11/6/04: It takes a real man to give away an angel.

Cutting Costs and Increasing Revenue, what a simple idea! How come AEG never thought of that?!?

Cutting costs means cutting salaries, something that the underpaid MLS is trying to avoid. And increasing revenue is not easy when SJSU doesn't allow you to make any money on parking or conscessions, and your championship team averages only 10,000 fans throughout the summer.

Of course uncle Phil wants stadiums with concerts and other events in mind. Thats how you INCREASE revenue. And of course he wants his own new stadium, thats how you CUT costs. San Jose fans can be bitter and bash AEG, but if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have MLS. The only reason I feel bad for SSV is because they are such a great organization and such loyal fans. I go to Metro games and see attendances dwindle year after every disappointing year, while the league bends over for NJSEA... If the Harrison deal falls through, Metro need to move.

 

I've gotta agree. What a piss-poor article. Gotta love the tangent about WUSA. An excellent example of how NOT to write an essay.

But the thesis: that SJ doesn't need a new stadium.

The place is a dump. I'm sorry, but it is. If you give the Bay Area a nice venue, they'll respond. The status quo can't continue.

 

We averaged 13,000 a game this year. And by cutting costs I think the author meant to negotiate a better lease at Spartan - which probably isn't in the cards. But otherwise I agree with a lot of what you say...

 

Not the best article that I have ever read, but the right to speak is for all.

From what I understand, the lease arrangement w/ Spartan Shops is, and has been, one of the worst in the league, from MLS's perspective.

The article would have been a little better if the author proposed some ways of cutting costs. The fact is, it's not cheap to open up a stadium. If I'm Spartan shops I need to cover all my costs. I'm sure Spartan Shops has contracts with their unions that they must live up to. (grounds crew, vendors, security, ushers) I imagine that the Spartan Shops contract with the unions say that whenever the stadium is opened for an event, some agreed number of workers are guaranteed the right to work. And remember it's a 27,000 seat stadium. The unions are not gonna sit by and say "ok we'll tell 2/3 of our workers that there is no work for them b/c Spartan Shops leased to a tennant that regularly only fills 1/3 of the stadiums capacity.

Spartan Shops has their obligations and they shouldn't change the allocation of revenue merely b/c the tennant fails to bring adequate attendance. The burden to bring in attendance (and thus increase revenue)is on MLS and the Quakes not Spartan Shops.

I imagine if MLS was not a tennant at Spartan, the stadium would look to fill the 15-20 dates w/ other events. It could be a few friendlies w/ Mexican or other foreign club teams, a fireworks night, national team games, ect...Presumably, Spartan Shops did this for the decade and a half after the NASL left town and before MLS returned.

I have sympathy for the loyal Quake fans out there. They have put up with a lot over the last 9 years. With the current situation, however, the Quakes either have to come up with some radical new cost effective marketing strategy that puts 15-20K fans regualrly in the seats (so as to increase revenue and perhaps give them a better bargaining position w/ Spartan Shops) or; find a private investor who is willing to build a stadium on his own or; move the club and start from scratch in new city.

If I were a betting man, I would have to say unfortunately that 2005 will likely be the last year of MLS in San Jose.

 

Yes, and the Rapids did not need a new stadium either. They have a sweetheart deal with Invesco Field where they actually get a bit of the parking and other revenue. So why would they go to all the trouble to building their own place? The clueless author of this article will never figure it out, I'm afraid. And by the way, there's no governemnet money paying for the new Commerce City stadium. But the local municipality issued the bonds for it. This sort of deal can probably be worked out in Northern California too.

 

The guy who wrote that Spartan stadium article is just talking out of his ass!!!

he doesnt give any details any numbers nor crunch any numbers!!! We should just renigotiate the lease and lower costs. GEEEEE whiz idiot, dont you think they would have done it?? Maybe Spartan shops is willing to negotiate but it probably isnt enough otherwise they would do it. AEG needs a stadium in which they have complete control over and this article writer nor Spartan shops seesm to understand that.

Oh well, maybe they will get the hint when the team is in Houston in a couple of years!

 

If a government entity is issuing bonds, that most likely means they are guaranteeing them, too. (it could be that Kroenke guaranteed them - but I doubt it.) Which means that if the revenue projections given to cover the debt service are not met, the government has to pay for the difference. For the cash strapped local governments of California the risk that the revenue will not cover the bond repayment is too great to make building a stadium politically palpable. If the California local government issues bonds, as opposed to certificates of participation, the issuance has to be put to a public vote because it involves raising taxes to secure the bonds. 2/3 majority needed to pass. So it's not going to be easy to do it in California. But there are some options out here that might play out...

 

Wow, exciting news. ChivasUSA Not Ready To Concede Donovan Just Yet.