What's new

Fay Vincent's comments on Loria & stadium

Strike 3

Muckdog
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,222
Reaction score
0
Miami Herald-Barry Jackson
CHATTER

? MLB officials would be more likely to approve steroid use than suggest publicly that the Marlins should pay for their own stadium. But Fay Vincent, who was commissioner when the franchise was awarded in 1991, said it's time for owner Jeffrey Loria to do that or find other private financing: ``I don't think there's much choice. People don't want to subsidize rich owners.''

Loria has offered $212 million (mostly in rent payments) toward a project that could top $500 million. (A gap of at least $30 million remains). But Vincent suggested the Marlins could pay more because ''I'm sure the franchise is making a lot of money. They're getting enormous shares of revenue sharing.'' (The Marlins and MLB executive vice president Rob Manfred insist the team isn't making a profit.)

Vincent, who lives in Vero Beach, said owners thought baseball here would be ``a spectacular success, but I don't think it has been.''

? Word is Dolphin Stadium officials have drawn up a contract for UM in the past week, and negotiations are in the late stages. Several UM officials continue to believe a move there (in '08 or '09) is more likely than staying at the Orange Bowl. But no decision will be made until several key upcoming meetings with Board of Trustees members.

? Though some trustees oppose moving, UM has pointed out that the number of alumni within 20 miles of both stadiums is nearly equal (41,000 for the OB; 40,000 for Dolphin Stadium).
 

DcFishFan

Muckdog
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
0
Miami Herald-Barry Jackson
CHATTER

? Though some trustees oppose moving, UM has pointed out that the number of alumni within 20 miles of both stadiums is nearly equal (41,000 for the OB; 40,000 for Dolphin Stadium).

Wow. Trustees aren't even being subtle about favoring alumni over current students. I'm not saying that the trustees shouldn't go for the money, but c'mon, be a little subtle about it...
 

pierremvp1

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
3,162
Reaction score
0
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/columni...sfla-sports-col
.
.
BERARDINO: Honey, I shrunk the ballpark
Published June 3, 2007


As the Marlins' push for a new stadium drags on with no resolution in sight, here's an idea for a possible way to break the stalemate.

Build smaller.

That's what the Oakland A's are planning to do if they receive approval for an ambitious project in nearby Fremont, Calif.

At 32,000, the capacity for Cisco Field would be the smallest in the majors and by far the smallest of any new park built in this latest wave of construction. However, A's owner Lew Wolff says that's the number that makes the most sense for a franchise that has always had trouble drawing fans, in good times or bad.

"We came to that [figure] with a lot of study a lot of people don't agree with, but we would like to see a filled-up ballpark, and I think the players would too," Wolff said last week in a phone interview. "We're in an area, and I think South Florida is a little bit the same way, where there's a lot of competition for the discretionary dollar, where people enjoy outdoor recreation. All these various things lead us to believe we should have a smaller rather than a larger park."

Another factor, Wolff admitted, is that it "costs incrementally less as you build smaller."

Perhaps the Marlins, understandably reluctant to build without a retractable roof, should consider cutting costs by dropping the planned capacity of their new stadium from the current 38,000.

That way, like the A's, they could sell intimacy as much as novelty.

"We're very hooked on getting the fans as close as possible," said Wolff, who made his fortune in real estate and hotels. "Sometimes the glow of the first five years of a new ballpark is overstated. There are certain markets -- I won't name them -- that if they had 10,000 less seats in their parks, the local government would be very happy."

The A's have reached 30,000 in average attendance just four times since moving from Kansas City in 1968, that during the Bash Brothers' heyday of 1989-92. The Marlins, by comparison, haven't crossed the 30,000 plateau in average attendance since their first two seasons (1993-94).

Another aspect of the A's plan that is refreshing is the limited reliance on public funds.

Wolff, 69, has already secured purchasing rights for 226 acres that would be used for the proposed Ballpark Village. The A's new home would eat up $450 million of the planned $1.8 billion redevelopment deal, a project that would include a hotel, nearly 3,000 luxury townhouses and 550,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space.

There is also talk of an A's-funded school on the property.

The club would fund the vast majority of that overhaul. No bond issues. No grab for general funds.

"I'm basically a developer that does urban redevelopment," Wolff said. "I've learned over the years, the more cookies you take out of the public jar, the sicker you get. It's really good for the public and private side to minimize trying to use funds that can go to other priorities."

