|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 8:22:03 GMT -8
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. Oakland still has no money, and any team who moves there will still need a new stadium. I could see the Chargers moving to San Antonio long before they would move to Oakland.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 23, 2015 8:25:43 GMT -8
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. Oakland still has no money, and any team who moves there will still need a new stadium. I could see the Chargers moving to San Antonio long before they would move to Oakland. If Oakland became available ... I could see the Chargers magically coming up with the funds to build their own stadium -- as long as the City or County provide the land (tax free)
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 23, 2015 8:32:26 GMT -8
Carson is indeed a POS. It's a complete farce perpetuated by clueless wannabes in a city known for absolutely nothing other than a parking lot for the Goodyear blimp and close proximity to the most poorly attended CSU campus containing an MLS stadium. Check this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_locations_by_income and you'll see that economically and geographically, Carson is basically a much smaller Chula Vista. Lowere middle class to middle class from an income standpoint and located south of where the REAL action is. (Inglewood? It's not wealthy either but much closer temporally from downtown and LAX plus the Forum has been completely renovated.)
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 8:43:10 GMT -8
Oakland still has no money, and any team who moves there will still need a new stadium. I could see the Chargers moving to San Antonio long before they would move to Oakland. If Oakland became available ... I could see the Chargers magically coming up with the funds to build their own stadium -- as long as the City or County provide the land (tax free) The Spanos net worth is (according to Forbes) $1.26 billion--80% of that is the Chargers franchise. I don't think there is any way they come up with the kind of money needed to build their own playpen.
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jun 23, 2015 8:51:13 GMT -8
I want them to stay. That feeling is based on and dependent on it being a overall positive for The Aztecs.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 23, 2015 8:53:49 GMT -8
Oakland still has no money, and any team who moves there will still need a new stadium. I could see the Chargers moving to San Antonio long before they would move to Oakland. If Oakland became available ... I could see the Chargers magically coming up with the funds to build their own stadium -- as long as the City or County provide the land (tax free) I think there's a chance of that. I have business in Oakland a couple times each year and it's always amazing how much fans talk about the Raiders while ignoring the A's. And consider this. There has been talk for the last several years of building a BB arena in San Francisco. That hasn't come to fruition but in speaking with a friend who lives up there a few weeks ago, he speculated that if the Warriors won the NBA title, that would provide an incentive to get it done. Oakland isn't SD. To quote John Steinbeck, there's no there, there. So assuming Oakland loses the Warriors, if they also lose the Raiders, the city is going to be desperate to find a replacement.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 23, 2015 9:21:28 GMT -8
If Oakland became available ... I could see the Chargers magically coming up with the funds to build their own stadium -- as long as the City or County provide the land (tax free) The Spanos net worth is (according to Forbes) $1.26 billion--80% of that is the Chargers franchise. I don't think there is any way they come up with the kind of money needed to build their own playpen. I think the Spanoi would be more realistic about the type of stadium they could afford to fund/finance in Oakland (along with the help of the NFL) ... they would build something in the $600M range with $200M provided by the NFL, $200M from the Chargers/Spanos & the remaining $200M through Goldman Sachs, Naming Rights & PSLs etc.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jun 23, 2015 9:22:55 GMT -8
. $51/year is a lot of money? Wow! How sad are you? Shall I write you a check now? Oh that's right, you don't live in San Diego city or county so it's a moot point to you. A sports package broker in the era of stubhub and Expedia is calling me out. Lol. and the correlation is?
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jun 23, 2015 9:28:17 GMT -8
Once again, your try to baffle everybody with your bull$#!+ instead of dazzling anybody with brilliance. Almost every f'ing Bowl game has at least 1 name sponsor and other minority sponsors. Your point? Kraft only stuck w/ it for 3 years. You were quoting a 2010 article i.e. history. As I stated more than once....keep up now....the Holiday Bowl probably wouldn't move out of town (as long as there is a stadium) but would no longer be a big payday $$ and attract the bigger conferences (just like the Kraft Bowl at a smaller stadium) AFTER moving their bowl to a larger stadium they kicked up one of the opponents i.e. higher payday to the Big 10. Bigger named teams = bigger attendance = bigger $$$ as one of the 3 factors sited in the article I posted. Do you just like to argue for arguments sake? ever admit you were wrong? (Haven't seen it) I never get tired of making you look like an idiot ... well I can't take all the credit -- you do most of the work, I just highlight it. Typical...you avoid the questions, you change the subjects because you got your ass whooped as usual. I proved you wrong on the Bowl games and again, you can't ever admit you're wrong. I'd love to put a your face with your name sometime. Shall we just call you Mr. Expert (on everything) LOL Nice photo of ya.
