Falcons Stadium Funding Update (Atlanta, Dallas: how much, hotels, lawyer) - Georgia (GA) - City-Data Forum

joey86 · 01-30-2013, 08:37 PM

Falcons could be ready to pony up more funding for new stadium | www.ajc.com The Falcons are now saying they would be willing to take 100 million less and pay 60 million of Ga Domes debt. Like I said before there is a snowball s chance in hell of this stadium being built anywhere but Downtown ATL!

joey86 · 01-30-2013, 08:43 PM

And who else saw it coming? They planned this. "I'll do it for 200 mil but just for you buddy" Arthur Blank

MattCW · 01-30-2013, 10:24 PM

Quote:

The city of Atlanta likely would issue the remaining $200 million bonds for the stadium, backed by the city’s hotel-motel tax...

Helllloooo Bankruptcy! When are people going to wake up and realize how bad this will end up being for the city? Demolishing the old dome for this new one, with the current economic situation, is tantamount to buying a car, then while it's still running, with no problems at all, throwing it away, and buying a new one, while unemployed. If the Hotel/Motel tax is to be used for helping to offset the costs of the services used by guests of the city (what ELSE would it be for?), there is a lot they could do for $200 million that would actually attract even more guests, as well as improving quality of life for existing residents. How much new business or guests is this new monument to waste going to attract? NONE! NADDA! ZIP! ZERO! If Mr. Blank wants to build this, he can do it himself!

netsirk · 01-30-2013, 10:43 PM

As a recent transplant...I don't understand any of this.

I went to a game a few weeks ago. First one at that stadium. Do I think the Dome is awful? Yes. It was a terrible place to watch a game, for me, but you also have to understand my perspective.

I moved here from NJ/NYC, and the teams there don't play under a dome. It was the first time I'd seen football inside, and that, first off, seems wrong. Football is an all-weather sport, not something to be under a parachute. You want a dome, fine, but it should at least be retractable. It was over 60 degrees outside the day I was there. It didn't feel like football...it felt like being inside a solarium. An old, ugly one, at that.

When I checked up later, I couldn't believe that the stadium isn't older than it is. Everything, from the seating to the concessions, seemed tired. And the people working the food stands, holy hell, I think I aged ten years just waiting for them to decide to make food.

All this said, and as bad as the stadium is, making the taxpayers pay for it seems wrong. People down here don't even love pro football the way they love the college nonsense--so why would they want to pay for it?

alco89 · 01-31-2013, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by netsirk

As a recent transplant...I don't understand any of this.

I went to a game a few weeks ago. First one at that stadium. Do I think the Dome is awful? Yes. It was a terrible place to watch a game, for me, but you also have to understand my perspective.

I moved here from NJ/NYC, and the teams there don't play under a dome. It was the first time I'd seen football inside, and that, first off, seems wrong. Football is an all-weather sport, not something to be under a parachute. You want a dome, fine, but it should at least be retractable. It was over 60 degrees outside the day I was there. It didn't feel like football...it felt like being inside a solarium. An old, ugly one, at that.

When I checked up later, I couldn't believe that the stadium isn't older than it is. Everything, from the seating to the concessions, seemed tired. And the people working the food stands, holy hell, I think I aged ten years just waiting for them to decide to make food.

All this said, and as bad as the stadium is, making the taxpayers pay for it seems wrong. People down here don't even love pro football the way they love the college nonsense--so why would they want to pay for it?

Was it the Giants game? Are you a Giants fan? Because if so, the 34-0 drubbing they got probably explains most of your feelings.

Seriously though, it may have been 60 degrees that day, but in the earlier part of the season it can be in the high 80s and 90s and humid, which is very uncomfortable to say the least. This is the south. Most teams down here have domes (Houston, Dallas, NO, even Arizona) and the ones that don't, struggle to sell tickets because of the weather (amongst other things lol). And don't give me that usual Northerner line "We sit outside in the cold to watch games." Like you said, if it was UGA or Alabama they would, but people don't care for the Falcons as much...yet. The Dome IS outdated unfortunately.

Oh and $200 million is a lot, but it's less than most other team owners ask for. We have a great owner in Arthur Blank who inherited a terrible franchise in a subpar stadium!

jsvh · 01-31-2013, 06:51 AM

Replace the dome.

For those of you choosing not to remember: The dome was 100% state funded. The state is on the hook for its expenses. It will quickly become a money pit, especially if the Falcons go to another stadium. What use is keeping a usable stadium if no one is going to use it and it will just drain money? Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. That old building your business is in might be sturdy and serve its purpose just fine, but replacing it with a new one will bring in enough new business and reduced maintenance to cover the replacement costs in a lot of cases.

This is an entirely reasonable plan to me. The hotels want to support a new venue that will bring them more customers. Let them and Arthur Blank go in on a deal together to build a new stadium. These are not your tax dollars. Cut the drama.