Jump to content

Atlanta Braves are planning to leave Turner Field


Olson30

Recommended Posts

I hope not, I don't want any more public funded stadiums.

I also don't want the Rays to have a sizable revenue bump, they are dangerous enough as it is.

I figured you wouldn't like that. Especially being a resident. I don't really care about that. Baseball wins so I'm happy. :D

The revenue bump is a scary proposition. Hadn't thought of that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just idiotic.

Turner Field is a baseball-only stadium, with plenty of luxury box and club seats, and all the modern amenities and whistles that any ballpark built in the last 20 years has.

And it's only 17 years old.

There are some sports teams that need a new stadium--A's, Raiders, Chargers, etc. The Braves decidedly do not need one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Atlanta wants a new stadium let the team pay for it. Why should the citizens have to pay any of the estimated $672 million it's going to cost. And you know that estimate is just an estimate. The thing will probably come close to $800 million by the time it's built. The team usually places between 10th and 15th in annual attendance and it's not because of the lack of mass transit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Atlanta wants a new stadium let the team pay for it. Why should the citizens have to pay any of the estimated $672 million it's going to cost. And you know that estimate is just an estimate. The thing will probably come close to $800 million by the time it's built. The team usually places between 10th and 15th in annual attendance and it's not because of the lack of mass transit.

I'm not a person who is opposed to any public financing of stadiums. It may be hokey, but sports teams do have a way of uniting a local community. I was watching a Youtube video of the fan reactions to last year's Ravens-Broncos playoff games and it really brought home how much of a communal moment it was.

So on that basis alone, in principle I'm okay with at least part of a stadium's cost being publicly financed. A sports team can indeed be an asset to the community.

That being said, if there were ever a situation where the team needs to pay for the entire stadium (and the surrounding infrastructure) itself, it's the Braves and this nonsense.

Stadiums can be replaced either if a) the stadium is clearly old and outdated and is putting the team at a competitive disadvantage, or b) if the stadium is clearly not a proper venue for the sport that it is hosting (a la the LA Coliseum and the Dodgers when they first moved to LA).

Turner Field fits into neither of these categories. It's not quite OPACY or PNC or the Giants' park in terms of being an outstanding setting, but it's a fine ballpark with every amenity the Braves need. It's not dated or aged in any sense. And while it was technically built first to host the Olympics, it was designed strictly for baseball in its final form.

So, yes, this is one clear example where the team needs to bear 100% of the cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fulton County (which includes Atlanta) is not putting forth any funding for the new stadium (they refused to pay for a couple of hundred million in renovations) because the Braves are moving to Cobb County whose government apparently has agreed to fund a large portion of the cost for a new stadium. From an economic perspective, public funding of stadia is a losing proposition - but as the owner of a team if someone is willing to give your team (bank account) a hand out, why not take it??

Edited by Plutarch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/13/the-braves-ballpark-bamboozling-is-beginning-on-schedule/

Revenue bonds could be paid off with funds generated by the stadium complex, although county taxpayers could still be responsible for making up the difference if stadium or other revenues fall short . . . A more likely scenario, though, is that the stadium will more than pay for itself and that its presence will unleash a flood of additional sales and hotel/motel tax revenues.

Taxpayers are going to get hosed again.

One would think that after the Marlins fiasco they would at least have to wait a few more years before pulling this garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/13/the-braves-ballpark-bamboozling-is-beginning-on-schedule/

Taxpayers are going to get hosed again.

One would think that after the Marlins fiasco they would at least have to wait a few more years before pulling this garbage.

Hosed is right ..... most of the studies that show that a stadium is economically positive utilize 'pie-in-the-sky' estimates. Things as far fetched as the economic value of the people who pick up the trash blocks away. There has never been a study endorsed by those who want the stadium built that has ever been correct about the amount of economic impact. The people of Fulton county should be happy that the people of Cobb county will get stuck with this (of course the state gov't would step in and impose the burden over all Georgians if the burden os too big)

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.




