There are 205 users in the forums
Originally posted by susweel:
Originally posted by BodhiPaddlesOut:
lol soccer.
Sounds like a bunch of entitled, butt-hurt, soccer moms trying to flex some political muscle.
Better learn to enjoy it because after football gets banned soccer gonna be the main sport.
Originally posted by Quest4six:Thats like saying SF will be hurting now the 49ers are not in SF
Young2Rice is right,
I'm trying to find a thread I posted in awhile ago that talked about the financial burden placed upon the city of Santa Clara with this new stadium. (it was something about a guy claiming he got scammed by the Yorks while buying season tickets)
All in all, if the 49ers revenue drops significantly, its really going to hurt that economy.
Originally posted by crake49:As a SC citizen..the 49ers is just like the many power businesses that are already established in our city...Just having the 49ers being here now makes a great city even better. The city will not be effected on how they perform.
Gosh, Niner fans are really worried about Santa Clara!
Its tax base is anchored by some of the biggest Silicon Valley companies in history, the average cost of a house there is something like $780k, and Niner fans are worried. What will they do? How will they survive? What can they possibly do with the $30 to $50 million they're expected to rake in early next year when the Super Bowl comes to town?
Cry for the good citizens of Santa Clara - easily one of the most down-trodden cities in the country.
Originally posted by BodhiPaddlesOut:
I'd rather convince myself I can follow an entire season of NASCAR.
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Thats like saying SF will be hurting now the 49ers are not in SF
As a SC citizen..the 49ers is just like the many power businesses that are already established in our city...Just having the 49ers being here now makes a great city even better. The city will not be effected on how they perform.
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:Hurting the Community ?
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
lol
Classiest land grab ever. 15 million for that much primo land in SC. GTFO.
Way to alienate your host city within a year Spud York.
Did York hold a gun to Santa Clara's head or what? If it's a good deal for the Niners, what are you whining about?
It was a good deal for the Yorks, sure. The deal was bad for the city. That is why SC is reviewing it for fairness, because it looks unfair, if i'm reading the issue correctly.
I'm not concerned about the York's lining their phat pockets, especially when it hurts the community.
This has nothing to do with the coaches and players on the field, whom i support.
Why do you constantly whine about my posts questioning spud york?
15 million to use the soccer fields on sundays in the fall/winter season or what ever even they have there..that is hurting the community ?
Did you even look at the 9ers tried getting land but the community protested or the 9ers tried to clean up some schools scoccer fields but the board of education delayed it for what ever reason
Did Jed say they are not going to help with the soccer fields anymore..i didn't see that in the articles, but i did see that the 15 million is to compensate for the time being since its a timely process
No use of City General or Enterprise funds for construction; no new taxes for residents for stadium; private party pays all construction cost overruns; no City/Agency obligation for stadium operation/maintenance.
First, it is assumed that the 49ers will continue to have a winning team for as far as the eye can see into the future, drawing fans from not only San Francisco but also other cities within a 100-mile radius of the stadium. That expectation, however, is already flawed, as more than 30 percent of those loyal fans in San Francisco holding season tickets have given them up, as the 40-mile drive each way and the potential traffic jams on game day were just too daunting.
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Thats like saying SF will be hurting now the 49ers are not in SF
As a SC citizen..the 49ers is just like the many power businesses that are already established in our city...Just having the 49ers being here now makes a great city even better. The city will not be effected on how they perform.
Good to hear from someone who actually lives there. I worked in Santa Clara for many years. I'm not worried about Santa Clara.
Originally posted by Quest4six:
And I'm not saying you should be.
What I'm saying is from an investor standpoint, whomever agreed to bring the stadium in and agreed to the terms and amount should be fired.
Originally posted by Quest4six:You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:Hurting the Community ?
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
lol
Classiest land grab ever. 15 million for that much primo land in SC. GTFO.
Way to alienate your host city within a year Spud York.
Did York hold a gun to Santa Clara's head or what? If it's a good deal for the Niners, what are you whining about?
It was a good deal for the Yorks, sure. The deal was bad for the city. That is why SC is reviewing it for fairness, because it looks unfair, if i'm reading the issue correctly.
