The reality is that if you move to L.A., under the current revenue structure of the NFL, you don't care if you get 50K to a game. They redid revenue sharing when the Houston Texans were added. Now, base ticket money and TV money is still shared. However, skyboxes are not. As a result, you toss in 200 skyboxes in L.A., and corporate money will buy those suckers for serious money (much more than K.C. with its few major business by comparison). KC gouges for parking (that is where it makes an added $1 million are year it doesn't have to share). However, by being in L.A., the difference on rent for about 4 skyboxes would make that $1 million alone. Also, any new stadium design there would have far more boxes than Arrowhead does (where the numbers by comparison are quite paltry).pittsburghparoyal wrote: Precisely why they won't leave. 80K people don't go to NFL games in LA or Phoenix or MIami. So if Hunt wants to pack his bags and make a go of it in a town where he's NOT the one-trick pony, then hit the bricks, Lamar.
Hunt & Glass need to pay their fair share. When did I say they should receive nothing? That's rigth, I never did. But for Glass-Hole to offer 25M in exchange for 200M+, is a complete and total joke. He needs to put in 50-60M, and taxpayers should put in 150.
For Hunt, same deal. YOu want 200M? You put in 100M then. Fair is fair. That's all I'm asking for.
In the money picture of the current NFL landscape, attendence isn't that big of a deal. It is the outside revenue steams that are not shared. In addition, that money that is outside the shared system, if the salary cap can be removed (which several owners who are in the best position via skyboxes want) then part of it can be put into motion to acquire better players, creating a have and have not situation like we see in professional baseball. If that happens, L.A. would sell out due to the superior product on the field.
Later,
Sam S.
Later,
Sam S.
