At least they didn't ask for a new airport to handle the away fans traffic, what a joke. I never believed the stadium can get done this fast, but I hope Pallotta and his friends already know how to deal with this, because everyone and their grandmother knew it will happen. If you apply the same logic they are using with the stadium project, that means no one in Rome can build or start a business unless he develops everything around it and make sure it doesn't affect the traffic, and then he needs to pay 50% of his profits to the state so the politicians can buy mansions and sit on their asses pretending they are doing something constructive. (Its huge land they requesting and it will cause traffic) .. Remind me again why Roma was/is paying tens of millions of taxes every year? And (requesting), apparently Rome is under communist rule and the state owns everything while private property means nothing. The fact that tens of millions were paid(money or shares) to acquire the land means nothing, sounds like they are begging the state to give them land for free like the Goths were.
Don't be ridiculous. Just because you bought some land doesn't mean you can do what you want to it. That is true anywhere in the world. I agree it's uncommon for the city to ask a developer to cover infrastructure costs. However if there is no other way to provide these infrastructure improvements then the club must cover them. It's either that or you don't do the project.
I'm sorry to be off-track, but about 3 years ago I asked my professor who acquires the cost of transportation and extra infrastructure when developing a stadium; the franchise's owner or the city? He said "Google it." ....scumbag. If Roma has to pay for the infrastructure surrounding the stadium, that's going to be an insane amount of money.
The main issue is where does we draw the line between what we can consider an infrastructure for the stadium and what is an infrastructure for the whole city. From what I understand they are expecting AS Roma to rejuvenate roads and metros that go far away from the stadium. If indeed that is the case, then it is ridiculous and shameful from a city like Rome. Moreover, it is borderline bullying and blackmailing. It reflects poorly on the country as a whole and it rebells foreign investors, in this age and time where more countries do the opposite attracting them and their money. "you want to build something? Sure, will give you permits but before let us make sure we milk you to the last drop and get as much freebies we could get out of your project"
Yeah, its not like they are throwing a stadium just like that, they are making it above all the current stadiums standards in the whole country, and are paying 270M to build infrastructure that they won't own and the state will get for free. Safety standards I understand, parking standards I understand, anti pollution standards I understand, requesting some basic roads I understand, but Metro station, seriously?! That explains why its generally a horrible idea to invest in Italy. The return on investment needs to be insane to justify all the infrastructure requirements costs. The (350M) stadium needs to generate something like 100-150M profits( which will be taxed) to justify all the risk and trouble to invest in a project like that. Its(don't do the project) that will happen in most cases, which harms the economy and people the most. Even from a state point of view that would be a horrible decision, to reject a project that will yield you 50-80M in taxes annually for at least 20-25 years because you want them to build a metro station. The remaining necessary infrastructure can be financed in a couple of years with the taxes that will be collected from the stadium revenues. But seriously, if the state can't keep up with the necessary infrastructure development with such high taxes, then what good are they?
Welcome to why European states in general (Germany/UK aside) are doing so terribly. It's almost like Europe is being run by UCLA students.
It seems as if the non-locals don't understand that the Metro-Station or the necessary infrastructures are a necessary part of the project , if they let Pallotta do what he wants he's going to speculate like no tomorrow and build 0 infrastructures , you can't just buy some land and build something on top of it guys , don't be ridicoulus.
Or simply merge it with the Ostiense. Why they have two major 2-way roads right next to each other is beyond me but It's been like that as long as I can remember. On top of that the exits are nothing more than painted stripes on the road which makes it freakin dangerous. They'll also probably just expand the Tor di Valle station and make a pedestrian overpass over both roads much like there is already at Ostia Antica.
A lot of work needs to be done , or the whole project could make an already very traffic-intense road even worse , that's all i'm saying.
Cheers Sal! just got back from Rome a couple of days ago. Was in the area almost daily so felt like contributing. @Khaos: Indeed! could even block up the Torrino neighbourhood with people not wanting to pay parking fees.
If i'm not mistaken Totti's new house is in the Torrino-Mezzocammino neighbourhood , think about Francesco coming back from the match and going "WHAT THE ******** GUYS"
In the US cities often build stadiums for teams, and it works out because of all the taxes they collect off the revenue created by the stadium and surround development plus the jobs created. I recognize this is not how it is done in Italy but maybe they could learn a thing or two about how to grow an economy from the US.
I'm just saying but i wouldn't even remotely think about not supporting my team , even if the management sucks. The teams , as far as i've read , move because they start sucking , the management fails to keep them competitive and they start losing supporters, which is out of the world to me.
As far as I know that's not entirely true but I'll defer to someone who knows more about this than I do... @SoCalYid @Wolfbeatseagle @AnyoneElse
Almost the entire NBA except for some really new teams and like Boston, Suns (though they're sorta new) and Knicks has moved. Lakers and Warriors are from Minnesota and Philly. When I was a kid the Clippers and Kings were in San Diego and Kansas City. And that's just the California teams.
Well , i'm not very informed but that's what i've read And i've seen that some teams have moved cities 3-4 times , maybe it's a different culture but still , weird to me.
Yeah maybe very few was the wrong word choice. But recently there haven't been that many teams moving. OKC from Seattle is the only one that rings a bell atm.
Who are the Vancouver Grizzlies now? They've moved at least twice in the last 15-20 years. Nets moved one or two years ago. Kings are going to move soon, I think.
It's why I prefer promotion/relegation. Maybe the Rams would have stayed and I'd still watch the NFL.