-
Vikings stadium: $920 million-$1.2 billion
Vikings stadium: $920 million-$1.2 billion
February, 22, 2011
By Kevin Seifert
As the Minnesota Vikings field interest from stadium sites in Ramsey County and Minneapolis, a central question has yet to be answered: How much will a new facility cost in 2011 dollars?
No official estimates have been announced for either site, making it difficult to pinpoint exactly how much public money the team would seek. But over at SavetheVikes.org, blogger Cory Merrifield has made an educated attempt at projecting costs.
The bottom line: A domed stadium and associated infrastructure costs at the Ramsey County site in Arden Hills likely will fall between $1 billion and $1.2 billion. A new domed stadium on the Metrodome site, which wouldn't need much in the way of infrastructure improvements, would come in around $920 million. Both figures are based on approval in this spring's state legislature session.
I exchanged e-mails this week with Merrifield, whose site is unaffiliated with the Vikings but is dedicated to helping the team find a new home in the state of Minnesota. The estimates are based on the last official cost estimate, which came in December 2009 from the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission (MSFC): $870 million for a new Metrodome on the existing Minneapolis site.
Taking into account a $50 million rise in construction costs, the same plan would be at least $920 million if approved this year. The Arden Hills site could require an additional $100 million to $200 million in infrastructure costs, pushing the total above $1 billion.
With a funding bill not yet on the floor, Vikings owner Zygi Wilf hasn't made a formal financial pledge for this year. Historically, the Vikings and NFL have committed to paying for about a third the cost of an open-air stadium. Subtracting about $200 million for the roof, that puts the Vikings/NFL contribution to either a Minneapolis or Ramsey County stadium at around $215 million.
(The Vikings argue they shouldn't share in the cost of a roof because its purpose would be to make the stadium useful for events other than football games.)
Based on those calculations, the Metrodome site would require about $705 million in public money this year. In Ramsey County, the public cost would range from $785 million to $985 million.
Again, these are all educated estimates based on year-old projections and commitments. But a stadium bill is reportedly on the horizon, and we're going to hear some very big numbers that will look something like those above. They're not meant to frighten, discourage or sway you. It's simply a reality check of where we likely are headed. As always, stay tuned.
-
-
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...ikings-stadium
Downtown site added to mix for proposed Vikings stadium
A fifth potential site for a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings has emerged, and according to the Star Tribune, it would be a mere walk across the street from the Metrodome in downtown Minneapolis.
Ted Mondale, chair of the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission, revealed Tuesday that the Vikings are eyeing property owned by the Star Tribune that abuts the Metrodome site. One appeal to building there is transit and infrastructure for a major venue already exist. Mondale and Vikings vice president Lester Bagley gave a stadium update at a commercial real estate forum in suburban Bloomington on Tuesday. "I think it's definitely a potential option that the Vikings or the public would buy that site," Mondale told reporters after the talk. The idea of leaving the Metrodome standing while building a new facility "has a significant benefit to the Vikings," Mondale said. Asked whether the Vikings have had any talks with the Star Tribune in the past six months, Mondale said he had no idea. Star Tribune chairman Mike Sweeney declined to comment on Mondale's remarks. So did Bagley. Other new stadium sites already publicly discussed include: the Metrodome, an area west of Target Field (home of baseball's Twins) in Minneapolis, part of the Target Corp. campus in Brooklyn Park and the former Twin Cities Ammunition Plant in Arden Hills.
-
Cities and States are going broke and yet Wilf expects the taxpayers of Minnesota to put up anywhere from $705 - $985 mil for his new digs yet won't even contribute a red cent to the cost of a dome because others may benefit from it. What a complete asshole!
Dear Ziggy Wilf,
Your team will play anywhere from 8-9 regular season games there, maybe a preseason game or two, and if you ever get a decent QB maybe a playoff game or three not to mention any potential Super-Bowl game that may come along. Yet you want to pay zero towards the cost of a dome that your paying customers will get a substantial benefit from too.
You sir are a cheap ass bastard and a complete fvcktard if you're using that to hold your team at ransom and are asking Minnesota taxpayers to meet your demands. What does a complete asshole like you do for a living besides robbing the public so that you can become even richer than you already are. Do you regularly steal retirees SS checks for giggles and grins as well? 
Signed, a Disgusted Bears Fan who hope that lousy ass team of your moves out of the NFCN and you try to rob the people of California next. They're used to it.
If Wilf is an example of the lame ass, cheating, horse theiving, candy stealing bastards who are conducting the CBA negotiations there will be no 2011 NFL season. I hope the SOB gets his domed stadium and then has his owners luxury suite collpase around him trapping his cheap ass in the wreckage. 
