Local: S.A. to discuss ways to lure pro franchises

[kornbread]

Originally Posted by Schertz1

You know, one thing I hate is a pessimistic attitude. The San Antonio nays Sayers alway pull the same cards and fail to mention the NFL cities that contradict the theories. When you look at Corporation bases look at Buffalo, Kansas City, Nashville, Tampa, Jacksonville, New Orleans, and Green Bay. There are several other Fortune 500s in San Antonio, Washington Mutual, MCI, Microsoft, Home Depot and Lowe’s operations are a few. We also have Zachary, Cordell, Rush, Koontz McCombs, West, Garden Ridge, and KCI. Austin is less than an hour, depending on where you live, so it is only logical may Austin companies would have suites. If Austin had an NFL team San Antonio companies would surly support it. NFL attendance is historically low for Christmas Eve games. Should San Antonio be any different? Basically, you do not know very much about South Central Texas.

Well, actually I grew up in San Antonio and South Central Texas. The post I responded to said that corporate purchasing power is why owners consider SA. My point was that it was actually more of a concern than a plus. I would categorize that as more realistic than pessimitic. I think SA is gaining a better corporate base and hopefully it will really flourish over the next 10 years.

I may be wrong, but I tihnk the only presence Microsoft, Lowes and Home Depot currently have in SA is retail and sales. Lowes has a proposed data center near Westover Hills. Microsoft is considering a data center nearby. Garden Ridge is actually headquartered in Houston.

[Schertz1]

Originally Posted by kornbread

Well, actually I grew up in San Antonio and South Central Texas. The post I responded to said that corporate purchasing power is why owners consider SA. My point was that it was actually more of a concern than a plus. I would categorize that as more realistic than pessimitic. I think SA is gaining a better corporate base and hopefully it will really flourishes over the 10 years.

I may be wrong, but I tihnk the only presence Microsoft, Lowes and Home Depot currently have in SA is retail and sales. Lowes has a proposed data center near Westover Hills. Microsoft is considering a data center nearby. Garden Ridge is actually headquartered in Houston.

The Lowe's data center is under construction, or at least the site work. Microsoft currently has a small operation here and may buy the land next to the new Lowe's Data center for their data center. Paypal is also looking at SA for a data center. Garden Ridge may have moved to Houston, but it was started in San Antonio. Lowe's may also build a regional distribution center in the San Antonio area. I made a mistake on Home depot, I meant Wal-Mart.

My point is there are many cities with less corporate presence than San Antonio. A fact you left out.

[NBTX11]

Hi guys,

First time poster, got to add my 2 cents, since I am also a sports fan. First of all, market shares do not buy tickets, people do. So I think it is relevant to look at metro population, or MSA population. Here are the cities in SA's neighborhood. I've put their rank in terms of US population as well as how may teams they have:

20 Tampa–St. Petersburg–Clearwater FL 2,647,658 - 3 teams
21 Pittsburgh PA 2,386,074 - 3 teams
22 Denver–Aurora CO 2,359,994 - 4 teams
23 Cleveland–Elyria–Mentor OH 2,126,318 - 3 teams
24 Portland–Vancouver–Beaverton OR–WA 2,095,861
25 Cincinnati–Middletown OH–KY–IN 2,070,441 - 2 teams
26 Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville CA 2,042,283
27 Kansas City MO–KS 1,947,694 - 2 teams
28 Orlando-Kissimmee FL 1,933,255
29 San Antonio TX 1,889,797 - 1 team
30 San Jose–Sunnyvale–Santa Clara CA 1,754,988
31 Las Vegas–Paradise NV 1,710,551
32 Columbus OH 1,708,625
33 Virginia Beach–Norfolk–Newport News VA–NC 1,647,346
34 Indianapolis–Carmel IN 1,640,591 - 2 teams
35 Providence–New Bedford–Fall River RI–MA 1,622,520
36 Charlotte–Gastonia–Concord NC–SC 1,521,278 - 2 teams
37 Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis WI 1,512,855 - 2 teams
38 Austin–Round Rock TX 1,452,529
39 Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro TN 1,422,544 - 2 teams
40 New Orleans–Metairie–Kenner LA 1,319,367 - 2 teams
41 Memphis TN–MS–AR 1,260,950
42 Jacksonville FL 1,248,371
43 Louisville–Jefferson County KY–IN 1,208,452
44 Hartford–West Hartford–East Hartford CT 1,188,241
45 Richmond VA 1,175,654
46 Oklahoma City OK 1,156,812
47 Buffalo–Niagara Falls NY 1,147,711 - 2 teams
48 Birmingham–Hoover AL 1,090,126
49 Rochester NY 1,039,028
50 Salt Lake City UT 1,034,484

