Soccer Silicon Valley Blog

« No One Can Enter Cartman's Amusement Park | Main | Mercury News, CC Times profile Wolff »

November 18, 2006

Merc weighs in on 49ers stadium

Today, the San Jose Mercury News offers up a story on Santa Clara's attempt to win the 49ers stadium deal. The story focuses on the City of Santa Clara's long track record of financial foresight, something that has always impressed us at SSV as well. For example, the article notes, Santa Clara owns the land upon which Great America is built, and pockets over $5 million a year in rent.

Naturally, there's a lot of enthusiasm in that city for the potential Niners deal. In San Francisco, the stadium cost was projected at $600 to $800 million, and most cities would be pleased to have that kind of investment in their community.

We've been thinking a bit about the numbers, though, and we're not so sure that a new soccer stadium isn't a better deal. We know that opinion will surprise a lot of people but here's our thinking:

- The football stadium proposed for San Francisco would seat 68,000. In a typical season, the Niners have ten home games, for a maximum potential total of 680,000 fans.

- The soccer stadium proposed by Lew Wolff and Earthquakes Soccer, LLC would have a capacity of about 20,000. MLS teams typically play about 20 home games over the course of a season, generating a maximum total of 400,000 fans. Add in an international exhibition or two, appearances by the U.S. men's and women's national teams, and you're up to 24 matches and a total of 480,000 people.

- While that's well below the football total, consider the following: A 20,000-seat stadium is ideal for concerts. The same cannot be said of the proposed 49ers facility—there are only a few bands these days that can sell out a 50,000-seat stadium: The Rolling Stones, who are sure to be cutting back on their touring schedule now that they have reached a cumulate 250 (!) years of age; U2; maybe Bruce Springsteen. There's also a lot of competition in the Bay Area for shows of that size: the Giants' ballpark is one, and we expect that rents at the Oakland/Alameda County Coliseum will be very reasonable for concerts once the A's leave those confines for Cisco Field.

On the other hand, there's an incredibly long list of performers who are capable of filling a 20,000 seater. If you sell out a modest six concerts a year, you're up to a total maximum of 600,000 attendees for your soccer stadium, which puts us in the neighborhood of total visitors to the potential 49ers stadium.

- Without even considering any of the other possible uses for the soccer stadium, we're looking at 10 events at 68,000 people each versus 30 events at 20,000 each. Those numbers are comparable, but which of these would have a greater impact on economic development? We'll ask you this: If you're an entrepreneur interested in opening a restaurant, do you want to be where there will be events drawing big crowds on 30 weekends a year or do you want to be where the crowds are only guaranteed 10 times a year? We think that most people making that decision would choose to be where the crowds will be 30 weekends a year, three times more than football has to offer.

- Here's another thing to consider: traffic. Which of these facilities would have a greater impact on traffic? Or, to put it another way, would you rather have to navigate through the cars that carry 68,000 people or those that carry 20,000 people? Granted, there are other issues involved here—proximity to mass transit, for instance. Still, the question stands.

- The thing that clinches it for us, though, is the cost: an estimated $600 to $800 million for the 49ers stadium (680,000 fans) versus an estimated $100 million for soccer (600,000 fans). To us, the soccer stadium looks like an absolute bargain.

The good news for Santa Clara, of course, is that they have the available land for both soccer and football stadiums, so either/or is not necessarily a choice they have to make. We thought it was worth pointing out, though, that a proposed soccer stadium can hold its own when compared to a gridiron facility, and could even be seen as a smarter investment.

Posted by Jay at November 18, 2006 08:13 AM

Comments

Posted by: Goodsport at November 18, 2006 07:07 PM

Posted by: Goodsport at November 18, 2006 07:12 PM