Rentschler Stadium expansion

[jostar1]

According to this story, it is costing $9 million a year to repay the debt plus interest. It will be paid off in 2020.

UConn pays the state $170,000 per game to rent the field.

http://www.ct.com/news/advocates/latest-news/brief-20111208,0,54104.story

 

[Carl Spackler]

I posted this in the other thread, but -

Think of the make up of the Big East when Rentschler was designed. Think of the current make up, and the make up going forward. Think (very long) on the fact that we do not currently sell out 40k on the regular.

Make no mistake, I would shout from the rooftops if we were filling 55k seats for UConn Football. But it is NOT a simple matter of "build it and they will come", and the funding is not a gimme.

Now, the value proposition would change if it was a matter of the Big Ten saying "Expand and you are in"... but is that even remotely on the table?


To that, I would add- the fact that money is available at relatively cheap rates does not automatically mean that expansion is a good investment. It's like stores saying "The more you BUY the more you SAVE!"

I would love to expand. But expand when demand is increasing. Not holding steady, with the risk of trending downward given our future conference makeup.

I don't have to think real hard about any of that. The simple problem is that even though we've got two conference titles and Fiesta Bowl appearance, we've not won more than 8 games in any one season since prior to being in a BCS conference, and we've been ranked in the top 25 in the country for a single week as a 1-A football playing program.

THe entire reason you're concerned at all about who the opponents are when it comes to ticket sales - is entirely because of that.

UConn starts posting some 9, 10, 11 win seasons, starts showing up in the top 25 regularly, and everyone will stop talking about who the opponents are when it comes to ticket sales, because the tickets will be sold to people that want to see UCONN - not see the opponents.

Got to win games. Got to win BIG games. Hasn't been done consistently in any way or fashion yet by the football program. Consistently being the key word.

It starts with recruiting.

 

[junglehusky]

I don't disagree with any of that Carl. But a thought occurs. We've won multiple men's and women's basketball championships in the past decade and have trouble selling out the XL center. Have to think Jim Delaney takes notice of that kind of thing. This is where being surrounded by Yankees Empire and Red Sox Nation dings us a little compared to Nebraska.

 

[Pudge]

1st ... when Louisville & Rutgers EXPANDED, that was the time to do it. I fully understand the handwringing today. We are in an uncertain environment. You can argue that our Prospects were better when the first shovel was put in the ground (BE had some good teams then); but, like lots of things ... this whole Realignment was foreseeable (with 20/20 hindsight). So, I don't agree with that premise. We went top shelf in Football. It was a good decision.

We should have been at 50k+ in 2008.

2nd ... which leads to the linked article in jostar1's post. Some CT people will never think that Rentschler was a good project. BS. It has been great. But, I would argue, it has been under-managed all the way around. We don't get enough utility from what it is. Not enough use. Not enough ancillary land development. Lots of really poor mediocre vision.

The numbers in that article are interesting. Where did he get the Debt Service? (cause it's not in that audit) If it is $9m (looks like a fully amortizing 20 year bond) ... has anyone looked to recast that debt. O my. This is where the questions fly. UConn pays $170k per game? I don't see that in the audit provided by mattp. And, the $8m a year in Luxury Suite money? Goes to the Athletic Fund? Huh? See ... you have your veritable can a worms in one day. The more you dive into this, the more questions.

BTW ... I believe Rentschler would have cost $140m if it was done a few years later (mostly higher steel cost).

 

[BlueMAB]

A pubic entity, with a very good credit rating can probably borrow short-term for 1-2 years for under 1%,

The CT 'pubic' entity (an appropriate typo) had it's credit rating downgraded this past year, and is still facing a deficit after the largest tax hike in the history of the state.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I didn't go past 2008 on the first page of the Link. Here's a fiscal statement from Feb 2010. The Northland/AEG contract was up in 2010, and there doesn't appear to be a 2011 Fiscal statement so far from OPM, at least not easily accessible on line. Don't know if that contract expire has anythin gto do with why I can't find anythign for 2011.

I think the info you'd be interested regarding bonding, and all that starts around page 40 with the Rentschler info and then after for about 30 pages of the Accounting report from 2008-2009 for the entire Adrien's landing project.

