It depends on how it would be funded, but there are many ways to do it without a public vote. The funding in Frisco was done without needing a public vote. I would bet on the local governmental authorities' being a bit more generous than that. Fourth largest city, but only the 10th or 11th largest market. Dallas-Ft. Worth is larger.
As you told us a few days ago, some of the funding came from a public vote. They just didn't know they were funding an MLS stadium at the time.
The vote was in 2000 for a bunch of FISD bonds, which included $17.5 million for a new football stadium for the district. That money wasn't spent until 2004, when FISD contributed $15 million for Pizza Hut Park. If you want to count that as a "public vote", then fine. But the city's $20 million contribution was made with only a city council vote and the county's $20 million contribution was made with only a commissioners court vote.
The vast majority of the bond funds voted on in that election were for the construction of new schools. At the time Frisco ISD was the fastest growing school district in the state and the city of Frisco was the 2nd fastest growing city in America. It was a no brainer....schools were badly needed. It was the largest bond issue in the history of the city and it passed with something like 70% approval. No one......and I mean no one....was quibbling over $20 million for a football stadium.
If it's a quote from aeg, you know it's a lie. You can tell they're lying because their mouths are open.
I guess my question boils down to this: How much red ink was the team bleeding a year? If it's down in the below-a-million-a-year range it seems that it would be fixable with competent management. * * * On the other hand, if a company like AEG is expecting to make huge returns on its investments (the way they've milked Regal, for instance), "breaking even" is really, in their world, losing big-time. A company that make a slender profit is a big loser to someone who expects returns in the area of 25-50% per year. Warren Buffett likes companies that are rock steady, and make about 10% a year. That's why he bought See's Candies years ago. I don't think Uncle Phil is a Warren Buffet style investor.
It was much, much more that the below-a-million-a-year range. It was only fixable with control of stadium revenues.
I don't know the truth. But.... I heard different. I heard that with the Adidas contract we would break even next season. Personally, I find that hard to believe. But it's just what I've heard.
No. That's not what I mean. I'm talking about the money that was due to teh teams from Adidas next season.
Bajoro, here's a couple of major items that your not taking into consideration for your items. 1. The teams do not keep 100% of the ticket revenue, a portion of each ticket goes to the League. This is because the Leauge pays the players. 2. The national sponsorship dollars go to the League, not the individual fanchise/team. 3. At the end of the year when they have determined the loss for that season (because as a league they aren't making money) based on their percentage of ownership in the league each owner chips in that amount to make up the losses (cash call). This is alos probably part of what they consider investment in the team. 4. Stadium expenses are a team expense and not a league one. So the teams need to meet their operating expenses from their portion of the ticket revenue and local sponsorthip. I would imagine that investment figure is everything that AEG has spent it's relationship / ownership with the San Jose franchise.
But the money doesn't go to the teams directly. The funds your referring to is going to pay for the reserve players, whose contracts are with the League and not with the individual teams/franchise. The way the league is set up you have to consider two different budgets/revenue/expenses; League and Franchise. All of the investors pay into the Legue bucket based on their % of ownership and they also have their local buget. So it's is possible for team to break even locally, but still end up losing money because of the overall losses of the league.
The KC Stadium feasability study from earlier this year had some financial info on page 17 (It's 32 on the PDF) http://www.kansascity.com/multimedia/kansascity/archive/sports/KC_Soccer_Final_Report.pdf MLS received 30% of the gate, the Investor/Operator 70%. All other sales (parking, concessions, etc.) went to the I/O. On the expense side, MLS pays the salary and that's it. I/O's pick up everything else, including rent, team operation, stadium operation and travel. So the fact that San Jose had a $1.7 Mil payroll (the bottom half of the league) while other AEG teams (save, surprisingly, the Metrostars) were above $2 Mil didn't help a potential I/O. There's no way the $20 Mil was all loss.