So, as you can see, there are 6 cities SMALLER than SA that have multiple franchises:Buffalo, New Orleans, Nashville, Charlotte, Milwaukee, and Indianapolis. Plus another 6 cities, that are SLIGHTLY larger in terms of population that have mulitple franchises. That's 12 cities that are smaller or nearly the same size that have more than one team. And, that's not even taking into account Austin, the #38 metro area just an hour away. For example, West Palm Beach is considered part of Miami's metro, even though it is the same distance from Miami as Austin is to San Antonio. There are other examples. If you combine the metro populations like ther cities do (DFW, WPB/Miami, etc), you have a top 15 metro area with over 3.3 million people. And SA is the gateway for all of South Texas down to the RGV. I don't there is ANY question, looking at the statistics, that SA can support one if not 2 more franchises.

[TexasBoi]

SA can support football no problem. 8 games out of the year is doable in a football crazy state.Still think it'll be Cowboy country, though. I have a hard time seeing SA supporting Major League Baseball. That league caters to large market or historic teams.

Tampa- Devil Rays were threatened to be contracted. Bucs are good though.

Pittsburgh- historic city that was once large yet they are on the verge of losing it's NHL franchise.

Denver- the only major city within a 600 mile radius. Nothing even remotely close to challenge it. That's why they have all four major sports.

Cleveland- see Pittsburgh

KC- this is not a good argument for people to bring up. the Royals could easily move to another city because the attendance is horrible.

Charlotte fits the discription of SA.

[METALMiKE]

Originally Posted by SAguy

Remember, the Saints were a mediocre team last year and this is Cowboys country. As for corportate support, I don't see it as a big problem. San Antonio corporate base continues to expand. Also the Alamodome is in the process of adding more suites however; it's still below the 100 mark. If San Antonio does land an NFL team it will likely need to build a new stadium or dome. Perhaps, use the Alamodome temporary until a new one is built.

Where did you hear about the Dome adding more suites??

[BSofA04]

Originally Posted by kornbread

Well, actually I grew up in San Antonio and South Central Texas. The post I responded to said that corporate purchasing power is why owners consider SA. My point was that it was actually more of a concern than a plus. I would categorize that as more realistic than pessimitic. I think SA is gaining a better corporate base and hopefully it will really flourish over the next 10 years.

I may be wrong, but I tihnk the only presence Microsoft, Lowes and Home Depot currently have in SA is retail and sales. Lowes has a proposed data center near Westover Hills. Microsoft is considering a data center nearby. Garden Ridge is actually headquartered in Houston.

It was pretty obvious to Tagliabue that the quality of football the NO Saints put on the field in 2005 was far from spectacular. Considering all the mishaps with Ticketmaster and no one actually caring about the Saints, San Antonio did a tremendous job. Tags even saluted the city after our efforts to sell as many tickets in a very short time span (what was it...4....5 months????) for a team TEXAS doesn't follow. Asking someone to fork over $50-$70 for a tix to see a crappy team, and then averaging over 60,000 is quite an accomplishment. I too was hoping for a sellout, as I attended all three games, but San Antonio did its part. Image if the team actually committed to SA.....would your opinion change then? Do you actually think 1 game wouldn't be sold out?

