77 Hitmen

IMO, this will be the make-or-break issue for the Sox and Bears proposals. It's one thing to get public funding solely by extending the current hotel tax, but who picks up any shortfalls? It should be the teams that are on the hook for this. Infrastructure costs will be another issue that'll need to be settled. Some of that would certainly come from public funding, but how much of that could be justified and approved? I know that some people will argue that there shouldn't be a single dime spent even on infrastructure needed for these projects, but I think that's an easier sell to the public. I guess we'll see.

According to the Sun-Times, the Bears proposal would still leave enough money from the hotel tax to fund a new Sox ballpark. So, I don't see this as the Bears beating the Sox to that funding source. https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2024/04/23/bears-new-stadium-dome-lakefront-soldier-field

Oh, absolutely I think a new Sox owner would want the team to play at the South Loop site instead of being locked in long-term at Guaranteed Rate Field in an area that just doesn't draw much visitors outside of attending a baseball game. Catering to fans who want a ballpark surrounded by a sea of parking lots isn't working out and isn't a good business model going forward. My guess is that if the team was sold in the next year or two (let's say Jerry suddenly passes) and The 78 lot was still available, they'd find a way to come up with $1B or so in private funding to make that ballpark happen because they realize that would boost market share and revenue for this team plus give a huge boost to the value of the franchise. As far as whether a new owner would move them out of state. I wouldn't say the chances of it are zero. The other markets don't compare to Chicago now, but they are booming. What if the new owner has roots in North Carolina or San Antonio? It's not implausible that they'd buy the team and move it to their home state. Utah has given the green light to spend $900M in public funds toward a new MLB stadium - do people really think that there isn't a buyer out there who wouldn't jump at the chance to play there instead of being the forgotten stepchild in Chicago being forever overshadowed by the Cubs and playing at what will soon be a 40-year old generic ballpark with not much around it?

In his mind, Eddie was never wrong about anything. He was right about SportsVision being a gold mine and he was right about Tropicana Field in St. Pete being a gold mine for MLB. What a visionary! Interesting quote from Jerry. That's about as close to admitting a mistake as he'll ever get. And note how his wording puts the blame back on the fans. It was us fans who weren't ready for their business model! It's like when someone says "I'm sorry you took it the wrong way" when they make a non-apology.

Yes, wasn't the subscription price something like $21/month? That's in 1982 dollars! It's equivalent to $68/month today. I don't remember if that was for both ON-TV and SportsVision and if there was a cheaper price for just SportsVision.

Wow - Sox fans advocating for the demise of our franchise so that Chicagoans can make a "Super Cubs" franchise a possibility. Simply incredible. I've said it before and it's worth repeating, the Sox must have the only fan base with diehards practically offering to drive the moving trucks out of town. I guess that's what 43 years of emotional abuse at the hands of Jerry and Eddie will do.

Agreed. There's no way this is going forward without JR committing a significant amount of private financing toward this project. Surely the city and state officials have made this clear to him and he'd have to be delusional to not realize this. Even the Royals are committing about $1B in private funds toward their new stadium proposal. Of course, we don't know all that's being discussed behind closed doors - and I don't expect all the finer details of what's being discussed in opening discussions to be made public. And I realize that Uncle Jerry didn't become a billionaire by conceding his final offer at the start of negotiations. But, in the end, I expect that Jerry or a new Sox owner will have to come up with something like $1B in private financing to make this happen.

The city has rejected a proposal by the White Sox to use the city's amusement tax as part of the funding stream for the new stadiums. https://www.chicagobusiness.com/politics/chicago-bears-white-sox-new-stadium-revenue-source-rejected-city

Jerry owes every Sox fan an apology.

Interesting. That would explain what's going on with this team, which is more than Jerry's usual level of incompetence.

I agree, but Jerry is 88 years old and will be 93 when the Sox current lease is up. Even if the South Loop ballpark goes forward, there's a very good chance he won't be around to see its opening. He's also said his family will sell the team after he's gone. Ownership change is coming. Of course, some might say that a new owner could be even worse than the way JR has run this team, but unless they move the team out of town, I don't see how that's possible.