Remember that the only way that Rowland was able to push the stadium plans through the legislature, after the local stadium in Storrs was shot down, by the town of Mansfield, et.al... and after Kraft backed out with the patriots move and the 65k seat stadium for downtown hartford, was to tie the entire stadium to the Adrien's landing project. and land on the other side of the CT river. That vote didn't get approved until summer 2000.

http://www.ct.gov/opm/lib/opm/secre...landingrentschlerfieldannualreportfeb2010.pdf

It is noted clearly on page 53, that total assets of the adrien's landing project exceeded liabilities as of June 30, 2009 but quite a bit, and fourth (and final) issuance of series D bonds, happened in 2008.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'm not freaking accountant and I despise math, and I have a headache from looking at that report I just linked. But on page 38 is a summary of the entire Rentschler consturction project.

It's pretty clear that bonds were issued in 2000 in the sum of 91,200,000. (page 41) The 2011 operating budget projected a $300k+ surplus, (page 44), but debt service for those 2000 bonds issued isn't a line item.

I just tried going through the 30+pages of the accounting summary, and now I'm unhappy - not because I didn't find what I was looking before, but because numbers give me a headache. Can't find a debt service line item anywhere for those bonds, so either that $91,2 mill is paid off as of feb 2010, (doubtful, or they're lumped in somewhere with the entire Adrien's landing project funding debt service, of which there are several pages describing the bonding, the last of which was issued in 2008.

Hope that helps. I need to go for a run now.

 

[Carl Spackler]

pudge - here's the link to the CT OPM website, and adrien's landing / rentschler info.

http://www.ct.gov/opm/cwp/view.asp?a=3003&Q=386466&opmNav_GID=1791

Best I can tell, is that the 91,2 mill in bonds that were issued in 2000 for Rentschler, are being paid off together with the bonding that has been issued for the entire project including the marriott hotels, convention center, and science center. Rentschler is operating regularly at a budget surplus (minus the line item for bonding debt service)

I do agree, that if the bonds haven't been refinanced, for the entire project, somebody's head needs to roll. Rell, well, she rode Rowland's coat tails, and Malloy doesn't impress me, so it's entirely possible that the entire project hasn't been refinanced since what was originally put together 12 years ago.

I do agree that the only impediment right now to a full go on expanding the stadium, is public perception.

 

[observer]

As I mentioned before I am not a UConn alum but am a CT resident and my public perception is that expanding the Rent is a waste of taxpayer dollars until such time as it is necessary to do so. Show me a significant waiting list for season tickets and I will change my mind but until then it is build it only when they want to come.

Better to spend money on a bigger venue for hoops than to waste it on a stadium that is rarely full.

 

[Srqhusky]

There is no need to analyze anything. When the state or any government institution wants anything it is simply the popularity of where the money is going that is all that matters. We then exercise our American right of buy now pay later. I have never seen anything the government do be rational or cost effective. Just think about the revenue the extra seats will make and the jobs it will create in building it.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Better to spend money on a bigger venue for hoops than to waste it on a stadium that is rarely full.

Rarely filled? Bullsh1t. The attendance at The Rent has always been strong.

It's the Civic Center vs no-name opponents that's like a morgue.

 

[UCFBfan]

Some CT people will never think that Rentschler was a good project. BS. It has been great. But, I would argue, it has been under-managed all the way around. We don't get enough utility from what it is. Not enough use. Not enough ancillary land development. Lots of really poor mediocre vision.

I agree with the bold part the most. I was watching the US get beat down by Brazil last week and it helped me recall how much I loved going to the US Men's friendly at the Rent a few years back. So I went onto the Rent's website to see what upcoming events there were and the first thing on the list was the UMass game. Actually, the only thing on the upcoming events are UConn games. WTF is that all about?

The stadium opened with a bang and held a few concerts, two US Nat'l Team games, a few US Women's games, and now it's done what? The only thing was the Whale game last season. I agree 100% that no one will see the value of spending money on this project if it's only used 6-7 days a year. The management at the Rent don't seem interested in getting any other events there so there's no other use. On top of that we don't sell out regularly so there will be no demand for a 15k upgrade.

Finally, I can already see the people of CT throwing a fit that money is being dumped into a stadium when there are about 35,000 other problems in our state. Even if the money doesn't come from tax payers or whatever you guys were saying (sorry I can only follow economics so much) people will think that the money is coming out of their pockets and won't be happy.

