|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Something scrounged from another thread that seems appropriate for Stadiumchat. 
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Something scrounged from another thread that seems appropriate for Stadiumchat. Shots fired 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Something scrounged from another thread that seems appropriate for Stadiumchat.  That is cold.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 05:41
|
|
|
To be fair, the Vikings stadium contains a lot more parts than New Horizons.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
Cool how Brett Favre was the last QB to lead the Vikings to an NFC championship game and the Packers before AA-RON Rodgers. Lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
When I came down the dawn poured into me I shook em up the walls came crumbling My fists kept trembling with these salty wounds My stolen gold inside the emperor's tomb
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 06:18
|
|
|
Re: Stadium chat, it feels good to just say "Owners should pay for everything, they're rich," but it's naive. 19 NFL owners have less than $2b in total assets, not including the Packers. A stadium today costs about a billion. Many of these teams are inherited from men who got into football when it wasn't insanely expensive, and football teams aren't absurdly profitable. The average NFL team is worth $1.43b. So people having to liquidate their holdings and lose hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium isn't the exception to the rule, it's what would happen in most cases. You build the stadium, you lose hundreds of millions of dollars, and you don't own the team anymore. Who's going to do that? The reality is many, many teams would just do what Mark Davis ($500m in assets) is doing, and run lovely old stadiums into the ground because they can't get a deal done for anything better. Eventually, the team would be dissolved because there's no feasible way to build a stadium. I could only find data from 2012, but from that year, here's each NFL teams net worth, with the profit it made that year in parenthesis. quote:1. Dallas Cowboys: $2.3 billion ($250.7 million) At that rate, it would take the Vikings 34 years to pay off their stadium costs without paying for anything else. There's no profit in that whatsoever. 34 years where the team makes no money. 34 years with no renovations. And they're far from the worst case. The Lions posted a loss. To be honest, the only thing that makes sense to me is to get the NFL as a whole more involved in paying for stadiums. They made $6b in profit last year, which was then split and divided among the teams. Just pop like 750 million out of there every 3 or 4 years, get the city and state to cover the rest, and divide up the rest. Volkerball fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Jul 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Re: Stadium chat, it feels good to just say "Owners should pay for everything, they're rich," but it's naive. 19 NFL owners have less than $2b in total assets, not including the Packers. A stadium today costs about a billion. Many of these teams are inherited from men who got into football when it wasn't insanely expensive, and football teams aren't absurdly profitable. The average NFL team is worth $1.43b. So people having to liquidate their holdings and lose hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium isn't the exception to the rule, it's what would happen in most cases. You build the stadium, you lose hundreds of millions of dollars, and you don't own the team anymore. Who's going to do that? The reality is many, many teams would just do what Mark Davis ($500m in assets) is doing, and run lovely old stadiums into the ground because they can't get a deal done for anything better. Eventually, the team would be dissolved because there's no feasible way to build a stadium. jerry jones is a wizard
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
I wish Al had his business sense so the Raiders wouldn't be playing in a sewer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:football teams aren't absurdly profitable. smh if you actually believe this
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
KettleWL posted:smh if you actually believe this I can believe that WCF was dumb enough to post a loss on an NFL team.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Calvin signed a mega-extension that summer, Schwartz signed a hefty extension that summer ( ), and Stafford and Suh were still raking in the cash while the team went 4-12. If anyone could post a loss, it's the Lions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Re: Stadium chat, it feels good to just say "Owners should pay for everything, they're rich," but it's naive. 19 NFL owners have less than $2b in total assets, not including the Packers. A stadium today costs about a billion. Many of these teams are inherited from men who got into football when it wasn't insanely expensive, and football teams aren't absurdly profitable. The average NFL team is worth $1.43b. So people having to liquidate their holdings and lose hundreds of millions of dollars to build a stadium isn't the exception to the rule, it's what would happen in most cases. You build the stadium, you lose hundreds of millions of dollars, and you don't own the team anymore. Who's going to do that? The reality is many, many teams would just do what Mark Davis ($500m in assets) is doing, and run lovely old stadiums into the ground because they can't get a deal done for anything better. Eventually, the team would be dissolved because there's no feasible way to build a stadium. Stadiums can be built for less than 2 billion dollars, you know.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Why would the owners spend money when they don't have to and can successfully swindle municipalities out of funds
