SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   San Antonio (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=447)
-   -   SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro News Thread (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=204101)

SAguy Apr 20, 2010 3:01 AM

SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro News Thread
 
From mysa.com:

The Kohl's department store chain will open an operations center in San Antonio that's expected to employ more than 1,000 people within about three years.

Kohl's planned expansion follows Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.'s announcement in October that it would create 838 jobs at a new regional corporate campus to be built in the Westover Hills area. It already employs more than 900 locally.


http://www.mysanantonio.com/business...wFullArticle=y

sirkingwilliam Feb 17, 2013 3:27 PM

SAN ANTONIO | City and Metro News Thread
 
The city is a finalist to land an aerospace project that would bring 5,000 jobs that have an average salary of $100,000. The overall economic impact would be 28.5 billion over tens years or 2.8 billion a year. There would also be over an over 1 billion dollar facility built for manufacturing and R&D.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/art...28-4284825.php

cole world11 Feb 21, 2013 5:23 AM

wow! Imagine the footprint this would have on the south side and then the entire city. Let's hope SA gets this.

sirkingwilliam Apr 27, 2013 10:07 AM

Chinese fashion company making San Antonio their North American headquarters.

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/21/15/54.../3/628x471.jpg

Quote:

Looking for new markets and seeking sources of new garment designs, the Haiyang Sweater Industry Association in China announced Monday that it is opening a sales office in San Antonio as its North American headquarters.

The new company, Shantex Group LLC, also signed an agreement with San Antonio's University of the Incarnate Word in which students in UIW's fashion program will supply new designs for the North American market to the Chinese garment makers and, in return, obtain internships in the industry.

County Commissioner Kevin Wolff and county Economic Development Executive Director David Marquez said the Shantex Group will begin with a sales staff of only two or three people. As Shantex establishes its connections to retailers selling its clothing products, a showroom, warehousing and even San Antonio-area manufacturing could follow, Wolff and Marquez said.
Read more.

sirkingwilliam Apr 27, 2013 12:14 PM

Czech Republic energy company establishes HQ in San Antonio.

Quote:

A Czech Republic company says it has found an abundant, long-term source of energy in South Texas to help European utilities produce electricity.

The energy source has nothing to do with the Eagle Ford Shale.
The source is the hated mesquite wood.

“We looked all over the world for a stable and big source of biomass. We found the source in Texas,” Zdenek Mayer said. He's business director and CEO for GreenHeart Energy LLC, the Texas division of GreenHeart Energy, based in Duchcov, Czech Republic.

GreenHeart Energy LLC has selected San Antonio for its Texas company's headquarters — for legal, banking and accounting purposes — but most of its activities will occur near and in Corpus Christi.
Read more.

adtobias Apr 28, 2013 7:30 AM

Did we get those 5000 jobs.

sirkingwilliam Sep 17, 2013 11:14 AM

SAN ANTONIO | City and Metropolitan News Thread
 
Post news articles or columns that wouldn't validate creating a thread for and also do not belong in the downtown development thread, metro development thread or transportation thread.

Basically, any and all miscellaneous news and information pertaining to San Antonio or the metro area that doesn't belong anywhere else.

:cheers:

sirkingwilliam Sep 17, 2013 11:14 AM

Average home price in San Antonio for August jumped to $210,000

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5060/5...ff63376b_z.jpg

Quote:

As of August 2013, the average price of a home stood at $209,672 — a seven percent increase from the average price of $195,693 posted last August.
More buyers of luxury/higher-end homes is said to be the reason.

Quote:

A major factor in the median-price rise — an increase in the number of higher-end homes sold, observes Steven Gragg, 2013 Chairman of the Board for SABOR.

“Since February, homes priced over $500,000 have edged close to or gone over four percent of total homes sold,” he says. “Usually that number is closer to three percent.”

In August, homes priced over $500,000 accounted for 3.9 percent of units sold in the San Antonio MSA, SABOR reports. Homes priced from $200,000 to $500,000 accounted for 36.6 percent of sales. Homes priced below $200,000 accounted for 59.3 percent of home sales in greater San Antonio.
LINK

Fireoutofclay Sep 17, 2013 4:00 PM

This is a great idea, Sir.

sirkingwilliam Sep 18, 2013 6:40 AM

Wizard World bringing Comic Con to San Antonio beginning in 2014.

http://ep.yimg.com/ay/wizardworld/sa...n-center-7.jpg

Quote:

The tour has expanded to include the following new shows: Sacramento, Calif. (March 7-9, Sacramento Convention Center); Louisville, Ky. (March 28-30, Kentucky International Convention Center); Minneapolis (May 2-4, Minneapolis Convention Center); Atlanta (May 30-June 1, Georgia World Congress Center); San Antonio (Aug. 1-3, Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center); Richmond, Va. (Sept. 12-14, Greater Richmond Convention Center) and Tulsa, Okla. (Nov., 7-9, Cox Business Center).
Funny enough, this announcement comes on the heels of the first annual Alamo City Comic Con taking place in a couple of weeks at the convention center.

LINK

sirkingwilliam Sep 20, 2013 4:11 PM

Household income up, uninsured population down in San Antonio

http://i.imgur.com/hzGTSgN.jpg

Quote:

The San Antonio metropolitan area’s median household income increased, the poverty rate was not statistically different and the uninsured rate decreased from the year before.

