Jump to content

Piece of SLU property considered for possible MLS stadium site


TheBand

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 144
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, HoosierPal said:

The advantage to me for the Union Station site is that it likely would revitalize UStation.  Besides the Station there isn't too much else going on in the 2 to 4 block area.

Union Station is already moving well along in terms of "revitalization." http://bit.ly/2ba3bBo

The occasional soccer games would help, but they won't tip the scales very much in terms of Union Station's success. For example, Scottrade is all of three blocks from Union Station's eastern boundary, and we can see what fabulous support that's provided for Union Station (and for any other hospitality business within about a six-block radius). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bonwich said:

Union Station is already moving well along in terms of "revitalization." http://bit.ly/2ba3bBo

The occasional soccer games would help, but they won't tip the scales very much in terms of Union Station's success. For example, Scottrade is all of three blocks from Union Station's eastern boundary, and we can see what fabulous support that's provided for Union Station (and for any other hospitality business within about a six-block radius). 

-parking is six blocks away, too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Just would like to point out that this proposed stadium would be a nice place to put a new SLU football program on the FCS level like Butler, Dayton, Nova and Georgtown.

Just waiting on that half-a-billion dollar donation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Won't take a donation that big.  Butler's football program has expenses of $850,000 a year. 

 You are neglecting interest/depreciation costs around facilities.   And usually the EIA operating cost estimates leave out recruiting costs (which for smaller budget programs are a substantial percentage of costs).

That $850,000 dollars in operating costs got them 22K fans for the whole year.  I doubt they are averaging $40 a ticket or getting much other revenue.

I know no one is seriously advocating for a football team but considering SLU's already poor finances I am not sure if administering a fatal financial blow is prudent advice.

Just a fun fact-- at some "elite" schools the costs of non-revenue sports can be even higher than football.  Rowing is an extemely expensive sport (some D-1 schools spend more money on rowing than football) and yet every Ivy and many others have a team.  A lot of those costs are funded by "friend of the sport" alumni donors but still a net cost to the school.  But then the sports are viewed as investments to attract good students rather than big spectator spectacles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few things.......

At a time when SLU is looking for ways to attract students, non-scholarship football is one way to attract them.  Butler's football program has 113 players on it's roster.  That is 113 students paying tuition and the costs to live on campus. I saw the other day that after aid the average student at SLU pays around $37,000 a year to attend SLU and live on campus.

The biggest facility cost would normally be the stadium, but in this case those cost are being picked up by others.  You could probably work out a deal where the team plays in the soccer stadium rent free.  I bet that is what the situation would be for SLU's soccer team.

Butler's football team operates at a loss.  That said, is it really operating at a loss if it gets you 113 more students paying to go to school?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hsmith19 said:

FCS football schools still give out scholarships, just a few less than the BCS schools. Unless there's something unique about Butler's football program I'm unaware of, most of those 113 players will be on either full or partial scholarship.

The teams in the Pioneer Football League don't give out scholarships.  Davidson and Dayton are, also, in that conference.  Dayton went to the FCS playoffs last season.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bonwich said:

Union Station is already moving well along in terms of "revitalization." http://bit.ly/2ba3bBo

The occasional soccer games would help, but they won't tip the scales very much in terms of Union Station's success. For example, Scottrade is all of three blocks from Union Station's eastern boundary, and we can see what fabulous support that's provided for Union Station (and for any other hospitality business within about a six-block radius). 

What Union Station really needs is to bring the trains back and to add a Metrolink station inside.  The current place is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Clock_Tower said:

What Union Station really needs is to bring the trains back and to add a Metrolink station inside.  The current place is a joke.

That train left the station a very long time ago and ain't never comin' back. (There are, by the way, private railcars that do currently operate out of Union Station.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the issue of football for SLU, I think that the mere mention of football when associated with the current $20 M deficit in the budget may be enough to give Dr. Pestello palpitations and shortness of breath. Let's not scare the man, we want him around for a long time (or I should say I would like to see him around for a long time). 

Regarding rowing and the Ivys. Keep in mind that our endowment is not in the same league as theirs. Just to provide an example the most recent fund raising campaign for Harvard netted something like $ 6.7 B, yes with a B. Not even in dreams can we hope to raise anywhere close to that amount in our funding campaigns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SLU's billion dollar endowment is twice the size of Dayton's and  Villanova's.  It is 800 million more than Butler's.  All those schools have football. 

We aren't talking about an expensive scholarship program.  This would be a realatively cheap non scholarship program.  It would actually add 100 plus tuition paying students to the schools enrollment.  Paying students the school needs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may have a point brianstl, now you need to find the way to sell it to the administration as a part of the effort to resolve the $20 M deficit. However do the math first, 100 paying students at an average $37,000/yr each is $3.7 M/yr. However, the fees paid by each student do not go automatically to the bottom line, there is a cost associated with each and every student enrolled, so let's assume you can come up and show that each paying student produces enough income to net $10,000/yr (probably this is a very optimistic estimate considering that no student pays the full tuition, the total amount netted from each student is generally offset by aid which is provided by the University in a variety of ways). This assumption of a $10,000/yr net per additional student means that the 100 new paying students may provide $1 M/yr net to defray the cost of the program first and ultimately flow to the bottom line. Assuming the new program costs can be kept to about $800,000 per year you will have a net of $200,000 per year that can be applied to reduce the budget deficit, which is not a small amount, but is a meager contribution to the bottom line given current needs. However, this analysis can only work if the cost of the football program is kept at $800,000 per year and each new paying student produces a net gain of $10,000/yr. The math presented here does not provide any wiggle room for cost inflation with time which can be expected to occur. I would think a new football program for the University may well result in additional budget deficits over time, or be considered likely to do so. I think it will be difficult to sell the administration this kind of a package based upon this kind of assumptions but you may try.

All I can say about this is that the budget at Dayton, Bulter, and Villanova have to be very different than ours and permit them to either assume all possible deficits resulting over time from a new football program. I think current deficits in the SLU budget will most likely not allow a new football program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, brianstl said:

I think the Grove is like a 10 block walk to the campus. The nearest completed Cortex building is a four block walk.  IKEA is a one block walk.  The new Foundry development will be a one block walk.

Thank you.  This is what I thought. Ideal for SLU.  And I would rather attend an MLS game by the Foundry/IKEA/Cortex and SLU rather another renovation of Union Station. Singing fudge shop, tired chain restaurants, unsafe movie theater... and now a fish tank?!? And this is called urban redevelopment?  No thanks.  I would rather go West a few blocks where people actually live, work, eat and spend time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...