cjd5050

New Panthers Stadium in 2022?

Recommended Posts

^^^Yep...the guy who was practically raised in a [hockey] barn.  The only guy on the forum that knows the difference between Moosejaw and an actual moose jaw.  The guy who has a maple tree planted on virtually every square foot of his lawn.:):):)

I am sorry, I could not help myself.  Due to a secret "country crush" I have for Canada, I feel the need to make remarks about the country anytime the opportunity arises.  Including blaming Canada for everything:

I love Canada...and Canadians...and hockey.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


^ yes, but it's only been a few months.

My favorite Gordie story was when he was on the Dick Cavett show. Dick asked "why do you wear a cup while on the ice but you choose to not wear a helmet?" Gord replied, "you can always pay somebody else to do your thinking for you.." 

Edited by kermit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the NFL blocked off all 3500 hotel rooms in downtown Houston for next years SuperBowl. How many rooms do we have or will have in uptown Charlotte? Their stadium is south of downtown but the NFL Fan zone etc will all be downtown.  I know overall Houston has many more hotel rooms than Charlotte does but are we not getting close to the numbers we need to have to host in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2016 at 7:25 PM, KJHburg said:

Just read the NFL blocked off all 3500 hotel rooms in downtown Houston for next years SuperBowl. How many rooms do we have or will have in uptown Charlotte? Their stadium is south of downtown but the NFL Fan zone etc will all be downtown.  I know overall Houston has many more hotel rooms than Charlotte does but are we not getting close to the numbers we need to have to host in the future?

Right now we have 5,000 rooms and 2,000 are under construction according to this.  NFL mandates there must be 35% as many hotel rooms are there are seats within 60 minutes of the stadium also and the stadium must be 70,000 seats.  

So the 'region' would need to have at least 24,500 hotel rooms and I would assume the NFL would like 10,000 of those to be Uptown or very close to Uptown.  But that's just my opinion on the last part.  Maybe in 15 years Charlotte would have that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2016 at 1:19 PM, grodney said:

Here's the Vikings Stadium impact assessment.  There's more than just Vikings games (in fact, 289 total annual events, but NFL attendance is 60% of the total attendance), but the assessment tends to break out how much impact is from the Vikings themselves....such as " approximately $247 million of the $275 million in annual output and 3,000 of the 3,400 jobs supported are estimated to result from Vikings’ operations." and " Approximately $29.4 million in [annual] tax revenues...are estimated to be attributable to Vikings-related activities" and all of Appendix A which shows 130MM direct spending, 246MM total output, and 95MM personal earnings per year.  The page and assessment below also have lots of numbers for the actual construction phase as well.

http://www.vikings.com/stadium/new-stadium/economic-impact.html

http://prod.static.vikings.clubs.nfl.com/assets/docs/csl-full-021511.pdf

p.s. I'm not an expert and I don't hold an opinion either way, just linking and quoting facts.

 

The Minnesota Vikings, recipients of $500m in public funds for their new stadium, have a clear, vested interest in disseminating information that projects the project as a positive revenue generator for the region.  Any numbers/figures put out by the team should be taken with a big grain of salt. This is not the same thing as a peer-reviewed independent research study.

At best, there are some quality of life arguments in favor (or at least neutral) about publicly financed stadiums. But economically, "despite overwhelming evidence, stadium subsidies are a poor use of public money." (https://psmag.com/the-impossible-fight-against-america-s-stadiums-26041189ef3e#.s2od738wo)

 

Other sources:

"Researchers who have gone back and looked at economic data for localities that have hosted mega events, attracted new franchises, or built new sports facilities have almost invariably found little or no economic benefits from spectator sports." - http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/hcx/Matheson-Baade_FinancingSports.pdf

"independent work on the economic impact of stadiums and arenas has uniformly found that there is no statistically significant positive correlation between sports facility construction and economic development." - http://www.faegrebd.com/webfiles/Homefield Economics.pdf

"That evidence is that sports subsidies cannot be justified on the grounds of local economic development, income growth or job creation." - https://econjwatch.org/articles/do-economists-reach-a-conclusion-on-subsidies-for-sports-franchises-stadiums-and-mega-events

"Our conclusion, and that of nearly all academic economists studying this issue, is that professional sports generally have little, if any, positive effect on a city’s economy." - https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp89.pdf

"Sports stadiums do not generate significant local economic growth." - http://news.stanford.edu/2015/07/30/stadium-economics-noll-073015/

"Across the nation, franchises have argued that building a new stadium will lead to economic development in the form of increased incomes, jobs and tax  revenues. However, the preponderance of academic research has disputed these claims." - http://gardner.utah.edu/_documents/publications/finance-tax/sports-stadiums.pdf

There's tons more of this stuff.