Unfortunately, I can't see the need for a stadium upgrade right now.

 

[Waquoit]

The management at the Rent don't seem interested in getting any other events there so there's no other use. On top of that we don't sell out regularly so there will be no demand for a 15k upgrade.

That's not quite true. I'm sure there is interest but the availability of events to go in there is limited.

FWIW, I sent the Bushnell an email recently asking about the chances of getting a soccer game at The Rent this summer. Got a nice note back saying that they were working to book an international friendly. I hope they pull it off, that Liverpool-Celtic game was a blast. Hartford was hopping that night. They also mentioned that they made it past the first stage of bidding for a major event next summer. I think they were talking about this. That would be all kinds of awesome.

 

[mattp]

The CT 'pubic' entity (an appropriate typo) had it's credit rating downgraded this past year, and is still facing a deficit after the largest tax hike in the history of the state.

even with the deficit and credit downgrade, CT or any decent issuer can easily issue long term debt under 3.5% and 5 year debt under 1%. considering the cheap financing available, and the relatively cheap cost of materials this would be a great time to expand. if we wait for the economy to recover we'll pay double for materials and possibly more than double for financing, and we'll probably be waiting for quite some time.

 

[WallStreetHusky]

Regardless of cheap funding, cheap labor, and cheap materials there is zero political will for the state to do this. You have the government shrinking and cutting services and education, and to think that the state is going to bond a Rent expansion is simply not going to happen. Anybody who promoted this idea would be voted out ASAP.

 

[mattp]

Regardless of cheap funding, cheap labor, and cheap materials there is zero political will for the state to do this. You have the government shrinking and cutting services and education, and to think that the state is going to bond a Rent expansion is simply not going to happen. Anybody who promoted this idea would be voted out ASAP.

that's pretty much what happened at Rutgers. they couldn't afford it, didn't need it, and anyone at all involved in that expansion is gone, but at the end of the day the stadium still holds 55k now. that's the kind of screw-the-consequences gumption we need

 

[BlueMAB]

even with the deficit and credit downgrade, CT or any decent issuer can easily issue long term debt under 3.5% and 5 year debt under 1%. considering the cheap financing available, and the relatively cheap cost of materials this would be a great time to expand. if we wait for the economy to recover we'll pay double for materials and possibly more than double for financing, and we'll probably be waiting for quite some time.

This is mostly true. I don't think the cost of materials are exactly cheap right now, but I could be wrong. Expansion would involve a lot of steel and concrete, and I don't believe those prices have gone down recently.

 

[BlueMAB]

that's the kind of screw-the-consequences gumption we need

Malloy has that gumption when it comes to magic busways for people to ride to a city that is losing employment opportunities.

 

[4UConn]

The State of CT invested a ton of money ($100 million plus) to play big boy football. I see the proposed expansion as just protecting the investment. UConn is at a crossroad; if it doesn't make itself more attractive to the coming mega conferences and the headline competition it would bring in to East Hartford, the investment already made will likely be a poor one, as the 40,000 seat stadium sees less and less capacity playing the likes of East Toodle Doo State University. Does expansion mean we'll get an invite, no..., but it certainly increases the likelihood of that happening. I don't know what the dollar cost of the expansion is (I'm thinking maybe $20 million), ...but I think it's a critical part in UConn's continued drive to become a truly great NATIONAL university. I just don't see standing still as an good alternative. Sure there's risk in expansion, but sometimes there's a lot more risk in doing nothing at all.

 

[Waquoit]

Expansion would be approved easily if it came along with membership in a different conference.

 

[mattp]

Expansion would be approved easily if it came along with membership in a different conference.

i agree i don't see the 40k stadium preventing us from being invited anywhere, and a B1G invite would get the upgrade approved. i'm pretty sure the B1G is a little more forward thinking than that. they invited Nebraska despite knowledge they'd be kicked from the AAU because they new it was a better move in the long run. if/when they add another team it'll be with a little more thought than who has more seats in their stadium today, just like it'll be about more than the team's record over the last 2-3 years. they're looking for long term strategic partners, and we could be a really good fit there. we're more useful to the B1G than we are to the ACC

 

[CL82]

I didn't go past 2008 on the first page of the Link. Here's a fiscal statement from Feb 2010. The Northland/AEG contract was up in 2010, and there doesn't appear to be a 2011 Fiscal statement so far from OPM, at least not easily accessible on line. Don't know if that contract expire has anythin gto do with why I can't find anythign for 2011.

