New stadium in LA

[Den60]

Without having read the contract, can't be sure. Could they claim they lost revenue because they couldn't raise prices due to the fact that the city didn't properly maintain the facility? Or that they paid for some maintenance the city was responsible for? Most likely, the maintenance thing is just another way to say that the stadium is inadequate and they need a new home. I do think they would most likely pay the exit fee if they were to leave, to avoid bad PR and lawsuits (and of course, the next few years of rent).

That was from an article in the Voice of San Diego: http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topic...-stadium-saga/

[Den60]

So why the double-standard. No vote necessary in LA, but it's a requirement of the team in SD?

No public money for either the Carson or Inglewood stadiums. At least not upfront.

[Wheels]

No public money for either the Carson or Inglewood stadiums. At least not upfront.

ok yeah, that makes sense. Forgot about that aspect.

[Den60]

Please include all long division in your equation.

funny-math-equations-1qnx2a7e.gif

[TTK]

One thing I don't see or hear discussed very much if at all (sorry if I missed it): If Spanos can't afford to build his own stadium, how the hell is he going to pay the $500M or $1B relocation fee?

Fabiani dodges that question like Neo in the Matrix every time he's asked about it.

[TTK]

You know, the argument that the Chargers won't draw in LA is kind of funny, because they don't really draw well in San Diego. Blackout threats and a stadium half full of opposing fans doesn't exactly speak well for a large dedicated fan base here. As Wheels states, if they win, they will draw fans no matter where they play. All over SoCal it's pretty evident that if you don't win you don't usually draw.

Oh come on. The games are typically very close to sell outs and we all know which seats don't sell, the obstructed view seats. And a brand new shiny stadium, even with higher ticket prices, would have more Charger fans more interested in coming out. Tailgating aside, the game day experience at the Q is terrible.

If the Chargers and the Rams both played in SD, which game are you going to go to? And no one is going to choose the Chargers over the Rams in LA. Their fan base is here. It's non-existent in LA.

[sandiego17]

One thing I don't see or hear discussed very much if at all (sorry if I missed it): If Spanos can't afford to build his own stadium, how the hell is he going to pay the $500M or $1B relocation fee?

$1B? Only place I've seen that is Canepa's pipe dream article of the NFL compensating cities for losing teams, he might has well have asked for a gazillion. I think the relocation fee for the Chargers would settle at ~250MM and they would most like finance that, just like they're financing everything else through GS. Hopefully the NFL charges Kroenke more (no claim to the market) and they compensate the Chargers with those funds, with the Bolts staying home.

[richpjr]

Oh come on. The games are typically very close to sell outs and we all know which seats don't sell, the obstructed view seats. And a brand new shiny stadium, even with higher ticket prices, would have more Charger fans more interested in coming out. Tailgating aside, the game day experience at the Q is terrible.

If the Chargers and the Rams both played in SD, which game are you going to go to? And no one is going to choose the Chargers over the Rams in LA. Their fan base is here. It's non-existent in LA.

Very close to sold out is kind of being generous the past 5 or so years. Many of the "sold out" games are not even close to sell outs, with many thousands of empty seats. And with that, how many games have we bitched about the stadium being half full of the opposing team's fans?

I'm not in any way arguing that the Chargers will be a bigger draw in LA than the Rams. I do think that LA is a fickle band wagon town and if the team did win, they likely would draw.

[Mister Hoarse]

Game not over, but Bolts set to score in LA
By Kevin Acee
9 A.M. APRIL 21, 2015

We’ve talked a lot about the stadium game here being in the waning minutes of the fourth quarter, with San Diego playing from well behind.

Simultaneously, the Chargers have been playing catch-up in a similar contest in Los Angeles. The team’s underdog status there has given San Diego some sense of reprieve.

Well, that game in L.A. may be about to draw essentially even. The Chargers might yet be great longshots to prevail, but their remaining competitive and even gaining steam is significant (and troubling for San Diego).

As Chargers coaches and players began the offseason workout portion of their next/last season in San Diego on Monday, the team sat at the threshold of a week in which it will take the next step in the bigger game in which it is involved.

Tuesday night, the Carson City Council could make it a tie ballgame in L.A.

The council, which has to this point shown unequivocal support for the stadium proposal in that city by the Chargers and Oakland Raiders, has the choice of either approving the plan for a public vote or simply approving it without a public vote.

Should Carson follow the path of the Inglewood City Council, which last month voted to bypass a public vote, the Chargers would be able to say Wednesday in New York in front of the Committee on Los Angeles Opportunities that their project is entitled, same as Stan Kroenke’s Inglewood development.

Kroenke’s group would still have the ball driving for another score, in that it has had a month to plan for the next steps.

It is also possible that if the Carson council green lights the proposal there would be legal or political opposition. However, the NFL has been assured by Carson officials that no significant objectors have surfaced yet.

Fact is, entitlement would be yet another indication the Chargers could be closing in on victory in Los Angeles – whatever form that takes.

That there are people intimately involved in the San Diego stadium push that still suspect Carson is a leverage play speaks to the distrust that permeates and pollutes the efforts here. It also might indicate an acute case of denial.

Some in San Diego are even banking on the Chargers bluffing.

That’s pretty big gamble.

The Chargers have spent a lot of money – almost certainly millions, taking into account legal fees and the signature-gathering campaign – in Carson. They will present to a committee of owners in New York further financing updates and more detailed stadium renderings on Wednesday.

Kroenke’s group will do the same. And we could find out the Rams’ owner is ready to pull permits and is weeks from tractors moving dirt. Many in the NFL believe the Rams and another team will end up sharing the stadium in Inglewood.

Regardless, the point is that the process in Los Angeles is progressing rapidly.

And how it is doing so – with the teams pushing citizens’ initiatives for friendly city councils to consider – points out one of the disadvantages San Diego faces in its comeback effort.

Only in the most optimistic view can it be fathomed such cohesion resulting in a ballot measure in San Diego in time to beat the NFL’s vote on relocation.

Considering the timeline that will commence on May 21, the day after the Citizens Stadium Advisory Group submits it financing plan to Mayor Kevin Faulconer, political operators agree the earliest the San Diego City Council could consider a referendum would be October. That would mean the earliest a special election could be held would be November. The absolute earliest. December is more likely.

The NFL is expected to vote on relocation in November, though NFL relocation and retention point man Eric Grubman did not rule out a short delay to accommodate a public vote.

Now, the above assumes the Chargers become the willing partner in San Diego they have not been so far. It would have to be the team that initiates and bankrolls the citizens’ initiative and signature-gathering campaign.

It remains to be seen if that will happen.

Whatever may or may not occur here, we know what’s happening in L.A. well before that.

I think Acee actually nailed it for once.

[TTK]

The Chargers still don't own the land in Carson. Didn't Fabiani say the sale would complete at the end of March? Now he is saying it's the end of April. Guess what he'll say next month?

[richpjr]

The Chargers still don't own the land in Carson. Didn't Fabiani say the sale would complete at the end of March? Now he is saying it's the end of April. Guess what he'll say next month?

We finished the purchase of the lot in Carson?

[Wheels]

I think Acee actually nailed it for once.

I thought you were convinced Carson is a bluff.