New stadium in LA

[Panamamike]

Neither do I. There are some hardcore Aztec football fans who believe the city will just give them the stadium and then they can renovate it. As for funding you see a lot of crazy ideas of using money raised by SDSU for other things, such as academics. I don't see that happening. You'll see a lot of these fans salivating at the thought of the Chargers leaving, thinking that SDSU will benefit from that (many blame the Chargers for the lack of success of the football program).

How are the Chargers to blame for their lack of success in football?

[Den60]

And bowl games. The city and county would easily build a $200-300m stadium. That's not a problem at all.

And just to go through point by point.
2&3. 40-45k and 20-30k are not that different, and the MSL team in Seattle plays in the same stadium as the Seahawks. The differences in stadium size are not that far off, and there are definite exceptions to your rule.
4. Monster truck gigs are for people who live in Lakeside. So it's more like a three hour drive. (I keed, I keed!)

5. Yeah well there's worse things to be than a city that doesn't subsidize a multi-billion dollar industry whose employees make salaries above $2m/year.

Let's do math on 35k seat $300 million stadium.
Aztecs: 7 games a year
Bowl Games: 2 games a year
Monster truck/concerts: 10 events a year
MLS: 10 events a year
Total: 30 events a year (close enough) - 30 events * 35k fans = 1 million fans/year * 20 years = 20 million fans.
20 million fans * $15/ticket surcharge/fan = $300 million. Done.

SDSU purchases land for $200 mil for University Extension/Student Housing (the trolley goes directly from stadium to campus btw), and now we're down to $5/ticket.

Piece of Pie.

Why would the city build a stadium for a state-owned institution? Yes, no stadium means no bowl games. As for the other events you mention you have Petco.

Currently, when asking for a new franchise the league wants dedicated soccer stadiums, not football stadiums used for soccer. There would be some considerations given to large markets. Atlanta's team will play in the new football stadium but Atlanta is the 8th largest television market. They will also have partitions to wall off the upper section creating a 30K soccer stadium. Seattle is 14. San Diego is 28. Expansion is already pending for Minnesota (15), Atlanta (8), Los Angeles (2) and Miami (16). Of those four, only Atlanta will play in a stadium not dedicated for soccer.

Seattle averages 44K fans, which is nearly double the next closest franchise in attendance.

[KNSD]

Because building a stadium for SDSU (+ other events) would be affordable and not break the bank.

Also, not sure TV market has anything to do with attendance to MLS soccer games. The population of San Diego County is greater than the population of King County, and the population of San Diego City is greater than the population of Seattle. So whatever man.

Bottom line: The political will from the city and county to bend over and take it in the ass for the Chargers is not there. The only real issue is whether the Chargers will settle for a reasonable stadium in San Diego, or if they'll build a stadium in a toxic waste dump in Carson, CA.

We shall see.

[richpjr]

Because building a stadium for SDSU (+ other events) would be affordable and not break the bank.

Also, not sure TV market has anything to do with attendance to MLS soccer games. The population of San Diego County is greater than the population of King County, and the population of San Diego City is greater than the population of Seattle. So whatever man.

Bottom line: The political will from the city and county to bend over and take it in the ass for the Chargers is not there. The only real issue is whether the Chargers will settle for a reasonable stadium in San Diego, or if they'll build a stadium in a toxic waste dump in Carson, CA.

We shall see.

The city doesn't even have 300 million so I'm not sure how affordable it is. And outright giving the stadium to SDSU is a pipe dream - no one in their right mind gives away a billion dollar parcel of land just 'cause.

[sandiego17]

And bowl games. The city and county would easily build a $200-300m stadium. That's not a problem at all.

And just to go through point by point.
2&3. 40-45k and 20-30k are not that different, and the MSL team in Seattle plays in the same stadium as the Seahawks. The differences in stadium size are not that far off, and there are definite exceptions to your rule.
4. Monster truck gigs are for people who live in Lakeside. So it's more like a three hour drive. (I keed, I keed!)

5. Yeah well there's worse things to be than a city that doesn't subsidize a multi-billion dollar industry whose employees make salaries above $2m/year.

Let's do math on 35k seat $300 million stadium.
Aztecs: 7 games a year
Bowl Games: 2 games a year
Monster truck/concerts: 10 events a year
MLS: 10 events a year
Total: 30 events a year (close enough) - 30 events * 35k fans = 1 million fans/year * 20 years = 20 million fans.
20 million fans * $15/ticket surcharge/fan = $300 million. Done.

SDSU purchases land for $200 mil for University Extension/Student Housing (the trolley goes directly from stadium to campus btw), and now we're down to $5/ticket.

Piece of Pie.

Why would the city need a second stadium in that "35K" size? All those non-football events could just be held at PETCO, couldn't they?

MLS isn't coming to San Diego anytime soon, the city is possibly losing a team in the most popular league in the US, not adding a team in the fifth most popular league. The MLS folded and rebranded a second LA team rather than consider San Diego.

[TTK]

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/apr/29/nick-canepa-stadium-carson

Follow the money, it leads to Carson

[Panamamike]

Why would the city need a second stadium in that "35K" size? All those non-football events could just be held at PETCO, couldn't they?

MLS isn't coming to San Diego anytime soon, the city is possibly losing a team in the most popular league in the US, not adding a team in the fifth most popular league. The MLS folded and rebranded a second LA team rather than consider San Diego.

