February 11, 20251 yr 27 minutes ago, WBWSF said: Its going to be interesting to see how this plays out. The present ownership does not want to renew the lease at the present stadium. If there is new ownership maybe they might think differently about staying at the present stadium. A temporary renewal while something is being constructed makes sense, but it doesn't make sense for new ownership to want to be wedded to that site. They're not going to get the same ridiculous sweetheart deal that Reinsdorf got if they do a long lease, it was a bad deal for the state last time. Furthermore, there's clearly been no opportunity whatsoever for development around the stadium site in the current area. For a modern ownership group, the ability to develop surrounding real estate is really important, that's where a lot of the money is.
February 11, 20251 yr 7 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: A temporary renewal while something is being constructed makes sense, but it doesn't make sense for new ownership to want to be wedded to that site. They're not going to get the same ridiculous sweetheart deal that Reinsdorf got if they do a long lease, it was a bad deal for the state last time. Furthermore, there's clearly been no opportunity whatsoever for development around the stadium site in the current area. For a modern ownership group, the ability to develop surrounding real estate is really important, that's where a lot of the money is. Why would the state not give the Sox a sweetheart deal to stay at the Rate? The past deal is irrelevant to an existing stadium with no other obvious use case.
February 11, 20251 yr 12 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: Why would the state not give the Sox a sweetheart deal to stay at the Rate? The past deal is irrelevant to an existing stadium with no other obvious use case. What's the status of the actual facilities? In Houston, there are clear articles saying "the publicly owned stadiums are not getting enough money put into them for maintenance and upkeep", which means they are passing the buck onto future politicians.
February 11, 20251 yr Author 1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said: Why would the state not give the Sox a sweetheart deal to stay at the Rate? The past deal is irrelevant to an existing stadium with no other obvious use case. My guess? Because the upgrade of the near south side would be worth more to them than what has happened around the current location, which is basically nothing.
February 11, 20251 yr 2 hours ago, Balta1701 said: A temporary renewal while something is being constructed makes sense, but it doesn't make sense for new ownership to want to be wedded to that site. They're not going to get the same ridiculous sweetheart deal that Reinsdorf got if they do a long lease, it was a bad deal for the state last time. Furthermore, there's clearly been no opportunity whatsoever for development around the stadium site in the current area. For a modern ownership group, the ability to develop surrounding real estate is really important, that's where a lot of the money is. A temporary renewal might happen if something is being constructed but if its not being built in the South Loop, where else would it be built?
February 11, 20251 yr 17 hours ago, tray said: https://www.wbez.org/real-estate-development/2025/01/31/discovery-partners-institute-university-illinois-the-78-related-midwest-bruce-rauner Tax payers and the U of I are already out North of 30 Million on the 78 nonsense. The so-called "78" parcel sits on a former river bed that was filled in with garbage for over a decade. It has no value , which is why it was given away by Nadhmi Shakir Auchi, an Iraqi businessman who purchased it from then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s former political fixer Tony Rezko ( convicted in 2008 of corruption-related charges and sentenced to more than 10 years in federal prison.) The site is a worthless dump that unfortunately the U lof I and IL taxpayers had to find out after spending 30 Million. The least Related Development could do now is to stop dragging the White Sox and other potential partners/tenants into a pipe dream designed to bail Related out. Not going to happen...ever. Dead in the water. I know I'm wasting my breath on this response, but the article says nothing about the unsuitability of the 78 parcel for construction and doesn't suggest that as the reason why U of I pulled out. That's not to say that we should fork over taxpayer money to billionaire Jerry for a new stadium, but that's not the question here. Edited February 11, 20251 yr by 77 Hitmen
February 11, 20251 yr 26 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said: I know I'm wasting my breath on this response, but the article says nothing about the unsuitability of the 78 parcel for construction and doesn't suggest that as the reason why U of I pulled out. Conspiracy 101, Illinois is hiding the real truth...or the Pritzker partnership was just more promising in a different Related parcel? Dead bodies of mobsters unearthed? Native American burial grounds? Edited February 11, 20251 yr by caulfield12
February 12, 20251 yr 4 hours ago, caulfield12 said: Conspiracy 101, Illinois is hiding the real truth...or the Pritzker partnership was just more promising in a different Related parcel? Dead bodies of mobsters unearthed? Native American burial grounds? A spiritual stomping ground of Billy Goats?
February 12, 20251 yr 13 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: My guess? Because the upgrade of the near south side would be worth more to them than what has happened around the current location, which is basically nothing. Developing the parcel at Roosevelt and Clark would be worth far more than anything that would be built at 35th & Shields as well.
February 12, 20251 yr Funny that the land east of State street, which was part of the same massive former rail yard, was developed in the late 80s. Both parcels heavily used by railroads for decades, but half of the land is supposedly non-developable? Please.
February 14, 20251 yr https://www.cleveland.com/news/2025/02/browns-unveil-financing-plan-for-24b-dome-stadium-in-brook-park.html
February 14, 20251 yr 3 hours ago, caulfield12 said: https://www.cleveland.com/news/2025/02/browns-unveil-financing-plan-for-24b-dome-stadium-in-brook-park.html Half privately funded, half from the state, $1.2 billion a piece. Still a big ask from the state but maybe? At least it would guarantee one Super Bowl.