That’s according to results from the 2012 American Community Survey. It found that the median household income in the San Antonio area was $51,486 in 2012. That’s up from $49,599 in 2011. In addition, 17.3 percent of people in the area were impoverished in 2012, up from 16.6 percent in 2011.

In 2012, 18.9 percent of the area’s population lacked health insurance coverage, a decrease from 19.9 percent in 2011.
San Antonio had the largest income gain percentage wise of the top 25 metros! :tup:


LINK

sirkingwilliam Sep 30, 2013 7:44 PM


Quote:

As expected, San Antonio will be battling some stiff competition for the 2017 College Football National Championship Game.

The playoff organizing group released six finalists for the Jan. 9, 2017 game.

Among those in the mix include:

San Francisco Bay Area (Levi’s Stadium)
Minneapolis (Vikings Stadium)
San Antonio (Alamodome)
South Florida (Sun Life Stadium)
Jacksonville (EverBank Field)
Tampa Bay (Raymond James Stadium)

It’s a tough bidding group, as every one of the finalists has either hosted or attracted a Super Bowl game in previous years.

sirkingwilliam Oct 1, 2013 8:23 PM


Quote:

The Stars & Stripes Drive-In Theatre Company has announced it will open a new drive-in theatre here in New Braunfels next summer.

Once open, the Drive-In will be open year-round, showing digital first-run double-features nightly. Two of the screen towers will measure over 90 feet wide, making them the largest movie screens in Texas.

Company officials say that the drive-in theatre will be located on 30 acres of land close to the intersection of FM 1101 and Kroesche Lane, about a mile from Freiheit Country Store.

Moviegoers will be able to enjoy watching from inside the comfort of their own car or outside in lawn chairs, and because the drive-in has always been more than just a movie going experience, Stars & Stripes will serve food from their 50’s Cafe and guests can also enjoy the patio and playground areas.

Again, the Stars & Stripes Drive-in will open in New Braunfels in the summer of 2014, and, according to the company, it will be the only drive-in theatre within a 150-miles.

sirkingwilliam Oct 2, 2013 7:01 AM

KCI, LifeCell Corp and Systagenix to merge
Headquarters will be in San Antonio

Quote:

San Antonio-based KCI, along with LifeCell Corp. and Systagenix, will become one globally diversified company focused on wound care, biologics and regenerative medicine.

It’s not immediately clear if the combined companies will operate under the KCI name or under a new moniker. However, a spokesman for KCI, Mike Barger, says the new entity will have its headquarters in San Antonio.

“The combination of these businesses will form a leading medical technology company with over $2 billion in revenue and a very important position within the health care system,” says Buddy Gumina, chairman of the board of directors of the parent company of KCI and New Jersey-based LifeCell Corp. “The new company, under the proven leadership of Joe Woody, will amplify existing capabilities, open the door for new growth opportunities and improve the lives of patients around the world.”

KCI and LifeCell Corp. will immediately begin operating as one company.

Once KCI closes on its acquisition of U.K.-based Systagenix, that company will be folded into the new entity as well. KCI officials announced in July that the company had signed a definitive agreement to acquire Systagenix, a provider of advanced wound care products, for $485 million.

sirkingwilliam Oct 3, 2013 3:21 AM


Quote:

The Texas Association of Realtors (TAR) has released its 2013 Texas Relocation Report, based on data from the National Association of Realtors and U-Haul.

Among demographic markets statewide, Bexar County posted the largest net inflow of households — a total of 5,601 families in 2012. Nationally, Bexar County experienced the fourth largest net gain of residents, according to the TAR report.

sirkingwilliam Oct 3, 2013 3:45 AM


Quote:

One of the city’s newest and most prestigious hotels has joined an elite group of iconic properties under one of Marriott International’s upscale brands.

The Éilan Hotel, Resort & Spa is officially the newest addition to Marriott’s Autograph Collection.

Founded in 2010, the Autograph Collection is “an evolving ensemble of strikingly independent hotels,” explains Marriott. The portfolio is made up of unique, iconic hotels from around the world — including the Boscolo Palace Roma in Rome; The Algonquin Resort in New Brunswick, Canada; and The Lexington in New York City.

sirkingwilliam Oct 17, 2013 1:37 PM




Quote:

Among those making the Top 25 Resorts in the Southwest list was the JW Marriott San Antonio Hill Country Resort & Spa.

“We are delighted to be recognized by Condé Nast Traveler’s discerning readers,” General Manager Arthur Coulombe says. “Our team is committed to a guest experience that embodies the authentic spirit of the Texas Hill Country. To us that means daily ‘Best In Class’ service that is welcoming, attentive and relaxing. Having been open just three years, we’re honored to be included among the top 25 resorts in the Southwest.”

The hotel is located at 23808 Resort Parkway.

Nearly 80,000 readers cast 1.3 million votes to come up with Condé Nast’s Readers’ Choice Awards 2013.

sirkingwilliam Oct 17, 2013 1:39 PM


Quote:

There is a good chance, perhaps an ever-increasing chance, that the San Diego Chargers will throw up their hands, end their quest for a new stadium in Southern California and move to another market.

