinn. “It is the city that is, essentially, the victim of what’s going on.
“Whenever the NFL acts they’re acting jointly in their own interests. In this case they seem to be threatening the city of San Diego: ‘Either do what we want, as a group, or we’re going to boycott the city of San Diego. We’re going to let this team leave and you’ll probably not get another one.’ Under those circumstances it would appear the city may well have claims under the anti-trust laws.”
“The NFL is going to take it seriously,” said Aguirre. “We have supported the Chargers for 50 years. We have a plan on the table. They can’t just ignore the anti-trust laws and say bye-bye.”
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 23, 2015 8:11:30 GMT -8
Carson isn't the only option. It just appears to be the #1 option. Is that $3.10/year going to kill you? So what are their other options? ? I will admit I haven't done my homework there, but from the sound of it you have a PHD in all things Chargers. Please inform me what their other options are? In 15 years I have not heard of 1 private group or city that is willing to partner and provide a massive subsidy for the Chargers on a stadium. I would much rather my $3.10 go to SDSU for a better educated workforce, or for infrastructure to attract a corporation that provides thousands of high paying jobs. Kroenke builds a new stadium in Inglewood and the Raiders - who never seem to say diddly squat themselves about moving to Carson - become Kroenke's tenant. Then Oakland retaliates by bending over backwards to replace them with anybody and the only anybody which still exists is the Chargers and Dino gets excited about being able to move his team to within an hour of his hometown of Stockton.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 8:16:18 GMT -8
A relocation fee in the hundreds of millions? For the Chargers moving to what is already considered by the NFL to be their secondary market? JMO, but I think the Chargers will get off quite easily on any relocation fees. It just depends on how greedy the other owners want to be. The relocation money winds up being split between them so it's in their best interests to have a higher relocation fee, especially for giving up such a giant market like LA. I'm sure there are other owners who would love to take that market but they're in situations where they can't get out of their stadium lease right now. None of this is etched in stone so it could be very little or it could be something insane like a billion dollars. Fabiani says that the Chargers have no idea what the relocation fee is yet but I think that's a load of crap. I'm sure they have a good idea what it will be by now. Fabiani is full of crap, and I think you're right--the NFL already knows who will be charged what in the way of relocation fees. I think the only thing undecided is what team will join the Rams in Inglewood, as I think the Carson "plan" is one of the biggest pieces of crap I've seen in quite some time.
|
|