Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, August 08, 2011

Losing $30M in annual fees shows city whiffed big-time on new Yankee Stadium, Citi Field

Juan gone to the Money Store!

If you want to know why more than 450 city park workers are about to be laid off or why the Parks Department has imposed outrageous fee increases, just take a look at the new Mets and Yankees ballparks… Deals the Bloomberg administration negotiated in 2006 have stripped some $30 million in annual revenue the Parks Department once generated from Shea Stadium and the old Yankee Stadium…

Shea and the old Yankee Stadium - both of which sat on park land and were owned by the city - were the Parks Department’s biggest revenue generators.

Under the old Yankee Stadium deal, the city was assured a percentage of gate receipts, a percentage of food sales, even a percentage of the team’s cable revenue.

Because of that, the old stadium produced as much as $15 million a year for Parks - even after deducting costs for stadium upkeep.

Likewise, the Shea Stadium deal generated as much as $9 million annually for the city.

As recently as 2008, the two ballparks represented nearly half of the $51 million in concessions revenue generated by the entire Parks system.

On top of that, the city was taking in an additional $6 million annually from parking fees at Shea and the old Yankee Stadium.

Once the new ballparks opened, all that revenue disappeared - even the parking money.

Today, the Mets keep all their parking revenue. Meanwhile, the Yankee Stadium garages, run by an independent firm, are nearly bankrupt and may never produce the $3 million annually they agreed to provide the city.

The District Attorney Posted: August 08, 2011 at 03:22 PM | 17 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: business, mets, yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: August 08, 2011 at 09:20 PM (#3895650)
But the city had to cut the best deal it could to prevent the Yankees from moving to Oklahoma City. Can't blame them too much.
   2. LionoftheSenate (Brewers v A's World Series) Posted: August 09, 2011 at 05:51 AM (#3896082)
Wow, I didn't know this.

I get why "cow town" ponies up cash to keep a MLB team, why again did New York city fall for this? Also, where is the roof? If one city could use a roof for baseball (or football for that matter), it is NYC.

At least the big bat is still there.
   3. Run Joe Run Posted: August 09, 2011 at 04:16 PM (#3896301)
I dunno - baseball reporters can't even get baseball right - it's hard for me to put much faith in their financial reporting. For that matter business reporters can't get finance right either.
   4. DA Baracus Posted: August 09, 2011 at 05:40 PM (#3896345)
Also, where is the roof? If one city could use a roof for baseball (or football for that matter), it is NYC.


There should never be roofs on football stadiums in the north. And if one city could use a roof for baseball, it's not NYC. Minneapolis and Miami are far more "deserving."
   5. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 06:02 PM (#3896355)
Wait, the city owned the old stadiums and the land? I'm pretty sure that's wrong.
   6. Sam M. Posted: August 09, 2011 at 06:24 PM (#3896368)
Because of that, the old stadium produced as much as $15 million a year for Parks - even after deducting costs for stadium upkeep.

Likewise, the Shea Stadium deal generated as much as $9 million annually for the city.


I don't dispute the basic gist of the article, but I will say that if you are going to make a realistic assessment of what should have been spent on "stadium upkeep" to actually keep those stadiums in reasonable condition, I am not at all sure that the stadiums would have been generating anything like $24-$30M in revenue ... or perhaps even a positive cash flow. There was a ton of deferred maintenance on those places, especially Shea.
   7. Howie Menckel Posted: August 09, 2011 at 06:25 PM (#3896369)
from 1971 article:

http://www.nytimes.com/specials/baseball/yankees/nyy-gid-stadium.html

There was a weird arrangement before the city bought Yankee Stadium (they always owned Shea iirc):

"The stadium, at 161st Street and River Avenue, the Bronx is owned by Rice University and the land is owned by the Knights of Columbus."
   8. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 06:36 PM (#3896375)
Thanks, I did not know that. But if the city owned the land and Yankee Stadium, don't they still own the land? And didn't they have to be paid off before letting it be torn down? I guess I should just read the article.
   9. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:00 PM (#3896388)
I guess I should just read the article.


Good god. Are you out of your mind?
   10. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:09 PM (#3896399)
Well I'm not going to do it, but I should...
   11. Howie Menckel Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:19 PM (#3896404)
ok, since you asked. from rtfa:

"Under the old Yankee Stadium deal, the city was assured a percentage of gate receipts, a percentage of food sales, even a percentage of the team's cable revenue. Because of that, the old stadium produced as much as $15 million a year for Parks - even after deducting costs for stadium upkeep.

