Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

732 Pro Bowl

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So I am supposed to believe that your knowledge is so specific you don't have the first clue on construction costs for baseball but you know for a fact that football stadium in LA is 6x as expensive? Especially when each football stadium is using several of the same companies to do the build? I give you more credit than that so I think we both know you were trolling there... At first it was the land costs are so high which is why the stadium is so costly. That was disproved. Instead of conceding at that point that you were wrong you changed your tune. Now the argument is the same companies that do both builds are billing 4x higher just because...why? There may be more costs that the companies incur that will get passed on but obviously it isn't 4x higher for labor/materials/etc. Google can be your friend. I'm not sure who "they" are. Probably the same people that think the median home price of an area is a good gauge for commercial real estate construction lol http://stadiumdb.com/stadiums/usa/cowboys_stadium https://americanfootball.fandom.com/wiki/AT%26T_Stadium#cite_note-football.ballparks.com-12 https://www.myplainview.com/news/article/Voters-decide-proposal-for-650-million-Cowboys-8874419.php http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls/messages/topic/rDwevggkAJrXyC8APXfuk
  2. The budget of AT&T was $650M. It doubled it's budget with a final cost of $1.3B. The original budget of SoFi was $2.66B. In what world do you round $1.3B up to $2B and $2.66B down to $2B? If you want to call me out for making logical assumptions without facts then the least you can do is present accurate facts.
  3. I don't know if you are serious or trolling but I'm not going to waste anymore time on this.
  4. I'm not saying $4B better. It's conversely also not 4x as cheap to build in Arlington. The Rangers just built a new baseball stadium in Arlington for 1.1b. Do you honestly think that would cost even $2b in LA?
  5. Correct. The biggest indicator is cost.
  6. Let's not be rude. If you want to discuss the matter then I'm open but I would appreciate you not belittle my intelligence. No. It's because NRG was built in 2002. AT&T is a better example which was built in 2009 and was state of the art when built at $1.3B. But 11 years is a long time and there are advancements in technology and construction. An example: The videoboard at AT&T was revolutionary in 2009. The videoboard at SoFi is going to be twice as long. Levi's Stadium was built in CA in 2014. Cost $1.3B. If CA is so heavily regulated why didn't that cost more? You might have a point if the cost of SoFi was going to be fractionally more than stadiums in other states. It isn't. It is so much more expensive that arguing that CA is more expensive doesn't come close to reconciling the variance. Even the budgeted amount of the stadium before over-runs was going to be 40% more than Allegiant. Unless you actually believe that if SoFi stadium would cost 50% less in other states then the argument or regulations holds no water. So how would you propose you judge how nice the stadium is? From a finance perspective the 3 acceptable valuations methods are cost, market, and income. We cannot use cost because it doesn't pass your smell test. We cannot use market because 1.) CA is too expensive and more importantly 2.) stadiums are too unique to get comps. And we don't have the financial data to know projected income figures for it. The best approach is cost.
  7. Not to mention, the team that got Rodgers would have 3 straight years without draft picks. The roster would be full of UDFAs and vets.
  8. This is absolutely true. My point wasn't that 1 stadium secures the Olympics but that 1 older/rundown (without a plan for major renovations) stadium penciled in as the site for opening ceremonies would lose the bid. LA could have potentially gotten the bid without SoFi but I would suspect one of those venues would have needed major renovations. Especially if they tried to reuse the Coliseum.
  9. Hosting those events is a competitive process. Bidding for those with poor facilities will almost certainly get rejected. Generally for Olympics a brand-new stadium is built for opening/closing ceremonies (this is usually a disaster for the countries post-games). Rio's games had a $500 million renovation on the existing building.
  10. Agreed. Though still one of my problems with the unis which matters to me is I still don't think they look good on fans aka me. Also I still don't like the bone unis but the blues are growing on me.
  11. I've never tried to explain why because I don't care. It's not my money. It seems grossly incompetent to be this far over budget but it's not my problem. I'm as ignorant as anyone on the finance side of this since I have no experience in budgeting and overseeing a stadium's construction. I think it's obvious though from looking at the final sketches of what it will look like and looking at Metlife Stadium to conclude that SoFi should cost more. How much more SoFi should cost is a debate I don't have a desire to have.
  12. College football fandom and roots are too deep to have a passable alternative imo.
  13. The 60 acre plot he purchased in LA was around $95m (asking price) in 2014. Rams new stadium is 300 acres so say in 2014 dollars it cost $500m. So, yeah the land is a significant part of the price tag but there's clearly more to it than LA land is more expensive. Even if you are arguing the land is $3b which seems extremely unlikely the stadium would still cost more than the Raiders stadium. Plus, as I said the stadium is going to host the Super Bowl, world cup games, and Olympic opening ceremonies. Is it the only stadium in the world capable of hosting those? Probably not, but it's certainly on a short enough list that I don't expect a lot of pushback for calling it the best which will inherently always be subjective.
  14. This is painful. We are at impasse. Not going to argue something that was never the original point.
  • Create New...