Panini Signs Mariota Card Deal Hublot Signs Borna Coric As Endorser ESPN To Carry NBA D-League Playoffs Tucson, Little Rock Seek Bowl Games NFL Disciplines Browns, Falcons truTV To Air Friday Night Boxing FS1 Gets 2.5 Overnight For NASCAR Curry Signs Deal For Coaching Site CoachUp Joe Gibbs Addresses Brain-Function Issues Of Son Several Teams Speak Out Against Indiana Law
SBD/18/Facilities VenuesPrint All
Yesterday the Rams announced an agreement to move to St. Louis after playing in Southern California for 49 years. Rams Owner Georgia Frontiere said she could not turn down the deal offered by the city of St. Louis, which included an unprecedented financial commitment to the team. Today, THE SPORTS BUSINESS DAILY continues to profile the NFL's infrastructure by comparing sections of the Rams deal in St. Louis with their lease at Anaheim.
St. Louis Football Stadium (SLFS)
AGE: Anaheim built in 1966,
SLFS to be completed 10/95
OWNERSHIP: Both operated by the cities. COST: Anaheim cost $20M for construction and land.
SLFS $266M paid by state, county & city bonds.
CAPACITY: 70,500 for Anaheim, 70,000 in St. Louis LUXURY SEATS: Anaheim has 108 luxury boxes, operated by Rams. SLFS 100 suites & 6250 club seats. CONCESSIONS: Anaheim: Ogden Services revenue split 50/50 between city and team.
St. Louis: No contract completed. Rams to receive large % of concession sales.
PARKING: Anaheim: 16,106 spots at $6, Rams split parking 50/50 with city.
St. Louis: Handled by the city Rams will receive large % of revenue.
MAINTENANCE: Anaheim: City handles maintenance on the facility.
St. Louis: Not available.
ADVERTISING: Rams get 25%, City 25%. MLB Angels receive undisclosed % of ad revenue.
St. Louis: Not Available naming rights owned by St.Louis Sports Authority.
LEASE: Anaheim: team exercised escape option at the end this year. St. Louis: Rams signed 30 year lease. RENT: Anaheim: $1.8M 10th highest in league. St. Louis: $250,000 5th lowest in the league.
(Sources: Michael Myers, Anaheim Stadium, FANS, Inc. St. Louis, rent figure from Florida Times Union article July 24, 1994).
New Bucs owner Malcolm Glazer made his presence felt in Tampa yesterday, pledging to work with local leaders on solving the area's stadium situation. Glazer, who bought the team Monday for $192M, visited Tampa Stadium for the first time and attended a Tampa Sports Authority (TSA) meeting (Joel Poiley, TAMPA TRIBUNE, 1/18). Although his offer included two-year commitment and $35M penalty if he moves the team in the next 10 years, Glazer did say "the Bucs would need a new stadium to remain in Tampa Bay" (Rick Stroud, ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, 1/18). Local officials have had mixed reactions to the prospects of higher taxes for a stadium. A renovation of Tampa Stadium would be a cheaper option, but would likely not keep the team in Tampa, according to TSA director Rick Nafe. Nafe said he would like a 25-30 year lease commitment from the Bucs if the TSA were to build a new stadium. The TSA will immediately begin looking for designs for a new stadium and a renovated Tampa Stadium. The estimated cost for a new stadium could be as high as $175M, with renovation at about $75-80M. Among tax options mentioned: a half-cent sales tax; tax on restaurant food and services, ticket surcharges; and a tax on city licenses (Joel Poiley, TAMPA TRIBUNE, 1/18). On Tuesday, Hillsborugh County Commission Chair Jim Norman withdrew a proposal to have voters approve a half-cent sales tax to build a new stadium. Norman's decision came after county leaders said "private sources, not tax dollars should pay the majority share of costs for a stadium project." Norman said leaders want seat licenses, luxury box rentals and club seating to pay for the park. But, he added: "If I don't see some movement, I'll bring back the referendum idea" (Kevin Walker, TAMPA TRIBUNE, 1/18).