I'm not concerned about the York's lining their phat pockets, especially when it hurts the community.
This has nothing to do with the coaches and players on the field, whom i support.
Why do you constantly whine about my posts questioning spud york?
15 million to use the soccer fields on sundays in the fall/winter season or what ever even they have there..that is hurting the community ?
Did you even look at the 9ers tried getting land but the community protested or the 9ers tried to clean up some schools scoccer fields but the board of education delayed it for what ever reason
Did Jed say they are not going to help with the soccer fields anymore..i didn't see that in the articles, but i did see that the 15 million is to compensate for the time being since its a timely process
I guess I'll just go over this again. Anyways, when I first saw the financial plans for the stadium I thought it was going to get rejected. I'm astonished the city of SC agreed
Lets start with the basics,
June 8th, 2010
A ballot is passed in the city of SC claiming
No use of City General or Enterprise funds for construction; no new taxes for residents for stadium; private party pays all construction cost overruns; no City/Agency obligation for stadium operation/maintenance.
Well, thats already been broken. Flaw #1
Twelve percent of the 1.3 billion it took to fund the stadium was charged to the city of Santa Clara (156 million dollars) with another 330 million to be borrowed by the city's Stadium Authority (486 million total)
Levi Strauss gave the stadium authority team 200 million to be paid out over 10 years
The NFL also LOANED (not gave) the Stadium authority 200 million to be paid back in the form of gate revenues, gift shop sales, beers, and so on...
So just to clarify, the city of Santa Clara (whos revenues are the lowest of the 3 listed above) makes just above 140 million a year.
Another interesting note is the NFL loan, to be paid back at 200 million after 5 years. The NFL came to the 5 year plan basing Candlesticks season ticker holders and average game day revenue.
Anybody notice any flaws there?
First, it is assumed that the 49ers will continue to have a winning team for as far as the eye can see into the future, drawing fans from not only San Francisco but also other cities within a 100-mile radius of the stadium. That expectation, however, is already flawed, as more than 30 percent of those loyal fans in San Francisco holding season tickets have given them up, as the 40-mile drive each way and the potential traffic jams on game day were just too daunting.
The other mind-bogglind thing I cannot understand is ALL of the above loans are short term plans, meaning that they have to be refinanced around this year. A .5% change in the interest rate could mean hundreds of millions of dollars (.5% of the original loan is an extra 45 million charged to the city of SC) and if we know anything rates aren't staying low anymore
http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary/item/18740-taxpayers-are-on-the-hook-for-new-49ers-stadium-in-santa-clara
There are a couple quotes from a Harvard professor and Stanford professor at the bottom of the article with their take on the situation, and both aren't good for the people of SC.
TLDR: -Jed York didn't like SF
-Jed York says I need 800 million to build a new stadium
-City of SF says hell no, city of SC says yes please
-Jed York says, lolz jk, i need 950 million
-City of SC says, based off of your revenue in SF (SC has 17% of the population of SF and 1/12 the yearly revenue) we should be ok (first problem)
-York says great lets do it, SC says oh crap we aren't ready- drops 37 million moving and upgrading a power station, spends another 12 million on developing a "redevelopment agency" to oversee land development and buisness
-SC looks to be short on funds, so without taking a public vote SA and 49ers decide to change loan amount from 950mil to 1.3bil, is approved without hesitation
-All in all, the city of SC assumed the 49ers would bring in as much income as they did from SF, and they also agreed to take on a loan of around 210 million that is paid by public taxes (the city itself brings in 114 million a year)
So ask yourself, (going from macro to micro economics)
If you were a used car salesman, and you wanted to open up a new location, would you take out a loan that was more than what your business made each year?
Keep in mind that this new location you are opening up you are assuming will make just as much money and keep your loyal customers (even though the new location has 17% of the population and a 1/12 of the income).
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Did you include what the city makes with the 49ers now being there ?
Did you factor in how much more new revenue (businesses/Sales) the city is getting now that the 49ers are here ?
SC is not no little neighborhood you pass by on a freeway.