 

TLDR: Don't build a stadium with public money.

Edited by birky
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of that said, if the team/city do decide to build a new stadium in the next 15 years, I have to think it will be somewhere on the BLE. I can't see any location in uptown that would be feasible - the Pipe & Foundry plot is cut by the ramp to 77.  Perhaps here?

 

Capture.PNG

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, birky said:

All of that said, if the team/city do decide to build a new stadium in the next 15 years, I have to think it will be somewhere on the BLE. I can't see any location in uptown that would be feasible - the Pipe & Foundry plot is cut by the ramp to 77.  Perhaps here?

 

Capture.PNG

Love this idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? Looks to be main line Railroad track leading into the switching yard. Two lines actually. We can't even get them to redo one grade / realignment at ADM to make the Red Line a reality. How can anyone expect them to plop a huge stadium in the middle of that area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, birky said:

There's tons more of this stuff.

TLDR: Don't build a stadium with public money.

There are 2 sides to the story.  

Not all stadiums are equal.  They are built in different cities which makes comparing what happened 'there' to what would happen 'here' almost impossible.  When a warm weather city, like LA or San Diego, builds a new stadium there is a reasonable connection made to landing major events like a Super Bowl.  But if Buffalo were to build a new stadium...the same can not be said.  

After all, Charlotte lost a lot of events due to HB2 but the only reason Charlotte had those events in the first place was due to having the stadiums and arenas for it.  Take the ACC Conference Championship game w/o any HB2 issues in 20 years.  The ACC is a customer and they are going to shop for the best possible setup.  Right now BofA is competitive.  In 20 years.....I don't know.  

But my biggest issue with these stadiums is that they always speak to 'economic development' and don't reference other items like quality of life or real estate development.  The reason is it's very hard for an academic who wants to or is paid to produce these studies to actually measure all of the impact.  Measuring 'economic development' is not as difficult so the basis of these studies is on them.  

I'll give you an example of real estate development and quality of life that's not measured.  It comes down to where a stadium is built or the Goldilocks location.

If you build a stadium in a sea of parking out in the middle of nowhere...you're not going to create spin off development. 

If you build a stadium in the middle of a dense downtown...you're not going to create any spin off development that wouldn't happen eventually on its own.

But, if you build a stadium in an area that needs a tipping point...then you can start to see real estate and quality of life improvements.  Take the location that Birky suggested.  Right now that's industrial and somewhat sketchy.  Even though there is the BLE there, redevelopment is slow and not on the scale of other areas like SouthEnd.  

If a stadium were built there, you would start to see the conversion of industrial properties to mixed use.  A developer is not going to build a tower next to a trucking transfer depot but they will build a tower next to a stadium.  When you add the stadium and tower...you add people.  People makes the whole area a lot safer and this increases the quality of life for the entire area.  

This is what happened in San Francisco and San Diego when they built their new baseball stadiums.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We do not need a new stadium.  The president of the team has made it known that the team wants to keep upgrading BofA but they don't necessarily want a new stadium.  They say it has great bones and it is a classicly designed venue so they hope that one day it is viewed as  the Wrigley or Fenway of Football stadiums.  Why city leaders like Kimble continue to push the notion that we need a $1 billion+ stadium in the near future when the team is not requesting it is beyond me.  It makes them seem borderline incompetent truthfully, as now any prospective new owner will know that city staff are willing to give them everything plus the kitchen sink.  

A better solution, if they are hell-bent on using public funds, is to continue to upgrade the stadium we currently have-maybe with new sideline suites and other amenities that the new stadiums are built with, slap a massive tether on the team in exchange for the public money (while Richardson is still the owner of course), and call it a day.  Spend a couple hundred million and accomplish the same objective as we can with a new $1 billion+ stadium.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^This is a very valid point, though it is worth noting that by my understanding Mr. Richardson's will requires that the team be sold to new owners within two years of his death.  I completely agree that the best option would be to continue upgrading the existing facility, however in the future new owners might not be as inclined to stay in the current BofA stadium.  

I know you mentioned while Mr. Richardson is still the owner, but a new deal probably won't be done until near the end of the current agreement, and realistically there is no guarantee of how long Mr. Richardson will still be alive to own the team.  Hopefully a long time, but no guarantee.

