Falcons nearly a lock for new stadium by 2017

[Brave-Bird 08]

I'm actually fundamentally against this. $700 million will come from Blank's pockets. $300 million will come from a hotel-motel tax income and possible seat licensing.

That's not to say the thought of a new building isn't exciting. Will be a retractable roof.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/gwcca-approves-falcons-stadium-blueprint/nTRYP/

[BlueSky]

Now all they need is fans that will come to the games...and that's without the PSLs that are a virtual lock.

This is a boondoggle. There's not a damn thing wrong with the Georgia Dome. A billion dollars? To me, it's like deciding between a used Honda and a new Mercedes. Sure, the Mercedes is better, but is it $80,000 better?

[mattb6]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

[HedleyLamarr]

1. The Georgia Dome is owned by the state. Arthur Blank only owns the operating rights. He doesn't make anywhere near as much as he would if he owned the building.

(For those wondering why no local folks were very interested in buying the Thrashers, Philips Arena is owned by the city of Atlanta and the operating rights controlled by Atlanta Spirit, owners of the Hawks. Atlanta Spirit doesn't make as much as they would if they owned the building, so they likely would have charged a huge rent fee to any prospective Thrashers owner to make up for the money the city makes off the building. Not that Atlanta Spirit was keen on keeping hockey at Philips Arena to begin with.)

2. The only way Atlanta gets to host another Super Bowl is if they get a new building.

There is nothing wrong with the Georgia Dome, itself. But there's plenty of reasons why Blank feels compelled to build his own stadium.

[illwauk]

I'm actually fundamentally against this. $700 million will come from Blank's pockets. $300 million will come from a hotel-motel tax income and possible seat licensing.

That's not to say the thought of a new building isn't exciting. Will be a retractable roof.

http://www.ajc.com/n...lueprint/nTRYP/

Wait... so $700 million can't build a nice enough stadium on its own?

[Gothamite]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

[walby2]

When cities were replacing worn out but still functional 1930s-1960s stadiums with new ones in the 1990s and 2000s, it seemed wasteful but I could, on at least some level, sort-of accept the rationalization that stadiums had come so far over that period that the old ones were just hopelessly obsolete and not worth fixing up.

But the getting rid of the Georgia Dome? With a roof, plenty of luxury boxes and other profit-generating creature comforts? Seriously? A public subsidy to boot? And people there don't mind any of this?

[dfwabel]

When cities were replacing worn out but still functional 1930s-1960s stadiums with new ones in the 1990s and 2000s, it seemed wasteful but I could, on at least some level, sort-of accept the rationalization that stadiums had come so far over that period that the old ones were just hopelessly obsolete and not worth fixing up.

But the getting rid of the Georgia Dome? With a roof, plenty of luxury boxes and other profit-generating creature comforts? Seriously? A public subsidy to boot? And people there don't mind any of this?

They can tax who they want, but note that the Georgia World Congress Center cannot levy a tax, that is up to other bodies which have already extended the existing hotel/bed tax last year through 2050 as long as a new venue was on GWCC property. Visitors are generally the one's who pay the hotel/bed tax. A metro Atlanta resident may get a room once a year at best. All this will do is that it MAY impact conventions.

The terms of today's deal does also allow the team to control all revenues and even have the option to hire a facility operator or do it themselves since the agreement is with both the Falcons and the team's "stadium company".

To piggyback the comment from 'HedleyLemarr'...

The Falcons will say/say/have said: Georgia Dome only has 4,600 club seats, less than 7% of total football capacity of approx. 71,250. The Mezzanine Level (middle level) only has the club between the 20s on both sides, unlike newer stadiums. The price break from a club to a non-club is immense. Club seat and suite revenue is not shared NFL revenue.

The Populous study done for the GWCC in 2010 did outline/recommend the following:

1- Capacity of 65,000 expandable to 75,000

2- Minimum of 7,500 club seats with point of sale concessions to meet that amount

3- 111 suites with the possibility to build out to hold 1,250 more

[vmd9]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

So stadiums only have a lifespan of 20 years now?

If so, Washington, Carolina, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Baltimore, and Tampa should get ready to rebuild already? Some of them will be hitting 20 over the next few years. Not to mention in addition to those teams there are 8 or so that are even older than the Georgia Dome.

[dfwabel]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

So stadiums only have a lifespan of 20 years now?

If so, Washington, Carolina, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Baltimore, and Tampa should get ready to rebuild already? Some of them will be hitting 20 over the next few years. Not to mention in addition to those teams there are 8 or so that are even older than the Georgia Dome.

