Here's the pitch on Marlins Web Posted: 04/01/2006 12:00 AM CST

 

Tom Orsborn

Express-News Staff Writer

A proposed baseball-specific stadium in Bexar County that would serve as a home for the Florida Marlins likely would seat 38,700 and include 69 suites, County Judge Nelson Wolff said Friday during a meeting with local business leaders.

 

With their first face-to-face meeting with Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria just days away, Wolff, District Attorney Susan Reed and other county officials spoke to a gathering of nearly 30 people about Bexar County's plans to lure the Marlins to San Antonio.

 

Mayor Phil Hardberger and former mayor Henry Cisneros also were present at a meeting that was part pep rally and part strategy session for a group that included the heads of most of the area's chambers.

 

"There is communitywide support already being generated, and the message today was how much support can we take to the Marlins," said Duane Wilson, president and CEO of the North San Antonio Chamber of Commerce. "We want to show them we can fill the suites, and that the community as a whole loves baseball."

 

Wolff said he has received 36 non-binding, oral commitments from area businesses to rent suites. That information, he said, will be passed on to Loria on Monday in Houston, where a San Antonio contingent led by Wolff, Hardberger and Reed will watch the Marlins' season opener against the Astros as Loria's guest.

 

The highlight of Friday's hourlong meeting hosted by the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce was a computer-generated slide show that included details about the proposed stadium and the outline for a memorandum of agreement between the county and the team.

 

According to the Marlins, the ballpark likely would sit on 18.2 acres, require an additional 100-140 acres for parking and include 38 luxury suites with 16 seats each.

 

There also would be 24 premium suites (20 seats each) and seven party suites (30 seats). The four newest ballparks in MLB have an average of 64 suites.

 

The presentation didn't address the cost of the proposed ballpark, the possible sites or whether it would have a retractable roof. Wolff said the Marlins told him weeks ago the stadium would cost $310 million, not including a retractable roof or the cost of the land.

 

Wolff's plan to pay for the proposed stadium requires the county to provide as much as $200 million, with the Marlins picking up the rest of the tab. The county's share would be generated, pending voter approval, through an extension of the hotel and car rental taxes paying for the AT&T Center.

 

Should the Marlins decide to enter into serious negotiations, county officials say they hope the talks would mirror their arena negotiations with the Spurs in 1999. That process began with the team sending the county a letter of intent.

 

The parties then entered into a memorandum of agreement, which was needed for the county to call an election.

 

After voters approved a 1.75 percent tax on hotel stays and a 5 percent tax on car rentals to pay $147.5 million in county bonds, a lease agreement was negotiated. The Spurs paid the rest, including cost overruns.

 

"That's the template we want to use," said Seth Mitchell, Wolff's chief of staff.

 

To reach a memorandum of agreement, county officials say the Marlins must commit to the following:

 

A long-term presence in Bexar County.

 

A cap on the county's fiscal contribution.

 

Responsibility for construction and operation of the ballpark.

 

Meaningful local ownership.

 

Wolff said several parties have approached him about becoming minority owners in the Marlins.

 

San Antonio billionaire B.J. "Red" McCombs confirmed Friday he spoke last week with Marlins president David Samson in a "friendly, get-acquainted" phone call.

 

McCombs told the San Antonio Express-News last month he would give serious consideration to buying into the Marlins if it would help the team move to San Antonio.

 

Samson "just called to introduce himself," McCombs said Friday. "He said he appreciated the comment about my interest in the Marlins and that he enjoyed his discussions with Judge Wolff and that the team's interest in San Antonio was serious. There was no commitment given and none was asked.

 

"I think San Antonio has a great shot (at landing the Marlins). Obviously, a lot has to be done before that can be accomplished. But when you have the president of the club just calling an interested citizen saying, 'I want to thank you for making a positive comment and am interested in San Antonio,' it's a good sign."

 

 

 

[email protected] Express-News staff writers Josh Trudell and Chuck Blount contributed to this report.