Could the team wind up in San Antonio? It’s possible, says one veteran Chargers observer.

San Diego Union-Tribune columnist Kevin Acee believes the Chargers are ripe for the picking. Acee, who was the Chargers beat writer for several years before becoming a columnist, wrote recently, “The only way the Chargers will stay is if they get a new place to play.”
He is not optimistic that San Diego leaders will come through in time with a workable plan.

The natives are restless. Apathy may be setting in.

sirkingwilliam Oct 17, 2013 1:43 PM




Quote:

San Antonio is truly a seller’s market.

As of September 2013, housing inventory in the Alamo City stood at 4.6 months — a six-year low for the market, according to the latest San Antonio Board of Realtors (SABOR) report.

The September report also shows that homes are on the market, on average, 70 days. Of the homes sold, 97 percent were bought at the listing price.

“We have seen our inventory getting smaller and smaller all year, making this more of a competitive market,” says Steven Gragg, 2013 SABOR chairman of the board. “Low inventory could result in sellers receiving multiple bids on homes located in prime locations or being able to sell closer to their asking price.”

In September, the average price of a home in the greater San Antonio area stood at $205,728 — up from an average price of $193,026 last September, and an average price of $189,723 in September 2011.

A total of 2,031 homes were sold over the 30 days ended Sept. 30, 2013, according to the latest SABOR analysis. By comparison, 1,686 sales were recorded last September. Two years ago, 1,576 home-sales were recorded.

Runner Oct 17, 2013 9:34 PM

Not going to happen. Why? The Alamodome is to outdated for an NFL team to play there. It would have to be demolished and a new billion dollar stadium put in its place. More than likely they will move to LA.

sirkingwilliam Oct 17, 2013 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runner (Post 6306471)
Not going to happen. Why? The Alamodome is to outdated for an NFL team to play there. It would have to be demolished and a new billion dollar stadium put in its place. More than likely they will move to LA.

I just used the Alamodome as a placeholder. Obviously any relocation would be tied to a new stadium. Alamodome would be temp.

cole world11 Oct 22, 2013 5:37 PM

:yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes: i'm not holding my breath or anything but just the possibility of getting NFL gives me the chills. how epic that would be.

ILUVSAT Oct 29, 2013 4:40 PM

That would be awesome! However, I believe LA, Mexico City or London would get a team before we would. The NFL will most likely think twice about putting another team in a "smaller" market (when larger ones may be available).

Furthermore, I'm not sure the owners would approve it (i.e., Jerry Jones and Bob McNair may push for a vote against a team in SA...right now). And that is not to mention voter approval of funds for a new stadium (in the neighborhood of $500MM-$600MM).

It's not impossible...and I'd like to see it happen...but, I too, am not holding my breath...for now.

sirkingwilliam Oct 29, 2013 6:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILUVSAT (Post 6319500)
That would be awesome! However, I believe LA, Mexico City or London would get a team before we would. The NFL will most likely think twice about putting another team in a "smaller" market (when larger ones may be available).

Furthermore, I'm not sure the owners would approve it (i.e., Jerry Jones and Bob McNair may push for a vote against a team in SA...right now). And that is not to mention voter approval of funds for a new stadium (in the neighborhood of $500MM-$600MM).

It's not impossible...and I'd like to see it happen...but, I too, am not holding my breath...for now.

London will never have an NFL, at least not in our life times.

ILUVSAT Oct 29, 2013 9:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam (Post 6319623)
London will never have an NFL, at least not in our life times.

I believe the saying goes: "Never say 'never!'"

STLtoSA Nov 1, 2013 4:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iluvsat (Post 6319500)
that would be awesome! However, i believe la, mexico city or london would get a team before we would. The nfl will most likely think twice about putting another team in a "smaller" market (when larger ones may be available).

Furthermore, i'm not sure the owners would approve it (i.e., jerry jones and bob mcnair may push for a vote against a team in sa...right now). And that is not to mention voter approval of funds for a new stadium (in the neighborhood of $500mm-$600mm).

It's not impossible...and i'd like to see it happen...but, i too, am not holding my breath...for now.

I have been wrong before, but if one of those cities you list gets a team it will be an expansion team. The league does not gain much from moving teams unless they are in horrible markets (example Jacksonville).

There is too much money in expansion and those are probably the only 3 cities that could afford a new franchise in today's NFL. Now if one of those cities gets an expansion team I could see another one getting a relocation, but it would happen in that order.

There are 3 teams that are in trouble right now; Jacksonville, San Diego, and Oakland. If at least one of these teams does not move in the next 5 years I would be surprised.


Metro's Over 1.5 million:
Los Angeles - 18.24 million (CSA) No brainer
Portland - 2.99 million (CSA) not an NFL town. Plus two College teams
Orlando - 2.92 million (CSA) Too close to Tampa? Money?
Sacramento - 2.46 million (CSA) Possible. Stadium? Cali is broke!
Salt Lake City - 2.35 (CSA) Too many college teams, not enough Alcohol sales!
Columbus - 2.35 million (CSA) They have OSU. 3 NFL teams in Ohio, nope
Las Vegas - 2.25 million (CSA) the NFL wont be the pioneer
San Antonio - 2.23 million (MSA)
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill - 2.00 (CSA) NC has a team and NCAA is king on tobacco row
Austin - 1.83 million (MSA) Not gonna happen
Virginia Beach - 1.80 (CSA) Metro is too fragmented
Greensboro-Winston Salem - 1.61 (CSA) NC has a team
Providence - 1.60 million (MSA) Never

Outside of Los Angeles, San Antonio is the only city in the US that could and would support an NFL franchise on a high level. I always discredited the notion of San Antonio supporting an NFL franchise, but over the last couple of years my perception has changed. Getting an NFL Franchise would be huge for the city and the area. Of course, only as long as a stadium deal wouldn't handcuff local government.

