SANTA CLARA - Levi's Stadium (68,028)

[murina]

This stadium took another step forward.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...DTL&type=49ers

The 49ers are hoping to play in Santa Clara in 2014.

[al74]

I really don´t like it, it looks like and old stadium

[Basincreek]

Yep, measure passed.

http://www.49ersnewstadium.com

[crazyalex]

Originally Posted by al74

I really don´t like it, it looks like and old stadium

agree and maybe they just want classic style stadium

[pesto]

Agreed that the design is nothing special, but not bad either. I just don't think that stadium design is a big motivator for spending money in most US cities. The coldness and lack of grace of some of the supposed "super" stadiums may have turned off people and nostalgica, comfort and convenience seem to be the new keys to a successful venue.

[Benn]

It certainly doesn't look like $937 million

[slipperydog]

Originally Posted by Benn

It certainly doesn't look like $937 million

'

True, but again, remember where it is being built.

[Benn]

Even so Minnesota is talking about a retractable roof stadium the same size for a $100 million cheaper, and the roof is $215 million, so more than $300 million difference for essentially the same thing? And its not like this is in downtown San Fran this is way out in Santa Clara.

[jay stew]

Santa Clara 49ers?

[540_804]

Originally Posted by Benn

Even so Minnesota is talking about a retractable roof stadium the same size for a $100 million cheaper, and the roof is $215 million, so more than $300 million difference for essentially the same thing? And its not like this is in downtown San Fran this is way out in Santa Clara.

Doesn't the Minnesota plan involve reusing portions of the Metrodome? That may be the source of some of the price difference.

[Benn]

The Ellerbe Becket proposal the City and state favor does. But not really with the most current one from HKS the Vikings favor, though there are very few details beyond some very conceptual renderings. Also with how much stadium Dallas just got for $1.1 billion I would feel a little short changed as a Niners fan.

[brewerfan386]

49ers still have tough yards left to finish stadium deal

By Howard Mintz
Bay Area News Group
Posted: 06/11/2010 12:35:49 AM PDT
Updated: 06/11/2010 12:35:49 AM PDT


The day after winning big at the ballot box, San Francisco 49ers President Jed York said he was unfazed by the obstacles to securing almost $500 million in financing and tapping into hundreds of millions of dollars more needed to build a new stadium in Santa Clara.
But two NFL executives and others who follow stadium deals said Wednesday that there are no guarantees the 49ers can line up the money to break ground on a 68,500-seat, $937 million stadium next to the Great America theme park.
Some of the league's most storied franchises, including the Dallas Cowboys and New York Jets and Giants, have been unable to sell the naming rights to their new stadiums — a major source of funding in the 49ers' plan. And perhaps more important, the NFL's hoped-for contribution to the project could hinge on the dicey possibility of the 49ers sharing the new stadium with the Oakland Raiders.
"Even though they won this election, they are going to have a hard time getting this project financed," said one NFL executive familiar with stadium issues.
For starters, the team must get financial backing for much of its $493 million share of the project in tight economic times. In addition, that share has always been dependent on the NFL kicking in with significant help, as the league has done with other stadium projects in recent years — and the NFL's fund for such projects is depleted. "They are counting on money that's not really there right
Advertisement

now," said another NFL executive.Moreover, the NFL, while it does have options to replenish a stadium fund, has made it clear that it would prefer the 49ers and Raiders to share a stadium. The league could link the level of any financial aid to the two rivals figuring out a way to navigate differences and join forces in Santa Clara. Two teams would generate more money for the city, but also double the potential traffic and noise headaches on game days.
The 49ers face other resistance, including resolving long-running conflicts with Cedar Fair Entertainment. The corporate owners of Great America have warned the city and the 49ers that they have not addressed concerns about lease violations and other threats to business from an NFL stadium.
But money is what really stands in the way for the 49ers.
League officials were not available to comment Wednesday on the team's prospects of getting NFL aid. Executives familiar with the process, however, say the NFL has various ways to aid teams building new stadiums, even with the depletion of the so-called "G3" fund, which helped finance the Giants' and Jets' joint new stadium.
At the same time, the NFL could exert its influence and make it a much sweeter deal for the 49ers and Raiders if they agree to share the stadium. "The NFL is not going to dictate that two teams share a stadium," one NFL executive said. "But the NFL could make the financial assistance far more attractive to two teams sharing a stadium than for a one-team stadium."
That is a tangled scenario at a time when the Raiders are exploring ways to build a stadium of their own in Oakland. While congratulating the 49ers on the election win, Amy Trask, the Raiders' chief executive, played down the sharing possibility Wednesday, only reiterating her position that the Raiders had an "open mind" about sharing a stadium with the 49ers somewhere in the Bay Area.
York, meanwhile, told the San Jose Mercury News that there have been no active discussions with the Raiders, even though the deal with Santa Clara permits the 49ers to bring in a second team. And York is confident that the team can not only persuade the NFL to help once the league reaches a new collective bargaining agreement, but also secure financing from investors.
"If we didn't feel comfortable with that number, we wouldn't have worked for 3 1/2 years on Santa Clara and spent close to $4 million winning an election," he said.
Santa Clara voters on Tuesday backed the stadium deal by approving Measure J with 59.6 percent of the vote. The measure locked in a $114 million public contribution toward the stadium.
Even if the 49ers get the rest of their financing in order, there is still an additional $330 million gap that must be closed to pay the construction total. Under the terms of the deal, a city-run stadium authority will be established to operate the stadium and raise that money, from getting naming rights to the stadium to selling seat licenses and luxury boxes.
But that, too, is no easy task.
While teams such as the Arizona Cardinals and Indianapolis Colts not so long ago attracted naming rights deals exceeding $100 million, more recently the Cowboys and Giants and Jets have been unable to sell naming rights to new stadiums. And the Jets have been struggling in recent months to sell seat licenses.
Roger Noll, a Stanford University economist who has studied the 49ers stadium deal, said in an e-mail exchange Wednesday that the 49ers' "main problem" is getting NFL money and raising revenue from naming rights and seat licenses.
Still, one NFL executive said the economic climate should be better for the 49ers as they approach stadium construction than it has been for those other teams. Even Jamie McLeod, one of two City Council members opposed to Measure J, said the debate over that $330 million figure is over.
"Now we have to figure out a way to make it happen and do it in a way that protects the city," she said.
Santa Clara Mayor Patricia Mahan said the city will get the stadium authority rolling soon. But everyone agrees that the outcome of this part of the stadium battle will unfold over a long period of time, and there may be as much suspense over the result as there was during the Measure J campaign.
San Francisco officials are watching closely, still clinging to hopes the financial part of the deal will fall through and the 49ers will consider a proposed stadium project at Hunters Point.
"I think they are going to hit a few stumbling blocks," said former 49ers President Carmen Policy, who is advising the developer of the San Francisco project. "The realities of financing a project like that in today's day and age are going to come home to roost."

