FYI I've heard from VERY reliable sources that, when the Weavers sold the Jags to Shad Khan, it was conditional that he not relocate the team, that this is a primary element to their agreement.goat314 wrote: ↑Jun 04, 2024I've lived in Jacksonville before. Not much going on there, so losing the Jags would be a major civic blow. It is a very conservative region, so I don't know if the public will support this much public funding, but football is king in FL, so who knows. What's crazy is that the Jacksonville metro is about half the size of St. Louis and they're about to make everyone pay about $500 towards a privately owned franchise. There are some super impoverished areas in Jacksonville too, that could definitely use that kind of infusion of cash. They have areas in Jacksonville that are so rundown and without services, they make North St. Louis look like paradise.
- 2,929
- 1,792
Is that in perpetuity? If so Jacksonville has all the leverage in any future stadium upgrade negotiations. Seems hard to believe.gone corporate wrote: ↑Jun 10, 2024FYI I've heard from VERY reliable sources that, when the Weavers sold the Jags to Shad Khan, it was conditional that he not relocate the team, that this is a primary element to their agreement.goat314 wrote: ↑Jun 04, 2024I've lived in Jacksonville before. Not much going on there, so losing the Jags would be a major civic blow. It is a very conservative region, so I don't know if the public will support this much public funding, but football is king in FL, so who knows. What's crazy is that the Jacksonville metro is about half the size of St. Louis and they're about to make everyone pay about $500 towards a privately owned franchise. There are some super impoverished areas in Jacksonville too, that could definitely use that kind of infusion of cash. They have areas in Jacksonville that are so rundown and without services, they make North St. Louis look like paradise.
When I lived in Jacksonville, the rumors were that the original deal was for Kroenke to move to LA and that a couple years later Khan would move to STL. Local Jax officials went scrambling to renovate the stadium to get a lease extension. My guess is that Khan will juice Jax for whatever he can get to remain profitable. Jax has about a million people less than St. Louis and really no major corporate presence. It's really a Navy town with a high transplant population and a relatively poor local population. It's gonna be really interesting to see how going forward a lot of these smaller markets with major teams and weaker corporate presence handle these stadium deals. I'm looking at places like Buffalo (which recently sold it's soul), New Orleans, Milwaukee, Memphis, Jacksonville, etc. are going to fund these mega stadium projects. Eventually, the relocation threats have to run out. There are only so many major metros that can support pro sports, much less fund the whole thing.STLEnginerd wrote: ↑Jun 10, 2024Is that in perpetuity? If so Jacksonville has all the leverage in any future stadium upgrade negotiations. Seems hard to believe.gone corporate wrote: ↑Jun 10, 2024FYI I've heard from VERY reliable sources that, when the Weavers sold the Jags to Shad Khan, it was conditional that he not relocate the team, that this is a primary element to their agreement.goat314 wrote: ↑Jun 04, 2024I've lived in Jacksonville before. Not much going on there, so losing the Jags would be a major civic blow. It is a very conservative region, so I don't know if the public will support this much public funding, but football is king in FL, so who knows. What's crazy is that the Jacksonville metro is about half the size of St. Louis and they're about to make everyone pay about $500 towards a privately owned franchise. There are some super impoverished areas in Jacksonville too, that could definitely use that kind of infusion of cash. They have areas in Jacksonville that are so rundown and without services, they make North St. Louis look like paradise.
- 1,792
Its not a matter of whether a region can support a team. They all can. The question is whether there is an opportunity for an ownership group to make more money and gain more prestige elsewhere to the point that it makes sense to burn the fanbase that supported them for the last umpteen years. For any one owner the dollar return threshold may vary. Obviously the leagues want to see relative revenue parity across the league because in a profit sharing structure the rich teams don't want to be subsidizing poor teams.
