Gov Pritzker: Bears new stadium is “non-starter” for state

[TheEarlofRobin]

Individual NFL teams benefit from the league’s remarkable financial discipline. “The bedrock of stadium finance is the NFL’s rules and regulations and the governance that the Commissioner’s Office hands down to the owners,” Vogel said. “The parameters and debt policies have been consistent for a very long time.”

Those include a $600 million cap on debt against a team—not much, considering the average team is now worth more than $5 billion.

Was raised to 700m in 2024. Even if you set up a Dev corp the problem is players get around 50% of NFL revenue. Once you factor in another 10-20% of other costs you dont have enough revenue left over to split with lenders and yourselves if you borrowing billions. The whole problem with borrowing for the stadium is the vast majority of the revenue coming from the stadium (ie NFL games) is off limits to lenders.

Other invesors require giving up equity. So if it costs 5 billion, you have 2.1b and borrow 700m. That leaves 2.2b which on a 6b valuation means you would need to sell a 37% stake. McCaskey family owns 80% so that would leave them with just 43%.

Doesnt really make sense as they probably can just make more from oldier Field and their 80% stake.

The McCaskey's are simply too poor to make AH work IMO.

So we can either look at what actually happened in reality....the Dallas Cowboys making money off their stadium with non-NFL revenue streams, the Raiders building a stadium with $1.3B in debt....or we can refer to Sportico articles. Which do you choose?

And wow at your last sentence. Thats pretty much all you needed to say this whole time. But I would disagree with 'poor', as Mark Davis was able to get a stadium built. I would use the word 'cheap' instead.

 

[remydat]

Yes, I guess its amazing that Mark Davis can't afford to pay Khalil Mack and then a couple years later he's building a new stadium. The Raiders owe about $1.3B on Allegiant Stadium which is more than $700M.

Remydat, what is your point with any of this? I still have no idea what you are trying to 'prove', because everything that you've said up to this point has been incorrect and/or irrelevant with reality.

You are confused. The Raiders only borrowed 650m externally from BoA. Not sure if you are confusing what they owe under the lease as they dont own Allegiant. The Las Vegas Sports Authority owns Allegiant and leases it to the Raiders.

That or as it is a 30 year loan, they will wns up paying around 1.3 billion including interest but interest isnt part of the loan amount.

 

[remydat]

So we can either look at what actually happened in reality....the Dallas Cowboys making money off their stadium with non-NFL revenue streams, the Raiders building a stadium with $1.3B in debt....or we can refer to Sportico articles. Which do you choose?

And wow at your last sentence. Thats pretty much all you needed to say this whole time. But I would disagree with 'poor', as Mark Davis was able to get a stadium built. I would use the word 'cheap' instead.

The Cowboys dont own their stadium. It is owned by the City of Arlington. It was also built using 325m of public funds not by external loans or selling equity. The cost was also much less than the 5b for AH as it was around 1.4b.

So the Cowboys stadium proves my point that most NFL teams prefer the city/state to own the stadium. Jones makes his money because he and Steinbrenner owns the company that provides concessions and merchandising. That and of course the revenue from NFL games.

So what actually happened in reality is the Cowboys funded their stadium via public funds not a massive third party loan.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

If McCaskey's would put professional team on the football field, money they are looking for be easier to get. Simple concept.

It wouldn't matter.

 

[dennehy]

Individual NFL teams benefit from the league’s remarkable financial discipline. “The bedrock of stadium finance is the NFL’s rules and regulations and the governance that the Commissioner’s Office hands down to the owners,” Vogel said. “The parameters and debt policies have been consistent for a very long time.”

Those include a $600 million cap on debt against a team—not much, considering the average team is now worth more than $5 billion.

Was raised to 700m in 2024. Even if you set up a Dev corp the problem is players get around 50% of NFL revenue. Once you factor in another 10-20% of other costs you dont have enough revenue left over to split with lenders and yourselves if you borrowing billions. The whole problem with borrowing for the stadium is the vast majority of the revenue coming from the stadium (ie NFL games) is off limits to lenders.

Other invesors require giving up equity. So if it costs 5 billion, you have 2.1b and borrow 700m. That leaves 2.2b which on a 6b valuation means you would need to sell a 37% stake. McCaskey family owns 80% so that would leave them with just 43%.

Doesnt really make sense as they probably can just make more from oldier Field and their 80% stake.

The McCaskey's are simply too poor to make AH work IMO.

If you read on in your link you will find info that contradicts your argument. The NFL actually has a program to help owners get financing for stadiums.

 

[Penny Traitor]

If McCaskey's would put professional team on the football field, money they are looking for be easier to get. Simple concept.

Didn't work out that easy for the Kansas City Chiefs and they have been pretty successful as of late.

Taxpayers refuse to pay new stadium expenses for billionaire sports owners

Taxpayers in Jackson County, Missouri, voted on Tuesday to discard a sales tax to finance stadium renovations for the Kansas City Chiefs and the

reason.com

 

[truthbedamned]

As much as I reference "Sportico" on a daily basis, there is no data to back up their claim. OK, NFL stadiums are simply too large for most concert acts....what does that mean? What data are they citing? What is a "mega act", and why is Bruce Springsteen mentioned?