With all of that said, I like what UTSA has going. If the NFL came to SA it would hurt UTSA's growth (of course if the possibility is there ... too bad UTSA). If the NFL doesn't come I see UTSA growing into a solid football program pretty fast; on the level of a UCF or South Florida within the next 5 years.

If the NFL comes, I am not sure if another stadium could be built downtown, but I would think that would be where you would want a new at least partially publicly funded stadium to be.

Paul in S.A TX Nov 1, 2013 6:24 PM

CSA and MSA metros should not be ranked together in my opinion not a fair comparison. S.A. Has a bigger population base than many listed and with San Marcos and Austin that strengthens the regions viability of supporting an nfl team. The question isn't whether San Antonio can support a team, its more of a political thing and it probably will never happen.

STLtoSA Nov 4, 2013 4:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6323733)
CSA and MSA metros should not be ranked together in my opinion not a fair comparison. S.A. Has a bigger population base than many listed and with San Marcos and Austin that strengthens the regions viability of supporting an nfl team. The question isn't whether San Antonio can support a team, its more of a political thing and it probably will never happen.

I don't agree with your assessment of CSA vs MSA, especially in this comparison. Raliegh-Durham-Chapel Hill, Virginia Beach-Norfolk, and Greensboro-Winston Salem are the only 3 listed that do not have an established core.

All of the Metros on the list that I presented are bigger than San Antonio. I only listed MSA numbers if a CSA does not exist. If San Antonio was part of a CSA, I would have used that figure, but it is not. So in my opinion they are viable comparisons because using CSA where it exists is a better reflection of the market in question.

As for the San Antonio and Austin coming together in support of an NFL team, don't hold your breath. If San Antonio gets a team it will be because of San Antonio, not a combination of the two cities. For MLB I believe that the San Antonio/Austin thing holds a little more weight, but not for football...not in this state.

I agree that it most likely will not happen and that politics will be the major factor, but outside of Los Angeles, I see San Antonio as the best US Market without an NFL franchise.

Paul in S.A TX Nov 4, 2013 8:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STLtoSA (Post 6323573)
I have been wrong before, but if one of those cities you list gets a team it will be an expansion team. The league does not gain much from moving teams unless they are in horrible markets (example Jacksonville).

There is too much money in expansion and those are probably the only 3 cities that could afford a new franchise in today's NFL. Now if one of those cities gets an expansion team I could see another one getting a relocation, but it would happen in that order.

There are 3 teams that are in trouble right now; Jacksonville, San Diego, and Oakland. If at least one of these teams does not move in the next 5 years I would be surprised.


Metro's Over 1.5 million:
Los Angeles - 18.24 million (CSA) No brainer
Portland - 2.99 million (CSA) not an NFL town. Plus two College teams
Orlando - 2.92 million (CSA) Too close to Tampa? Money?
Sacramento - 2.46 million (CSA) Possible. Stadium? Cali is broke!
Salt Lake City - 2.35 (CSA) Too many college teams, not enough Alcohol sales!
Columbus - 2.35 million (CSA) They have OSU. 3 NFL teams in Ohio, nope
Las Vegas - 2.25 million (CSA) the NFL wont be the pioneer
San Antonio - 2.23 million (MSA)
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill - 2.00 (CSA) NC has a team and NCAA is king on tobacco row
Austin - 1.83 million (MSA) Not gonna happen
Virginia Beach - 1.80 (CSA) Metro is too fragmented
Greensboro-Winston Salem - 1.61 (CSA) NC has a team
Providence - 1.60 million (MSA) Never

Outside of Los Angeles, San Antonio is the only city in the US that could and would support an NFL franchise on a high level. I always discredited the notion of San Antonio supporting an NFL franchise, but over the last couple of years my perception has changed. Getting an NFL Franchise would be huge for the city and the area. Of course, only as long as a stadium deal wouldn't handcuff local government.

With all of that said, I like what UTSA has going. If the NFL came to SA it would hurt UTSA's growth (of course if the possibility is there ... too bad UTSA). If the NFL doesn't come I see UTSA growing into a solid football program pretty fast; on the level of a UCF or South Florida within the next 5 years.

If the NFL comes, I am not sure if another stadium could be built downtown, but I would think that would be where you would want a new at least partially publicly funded stadium to be.

Urbanized area San Antonio is bigger than most on the list, same size as Portland, larger than Columbus,Ohio, Orlando, Salt Lake, Sacramento. I know the Nfl looks at regional population base and san Marcos,Kyle,Austin, are not technically a part of S.A., but it could easily be looked as if they were a CSA. Over 4 million people in 5 adjacent counties along I35. You can't claim a population this size for any of those regions listed.

