Jump to content

Recommended Posts


14 hours ago, CandyAisles said:

Concerts primarily. You’d get more U2, Paul McCartney, Metallica, Taylor Swift, etc. Those acts need assurances from weather typically.

They don't need it, they'd prefer it.  Plus, both Paul McCartney and Taylor Swift have already played the stadium, maybe even multiple times, among other artists.  I can't recall if U2 or Metallica have.   U2 has played Vanderbilt Stadium, however.

14 hours ago, CandyAisles said:

Paying up for a new stadium is indenfensible…but not as much as letting the NFL leave town or to sink $1 billion in a really terrible building that was purposefully built on the cheap.

Wow, we've already jumped ahead in the game to the relocation stage.  That was fast.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grilled_cheese said:

They don't need it, they'd prefer it.  Plus, both Paul McCartney and Taylor Swift have already played the stadium, maybe even multiple times, among other artists.  I can't recall if U2 or Metallica have.   U2 has played Vanderbilt Stadium, however.

Wow, we've already jumped ahead in the game to the relocation stage.  That was fast.

Yes,  important to keep in mind that the current stadium is getting most of the things being mentioned in this thread, before any upgrades or rebuilds.

And there is nothing the Titans and their lobbyists would love more than for people to start throwing around baseless relocation panic.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I would be interested to hear what the owners of Bridgestone  Arena think about the possibility of a new Titans stadium.  Currently they get the large concerts, basketball events, etc. I would assume a new/bigger Titans stadium would poach events away from them. So I wouldn't they would be too happy about possibly losing some revenue, especially if it is funded by the city.

Would residents of Williamson county have to chip in for a stadium? Asking for a friend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bigeasy said:

Would residents of Williamson county have to chip in for a stadium? Asking for a friend

I would think residents of all Tennessee Counties, would somehow have to chip in . You know some kind of funding or incentives would be on a state level. Wasn’t that the case with the team being the Tennessee Titans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

I would think residents of all Tennessee Counties, would somehow have to chip in . You know some kind of funding or incentives would be on a state level. Wasn’t that the case with the team being the Tennessee Titans?

I believe so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

I would think residents of all Tennessee Counties, would somehow have to chip in . You know some kind of funding or incentives would be on a state level. Wasn’t that the case with the team being the Tennessee Titans?

No way that is going to happen, and Republican power has grown dramatically in TN since the bygone era when the Titan's stadium was built...  And the cultural war between Davidson county and the surrounding counties has only intensified since then.  No - I think it's fair to assume there would be staunch opposition to any state money going into a new stadium.  Davidson county will have to go it alone.

One person asked about Williamson - - HA!  That really makes me laugh because Williamson county's whole brand is their ability to enjoy all the benefits of proximity to Davidson without any of the problems or taxes.  It would be political suicide for anyone in Williamson government to voluntarily hitch their wagon to Nashville's financially questionable endeavors. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Armacingi hear what your saying, but I believe there’s many projects here in Nashville that the State has its hands in. Oracle and Amazon come to mind. Those new tunnels under I-24 to connect the East Bank with the rest of East Nashville are a state TDOT  example, plus incentives that the State made. It happens a lot more then some think, and in reality Nashville IS Tennessee. This growth that’s happening is because of Nashville, without it, the rest of Tennessee wouldn’t even be considered for much of anything. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Luvemtall said:

@Armacingi hear what your saying, but I believe there’s many projects here in Nashville that the State has its hands in. Oracle and Amazon come to mind. Those new tunnels under I-24 to connect the East Bank with the rest of East Nashville are a state TDOT  example, plus incentives that the State made. It happens a lot more then some think, and in reality Nashville IS Tennessee. This growth that’s happening is because of Nashville, without it, the rest of Tennessee wouldn’t even be considered for much of anything. 

This is true. People move to middle tn because of the attractions Nashville provides. That said, I’m for a new stadium if they can fund it using primarily private money. I hate taking money the east bank will be generating anyway in 10-20 years to subsidize the NFL. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

@Armacingi hear what your saying, but I believe there’s many projects here in Nashville that the State has its hands in. Oracle and Amazon come to mind. Those new tunnels under I-24 to connect the East Bank with the rest of East Nashville are a state TDOT  example, plus incentives that the State made. It happens a lot more then some think, and in reality Nashville IS Tennessee. This growth that’s happening is because of Nashville, without it, the rest of Tennessee wouldn’t even be considered for much of anything. 

I think you might be too deep into the Nashville bubble.  Nashville has not risen to the level of a ultra-dominant primate city like Atlanta/Seattle/Portland/Chicago/Boston, etc.   The state's population is still relatively spread out between the 3 grand divisions and economic growth has continued to happen in all 3 regions.  Nashville is getting a lot of media attention that the other parts of the state don't get, but I bet that will change soon.  I think ultimately Tennessee will be more like Ohio and less like Georgia in the sense that we will have several good-sized cities rather than one dominant city that becomes the center of gravity.

Personally, I think Memphis, Chattanooga, and Knoxville are primed for growth and I wish I had money to invest in real estate in those cities.

