Stadium Discussion

Where Do You Want The Stadium?

  • Manhattan

    Votes: 54 16.6%
  • Queens

    Votes: 99 30.5%
  • Brooklyn

    Votes: 19 5.8%
  • Staten Island

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Westchester

    Votes: 18 5.5%
  • The Bronx

    Votes: 113 34.8%
  • Long Island

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Dual-Boroughs

    Votes: 3 0.9%
  • Etihad Island

    Votes: 5 1.5%

  • Total voters
    325
Forgot to also post pier 40 rendering in comparison to the WP. That was a long time ago. Amazing how times change and a large supporters section wall was added, tons of luxury boxes, the oculus scoreboard….

1668704482439.jpeg
 
Etihad is more than the airline. This is sports washing. They need their name on the stadium. It’s the entire point.
Entire point for whom? Etihad Airways has no ownership stake in City Football Group, just a comprehensive naming rights deal for CoMS and the MCFC academy facilities next door, plus the kit sponsorships for Manchester City, NYCFC and Melbourne. They don't have a naming rights deal with any of the other teams (their naming rights deal in Melbourne is actually for the rugby stadium; Melbourne FC plays in AAMI Park).

So, yeah -- it's entirely possible they come with a big-time offer and CFG takes it. But it's not a given. It's not something they've been doing across the board with CFG teams. They haven't even taken the kit sponsorships with everyone, which is a lot cheaper and easier to do.

Anyway, I'm just looking at it as a business case. It's hard to see a return for them. Their primary market is Europe and the Middle East. Their flights from JFK, Chicago and Washington D.C. are to Abu Dhabi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad (and one to Chennai), and there aren't a lot of them. If they're intent on setting fire to their money for public relations purposes, that's one thing; and maybe they are even though they haven't done it elsewhere. But it's outside the parameters of the case.

The case for JetBlue, on the other hand, is damn near perfect. And there's no reason why Etihad Airways can't keep the kit sponsorship and JetBlue take the naming rights, and maybe the sleeve when the Dude Wipes deal expires. (I'd make a crack about "Fly With the Pigeons" but it's too early in the day. LOL)

One other consideration: Everyone already calls Manchester City's park the Etihad. Would CFG really want their new stadium to be "the Other Etihad"? Or something clumsy (as someone suggested on Reddit), like Etihad USA? And ultimately, it's up to CFG to decide.
 
I would be SHOCKED if the Club as currently constituted owns the stadium. You are signing a 49 year lease. Some LLC wholly owned by CFG or Abu Dhabi will own and operate the stadium. NYCFC will pay that entity rent. In turn, the LLC will pay the City of New York up to $4 Million in annual rent.

Why would CFG allow the Yankees anywhere near this deal they cut?
Have to agree here. No way CFG doesn’t have a very easy prenup with the ability to buy Yanks out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adam
Entire point for whom? Etihad Airways has no ownership stake in City Football Group, just a comprehensive naming rights deal for CoMS and the MCFC academy facilities next door, plus the kit sponsorships for Manchester City, NYCFC and Melbourne. They don't have a naming rights deal with any of the other teams (their naming rights deal in Melbourne is actually for the rugby stadium; Melbourne FC plays in AAMI Park).

So, yeah -- it's entirely possible they come with a big-time offer and CFG takes it. But it's not a given. It's not something they've been doing across the board with CFG teams. They haven't even taken the kit sponsorships with everyone, which is a lot cheaper and easier to do.

Anyway, I'm just looking at it as a business case. It's hard to see a return for them. Their primary market is Europe and the Middle East. Their flights from JFK, Chicago and Washington D.C. are to Abu Dhabi, Mumbai, Ahmedabad (and one to Chennai), and there aren't a lot of them. If they're intent on setting fire to their money for public relations purposes, that's one thing; and maybe they are even though they haven't done it elsewhere. But it's outside the parameters of the case.

The case for JetBlue, on the other hand, is damn near perfect. And there's no reason why Etihad Airways can't keep the kit sponsorship and JetBlue take the naming rights, and maybe the sleeve when the Dude Wipes deal expires. (I'd make a crack about "Fly With the Pigeons" but it's too early in the day. LOL)

One other consideration: Everyone already calls Manchester City's park the Etihad. Would CFG really want their new stadium to be "the Other Etihad"? Or something clumsy (as someone suggested on Reddit), like Etihad USA? And ultimately, it's up to CFG to decide.

It's not about the airline.

