CSU going bankrupt? lolno

[dio]

I am going to laugh when the new stadium opens in 2016 in Fort Collins. CU vs CSU is the first game on the docket. It is CSU's home game...... and Bohn forces them to play in Denver :lol:

 

[Buffarino]

You guys mad I'm reporting what the expert feasibility firm is reporting? I'm not making these stats up. If you have beef with the stats then ask them, but I atleast posted the minimums that they reported

We're not mad, but it's sheer lunacy to believe that a new stadium alone would increase CSU's attendance by 70% overnight. CSU has averaged roughly 22k per year (give or take a few hundred) for the past 5 years straight.

 

[OMFGasm]

We're not mad, but it's sheer lunacy to believe that a new stadium alone would increase CSU's attendance by 70% overnight. CSU has averaged roughly 22k per year (give or take a few hundred) for the past 5 years straight.

I didn't do the feasibility report

 

[Buffarino]

I am going to laugh when the new stadium opens in 2016 in Fort Collins. CU vs CSU is the first game on the docket. It is CSU's home game...... and Bohn forces them to play in Denver :lol:

[Chris Trager] I would literally die laughing if that happened [/Chris Traeger]

 

[Duff Man]

We're not mad, but it's sheer lunacy to believe that a new stadium alone would increase CSU's attendance by 70% overnight. CSU has averaged roughly 22k per year (give or take a few hundred) for the past 5 years straight.

...as well as counting stadium naming rights as a lump sum payment. Does not quite work that way.

 

[Buffarino]

I didn't do the feasibility report

Never said you did. But you're reporting the numbers as if they're fact. They're not. They're bull**** made up numbers.

 

[Buffs@5345']

Found this at:

http://www.frewnations.com/city-of-cedar-rapids-and-us-cellular-corporation-announce-naming-rights-agreement-for-city%E2%80%99s-new-convention-complex

12MM seems legit

Cedar Rapids Convention Complex Naming Rights Agreement
Comparable Venues
February 23, 2012
				​
		Total​	Term​	Average Annual Investment​
Sears Centre	Hoffman Estates, IL	$10,000,000​	10​	$1,000,000​
Qwest Center (CenturyLink)	Omaha	$14,000,000​	15​	$933,333​
Wells Fargo Arena	Des Moines	$11,500,000​	20​	$575,000​
Ford Center	Evansville, IN	$6,845,000​	15​	$456,333​
Hy-Vee Hall	Des Moines	$8,025,000​	20​	$401,250​
U.S. Cellular Center and Doubletree by Hilton at the U.S. Cellular Center	Cedar Rapids	$3,832,402​	10​	$383,240​
Comcast Arena	Everett, WA	$3,700,000​	10​	$370,000​
1STBANK Center	Broomfield, CO	$1,750,000​	5​	$350,000​
Huntington Center	Toledo, OH	$2,100,000​	6​	$350,000​
ShoWare Center	Kent, WA	$3,175,000​	10​	$317,500​
AMSOIL Arena	Duluth, MN	$6,000,000​	20​	$300,000​
Community Choice/Vet’s Auditorium	Des Moines	$2,500,000​	10​	$250,000​
		​

 

[btbuff]

...as well as counting stadium naming rights as a lump sum payment. Does not quite work that way.

You could negotiate it to be a lump sum payment. You wouldn't get the same amount especially if it is a large company that borrows relatively cheap. There also isn't any reason to believe a bank/bondholder wouldn't let you use that as guaranteed cash flow.

 

[Rick James]

Just got back from the stadium meeting. The feasibility firms there have done reports on hundreds of new stadiums and 50+ football stadiums.


CSU can expect a MINIMUM of $13million in extra revenue each year due to the stadium and a max of $22million. This comes from naming rights of the stadium, loge boxes, box seats, club seats that aren't at Hughes. An attendance of 37,800. Sounds like sustainable revenue.