But back to your good point about state incentives for recent relocations:  True, those had state money.  But in all cases the private company was making the investment and they were getting tax cuts or wage subsidies based on the number of good jobs they bring.  There was some infrastructure building in those deals, but I would argue that building out city infrastructure is a normal function for city government, and everyone can use those streets.

In contrast, the Titans are asking the government to make the capital investment for a highly-specialized asset that cannot be utilized by the general public.  And the Titans are already here, so I don't think the state has yet in its history faced the "If you don't build it, we will leave" scenario like it will with the new stadium.  To me it seems that arouses a different emotional response in the public than the typical "If you build it they will come" scenario.  It raises the question "If Nashville is so special, why would they leave?"  The troubling answer to that question is "Nashville is not special, the team is only here for the state subsidies"  Of course, that line of questioning applies to all the scenarios you mentioned, but I think the threat to leave puts that question into starker contrast.  At least when a business is moving here with subsidies, the question of whether they come for the city or the subsidies is open-ended... it could be either or both.  One is a compliment and the other is an insult, so they balance out.  But the threat to leave removes all doubt and I think that plays differently with the public, and therefore, with politicians.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


12 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

This growth that’s happening is because of Nashville, without it, the rest of Tennessee wouldn’t even be considered for much of anything. 

Dude, Memphis just got a multi billion dollar Ford vehicle and battery complex. And no, Wilson, Sumner, Maury, Montgomery, Rutherford, etc. are not going to help fund any of Nashville's pet projects. Just like Nashville wouldn't for anyone else. In what universe would Nashville fund projects in Gatlinburg?

Edited by Licec
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

A couple of us have mentioned that we believe the Titans benefit from Nashville more than Nashville benefits from the Titans

This is a really important concept that Nashville needs to embrace broadly.   Nashville no longer needs to so anxiously chase every shiny new toy and development opportunity, regardless of the cost or the burden on available city resources.  We need to be confident in what we have to offer and push developers and companies to really truly invest here,  even if maybe that means the companies have to make a bit less profit in the process.  There is plenty of room for Nashville to expect more before we need to worry about companies choosing  somewhere else.     

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Melrose said:

This is a really important concept that Nashville needs to embrace broadly.   Nashville no longer needs to so anxiously chase every shiny new toy and development opportunity, regardless of the cost or the burden on available city resources.  We need to be confident in what we have to offer and push developers and companies to really truly invest here,  even if maybe that means the companies have to make a bit less profit in the process.  There is plenty of room for Nashville to expect more before we need to worry about companies choosing  somewhere else.     

Nashville is also bottom 5 NFL markets, so... I think Nashville and Titans both benefit from each other. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, markhollin said:

Another concept that needs to be strongly considered is the burgeoning value of the approximate 100 acre campus that Nissan Stadium sits on that is owned by Metro/Sports Authority.  The recent sale by Monroe Investments of the 3 + acres next to the Oracle campus to GBT worked out to $16.21 million per acre....and that is 3/4 of a mile north of the stadium district.  That would certainly translate into this 100 acre campus directly across from the downtown/Broadway being worth around $20 million per acre.  Thus, that entire plot is worth $2 Billion TODAY.  So the city should be very wise, savvy, and shrewd about how they allow any private enterprises to be involved, and make sure they maximize the long-term outcomes of that raw land for the benefit of the city---not just the enterprises.

The land is extremely valuable in the private sector, yes, but I don't trust that the city would be able to negotiate a price tag that high. We have seen time and again the sales of public land going for pennies compared to the private sector. Personally, I don't want the Sports Authority to sell a single acre. I want them to ground lease to private development firms that allow them to build on the property while the city benefits longterm. This would include the stadium as well.

A good example of how another city did this is the Winthrop Tower in Boston's business district. There was a condemned garage that the city owns, they put out to bid for redevelopment and let the private sector bid both from what they would development as well as terms of the ground lease. The winning bid is producing a pretty awesome Retail, Office, Condo tower that includes $150 million ground lease for the city. The city maintains the ownership of the land, while benefiting from the tax revenue the new tower develops. 

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

I was curious about those options, and ground leases seem to be a good way to go, perhaps with incentives to build the garages and allowing a portion of the concessions for certain events. I think I heard there's a PILOT arrangement for that area, but don't know for sure. That's a good start. My fault with MDHA has long been (what I think) is their inability to negotiate fair market value for the land they control AND to place requirements for what gets developed on those sites. The handling of the Trolley Barns and surrounding land seemed inept with the choice of developer (one major component still hasn't broken ground 9 years later!)... and the acquisition of land before the Music City Center was built. MDHA knew that was where the city wanted to build the convention center for years. Yet, developers were buying key parcels (Remember the Marks family from California?) swooping in and then selling them to Metro at 5X what they paid for it.  There was at least one lawsuit that MDHA filed, which I'm quite sure they lost.  I heard from several sources back then that former MDHA chief Rick Barnhardt isn't  the brightest bulb by far.  I don't know him personally; so take that FWIW. 

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.