What we all suspected is true

[valponick]

And... ?

 

 

What does that have to do with your incorrect information about the Sox making 10's of $$'s of dollars from parking...?

I think he was just trying to show you that you were wrong about the percentage the Sox got from parking....

Edited November 11, 2005 by valponick

[JUGGERNAUT]

I think he was just trying to show you that you were wrong about the percentage the Sox got from parking....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Unless someone has a credible source for information on the actual revenue from parking all we can do is guestimate it. I've done that using the per patron revenue figure for 2001.

 

Another way of doing this is to guess at how many Sox fans are coming from the el. If you assume no more than 4000 then that means 25K are coming from cars & dividing that by 2 gets you about 12,000. I don't know how many spots are available but I do know I've been to games where the front lots are full & I've had to park behind the tracks.

 

At a price of $17 it's not a stretch to suggest on average 200K per game in parking revenue. That's over 16 million a season. To this you have to add 6 post season games with much higher prices. For 2005 close to 20 million in parking revenue is not unreasonable & the lion's share of that is going to the White Sox.

Edited November 11, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[Soxbadger]

Hey Steff, the real estate group that owns the parking lots doesnt happen to be Reinsdorf's group does it?

 

Just does not seem to make sense that a real estate guy like Reisndorf would let those pieces of property slip through the cracks, and not be part of the original sale of the Chicago White Sox. It also intrigues me because some of the lots are where Old Comiskey was, which means the Sox had to have owned them at the time the new park was built.

 

So did they sell them?

 

Or did they just put them into a different corporation or LLC.

 

I have no information myself, so I was just wondering. I figured the White Sox owned the entire area and could do whatever they wanted with it.

 

If you dont know the answers its no big deal, just kind of an interesting side bar.

 

SB

[Steff]

I think he was just trying to show you that you were wrong about the percentage the Sox got from parking....

 

 

 

And where did he do that..?

 

Sox attendance for '05 - 2.4 million

Let's say 80% of them parked in the lots which brings that # to 1.9 million

Average parking $15.00 ($17 for day of game, $13 for season ticket holders, and not figuring in those that have residential parking or park in the $8 lot)) = $28.5 million $'s

Let's say the Sox get 50% (not a snowballs chance in hell they do, but let's pretend they do) that's $14.2 million for the season.

 

How is that 10's of millions of $$'s...?

 

It's not.

[Steff]

Hey Steff, the real estate group that owns the parking lots doesnt happen to be Reinsdorf's group does it?

 

 

It is.

[valponick]

And where did he do that..?

 

Sox attendance for '05 - 2.4 million

Let's say 80% of them parked in the lots which brings that # to 1.9 million

Average parking $15.00 ($17 for day of game, $13 for season ticket holders, and not figuring in those that have residential parking or park in the $8 lot)) = $28.5 million $'s

Let's say the Sox get 50% (not a snowballs chance in hell they do, but let's pretend they do) that's $14.2 million for the season.

 

How is that 10's of millions of $$'s...?

 

It's not.

Settle down, its ok to not be right about everything.

[Steff]

Settle down, its ok to not be right about everything.

 

 

 

I wouldn't know anything about that.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Settle down, its ok to not be right about everything.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I didn't take into consideration the $13 for season ticket holders. The $14.2M figure seems reasonable with that. That is an 8 digit figure & that does represent 10's of millions as opposed to a 7 digit figure which just represents millions.

[3E8]

And where did he do that..?

 

Sox attendance for '05 - 2.4 million

Let's say 80% of them parked in the lots which brings that # to 1.9 million

Average parking $15.00 ($17 for day of game, $13 for season ticket holders, and not figuring in those that have residential parking or park in the $8 lot)) = $28.5 million $'s

Plus you are being way too generous with this figure. Say 80% got to the game via automobile. They only paid $15/car, not $15/person.

[Steff]

Plus you are being way too generous with this figure.  Say 80% got to the game via automobile.  They only paid $15/car, not $15/person.

 

 

 

Oh s***.. that's right. Figure 2 people per car and it cuts the revenue down to $7 million for the season. Thanks 3E8

 

The numbers wont be accessable until after March so I'll have to wait to get a look a them until then.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Which gets us right back to the source of the disagreement. You claim the White Sox don't even get 50% of that revenue. That would put their take at millions. I claim they get nearly all of it which would put their take in 10's of millions or if you prefer over $15M with the post-season.

 

What we know from credible sources is that the ISFA is getting next to nothing from this revenue & if the White Sox did include a 3rd party which takes away revenue from the organzation then the ISFA would have had to approve that as well.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...94.story?page=1

One more thing to add in the White Sox revenue sources is the fact that they have more non-gate revenue sources now:

Pontiac is paying them over a million for the Fundamentals billboard tower.

 

For the first time in team history they are sharing in broadcast advertising revenues. Not only does Comcast pay them for the games but they share a % of the ad revenue as well. My guess it that they followed a similar suit with the new radio deals (WSCR & the Spanish stations).

Edited November 11, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[Steff]

It's got nothing to do with the ISA. The lots are not owned or run by the Sox. They are owned by a private group, leased to the Sox and run by a parking company - which is union. They have to make their $$ and pay their staff, security, etc. I say the Sox don't get 50%, but I don't know, so for the sake of appeasing I figured the $$ at 50%. 50% is a pretty big cut.. for doing NOTHING.

[JUGGERNAUT]

The 2001 per patron revenue figure strongly suggests the White Sox are getting the lion's share of the parking revenue. Here's another link that shows stadium revenue per ticket sold for the White Sox. They ranked higher than the NYY.

http://www.mcfol.org/hottopics/artsculture/sox.asp

 

If you have a link for this 3rd party that you believe is getting the lion's share of that revenue then post it otherwise it's here-say.

