Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, cltbwimob said:

Here is my two cents:

1.  No one can explain exactly why a new stadium is needed other than to say it’s necessary if we are to ever have a chance at hosting a Super Bowl, BCS Championship game, and Final Four.  But are we really so desperate to have, if we are lucky, 1-2 Super Bowls, 1-2 BCS Championship games and a couple of final fours that we are willing to potentially spend upwards of 1/2 billion taxpayer dollars to get a few extra one/two-off events over the span of several decades?

2.  No one can say exactly why BofA is so out of date.  Sure the concrete itself is 22 years old, but beyond that the stadium is relatively up-to-date.  The city and the team have implemented approximately $160 million worth of upgrades and renovations since 2013, including upgraded lux suites, large video boards and ribbon boards, escalators etc. to ensure it is relevant for the foreseeable future.  Aside from the sideline suites that are popular in today’s new builds, the stadium to my knowledge has just about anything that any other newer or rennovated stadium has.

3.  I have said this time and again-BofA in a lot of ways represents to football what Camden Yards represents to baseball in that it fundamentally changed how football stadiums were designed.  It ushered in a new era in stadium architecture-an era dedicated to the fan experience-and a good number of  stadiums since built have used BofA as a model.  In this regard, if Camden Yards is “the Ballpark that changed baseball” then BofA can be viewed as the stadium that changed football.  As such, it is a piece of NFL history unto itself in the same way Camden Yards is a piece of baseball history.

4.  If nothing else BofA is certainly an icon of Charlotte and should be valued as such.  For 22 years it has served as an anchor in the foreground of all skyline shots taken from the southwest and Is one of the most recognizable features of the skyline.  It is, in a town that is all to quick to tear down every vestige of its past, a big part of Charlotte’s modern history and her coming of age.  In fact one might argue that it (and of course the team it’s housed for 22 years) has not just been a part of Charlotte’s coming of age but was indeed integral to her rise to major city status.

If and only if it is required to keep the Panthers in metro Charlotte as opposed to moving to Raleigh or some other metro in the Carolinas would I say the potential investment would be worth the cost.  If the scenario is either the Panthers tear down and build anew in Charlotte or they tear down and build anew somewhere else in metro Charlotte area such as Fort Mill, then, I am fairly indifferent as to the location.  If under such a scenario taxpayer money is involved, then let Fort Mill have it.  I will gladly support additional taxpayer money going to continued renovation of the current stadium, but if the team is insistent on abandoning BofA for greener pastures, then I prefer that not a dime of my tax money go that cause.

Yes, a new multi-billion dollar stadium is completely necessary for the exact reasons you mentioned. While hosting a Super Bowl isn’t a necessity as much as it is a bragging right, what it will do for Charlotte and the state economically makes it worth it alone. Not to mention smaller cities than Charlotte are being awarded the Super Bowl and the sole reason we have yet to host is because of the stadium. 

If you cannot see a drastic difference in the designs of NFL stadiums under construction/recently built and the current Bank of America Stadium, then you’re delusional. The current stadium looks like a glorified university stadium when looking at Atlanta or Minneapolis’ new stadium. It’s replacement won’t make a skyline shot any less recognizable, either. No one outside of sports fans identify Charlotte by the stadium. 

Edited by TheOneRJ
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


4 hours ago, TheOneRJ said:

Yes, a new multi-billion dollar stadium is completely necessary for the exact reasons you mentioned. While hosting a Super Bowl isn’t a necessity as much as it is a bragging right, what it will do for Charlotte and the state economically makes it worth it alone. Not to mention smaller cities than Charlotte are being awarded the Super Bowl and the sole reason we have yet to host is because of the stadium. 

If you cannot see a drastic difference in the designs of NFL stadiums under construction/recently built and the current Bank of America Stadium, then you’re delusional. The current stadium looks like a glorified university stadium when looking at Atlanta or Minneapolis’ new stadium. It’s replacement won’t make a skyline shot any less recognizable, either. No one outside of sports fans identify Charlotte by the stadium. 

He’s talking about the next decade of stadiums that were built after BoA.  It definitely ushered in a new wave of NFL stadium design.  That’s why it’s compared to Camden Yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, asthasr said:

Investing any public funds in another stadium is idiocy.

Not as bad as continuing to throw public funds at the current stadium.  A dome can be used many more days a year and opens up the type of events you can host. Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta hosted 60 ticketed events its first year. BofA is lucky to host a dozen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, asthasr said:

Maybe so, but my position is simpler: no public funds should go to stadiums at all.

