We've all heard that the atmosphere, the stadium, and the attendence are all inferior to that of soldier field. BUT, the bottom line is the bottom line. With the fire paying out the nose for rent for soldier field and getting no concessions and no merchandising money at soldier field, the REAL question is whether or not naperville is better money-wise. What kind of rent do they pay? Do they get a percentage of concessions? The reason I ask is not because I want to see the fire stayin naperville, god knows I hate watching games from there on tv. My reason for asking is will the fire organization be able to use staying at naperville as a gambling chip in negotiations for soldier field when they come back. Could they say, "listen we're losing a lot less money out there in soldier field, and we know you need our dates for your newly renovated place. Either you cut the rent and give us a cut of merchandise and concessions or we stay in naperville." what do you guys think?