Not to derail the ATL talk, but:

SF is building NEW ...OAK has their own issues...STL is in arbitration...MIN is to be replaced...SD has their issues/difficulties...

Washington- FedEx Field has already reduced capacity to accommodate two party decks due to reduced season tickets. That waiting list is long gone. The District is also proposing to land swap the FBI Building and some land for a practice facility where RFK is for FedEx Field.

Carolina is still thought of as a potential team for Farmers Field in L.A.

Tampa's "Community Investment Tax" approved in 1996 still has not paid off the stadium and it tuns through 2026. There are even more questions on the tax since not as much has gone to road construction as the measure detailed.

[njmeadowlanders]

When cities were replacing worn out but still functional 1930s-1960s stadiums with new ones in the 1990s and 2000s, it seemed wasteful but I could, on at least some level, sort-of accept the rationalization that stadiums had come so far over that period that the old ones were just hopelessly obsolete and not worth fixing up.

But the getting rid of the Georgia Dome? With a roof, plenty of luxury boxes and other profit-generating creature comforts? Seriously? A public subsidy to boot? And people there don't mind any of this?

They can tax who they want, but note that the Georgia World Congress Center cannot levy a tax, that is up to other bodies which have already extended the existing hotel/bed tax last year through 2050 as long as a new venue was on GWCC property. Visitors are generally the one's who pay the hotel/bed tax. A metro Atlanta resident may get a room once a year at best. All this will do is that it MAY impact conventions.

The terms of today's deal does also allow the team to control all revenues and even have the option to hire a facility operator or do it themselves since the agreement is with both the Falcons and the team's "stadium company".

To piggyback the comment from 'HedleyLemarr'...

The Falcons will say/say/have said: Georgia Dome only has 4,600 club seats, less than 7% of total football capacity of approx. 71,250. The Mezzanine Level (middle level) only has the club between the 20s on both sides, unlike newer stadiums. The price break from a club to a non-club is immense. Club seat and suite revenue is not shared NFL revenue.

The Populous study done for the GWCC in 2010 did outline/recommend the following:

1- Capacity of 65,000 expandable to 75,000

2- Minimum of 7,500 club seats with point of sale concessions to meet that amount

3- 111 suites with the possibility to build out to hold 1,250 more

And then 5 new stadiums will open with different features that makes this new stadium a relic only 7 years into its existence so now we need a new one that will be obsolete in 3 seasons and it'll get to the point where they have 8 new stadiums for all 8 home games every year and then they'll play second halves in new stadia that are obsolete by the 2:00 warning and WHEN WILL IT END?!?!?!

[BlueSky]

1. The Georgia Dome is owned by the state. Arthur Blank only owns the operating rights. He doesn't make anywhere near as much as he would if he owned the building.

(For those wondering why no local folks were very interested in buying the Thrashers, Philips Arena is owned by the city of Atlanta and the operating rights controlled by Atlanta Spirit, owners of the Hawks. Atlanta Spirit doesn't make as much as they would if they owned the building, so they likely would have charged a huge rent fee to any prospective Thrashers owner to make up for the money the city makes off the building. Not that Atlanta Spirit was keen on keeping hockey at Philips Arena to begin with.)

2. The only way Atlanta gets to host another Super Bowl is if they get a new building.

There is nothing wrong with the Georgia Dome, itself. But there's plenty of reasons why Blank feels compelled to build his own stadium.

The state will own the new stadium too. The difference is where the revenue will go. FWIW, from what I've seen here in metro Atlanta so far, most people are against any public money whatsoever being used for a new stadium.

I don't understand the Super Bowl thing since they've had one here already. That's on the league, not the people of Atlanta.

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

Meet the Superdome, which opened in 1975.

[NJTank]

I would love to see the Saints in an outdoor stadium

[BlueSky]

I would love to see the Saints in an outdoor stadium

Not on a sunny 90 degree day with 90% humidity you wouldn't. Having seen the Saints outdoors when they played in Tulane Stadium, I can testify that the humidity is a killer regardless of season. Makes it smothering in hot weather and feel colder in winter. I'd hope though that a new outdoor stadium would have more than wooden bleacher benches like Tulane Stadium. After three hours on those, your a** made the rest of you forget you were hot or cold.

As for Atlanta, this is not the situation they had with Fulton County Stadium, i.e. a run-down facility unworthy of the NFL. Surely they could rework the Georgia Dome to add the kind of $eats they want and revise the revenue $tream instead of spending a BILLION FREAKIN' DOLLARS on a new stadium.