I think one of the dangers for the NFL is their apparent embracing of private equity.STLEnginerd wrote: ↑Jun 10, 2024Its not a matter of whether a region can support a team. They all can. The question is whether there is an opportunity for an ownership group to make more money and gain more prestige elsewhere to the point that it makes sense to burn the fanbase that supported them for the last umpteen years. For any one owner the dollar return threshold may vary. Obviously the leagues want to see relative revenue parity across the league because in a profit sharing structure the rich teams don't want to be subsidizing poor teams.
https://www.sportico.com/business/finan ... 234779041/
What I think you're going to see happen is the pushing out of the old guard owners who have inherited the team but won't be able to because of
1) inheritance taxes
2) rapidly escalating team values partially subsidized by public money for $2 billion monuments to excess.
3) they don't have outside wealth
I'm talking the Rooney family (Steelers), McCaskeys (Bears), AZ Bidwills (Cardinals)
The public money to billionaires gravy train just keeps on rolling.
At least the one slight justification is it's also their MLS team stadium.
At least the one slight justification is it's also their MLS team stadium.
and rolling….
- 144
The Browns want 3.6 billion dollars for a domed stadium and entertainment district in the suburbs.
I'm really of the view we dodged a bullet on the Rams. These increased demands being made for venues that draw people in about a dozen days a year are just obscene especially from teams owned by bonafide billionaires. The average person is priced out of NFL games as well at this point. At least I can rather inexpensively attend multiple baseball or hockey games throughout any given season.
Something has to give. Middle of the road towns can't keep handing over billions to these crooks with no return whilst their municipal infrastructure rots. Scam bonds seem to be the flavor of the month just now for pushing through this stuff.
I'm really of the view we dodged a bullet on the Rams. These increased demands being made for venues that draw people in about a dozen days a year are just obscene especially from teams owned by bonafide billionaires. The average person is priced out of NFL games as well at this point. At least I can rather inexpensively attend multiple baseball or hockey games throughout any given season.
Something has to give. Middle of the road towns can't keep handing over billions to these crooks with no return whilst their municipal infrastructure rots. Scam bonds seem to be the flavor of the month just now for pushing through this stuff.
Agreed, St. Louis is much better off without the Rams and no thought should be given to trying to lure another NFL team here.
You can at least do some math to justify some more to arenas or baseball stadiums which get you 80, 100, 120+ event days a year. Especially if the city gets parking revenue the way St. Louis does at Enterprise.Suburban Sprawl wrote: ↑Aug 06, 2024The Browns want 3.6 billion dollars for a domed stadium and entertainment district in the suburbs.
I'm really of the view we dodged a bullet on the Rams. These increased demands being made for venues that draw people in about a dozen days a year are just obscene especially from teams owned by bonafide billionaires. The average person is priced out of NFL games as well at this point. At least I can rather inexpensively attend multiple baseball or hockey games throughout any given season.
Something has to give. Middle of the road towns can't keep handing over billions to these crooks with no return whilst their municipal infrastructure rots. Scam bonds seem to be the flavor of the month just now for pushing through this stuff.
But 10 maybe 15 days a year with a football stadium?
Suburban Sprawl wrote: ↑Aug 06, 2024The Browns want 3.6 billion dollars for a domed stadium and entertainment district in the suburbs.
I must admit, the dome turning into the STL Bernabeu would have been amazing.
Ironically that vision is super close to what the Rams wanted out of the Dome renovations. STL should have offered something like this in 2012 before Kroenke found Hollywood Park. The best way to keep a team is to get them to sign on the dotted line before they think of leaving.
St. Louis has only went backwards on growth mentality and it’s sad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ironically that vision is super close to what the Rams wanted out of the Dome renovations. STL should have offered something like this in 2012 before Kroenke found Hollywood Park. The best way to keep a team is to get them to sign on the dotted line before they think of leaving.
St. Louis has only went backwards on growth mentality and it’s sad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
^^ Love that roof, seems so much more open than the SoFi style.
^ Lol, no thanks. That deal would have cost $800m and the Rams would have been free to leave in 10 years which means we would have been going through the relocation drama again right about now. So glad that's over and done.