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 9:35:18 GMT -8
The Spanos net worth is (according to Forbes) $1.26 billion--80% of that is the Chargers franchise. I don't think there is any way they come up with the kind of money needed to build their own playpen. I think the Spanoi would be more realistic about the type of stadium they could afford to fund/finance in Oakland (along with the help of the NFL) ... they would build something in the $600M range with $200M provided by the NFL, $200M from the Chargers/Spanos & the remaining $200M through Goldman Sachs, Naming Rights & PSLs etc. The last time I saw an estimate for a new stadium in Oakland, it was for around $900 mil, it would seat under 60,000, and would not have all the bells and whistles associated with new NFL stadia, nor would it be large enough to host Super Bowls. I don't think there is any possible way that the Chargers would 1) move to Oakland, or 2) build their own stadium.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 23, 2015 9:46:07 GMT -8
I think the Spanoi would be more realistic about the type of stadium they could afford to fund/finance in Oakland (along with the help of the NFL) ... they would build something in the $600M range with $200M provided by the NFL, $200M from the Chargers/Spanos & the remaining $200M through Goldman Sachs, Naming Rights & PSLs etc. The last time I saw an estimate for a new stadium in Oakland, it was for around $900 mil, it would seat under 60,000, and would not have all the bells and whistles associated with new NFL stadia, nor would it be large enough to host Super Bowls. I don't think there is any possible way that the Chargers would 1) move to Oakland, or 2) build their own stadium. I don't see an avenue for the Chargers to move to Oakland from San Diego unless the Raiders moved to a market other than So Cal -- so I don't think it would happen either ... however what is probable is not the same as what is possible, so as remote as it is, I have to allow for it. I have said before, if GS can finance the Chargers for a $1.7B stadium plus associated costs (temp facility, practice facility, corporate offices etc) in LA, they could surely finance something for half as much anywhere else. Every team seems to start with between $400M to $500M in funding from their own pockets and the G4 loan ... this would mean that in either SD or Oakland, the team would have to finance $500M or so to "self-fund". Compare that to LA and financing $1.2B+ for the Carson deal through Goldman Sachs.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 23, 2015 10:02:06 GMT -8
I never get tired of making you look like an idiot ... well I can't take all the credit -- you do most of the work, I just highlight it. Typical...you avoid the questions, you change the subjects because you got your ass whooped as usual. I proved you wrong on the Bowl games and again, you can't ever admit you're wrong. I'd love to put a your face with your name sometime. Shall we just call you Mr. Expert (on everything) LOL Nice photo of ya. Dude (Bruce), you are so sad and so not worth the effort to continue a back and forth with. You are probably one of the most vociferous yet vacuous posters on here. Your intellectual superiority and awesome disputation skills exist only in your mind -- where apparently, you are also some sort of deity. It is quite possible that once upon a time you were of some value to the discourse, but based on your inappropriate PM messages and factually-challenged psots in open threads ... I'm guessing that was decades ago. We are taught to respect our elders, but that respect is not eternal and is revoke-able. You should be appreciative that most members recognize your deficiencies and just skip responding to you. That is something that I need to do more often, there is no point in a debate with someone who is a legend in their own mind.
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Jun 23, 2015 10:02:23 GMT -8
I only raised the possibility of the Chargers going to Oakland in response to the question of whether they would have any other options besides SD, Carson or Inglewood. Although I don't think their moving to Oakland is very likely, it's definitely not outside the realm of possibility. In fact, considering how the Spanoi have farted around for 13 years whining and moaning about the building of a new stadium, I could see them continuing to not get anything done in SD while the Rams break ground on a stadium in Inglewood (which many think will occur just six months from now) and while the Raiders talk to the Rams and try to get NFL support for their being the Rams' tenant.
As to hosting Super Bowls, that it irrelevant to a stadium in Oakland. If there are going to be Super Bowls in the Bay Area going forward, they will be at Levi's Stadium, which trails only Jerry's World in opulence. So really, they don't need a stadium holding more than 60K and last I heard, if a stadium was built in east Oakland just west of what I recall is I-280, redevelopment money should be available to help with the cost. Why won't the Raiders just build there? Because when it comes to NFL owners, Mark Davis is dirt poor.
|
|
|
Post by pbnative on Jun 23, 2015 10:10:59 GMT -8
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. Interesting lol... still not really a situation where a new city is jumping up to subsidize and hand the Chargers millions. Oakland would replace the Raiders, but I would love to see what happens when blue and gold uniforms trott out on the field infront of Raider Nation.