Edited by J-Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

We do not need a new stadium.  The president of the team has made it known that the team wants to keep upgrading BofA but they don't necessarily want a new stadium.  They say it has great bones and it is a classicly designed venue so they hope that one day it is viewed as  the Wrigley or Fenway of Football stadiums.  Why city leaders like Kimble continue to push the notion that we need a $1 billion+ stadium in the near future when the team is not requesting it is beyond me.  It makes them seem borderline incompetent truthfully, as now any prospective new owner will know that city staff are willing to give them everything plus the kitchen sink.  

A better solution, if they are hell-bent on using public funds, is to continue to upgrade the stadium we currently have-maybe with new sideline suites and other amenities that the new stadiums are built with, slap a massive tether on the team in exchange for the public money (while Richardson is still the owner of course), and call it a day.  Spend a couple hundred million and accomplish the same objective as we can with a new $1 billion+ stadium.

Therein lies the rub.  Jerry Richardson is 80 and I think has mandated a sale when he passes.  So it will be a new owner and a new president.  The bigger challenge is the economics for the new owner.  Richardson paid $206 million for the Panthers.  The new owner would most likely be looking at over $2 billion.  Debt service on that $2B is a much different than outlook than what Richardson and his team President have to account for....if at all.  

That said, I do think you're on to something with doing a long term deal with Richardson while he still owns the team.  Ralph Wilson (Bills owner) locked his team into a similar deal before he passed away and it was a huge driving force to keeping the team in Buffalo.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, cjd5050 said:

That said, I do think you're on to something with doing a long term deal with Richardson while he still owns the team.  Ralph Wilson (Bills owner) locked his team into a similar deal before he passed away and it was a huge driving force to keeping the team in Buffalo.  

This was my underlying point, but I do not think I was as clear as I could have been.  Yes it is true that Jerry Richardson is 80 and has mandated a sale of the team within two years of his death.  However, the current hard tether expires in 2019 which means that he will only be 83 by then.  Now I know that there is no guarantee that he-or anyone for that matter- will live the next 24 hours, but it is conceivable that he lives the next three years.  If the city wants to spend public money on sports venues, then their best option in terms of affordability, is to help the team continue to upgrade its current stadium.  Much of the 21st century upgrades (large high-def video boards, ribbon boards, escalators, etc) the Panthers asked for have already been incorporated into the current stadium.  Many of the other requests made by the Panthers have nothing to do with the stadium itself (they wanted $30 million for an indoor practice facility).  As such, the stadium has most of the amenities of a newer stadium.  What I am suggesting is spend $200-$250 million to give the team what they want plus a little extra (i.e.sideline suites, an indoor practice facility, etc-bring BofA stadium up to the standards of say Met Life stadium), slap a 20+ year hard tether on the team at the expiration of the current hard tether in 2019 while Jerry is still [God-willing] alive, and avoid having to build a $1-$1.5 billion new stadium.

My other underlying point is if the Panthers like their current stadium and only ask for upgrades yet Ron Kimble comes back and insists that they need a new stadium altogether then he is potentially putting the city in a bad situation when new ownership does come by laying all his cards on the table now.  Either the city will be on the hook for a massive expenditure in the form of a new stadium, or the Panthers may leave.  In that regard, I question his ability to perform competently in the city manager position.  Fortunately he no longer fulfills that role, but I hope the new one hasn't taken any clues on negotiation techniques from Mr. Kimble.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were king, I would change the path of I277 and run it down Carson Street elevating it along Carson turning it over Tryon and reconnect going over College and reconnection with the current alignment.  A massive area would be delivered for development.

But note, I am not king.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, cltbwimob said:

This was my underlying point, but I do not think I was as clear as I could have been.  Yes it is true that Jerry Richardson is 80 and has mandated a sale of the team within two years of his death.  However, the current hard tether expires in 2019 which means that he will only be 83 by then.  Now I know that there is no guarantee that he-or anyone for that matter- will live the next 24 hours, but it is conceivable that he lives the next three years.  If the city wants to spend public money on sports venues, then their best option in terms of affordability, is to help the team continue to upgrade its current stadium.  Much of the 21st century upgrades (large high-def video boards, ribbon boards, escalators, etc) the Panthers asked for have already been incorporated into the current stadium.  Many of the other requests made by the Panthers have nothing to do with the stadium itself (they wanted $30 million for an indoor practice facility).  As such, the stadium has most of the amenities of a newer stadium.  What I am suggesting is spend $200-$250 million to give the team what they want plus a little extra (i.e.sideline suites, an indoor practice facility, etc-bring BofA stadium up to the standards of say Met Life stadium), slap a 20+ year hard tether on the team at the expiration of the current hard tether in 2019 while Jerry is still [God-willing] alive, and avoid having to build a $1-$1.5 billion new stadium.