^ Lol, no thanks. That deal would have cost $800m and the Rams would have been free to leave in 10 years which means we would have been going through the relocation drama again right about now. So glad that's over and done.
Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
About that, I wasn’t suggesting that deal. I was suggesting a deal that was never offered. Reconstruct the dome for a new 30 year deal that would have replaced the old one. Make the deal in 2012 a year before Hollywood Park went for sale. Kroenke had no idea that Hollywood Park would be for sale until 2013. That was a full year where ink could have hit contract.pdm_ad wrote:^^ Love that roof, seems so much more open than the SoFi style.
^ Lol, no thanks. That deal would have cost $800m and the Rams would have been free to leave in 10 years which means we would have been going through the relocation drama again right about now. So glad that's over and done.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The entirely of the settlement not part of the settlement fee by the lawyers should have been placed in a trust fund for the dome renovations.ldai_phs wrote:Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
I’m saying the money that would have gone to build the riverfront stadium and not the settlement dollars. I always hear “well we could get higher ROI”. Well then what did St Louis spend the money on inside? Did it pan out?Fraydog wrote:The entirely of the settlement not part of the settlement fee by the lawyers should have been placed in a trust fund for the dome renovations.ldai_phs wrote:Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
Might be a question for dbinsouthcity to answer.ldai_phs wrote: ↑Aug 08, 2024I’m saying the money that would have gone to build the riverfront stadium and not the settlement dollars. I always hear “well we could get higher ROI”. Well then what did St Louis spend the money on inside? Did it pan out?Fraydog wrote:The entirely of the settlement not part of the settlement fee by the lawyers should have been placed in a trust fund for the dome renovations.ldai_phs wrote:Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
But the Dome renovations on the board are more there right now to kick the can down the road. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
If someone here had $4 billion and the NFL reopened expansion, I would never say never. But that seems very far off.
IIRC the ~$150M the city was going to contribute was to come from bonding out the city's annual contribution from the hotel tax to paying off the dome bonds which were a few years from being paid off. I guess that's going to the convention center expansion and dome maintenance.
- 1,792
well its not exactly a fair question. The amount would have been bonds paid off over decades, so the yearly amount is what is at question not the total amount. Personally i think it has significantly strengthened the cities financial position for any number of projects and kept the credit rating powder dry for the next big investment the will require multi year bonds that may come along. I would think you can attribute it to the cities ability to execute on things like airport reno, convention reno, city park infrastructure investments, etc. Not to say these things wouldn't have happened, but having a healthier balance sheet reduces risk to the bonds and thus lower interest rates.ldai_phs wrote: ↑Aug 08, 2024I’m saying the money that would have gone to build the riverfront stadium and not the settlement dollars. I always hear “well we could get higher ROI”. Well then what did St Louis spend the money on inside? Did it pan out?Fraydog wrote:The entirely of the settlement not part of the settlement fee by the lawyers should have been placed in a trust fund for the dome renovations.ldai_phs wrote:Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
- 9,553
It went to pay the bonds for the convention center expansion project.
$70,000,000 went to Dome renovation fund, $30,000,000 to Convention Center expansionFraydog wrote: ↑Aug 08, 2024The entirely of the settlement not part of the settlement fee by the lawyers should have been placed in a trust fund for the dome renovations.ldai_phs wrote:Instead of spending $500 million on a stadium, what has St Louis done instead in the past decade with that money? I know half of it was the States and went away. But where was the local portion spent?
Not trying to stir the pot just curious.
Jacksonville is “borrowing” money from the pensions and will “pay it back”
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/202 ... ment-plan/
https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/202 ... ment-plan/
It is with great regret that I must inform the group that the Rams are now the second-most valuable franchise in the NFL.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/cowboys-ar ... 09027.html
F**k Stan Kroenke.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/cowboys-ar ... 09027.html
F**k Stan Kroenke.