They expect the fundraising to be at $212-490million. So yeah, $212million minimum.

Owned. Told you so

You do understand that CSU has only had an attendence over 35 thousand FOUR times, right?

You do also realize that two of those games came against CU (to where we can attribute a good number of those in attendence) and the other two games were against Utah and Wyoming.

Oh yea, all of those games were a long time ago. Like twenty years ago long time ago.
Back when the Rams were good and mattered not only in Colorado, but the national stage.

You really think that just because you put your stadium on campus suddenly everyone who didn't care before will suddenly start showing up in unprecedented numbers to watch a terrible program?

You guys barely got thirty five (much less thirty eight) when you were a nationally ranked team playing in local rivalries. Averaging more than that with a bad team in a C rate conference just because you moved your stadium a few minutes closer is a pipe dream.

 

[4DemBuffs]

Gasm...

real question here and humor me if you will.

for the last few years CSU has not been able to sell half of thier tickets to the RMSD vs Colorado, thier hated rival. home attendence has been in the mid to upper teens in the thousands. well below capacity.

now, a new on campus stadium may help but, do you really believe to the tune of about 30,000 extras for a capacity crowd or say even 20,000 others? what will change, other than the location? will the team be that much better in your estimation?

there has to be something to put butts in the seats. what is it in CSU's case that will do it? will it be teams you draw into your home field? the product on the field? the location?

i would like to hear your thoughts on the matter.

thanks.

 

[OMFGasm]

...as well as counting stadium naming rights as a lump sum payment. Does not quite work that way.

I never said it was, but that is included in overall payment towards the $248million. The stadium isn't paid in full at one time and neither is the naming rights

 

[Duff Man]

You could negotiate it to be a lump sum payment. You wouldn't get the same amount especially if it is a large company that borrows relatively cheap. There also isn't any reason to believe a bank/bondholder wouldn't let you use that as guaranteed cash flow.

Fair enough. But I think the overall point remains the same: in all likelihood, they are going to be borrowing some money against future revenue.

 

[Duff Man]

I never said it was, but that is included in overall payment towards the $248million. The stadium isn't paid in full at one time and neither is the naming rights

Good to see you are finally understanding where Dio is coming from because it sure looked like you were willfully ignoring his posts.

 

[Buffs@5345']

Just saw the stadium meeting news blurb on 9 news. Nice of them to include the shot of the broken sign at Hughes, and the trash stuck in the fence. The bushes look good though, on second thought they should leave them there to increase the curb appeal when they try to sell it.

 

[dio]

I'm still not sure why Gasm is gloating here. The meeting tonight did provide further insight into what the plan is - but how much of the stadium is from donations and how much from financing is the major issue, as we were discussing to some degree before the meeting. All of the same hurdles and concerns about long-term financial health and viability are still on the table. As are the needs of WINNING on the football field.

 

[OMFGasm]

I'm still not sure why Gasm is gloating here. The meeting tonight did provide further insight into what the plan is - but how much of the stadium is from donations and how much from financing is the major issue, as we were discussing to some degree before the meeting. All of the same hurdles and concerns about long-term financial health and viability are still on the table. As are the needs of WINNING on the football field.

They already went through that. $212-$490million in donations. The rest would be paid for from naming rights and associated revenue with the new stadium (loge seats, box seats etc)

 

[Creebuzz]

I didn't do the feasibility report

A feasibility study is merely a projection. In my experience in financing large projects, I have found that consultants often bend their numbers to reach a favored conclusion. The world is littered with examples of failed projects that were "feasible" on paper. I would be particularly skeptical if the study included large swings in historical numbers. I would look very hard at the underlying analytics before relying on the report.

Anyway, as I said in another thread, good luck in building the stadium. Hopefully, it'll help kill the stupid game in Denver.

 

[dio]

Well, if you get that much in donations, then more power to you.