My other underlying point is if the Panthers like their current stadium and only ask for upgrades yet Ron Kimble comes back and insists that they need a new stadium altogether then he is potentially putting the city in a bad situation when new ownership does come by laying all his cards on the table now.  Either the city will be on the hook for a massive expenditure in the form of a new stadium, or the Panthers may leave.  In that regard, I question his ability to perform competently in the city manager position.  Fortunately he no longer fulfills that role, but I hope the new one hasn't taken any clues on negotiation techniques from Mr. Kimble.

Good points but...in reverse order...

What Ron Kimble is doing can go two ways.  He is either making a huge mess and pushing for a stadium that's not needed or he is forecasting that the owner is 80 and the team will be sold and simply laying the eventual ground work for what is anticipated.  Especially since the Panthers are only on the hook to 2019.  I see both sides here.  

As for Richardson, I am not sure he would ink a 20 year deal...regardless of what's offered.  As you mentioned, the stadium today is pretty darn good and a cash cow for him.  I am not sure he would want to bring the possible bad feelings of even the $200-$250million you suggest into his run.

Personally, I think the way stadiums are built and how they are funded needs to change.  It needs to be more creative.  You're never going to do away with rich owners becoming even richer.  Fighting that is pointless.

Having a NFL team is a luxury and it's up to each city to decide if they want and can afford to have that luxury.  

What I like is creative plans like the one that was floated in San Diego by the current owner about 10 years ago.  The current stadium in San Diego sits on a massive  166 acre parcel of land that has light rail access.  The owner pitched that they would build a new stadium at no cost to the city if the city would turn over all of the development rights to the entire parcel.  In turn the owners would build out the entire 166 to cover the costs.  The city said no.  Now they are having a vote to build a stadium for the team downtown and having to eventually build a second stadium for SDSU.  

I wonder if there is a parcel in Charlotte that could offer a similar deal.  A parcel large enough that the owner of the team would also have enough land around the stadium to build out housing/offices/retail.  The project cost would be massive, north of $3 billion I would assume, but you could work a project like this at no cost to the taxpayer outside of handing over the land.   

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 9/13/2016 at 0:15 PM, mfowler12 said:

SC gets training camp - look at the improvements Wofford has made to their facilities because of this.

Just a point of clarification, Wofford College doesn't get that much in terms of revenue from the training camp. There's no cost to go, and parking is free (or low cost, I assume). All of the major improvements to their campus (Richardson Indoor Stadium and the art museum) were from donations by Jerry Richardson and his wife. Obviously the donations themselves and fact that the training camp is there is because Richardson went to Wofford - but I don't think any future relocation of the training camp would result in the same types of upgrades for other schools. 

 

On 9/14/2016 at 7:42 PM, Nick2 said:

And as far as the whole Carolina Panthers vs Charlotte Panthers thing, they'll never change it from Carolina unless something drastic happens. South Carolinians view the Panthers as their team just as much as a North Carolinian or Charlottean so it would be dumb from a market perspective to limit it much more by calling them the "Charlotte Panthers" instead.

Yep. South Carolina was a key part of the delegation that recruited the Panthers here to start with. South Carolina, for the most part, view the Panthers as their team. The only exception is in the Augusta and maybe Savannah area where the TV markets tend to carry the Falcons.

On 9/15/2016 at 11:25 AM, BullDurhamer said:

Carolina Panthers makes great sense with the reach the Panthers have across the region.  On the other hand, the Carolina Hurricanes has to be the dumbest name ever.  It's not like anybody outside of Raleigh cares at all, and even they don't really care.  

 

On 9/15/2016 at 0:40 PM, ChessieCat said:

Nobody cares about the Canes cause they built PNC Arena in the wrong place.  The Canes financed the majority of the arena with their own funds and in order to obtain state financing, built it next to NC State's football stadium so Wolfpack basketball team would have a new home.  But unfortunately it sits in the middle of a parking lot with little to no businesses within walking distance.  

They could have probably obtained state financing anyway if they had agreed to build it downtown as a revitalization project.     

There is nothing worse than a coliseum sitting in the middle of a parking lot.  If local governments want to finance new arenas with tax dollars, at least build them downtown where foot traffic can generate some sort of $$$ for local business!!!

