Originally Posted by NodakPaul
In the end the FANS are who are paying the cost of the stadium whether it is through higher ticket prices, higher costs on concessions, parking, or whatever they use to fund it. The point remains the same. We took on an additional billion dollars in costs and they need to be paid by the fans in one way or the other. Whether the fans give it to Ziggy and he pays it or they py it to the state and they pay it is academic. In the end they will not build a new stadium of that price and not see prices go up by a pretty big chunk.
First of all - the Vikings don't pay for operating costs on the new stadium - no more than they do with the Metrodome. They LEASE the stadium. The Stadium Authority, similar to the MSFC, will handle operating costs.
And you think by changing the name of a seat from a general admission seat that is subject to revenue sharing and renaming it a club seat that carries a PSL is not going to change the amount that seat costs compared to what it cost in the dome? I know you are better than that.
Second, as has been the case for, oh 20 years or so, the NFL has revenue sharing in place for standard tickets. Hiking the cost of standard tickets will NOT result in some significant increase in revenue to the Vikings. So your argument that the Vikings will have to hike prices on tickets to help cover their lease or operating expenses is not valid. The plan to help supplant the extra cost of lease (which in turn funds operating expenses) is to have many, many more non-revenue sharing seats such as club seats and suites. In fact, that was the whole point of the new stadium - because the metrodome couldn't support enough non-revenue sharing seats.
One of the big reasons for nfl revenue sharing was to be able to offer tickets at prices that would be able to sell out stadiums regardless of the market. New York and Dallas can charge over a hundred dollars for the average ticket because of the market they are in. Minnesota (and most markets) cannot. Not only is there no fiscal reason to hike the prices like you are suggesting, but the market wouldn't support it.
So think of it this way-
The NFL has said for years and Goodell has been here during the stadium drive making the case that the dome didn't generate enough revenue so the league had to subsidize us through the money made at other stadiums.
In order for us to not be subsidized by the NFL and to make his case, then ticket prices HAVE to go up here to provide the revenue from this stadium that is not being generated in the dome.
Or are you saying that we will build a new facility and still rely on a subsidy from the NFL to keep the ticket prices artificially low. If you believe that is the case then we will just need to revisit the topic when prices come out but I believe you would be very wrong. In fact, it should be the case that we would be on the other end and subsidizing the teams with older stadiums now that we have a new one.
Well, you will need it if you think we are going to have a new stadium with hardly any additional seats and not have to raise prices to pay for it. I know you are smarter than that. It would be like saying you have an old house that was built for 50,000 dollars and is paid for but the utilities are too expensive so you want to build a 1 Million dollar house to live in and you think you can keep the payment the same as long as someone pays the utilities.The math doesn't work.
You don't need magic fairy dust to know that we aren't going to see $100 average tickets in Minnesota. I stand by the max of $85 average tickets.