This is an oversimplification of a valid personal belief.  I also believe ideally public funds should not go to this, BUT that is not the way it works unfortunately.  You need get every city and state in the country to agree to not subsidize.  Only then can this be achieved.  Since that will never happen you are left with two choices as a city.... Have pro sports teams or not.   When it comes down to that, I say having pro sports in a city overrides my personal feelings on this issue as the benefits, economic and intangibles, which is far greater than it gets credit for, outweighs the distastefulness of this spending.  

Also the exact same can be said for job incentives for companies cities and states give.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^I like your long winded spirit but no one is going to invest one damn dime to help poor people, not anything of a sports arena magnitude.  Charlotte needs a dome for all the obvious reasons.  It doesn't matter about the owner investment ratio, surely he'll make a lofty investment, but all this back and forth will  only result in what happen to the Hornets.  Nostalgia?  That damn thing is going to get imploded one day, all sports arenas have a life expectancy and this one is closer to the end.  Losing the Panthers due to lack of perceived "economic" benefits, crying about taxpayer money, etc etc is wasted time/energy.  This is the big leagues...either pay to play or carry on.  The stain of losing of a pro sports team isn't anything to take lightly, especially for small markets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the impact of pro sports is overestimated. Cord cutters and fragmentation have made it harder than ever to watch sports on TV. (I used to be able to pay for basic cable and watch games when I wanted to; now I don't even know what channels I'd need to get to watch my preferred teams. Certainly more than one.) The concussion problems in football mean the "pipeline" is getting shallower, which in turn means that the professional version will be declining in popularity as time goes on. MLB attendance is tanking. NASCAR's collapse has already hit us close to home. If the Panthers come knocking for hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, I'd politely invite them to go ask York or Gaston County. I'd probably be immediately voted out by people who think that pro sports genuinely matter, but there's something distasteful about signing on the dotted line for a debt worth thousands of dollars per city resident that (a) doesn't produce an asset most residents can use, (b) will not pay for itself in economic development, and (c) will likely outlast the "asset" itself.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, asthasr said:

I think the impact of pro sports is overestimated. Cord cutters and fragmentation have made it harder than ever to watch sports on TV. (I used to be able to pay for basic cable and watch games when I wanted to; now I don't even know what channels I'd need to get to watch my preferred teams. Certainly more than one.) The concussion problems in football mean the "pipeline" is getting shallower, which in turn means that the professional version will be declining in popularity as time goes on. MLB attendance is tanking. NASCAR's collapse has already hit us close to home. If the Panthers come knocking for hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, I'd politely invite them to go ask York or Gaston County. I'd probably be immediately voted out by people who think that pro sports genuinely matter, but there's something distasteful about signing on the dotted line for a debt worth thousands of dollars per city resident that (a) doesn't produce an asset most residents can use, (b) will not pay for itself in economic development, and (c) will likely outlast the "asset" itself.

#Resist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

15 hours ago, Durhamite said:

^^I like your long winded spirit but no one is going to invest one damn dime to help poor people, not anything of a sports arena magnitude.  Charlotte needs a dome for all the obvious reasons.  It doesn't matter about the owner investment ratio, surely he'll make a lofty investment, but all this back and forth will  only result in what happen to the Hornets.  Nostalgia?  That damn thing is going to get imploded one day, all sports arenas have a life expectancy and this one is closer to the end.  Losing the Panthers due to lack of perceived "economic" benefits, crying about taxpayer money, etc etc is wasted time/energy.  This is the big leagues...either pay to play or carry on.  The stain of losing of a pro sports team isn't anything to take lightly, especially for small markets.

Ah yes, having the football team is the big leagues. Bankrupt the city and torpedo the pension fund but at least you’ll have a big time franchise to pull for while you huddle around the trash can fire. Never mind the fact that every serious economic study shows that public finance in stadiums is the equivalent of lighting a cigar with flaming cash. Anyone that makes this argument is either (1) deeply stupid or (2) a shill.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a tax fund earmarked to go towards tourist funds what would you suggest using it on  if not for some of the existing amenities (aka pro teams) of the city?