Exactly. Biuild a 300 MM stadium that would compete against an existing facility for a limited amount of engagements that they are relying on as major source of their revenue. Doesn't sound like a solid plan to me....but maybe there is a much bigger market for events than I envision.

[Stinky Wizzleteats+]

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/...stadium-carson

Follow the money, it leads to Carson

By Nick Canepa April 29, 2015

If they ever dig a hole for a new downtown multi-purpose stadium/convention center annex, it will have to be deep enough to bury the whole thing. Because the best site, the East Village, where it would be the ideal fit, is dead. Even worse, the idea of it is dead.

We may as well prepare a funeral march for it all. As we’ll get to in a moment, the proposed Qualcomm Stadium site, preferred by Mayor Kevin Faulconer and his task force, appears to have one foot on an oil slick and the other on a banana peel up the 405 freeway.

A lot has to do not with a hole in the ground, but the opposite, a mountain of dirt. And we’ll get to that.

“Too much time has gone by to revisit it now,” says Mark Fabiani, the Chargers’ stadium point man, of a downtown site. “We made a proposal in 2011 and the city rejected it. We made a proposal in 2013 and the city and coastal commission rejected it. We even made one in 2015.

“It’s really hard to see how to revive it, it’s been rejected so much. I guess anything’s possible.”

Too much politicking going on downtown. The hoteliers don’t want it there, for reasons that may forever be unexplained, and that’s just about that. Never mind Petco worked in spades and may have saved the city from fiscal ruin. Never mind that JMI, which built Petco and remains the only entity around here that knows how to get a stadium done, prefers downtown and has a great plan.

As we’re sitting here, on April 29, as stupid and ridiculous the whole Carson deal seems to be -- the Spanos family may find out the hard way L.A. wants nothing to do with the Chargers, but that’s its problem -- the San Diego thing appears doomed.

There have been no positives. A war of words between Fabiani and the task force will be won by … his boss, Dean Spanos. Because he has the big weapon. The team.

Now, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wants all L.A. stadium material from the Chargers, Rams and Raiders -- and that also means from the cities trying to keep them -- on the table by the end of the year, not next March, as originally believed. He wants the process accelerated, and Faulconer’s stadium committee -- perhaps dealt a mortal wound when told by the NFL that development used to pay for the new Mission Valley project will give The League no (immediate) satisfaction -- will run out of clock.

The downtown idea was a stone that could have killed two birds -- a multi-purpose sports venue and a sorely needed convention center addition. No dice.

Meanwhile, the city and county each have put in $250,000 for stadium experts and attorneys to work with City Attorney Jan Goldsmith (who could be the savior here) on the project. But it has been aboard what appears to be a sinking ship for nearly two weeks on and has yet to meet with the task force crew.

“It’s going to happen real soon,” promises committee member Jim Steeg, whose group has until May 20 to find a financial plan.

Now, back to the Qualcomm site. Problem. To build a new stadium on it, enough fill dirt - along with about five lakes worth of water -- must be brought in to raise the 166 acres to level with Friars Road. Think. How many trucks of dirt would it take and how long? And more than likely most of the fill would have to come from somewhere else.

It’s been estimated that it could cost up to $500 million. Deal breaker.

“That’s one of the tough issues we have to get done,” says Steeg, who denies rumors he’s leaving the task force. “It’s about a 40-foot drop to the river.”

The Chargers investigated that 10 years ago when they wanted to build on the Qualcomm site and pay for everything but the land. They were rejected.

“If they can’t get the fill locally and have to get it from other areas,” says Fabiani, who had an engineer research the necessary fill way back when, “it will be enormously expensive.”

Follow the money. It leads to Carson, where there isn’t any.

That much fill dirt creates a subduction zone, put a Stadium on top and you have an earthquake disaster waiting to happen.

[Panamamike]

"Too much politicking going on downtown. The hoteliers don’t want it there, for reasons that may forever be unexplained, and that’s just about that. Never mind Petco worked in spades and may have saved the city from fiscal ruin. Never mind that JMI, which built Petco and remains the only entity around here that knows how to get a stadium done, prefers downtown and has a great plan."

This to me is the biggest reason why the Chargers will be moving. My question is why do they need the hoteliers approval? do they own the land? I have never understood that as a necessity. I mean it would be good if they were on board, but how is it a deal breaker?

[UtahBolt]

Not sure why the hoteliers approval is so coveted. That said, why would they not give their approval? It makes no freaking sense that they would be against this as it seems a downtown stadium could only be a positive influence on occupancy rates all over the downtown area? What are we missing here?

[6025]

Doug Manchester is what we are missing here. He is the Lord and Master of the hoteliers. And of the city council too.

[TTK]

"Too much politicking going on downtown. The hoteliers don’t want it there, for reasons that may forever be unexplained, and that’s just about that. Never mind Petco worked in spades and may have saved the city from fiscal ruin. Never mind that JMI, which built Petco and remains the only entity around here that knows how to get a stadium done, prefers downtown and has a great plan."

This to me is the biggest reason why the Chargers will be moving. My question is why do they need the hoteliers approval? do they own the land? I have never understood that as a necessity. I mean it would be good if they were on board, but how is it a deal breaker?

I don't understand the whole hotelier dynamic but as far as downtown goes, wasn't the Chargers last proposal the non-contiguous stadium/convention center expansion combined with the TOT? That thing will never fly for a million reasons, even with the hoteliers on board.