Quin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: It's also an owners who has cut players with no gain at all. He essentially cut John Danks a $10 million check when he cut him. He did it last year with Leury Garcia. JR and his ancestors stand to gain hundreds of millions of dollars here. This isn't something as simplistic as a baseball contract. This is investment that pays off for decades (maybe longer), not a baseball player which pays off for a period of less than a decade, at most. This is a man who has cut checks for investments all of his life. It is where he made his fortune to buy into the White Sox and Bulls. I know this is a typo, but I'm imagining 19th Century Reinsdorf looking down and being like "good job Jerry, good job." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Big difference between a chairman who doesn't want to pay players because of his antiquated ownership vs labor beliefs, and a chairman that stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars for his heirs in a massive stadium/real estate developement. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, Quin said: I know this is a typo, but I'm imagining 19th Century Reinsdorf looking down and being like "good job Jerry, good job." Meaning his kids, his kids/kids, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 7 minutes ago, Tnetennba said: The bump in franchise valuation alone just from moving downtown easily covers that. It would be a drop in the bucket. The bump in franchise value might actually pay for the entire stadium, potentially, though to be fair paper value is not cash in a bank account. But it does go to if you view paying off the old stadium as an investment in the new stadium, it is a no brainer. Again, also keep in mind that the ISFA is functioning as we speak, so every month that goes by means another payment gets made. The thought is that to get a stadium done for opening day 2030, you need 3 years of construction means that we have at least 3 more years of payments to make until someone needs to be paid to put a shovel into the ground for the first time. Also keep in mind that this scary $50 million number being thrown around also exists because of the remodels which have been done there over the years, and not simply because of original construction. There is a pretty fair chance that this payment structure is directly related to the expiration of the lease too. The ISFA probably took into consideration that there could be no stadium occupant after this lease was completed when they agreed to a payment schedule. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 29 minutes ago, LittleHurtCG said: Who is gonna cut that check for the remaining balance on GRF? I don't see Jerry lining up to do that. Also, the stadium would still exist in Bridgeport without a tenant and without revenue coming in. So the State of Illinois and/or City of Chicago would be part owners of the new stadium? Like I said, good luck with that. The private develepors are also going to be asking for $$ from the State and City. $$ that doesn't exist without new taxes or some sort. Jerry will. Jerry has private investors lined up and it's not going to cost the gov anything more than what they're paying now. 21 minutes ago, LittleHurtCG said: First I've heard about the Bears wanting to shift away from Arlington Heights. Didn't they already buy all the land in AH and do a bunch of renderings of what the new stadium and surrounding area would look like? Where would they go on the lakefront? Would they put a massive domed stadium right on the lake? They did basic renderings of how they could fill the land, but no actual stadium pictures. For all things Lorri did wrong, she did render some images of a new Soldier Field land. A domed stadium on the lake would be awesome to be honest, but it would cost crazy money to pull off. My thoughts is doing something similar to SoFi, but also have retractable windows to open it up to the lake during the summer time. You would be looking at a 5 billion dollar stadium, however, and that's without figuring out how to navigate "Friends of the Park" as well as the rest of the development (train station being a major one). In addition, one of the main reasons why the Bears wanted their own stadium is so they could generate their own revenue. They wanted a sportsbook. They wanted Bears land and they wanted control of it. You build anywhere near Soldier Field and FOTP is going to cancel 80% of your vision, hence why JR doesn't go through them. He's many bad things as an owner, the one thing he isn't is a bad business man. 11 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: It's also an owners who has cut players with no gain at all. He essentially cut John Danks a $10 million check when he cut him. He did it last year with Leury Garcia. JR and his ancestors stand to gain hundreds of millions of dollars here. This isn't something as simplistic as a baseball contract. This is investment that pays off for decades (maybe longer), not a baseball player which pays off for a period of less than a decade, at most. This is a man who has cut checks for investments all of his life. It is where he made his fortune to buy into the White Sox and Bulls. JR has been kind to people. He has not been a good owner. But he does have a soft spot. 9 minutes ago, Tnetennba said: The bump in franchise valuation alone just from moving downtown easily covers that. It would be a drop in the bucket. Bingo. In addition, the sale of the team with the new downtown stadium, along with owning the real estate and owning the stadium land with Stephen Ross will be enough. JR is going to gain tons of money from this. 50 million is a non-cited parking ticket for him. It doesn't even register for him. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 20 minutes ago, LittleHurtCG said: I mean this a owner who still hasn't given out a $100 million contract. Color me skeptical that he would write out that check for 50 million from his own pocket. Not to carry too much water for JR, but I do think this factoid of no $100M is partly just due to circumstances. Hahn seemed to be a true believer in conservative payroll management and I suspect someone else in charge could have convinced Jerry to go big on a contract somewhere along the line. And presumably he was willing to give someone like Machado over $200M (i.e., Sox didn't get him but I assume the offers were made in good faith and not just for the purpose of leaking out "we tried" afterwards). Sox have had fairly high payrolls in the very recent past. I've been frustrated with how the Sox never hit the accelerator when the window was open and no doubt Jerry could have opened up the pocketbook further, but I also think the guy he just fired was telling him the plan was good. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: Meaning his kids, his kids/kids, etc. I know what you were going for, but you meant descendants man 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 Just now, Quin said: I know what you were going for, but you meant descendants man Ah yes. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 A few things Anyone thinking the $50M is an issue needs to leave the conversation The government will fund infrastructure upgrades that they would for any development. This will be viewed as the taxpayers handing money to JR but they would be wrong. The White Sox and Bears are in a race for ISFA bond issuance Not seen in this message - who own Related Midwest ----- the Miami Dolphins----- who could position themself to buy all this up when JR visits his ancestors ---- Stephen Ross ---- as we learned in the movie JFK ---- follow the money The way JR runs his sports teams has zero correlation with this project. The yelling at the cloud crowd need to understand this. This was proven with the UC deal. The Metra schedule is not that conducive currently. I can walk to it but I still drive and park for free. Make the experience better (schedule wise) and I'm on the train. I also would drag my boat home from Michigan for a ride up the River. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptatc Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 55 minutes ago, Tnetennba said: I don't give a s%*# about the Bears personally, but I'm curious where on the lakefront this would be. I'm all for erasing the ugly spaceship from the Soldier Field colonnades, but a lake front location doesn't seem to solve their supposed issues. I believe it's where the very south parking lot and the old section of Mccormick place is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 https://chicago.suntimes.com/white-sox/2024/2/7/24065603/new-white-sox-ballpark-south-loop-renderings-guaranteed-rate-field-soccer-stadium https://soxmachine.com/2024/02/rendering-judgments-on-a-new-white-sox-ballpark-in-chicagos-the-78/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Honestly the renderings didn't blow me away. Location is very cool and love the backdrop, but the stadium itself is very vanilla, lacks any sort of personality. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSox2023 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 minutes ago, Tony said: Honestly the renderings didn't blow me away. Location is very cool and love the backdrop, but the stadium itself is very vanilla, lacks any sort of personality. Agreed. I was surprised there wasn’t more to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducksnort Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Tony said: Honestly the renderings didn't blow me away. Location is very cool and love the backdrop, but the stadium itself is very vanilla, lacks any sort of personality. On the inside, looks a lot like Comerica imo. Which is actually a very underrated ballpark. Not much to look at from the inside, but a great place to watch a game. Edited February 8 by ScootsMcGoots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleCoastBias Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 15 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said: A few things Anyone thinking the $50M is an issue needs to leave the conversation The government will fund infrastructure upgrades that they would for any development. This will be viewed as the taxpayers handing money to JR but they would be wrong. The White Sox and Bears are in a race for ISFA bond issuance Not seen in this message - who own Related Midwest ----- the Miami Dolphins----- who could position themself to buy all this up when JR visits his ancestors ---- Stephen Ross ---- as we learned in the movie JFK ---- follow the money The way JR runs his sports teams has zero correlation with this project. The yelling at the cloud crowd need to understand this. This was proven with the UC deal. The Metra schedule is not that conducive currently. I can walk to it but I still drive and park for free. Make the experience better (schedule wise) and I'm on the train. I also would drag my boat home from Michigan for a ride up the River. Can you expand on this Miami Dolphins ownership group thing? I'm entirely unfamiliar with them (aside from the allusions to the owner of Related Midwest being an international criminal). Are you suggesting that partners in this development deal may also be lining up for the possible team sale/purchase? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) I dont think the inside of the stadium pics are actual renderings. Edited February 8 by Buehrle>Wood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 16 minutes ago, ptatc said: I believe it's where the very south parking lot and the old section of Mccormick place is. Which sounds just as miserable to navigate as Soldier Field is currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiddleCoastBias Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 13 minutes ago, Tony said: Honestly the renderings didn't blow me away. Location is very cool and love the backdrop, but the stadium itself is very vanilla, lacks any sort of personality. I was on this same side until I saw that photo from inside the stadium. The three-tiered/stacked RF bleachers looks really cool. I'm still leery of what the pretty pictures may turn into once the pencils need to be sharpened, and fear that green space turns into characterless concrete, but I'll hold out hope. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 If you are someone who would require parking I recommend looking at how US Bank stadium (Vikings) handles parking. There is very little visible parking at the stadium, yet it has about 20k spots available in the near radius. That's for something with 73k capacity. What that should mean will be a) certainly any families with accessibility needs are likely still going to be able to have some parking under or close to stadium. B) many of the rest will be accommodated in mixtures of garages in the immediate area, though not all right next to the stadium. That's not a particularly dense area. 20k is certainly less than the capacity now, when you think about "well if you don't need a car I'm sure you don't care" is also that many of the people that are in between (like me) will probably choose public transit, lowering the amount of cars that need to be there. WHile there was public transportation prior (that I still mostly take when by myself), it also funneled everyone to two lines. North/South taken care of by Red. West/South by Green. Adding Red/Orange/Blue and Green will all be served within close walking distance. A 192 bus can run to Ogilvie/Union station. You had like the state street bus before. Just a lot more options. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 21 minutes ago, Tony said: Honestly the renderings didn't blow me away. Location is very cool and love the backdrop, but the stadium itself is very vanilla, lacks any sort of personality. I think the home plate and river front view was pretty snazzy, personally. I like that they had an upper deck in RF. But centerfield is kinda dumb to me. I'm not sure any stadium has really found a nice looking solution for the needs of that center field space. But also we all know it'd be a year before much of that view gets ads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurtCG Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Dick Allen said: They can draw these things up and make them as nice as they want to make them look, the problem is, they cost a ton of money. They are saying the 78 development has a $9 billion price tag. If they build the drawings, you could bet it would be a lot closer to double that. And how much would it cost to fix the stadium for the Fire? These are pipedreams unless some private fund rich person or persons step way up. You nailed it. These are all pipedreams until it is time for someone to pay up. When is the last time the city and state pulled off a 9 billion dollar private/public development? 1 hour ago, Tnetennba said: I don't give a s%*# about the Bears personally, but I'm curious where on the lakefront this would be. I'm all for erasing the ugly spaceship from the Soldier Field colonnades, but a lake front location doesn't seem to solve their supposed issues. Another lakefront stadium for the Bears seems like a pipedream and like you said doesn't solve many of their current issues. It sounds like the Bears are having issues with financing and will go wherever they can milk the most out of taxpayers. 58 minutes ago, Jake said: Not to carry too much water for JR, but I do think this factoid of no $100M is partly just due to circumstances. Hahn seemed to be a true believer in conservative payroll management and I suspect someone else in charge could have convinced Jerry to go big on a contract somewhere along the line. And presumably he was willing to give someone like Machado over $200M (i.e., Sox didn't get him but I assume the offers were made in good faith and not just for the purpose of leaking out "we tried" afterwards). Sox have had fairly high payrolls in the very recent past. I've been frustrated with how the Sox never hit the accelerator when the window was open and no doubt Jerry could have opened up the pocketbook further, but I also think the guy he just fired was telling him the plan was good. The Sox never had any intention of signing Machado or Harper. "The $$$ will be spent was all a sleight of hand by JR and company. 