Ever hear of "Day on the Green"? Used to go every single year. Been to at least 50 concerts held at the Oakland Coliseum.

Note to all:

Has there EVER been an example of an auditor of any type ever admitting they were wrong?

Not in my lifetime. @remydat is an auditor. Give it up.

 

[Dstone5553]

Ever hear of "Day on the Green"? Used to go every single year. Been to at least 50 concerts held at the Oakland Coliseum.

Note to all:

Has there EVER been an example of an auditor of any type ever admitting they were wrong?

Not in my lifetime. @remydat is an auditor. Give it up.

You see the one in 77?

Lynyrd Skynyrd closing?

Just curios.

Love the GD sets from Day on the Green.

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

You are confused. The Raiders only borrowed 650m externally from BoA. Not sure if you are confusing what they owe under the lease as they dont own Allegiant. The Las Vegas Sports Authority owns Allegiant and leases it to the Raiders.

That or as it is a 30 year loan, they will wns up paying around 1.3 billion including interest but interest isnt part of the loan amount.

They also borrowed another $200M from the NFL in the form of a loan, and the NFL also kicked in an additional $200M in cash. I never said the Raiders owned the stadium. But they got one built. So either let me know when you've been correct about anything in this thread, or just tell me what your point is with all of this. Please, no more Sportico articles.

 

[truthbedamned]

You see the one in 77?

Lynyrd Skynyrd closing?

Just curios.

Love the GD sets from Day on the Green.

No. I had just got out of the navy and was broke. But I did see GD in 76.

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

The Cowboys dont own their stadium. It is owned by the City of Arlington. It was also built using 325m of public funds not by external loans or selling equity. The cost was also much less than the 5b for AH as it was around 1.4b.

So the Cowboys stadium proves my point that most NFL teams prefer the city/state to own the stadium. Jones makes his money because he and Steinbrenner owns the company that provides concessions and merchandising. That and of course the revenue from NFL games.

So what actually happened in reality is the Cowboys funded their stadium via public funds not a massive third party loan.

Did I say the Cowboys owned their own stadium? In the context of alternate revenue streams, are you actually saying that Jerry Jones and the Cowboys DON'T utilize this aspect of the stadium?

 

[remydat]

If you read on in your link you will find info that contradicts your argument. The NFL actually has a program to help owners get financing for stadiums.

They do but there is still a cap.

 

[remydat]

They also borrowed another $200M from the NFL in the form of a loan, and the NFL also kicked in an additional $200M in cash. I never said the Raiders owned the stadium. But they got one built. So either let me know when you've been correct about anything in this thread, or just tell me what your point is with all of this. Please, no more Sportico articles.

Yes they got one built with 750m from Vegas. The point again is the Bears dont have the means to privately finance AH which is double cost of Allegiant. Using an example where Vegas put in 750m makes no sense.

Did I say the Cowboys owned their own stadium? In the context of alternate revenue streams, are you actually saying that Jerry Jones and the Cowboys DON'T utilize this aspect of the stadium?

No I am saying even Jerry Jones who is infinitely better at business than the McCaskeys chose to get public funding for a stadium that was like 30-40% of the cost of AH proposed 5b development.

 

[TheEarlofRobin]

They do but there is still a cap.

The cap is set by the owners themselves. I'm guessing they'd make an 'exception' for the Bears.
JMO

 

[Dstone5553]

No. I had just got out of the navy and was broke. But I did see GD in 76.

Fuk yes.

I love you now.

 

[remydat]

The cap is set by the owners themselves. I'm guessing they'd make an 'exception' for the Bears.
JMO

The problen is how much they would need to borrow externally with no public financing. It would potentially be over 50% of the cost where again most of the locked in revenue goes to the players and to cover other operating costs. Carrying that high a debt to equity ratio would also impact their credit rating and thus the interest rate charged on any debt.

 

[dennehy]

They do but there is still a cap.

Well your point was that the cap makes building a new stadium for the Bears prohibitive. This doesn't seem to be accurate. And I think it calls into question whether this is a real cap or a scheme to bolster the league's credit rating.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

It's all very simple: saying no to billionaires is great political capital.

@Montucky said it yesterday, and he's right, and I'm sure it was mentioned in some of the first few pages. It doesn't have to be complicated.

 

[remydat]

Well your point was that the cap makes building a new stadium for the Bears prohibitive. This doesn't seem to be accurate. And I think it calls into question whether this is a real cap or a scheme to bolster the league's credit rating.

It makes building a 5b stadium prohibitive without public money if you can only contribute 2b.

 

[dennehy]

It makes building a 5b stadium prohibitive without public money if you can only contribute 2b.

I don't think so. Seems pretty clear the league will facilitate stadium funding despite the on-paper debt cap. Why else would it have that program?

Also the actual stadium is projected at $3.2b, not $5b.