Uhhhhh -

From the Coloradoan live blog

KellyLyell:
That includes potential financed debt of $167M to $270M that Jack Graham says would be paid through #CSUStadium revenue streams. [via Twitter]

NCBR:
Finance subcommittee believes that between $45 and $220 million could be garnered from current donors.#CSUStadium [via Twitter]

​

 

[dio]

If you can get $220MM donated, then you're in great shape and congratulations to you.

 

[dio]

This is interesting, but I assume it is just for public consumption

coloradoan: RT @KellyLyell: VP Brett Anderson says CSU not actively fundraising for #CSUstadium right now.[via Twitter]

​

 

[Buffs@5345']

They already went through that. $212-$490million in donations. The rest would be paid for from naming rights and associated revenue with the new stadium (loge seats, box seats etc)

Again a legitimate question - how much of the 212-490MM have to be in hand to break ground? Who guarantees the remaining amount? If 100MM in donations are gathered and the stadium is built who is left holding the bag if those donations dry up?

 

[dio]

And this note

coloradoan: CSU projects it could raise as much as $135 million from donors. #CSUstadium [via Twitter]

 

[OMFGasm]

Oops. I meant they thought the stadium could be anywhere from $212-490, not all from donations. My b

 

[Buffs@5345']

And this note

coloradoan: CSU projects it could raise as much as $135 million from donors. #CSUstadium [via Twitter]

That's OK, OMFGasm will make up 355MM in donations, right?

 

[4DemBuffs]

so, i guess gasm is not going to address my questions.

and, i thought we were friends.

 

[dio]

All of the below I pulled out of the liveblog of the meeting you supposedly went to:

http://www.coloradoan.com/article/2...ing-7-p-m-?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Fun fact: CSU yesterday issued a request for proposals for banking services. There was no mention of any sort of stadium naming rights included in the RFP. Regarding feasibility studies, in all my years of covering things like this, I'm not sure I ever recall a study saying a project should not go forward. Consultants tend to pride themselves on finding "creative" solutions to such things. Consultants say that a new building would "naturally" increase game attendance for at least a while - maybe as much as 22 percent increase. Regarding data sources: CSU has been surveying donors and alumns. They are then using their experience with the $500M capital campaign to extrapolate. coloradoan: Consultants: A new building would "naturally" increase game attendance for a while, maybe as much as 22 percent increase. #CSUstadium [via Twitter] Consultant: Luxury seats could generate about $13 million in additional revenues annually. NCBR: Average annual revenue for recent collegiate naming rights values: $1.2 million. #CSUStadium [via Consultant projects that attendance would go up 4 percent in each of the first four years, then stay flat after that. Consultant: Stadium could generate revenue of $18M-$31.6M annually through operations -- seat sales, parking, merchandise sales, rentals, etc. NCBR: CSL: Potential net stadium revenue in first year, base scenario: $15.9 million. #CSUStadium [via Twitter]

 

[dio]

Sorry for the ****** formatting, pasting out of the blog program

NCBR: 4 primary funding sources: private donors, corporate naming, premium seating, event development fee. #CSUStadium [via Twitter] NCBR: Graham: No expectation we'll sell naming rights for $12 million. It will be much higher than that.#CSUStadium [via Twitter] gracehood: #csustadium could generate at least $50k to $1.5 million in additional revenue from hosting special events. [via Twitter]

 

[Darth Snow]

I still don't understand how best case projections made by a sales company are FACT.

Our questions are legitimate and have not been answered in any way by your beloved sales company's projections. Now, whenever you feel like providing a FACT like actual revenue or donations raised, little boy, then maybe we will have something concrete to talk about

 

[wsp4820]

Was this guy running the meeting? I wouldn't trust his figures.

View attachment 9407

We're you sent here by the devil?

 

[dio]

Interesting stuff. The consultants kept reiterating that they were being 'extremely conservative' in their funding estimates - but aspects of this seem quite aggressive, such as the attendance increases.