Likewise, the Shea Stadium deal generated as much as $9 million annually for the city. As recently as 2008, the two ballparks represented nearly half of the $51 million in concessions revenue generated by the entire Parks system.

On top of that, the city was taking in an additional $6 million annually from parking fees at Shea and the old Yankee Stadium. Once the new ballparks opened, all that revenue disappeared - even the parking money. Today, the Mets keep all their parking revenue.

Meanwhile, the Yankee Stadium garages, run by an independent firm, are nearly bankrupt and may never produce the $3 million annually they agreed to provide the city. This loss of $30 million each and every year is a hidden cost to taxpayers from the new ballparks."
   12. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:28 PM (#3896412)
Hey! I read the excerpts! But what is happening with the land on which the stadium formerly sat, and which the City presumably still owns? Why don't they make money on parking from that?
   13. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:32 PM (#3896415)
But what is happening with the land on which the stadium formerly sat, and which the City presumably still owns? Why don't they make money on parking from that?
At what was Shea, they should be, because it's all parking lots. But apparently the City gave the Mets the parking revenue because...well, because they're idiots, I guess. The former Yankee Stadium is a park, which was part of the deal to replace the parks the new Yankee Stadium is now occupying.
   14. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:45 PM (#3896426)
But what is happening with the land on which the stadium formerly sat, and which the City presumably still owns?

Didn't that replace the parkland that became the new Stadium?

EDIT: Either these time stamps are off or I'm a very slow typist. Drinks for #13, put it on the BBTF tab!
   15. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 07:59 PM (#3896435)
The former Yankee Stadium is a park, which was part of the deal to replace the parks the new Yankee Stadium is now occupying.


How did the Yankees get the current land? That seems like a strange deal, was the Yankees' offer: "If you give us this land for a new stadium, we will give you land that you already own to build parks on?"
   16. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 09, 2011 at 08:23 PM (#3896454)
That seems like a strange deal, was the Yankees' offer: "If you give us this land for a new stadium, we will give you land that you already own to build parks on?"

To be fair, I think some old, under-used ball fields were used for the NYS, and eventually replaced with some pretty fancy athletic facilities at the site of the former Yankee Stadium.
   17. Nasty Nate Posted: August 09, 2011 at 08:48 PM (#3896473)
To be fair, I think some old, under-used ball fields were used for the NYS, and eventually replaced with some pretty fancy athletic facilities at the site of the former Yankee Stadium.


Did the city own the land under the old under-used ball fields? If so, why didn't they try for the same deal they had with the old park?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Adam M
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(5720 - 5:07pm, Aug 27)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogPosnanski: Blaming the fans
(80 - 5:05pm, Aug 27)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 8-27-2014
(17 - 5:02pm, Aug 27)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-27-2014
(11 - 4:59pm, Aug 27)
Last: Harveys Wallbangers

NewsblogAJC: O’Brien: Expect B.J. Upton trade talks to be revisited
(29 - 4:58pm, Aug 27)
Last: Colin

NewsblogBrooklyn Cyclones, Nickelodeon to host '90s night
(14 - 4:58pm, Aug 27)
Last: TerpNats

NewsblogCameron: Next year really might be THE year, Cubs fans
(27 - 4:57pm, Aug 27)
Last: Harveys Wallbangers

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(688 - 4:55pm, Aug 27)
Last: I am going to be Frank

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(86 - 4:54pm, Aug 27)
Last: DJS and the Infinite Sadness

NewsblogReports: The Astros may still be able to sign top pick Brady Aiken
(2 - 4:53pm, Aug 27)
Last: Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(345 - 4:45pm, Aug 27)
Last: Jimmy P

NewsblogMariners Extend GM Jack Zduriencik
(45 - 4:05pm, Aug 27)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogRoyals Walk Off; Ned Yost Complains About Attendance
(4 - 3:52pm, Aug 27)
Last: BDC

NewsblogFangraphs: Cameron | Tim Lincecum: Now a Reliever, Maybe Needs to Close
(27 - 3:23pm, Aug 27)
Last: SouthSideRyan

NewsblogFG: A Good Reason To Watch Yusmeiro Petit Pitch
(3 - 2:49pm, Aug 27)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

Page rendered in 0.2068 seconds
53 querie(s) executed