This in a city with a crumbling sewer system and water main breaks about every 5 minutes.

[walby2]

They can tax who they want, but note that the Georgia World Congress Center cannot levy a tax, that is up to other bodies which have already extended the existing hotel/bed tax last year through 2050 as long as a new venue was on GWCC property. Visitors are generally the one's who pay the hotel/bed tax. A metro Atlanta resident may get a room once a year at best. All this will do is that it MAY impact conventions.

It may be visitors who pay the amount allocated to a new stadium, but it's still coming out of the public treasury - it's money that could be used for any number of purposes arguably more beneficial than helping the Falcons to replace stadiums as often as some people replace cars. Honestly, if a facility as palatial as the Georgia Dome does not allow a sports business to run at a profit, then maybe there is a problem with the business or its model... it hardly seems like a situation that demands public involvement.

The terms of today's deal does also allow the team to control all revenues and even have the option to hire a facility operator or do it themselves since the agreement is with both the Falcons and the team's "stadium company".

To piggyback the comment from 'HedleyLemarr'...

The Falcons will say/say/have said: Georgia Dome only has 4,600 club seats, less than 7% of total football capacity of approx. 71,250. The Mezzanine Level (middle level) only has the club between the 20s on both sides, unlike newer stadiums. The price break from a club to a non-club is immense. Club seat and suite revenue is not shared NFL revenue.

The Populous study done for the GWCC in 2010 did outline/recommend the following:

1- Capacity of 65,000 expandable to 75,000

2- Minimum of 7,500 club seats with point of sale concessions to meet that amount

3- 111 suites with the possibility to build out to hold 1,250 more

Why can't club seats be added? What is preventing the Falcons from replacing, say, the top 10 or 15 rows of each section between the goal lines with club seats and building a club lounge? It's not like that hasn't been done before. It seems crazy to ask the public to chip in towards a billion dollar pricetag just so that you can add a few more club seats and suites to make a team a few more million dollars per year.

[bosrs1]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

So stadiums only have a lifespan of 20 years now?

If so, Washington, Carolina, Jacksonville, Cleveland, Baltimore, and Tampa should get ready to rebuild already? Some of them will be hitting 20 over the next few years. Not to mention in addition to those teams there are 8 or so that are even older than the Georgia Dome.

Not to derail the ATL talk, but:

SF is building NEW ...OAK has their own issues...STL is in arbitration...MIN is to be replaced...SD has their issues/difficulties...

Washington- FedEx Field has already reduced capacity to accommodate two party decks due to reduced season tickets. That waiting list is long gone. The District is also proposing to land swap the FBI Building and some land for a practice facility where RFK is for FedEx Field.

Carolina is still thought of as a potential team for Farmers Field in L.A.

Tampa's "Community Investment Tax" approved in 1996 still has not paid off the stadium and it tuns through 2026. There are even more questions on the tax since not as much has gone to road construction as the measure detailed.

Since when was Carolina on any of the LA lists?

Also SF, Oakland, and SD are all trying to replace stadiums that were built in the 60's (all were either baseball parks or multipurpose). In other words, they're still at the tail end of the last building boom that started with Georgia Dome in the 90's (or with Miami in 87 depending on which you view as the first in the latest building boom). The Metrodome is a bit of a odd duck being that it was built between building booms, but it's also the defective, POS Metrodome which in addition to being an injury lawsuit waiting to happen is also lacking most of the modern amenities.

St. Louis is as ridiculous as Atlanta but from what I understand Edward Jones Dome also lacks many of the modern amenities that Georgia Dome does have.

[BBTV]

I've always thought of the Georgia Dome and St. Louis Dome in the same category as New Comiskey Park - built post-cookie cutter era, yet pre-revenue-generating, corporate friendly modern stadium era. They've spent years bringing Comiskey up to standards, and even now (just from what I've read, mostly on here) while considerably improved, it's still behind most of the parks built even shortly after. Also... what dfwable said regarding revenue streams.

[tigerslionspistonshabs]

Is it just me or does it seem that sports facilities become obsolete quicker than electronics nowadays?

[BlueSky]

Is it just me or does it seem that sports facilities become obsolete quicker than electronics a Kardashian sister nowadays?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[mattb6]

what BlueSky said. What's wrong with the 20 year old Georgia Dome?

You just answered your own question.

exactly its only 20. theres many more stadiums older than this