As a native South Carolinian, the fact that they are called the "Carolina" Hurricanes is mildly offensive. IMO, the location of the arena in Raleigh is not the issue. It's that the team is in Raleigh, period. Aside from the fact that the vast majority of people don't care about hockey to begin with - Raleigh is not at all convenient for anyone in South Carolina to get to. If you actually wanted to have a team represent both states, actually build a fanbase, and actually grow the sport of hockey - Charlotte is clearly the best place to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cjd5050 said:

Therein lies the rub.  Jerry Richardson is 80 and I think has mandated a sale when he passes.  So it will be a new owner and a new president.  The bigger challenge is the economics for the new owner.  Richardson paid $206 million for the Panthers.  The new owner would most likely be looking at over $2 billion.  Debt service on that $2B is a much different than outlook than what Richardson and his team President have to account for....if at all.  

That said, I do think you're on to something with doing a long term deal with Richardson while he still owns the team.  Ralph Wilson (Bills owner) locked his team into a similar deal before he passed away and it was a huge driving force to keeping the team in Buffalo.  

 

Pretty sure Jerry only owns a small majority of the team. There are a lot of owners.

A lot of Charlotte power players own the rest of the team:

Minority owners: Rosalind R. Richardson, Mark Richardson, Ashley Richardson Allen, M.C. Belk Pilon, Tim Belk, H.C. Bissell, Erskine Bowles, Derick S. Close, Elliott S. Close, Cameron M. Harris, John W. Harris, Leon Levine, Jerry Wordsworth, Steve Wordsworth

Wouldn't surprise me at all to see some of these minority owners be given first rights to increase their stake. The Belks and the Levines are both sitting on piles of cash right now from selling their companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one family with the money to buy the team from the Richardsons should the opportunity arise is the Bruton Smith family owners of Speedway Motorsports of course. Any discussion of a new location of a stadium would have to factor in who the new owner will be. If the Smiths, my bets are on the speedway property.  That being said I would prefer the stadium to stay where it is and keep renovating it. However any new owners you would have to think outside the box like Cabarrus county. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Niner National said:

Pretty sure Jerry only owns a small majority of the team. There are a lot of owners.

A lot of Charlotte power players own the rest of the team:

Minority owners: Rosalind R. Richardson, Mark Richardson, Ashley Richardson Allen, M.C. Belk Pilon, Tim Belk, H.C. Bissell, Erskine Bowles, Derick S. Close, Elliott S. Close, Cameron M. Harris, John W. Harris, Leon Levine, Jerry Wordsworth, Steve Wordsworth

Wouldn't surprise me at all to see some of these minority owners be given first rights to increase their stake. The Belks and the Levines are both sitting on piles of cash right now from selling their companies.

 

3 hours ago, KJHburg said:

The one family with the money to buy the team from the Richardsons should the opportunity arise is the Bruton Smith family owners of Speedway Motorsports of course. Any discussion of a new location of a stadium would have to factor in who the new owner will be. If the Smiths, my bets are on the speedway property.  That being said I would prefer the stadium to stay where it is and keep renovating it. However any new owners you would have to think outside the box like Cabarrus county. 

NFL rules require a single big investor to control at least 30% of the team.  One of the above will have to pony up $600 million to buy that control from the Richardson estate alongside everyone else ponying up $1.4 Billion collectively (if the Panthers are valued at $2B).  We shall see...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KJHburg said:

The one family with the money to buy the team from the Richardsons should the opportunity arise is the Bruton Smith family owners of Speedway Motorsports of course. Any discussion of a new location of a stadium would have to factor in who the new owner will be. If the Smiths, my bets are on the speedway property.  That being said I would prefer the stadium to stay where it is and keep renovating it. However any new owners you would have to think outside the box like Cabarrus county. 

Locating out at the speedway property or Cabarrus County are perfect examples of building a stadium, with public money, in the wrong place.  I am also not sure any owner, even the Bruton family, would want to build all the way out there as the money is in luxury seats and suites.  Those need to be where the companies that purchase them...which would be close to downtown.  Added to this, the farther you get away from the airport and uptown the less desirable the stadium becomes for things like bowl games and ACC conference championship games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Spartan said:

As a native South Carolinian, the fact that they are called the "Carolina" Hurricanes is mildly offensive. IMO, the location of the arena in Raleigh is not the issue. It's that the team is in Raleigh, period. Aside from the fact that the vast majority of people don't care about hockey to begin with - Raleigh is not at all convenient for anyone in South Carolina to get to. If you actually wanted to have a team represent both states, actually build a fanbase, and actually grow the sport of hockey - Charlotte is clearly the best place to do that. 

The sticky part about moving the Carolina Hurricanes is that the owner also owns the arena.  Walking away from Raleigh would mean walking away from that revenue directly back into your pocket and devaluing the asset itself.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.