I see both sides to the argument but knowing where the money is coming from and what it's earmarked for I wonder what other suggestions folks that don't want to subsidize stadiums have is all..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Durhamite said:

^^I like your long winded spirit but no one is going to invest one damn dime to help poor people, not anything of a sports arena magnitude.  Charlotte needs a dome for all the obvious reasons.  It doesn't matter about the owner investment ratio, surely he'll make a lofty investment, but all this back and forth will  only result in what happen to the Hornets.  Nostalgia?  That damn thing is going to get imploded one day, all sports arenas have a life expectancy and this one is closer to the end.  Losing the Panthers due to lack of perceived "economic" benefits, crying about taxpayer money, etc etc is wasted time/energy.  This is the big leagues...either pay to play or carry on.  The stain of losing of a pro sports team isn't anything to take lightly, especially for small markets.

say what?  Charlotte (and the state and feds) just spent over a billion dollars to bring economic development to one of the poorest areas of the city, after successfully doing so with a previous project.  While those projects (the Blue Line if you haven't figured it out yet) did (or are going to) displace quite a few poor people it also brought income diversity to areas of the city that desperately needed it.  The light rail also provided a way to actually be able to live in the city without a car, and there are still affordable housing options available within walking and biking distance  to those stations.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SouthEndCLT811 said:

With a tax fund earmarked to go towards tourist funds what would you suggest using it on  if not for some of the existing amenities (aka pro teams) of the city?

I see both sides to the argument but knowing where the money is coming from and what it's earmarked for I wonder what other suggestions folks that don't want to subsidize stadiums have is all..

The problem is that the amount earmarked for the Panthers is only enough to cover an additional round of renovations. Covering half the cost of a new $1+billion stadium could not be accomplished under the existing hotel tax even if the city abandoned every other priority and threw every dime from that fund toward a new stadium. As a result, some sort of debt instrument would have to be part of the finance picture.  This is why opportunity cost has to be a consideration.  The same bonds that would have to be issued to cover stadium construction costs could also go to affordable housing or various infrastructure improvements including possibly the Big Bang transit plan.

Now if the Panthers  were to front 90+% of the construction costs it would be a different story.  But consensus opinion is that the ask, should there be one will be 30-50%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

The problem is that the amount earmarked for the Panthers is only enough to cover an additional round of renovations. Covering half the cost of a new $1+billion stadium could not be accomplished under the existing hotel tax even if the city abandoned every other priority and threw every dime from that fund toward a new stadium. As a result, some sort of debt instrument would have to be part of the finance picture.  This is why opportunity cost has to be a consideration.  The same bonds that would have to be issued to cover stadium construction costs could also go to affordable housing or various infrastructure improvements including possibly the Big Bang transit plan.

Now if the Panthers  were to front 90+% of the construction costs it would be a different story.  But consensus opinion is that the ask, should there be one will be 30-50%

Tampa is reportedly requiring that the Rays foot 50% of the costs of a new ballpark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just mentioning this and lets NOT discuss the reasons why as there are several:  the fact is NFL attendance is in decline and has been for a couple of years.  Look at the Panthers game in Cleveland they had 8000 plus empty seats and that was the reported attendance.   NASCAR has already dealt with this by tearing out seats in major race tracks including Charlotte across the country.    I am not saying the NFL is going away but peak NFL attendance has passed probably.   This is the best economy in years and if you can't fill a stadium now when can you?  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SouthEndCLT811 said:

With a tax fund earmarked to go towards tourist funds what would you suggest using it on  if not for some of the existing amenities (aka pro teams) of the city?

I see both sides to the argument but knowing where the money is coming from and what it's earmarked for I wonder what other suggestions folks that don't want to subsidize stadiums have is all..

Is there any possibility an argument can be made for using tourism funds towards Mass Transit (Big Bang) - Moving tourists around certain CLT corridors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed Panthers advertising luxury boxes available on broadcast TV, and not during football games. Last night during The Simpsons there was an advertisement for buying game tickets. Never sen that type of push before.

46 minutes ago, KJHburg said:

I am just mentioning this and lets NOT discuss the reasons why as there are several:  the fact is NFL attendance is in decline and has been for a couple of years.  Look at the Panthers game in Cleveland they had 8000 plus empty seats and that was the reported attendance.   NASCAR has already dealt with this by tearing out seats in major race tracks including Charlotte across the country.    I am not saying the NFL is going away but peak NFL attendance has passed probably.   This is the best economy in years and if you can't fill a stadium now when can you?  

 

Edited by tarhoosier
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather the tourism money go towards transit and connectivity / linkages.  Make connections from the airport, center city, Southpark, etc. better not for just the citizens of Charlotte, but the visitors as well.  The NFL is declining in popularity and IMO product.  I see no need to spend more money than periodic updates and renovations to our stadium at present.

Edited by Sigma
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.