  • Posts

    • While I don’t think Santander is a great or even good outfielder, I think some of this is a little much. The Hays/Santander switch implies that LF at Fenway is easy to play, which I don’t agree with. It certainly has less ground to cover for sure, but it’s a gimmicky spot that is a little tricky. Plus it was 36 and windy. Now with that I will say 2 things:  1. Would have rather seen Stowers get the start. 2. Definitely would have liked McKenna to be out there in the 8th.
    • I guess my question would be this: what is the level of production he would have to have to make it okay for Westburg/Ortiz to stay down? Does this production even exist? I am also assuming with this question that those 2 are producing in AAA.
    • Here is   the issues the MSA is running into with the stadium improvement financing. *As of March 13, 2023, project is cancelled. Project will rebid but no definite date yet.** https://www.bizjournals.com/baltimore/news/2023/03/07/baltimore-ravens-stadium-upgrades-financing.html After promising the Baltimore Ravens up to $600 million worth of upgrades to their stadium if the team resigned its lease, the Maryland Stadium Authority is now exploring how to finance those renovations amid a difficult economic environment. Chief Financial Officer David Raith told the Stadium Authority’s board on Tuesday that the agency won’t be able to finance $435 million in planned improvements to M&T Bank Stadium with only tax-exempt bonds and is seeking the OK to find a bank loan or other financing to pay for up to $200 million of the project costs. Financing updates to the Baltimore Ravens stadium primarily using tax-exempt bonds, a cheaper option, won’t work because those types of bonds have to be spent in a three-year period. If the money is not spent in three years, Raith said the authority would be at risk of being penalized by the Internal Revenue Service. “I knew there was no way we could spend $600 million in three years,” Raith told the Baltimore Business Journal after the meeting. Raith wants to split the $435 million cost into two methods of financing — $235 million in tax-exempt revenue bonds and $200 million in taxable financing. That money could be raised through a letter of credit, a taxable bond deal or a bank loan. Acquiring taxable debt will be costly as Raith predicted the $200 million in taxable financing would have an interest rate of 5.6%, compared to 3.6% for the tax-exempt bonds. He said the agency would prefer a bank loan for the $200 million because the agency would not have to pay interest until it starts using the loan funds, which could save millions of dollars a year. But Raith said he first needs to see if there are any lenders interested in ponying up the money. “I just don’t know whether there is enough commitment from the banking community for something like that,” he said. The renovations are part of a plan by the state to incentivize both the Ravens and Orioles to stay put in Baltimore. The Maryland General Assembly last year passed House Bill 896, which allowed the stadium authority to borrow $1.2 billion in bonds to pay for improvements to both stadiums. The stadium improvement funds were used as a carrot to get the teams to sign long-term leases. Once the team signed a lease, it would then get access to $600 million. The Ravens in January signed a 15-year lease extension that keeps the team at M&T Bank Stadium until 2037. The signing of the lease started a one-year period for the stadium authority to get financing in place for planned upgrades to M&T Bank Stadium. The Ravens could not be reached for comment. To get all $435 million for renovations financed as quickly as possible, the stadium authority approved a measure on Tuesday allowing Raith to start exploring how he wants to secure the $200 million in taxable borrowing. But the authority also needs the Maryland General Assembly to pass legislation that would allow dual financing for the project. House Bill 524 introduced in Annapolis would create separate financing funds for both the Ravens and Orioles project costs. The clock is ticking for Raith to secure this funding. He said a potential increase by the Federal Reserve of the federal interest rate could cost the authority and taxpayers millions more. “With rising interest rates, the [Maryland Stadium Authority] is trying to get to market as soon as possible to get the best interest rates and generate as much money as possible to ensure we can complete the projects,” Raith said. Unlike the Ravens, the Orioles have yet to sign a lease. The Orioles' lease is up at the end of 2023 and Raith said if the Orioles sign a long-term lease the stadium authority would have to repeat this process again. Raith said he was surprised that the Ravens lease agreement happened first because the team's deal still had five years left on it. “I don’t think anyone expected that the Ravens would be the first ones to the plate because the Orioles' lease was the one that really was a top priority,” Raith said
    • Someone should ask him about maybe having the highest prices for beer of any team? This is at the new market stores. 16oz beers are $10.99 for domestic and $12.49 for craft, hard, seltzers, or imported beers. 24oz beers are $14.99 for domestic and $15.75 for imports or hard seltzers. 12oz canned cocktails are $12.99.
    • I would say "stunning".... but is it, really?
    • Don't like this answer either.He is going to do Baltimore a favor and give them a gift. Don't trust him. Plus the Ravens stadium improvement money may not all come from bonds and maybe have to partially pay it off with a bank loan. As the MSA said the longer you wait on the financing, the more it will cost the taxpayers. I have heard the longer you wait and with interest rates rising the State is not sure the Orioke improvements can all be done with public funds.   The Orioles will play their first home game next Thursday, and Gov. Wes Moore and his children will throw out the first pitch. The Orioles’ current lease with the state of Maryland, its landlord, expires at the end of the year. Angelos has said that he hopes signing a long-term lease can be an “All-Star break gift,” meaning the deal would be done by early July. He didn’t provide an update on timing Thursday when asked, but said “we’re going to come through” when it comes to the lease. “There’s no question about it,” he said.
    • During the game, Angelos was asked if the Orioles would seek contract extensions with players such as Rutschman or top rookie Gunnar Henderson. Other teams have signed young players to long-term deals to avoid losing them later in free agency. For example, Wander Franco signed an 11-year, $182 million deal with the Tampa Bay Rays — a small-market team like the Orioles — this offseason. The Cleveland Guardians, another franchise Angelos pointed to as a team the Orioles would like to emulate, this week signed their young star, Andrés Giménez, to a seven-year contract reportedly worth $106.5 million. Angelos first pointed to the difficulty that small market teams face in MLB as compared to the NFL but did say he hoped that executive vice president and general manager Mike Elias would be able to extend the team’s young talent.   They’re going to do what they can within the system that they’re in. Does that mean extensions? Absolutely, I would hope so. But you gotta go with the system you’re in. It’s much, much, much tougher to be in the baseball system than in the football or basketball system,” he said.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...