Falcons new stadium (Mitchell: ticket, best, mayor)

[glovenyc]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Not necessarily. If instead of offering the Falcons a new stadium, the city had offered one to the Braves where the new Falcons stadium is going, it would have consolidated the sports life of the metro area into one spot, which would very effectively be a year-round draw, which would thus have encouraged a lot of positive economic development, in the city. Instead, the Falcons stadium won't do anything that the Georgia Dome isn't, so basically the city spent $200 Million simply to maintain the status quo. Even IF the new stadium draws more events (and this is a huge IF) it won't be more than maybe 20 more events/days per year, it will otherwise sit vacant. A new Baseball stadium next to the Dome would have had events for about 80 days per year, PLUS the events in the Dome for probably 100 days per year total, but in the same location. This would have been a $200 Million investment, the way it is now, it's a $200 Million handout...or maybe ransom payment. There is no way Atlanta can recoup the costs AND profit off of this deal

Although I am not against the new Braves stadium in Cobb...I've always felt that the best location would have been the originally proposed "north site" up by Ivan Allen Blvd, which would have created a year-round experience down there.

[arc-lang]

Originally Posted by glovenyc

Although I am not against the new Braves stadium in Cobb...I've always felt that the best location would have been the originally proposed "north site" up by Ivan Allen Blvd, which would have created a year-round experience down there.

Agree with both of you.

But of course that city of Atlanta was not going to give the Braves the financial support to make that a reality. I think Liberty Media knew that all along, and they bluffed the city when they asked for I believe the $200 million plus in renovations to Turner Field, knowing all along the city wouldn't do that. At the same time they were secretly talking to Cobb which they knew was more lucrative because Cobb would allow them to control the area around stadium to increase their revenue. This way Liberty Media could come back and tell the fans in the city of Atlanta, that they tried but the city was the one to blame.

[J2rescue]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Not necessarily. If instead of offering the Falcons a new stadium, the city had offered one to the Braves where the new Falcons stadium is going, it would have consolidated the sports life of the metro area into one spot, which would very effectively be a year-round draw, which would thus have encouraged a lot of positive economic development, in the city. Instead, the Falcons stadium won't do anything that the Georgia Dome isn't, so basically the city spent $200 Million simply to maintain the status quo. Even IF the new stadium draws more events (and this is a huge IF) it won't be more than maybe 20 more events/days per year, it will otherwise sit vacant. A new Baseball stadium next to the Dome would have had events for about 80 days per year, PLUS the events in the Dome for probably 100 days per year total, but in the same location. This would have been a $200 Million investment, the way it is now, it's a $200 Million handout...or maybe ransom payment. There is no way Atlanta can recoup the costs AND profit off of this deal

Except the Super Bowl and College Football Championship.

[MattCW]

I included those two events in my reasoning, even if it's not explicit that I did.

[jsvh]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Not necessarily. If instead of offering the Falcons a new stadium, the city had offered one to the Braves where the new Falcons stadium is going, it would have consolidated the sports life of the metro area into one spot, which would very effectively be a year-round draw, which would thus have encouraged a lot of positive economic development, in the city. Instead, the Falcons stadium won't do anything that the Georgia Dome isn't, so basically the city spent $200 Million simply to maintain the status quo. Even IF the new stadium draws more events (and this is a huge IF) it won't be more than maybe 20 more events/days per year, it will otherwise sit vacant. A new Baseball stadium next to the Dome would have had events for about 80 days per year, PLUS the events in the Dome for probably 100 days per year total, but in the same location. This would have been a $200 Million investment, the way it is now, it's a $200 Million handout...or maybe ransom payment. There is no way Atlanta can recoup the costs AND profit off of this deal

You're going to build a brand new MLB stadium for $200M?

[magnetar]

There is zero chance of a facility like the Georgia Dome getting another Super Bowl anytime remotely soon; they're getting to the point where they're bid like the World Cup or Olympics and a new stadium is basically a requirement at this point.

If the city of Atlanta had followed some of your advice, they'd have shelled out nearly half the cost of a new baseball facility; at best we'd be getting an improved version of Turner Field. Instead, for the same $200m, we're getting a $1.2billion facility that has the potential to bring serious events to Atlanta, ones that the Dome or a baseball field would never, ever have attracted.

If paying $300m for a $672m baseball field seems like a better investment, move to Cobb, stay off the Atlanta forum, and everyone will be happy.

[MattCW]

How is a Superbowl beneficial? As the links earlier showed, they aren't necessarily profitable for the host city. But that's one, single event, that the new stadium will get what? Once? What will happen when the Falcons want to host another one in 10 years? Build another new stadium? A new baseball stadium near the existing Dome would have brought a lot more and a lot more continuous economic activity, mostly by virtue of it being a lot more throughout the year especially when taken in conjunction with a nearby football stadium.

[0nyxStation]

Originally Posted by arc-lang

Agree with both of you.

But of course that city of Atlanta was not going to give the Braves the financial support to make that a reality. I think Liberty Media knew that all along, and they bluffed the city when they asked for I believe the $200 million plus in renovations to Turner Field, knowing all along the city wouldn't do that. At the same time they were secretly talking to Cobb which they knew was more lucrative because Cobb would allow them to control the area around stadium to increase their revenue. This way Liberty Media could come back and tell the fans in the city of Atlanta, that they tried but the city was the one to blame.

that seems about right.

[frankieg73]

I see some people saying a baseball stadium is a better investment than a football stadium. Each deal has to be evaluated on its own merit, and the new Braves Stadium is no better for the taxpayers than the new Falcons stadium is/will be.

Braves stadium docs: Team pays 51-55% of costs, gets 100% of revenues | Field of Schemes

In this case, having more events throughout the year means nothing to the taxpayers if the team keeps everything.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by frankieg73

I see some people saying a baseball stadium is a better investment than a football stadium. Each deal has to be evaluated on its own merit, and the new Braves Stadium is no better for the taxpayers than the new Falcons stadium is/will be.

Braves stadium docs: Team pays 51-55% of costs, gets 100% of revenues | Field of Schemes

In this case, having more events throughout the year means nothing to the taxpayers if the team keeps everything.

You're missing the point. As a single, unconnected entity, there is no benefit. But had the Braves either stayed or been moved next to the Dome, there would have been substantial benefits. I've hashed them out earlier in this thread so I'm not doing it again.