The Bears hold their first meeting with the ISFA on their lakefront stadium plan: https://chicago.suntimes.com/bears/2024/04/04/bears-new-stadium-illinois-sports-facilities-authority-white-sox-south-loop-funding “Both teams appear to understand that the continuation of the 2% hotel tax is unlikely to pay for two new stadiums and pay off the legacy [outstanding] stadium debt,” Bilecki told the Sun-Times. “Which, I assume, is part of the ongoing discussion between the teams. That’s up to them to try and figure out. ... It’s the million-dollar question. We’ve got to wait to see what they propose.”

According to this article, this would be the text of the proposed ballot measure: "Shall the people of Chicago provide any taxpayer subsidies to the Chicago Bears or Chicago White Sox in order to build a new stadium or real estate development?," https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/chicago-politics/referendum-for-royals-chiefs-stadiums-fails-as-bears-white-sox-seek-public-funds/3400874/ Note that they only mention this being on the ballot in the city, not statewide. Also, I read this to mean that, if it was on the ballot and it passed, it would reject ANY amount of public funding even for infrastructure toward real estate development at the stadium sites. That's pretty strict and with no room for compromise. What if (and I realize it's a huge IF) JR agreed to foot the bill for the entire baseball stadium? Even in that scenario, no public money at all - not one cent - could be spent on things like moving the Metra tracks, extending the Riverwalk, or building a new Red Line subway stop at 15th and Clark. You're right that if the Bears and Sox were separated, the Bears could very well pass while the Sox measure would almost certainly fail. Heck, even some die-hard Sox fans are saying NOT ONE DIME! and some are even practically rooting for the team to move to Nashville before one red cent public cent is spent on The 78.

Heck, if the Royals can say they're proposing to provide $1B in private funding toward a new baseball stadium, then why can't Jerry commit to at least that amount? If JR came out and said he'd provide $1B in private funding toward the ballpark, my guess is that a stadium deal would very likely get approved by the state legislature.

Unfortunately, that's the way Jerry has operated the White Sox pretty much from day 1 and the result is that the Sox have had one of the worst post-season track records in the expanded playoff era of the last 30 years. Number of post-season appearances, number of years where they won at least 1 playoff series, etc - the Sox rank near the bottom. Penny wise and pound foolish is how this team operates. Now, that being said, two things can be (and IMO are) true: The Sox would draw well if they fielded teams that made the playoffs often and were able to advance at least more than once during JR's entire 43 year ownership. At the same time, IMO the Sox would be a better draw at The 78 than at 35th & Shields over the long haul through ups and downs of team performance. The current park is simply never going to get the love outside of the die-hard Sox fan base enough to broaden interest in this team. At best, people outside the core fan base see the park and location as "meh" and that's not going to change. And for those who argue that location won't matter as long as Reinsdorf owns the team. Well, he is 88. Ownership change is coming within the next 10 years and probably sooner than that.

That's not the whole story about the Caps and Wizards, though. The reason why the Virginia deal is dead is because the Caps and Wizards have come to an agreement with DC to stay at their current arena until 2050. The city has agreed to pay $515M in upgrades to Capital One Arena to keep those teams in Washington. https://www.axios.com/local/washington-dc/2024/03/27/capitals-wizards-alexandria-virginia-arena

But, they're not proposing to raise the hotel tax. The funding would come from the existing 2% hotel tax, not an increase in the tax.

This is basically how I feel about it. The existing 2% hotel tax isn't increasing and isn't going away regardless of what happens to the stadium proposals, so I don't see a negative impact on tourism and convention business. Does this mean I want the state to give JR a $1B blank check? Heck, no! If the McCaskeys can come up with $2B in private financing for their new stadium, why can't Uncle Jerry come up with at least a huge chunk of the $1B needed for his new stadium with private financing? Ultimately, I think there's a deal that can be done here for both projects and if so, that would mean two outstanding facilities and improved infrastructure for citizens to enjoy for decades to come and that'll help showcase Chicago as still one of America's premier cities instead of an image of a decaying, has-been city that doesn't think big anymore.

