January 19, 20242 yr 7 hours ago, greg775 said: Playing in the loop does not sound good with our big cities having some major problems in modern America. Suburban fans won't be coming. They need to drive their cars and there's nowhere to park down there, baby. A ballpark in the loop would make it easier and encourage more fans to use public transit. They could build a platform right at the stadium along the Rock Island line that would encourage more people to take the train. And even if fans took the Heritage Corridor, it would be a pretty easy walk from LaSalle Street Station. Living in Joliet, I always take Metra to Sox games, and the trains are always packed with Sox fans on game days. I think you'd see even more people taking Metra if the park was in the Loop.
January 19, 20242 yr I was surprised when the Rays owners agreed to a new stadium right by the present one in St. Pete. They also agreed to pay $600 million dollars towards the new stadium. The Oakland/Las Vegas A's agreed to pay millions towards the new stadium in Vegas. I would guess that JR would pay for part of the new stadium. That would make most people happy and get the new stadium off the ground.
January 19, 20242 yr 6 minutes ago, Panerista said: They pretty much have to do this, IMHO Yeah, and I don't think the rumor is out there by chance. It was almost certainly a controlled leak to gauge response, and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. The question is, how long until we hear it's a go or not? They have less than six years before the Rate's lease is up. They'll need a huge chuck of that time to get a stadium approved and built.
January 19, 20242 yr 10 minutes ago, hogan873 said: Yeah, and I don't think the rumor is out there by chance. It was almost certainly a controlled leak to gauge response, and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. The question is, how long until we hear it's a go or not? They have less than six years before the Rate's lease is up. They'll need a huge chuck of that time to get a stadium approved and built. If they’re serious about moving there, they can make it work. They’re not at panic stages but you’re right, i think they have to do something soon
January 19, 20242 yr 52 minutes ago, WBWSF said: I was surprised when the Rays owners agreed to a new stadium right by the present one in St. Pete. They also agreed to pay $600 million dollars towards the new stadium. The Oakland/Las Vegas A's agreed to pay millions towards the new stadium in Vegas. I would guess that JR would pay for part of the new stadium. That would make most people happy and get the new stadium off the ground. Living in Florida and attending many Rays-Sox games I also was surprised that they are building the new stadium almost next door to the Trop, big mistake but that’s all the Rays could get. The population center of the Tampa Bay Area is downtown Tampa and that’s where the Rays should be playing, not in hard to get to St.Pete. If you live in towns east of the actual Tampa Bay it’s at least 20 miles out of the way as you need to head south to the Sunshine Skyway and then head back north across the bridge to St. Pete. The Lightning continue to sellout game after game at Amalie Arena in the Channelside area which is a great area and basically part of downtown. Edited January 19, 20242 yr by The Mighty Mite
January 19, 20242 yr Listened to the latest White Sox Talk podcast with Garfien on this. He talked with one of the Sun Times reporters that broke the story. Apparently, the owner of that land is an Iranian arms dealer that is not allowed in the country. Not sure how much that would complicate things. He also mentioned they want a smaller stadium that would seat around 35K, which was interesting.
January 19, 20242 yr Author 7 hours ago, HOFHurt35 said: They wouldn't be discussing this site if that's the case. And for WAY bigger projects than a ballpark at different times.
January 19, 20242 yr Author 7 minutes ago, HoosierSox said: Listened to the latest White Sox Talk podcast with Garfien on this. He talked with one of the Sun Times reporters that broke the story. Apparently, the owner of that land is an Iranian arms dealer that is not allowed in the country. Not sure how much that would complicate things. He also mentioned they want a smaller stadium that would seat around 35K, which was interesting. Pretty sure after the changes in the stadium, the current one maxes out around 39k before SRO.
January 19, 20242 yr 44 minutes ago, The Mighty Mite said: Living in Florida and attending many Rays-Sox games I also was surprised that they are building the new stadium almost next door to the Trop, big mistake but that’s all the Rays could get. The population center of the Tampa Bay Area is downtown Tampa and that’s where the Rays should be playing, not in hard to get to St.Pete. If you live in towns east of the actual Tampa Bay it’s at least 20 miles out of the way as you need to head south to the Sunshine Skyway and then head back north across the bridge to St. Pete. The Lightning continue to sellout game after game at Amalie Arena in the Channelside area which is a great area and basically part of downtown. If all they could get was a new stadium right at the present location I'm surprised that the owners of the Rays didn't move the team. I thought they would move to Orlando or Nashville.
January 19, 20242 yr 18 minutes ago, HoosierSox said: Listened to the latest White Sox Talk podcast with Garfien on this. He talked with one of the Sun Times reporters that broke the story. Apparently, the owner of that land is an Iranian arms dealer that is not allowed in the country. Not sure how much that would complicate things. He also mentioned they want a smaller stadium that would seat around 35K, which was interesting. Unless I am wildly mistaken, Related (the development company that built Hudson Yards in NYC) owns it. Their majority owner is Stephen Ross, owner of the Dolphins. If he's moonlighting as an Iranian arms dealer, then the Dolphins just became the most fascinating team in the NFL to follow.
January 19, 20242 yr Part of this is chalked up to having a large market team, but the handful of teams which completely own their own stadium are worth the most. Getting free or near free land plus infrastructure paid for your development of baseball and non baseball revenue generating real estate is the best long term value for a team. JR is too old to have a long term, but his kids would benefit if they owned and operated the stadium, team and TV network, vs. settling for what he can finagle out of politicians and settling for a less than ideal arrangement. MLB Teams which own their stadium (2023 Forbes Franchise Rank & Value) 2 $4.8B Los Angeles Dodgers 3 $4.5B Boston Red Sox 4 $4.1B Chicago Cubs 6 $2.9B New York Mets 10 $2.6B Saint Louis Cardinals 12 $2.2B Texas Rangers 14 $2.0B Toronto Blue Jays 20 $1.5B Colorado Rockies Colorado is the outlier (Toronto dragged down a bit due to the value of the Canadian dollar), and would chalk that up more to inept ownership and management of the team. Steve Cohen purchased both the Mets and the publicly owned stadium in 2020 for $2.4B. The team value is up a half billion per Forbes, and he is planning a $8B development investment around the complex he owns. This is the way to maximize long term value.