Daren Nov 4, 2013 10:38 PM

I think our biggest problem is our media market. We are still very tiny. :duh
I believe our city "leaders" should be more focused on our media market rather than street car.
How? I have no idea.

By the way, I live in S.A. and I will be driving up to Austin to see the F1 Race! :fireworks:

miaht82 Nov 5, 2013 5:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6326621)
Urbanized area San Antonio is bigger than most on the list, same size as Portland, larger than Columbus,Ohio, Orlando, Salt Lake, Sacramento. I know the Nfl looks at regional population base and san Marcos,Kyle,Austin, are not technically a part of S.A., but it could easily be looked as if they were a CSA. Over 4 million people in 5 adjacent counties along I35. You can't claim a population this size for any of those regions listed.

The "regional" population between the Triad (Greensboro-WS), and Triangle (Raleigh-Durham) is just under 4 million. It is 55 miles from Durham or Chapel Hill to Greensboro, which is about what it is from Schertz to Buda. Raleigh-Durham is also 24th (or 27th, depending where you look) in media market share; SA by comparison is 36th and 37th on those same lists.

I am not arguing against SA, quite the opposite, I agree with STLtoSA in that the NCAA is king around here, and I may be a bit bias, but I just don't get that same energy or vibe as I do in SA, and it may be due to the fact that there is no real "core" here as SA has (although there is a 23-story residential tower going up in DT Raleigh, but thats another topic). SA may not be tops in media market share, but it does pop up 8th on "Hispanic or Latino TV Homes", whatever that's worth to the NFL (growing city, growing demographic?), which outside of LA, makes it second on the list as next best possible location. And not for that reason alone, but for the fact that it is a healthy city in a football, beer drinking state, with some numbers to justify, just to name a few.

STLtoSA Nov 6, 2013 6:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6326621)
Urbanized area San Antonio is bigger than most on the list, same size as Portland, larger than Columbus,Ohio, Orlando, Salt Lake, Sacramento. I know the Nfl looks at regional population base and san Marcos,Kyle,Austin, are not technically a part of S.A., but it could easily be looked as if they were a CSA. Over 4 million people in 5 adjacent counties along I35. You can't claim a population this size for any of those regions listed.

Just off of the top of my head I would say that LA, Portland, Columbus, and Providence (maybe even Salt Lake City) have a larger Urbanized area than San Antonio. City Population does not equal Urbanized area.

In addition, Urbanized area does not even factor into the equation for an NFL franchise (at least I don't understand how). As it has been pointed out; Socio-economics, Market size, Corporate presence, and shear fandom are the main components.

I think that you miss the point of my initial post...I was arguing that San Antonio outside of LA is the best choice. The list was to show other Metros that do not have a franchise.

UrbanTrance Nov 6, 2013 12:22 PM

^^ According to this list(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...10_Urban_Areas), SA has a larger UA than all of those cities except LA and Portland. But it's much more than just population for an NFL team to relocate. If that was the case, LA would have had one in a second.

STLtoSA Nov 7, 2013 4:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alice93 (Post 6328860)
^^ According to this list(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...10_Urban_Areas), SA has a larger UA than all of those cities except LA and Portland.

Well I am not a big fan of UA and when I see someone use the term Urbanized Area I think of something completely different than that of the Census Bureau's definition.

Anyways, my response wasn't necessary because it appears that Paul' was referring to UA; and to that he was correct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alice93 (Post 6328860)
But it's much more than just population for an NFL team to relocate. If that was the case, LA would have had one in a second.

Agreed, which is why I posted this:
In addition, Urbanized area does not even factor into the equation for an NFL franchise (at least I don't understand how). As it has been pointed out; Socio-economics, Market size, Corporate presence, and shear fandom are the main components.

Population was only used to produce a list of possible (not probable) NFL candidate cities.

maxus Nov 9, 2013 3:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6326621)
Urbanized area San Antonio is bigger than most on the list, same size as Portland, larger than Columbus,Ohio, Orlando, Salt Lake, Sacramento. I know the Nfl looks at regional population base and san Marcos,Kyle,Austin, are not technically a part of S.A., but it could easily be looked as if they were a CSA. Over 4 million people in 5 adjacent counties along I35. You can't claim a population this size for any of those regions listed.

sorry p. you're all confused again.

Paul in S.A TX Nov 9, 2013 4:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STLtoSA (Post 6330092)
Well I am not a big fan of UA and when I see someone use the term Urbanized Area I think of something completely different than that of the Census Bureau's definition.

Anyways, my response wasn't necessary because it appears that Paul' was referring to UA; and to that he was correct.



Agreed, which is why I posted this:
In addition, Urbanized area does not even factor into the equation for an NFL franchise (at least I don't understand how). As it has been pointed out; Socio-economics, Market size, Corporate presence, and shear fandom are the main components.

Population was only used to produce a list of possible (not probable) NFL candidate cities.


I just wanted to point out that the cities mentioned are not larger cities based on urbanized area or the offical metro rankings, not a secondary list that combines both CSA and MSA.

Back on the subject of CSA's. This population classification consits of more than one metro area, and this is why I say its not an equal comparrison versus a single MSA.