23 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said: A few things Anyone thinking the $50M is an issue needs to leave the conversation The government will fund infrastructure upgrades that they would for any development. This will be viewed as the taxpayers handing money to JR but they would be wrong. The White Sox and Bears are in a race for ISFA bond issuance Not seen in this message - who own Related Midwest ----- the Miami Dolphins----- who could position themself to buy all this up when JR visits his ancestors ---- Stephen Ross ---- as we learned in the movie JFK ---- follow the money The way JR runs his sports teams has zero correlation with this project. The yelling at the cloud crowd need to understand this. This was proven with the UC deal. The Metra schedule is not that conducive currently. I can walk to it but I still drive and park for free. Make the experience better (schedule wise) and I'm on the train. I also would drag my boat home from Michigan for a ride up the River. Why do the White Sox need bonds from the ISFA to build a new state of the art stadium? I thought Jerry had the financing all lined up and is ready to cut a billion dollar check? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Just gonna throw out there that investing in a large real estate development may not be the same thing to Jerry as signing labor to a large contract he thinks they will decline with. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tnetennba Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 19 minutes ago, bmags said: If you are someone who would require parking I recommend looking at how US Bank stadium (Vikings) handles parking. There is very little visible parking at the stadium, yet it has about 20k spots available in the near radius. That's for something with 73k capacity. What that should mean will be a) certainly any families with accessibility needs are likely still going to be able to have some parking under or close to stadium. B) many of the rest will be accommodated in mixtures of garages in the immediate area, though not all right next to the stadium. That's not a particularly dense area. 20k is certainly less than the capacity now, when you think about "well if you don't need a car I'm sure you don't care" is also that many of the people that are in between (like me) will probably choose public transit, lowering the amount of cars that need to be there. WHile there was public transportation prior (that I still mostly take when by myself), it also funneled everyone to two lines. North/South taken care of by Red. West/South by Green. Adding Red/Orange/Blue and Green will all be served within close walking distance. A 192 bus can run to Ogilvie/Union station. You had like the state street bus before. Just a lot more options. This is what I and others have been trying to get at. There won't be a lack of parking in the vicinity, just not acres of parking directly at the ballpark like at GRF. I have no doubt that parking needs will be accommodated by pre-existing lots and garages nearby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 44 minutes ago, MiddleCoastBias said: I was on this same side until I saw that photo from inside the stadium. The three-tiered/stacked RF bleachers looks really cool. I'm still leery of what the pretty pictures may turn into once the pencils need to be sharpened, and fear that green space turns into characterless concrete, but I'll hold out hope. My dad said that they reminded him of old Comiskey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 48 minutes ago, bmags said: If you are someone who would require parking I recommend looking at how US Bank stadium (Vikings) handles parking. There is very little visible parking at the stadium, yet it has about 20k spots available in the near radius. That's for something with 73k capacity. What that should mean will be a) certainly any families with accessibility needs are likely still going to be able to have some parking under or close to stadium. B) many of the rest will be accommodated in mixtures of garages in the immediate area, though not all right next to the stadium. That's not a particularly dense area. 20k is certainly less than the capacity now, when you think about "well if you don't need a car I'm sure you don't care" is also that many of the people that are in between (like me) will probably choose public transit, lowering the amount of cars that need to be there. WHile there was public transportation prior (that I still mostly take when by myself), it also funneled everyone to two lines. North/South taken care of by Red. West/South by Green. Adding Red/Orange/Blue and Green will all be served within close walking distance. A 192 bus can run to Ogilvie/Union station. You had like the state street bus before. Just a lot more options. If they are able to pull it all off, there certainly will be plenty of options. I just hope it’s consistent and runs smoothly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.