|
|
|
Post by ab on Jun 23, 2015 10:16:25 GMT -8
Typical...you avoid the questions, you change the subjects because you got your ass whooped as usual. I proved you wrong on the Bowl games and again, you can't ever admit you're wrong. I'd love to put a your face with your name sometime. Shall we just call you Mr. Expert (on everything) LOL Nice photo of ya. Dude (Bruce), you are so sad and so not worth the effort to continue a back and forth with. You are probably one of the most vociferous yet vacuous posters on here. Your intellectual superiority and awesome disputation skills exist only in your mind -- where apparently, you are also some sort of deity. It is quite possible that once upon a time you were of some value to the discourse, but based on your inappropriate PM messages and factually-challenged psots in open threads ... I'm guessing that was decades ago. We are taught to respect our elders, but that respect is not eternal and is revoke-able. You should be appreciative that most members recognize your deficiencies and just skip responding to you. That is something that I need to do more often, there is no point in a debate with someone who is a legend in their own mind. Dude- Feel free to NEVER EVER respond to any of my posts again, because you continue to prove what you have in your quote..."An "EXPERT" is someone who knows more and more about less and less " You have almost 4,000 posts on here with each and every one of them proving that you fit the bill. You can baffle some of these people but I can read right through your snowjob. But then again, you're never wrong.. LOL You're a BAD joke.
|
|
|
Post by HighNTight on Jun 23, 2015 10:25:03 GMT -8
Dude (Bruce), you are so sad and so not worth the effort to continue a back and forth with. You are probably one of the most vociferous yet vacuous posters on here. Your intellectual superiority and awesome disputation skills exist only in your mind -- where apparently, you are also some sort of deity. It is quite possible that once upon a time you were of some value to the discourse, but based on your inappropriate PM messages and factually-challenged psots in open threads ... I'm guessing that was decades ago. We are taught to respect our elders, but that respect is not eternal and is revoke-able. You should be appreciative that most members recognize your deficiencies and just skip responding to you. That is something that I need to do more often, there is no point in a debate with someone who is a legend in their own mind. Dude- Feel free to NEVER EVER respond to any of my posts again, because you continue to prove what you have in your quote..."An "EXPERT" is someone who knows more and more about less and less " You have almost 4,000 posts on here with each and every one of them proving that you fit the bill. You can baffle some of these people but I can read right through your snowjob. But then again, you're never wrong.. LOL You're a BAD joke. I have serious doubts as to your ability to comprehend what it is that you are reading -- as I have said, you are a legend in your own mind ... and in your mind is the only place that you make any sense. Out here in the real world, you have been reduced to a caricature. Whatever rest home gets you is in for a treat.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 23, 2015 10:31:25 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. "The relocation policy also gives the Commissioner discretion to adjust the transfer free based on the NFL’s interest in encouraging the move or discouraging the move. In other words, the NFL will once again be able to do whatever it wants to do." profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/05/l-a-transfer-fees-could-be-up-to-500-million/
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 10:46:40 GMT -8
I only raised the possibility of the Chargers going to Oakland in response to the question of whether they would have any other options besides SD, Carson or Inglewood. Although I don't think their moving to Oakland is very likely, it's definitely not outside the realm of possibility. In fact, considering how the Spanoi have farted around for 13 years whining and moaning about the building of a new stadium, I could see them continuing to not get anything done in SD while the Rams break ground on a stadium in Inglewood (which many think will occur just six months from now) and while the Raiders talk to the Rams and try to get NFL support for their being the Rams' tenant. As to hosting Super Bowls, that it irrelevant to a stadium in Oakland. If there are going to be Super Bowls in the Bay Area going forward, they will be at Levi's Stadium, which trails only Jerry's World in opulence. So really, they don't need a stadium holding more than 60K and last I heard, if a stadium was built in east Oakland just west of what I recall is I-280, redevelopment money should be available to help with the cost. Why won't the Raiders just build there? Because when it comes to NFL owners, Mark Davis is dirt poor. I still think San Antonio is a viable option, as they have a stadium that is currently better than either the Oakland Mausoleum (even though apparently Davis has no interest in moving there--allegedly), or Qualcomm Stadium, and apparently have the money to build a new facility.
|
|
|
Post by SDSU-Alum2003 on Jun 23, 2015 11:10:09 GMT -8
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. Oakland still has no money, and any team who moves there will still need a new stadium. I could see the Chargers moving to San Antonio long before they would move to Oakland. Athletics co-owner doesn't want to share new stadium with Raiders www.si.com/mlb/2015/06/22/oakland-raiders-athletics-new-stadium
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Jun 23, 2015 11:40:55 GMT -8
That story title is misleading, as it gives the impression that any new stadium would be shared (as the current stadium is).
|
|