February 14, 20251 yr On 2/11/2025 at 9:08 AM, Balta1701 said: Furthermore, there's clearly been no opportunity whatsoever for development around the stadium site in the current area. False.
February 14, 20251 yr 15 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said: Be specific. I can be. They've tried, they tried putting a bar on that site years ago, I went once, but everything other than the ballpark in that sea of concrete seems to shut down, even many of the local businesses.
February 14, 20251 yr 10 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said: Be specific. That would require actual knowledge of the inner workings of the ISFA, the Sox lease at GRF, and Jerry's business interests and relationship with the 11th Ward alderman and the city over the years. Then again, why provide facts when you can speculate wildly on the internet to justify a made up narrative.
February 14, 20251 yr 5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: I can be. They've tried, they tried putting a bar on that site years ago, I went once, but everything other than the ballpark in that sea of concrete seems to shut down, even many of the local businesses. There is a bar at Gate 5 now, but that's the only thing they've ever developed. The team store is open daily, but the bar is only open on game days, and not very late after games. It's hardly a money maker. The two bars on 33rd do far more business on game days than said bar attached to Gate 5. I've never put much stock in the rumors that the 'neighborhood' wouldn't let the area be developed. Presumably Jerry doesn't want to lose his parking monies or compete with outside businesses syphoning off money that would otherwise be spent in the park.
February 14, 20251 yr 6 minutes ago, Tnetennba said: There is a bar at Gate 5 now, but that's the only thing they've ever developed. The team store is open daily, but the bar is only open on game days, and not very late after games. It's hardly a money maker. The two bars on 33rd do far more business on game days than said bar attached to Gate 5. I've never put much stock in the rumors that the 'neighborhood' wouldn't let the area be developed. Presumably Jerry doesn't want to lose his parking monies or compete with outside businesses syphoning off money that would otherwise be spent in the park. I don't know that it's the neighborhood that prevents things, my opinion was it's that it's so far from walkable. You don't go to that area unless you're going to a ballgame, then you park and leave. You can't keep the ballpark as it is and have a connection to the neighborhood without finding a way to replace the parking. A sea of parking doesn't fit a walkable set of businesses.
February 14, 20251 yr 5 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: I don't know that it's the neighborhood that prevents things, my opinion was it's that it's so far from walkable. You don't go to that area unless you're going to a ballgame, then you park and leave. You can't keep the ballpark as it is and have a connection to the neighborhood without finding a way to replace the parking. A sea of parking doesn't fit a walkable set of businesses. s%*# gets built in this neighborhood that residents are against. Grease the alderman's office enough and you'll get the green light. It's Bridgeport FFS. I'm opposed to 35th & Shields turning into Clark & Addison, not something I really have to fear, but the sea of parking has always been absurd, and lack of adjacent pre & post game options a massive missed opportunity. Bridgeport will never be the draw Wrigleyville is, but I have always believed that with the right investment around the park, it could be a game day draw, and an off-season draw for Sox fans. But as things stand, I don't think we will ever know.
February 14, 20251 yr On 2/10/2025 at 11:46 PM, tray said: https://www.wbez.org/real-estate-development/2025/01/31/discovery-partners-institute-university-illinois-the-78-related-midwest-bruce-rauner Tax payers and the U of I are already out North of 30 Million on the 78 nonsense. The so-called "78" parcel sits on a former river bed that was filled in with garbage for over a decade. It has no value , which is why it was given away by Nadhmi Shakir Auchi, an Iraqi businessman who purchased it from then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s former political fixer Tony Rezko ( convicted in 2008 of corruption-related charges and sentenced to more than 10 years in federal prison.) The site is a worthless dump that unfortunately the U lof I and IL taxpayers had to find out after spending 30 Million. The least Related Development could do now is to stop dragging the White Sox and other potential partners/tenants into a pipe dream designed to bail Related out. Not going to happen...ever. Dead in the water. Had this sourced last year On 9/6/2024 at 9:01 AM, DFAthewave69420 said: It's not about the money. It's about what is under the ground currently and nearby areas. Digging in this area and moving/removing what is there is an issue.
February 14, 20251 yr 24 minutes ago, WBWSF said: Its sure been quiet about new stadiums for the White Sox and Bears. Not really, Kevin Warren brings it up every time he is interviewed. The end of the discussion is the same, the state isn’t paying for it
February 14, 20251 yr Author 1 hour ago, Tnetennba said: That would require actual knowledge of the inner workings of the ISFA, the Sox lease at GRF, and Jerry's business interests and relationship with the 11th Ward alderman and the city over the years. Then again, why provide facts when you can speculate wildly on the internet to justify a made up narrative. False. Oh wait, are we not doing this anymore?
February 14, 20251 yr 38 minutes ago, WBWSF said: Its sure been quiet about new stadiums for the White Sox and Bears. As well as it should be, the politicians have already made their feelings very clear in Springfield, JR and the McCaskey family are SOL and they know it.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.