This place is a dump

[SDFan]

Lol! :d :d

There's that bug...again. Mods, please fix! Software not allowing for uppercase, in some instances. Now...back to what I was trying to say:

LOL!

Upper case works for me LOL

[Wheels]

Why would they feel like they got played? They've got one of the finest venues for watching a ballgame in the US. The area around the downtown is booming on game nights. The businesses down there love that Petco is at their back doors. The citizens weren't directly taxed, the bonds were raised through hotel taxes. The increased revenues from the park and hotels and restaurant/bar businesses increase city taxes. The increased property values in the area raise the taxes gained from property taxes.

If the people are pissed because the Padres don't spend as much money on FAs as they think they should, then that's a separate issue. The fact is, the stadium has done a lot of good for the area.

A couple more facts: The stadium would have been built a lot more cheaply if Hendersen and Aguirre weren't such dickheads and caused major delays in construction. The Padres paid over 130 million to help build the stadium. The Padres have the stadium for 35 years, and then ownership of the stadium goes to the city.

I'd say the deal was a win/win, and that's why I think a stadium downtown would be a further boon for the economy and the city, if it's done right, like Petco.

I can tell you it's entirely based on the lack of spending. There was what appeared to be a mutual agreement that the team would raise it's payroll investment to respectable levels once they were given this extra revenue stream from the new park. That lasted about 2 seasons, and then it got cut big time. I don't care what the extraneous circumstances were, it was a broken promise. The billionaire got his, and then turtled up because of a pending divorce. I don't give the Padres a dime these days. The cutting of the payroll was a stab in the back.

[QSmokey]

Upper case works for me LOL

Yeah, it doesn't happen all the time. Check out my post, above. The first line - despite re-typing it a few times - got transformed to mixed case. Actually, only the 1st letter of the first word was allowed to be upper case. Once I started my 'complaint' sentence, true mixed case returned.

This could be a tough little bug to find.

[lightningrod13]

there's NO Farmer's Field in SD, or LA for that matter either.

Correction: I meant to say "Farmer's Field" in downtown Los Angeles(as was proposed),typo on my part.

[lightningrod13]

The stadium is embarrassing and completely substandard in all respects. The only thing in a worse state would be your local politics. Seriously, how the hell do those clowns keep getting elected there? 4 mayors in 5 years. Wow. Why not just hold a lottery every week for the title "mayor for a week". It would probably be an improvement; hard to imagne it could be worse. For sure there would be a better chance of getting a stadium deal done.

I could care less about the politics/economics surrounding the stadium and the logic of it.If this team Bolts for LA,I'm done with them,I'll no longer recognize this team.
To me,they'll always be the San Diego Chargers and nothing else.I will not support NFL in LA.

[lightningrod13]

...gentlemen-the end game is nearer than most of us want to realize.

Yes; the Chargers are a San Diego fixture/institution/asset; choose your own descriptor.

But-at their core, they are a business and the Spanos' are business people who own the business known as the San Diego Chargers.

This mess has been going on for a decade. I've stopped flying across the country to see 'em in Qualcomm; I'll go to newer, more accessible
venues closer to my home; endure bad weather and sitting among folks who support our opponent. Gonna do it twice this year.

Some future AM, San Diegans may awaken to the news the Chargers are headed out-of-town. For good. There'll be no retaining
the name, colors, or logo; these aren't the Browns. The new locale doesn't have to be Los Angeles-though it may be.

Trust me-I love coming to San Diego, and I don't like the way this is playing out.

There's other teams to root for then,if that happens.I won't support the Pro Los Angeles market,and hope that their quest for an NFL team fails.

[QSmokey]

I could care less about the politics/economics surrounding the stadium and the logic of it.

But that is the reality. I completely understand your feelings and would not root for a non-San Diego team, either. But the situation is complicated. Unfortunately, money AND politics are at play here. Bad combo.

[sandiego17]

I've got some pumice infused mechanic's soap if you don't wanna wait.

Not for this thread.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Detroit residents might have something to say about where the most dysfunctional city government is.

Detroit's major problem is not city government, it is the sudden and dramatic decline of the only industry in a one-industry town. When it comes to leadership and mismanagement, San Diego's is at or near the top. The city has been plagued by scandal after scandal for many years. And the intransigents (of which you appear to be one), have prevented the city from moving forward in a progressive manner. Examples abound.

That family legally robbed the city with the ticket guarantee - the same guarantee given by that same dysfunctional group of politicians that Trotter spent a couple paragraphs discussing.

I've said many time, blame is misplaced on the Spanoses for that. If you think it was a bad deal, then blame the city government. What business wouldn't take that deal?

Bull. His family's money means a lot more than what San Diego Chargers fans think of the Spanoses.

Assertion.

What's happened locally? Maybe Spanos really thinks the bad economy has been limited to San Diego.

I don't believe the point was limited to the economy. I believe it's related to dysfunctional and distracted city government that's unable to get things done, and a large contingent of retrograde Aguirres who seem to want to stand in the way of progress.


[QUOTE]Okay. The only legitimate argument so far for building a new stadium. But won't the city eventually have the same or more annual costs to maintain a new stadium?[/QUOTES]

Perhaps. Perhaps eventually. But financial cash-flow analysis is key. If you can generate revenue today and forestall payments for another 20, 30 or 40 years then that's a good thing.

Maybe that's because the Chargers have sucked as a franchise? Who are the other teams at the bottom? I'm guessing they aren't a bunch of winners.

Bottom 16 in terms of revenue: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/30/...Revenue_2.html

Only 4 of them have new stadiums in the last 10 years and two of the franchises share one (New York). Indy and Arizona are the others. The Chargers haven't "sucked" as a franchise over the last decade. Several of the teams on this list have made/won Super Bowls, been contenders, etc in recent years.

Here's the top 16: http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/30/...s_Revenue.html

Each of the top 5 have stadiums built in the last decade or so. And most of the top 16 have either a new crib or a major re-design.

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

People voted for Petco Park, and feel like they got played in the process....which is why nobody wants to do it again.

Petco got built but there was huge opposition even after it was green-lighted, which had nothing to do with feeling like they "got played."

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

Why would they feel like they got played? They've got one of the finest venues for watching a ballgame in the US. The area around the downtown is booming on game nights. The businesses down there love that Petco is at their back doors. The citizens weren't directly taxed, the bonds were raised through hotel taxes. The increased revenues from the park and hotels and restaurant/bar businesses increase city taxes. The increased property values in the area raise the taxes gained from property taxes.

If the people are pissed because the Padres don't spend as much money on FAs as they think they should, then that's a separate issue. The fact is, the stadium has done a lot of good for the area.

A couple more facts: The stadium would have been built a lot more cheaply if Hendersen and Aguirre weren't such dickheads and caused major delays in construction. The Padres paid over 130 million to help build the stadium. The Padres have the stadium for 35 years, and then ownership of the stadium goes to the city.

I'd say the deal was a win/win, and that's why I think a stadium downtown would be a further boon for the economy and the city, if it's done right, like Petco.

Bingo

[ArtistFormerlyKnownAsBKR]

I can tell you it's entirely based on the lack of spending. There was what appeared to be a mutual agreement that the team would raise it's payroll investment to respectable levels once they were given this extra revenue stream from the new park. That lasted about 2 seasons, and then it got cut big time. I don't care what the extraneous circumstances were, it was a broken promise. The billionaire got his, and then turtled up because of a pending divorce. I don't give the Padres a dime these days. The cutting of the payroll was a stab in the back.

I get it, and I share your feelings but the city has benefited significantly even if the Padres' lineup hasn't. At worst, it's a push.