 

 

 

Link

 

 

 

 

 

Here is a link to the actual Powerpoint Presentation the County has for the Marlins:

 

 

 

Powerpoint Presentation]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now I'm going to say this....

 

 

 

Yall are going to hate and see this as fluff. San Antonio in all their pipe dreams for a second team has never actually been 'this serious'

 

 

 

Take it however you want.

 

 

 

Have a good day.

 

 

 

:hat

so the stadium costs 310 without land and a retractable roof. how much would land be?

so the stadium costs 310 without land and a retractable roof. how much would land be?

 

 

all depends on the site :hat

so the stadium costs 310 without land and a retractable roof. how much would land be?

 

 

all depends on the site :hat

 

do you have a range? does $40 million sound about right or is that too much?

so the stadium costs 310 without land and a retractable roof. how much would land be?

 

 

all depends on the site :hat

 

do you have a range? does $40 million sound about right or is that too much?

 

Probably on the high side, but we can use it for arguements sake.

310 without a roof and land? If they still insist on the roof in SA, then that's going to be too high.

I think all the numbers SA is putting out there are for a stadium without a roof.

AND that is how the cookie crumbles.

The dimensions given in the presentation are similar to those at Dolphins Stadium. They could very well be the dimensions for the ballpark HOK designed for Miami. The new ballpark also includes a new version of the Teal Tower (25 foot fence).

so we're looking at a stadium that costs about $350 million without a roof, including the cost of land. the marlins are prepared to contribute $190 million and bexar county has pledged $200 million. that's $390 million. if they wanted to do this they would have done so already, unless they are determined to have a roof.

so we're looking at a stadium that costs about $350 million without a roof, including the cost of land. the marlins are prepared to contribute $190 million and bexar county has pledged $200 million. that's $390 million. if they wanted to do this they would have done so already, unless they are determined to have a roof.

 

Except there has been no plan to finance the Marlins' portion presented other than "go to the bank."

so we're looking at a stadium that costs about $350 million without a roof, including the cost of land. the marlins are prepared to contribute $190 million and bexar county has pledged $200 million. that's $390 million. if they wanted to do this they would have done so already, unless they are determined to have a roof.

 

 

...and here's where SA has a huge advantage over So. Florida. They wouldn't need a roof in SA, because there aren't the same probs. with rain. Now, heat and humidity -- still a problem.

Except there has been no plan to finance the Marlins' portion presented other than "go to the bank."

 

 

Red McCombs'll finance 'em (he owns a couple banks)! He said he'd do anything but take over control of the team!

 

Or not. He's not stupid enough to make a bad loan just to get something accomplished...

 

What are the Marlins valued at though? Forbes says $136 mil... Loria owns 90%, and would probably be required to sell 25-30% to local investors... That's $34m (at 25%). Naming rights is another $50m (http://www.namingrightsonline.com/mlb_nr.htm) or so. So that's $84m out of the needed $110 mil.

 

Plus whatever the land costs. So that's $50-60 mil they'd need to figure out.

Naming rights are not paid in front.

Naming rights are not paid in front.

 

 

No they're not, but it's a guaranteed income that it would not be hard to get a loan against the amount.

Naming rights are not paid in front.

 

 

No they're not, but it's a guaranteed income that it would not be hard to get a loan against the amount.

Depends on the length of the deal. Long-term would make it really easy. AT&T Park is taken by the Giants, so are we looking at Toyota Park or Clear Channel Park?

Keep these thing in mind before you pack their bags:

 

1. Proposals ALWAYS looks great. You do not include negatives in proposals.

 

2. In the end San Antonio taxpayers will have their say count. They want baseball don't ya think they may ask "If Loria is willing to pay $300MM of this project why doesn't he own it and we will pay off the $10M-$50M-$150M over 30 years?" They will come to the same conclusion...paying a lease is not paying for the building of a stadium..

 

3. MLB owners have yet to vote on a move to S.A.. The Rangers and Astros no matter what's said will not be in favor of this and they do have friends in the game. Loria needs 20 of 30 owners to say yes....and he has few friends.

