LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 04:33 PM) Which will change a lot in 15 years. Odds aren't very good that the team will get any help from the State of Illinois on a new stadium next time around. If Las Vegas throws a billion dollar package at them, while Illinois offers squat, does it change ownerships minds? It is hard to predict the future. i don't care how loyal any owner is, a huge money offer from some city will be hard to turn down. damn, i think i will quit baseball if i had to cheer on the northsiders. that will be like living in purgatory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 i don't care how loyal any owner is, a huge money offer from some city will be hard to turn down. damn, i think i will quit baseball if i had to cheer on the northsiders. that will be like living in purgatory. I don't think there are many, if any, cities that are actively trying to get MLB teams. If there were, Tampa wouldn't still be in Tampa. The only real threat to the Sox leaving Illinois is NW Indiana deciding to build a stadium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:50 AM) I don't think there are many, if any, cities that are actively trying to get MLB teams. If there were, Tampa wouldn't still be in Tampa. The only real threat to the Sox leaving Illinois is NW Indiana deciding to build a stadium. There weren't cities trying to do so for the last 5 years because the nation's economy nearly collapsed. If the lease comes up in one of the periods in-between major economic collapses where cities are feeling able to spend money, that'd be a different story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 04:58 PM) There weren't cities trying to do so for the last 5 years because the nation's economy nearly collapsed. If the lease comes up in one of the periods in-between major economic collapses where cities are feeling able to spend money, that'd be a different story. 2 excellent posts and thinking outside the box. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 04:50 PM) I don't think there are many, if any, cities that are actively trying to get MLB teams. If there were, Tampa wouldn't still be in Tampa. The only real threat to the Sox leaving Illinois is NW Indiana deciding to build a stadium. that was why when i mention about the possible cities who may be interested in a sports presence by have a sports team last month, i was referring to cities or states. the only site i really see who could foot the bill is Vegas. i still think Chicago can but in the western subs or nw subs. but JR group are smart, really smart business people, he will not want to come up with any front money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3GamesToLove Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:39 AM) i don't care how loyal any owner is, a huge money offer from some city will be hard to turn down. damn, i think i will quit baseball if i had to cheer on the northsiders. that will be like living in purgatory. Eh, cheer for the Brewers instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (OsweGo-Go Sox @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 05:09 PM) Eh, cheer for the Brewers instead. ummm nice thought, also the cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 2 excellent posts and thinking outside the box. that was why when i mention about the possible cities who may be interested in a sports presence by have a sports team last month, i was referring to cities or states. the only site i really see who could foot the bill is Vegas. i still think Chicago can but in the western subs or nw subs. but JR group are smart, really smart business people, he will not want to come up with any front money. Vegas is going to have a hard time supporting a pro sports team, with the possible exception of NBA. Too many other entertainment options to compete with. Do I want to go watch a baseball game or go see a dozen showgirls' titties for a couple hours??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (LDF @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 09:00 AM) i agree but will add, in the current economic conditions in the nation, any sports team may not move, unless economical force too. the time of the city, state financing a sport building / venue will be hard to justify. Leaving Chicago means they lose at least 100 million a year in tv money. And that number will explode after 2019. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 11:41 AM) Leaving Chicago means they lose at least 100 million a year in tv money. And that number will explode after 2019. They already own their own network. How much more room is there to go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 06:41 PM) Leaving Chicago means they lose at least 100 million a year in tv money. And that number will explode after 2019. another great post, the corp money they will also loose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 11:57 AM) They already own their own network. How much more room is there to go? They are getting $50 or so million a year in local tv money. That is currently below the padres and Astros(both who recorded new deals recently). That nber can conservatively rise to $150 million or more if everything works out. They are NOT guaranteed that much in Portland, Vegas, or any other small market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 12:05 PM) They are getting $50 or so million a year in local tv money. That is currently below the padres and Astros(both who recorded new deals recently). That nber can conservatively rise to $150 million or more if everything works out. They are NOT guaranteed that much in Portland, Vegas, or any other small market. From where? Themselves? They already own the station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 07:05 PM) They are getting $50 or so million a year in local tv money. That is currently below the padres and Astros(both who recorded new deals recently). That nber can conservatively rise to $150 million or more if everything works out. They are NOT guaranteed that much in Portland, Vegas, or any other small market. if the deal with the new area will subsidize that. who knows what the money will be like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 From where? Themselves? They already own the station. Well, they own the station jointly. The station pays the teams rights fees directly, but the station itself is still making a profit, and 20% of the station's profit also goes to the team. So as advertising revenue goes up, more money goes to the team in some combination of direct rights fees or station profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 07:11 PM) From where? Themselves? They already own the station. excatly, they will get a contract based on the business, what ever the company name is for the sox. then it is a separate lease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 12:16 PM) Well, they own the