It's about Abu Dhabi. This is an Abu Dhabi commercial venture
 
Never too early to start planning. Would be great to have a critical mass of forum peeps somewhere in our new stadium.

Using this model, if you assume supporters are in blue (duh) and benches are on the green side, where do you intend to get seats?
proxy.jpg

I think I lean toward G9. I love being close to the action and the SS (current seats are front row behind the SS goal at YS). Though I could also get into one of the GU sections for a higher vantage point.
 
If the Yankees still own 20% in 2027, do they have to pay 20% of the rent due on the stadium?
The club is organized as an LLC. Owners don't pay operating expenses of an LLC, the LLC pays them out of its own funds. If the owners paid that would render the separate corporate form moot and make the owner(s) susceptible to direct liability. I also find it inconceivable te club could not afford $4M annual rent.
It theoretically is possible the LLC could require a capital infusion at some point, and in that regard I'm wondering why you asked about the annual rent and not the $700M+ price to build. But even then, loans should be easily arranged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoupInNYC and Kenny
Never too early to start planning. Would be great to have a critical mass of forum peeps somewhere in our new stadium.

Using this model, if you assume supporters are in blue (duh) and benches are on the green side, where do you intend to get seats?
View attachment 12384

I think I lean toward G9. I love being close to the action and the SS (current seats are front row behind the SS goal at YS). Though I could also get into one of the GU sections for a higher vantage point.
Do the directional designations in that match the expected orientation for DWS*?

* Dude Wipes Stadium
 
It's not about the airline.

It's about Abu Dhabi. This is an Abu Dhabi commercial venture
That happens to be something I know a heck of a lot about. You know the GlobalFoundries project I've been talking about? Until going public last October, GloFo (now GF) was wholly-owned by Mubadala Investment Company, which is the sovereign investment fund of the United Arab Emirates. Even now, the chairman is Ahmed Yahia Al Idrissi.

What the UAE is up to is more than sportswashing, or greenwashing. They have a long-term strategy for leveraging their oil wealth to diversify into a variety of businesses before the oil starts to run out -- or we start using a heck of a lot less of it. And they want those businesses to function as profit centers. It's not all about geopolitics.

Would Abu Dhabi set fire to, say, $10 million a year to name our stadium for PR purposes? Maybe. I'm just saying, it's not something they've been doing elsewhere, and they could have. It's not in any way a given.

Without getting too deep into the weeds, I'd also point out the UAE itself is a pretty complicated situation. None of the constituent emirates is really free to just go rogue with their money. A naming rights deal is certainly chump change in their world, but the question of a return still matters. You're not going to get very high up the greasy pole over there if you're making bad deals.
 
The club is organized as an LLC. Owners don't pay operating expenses of an LLC, the LLC pays them out of its own funds. If the owners paid that would render the separate corporate form moot and make the owner(s) susceptible to direct liability. I also find it inconceivable te club could not afford $4M annual rent.
It theoretically is possible the LLC could require a capital infusion at some point, and in that regard I'm wondering why you asked about the annual rent and not the $700M+ price to build. But even then, loans should be easily arranged.

I think you misunderstood. A new LLC owned by CFG will build the stadium. NYCFC would pay rent to CFG to occupy the stadium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Cos and Kenny
Do you knot know how corporate entities work? I explained it. If you need more background use google. The owners ain't paying operating expenses. The team currently pays $1M per game and suddenly it can't afford $4m per year?

Do you need me to explain this to you like you’re 5?
 
Never too early to start planning. Would be great to have a critical mass of forum peeps somewhere in our new stadium.

Using this model, if you assume supporters are in blue (duh) and benches are on the green side, where do you intend to get seats?
View attachment 12384

I think I lean toward G9. I love being close to the action and the SS (current seats are front row behind the SS goal at YS). Though I could also get into one of the GU sections for a higher vantage point.
I've loved sitting first couple of rows of the second level at midfield at RBA. As heavy a hitter as I obviously am, I can't imagine spending for club seats in this stadium and I'd guess lower level middle-third seats are going to be largely club.
 
I've loved sitting first couple of rows of the second level at midfield at RBA. As heavy a hitter as I obviously am, I can't imagine spending for club seats in this stadium and I'd guess lower level middle-third seats are going to be largely club.
These will be the best seats, but not cheap, as you point out.

Right now, I am 2nd row, 2nd level about at the top of the penalty area. Essentially GU9 on that map. I'd be happy again there, or maybe 1-2 sections closer to the middle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MumonA and Kjbert