I think the info you'd be interested regarding bonding, and all that starts around page 40 with the Rentschler info and then after for about 30 pages of the Accounting report from 2008-2009 for the entire Adrien's landing project.

Remember that the only way that Rowland was able to push the stadium plans through the legislature, after the local stadium in Storrs was shot down, by the town of Mansfield, et.al... and after Kraft backed out with the patriots move and the 65k seat stadium for downtown hartford, was to tie the entire stadium to the Adrien's landing project. and land on the other side of the CT river. That vote didn't get approved until summer 2000.

http://www.ct.gov/opm/lib/opm/secre...landingrentschlerfieldannualreportfeb2010.pdf

It is noted clearly on page 53, that total assets of the adrien's landing project exceeded liabilities as of June 30, 2009 but quite a bit, and fourth (and final) issuance of series D bonds, happened in 2008.

How did Mansfield shoot it down? I thought the original proposal at Storrs, was too pricey. I think, effectively, the Rent, Shankman and Burton were all rolled together into a single project and people balked at the price tag. Anyone else remember what happened with the original proposal?

 

[Carl Spackler]

I appreciate the questions, but my fingers hurt. (figuratively) I know there are other posters around here that know the history. Maybe somebody else can jump in here and help. I don't feel like diggign for all the news articles again, and my memory is pretty good, but I don't remember all the little details about everything.

I'm 99.99% sure it was Mansfield that went to the state legislature with all kinds of issues with the stadium plans once they found out what the UConn BOT had been planning. I'm pretty sure it was simple political pressure on elected officials that ended the possibility of funding for an on-campus stadium, and maybe a legal technicality or something, that got the state to put a hold on the funding for the on-campus facility because the entire thing was ready to go, by UConn leadership, but once the surrounding community found out - they had a fit. THe stadium was originally going to be in the vicinity of the Jungle, just north of it, and if I remember correclty they were considering knocking down the jungle to do it THe plans were go, to build on campus, until the surrounding communities got it axed.

ALl things considered, it's probably a good thing that it happened, b/c the transportation infrastructure in and out of Storrs would have been a disaster in 2003, and hte stadium and grounds we've got are absolutely phenomenal for a college football game day atmosphere. I think every visitor to the Stadium should take the time to go up in the tower or climb up to the top of the deck and look out over the surrounding area on game day.

 

[UCFBfan]

That's not quite true. I'm sure there is interest but the availability of events to go in there is limited.

FWIW, I sent the Bushnell an email recently asking about the chances of getting a soccer game at The Rent this summer. Got a nice note back saying that they were working to book an international friendly. I hope they pull it off, that Liverpool-Celtic game was a blast. Hartford was hopping that night. They also mentioned that they made it past the first stage of bidding for a major event next summer. I think they were talking about this. That would be all kinds of awesome.

That would be pretty epic to get something like that at The Rent. However, just from that short article, it looks like, based on the record numbers they mentioned, that they'll be looking at bigger venues to host this at then a 40K stadium. It would be sweet to nail down that deal though! In the meantime, I'd take an International friendly or a club friendly. Something soccer oriented. I'd love to see a push to get soccer in CT.

I wish, yes a total pipe dream, that they'd build a soccer stadium in Hartford and get the Revolution to leave an empty Foxboro and come to this new stadium. It would be awesome. It would be soccer specific, like so many of the MLS clubs are moving to and would breath some life back into Hartford. You could build it on the side of 84 where the butt-ugly building was. NHL isn't coming back so why not go for a rising sport in MLS? Come on! Is this not a bad pipe dream to have?

 

[Adios]

I wish, yes a total pipe dream, that they'd build a soccer stadium in Hartford and get the Revolution to leave an empty Foxboro and come to this new stadium. It would be awesome. It would be soccer specific, like so many of the MLS clubs are moving to and would breath some life back into Hartford. You could build it on the side of 84 where the butt-ugly building was. NHL isn't coming back so why not go for a rising sport in MLS? Come on! Is this not a bad pipe dream to have?

An MLS exec said soccer will become the second most popular sport here in a matter of time, behind gridiron football. Sure would be nice to have the Revolution relocate to Hartford.