...and some of us, fed up with residing on Baltic Avenue while douchebag Hauptman waits to pass "Go" before his next roster move, are leaving for sunnier climes. Hauptman out 'til I die!
Looking at the pockets of the owners/ownership groups that have come into the league the last few years, there is little chance the Fire will/can do necessary diligence to be more than a one shot, win now success, at best, if the planets aligned juuusst right. At least we kinda have an excuse, the Revs on the other hand.......
Beat me to it. Only if we had an owner that care about his team to build one of these. http://www.kansascity.com/sports/mls/sporting-kc/article198537254.html
The Fire recently announced they were multiplying their investment in the dedicated training facility by ten times, compared to last year. Ten times!
It is absolutely true. Last year, they invested $0 in the dedicated training facility. This year, they will multiply that same investment by 10x. Do the math. (You see what I did there )
Slight contrast in ambitions - https://www.lafc.com/post/2018/01/3...orm-historic-broadcast-and-jersey-partnership
And, that has nothing at all to do with the question at hand. But thanks for playing! In fact, the very same Q & A answers the question at hand, just two lines later: Where does your first team train? Did you build the training facility yourself? If so, how much did it cost? The Fire first team trains at the stadium training grounds built and maintained by the Village of Bridgeview as a part of the $100 million project in 2006. The first team also makes use of the club’s $22 million facility, The PrivateBank Fire Pitch, for select training sessions. So, basically, they have spent exactly zero on first team training facility. The "PrivateBank Fire Pitch" is not owned by the "club," it is a private, for-profit venture and can only be used for "select training sessions," by their own admission.
I thought that I read someone where that the Fire have "rent" the Fire Pitch when they do want to use it that 5x per year.
https://www.seattletimes.com/sports...ave-to-spend-more-in-new-mls-financial-realm/ For years, the Sounders parlayed huge CenturyLink Field crowds into larger revenues than most teams. But Atlanta drew record crowds of its own last year, while Toronto also significantly boosted revenue. Toronto, New York City FC and Chicago have also shown a willingness to spend a higher percentage of revenue on player payroll than the Sounders have.
Yes, the Fire spend a higher percentage of revenue on player payroll as the Fire are atrocious at generating revenue. Of all of the crap surrounding the team, the lack of revenue generation is second only to the disrespect shown towards the long time fans (the "Editorial," denigrating season ticket holders, lack of premiums for STH, etc.). -The Fire were put in charge of finding a new stadium sponsor several years ago. Result? No stadium sponsor. -The Fire have one of the lower jersey sponsors at an estimated $2.5 million* a year. Perhaps in the top half (exact numbers are hard to find), but certainly well below the value for the "Second [err, third] City" (and having one of the top-3 selling jerseys, thanks to Bastian Schweinsteiger). LAG and Seatle are both way above $4 million. -Broadcasting rights? LAG receive $5.5 million a year. LAFC have an innovative deal with Youtube TV. The Fire? They have to pay to have the games shown on local tv. -The "Fire Pitch" is not even owned by the team, so the revenue generated has little effect on the bottom line for the Fire. Essentially, the Fire are loaning their name to the commercial establishment. Etc. *http://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti...icago-fire-sign-valspar-as-new-jersey-sponsor
LAFC's deal with Youtube Live is awful - it's the equivalent to the Sox jumping off 44 to Sportsvision . That deal cemented the Sox playing second fiddle. If the Fire jumped to YouTube Live as their exclusive partner , everyone on here would be up in arms.