I am quite aware that the TV market size is the first thing the NFL looks at, and the other things you mentioned, which in fact would favor San Antonio and, put it at the top of the list of possible relocation or expansion cities. San Antonio has the largest corporate base of the cities mentioned, healthy socio-economics and, is, definitely football crazy. However, TV market size isnt really a measurement of a city's size. The Indianpolis TV market is larger than San Diego's and, San Diego is just one rank above, Nashville. Which metro is bigger out of those cities?

Having a larger TV market helps more on a marketable standpont and should not be the only indicator if a region can support a team. A large Population base in close proximity to NFL venue is equally if not more important than a television set tuning in 100 miles out. Nonetheless all important factors in attracting a NFL franchise.

A future NFL city should be based on how heathly the economy is, future growth, and the regional population even if it crosses into another metro's boundaries. Austin-San Marcos should definitely be a part of San Antonio's equation. As well as all South Texas, the Rio Grande Valley, Corpus Christi, and Laredo.

A San Antonio NFL team versus the Dallas Cowboys or Pittsburgh Steelers would certanly sell out over and over.

The success of the San Antonio Spurs has made the name 'San Antonio' somewhat of a household name when it comes to pro sports.

STLtoSA Nov 13, 2013 9:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6332911)
I just wanted to point out that the cities mentioned are not larger cities based on urbanized area or the offical metro rankings, not a secondary list that combines both CSA and MSA.

Back on the subject of CSA's. This population classification consits of more than one metro area, and this is why I say its not an equal comparrison versus a single MSA.

I am quite aware that the TV market size is the first thing the NFL looks at, and the other things you mentioned, which in fact would favor San Antonio and, put it at the top of the list of possible relocation or expansion cities. San Antonio has the largest corporate base of the cities mentioned, healthy socio-economics and, is, definitely football crazy. However, TV market size isnt really a measurement of a city's size. The Indianpolis TV market is larger than San Diego's and, San Diego is just one rank above, Nashville. Which metro is bigger out of those cities?

Having a larger TV market helps more on a marketable standpont and should not be the only indicator if a region can support a team. A large Population base in close proximity to NFL venue is equally if not more important than a television set tuning in 100 miles out. Nonetheless all important factors in attracting a NFL franchise.

A future NFL city should be based on how heathly the economy is, future growth, and the regional population even if it crosses into another metro's boundaries. Austin-San Marcos should definitely be a part of San Antonio's equation. As well as all South Texas, the Rio Grande Valley, Corpus Christi, and Laredo.

A San Antonio NFL team versus the Dallas Cowboys or Pittsburgh Steelers would certanly sell out over and over.

The success of the San Antonio Spurs has made the name 'San Antonio' somewhat of a household name when it comes to pro sports.

I am not sure who is confused; me or you.

I am and have been saying that San Antonio is the most viable American Market for an NFL team (outside of LA).

Maybe the 3rd time will be a charm:
Quote:

Population was only used to produce a list of possible (not probable) NFL candidate cities.
I was not ranking "viability" by population. It was just a rough candidate list.

It is true that CSA and MSA are different classifications, but they can be used as a comparison; if you understand them.

For example, you can't use the San Fransisco-Oakland MSA in comparison to the Washington-Baltimore CSA. You would compare the San Jose-San Fransisco-Oakland CSA to the Washington-Baltimore CSA.

The whole point behind CSA's is to classify areas that have multiple cores.

Combined Statistical Areas defined:
Quote:

A Combined Statistical Area is an aggregate of adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSAs) (either Metropolitan Statistical Areas or Micropolitan Statistical Areas) that are linked by commuting ties.
"Commuting ties" is the key phrase. If a large enough percentage of the populations cross-commutes to the point that it is classified as a CSA, then I would say you can group the Market size.

Getting an NFL team would be great for the area. I am not sure if it will happen anytime soon, but I believe that San Antonio would have no issues supporting a franchise.

From a personal perspective, I would like to see San Antonio rally behind a possible MLS Franchise and/or MLB Franchise because they would also be great for the city...and they are more attainable.

And go support the Road Runners, that program has risen quickly. In the years to come it could/should be a perennial contender in CUSA. They have been averaging just under 30,000/game this year (29,744). In a couple of years I could see the average rise to 35,000-40,000/game. The dome is not perfect for UTSA, but it is a great home (being so far from campus hurts student attendance, however accessibility can boost other general public attendance). The dome lease also allows UTSA to use there Athletic Budget to improve other needed Student Athlete facilities without having to finance a 30,000 seat football stadium.

Paul in S.A TX Nov 15, 2013 6:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STLtoSA (Post 6338076)
I am not sure who is confused; me or you.

I am and have been saying that San Antonio is the most viable American Market for an NFL team (outside of LA).

Maybe the 3rd time will be a charm:

I was not ranking "viability" by population. It was just a rough candidate list.

It is true that CSA and MSA are different classifications, but they can be used as a comparison; if you understand them.

For example, you can't use the San Fransisco-Oakland MSA in comparison to the Washington-Baltimore CSA. You would compare the San Jose-San Fransisco-Oakland CSA to the Washington-Baltimore CSA.

The whole point behind CSA's is to classify areas that have multiple cores.