January 19, 20242 yr 2 minutes ago, South Side Hit Men said: Getting free or near free land plus infrastructure paid for your development of baseball and non baseball revenue generating real estate is the best long term value for a team. These days it isn't just that - it's also being able to take advantage of the land around your ballpark to build things that integrate with it - real estate, shops that bring in additional revenue. That's why the Cohen plan you cite is worth so much and why he's put so much money into the Mets. The White Sox could at least have some opportunity to do that at this site.
January 19, 20242 yr 2 hours ago, Panerista said: If they’re serious about moving there, they can make it work. They’re not at panic stages but you’re right, i think they have to do something soon This will be a very, very long process if they want to actually do it. It makes sense, but there's going to be a huge amount of negotiation with the city and state on money and ownership rights. Construction on that site will be slow also as they will have to do a lot of environmental remediation as the first steps.
January 19, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, Balta1701 said: These days it isn't just that - it's also being able to take advantage of the land around your ballpark to build things that integrate with it - real estate, shops that bring in additional revenue. That's why the Cohen plan you cite is worth so much and why he's put so much money into the Mets. The White Sox could at least have some opportunity to do that at this site. This is what I’m getting at. Thinking long term vs. grabbing free nickels today and forgoing dollars tomorrow. The Ricketts will profit immensely based on the real estate acquired around the ballpark. Comiskey II is a junk stadium (better / acceptable for free after the significant restructure project) sounded by acres of blacktop.
January 19, 20242 yr 17 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: This will be a very, very long process if they want to actually do it. It makes sense, but there's going to be a huge amount of negotiation with the city and state on money and ownership rights. Construction on that site will be slow also as they will have to do a lot of environmental remediation as the first steps. I'd imagine the environmental investigation and remediation will add an extra year onto the process, at a minimum.
January 19, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, ron883 said: I'd imagine the environmental investigation and remediation will add an extra year onto the process, at a minimum. The good news would be - if they have an actual plan to do this, they have a completely functioning ballpark they could use for a couple of extra years with no obvious issues. This isn't like "Oakland/Vegas", where I have no idea where they're actually playing while a stadium is being built. If all parties wanted this to work, it all comes down to who pays for what.
January 19, 20242 yr 2 hours ago, Panerista said: If they’re serious about moving there, they can make it work. They’re not at panic stages but you’re right, i think they have to do something soon If you listen to Warren from the bears, it's 3 years from ground breaking to playable.
January 19, 20242 yr 16 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: The good news would be - if they have an actual plan to do this, they have a completely functioning ballpark they could use for a couple of extra years with no obvious issues. This isn't like "Oakland/Vegas", where I have no idea where they're actually playing while a stadium is being built. If all parties wanted this to work, it all comes down to who pays for what. Apparently they've already done investigation and some remediation at the location, which makes sense. Looks like they wouldn't need any more investigation, and minimal reporting. I think at this point they'd just need to remediation consisting of digging up the dirty dirt and making some barriers, which would essentially coincide with regular construction. I don't see it as a major hurdle. Edited January 19, 20242 yr by ron883
January 19, 20242 yr 10 minutes ago, ptatc said: If you listen to Warren from the bears, it's 3 years from ground breaking to playable. A spot in the suburbs is quite different from a spot downtown with a contamination history.
January 19, 20242 yr 1 minute ago, ron883 said: Apparently they've already done investigation and some remediation at the location, which makes sense. Looks like they wouldn't need any more investigation, and minimal reporting. I think at this point they'd just need to remediation consisting of digging up the dirty dirt and making some barriers, which would essentially coincide with regular construction. I don't see it a major hurdle. The hurdle would be how much it would cost and who will pay for it. It's reasonable for the city and state to pay a portion of those costs but maybe not all? And of course, it does take time to get it done.
January 19, 20242 yr https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/white-sox/ct-chicago-white-sox-ballpark-jerry-reinsdorf-20240118-dwt7p2n4gveyfd5cfgjd2xayea-story.html
January 19, 20242 yr 4 hours ago, hogan873 said: A ballpark in the loop would make it easier and encourage more fans to use public transit. They could build a platform right at the stadium along the Rock Island line that would encourage more people to take the train. And even if fans took the Heritage Corridor, it would be a pretty easy walk from LaSalle Street Station. Living in Joliet, I always take Metra to Sox games, and the trains are always packed with Sox fans on game days. I think you'd see even more people taking Metra if the park was in the Loop. Honestly, if they played it right and the Bears were to stay at Soldier Field, they could try to beef up the public transit on Roosevelt between the river and Soldier Field to maximize both accessibility to Soldier Field as well as the pre-game and post-game (and pre- / post-concert) dollars spent on those days, as well.
January 19, 20242 yr 2 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said: https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/white-sox/ct-chicago-white-sox-ballpark-jerry-reinsdorf-20240118-dwt7p2n4gveyfd5cfgjd2xayea-story.html Paywalled.
January 19, 20242 yr 1 hour ago, Balta1701 said: A spot in the suburbs is quite different from a spot downtown with a contamination history. The contaminated soil will be analyzed and decisions will be made on that prior to the ground breaking. Core samples will be taken. Once they break ground it shouldn't be much different.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.