Neither am I, but just for discussion sake let's say the biggest part of the renovation ticket is the structural cost for seating on the outfield side, and the lesser cost is the seating subtraction to accommodate length. Say, 50 million? That's appears to be a very doable number for DS to produce, no? Dome to boot. I'm in.
As a fan, it's a great idea to take it over. But as a business you you have to think this through. 50 million would just be construction. To consider this kind of project (40k+ stadium) you have to think about long-term operating costs, etc. in addition to buildout costs. What is the school going to do off season? What about maintenance and up-keep? What about staffing costs (full-time/part-time). Parking management? Vendor management? 3rd party management contract? What about politics and stakholder management? It's expensive and not a core business of an University. Better to lease one than own one. The responsibilities and costs increase significantly with ownership.
Then why did a small school like Tulane build one? This is just like anything else, you own then you have to pay maintenance, upkeep, insurance etc.
Since this is a business, you failed to mention the following (PRETTY MAJOR) the
increase in revenues.
There are naming rights....CHA CHING
There are off season events....CHA CHING
There will be no more splitting of the gate....CHA CHING
The issue I have with this is that it seems that getting a stadium is a lot of HARD WORK and very TIME CONSUMING, neither of which can't be overcome with proper planning and drive.
Didn't know this was going to turn into a debate, but here it goes.
There are naming rights....CHA CHING
- Probably not. If you expect donor funds, the naming rights goes to the donor. See Tulane's case (since you mentioned it).
There are off season events....CHA CHING
- Who is managing this? If this was so easy, olympic stadiums would be making money instead of crumbling around the world.
There will be no more splitting of the gate....CHA CHING
- Yes, but it would be years before you can make the money to cover the cost of buildout and operations.
BTW, I am an alum of both Miami and Tulane. The info on Tulane stadium that makes it different from Miami's situation are:
1. Land - Tulane already has the on-campus land and most of the 55 million construction cost (Still wondering why they are doing it...ego-maniac president wants legacy).
2. Location - New Orleans is in a rebuilding mode. Much easier to get through the political process to get anything done (try that with Coral Gables/Miami)
3. Tulane stadium is small and not state-of-the-art. 30,000 including standing room (Marlin Park - c'mon, it has a retractable roof. Maintenance anyone?)
4. Shared use - Tulane stadium replaces the practice field and has built-in conference space for school use (Drive over to Marlin Park for a meeting?)
5. Tulane had a stadium on-campus for many years (site of the old sugar bowl), memory of it still runs strong with some locals (check the donor list).
The bottom line is the situation for Tulane is different. No one will know for sure what the cost for UM would be in the long-run unless you do a detailed feasibility analysis (which includes monetary and non-monetary considerations). I am pretty sure the school has done one (internal or contracted) and the case is not there. That's why the statements made by the school has been very consistent on this issue.