About the Alamodome....it was made very clear along time ago that the dome would be a temporary solution until a new stadium deal was put on the table. You know this man, so stop using the Alamodome as a scapegoat for another crappy reason why SA shouldn't have a football team. Your responses are convincing enough to prove that you know what you're talking about, so why play dumb?

I still don't see why you think local SA powerhouses wouldn't want to be associated with a pro football team? Why would it be a concern? When 65000-70000 San Antonians are showing up 8 times a year to support a local team, why wouldn't they want to be associated with that? HEB would be all over it like they were for the Saints (Sponsered the tailgating), USAA would purchase a suite to raffle off to employees like they do for the Spurs games, and probably one more for the CEO. Valero much the same I'm sure. 2 owners boxes. We could go on and on with this but I'm not sure you even beileve me. Well, I respect your opinion but should SA recieve a team, I hope you purchase tix early, because they won't last.

[LouisianaRush]

Originally Posted by NBTX11

Hi guys,

For example, West Palm Beach is considered part of Miami's metro, even though it is the same distance from Miami as Austin is to San Antonio. There are other examples. If you combine the metro populations like ther cities do (DFW, WPB/Miami, etc), you have a top 15 metro area with over 3.3 million people.

Austin/San Antonio is not a metro area this is because of their lack of interconnectivity between the two cities and the vast amount of empty space between the two. West Palm/Miami may be the same distance as Austin/San Antonio, but WPB/Miami are interdependent, has strong commuting patterns, and it has no empty land between the two.

[SAguy]

METALMiKE-Where did you hear about the Dome adding more suites??

I believe I read in the January 12 edition of the San Antonio Business Journal which still out until this Friday. If not there, it was in the San Antonio Express News.

[kornbread]

Originally Posted by BSofA04

It was pretty obvious to Tagliabue that the quality of football the NO Saints put on the field in 2005 was far from spectacular. Considering all the mishaps with Ticketmaster and no one actually caring about the Saints, San Antonio did a tremendous job. Tags even saluted the city after our efforts to sell as many tickets in a very short time span (what was it...4....5 months????) for a team TEXAS doesn't follow. Asking someone to fork over $50-$70 for a tix to see a crappy team, and then averaging over 60,000 is quite an accomplishment. I too was hoping for a sellout, as I attended all three games, but San Antonio did its part. Image if the team actually committed to SA.....would your opinion change then? Do you actually think 1 game wouldn't be sold out?

The support would likely be there for the first few seasons, but how long would someone fork out over $50-$70 a ticket if it was a crappy team? The NFL is thinking long term.

I think those that were serious about supporting a team bought their tickets. That's why the first 2 games sold well. I think the buyout-sellout of the third game sends out mixed signals. There is no doubt in Green Bay where they have a waiting list of over 10,000 for season tickets and a crappy team.

Originally Posted by BSofA04

About the Alamodome....it was made very clear along time ago that the dome would be a temporary solution until a new stadium deal was put on the table. You know this man, so stop using the Alamodome as a scapegoat for another crappy reason why SA shouldn't have a football team. Your responses are convincing enough to prove that you know what you're talking about, so why play dumb?

It seems you misunderstood my point. A new stadium would be included in securing a team. That new stadium would have many more suites than what the Alamodome has. Most new stadiums have around 100 suites, so the NFL is looking for a community that has the demand for those kinds of numbers.

The other mention of the dome was the campaign that if a stadium was built the city would get a team. That obviously didn't happen. Hopefully the leagues will be up-front about the city's realistic chances of getting a team.

Originally Posted by BSofA04

I still don't see why you think local SA powerhouses wouldn't want to be associated with a pro football team? Why would it be a concern? When 65000-70000 San Antonians are showing up 8 times a year to support a local team, why wouldn't they want to be associated with that? HEB would be all over it like they were for the Saints (Sponsered the tailgating), USAA would purchase a suite to raffle off to employees like they do for the Spurs games, and probably one more for the CEO. Valero much the same I'm sure. 2 owners boxes. We could go on and on with this but I'm not sure you even beileve me. Well, I respect your opinion but should SA recieve a team, I hope you purchase tix early, because they won't last.

