Go Back   The Official Los Angeles Chargers Forum > Chargers Talk > General Discussions
Register FAQ Members List Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-27-2005, 11:46 AM
csfoster's Avatar
csfoster csfoster is offline
Keep the Chargers in SD!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: San Diego Gaslamp
Posts: 2,918
Default Public Perception is Everything....Reality Lost in Translation!

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniont...26nflmeet.html

Dear Mr.Trotter and Mr. Spanos,

For Bolts Fans and Fans of San Diego active in support of the development of a 21st century stadium to "Keep the Chargers the San Diego Chargers" and to fulfill a shared future vision of San Diego as a world class city, Thursday's UT article "Revenue issue major concern for Chargers" represents a step backward and a missed opportunity to promote this effort.

The wrong public message is being sent when a new stadium is tied to bottom-line future ticket price increases and/or fielding a competitive team without additional context also being provided. This is particularly true when no mention is made in the article that the development of the new stadium and the construction of necessary off-site public infrastructure
improvements as currently proposed by the Chargers does not require local government financing or taxpayer funding.

For those who are decidedly opposed to a new stadium, this article will no doubt be used to paint and promote a public perception that the new stadium is all about revenue and greed. Lost in translation, is the reality that the team has proposed to self-invest and/or privately finance 100% of the costs and assume all the financial risks for the $600+ million dollar development and construction of a new 21st century stadium.

This is a critical part of the essential message that the team needs to publicly broadcast whenever there is an opportunity to discuss anything related to the proposed new stadium.

Public Perception is Everything....Reality Lost in Translation!
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Dedicated to Keeping the Chargers the San Diego Chargers

Last edited by csfoster; 05-27-2005 at 12:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-27-2005, 02:21 PM
boltzpride's Avatar
boltzpride boltzpride is offline
PLEASE AJ,WE NEED SAFETYS
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: thermal
Posts: 600
Default

Isnt it always about the revenue. The team needs more revenue for larger signing bonuses and more guaranteed money for elite players and established coaches. The best way to generate more revenue is to build a new stadium. The league also needs to figure out how to divide up local revenues if they want to be able to negotiate a new labor agreement. The chargers are not building a new stadium for the locker rooms or training rooms.

Last edited by boltzpride; 05-27-2005 at 02:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-27-2005, 02:51 PM
foty89
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The Chargers can not use a penny of any new revenue that the stadium could produce for player expenses. That is covered by the salary cap and no team can exceed it. Coaches are a different story.

While new stadiums are always about more revenue in some fashion, San Diego is unique in that the proposed project is a whole area redevelopment of the site including housing, stores and hotels along with a large park and a state of the art stadium for not only the Chargers, but also the Aztecs, holiday bowl, possible BCS bowl and other special events.

It is important to remember that while the Chargers will indeed generate new revenue with a new stadium, they will still be vastly improving the area. And besides, what is wrong with making money? That is in fact what a business is suppose to do and as it will cost the city nothing to build, where is the problem here?

Let us also not forget the sad shape the Q is in right now. It is falling apart with over $50 million of deferred maintenance and falls further behind the NFL standard with each passing season.

Let us also remember that the Chargers proposal is based on what the city's own task force recommended, that the Chargers pay the cost of the stadium.

The current proposal of the Chargers is a good one, but it is just a starting point for reaching a deal. The problem we face is that the city council has failed to live up to the promise they made to work in good faith to get a stadium deal on the ballot in 2006. They have so far done nothing to reach this goal.

The Chargers have been trying to work with the city and all the city does is stonewall and avoid the issue. The Q is no going to last forever and the longer things take to get done, the more it will cost the city to keep up the Q.

Where is the sense in the approach the city is taking?

Go Bolts!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-27-2005, 02:57 PM
foty89
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The article also makes a good point about the importance of revenue to a team. While many have complained about the quality of the teams the Chargers have fielded at times, the fact that they are so far below other teams in the league certainly contributes to that.

If you want to have a winner, you have to treat your team like a winner. A new stadium is one part in the overall picture of how the Chargers can be a successful and winning team now and in the future.

Go Bolts!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-28-2005, 01:55 AM
Eowawa
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Arrow Not Only Not Cooperating But Showng A MESS to The Entire Nation

The current proposal of the Chargers is a good one, but it is just a starting point for reaching a deal. The problem we face is that the city council has failed to live up to the promise they made to work in good faith to get a stadium deal on the ballot in 2006. They have so far done nothing to reach this goal.

The Chargers have been trying to work with the city and all the city does is stonewall and avoid the issue. The Q is no going to last forever and the longer things take to get done, the more it will cost the city to keep up the Q.

Where is the sense in the approach the city is taking? RE: Forty
**************************************************

The frustrating part of this too for the Chargers is that they are concurrently trying to find a quality development partner to work with in solidifying a final proposal by the ever looming final deadline date of 2/06/06. Mark Fabioni has said (on KOGO radio last Sunday) that it has become increasingly harder to find that partner with the "ten ring circus show going on right now down at city hall. Our prospective partners read the papers too and are very uneasy about entering into a potential $2 billion dollar total project with us under such circumstances. They look for stability first and are not seeing it here at present"
The Chargers need a QUALITY partner because such a huge project is just too much for them to bear all alone. Cost overruns and unforeseen extra expenses are all on their shoulders (not the city), so you can readily understand their desire for a stable, dependable development partner.
Mark said they still could go ahead and furnish the final proposal as a last result, but for something this complex, also involving infrastructure, they really would prefer the input expertise of the partner for the detailed specifics. Can anyone in their right mind blame them?
He also mentioned they are considering using special resilent turf grass on the park section so that that those 30 acres can also be used for parking and tailgating for the fans on gamedays. The Rosebowl has done much the same on gamedays for years with good results.

Last edited by Eowawa; 05-30-2005 at 07:33 PM.. Reason: sp
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:18 PM.


© 2018 Los Angeles Chargers. All Rights Reserved.