Combined Statistical Areas defined:


"Commuting ties" is the key phrase. If a large enough percentage of the populations cross-commutes to the point that it is classified as a CSA, then I would say you can group the Market size.

Getting an NFL team would be great for the area. I am not sure if it will happen anytime soon, but I believe that San Antonio would have no issues supporting a franchise.

From a personal perspective, I would like to see San Antonio rally behind a possible MLS Franchise and/or MLB Franchise because they would also be great for the city...and they are more attainable.

And go support the Road Runners, that program has risen quickly. In the years to come it could/should be a perennial contender in CUSA. They have been averaging just under 30,000/game this year (29,744). In a couple of years I could see the average rise to 35,000-40,000/game. The dome is not perfect for UTSA, but it is a great home (being so far from campus hurts student attendance, however accessibility can boost other general public attendance). The dome lease also allows UTSA to use there Athletic Budget to improve other needed Student Athlete facilities without having to finance a 30,000 seat football stadium.



I understand what you are saying in regards to what constitutes a CSA, and how it is determined by the percentage of commuting patterns but that is based on employment figures, and it is not the same percentage that will travel for leisure activities such as a prime time sporting event such as the NFL. So looking at the raw population within a radius is the main factor, and not metro boundaries or other classifications such as TV market size.

When you mention the metros such as Raleigh Durham, Winston-Salem, Greensboro the triad, combined would have a similar population to the S.A.-Austin corridor and, that may very well be true but, that is too many cores to be looked at in the same light as the more unified Austin-SA corridor.

Regardless of all this, politics, will be the deciding factor if South/Central Texas will ever see NFL. By 2025 there will be over 5 million people in the 6 corridor counties
(Interstate 35) of the S.A/Austin corridor and, probably still no NFL.

STLtoSA Nov 15, 2013 8:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6340160)
When you mention the metros such as Raleigh Durham, Winston-Salem, Greensboro the triad, combined would have a similar population to the S.A.-Austin corridor and, that may very well be true but, that is too many cores to be looked at in the same light as the more unified Austin-SA corridor.

I never grouped those together that was miaht82.

I do not believe that the Raliegh/Durham Metro and the Greensboro/Winston-Salem Metro should be combined into one area.

However, if one wants to lump Austin and San Antonio together then you might as well lump the NC cities together too. The similarities between the two regions are scary.

Distance:
Greensboro to Raleigh - 82 miles
San Antonio to Austin - 81 miles

Lewisville (far west) to Clayton (far east) - 130 miles
Castroville to Serenada - 132 miles

Population (2012 Estimates):
SA/Austin Area - 4,068,000
Raleigh/Greensboro Area - 3,610,051

The main difference is that the NC area is more fragmented with at least 4 cores where the SA/Austin area has two distinct cores.

miaht82 Nov 17, 2013 5:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STLtoSA (Post 6340981)
I never grouped those together that was miaht82.

I do not believe that the Raliegh/Durham Metro and the Greensboro/Winston-Salem Metro should be combined into one area.

However, if one wants to lump Austin and San Antonio together then you might as well lump the NC cities together too. The similarities between the two regions are scary.

Distance:
Greensboro to Raleigh - 82 miles
San Antonio to Austin - 81 miles

Lewisville (far west) to Clayton (far east) - 130 miles
Castroville to Serenada - 132 miles

Population (2012 Estimates):
SA/Austin Area - 4,068,000
Raleigh/Greensboro Area - 3,610,051

The main difference is that the NC area is more fragmented with at least 4 cores where the SA/Austin area has two distinct cores.

...and I only lumped them together to speak to the point of "regional" pull, which area and population-wise (like you pointed out) is a similar comparison. However, I also said that the two didn't compare due to the fact that alot of the population is spread out here (I live in Cary).

GoldenBoot Nov 20, 2013 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daren (Post 6326862)
I think our biggest problem is our media market. We are still very tiny. :duh
I believe our city "leaders" should be more focused on our media market rather than street car.
How? I have no idea.

By the way, I live in S.A. and I will be driving up to Austin to see the F1 Race! :fireworks:

That's a point to consider...you will be driving up to Austin for ONE race.

Let's really examine this "regional" notion...how many Austinites will actually drive to SA for multiple NFL games every year is the real question to ponder (especially considering the traffic issues in Austin and the corridor)? I believe: not many. At least not enough to count on to fill a portion of a stadium.

Should an Austinite have an affiliation with an NFL franchise, it's more likely Dallas or Houston. Citizens of Austin will not get "excited" about an NFL franchise in SA (and absolutely visa versa). It's too new. Is UTSA building a 100,000-seat stadium for its now-FBS football team? No. One must build its fan base. Even in a metro of 2.2 million people (let alone a "region" of 4.1 million). Thus, any argument trying to use the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA as an additional reason to place an NFL franchise in SA is misguided and weak.

The NFL is too smart and they know this fact. In actuality, the NFL focuses on TV markets, not "potential CSA size." And at last check, the SA market does not include Austin and visa versa in their respective TV markets (to which Daren has alluded). Dallas-Ft. Worth, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, Miami-Ft. Lauderdale-West Palm Beach (as examples) are all individual TV markets. It really does not matter how "close" two cities are...it's whether or not they are considered one or two individual markets.