Now you might say Wolff has little choice but to go this route after the Giants built their new home across the bay without taxpayer assistance, but it's still nice to hear such straight talk from a member of baseball's ownership fraternity.

Keep in mind, Wolff is a former University of Wisconsin fraternity brother of Commissioner Bud Selig. Whenever Wolff calls his old friend, he identifies himself as "No. 30," a reference to his junior standing among major league owners.

If the A's move to Fremont goes through, Wolff's spot on the pecking order should improve considerably.

Around the horn

WHOA, BILLY: Like the Marlins, the A's don't plan to jack up their $65 million payroll upon approval of a new stadium. Even once they make the move, perhaps by 2011, the A's will keep their player outlay in the range of 50 percent of total revenues. "It will be business as usual," A's owner Lew Wolff said. "We have a staff, led by [GM] Billy Beane, that is very, very bottom-line oriented. Billy loves doing it that way. Frankly, it's more fun."

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I have a few thoughts on the above, but I'll start with just one:
.
.
This owner has a self-esteem problem if he put himself at #30 in a club of 30 that Loria is a member of.
 

CapeFish

Muckdog
Joined
Jun 17, 2003
Messages
23,494
Reaction score
1
Wolff is one of the rookie owners. He is still learning, he's never owned a team before.
 

Guest

Guest
(The Marlins and MLB executive vice president Rob Manfred insist the team isn't making a profit.)
:lol

Anyway, the plan to build smaller could be a good one. Possibly make the stadiums footprint smaller, finding more locations where it could easily be fit into. Reduce the funds needed to build it and put them towards the roof. Maybe 33,000 seats not including luxury boxes.
 

pierremvp1

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
3,162
Reaction score
0
Another thought that I had when reading this was the price mentioned as the cost of this stadium. 450 million, for a 32000 seat stadium, with no roof, in Fremont. And we're led to believe that 490 million is an accurate figure for a stadium 20% larger, with a roof, in Miami.
 

marlin2266

Muckdog
Joined
Aug 28, 2002
Messages
915
Reaction score
0
Another thought that I had when reading this was the price mentioned as the cost of this stadium. 450 million, for a 32000 seat stadium, with no roof, in Fremont. And we're led to believe that 490 million is an accurate figure for a stadium 20% larger, with a roof, in Miami.


I can sign off on the 33K, with the proviso that walkways and SRO would accomodate 36-38K for big games (WS, All-Star, Jankees, etc.......). Including fire-law clearance.
 

prinmemito

Muckdog
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
6,445
Reaction score
0
Another thought that I had when reading this was the price mentioned as the cost of this stadium. 450 million, for a 32000 seat stadium, with no roof, in Fremont. And we're led to believe that 490 million is an accurate figure for a stadium 20% larger, with a roof, in Miami.

Land is much more expensive in the Bay Area, I believe.
 

TSwift25

Muckdog
Joined
Dec 2, 2003
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
0
Another thought that I had when reading this was the price mentioned as the cost of this stadium. 450 million, for a 32000 seat stadium, with no roof, in Fremont. And we're led to believe that 490 million is an accurate figure for a stadium 20% larger, with a roof, in Miami.

Land is much more expensive in the Bay Area, I believe.

Fremont's not Oakland, and neither of which would be mistaken for San Francisco.
 
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
Wolff is one of the rookie owners. He is still learning, he's never owned a team before.
Wolff may be a "rookie" owner, but if there is any owner in MLB who can pull this off, it's him. Also, he has been sowing the seeds for this for years... he had an option to purchase the team for a time and he used all of that time on due diligence for this stadium proposal.

Believe me - you guys would love to have an owner like Wolff. He does he work behind the scenes, he doesn't alienate the fanbase by playing footsie with other cities, etc. And he takes zero credit for the Moneyball success engineered by Billy Beane - he just stays out of the way.

Cape - I'm not trying to be confrontation here, but dismissing Wolff as a rookie owner who's still learning is quite shortsighted IMO.
 

Shaq-Man

Muckdog
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
8,206
Reaction score
0
Another thought that I had when reading this was the price mentioned as the cost of this stadium. 450 million, for a 32000 seat stadium, with no roof, in Fremont. And we're led to believe that 490 million is an accurate figure for a stadium 20% larger, with a roof, in Miami.