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
If the Vikings owner had to pay for it himself he probably would end up deciding it didn't necessarily have to be a giant glass boat and gone with a cheaper design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Ross Angeles posted:Why would the owners spend money when they don't have to and can successfully swindle municipalities out of funds Well yeah. And if I had the ring of Gyges I'd probably do some absolutely heinous poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
How can you say teams are not very profitable, and then follow it up with the statement that the NFL makes 6B a year and splits it among the teams? The teams are only making a small profit if you exclude their largest source of income under that description. I dont actually know how much teams make, or the revenue sharing works, and I dont care enough to look it up. But it is pretty clear the NFL is printing money, regardless of any accounting game that allows someone to pretend an individual owner is not making money. they can afford their own stadiums, gently caress them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
e: don't half read posts and reply to them, Tatum, you dumb dick
sexpig by night fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Jul 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
About that Vikes thing, people I know on the Internet and the who are pro soccer are so obnoxious about that Pluto vs Stadium thing, thanks WCCO
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:47
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:How can you say teams are not very profitable, and then follow it up with the statement that the NFL makes 6B a year and splits it among the teams? The teams are only making a small profit if you exclude their largest source of income under that description. That's 187 million per team. Teams spend well over 200 million a year, so that amount only covers a substantial chunk of losses, with local and regional income covering the rest and then providing income.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Stadiums can be built for less than 2 billion dollars, you know. Why should an owner be obligated to spend half of the money he's made in his life, mostly out of football, to buy something that benefits 79,999 other people 8 weeks a year? You can make a moral argument or w/e, but if your message is "you can be an NFL owner if you're willing to accept a guaranteed like 800 million in losses for the privilege" you're not going to have any buyers, and a lot of the current owners are going to be stuck with their dicks in their hands because they literally cannot meet the requirements. FuriousxGeorge posted:If the Vikings owner had to pay for it himself he probably would end up deciding it didn't necessarily have to be a giant glass boat and gone with a cheaper design. This is America, comrade. China's thataways.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Why should an owner be obligated to spend half of the money he's made in his life, mostly out of football, to buy something that benefits 79,999 other people 8 weeks a year? You can make a moral argument or w/e, but if your message is "you can be an NFL owner if you're willing to accept a guaranteed like 800 million in losses for the privilege" you're not going to have any buyers, and a lot of the current owners are going to be stuck with their dicks in their hands because they literally cannot meet the requirements. I'm not saying an owner is obligated to do anything. I'm saying I don't like what they're doing and I really hate that they profit this way. gently caress the owners, gently caress their stranglehold on most cities, and gently caress you if you think it's ok. And gently caress me too, because I occasionally spend money on the NFL. That's the way the first world works, we are all complicit in terrible poo poo, whether we like it or not. Morality is a myth and if God really exists then every owner- especially everyone with stock in the Packers- will suffer in hell eternally. Go Hawks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
If you want to throw poor, plucky Mark Davis under the bus and the Raiders with him so that you bougie gently caress IT nerds don't have to pay taxes for the privilege of having an nfl team a half hour away, gently caress you too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