Edited November 11, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[Steff]

And where does it suggest that..?

 

I did see this..

 

"Sox fans spend a great deal on drinks, food, parking, and souvenirs, but they spend almost all of it inside the stadium because there is nowhere else to go. "

 

 

And you go measure pee pee's with someone else. It's common knowledge that the Sox don't own the lots.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Yes it's common knowledge the ISFA owns the stadium & the lots & office bldg's around it. It's likewise common knowledge that the ISFA doesn't make squat from the parking revenue.

 

That has nothing to do with your belief that there exists an infamous 3rd party company taking the lion's share of the parking revenue from the White Sox.

 

Perhaps this will help convince you that you are wrong.

http://www.dcwatch.com/auditor/audit041112.htm

What you are suggesting is that JR is somehow less saavy a buisness man than the managing partner/owner of the Cleveland Indians. I doubt that very much.

 

Cleveland retains all parking, signage, concessions, luxury and club seat revenues.

 

It's common knowledge that the ISFA owns & operates US Cellular Field.

It's common knowledge that they more recently approved fitting the parking lots with video cameras to increase security outside the park. Now if there was a 3rd party involved they would clearly have been mentioned in that deal.

[Steff]

Yes it's common knowledge the ISFA owns the stadium & the lots & office bldg's around it. . 

 

 

 

They don't own the lots...

[JUGGERNAUT]

http://www.chicagolaunch.com/company.asp?r...&companyID=5357

# Levy Restaurants

# Fully equipped business center (allowing Internet access, faxing and copying capabilities)

# On-site parking, free on non-game days

 

The free on-site parking strongly suggests the ISFA owns the lots.

 

That's not to say the White Sox manage parking operations. I doubt that very much. It's likely a company the ISFA recommends that is paid a flat fee each year. Probably similar arrangements exist with other management operations of the stadium.

[Steff]

Juggs..

 

 

Jerry Reinsdorf owns the lots. It's been documented here many times.

[JUGGERNAUT]

I haven't been able to find anything to support that either. But I do want to point out something that maybe most people don't know. The ISFA is handling the renovations. The White Sox are paying the costs.

 

It doesn't seem like a big deal but it is because the ISFA controls the purse strings for those contracts. That generates added tax revenue for the state from sales tax to income tax.

 

http://207.241.73.152/images/ISFA_AR_2004.pdf

 

Rather than nit-pick on the details the main point I'm getting at is that the White Sox are moving in the direction of a top 10 revenue team in MLB.

I saw a 2003 estimate for revenue & it was $128M to the Cub $156M.

That's a reflection of price increases & such but again if you divide that revenue by the attendance figure the White Sox are getting more bang per ticket sold.

 

Where this is all leading to is something White Sox fans probably are not ready to accept. In 5 yrs team $100M payroll should be expected for this franchise.

 

If you are thinking the loss of seats will keep them from getting there, plans have already been discussed to create a right field porch that will add 2,500 new seats. They will probably announce this sometime during the 2006 season in time for 2007.

 

The whole strategy of adding something new each year seems to be working as well. It creates buzz about the stadium.

[whitesoxin']

Why does it matter who owns the lots?

[Steff]

But I do want to point out something that maybe most people don't know.  The ISFA is handling the renovations.  The White Sox are paying the costs. 

 

 

That site completely contradicts that statement, as well did the Sox when explaining the usage of the $$ from the naming rights.

 

Page 4 - Message from the Chairman, and the Bond details support what both the ISA and the Sox have said in regards to the funds.

[JUGGERNAUT]

http://207.241.73.152/images/ISFA_AR_2004.pdf

Total asset value for the ISFA has risen from $157M to $235M. A lot of people ignore this as well. When the White Sox' currently lease expires (2011) the ISFA will be in an even bigger position to get a better deal with the asset value probably rising to $250M.

 

They are listing a charge of $3.8M a yr for maintenance. A total of over $24M to date.

 

Finally, I looked up Jacob's Field. It's initial cost was $173M but it had over $75M in cost overruns. So you are looking at nearly $100M more was spent on Jacob's over Comiskey initially.

[Steff]

They are listing a charge of $3.8M a yr for maintenance.  A total of over $24M to date. 

 

 

 

That financial info is YE June 2004...???

[Steff]

Juggs.. I'm not sure what exactly you are looking at.. but on page 17 the transfers out to the Comiskey Park Improvement fund were over $6 million $'s.. and their reserve was another $2+ million...

 

Where are you seeing the Sox paying for improvements..??

 

And that $24 million for maintenance... $20 million was just for 2003. The years are at the top.

 

This report is for fiscal year June 03 to June 04.

 

And the assets...

 

They are listed at $339,872,302 *... while the liabilities are at $528,439,678 *... with the equity balacing things out.

 

* assest - page 14

* liabilities - page 15

 

Can you explain where you are getting your figures from..?

[JUGGERNAUT]

That site completely contradicts that statement, as well did the Sox when explaining the usage of the $$ from the naming rights.

 

Page 4 - Message from the Chairman, and the Bond details support what both the ISA and the Sox have said in regards to the funds.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't know what your referring to put there are at least two references to renovations in the report. 1 is a charge of $1.24M from 2001 to 2007.

 

The other is up front in the Message from the Chairman. It doesn't even mention the White Sox. It mentions 83 new jobs & the project being completed within budget. It's common knowledge the White Sox are paying for the renovations from the money being paid by US Cellular for naming rights.