Land is much more expensive in the Bay Area, I believe.

Fremont's not Oakland, and neither of which would be mistaken for San Francisco.
Regarding the original statement, yes, Fremont is absurdly expensive, much like the rest of the Bay Area.

Just because it's not SF does not mean it's still not astronomically expensive.
 
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
The roof adds $100m to the cost. Yeah land in the SF Bay Area is more expensive, but is it really that much more than downtown Miami (I trust that Marlins2003 and other insiders know the answer to that one better than I do)?

I think that $490m is optimistic, and the people at the negotiating table know it. That's why they are quibbling over $30m, because the reality is that there is a fair to good likelihood that the stadium will go over budget and someone (ownership according to the most recent published reports, which I still find hard to believe) will get stuck with the bill.
 

SoFlaFish

Muckdog
Joined
Dec 24, 2003
Messages
691
Reaction score
0
The roof adds $100m to the cost. Yeah land in the SF Bay Area is more expensive, but is it really that much more than downtown Miami (I trust that Marlins2003 and other insiders know the answer to that one better than I do)?

I think that $490m is optimistic, and the people at the negotiating table know it. That's why they are quibbling over $30m, because the reality is that there is a fair to good likelihood that the stadium will go over budget and someone (ownership according to the most recent published reports, which I still find hard to believe) will get stuck with the bill.

What all of you seem to forget is that the $490M price tag for the stadium down here DOES NOT INCLUDE THE REAL ESTATE/LAND PURCHASE PRICE/VALUE OF LAND. That is because they would be using property that already belongs to the City of Miami or Miami-Dade County. If we were talking about private land or land that needed to be condemned, then the price tag would skyrocket and probably, then, you could compare the prices of the stadium here with the stadium in Fremont equally. Until then, the Fremont price tag probably includes land, while the Marlins price tag does not.
 

Out of the Past

Muckdog
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
3,416
Reaction score
0
The roof adds $100m to the cost. Yeah land in the SF Bay Area is more expensive, but is it really that much more than downtown Miami (I trust that Marlins2003 and other insiders know the answer to that one better than I do)?

I think that $490m is optimistic, and the people at the negotiating table know it. That's why they are quibbling over $30m, because the reality is that there is a fair to good likelihood that the stadium will go over budget and someone (ownership according to the most recent published reports, which I still find hard to believe) will get stuck with the bill.

What all of you seem to forget is that the $490M price tag for the stadium down here DOES NOT INCLUDE THE REAL ESTATE/LAND PURCHASE PRICE/VALUE OF LAND. That is because they would be using property that already belongs to the City of Miami or Miami-Dade County. If we were talking about private land or land that needed to be condemned, then the price tag would skyrocket and probably, then, you could compare the prices of the stadium here with the stadium in Fremont equally. Until then, the Fremont price tag probably includes land, while the Marlins price tag does not.
I'm think Cisco owned the land for the A's stadium.
 

Guest

Guest
Build PNC v2, throw a roof on. $380 million right there. :whistle
 

Shaq-Man

Muckdog
Joined
Oct 9, 2003
Messages
8,206
Reaction score
0
What all of you seem to forget is that the $490M price tag for the stadium down here DOES NOT INCLUDE THE REAL ESTATE/LAND PURCHASE PRICE/VALUE OF LAND. That is because they would be using property that already belongs to the City of Miami or Miami-Dade County. If we were talking about private land or land that needed to be condemned, then the price tag would skyrocket and probably, then, you could compare the prices of the stadium here with the stadium in Fremont equally. Until then, the Fremont price tag probably includes land, while the Marlins price tag does not.
Bingo.
 

pierremvp1

Muckdog
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
3,162
Reaction score
0
Wolff, 69, has already secured purchasing rights for 226 acres that would be used for the proposed Ballpark Village. The A's new home would eat up $450 million of the planned $1.8 billion redevelopment deal, a project that would include a hotel, nearly 3,000 luxury townhouses and 550,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space.

.
.
.
Maybe somebody else can find a google earth map of exactly where this land is, but it clearly isn't prime real estate if Wolff managed to buy 226 acres. I would guess it's probably equivalant to the land value around the dump in the Hialeah Heights proposed site. Maybe 2 million an acre. So figure land cost of roughly 30 million. The 490 million from the Marlins still doesn't add up.
 

Top Bottom