quote:Why should an owner be obligated to spend half of the money he's made in his life, mostly out of football, to buy something that benefits 79,999 other people 8 weeks a year? I think the government should give me $2 billion to buy the Eagles. If they don't...then how will I own them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:I think the government should give me $2 billion to buy the Eagles. If they don't...then how will I own them? You'll regret it when you're on the hook for a stadium, facing a billion dollars in debt, and can't find anyone dumb enough to pay 2 billion for the privilege to adopt that situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:If you want to throw poor, plucky Mark Davis under the bus and the Raiders with him so that you bougie gently caress IT nerds don't have to pay taxes for the privilege of having an nfl team a half hour away, gently caress you too. Woah man. You've gone way too far and I think you owe me an apology. I know this is a comedy forum and we all like to make fun of each other, but implying I work in IT is extremely rude. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:You'll regret it when you're on the hook for a stadium, facing a billion dollars in debt, and can't find anyone dumb enough to pay 2 billion for the privilege to adopt that situation. I'll just find the plans for the Vet and rebuild it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
*600 million in debt
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Sounds like they shouldn't be in business if they can't afford the basic parts of their business. They're not airlines, where their facilities are an obligation of the government because of a loose interpretation of a phrase in the Constitution.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Sash! posted:Sounds like they shouldn't be in business if they can't afford the basic parts of their business. They're not airlines, where their facilities are an obligation of the government because of a loose interpretation of a phrase in the Constitution. All but a handful of NFL teams aren't about business. Many of them are inherited as a symbol of pride for a family that has no other business ventures going on. For those that are sold, it's about having a toy to show your friends. So for these family run teams, there's just not enough profit to drop a billion on a stadium. You have to dig into reserves because you'll be taking huge losses, and if the team is your primary source of income, you're hosed. For the people who are looking to buy a team, if you spend 2 billion on the team and another billion or two on stadiums in your lifetime for like, 20 million a year profit, that's a loving stupid expensive toy that few can afford.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:All but a handful of NFL teams aren't about business. Many of them are inherited as a symbol of pride for a family that has no other business ventures going on. For those that are sold, it's about having a toy to show your friends. So for these family run teams, there's just not enough profit to drop a billion on a stadium. You have to dig into reserves because you'll be taking huge losses, and if the team is your primary source of income, you're hosed. For the people who are looking to buy a team, if you spend 2 billion on the team and another billion or two on stadiums in your lifetime for like, 20 million a year profit, that's a loving stupid expensive toy that few can afford. Don't spend 1 billion on stadiums then.  I won't shed a tear for the Rooneys or Maras.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Back in the good old days my grandfather watched football from a wooden bleacher, and he enjoyed it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Really though what's the cheapest you could get an NFL caliber stadium that you can at least get 20 years of use out of without dropping 200 mil on renovations every 10 years? 500 mil? 600 mil?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Really though what's the cheapest you could get an NFL caliber stadium that you can at least get 20 years of use out of without dropping 200 mil on renovations every 10 years? 500 mil? 600 mil? Unfortunately, I believe that stadium costs are something like starting QB salaries... they just keep going up. "Approaching a billion" is about to be the loving bargain basement for new stadiums.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Really though what's the cheapest you could get an NFL caliber stadium that you can at least get 20 years of use out of without dropping 200 mil on renovations every 10 years? 500 mil? 600 mil? I dunno. What's "nfl caliber" to you? Does every stadium absolutely need to have cell phone charging stations and downtown locations? Can it just be a big ol' barebones monstrosity that seats 90,000?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:I dunno. What's "nfl caliber" to you? Does every stadium absolutely need to have cell phone charging stations and downtown locations? Can it just be a big ol' barebones monstrosity that seats 90,000? Nobody is buying FedEx from you, Mr. Snyder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Nobody is buying FedEx from you, Mr. Snyder. I'll sue you
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Part of the problem might be only rich people can afford to go to NFL games anymore. College games fill up even bigger stadiums with less amenities--but gently caress spending nfl money if you're going to have poo poo wifi and get scalped by billionaires.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Back in the good old days my grandfather watched football from a wooden bleacher, and he enjoyed it. today, we know him as Deteriorata
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 17:34 |
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2015 05:58
|
|