-
High Fives / Like - 1 High Fives, 0 Dislikes
-
He should be putting in 25-40 % of that bad boy. The city does get a huge boost in economy though, employment increases, which increases taxes, and if done right it becomes a better venue for other attractions. It's actually a good idea for a city in recession to build help expense one of these things b/c it's citizens can get back to work.
-
Will they put in a mural of Favre's wang or will it just be a statue?
Arguing on the internet is like winning the special olympics, even if you win your still messed up.
Restore the roar!
-
Originally Posted by
Riczaj01 
He should be putting in 25-40 % of that bad boy. The city does get a huge boost in economy though, employment increases, which increases taxes, and if done right it becomes a better venue for other attractions. It's actually a good idea for a city in recession to build help expense one of these things b/c it's citizens can get back to work.
It really depends on your individual economic philosophy but you are correct, there IS a train of thought that maintains that you spend when you are in a downturn.
In fact, a handful of companies in Japan put this idea to the test during Asia's last economic collapse. It turned out, in their case, that once Japan's economy recovered those companies that spent were way ahead of those companies that didn't spend in terms of development, research, property, & equipment. It is a risky way to run your business but in that case it paid off handsomely.
-
Originally Posted by
Riczaj01 He should be putting in 25-40 % of that bad boy. The city does get a huge boost in economy though, employment increases, which increases taxes, and if done right it becomes a better venue for other attractions. It's actually a good idea for a city in recession to build help expense one of these things b/c it's citizens can get back to work.
the tough part becomes as a business owner if another city ( ie L.A. or OKL) is willing to put 100% in, why would you risk $200-400 mill of your own capital when cn use it elsewhere if another city is funding close to 100%??.. Not saying agree with it, but frma business standppoint it is a concern
-
Originally Posted by
dabears54 the tough part becomes as a business owner if another city ( ie L.A. or OKL) is willing to put 100% in, why would you risk $200-400 mill of your own capital when cn use it elsewhere if another city is funding close to 100%??.. Not saying agree with it, but frma business standppoint it is a concern
Didn't know OKL was in the market; knew about LA; but imo LA is a far riskier venture b/c of all the NFL Fail that has happened there in the past. I understand what you mean DB; but in the current downtrend where cities/states are massive in the red you cannot expect the city put in 100%. How much is the rebranding/moving going to cost? Not saying he isn't going to take a hit in the pocket but that also has to be taken into consideration...now is the worst time for them to be moving to LA; they are in full rebuild mode and is not going to be a definate winner; and as you see w/the clippers, if you don't win LA doesn't care.
-
High Fives / Like - 1 High Fives, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by
Riczaj01 Didn't know OKL was in the market; knew about LA; but imo LA is a far riskier venture b/c of all the NFL Fail that has happened there in the past. I understand what you mean DB; but in the current downtrend where cities/states are massive in the red you cannot expect the city put in 100%. How much is the rebranding/moving going to cost? Not saying he isn't going to take a hit in the pocket but that also has to be taken into consideration...now is the worst time for them to be moving to LA; they are in full rebuild mode and is not going to be a definate winner; and as you see w/the clippers, if you don't win LA doesn't care.
Whil agree the move would suck, just to play devil's advocate, even when winning Minny wasn't selling out, heck they almost didn't sell out their playoff games in 2008 and almost had their last 2 games "blacked out"- So its not exactly a 'rabid" fanbase there- and add in the obvious distinction of going from something like a local market of under 2 million to 10 million in LA, even if respnse only 'tepid" it would still be a bigger audience than Minny. And that means more ad revenue, more jersey sales and obviously alot more top end $$$ for luxery boxes that are the NFL's owner bread and butter profit-I agree IMO the LA market had their chance, but that 10 mill people hard to resist both from a local standpoint and from a TV viewership for the league as a whole.. The LA market will increase ratings nationawide over Minny, which the league as a whole also wants
-
Originally Posted by
dabears54 the tough part becomes as a business owner if another city ( ie L.A. or OKL) is willing to put 100% in, why would you risk $200-400 mill of your own capital when cn use it elsewhere if another city is funding close to 100%??.. Not saying agree with it, but frma business standppoint it is a concern
Then just like I said he should move the team to LA and let Calfornia taxpayers pony up. When other NFL teams are filling stadiums and many have waiting lists for season tickets doesn't the fact that Wilf isn't having that experience say something about him and his team? I think that by in large the citizens of Minneapolis are pretty intelligent people so I'll leave it to them to decide whether or not it's worth to be held hostage by Ziggy Wilf.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