I don't doubt that the city would enjoy support from local corporations. The question was is there the kind of corporate support that NFL teams enjoy in other cities.

San Antonio has 5 Fortune 500 companies; 4 in the top 252 thanks to the big profits from refiners (Valero, at&t, Tesoro, USAA) with Clear Channel being the other F500. After that there is only 1 more (Rush Ent.) in the top 1000. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...une500/cities/

San Antonio also has a fairly low median income like New Orleans
http://www.efanniemae.com/sf/refmaterials/hudmedinc/

How is it that SA does not have a team now? It all comes down to economics. Has the climate changed enough to make the city attractive today? That remains to be seen.

[NBTX11]

The Alamodome would only be a temporary solution in luring a team here. Remember, the city was willing to fork over at least 200 million to lure the Marlins here, with a new stadium. If a team were to seriously look into SA, you can bet Hardberger and Wolff would put up at least 250-300 million to upgrade the alamodome to NFL stadards by adding a whole bunch of suites, or as a downpayment on a new stadium. The current city leadership would do whatever it took to land a team, including forking over big money. After Hardberger leaves office, that might change though. Oh, and by the way, the Alamodome is adding some more suites. That was part of the deal when garza tried bringing in MLS soccer. The city said no to MLS when hardberger took over, but decided to add suites anyway. I don't know how many though, I think it was in the neighborhood of an additional 12-18 suites.

[NBTX11]

Originally Posted by HoustonRush

Austin/San Antonio is not a metro area this is because of their lack of interconnectivity between the two cities and the vast amount of empty space between the two. West Palm/Miami may be the same distance as Austin/San Antonio, but WPB/Miami are interdependent, has strong commuting patterns, and it has no empty land between the two.

I wouldn't say vast amounts of open space between Austin/San Antonio. New Braunfels is booming. Housing is going in like crazy in places like Schertz/Cibolo. The open lands are disappearing. There is open land, but I would not say vast amounts. You are correct that Austin/SA are not interconnected like WPB/Miami, but a lot of folks in New Braunfels/San Marcos commute to either SA or Austin. I think an NFL franchise, if marketed correctly, could be marketed to both SA and Austin. That is what they were going to do when they talked about putting a MLB stadium on the Comal/Bexar county line for the Marlins.

[BSofA04]

Originally Posted by kornbread

The support would likely be there for the first few seasons, but how long would someone fork out over $50-$70 a ticket if it was a crappy team? The NFL is thinking long term.

I think those that were serious about supporting a team bought their tickets. That's why the first 2 games sold well. I think the buyout-sellout of the third game sends out mixed signals. There is no doubt in Green Bay where they have a waiting list of over 10,000 for season tickets and a crappy team.


It seems you misunderstood my point. A new stadium would be included in securing a team. That new stadium would have many more suites than what the Alamodome has. Most new stadiums have around 100 suites, so the NFL is looking for a community that has the demand for those kinds of numbers.

The other mention of the dome was the campaign that if a stadium was built the city would get a team. That obviously didn't happen. Hopefully the leagues will be up-front about the city's realistic chances of getting a team.


I don't doubt that the city would enjoy support from local corporations. The question was is there the kind of corporate support that NFL teams enjoy in other cities.

San Antonio has 5 Fortune 500 companies; 4 in the top 252 thanks to the big profits from refiners (Valero, at&t, Tesoro, USAA) with Clear Channel being the other F500. After that there is only 1 more (Rush Ent.) in the top 1000. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu...une500/cities/

San Antonio also has a fairly low median income like New Orleans
http://www.efanniemae.com/sf/refmaterials/hudmedinc/

How is it that SA does not have a team now? It all comes down to economics. Has the climate changed enough to make the city attractive today? That remains to be seen.