Furthermore, and most importantly, if SA cannot stand on its own, it should not be granted a franchise (another point to which the NFL is familiar...see: Jacksonville, Tampa). Look at two of the most storied NFL franchises: Miami and Oakland...they are both currently hurting financially in "regions" that put AUS-SAT to shame in terms of population. Carolina is having a good year (on the field), yet its franchise is still not in the most positive of financial positions.

The citizens of SA will be solely responsible for the success or failure of an NFL franchise in San Antonio. It is not the responsibility of Austin to help or sustain a franchise in another city...especially since it will not reap any benefits (should they be available).

miaht82 Nov 21, 2013 4:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot (Post 6347019)
Carolina is having a good year (on the field), yet its franchise is still not in the most positive of financial positions.

...and yet I still see very little support, by show of Carolina gear or by verbal poll. I see more visible support for Duke football this year; added to the support for Tar Heels, Wolfpack and the Pirates and that leaves very little room for the Panthers around here. Just like San Antonio, there are many transplants living here (in the Triangle) and I see more support for the Steelers, Eagles, Giants or Patriots combined than the Panthers.


Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenBoot (Post 6347019)
The citizens of SA will be solely responsible for the success or failure of an NFL franchise in San Antonio. It is not the responsibility of Austin to help or sustain a franchise in another city...especially since it will not reap any benefits (should they be available).

It may not be Austin's responsibility, but I think (to my last point in previous comment) that some transplants may offer some help, from Austin or SA, in their hunt to show support for their "home" team. If you don't believe its possible to fill seats with the opposing teams "fans", then my first exhibit would be a Spurs-Lakers game. Is that enough to put it over the top? Probably not, but it would help out some while they built up their own fan base, and of course early success would be crucial.

Paul in S.A TX Nov 24, 2013 10:00 PM

San Antonio can support NFL, it should not even be a debate when markets a fraction the size, can. Green Bay, New Orleans, Buffalo, seem to be going a decent job filling their stadiums, and these markets are not in the same size tier with San Antonio. A S.A. NFL team will gain support from outside the San Antonio metro, and draw spectators from all South Central Texas. If their are NFL fans in Austin, or any other city in South-Central Texas they will attend a San Antonio game, they might not be a fan of the team but, just a fan of the sport.

Schertz1 Nov 29, 2013 5:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul in S.A TX (Post 6351527)
San Antonio can support NFL, it should not even be a debate when markets a fraction the size, can. Green Bay, New Orleans, Buffalo, seem to be going a decent job filling their stadiums, and these markets are not in the same size tier with San Antonio. A S.A. NFL team will gain support from outside the San Antonio metro, and draw spectators from all South Central Texas. If their are NFL fans in Austin, or any other city in South-Central Texas they will attend a San Antonio game, they might not be a fan of the team but, just a fan of the sport.

To name three and there are many others. Furthermore, SA's DMA may never appear favorable for NFL - at least on the surface. But it too, is larger than many NFL markets.

ski-man Nov 30, 2013 3:15 AM

Another aspect the NFL will look at is income. Can a town/region support the costs of purchasing season tickets, psl's, and all other costs on a consistent basis. Cities may have a large population, but does a large enough portion of the population make enough income to consistently support this aspect as well. This include the needed suites and expensive boxes at an up to date stadium that will make the team and the NFL money. Just something else to think about.

Sean1187 Dec 27, 2013 2:14 PM

Thought this was interesting. The Atlantic Cities reports on "Important Buildings We Lost in 2013". The Univision Building was among them.

http://www.theatlanticcities.com/nei...ost-2013/7948/

21bl0wed Jan 25, 2014 5:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adtobias (Post 6107766)
Did we get those 5000 jobs.

No, union got a deal to keep them in their current town.

sirkingwilliam Jan 25, 2014 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 21bl0wed (Post 6422413)
No, union got a deal to keep them in their current town.

That was a completely different enterprise.

21bl0wed Jan 29, 2014 4:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam (Post 6422849)
That was a completely different enterprise.

Not if he was referring to sa landing the boeing 777x. Sa was in the running with a few other cities to land that contract which would have added a couple thousand of jobs but Boeing and the union in Everett WA worked it out so no relocation was needed. Not sure what you're talking about.

JACKinBeantown Jan 29, 2014 5:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirkingwilliam (Post 6107115)
Czech Republic energy company establishes HQ in San Antonio.

Quote:
A Czech Republic company says it has found an abundant, long-term source of energy in South Texas to help European utilities produce electricity.

The energy source has nothing to do with the Eagle Ford Shale.
The source is the hated mesquite wood.

“We looked all over the world for a stable and big source of biomass. We found the source in Texas,” Zdenek Mayer said. He's business director and CEO for GreenHeart Energy LLC, the Texas division of GreenHeart Energy, based in Duchcov, Czech Republic.

GreenHeart Energy LLC has selected San Antonio for its Texas company's headquarters — for legal, banking and accounting purposes — but most of its activities will occur near and in Corpus Christi.


"Hated mesquite wood"? Who hates mesquite wood? It's great for barbecues.

So a Czech company is going to clear cut south Texas mesquite to help European utilities? "You take our trees leaving us a desert, and we'll give you a supply of energy." Sounds like a fair deal.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.