 

4. MLB owners will ask...what's in it for us? Loria gets free money from owners for the past few years...then gets a free stadium from S.A. and the owners, what do they get? They get a smaller TV/media market.

 

When it was Las Vegas I said....not a chance. San Antonio..I won't say not a chance but this is very unlikely to happen. Far too any obstacles...tax money...Astros/Rangers....MLB owners...

Depends on the length of the deal. Long-term would make it really easy. AT&T Park is taken by the Giants, so are we looking at Toyota Park or Clear Channel Park?

 

 

Valero Field

Tesoro Field (field makes more sense for oil companies )

H.E.B. Park (please no, it WOULD be called "The Butt", besides regional company)

Toyota

Clear Channel

Wamu

USAA

 

There's possibilities...

 

When it was Las Vegas I said....not a chance. San Antonio..I won't say not a chance but this is very unlikely to happen. Far too any obstacles...tax money...Astros/Rangers....MLB owners...

 

 

I pretty much agree with what you say, but I doubt there would be any problems with a tax vote here since it isn't taxing residents and there really does seem to be a lot of support for the idea of MLB (well, second major league team in general).

 

But I agree it's certainly not likely the Marlins are coming here. It's far more acceptable for a team from a semi-comparable market to come here (Minnesota, KC, etc), than from Miami.

A roofed stadium would cost about 40-50 million more.

A roofed stadium would cost about 40-50 million more.

 

 

Maybe if it was a straight dome, but they'd want a retractable roof which would cost like $120m more...

I'm a little freaked out by this.

Naming rights are not paid in front.

 

 

Huntington Banks has paid a pretty nice sum up front here in Columbus to build our new AAA Huntington Field. Their money goes right into the building fund or whatever.

 

So it's not out of the question, although AAA naming rights are considerably less than major league rights.

so we're looking at a stadium that costs about $350 million without a roof, including the cost of land. the marlins are prepared to contribute $190 million and bexar county has pledged $200 million. that's $390 million. if they wanted to do this they would have done so already, unless they are determined to have a roof.

 

Neither this or Hialeah's deal is anywhere close to being done. And the Marlins still have time to wait to see if Miami or Norfolk or any other city will get into the bidding. They're not agreeing to any deal outside of Florida as long as there's a credible proposal by South Florida on the table.

 

Naming rights are not paid in front.

 

Nope, but it worked for the Spurs.

 

Keep these thing in mind before you pack their bags:

 

1. Proposals ALWAYS looks great. You do not include negatives in proposals.

 

2. In the end San Antonio taxpayers will have their say count. They want baseball don't ya think they may ask "If Loria is willing to pay $300MM of this project why doesn't he own it and we will pay off the $10M-$50M-$150M over 30 years?" They will come to the same conclusion...paying a lease is not paying for the building of a stadium..

 

3. MLB owners have yet to vote on a move to S.A.. The Rangers and Astros no matter what's said will not be in favor of this and they do have friends in the game. Loria needs 20 of 30 owners to say yes....and he has few friends.

 

4. MLB owners will ask...what's in it for us? Loria gets free money from owners for the past few years...then gets a free stadium from S.A. and the owners, what do they get? They get a smaller TV/media market.

 

When it was Las Vegas I said....not a chance. San Antonio..I won't say not a chance but this is very unlikely to happen. Far too any obstacles...tax money...Astros/Rangers....MLB owners...

 

1. Absolutly

2. Yep, but hopefully they come to the same conclusion nearly every other MLB city has over the past 50 years

3. Actually I believe it is 22 or 23 votes, but see #4.

4. Turning a low-revenue team into a mid or high revenue team is what they get. They get a team that no longer takes approx. $20M from other teams in revenue sharing to a team that will be contributing to it. Adding South Florida to the number of sites that they can threaten teams with. Nevermind that South Florida has never been too generous with paying for MLB, the mere threat will help teams in forcing concessions from their host cities.