Originally posted by Quest4six:SF wont take on anything..thats just the way they are...they almost lost the giants for christ sakes
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Did you include what the city makes with the 49ers now being there ?
Did you factor in how much more new revenue (businesses/Sales) the city is getting now that the 49ers are here ?
SC is not no little neighborhood you pass by on a freeway.
The questions you presented above don't really focus on the bulk of what I am trying to say.
I get bringing in the 49ers is going to increase revenue.
What that article is saying, and what I am saying, is that the city of SC accepted these loans on projections
When the city and other banks took the loans, they answered those above questions for us, thats what bankers/economists/credit analysts get paid for
What the big issue here is, is that all of these people assumed that the 49ers would be just as financially stable in SC as they were in SF.
I get that SC isn't a "little neighborhood", but it is compared to SF
SC took on a loan that SF wasn't willing to
Originally posted by Quest4six:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:Hurting the Community ?
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
lol
Classiest land grab ever. 15 million for that much primo land in SC. GTFO.
Way to alienate your host city within a year Spud York.
Did York hold a gun to Santa Clara's head or what? If it's a good deal for the Niners, what are you whining about?
It was a good deal for the Yorks, sure. The deal was bad for the city. That is why SC is reviewing it for fairness, because it looks unfair, if i'm reading the issue correctly.
I'm not concerned about the York's lining their phat pockets, especially when it hurts the community.
This has nothing to do with the coaches and players on the field, whom i support.
Why do you constantly whine about my posts questioning spud york?
15 million to use the soccer fields on sundays in the fall/winter season or what ever even they have there..that is hurting the community ?
Did you even look at the 9ers tried getting land but the community protested or the 9ers tried to clean up some schools scoccer fields but the board of education delayed it for what ever reason
Did Jed say they are not going to help with the soccer fields anymore..i didn't see that in the articles, but i did see that the 15 million is to compensate for the time being since its a timely process
I guess I'll just go over this again. Anyways, when I first saw the financial plans for the stadium I thought it was going to get rejected. I'm astonished the city of SC agreed
Lets start with the basics,
June 8th, 2010
A ballot is passed in the city of SC claiming
No use of City General or Enterprise funds for construction; no new taxes for residents for stadium; private party pays all construction cost overruns; no City/Agency obligation for stadium operation/maintenance.
Well, thats already been broken. Flaw #1
Twelve percent of the 1.3 billion it took to fund the stadium was charged to the city of Santa Clara (156 million dollars) with another 330 million to be borrowed by the city's Stadium Authority (486 million total)
Levi Strauss gave the stadium authority team 200 million to be paid out over 10 years
The NFL also LOANED (not gave) the Stadium authority 200 million to be paid back in the form of gate revenues, gift shop sales, beers, and so on...
So just to clarify, the city of Santa Clara (whos revenues are the lowest of the 3 listed above) makes just above 140 million a year.
Another interesting note is the NFL loan, to be paid back at 200 million after 5 years. The NFL came to the 5 year plan basing Candlesticks season ticker holders and average game day revenue.
Anybody notice any flaws there?
First, it is assumed that the 49ers will continue to have a winning team for as far as the eye can see into the future, drawing fans from not only San Francisco but also other cities within a 100-mile radius of the stadium. That expectation, however, is already flawed, as more than 30 percent of those loyal fans in San Francisco holding season tickets have given them up, as the 40-mile drive each way and the potential traffic jams on game day were just too daunting.
The other mind-bogglind thing I cannot understand is ALL of the above loans are short term plans, meaning that they have to be refinanced around this year. A .5% change in the interest rate could mean hundreds of millions of dollars (.5% of the original loan is an extra 45 million charged to the city of SC) and if we know anything rates aren't staying low anymore
http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary/item/18740-taxpayers-are-on-the-hook-for-new-49ers-stadium-in-santa-clara
There are a couple quotes from a Harvard professor and Stanford professor at the bottom of the article with their take on the situation, and both aren't good for the people of SC.