Come on NFL just fund the darn building already!

[pesto]

Useless article; probably a plant from the the city of SF or the Hunter's Point developers. It's mostly generalities about the bad economy and retread quotes from opponents of the stadium. At the end of the day, all it says is that the 49ers have to go about arranging financing now. Does the author figure they haven't been thinking about this for the last 5 years?

Just last week the stadium opponents were saying that a yes vote would make the 49ers rich at the expense of the people of Santa Clara and that the stadium would bankrupt the city? When the voters dismissed that lie, the new lie is that Santa Clara was "too smart" and left the 49ers facing a hopeless financial situation.

Given the huge corporate presence on the Peninsua and South Bay, financing does not strike me as a real problem. I think they might be able to sell seats as well, given that they still have the same fans from the Bay Area (with shorter average commutes) plus thousands in additional corporate boxes that will be snapped up. I'm talking about Google, Intel, HP, Oracle, Cisco, Apple, 200 VC's, law firms, financial advisors, marketing, PR, recruiters, technical services, not to mention areospace, defense, biotech, etc. Lots of football fans and lots of money.

[eljeferino]

While I'm not a huge fan of the design, as a 49ers fan it is imperative they get a new stadium asap. They've become one of the lowest revenue-generating teams because of Candlestick and in order to compete with the big spenders, they need this new stadium badly.

And while it may not be San Francisco, the team headquarters has been in Santa Clara for a while now so it makes sense. also consider over 90% of 49ers fans come from the San Francisco Bay Area, and not actually from the city of San Francisco. The 40 mile move south won't be an issue.

The cost does seem quite high for the pedestrian design, but being built right by Silicon Valley is no cheap task.

[Tom Hughes]

That appears to be an astronomical price for this stadium. If, as some have stated this is due mainly to high land prices, I would seriously consider the merits of moving at all. This stadium appears to be very basic.... it even states that the lower tier holds 45,000 alone, and these shallow raked tiers are generally very cheaply constructed seats..... meaning the largest proportion of seats are at budget cost surely. This doesn't equate to the final cost given. Therefore, it would be interesting to see a full breakdown.

I realise sport is a completely different animal in the US, but I can't get my head around relocating teams to completely different areas. It seems bizarre to just leave your roots/history/identity in one fell swoop.... is there no value associated to these over there?

[Archbishop]

It's barely a move. They are just going from San Francisco to Santa Clara. Santa Clara is just 40 miles away from San Francisco.

[RaiderATO]

They're moving closer to their fan-base and into what appears to be a more accessible area. This isn't really a move.

[pesto]

In a way, this IS a move in that the SJ area has developed much more than SF in recent years. It's analogous to the NY teams moving to LA and SF but on a smaller scale (and probably without a name change). These kinds of moves make a lot more sense in a country where population started in one corner and has over time moved south and west in huge numbers. In the Bay Area it started in SF and Oakland and has spread south and east.

Another factor for moves is the large number of mid-sized cities that find it attractive to lure teams that are not doing well economically in older cities that have not kept up in population. Not good for the fans in the old town, but a lot more reasonable than having teams in, say, Syracuse or Canton, and none in Houston or Dallas.

[Tom Hughes]

Originally Posted by Archbishop

It's barely a move. They are just going from San Francisco to Santa Clara. Santa Clara is just 40 miles away from San Francisco.

That would be akin to Everton or Liverpool FC moving to Manchester...... a complete non-starter on every level. Although I realise distances are measured on a different scale over there, I still wonder what is to happen with the current local fanbase who have kept the club/team/franchise alive for so many years..... or is it genuinely the case that the bulk of the fanbase is elsewhere? Is there an efficient mass transit system to take them to the new venue? Liverpool for instance have a national/international fanbase with far more fans living outside the city than in it, yet the highest concentration will always be in the city/metropolitan area itself, and it is these that will fill most of the seats most regularly. Does Santa Clara really posses a greater number and concentration of 49ers fans? I've been to SF many times, but can't profess to know much about its teams and their history etc.

[Archbishop]

Someone from San Francisco would know better than me, but I believe that the 49ers have their fanbase way more spread out over the Bay Area and Northern California region than the Raiders who are mostly just in Oakland. Also, like pesto said, Santa Clara is very close to San Jose which is about to top 1,000,000 people in the city, so it will open up the team to a whole new big city as well. I am not sure if BART extends to them though.