station jointly. The station pays the teams rights fees directly, but the station itself is still making a profit, and 20% of the station's profit also goes to the team. So as advertising revenue goes up, more money goes to the team in some combination of direct rights fees or station profit. It will be squeezing one side to give to the other. So if the broadcast rights fees go up, that means their profits and equity at the station go down. It is a zero sum game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 07:20 PM) It will be squeezing one side to give to the other. So if the broadcast rights fees go up, that means their profits and equity at the station go down. It is a zero sum game. not in a sense, they will have exclusive rights as oppose to competitive rights from other sports teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 12:11 PM) From where? Themselves? They already own the station. They own PART of csn Chicago. And they get paid from subscriber fees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewokpelts Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 12:20 PM) It will be squeezing one side to give to the other. So if the broadcast rights fees go up, that means their profits and equity at the station go down. It is a zero sum game. That's not how it works at all. Subscriber fees and advertising are the revenue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 1) If they would of built the Cell at Roosevelt and Clark, we wouldn't be talking about building a new stadium for the White Sox. The City of Chicago wanted to build the stadium in the South Loop. JR wanted to move to Addison/Dupage County. When Addison didn't work out, they wound up at its present location. The City of Chicago withdrew the South Loop offer and the white Sox got stuck building a stadium where it should not of been built. A terrible move for the White Sox. 2) Anybody who thinks the government won't build another stadium for the White Sox is wrong. As long as there is money to be made, a new stadium is a possibility. Keep in mind the City is building a new arena for Depaul, who nobody cares about. Mayor Daley was going to build an Olympic Stadium for the Olympics which would of cost upwards of $300 million dollars. The city was then going to knock it down after the games were over with. 3) I wouldn't be surprised to see Rocky wirtz buy the White Sox. He's one of the investors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (WBWSF @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 09:57 PM) 1) If they would of built the Cell at Roosevelt and Clark, we wouldn't be talking about building a new stadium for the White Sox. The City of Chicago wanted to build the stadium in the South Loop. JR wanted to move to Addison/Dupage County. When Addison didn't work out, they wound up at its present location. The City of Chicago withdrew the South Loop offer and the white Sox got stuck building a stadium where it should not of been built. A terrible move for the White Sox. 2) Anybody who thinks the government won't build another stadium for the White Sox is wrong. As long as there is money to be made, a new stadium is a possibility. Keep in mind the City is building a new arena for Depaul, who nobody cares about. Mayor Daley was going to build an Olympic Stadium for the Olympics which would of cost upwards of $300 million dollars. The city was then going to knock it down after the games were over with. 3) I wouldn't be surprised to see Rocky wirtz buy the White Sox. He's one of the investors welcome. JR while smart investor, sometime over plays his hand. pretty much like he did with the ARZ hockey team. don't know what happen in the Addison vs the south loop, but that is in the hindsight. ref to your #2, that was again in a another time. this is now, the sox, i think will not get the help from any government front, b/c it will be hard to be justified. second, in this post, we are still talking about many yrs from now. lets see how the economy rebounds. i still think as of right now, that land around the stadium is still in play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (ewokpelts @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 02:27 PM) That's not how it works at all. Subscriber fees and advertising are the revenue. The station gets the subscriber fees and advertising. The Sox get the broadcast fees. If the Sox broadcast fees go up, the amount left over from the subscriber fees and advertising goes down. They get more upfront, but less from their ownership in CSN. And they will be robbing the Cubs and Blackhawks to do it. This isn't like other cities where either the partnerships were set up as a part of the broadcast rights, or they are getting a big check from a new network. JR already owns 40% of the network. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (WBWSF @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 02:57 PM) 1) If they would of built the Cell at Roosevelt and Clark, we wouldn't be talking about building a new stadium for the White Sox. The City of Chicago wanted to build the stadium in the South Loop. JR wanted to move to Addison/Dupage County. When Addison didn't work out, they wound up at its present location. The City of Chicago withdrew the South Loop offer and the white Sox got stuck building a stadium where it should not of been built. A terrible move for the White Sox. 2) Anybody who thinks the government won't build another stadium for the White Sox is wrong. As long as there is money to be made, a new stadium is a possibility. Keep in mind the City is building a new arena for Depaul, who nobody cares about. Mayor Daley was going to build an Olympic Stadium for the Olympics which would of cost upwards of $300 million dollars. The city was then going to knock it down after the games were over with. 3) I wouldn't be surprised to see Rocky wirtz buy the White Sox. He's one of the investors The State of Illinois is a fiscal disaster, that is only going to get worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:18 PM) The station gets the subscriber fees and advertising. The Sox get the broadcast fees. If the Sox broadcast fees go up, the amount left over from the subscriber fees and advertising goes down. They get more upfront, but less from their ownership in CSN. And they will be robbing the Cubs and Blackhawks to do it. This isn't like other cities where either the partnerships were set up as a part of the broadcast rights, or they are getting a big check from a new network. JR already owns 40% of the network. very good research. i llike it. but the biggest gain will be in the equality in CSN, let alone what is the upfront money with the lease cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 31, 2014 -> 10:19 PM) The State of Illinois is a fiscal disaster, that is only going to get worse. this is the main point in any discussion. great point. 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.