TLDR: -Jed York didn't like SF
-Jed York says I need 800 million to build a new stadium
-City of SF says hell no, city of SC says yes please
-Jed York says, lolz jk, i need 950 million
-City of SC says, based off of your revenue in SF (SC has 17% of the population of SF and 1/12 the yearly revenue) we should be ok (first problem)
-York says great lets do it, SC says oh crap we aren't ready- drops 37 million moving and upgrading a power station, spends another 12 million on developing a "redevelopment agency" to oversee land development and buisness
-SC looks to be short on funds, so without taking a public vote SA and 49ers decide to change loan amount from 950mil to 1.3bil, is approved without hesitation
-All in all, the city of SC assumed the 49ers would bring in as much income as they did from SF, and they also agreed to take on a loan of around 210 million that is paid by public taxes (the city itself brings in 114 million a year)
So ask yourself, (going from macro to micro economics)
If you were a used car salesman, and you wanted to open up a new location, would you take out a loan that was more than what your business made each year?
Keep in mind that this new location you are opening up you are assuming will make just as much money and keep your loyal customers (even though the new location has 17% of the population and a 1/12 of the income).
Originally posted by Quest4six:
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Did you include what the city makes with the 49ers now being there ?
Did you factor in how much more new revenue (businesses/Sales) the city is getting now that the 49ers are here ?
SC is not no little neighborhood you pass by on a freeway.
The questions you presented above don't really focus on the bulk of what I am trying to say.
I get bringing in the 49ers is going to increase revenue.
What that article is saying, and what I am saying, is that the city of SC accepted these loans on projections
When the city and other banks took the loans, they answered those above questions for us, thats what bankers/economists/credit analysts get paid for
What the big issue here is, is that all of these people assumed that the 49ers would be just as financially stable in SC as they were in SF.
I get that SC isn't a "little neighborhood", but it is compared to SF
SC took on a loan that SF wasn't willing to
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by Quest4six:SF wont take on anything..thats just the way they are...they almost lost the giants for christ sakes
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Did you include what the city makes with the 49ers now being there ?
Did you factor in how much more new revenue (businesses/Sales) the city is getting now that the 49ers are here ?
SC is not no little neighborhood you pass by on a freeway.
The questions you presented above don't really focus on the bulk of what I am trying to say.
I get bringing in the 49ers is going to increase revenue.
What that article is saying, and what I am saying, is that the city of SC accepted these loans on projections
When the city and other banks took the loans, they answered those above questions for us, thats what bankers/economists/credit analysts get paid for
What the big issue here is, is that all of these people assumed that the 49ers would be just as financially stable in SC as they were in SF.
I get that SC isn't a "little neighborhood", but it is compared to SF
SC took on a loan that SF wasn't willing to
but isn't that basics for every loan, Youre projecting that you will still have future revenue to pay it off ?
With all the new projects/construction going on right now..it doesn't look like the city is worried...who knows...we will find out years from now
Originally posted by Marvin49:Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:SF wont take on anything..thats just the way they are...they almost lost the giants for christ sakesOriginally posted by Quest4six:Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:You really think no one will go to 9er games for X amount of years ?
Did you include what the city makes with the 49ers now being there ?
Did you factor in how much more new revenue (businesses/Sales) the city is getting now that the 49ers are here ?
SC is not no little neighborhood you pass by on a freeway.
The questions you presented above don't really focus on the bulk of what I am trying to say.
I get bringing in the 49ers is going to increase revenue.
What that article is saying, and what I am saying, is that the city of SC accepted these loans on projections
When the city and other banks took the loans, they answered those above questions for us, thats what bankers/economists/credit analysts get paid for
What the big issue here is, is that all of these people assumed that the 49ers would be just as financially stable in SC as they were in SF.
I get that SC isn't a "little neighborhood", but it is compared to SF
SC took on a loan that SF wasn't willing to
but isn't that basics for every loan, Youre projecting that you will still have future revenue to pay it off ?
With all the new projects/construction going on right now..it doesn't look like the city is worried...who knows...we will find out years from now
No kidding. All of the stuff that is going to happen...including a brand new Downtown for SC that is FIVE TIMES the size of the stadium doesn't happen without Levis. Neither does the Montana project. Neither does the SB.