In addition to several of the points already brought up in this thread, one interesting thing they mention is that leagues usually charge franchises several hundred million $ for a relocation fee. Is this true for MLB? Does anyone know if the A's are paying such a fee? If so, it's another argument against JR's veiled relocation threat. If he or a new Sox owner are going to have to cough up a few hundred mil to the league to move to a smaller market, why not just apply that money toward private financing of a stadium at Lot 78? For those who can't read the article due to the paywall, they also mention that, while Nashville is one of the fastest growing metro areas in the US, it's still has 2.1M people vs. Chicagoland's 9.4M. Also, it's not a given that Nashville is going to hand Sox ownership $1B in public funding for a baseball stadium just after they spent over $1B in public money for the new Titans stadium that is currently under construction. In the end, my guess is that JR (or a new Sox owner if he passes) comes up with enough private money to get a South Loop ballpark built. Even if it takes a few years, as long as something else isn't built on that lot or the Sox sign a long-term lease at GRF, a new ballpark in the South Loop will still be an option.

My guess is that he'll ultimately pay for a significant chunk of a new stadium because that'll make the franchise much more valuable if and when it's sold. The McCaskeys (below) say they'll commit $2B in private funding towards a new Bears stadium. If they do that, then the pressure will be on JR to get private funding for a $1B baseball stadium. Like you said, we'll see. One thing I don't get is why the McCaskeys would pay $2B for a stadium that is publicly owned. Isn't that one of their main complaints now - that they don't own their own stadium and there's nothing around the stadium to generate a ton of revenue? Also, I'm not sure where they'd squeeze in a hotel and restaurants if they're going to build a massive indoor stadium on the existing parking lots and convert Soldier Field to public athletic facility.

If this source is accurate, I take that comment to mean that JR will ultimately pay up to make this happen if it comes to that. Of course, he isn't going to say that now right after he has asked for the moon. Heck, it worked once.....actually twice if you count his role in getting public financing for Nationals Park. He didn't get rich without knowing how to negotiate. He's not going to undermine that now by admitting what, if any, private funds he'll contribute toward a new stadium. But if this source truly believes this "will definitely happen", that tells me that, in the end, JR will pay up to make this happen. The Andy Shaw editorial from the other day gives one example of how he could make this happen. The Twitter post above about how much money the Braves are raking in gives an indication that JR isn't going to simply walk away from the 78 stadium if he's rebuffed by the state. At the very least, they'll have to get the state to pay for the infrastructure work, but that's probably something that the Gov and Legislature can accept and sell to the public.

Andy Shaw, former local TV political reporter and former head of the Better Government Association, offers a pretty good opinion on funding for a new South Loop Sox ballpark including a suggestion of how to privately finance the new stadium. https://chicago.suntimes.com/other-views/2024/03/13/white-sox-jerry-reinsdorf-white-sox-stadium-do-not-give-taxpayer-subsidies-andy-shaw

Phoenix has hosted a Super Bowl 4 times, with 3 of those at their current State Farm Stadium. Two of those were within an 8 year period (2015 and 2023). So, I expect them to be on the NFL's list host again at some point. Dallas hosted once and, while the game was indoors, the weather during "Super Bowl week" was miserable. https://abcnews.go.com/US/dallas-hit-bitter-cold-ice-super-bowl/story?id=12832352 New Orleans is hosting the game again next year. I'm personally not a fan of having it in Miami because it's outdoors and can rain - as it did for the Bears-Colts game. But, I can see why the NFL likes going there since the week of festivities in the host city leading up to the game has become an important part of the event.

This seems to be the case with any cold-weather city with an indoor stadium - yes, the NFL gives them a Super Bowl, but it's one and done. Detroit and Minneapolis have had two each, but only after they replaced their old domes with new stadiums. Unlike warm weather cities, I don't expect Detroit, Minneapolis, or Indianapolis to be in the rotation for another Super Bowl again. Chicago would probably be in the same boat given the typical weather here in Chicago in early Feb. even if the game itself is indoors. So, the promise that spending $1B+ in public funds will land Chicago a Super Bowl - it'll just be a one-time thing and not a recurring event.

Father time is going to make Jerry relocate away from this world at some point. Maybe even before any new ballpark in the South Loop ever opens. A number of Sox fans are actually saying this. They would rather the Sox move to Nashville than he gets "ONE DIME" of public money toward a new ballpark. But then again, I suppose it can be argued that they're not "most reasonable people." JR is no doubt is emboldened by the deals he got for New Comiskey and Nationals Park. This time, he won't get away without putting a big chunk of his own money toward this. There's probably some middle ground where he commits enough of his own funds to get a deal done. If he's going to refuse to pay anything, then the deal is dead IMO.