AZBearsFan Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 18 minutes ago, dll2000 said: I think the backlash to such a move would be immense. They wouldn't be able to keep much of their existing fan base. For me if Bears go to suburbs that is fine. I want them to. I will be a bigger fan. I would actually attend games in Arlington. But if they went to St. Louis, London, Toronto, San Diego or San Antonio (trying to think of likely new NFL team cities) I wouldn't keep being a Bear fan. I probably would become a general NFL fan and then kind of slowly phase it out of my life and take up other interests more. If I eventually move to AZ or FL or AL to retire I will keep being a Bear fan. That is me moving not them. The Bears would be the Cowboys from a profitability standpoint under different and more aggressive (or maybe just wealthier) ownership IMO. They’re a cash cow for the league ratings wise even when they suck. Much if not most of that is because they are in Chicago. A move to the suburbs won’t change any of that, but they’re never relocating from a world class city and abandoning much of what is a top 3 fan base in terms of volume to go to San Antonio. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 15 Share Posted June 15 31 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said: The Bears would be the Cowboys from a profitability standpoint under different and more aggressive (or maybe just wealthier) ownership IMO. They’re a cash cow for the league ratings wise even when they suck. Much if not most of that is because they are in Chicago. A move to the suburbs won’t change any of that, but they’re never relocating from a world class city and abandoning much of what is a top 3 fan base in terms of volume to go to San Antonio. They really should sell the team. Their lack of resources does hold them back in many ways. Probably never be a better time to cash out. Sell high. Maybe they will when mom passes. Maybe they keep riding the golden goose. We'll see what they decide. But even NFL won't keep rising forever. Something will happen at some point that halts that and reverses it. Or a combination of somethings. Just way history works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 11 hours ago, dll2000 said: I agree it is highly unlikely. I bet they explore it. I bet they already have. They may even threaten it if they get desperate. Why I call it the nuclear option. They threatened it before when Mikey was the CEO. It was a hollow threat then and it would be a hollow threat now. The NFL isn't gonna approve a move away from one of the largest markets in the country to become the Lexington, KY Colonels. They'll get their new digs and I'm willing to even bet a buck it will be on the Lakefront. AH gets them a new and bigger stadium along with a chance to develop Bearsville. The Lakefront gets Chicago a world class show place. They just haven't sold it hard enough yet or come up with the right balance of cost vs revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 4 hours ago, dll2000 said: News flash - everyone wants free money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 hour ago, AZBearsFan said: News flash - everyone wants free money. You can say free money. Or you can say a community investment. Or a public private partnership. Like how they name big spending bills. Always cracks me up. It’s the ‘Be Nice to Puppies and Babies Act of 2024’. What’s in it? A warm glass of shut the hell up Nazi. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW Posted June 16 Share Posted June 16 1 hour ago, dll2000 said: You can say free money. Or you can say a community investment. Or a public private partnership. Like how they name big spending bills. Always cracks me up. It’s the ‘Be Nice to Puppies and Babies Act of 2024’. What’s in it? A warm glass of shut the hell up Nazi. I love the euphemism's for stuff like that. "Let's call it the Infinite American Freedom Act!" "What's in it?" "Warrantless wire tapping if your name contains a vowel" Anyway, very interesting the amount of pushback that's finally landing on these stadium deals. The Panthers guy seems to have amassed a ton of ill will in a hurry. The Bears are generally likeable if ****ty so we'll see if they get like Waukegan to cough up money if no one else will. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 NFL owners need to get over their bad selves. With NFL franchises worth billions of dollars, the cost of attending a game well over $100, and a monopoly on even TV viewing, taxpayers aren't anxious to fund their gridiron ego palaces any longer. Guys like Tepper can threaten all they like but where would they move to? There are only so many markets that can support an NFL team and most are covered. Moving would cost him a small fortune and to where? Billings, Montana? Boise, Idaho, Portland, Oregon? Sacramento, California? In the modern NFL Green Bay would not have a team. Any threat of moving an NFL team now I would deem a hollow threat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskieBear Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 21 hours ago, AZBearsFan said: News flash - everyone wants free money. Tepper needs it tho. he's one of the poorest owners in the league /s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZBearsFan Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 18 hours ago, dll2000 said: Or you can say a community investment. It could be that. Say the state gets 25% of all Bears ticket revenue, and like 5-10% of all non-Bears game ticket revenue for the first 20 years the stadium is open in exchange for a $1B investment toward the stadium construction. In 2024, the average Bears ticket costs $130.29 (direct purchase, not aftermarket). Assuming a 70,000 seat stadium, 10 home games a year (which is hopefully low since 10 would mean zero playoff games, which are also higher revenue tickets) and a 5% annual increase in ticket prices (which may also unfortunately be low), the state’s return from just the Bears tickets would be $753,921,000 over the 20 years (thanks Excel). That wouldn’t even yet include any concerts, Super Bowls, Big Ten conference championship games, Final Fours, etc. either, before any other revenue is generated by stadium-adjacent businesses, etc. Even adjusting for anticipated inflation, if the municipality were to “partner” with the Bears in an arrangement like this don’t they both come out way ahead in the long run here? Especially if you’re talking AH here instead of the lakefront, since AH doesn’t already have the tourism driven revenue in the proposed venue? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 3 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said: It could be that. Say the state gets 25% of all Bears ticket revenue, and like 5-10% of all non-Bears game ticket revenue for the first 20 years the stadium is open in exchange for a $1B investment toward the stadium construction. In 2024, the average Bears ticket costs $130.29 (direct purchase, not aftermarket). Assuming a 70,000 seat stadium, 10 home games a year (which is hopefully low since 10 would mean zero playoff games, which are also higher revenue tickets) and a 5% annual increase in ticket prices (which may also unfortunately be low), the state’s return from just the Bears tickets would be $753,921,000 over the 20 years (thanks Excel). That wouldn’t even yet include any concerts, Super Bowls, Big Ten conference championship games, Final Fours, etc. either, before any other revenue is generated by stadium-adjacent businesses, etc. Even adjusting for anticipated inflation, if the municipality were to “partner” with the Bears in an arrangement like this don’t they both come out way ahead in the long run here? Especially if you’re talking AH here instead of the lakefront, since AH doesn’t already have the tourism driven revenue in the proposed venue? Bears want more than what they are currently getting from Chicago. I think currently the park district collects some of parking from Bears games and all of it from other stuff like Taylor Swift concert or whatever. Plus Bears pay a lease too - like 6 million a year or something like that. Bears currently think that deal sucks for them and have said so. They opened with an offer that they want ALL of the revenue from everything - pretty bold. So if they went in direction you are proposing - it would be a radical departure from what they are currently demanding which is 100%. But if they currently get zero from Taylor Swift concerts, getting whatever percentage going forward from other use of stadium is better than what they currently have which is 0%. The main 'investment' for the city/state paying half for the stadium is they get the good things that happen as a result of stadium existing and Bears or insert NFL team playing there. That is NFL owner argument around the country. And there is some of that I think. Though a bunch of different studies have concluded it is not typically a net economic public gain all things considered. More of a rearranging of deck chairs. Not sure about their methodology or motivation. A tourist destination has economic impact. I would think Orlando would not be Orlando of today without Disney World building there. Same with Anaheim. But the Bears not owning the stadium would be unique. Bears propose a public stadium - but they get all the revenue. I don't think that is going to fly. Though current Mayor is ready to agree to whatever. State isn't on board. And Friends of Park isn't on board and will sue to block it. It doesn't sound like State wants to help in Arlington either. You might say the obvious answer is to give Bears a percentage of revenue for concerts/olympics. That still leaves problem of parking, fixing Lake Shore drive and bringing Metra to Soldier Field which will cost Billions and I don't see why Bears would pay for all that. You don't need to do all that for Arlington. You probably need to dig new sewer connections and create a few new exits/entrances and add stop lights. But you have ample space. You would ideally rather be on Lakefront location wise. It is prettier with the lake there. It is Chicago. More hotels. More restaurants. Other stuff is there. Bigger population nearby stadium. But you have uncertainty of property taxes in Arlington. Which could theoretically be an astronomical amount depending on how they decide to assess a stadium's property value. So many things to consider. It is complicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 (edited) A wildcard option no one has considered for stadium since it is rural. Just spitballing. But there is also an old Motorola factory property in Harvard, IL. It is HUGE property and just sitting there. 1.5 million square feet. It has a metra stop. It's probably around an hour ride from downtown Chicago Express (no stops). I bet it is relatively cheap to buy since it is basically abandoned land at the moment. It is NOT in Cook county. It is in McHenry county. McHenry would probably give you a near 0 property tax deal or maybe even 0. I would consider that were I the Bears. Edited June 17 by dll2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soulman Posted June 17 Share Posted June 17 7 hours ago, HuskieBear said: Tepper needs it tho. he's one of the poorest owners in the league /s LOL......he could write a check for the $650 mil in upgrades he wants and it wouldn't even make a dent in his net worth. His annual ROI would more than cover it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 18 Share Posted June 18 Other thing that cracks me up (in a sad way) is park district/city make all this crazy bank on Taylor Swift concerts and other big events over years and it doesn’t even occur to anyone in govt. to make a single principal payment on their loan for Soldier Field renovations. Not one payment in all this time! Only interest. When Chicago and state is broke it is always everyone else’s fault plus global warming and racism and hurricanes or whatever else they can blame it on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dll2000 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Chiefs threatening to move to Kansas because they didn’t get public money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.