I see your point about the Alamodome and I feel optimistic that we can feel 100+ suites.

At this point, I feel that there is nothing more the city of San Antonio can do other than sit back and wait to see if any paticular league (MLB, NFL) comes forward. Until then, we'll keep growing.

[KevinFromTexas]

Austin and San Antonio are much more connected than they'd probably each care to admit. Maybe not the two cities themselves, but our suburbs are rubbing elbows with each other, and because of that so are the cities of San Antonio and Austin. We have friends in New Braunfels who used to live in Austin. He had a landscape business in Austin and she worked in San Antonio at AT&T. She commuted to work. They finally moved down to New Braunfels to make the commute easier and he still has his landscape business. I believe he does business in both cities and all the suburbs.

On open space, there is some between Austin and San Antonio, and I mean some, it's quickly going away. San Antonio's suburbs of Selma, Live Oak and others are filling in and Austin's suburbs of Kyle and Buda are growing a bunch, too.

[NBTX11]

Don't forget, New Braunfels is considered a suburb of SA, San Marcos of Austin, and they are only about 10 minutes apart, with little land in between them.

[Schertz1]

There are few cities with more than five F500 companies. They are listed below.

New York New York 44
Houston Texas 23
Atlanta Georgia 14
Dallas Texas 11
Chicago Illinois 10
Charlotte North Carolina 7
Cincinnati Ohio 7
Minneapolis Minnesota 7
Philadelphia Pennsylvania 7
Richmond Virginia 7
St. Louis Missouri 7
Milwaukee Wisconsin 6
Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 6
San Francisco California 6
Cleveland Ohio 5
Columbus Ohio 5
Denver Colorado 5
Omaha Nebraska 5
San Antonio Texas 5
Seattle Washington 5

[matttwentyeight]

i work in new braunfels and live in SA, and i see many people move in or out of NB to live near their kids or grandkids who happen to live in austin or san antonio. i am closing on a house on the 12th of next month and they are from richardson (dallas suburb), moving to new braunfels, to be close to their kids; with one in austin, one i NB, and one in san antonio. it really isn't that much of a commute just to come and check out a game one or to nights a week. in fact it would be great to have us all come together in the middle somewhere since everything is booming for every one of these cities between san antonio and austin.

thay need to build a light rail train that coulf take people to and from the games and they can make stops at their cities transit center. each of the transit centers could be perfect for mixed projects like hotels, highend retail, condos, and different services and specalty real estate that would not only help support these little stops but bring in capital from the people visiting these places on their way to work, school, THE GAME, etc.! we need mass transit and that is what the real people (like tagliablue) want to see. it doesn't make sense to have all these stadiums built in locations without the whole picture being looked at from a not just now perspective, but a perspective that can see what is best for our furure. amen

[kornbread]

Originally Posted by Schertz1

There are few cities with more than five F500 companies.

SA is fairly well represented there, especially when you throw in HEB (over 11 billion in sales). But dig a little deeper.

The site actually lists the F1000 by state. Also, it only lists by city proper. So include the metro area to get a better idea of comparative cities. For example the Charlotte area has 13 and the Nashville area has 12 in the F1000.

San Antonio's outlying communities are fairly small as suburban communities are many times annexed by the city. SA has 6 in F1000 (adding Rush Ent from New Braunfels).

The F500/1000 list is a good resource to get some insight as to what other city's economies are like and what areas like Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa and Jacksonville have to offer (most recent new cities to get teams).

[NBTX11]

Originally Posted by kornbread

SA is fairly well represented there, especially when you throw in HEB (over 11 billion in sales). But dig a little deeper.

The site actually lists the F1000 by state. Also, it only lists by city proper. So include the metro area to get a better idea of comparative cities. For example the Charlotte area has 13 and the Nashville area has 12 in the F1000.

San Antonio's outlying communities are fairly small as suburban communities are many times annexed by the city. SA has 6 in F1000 (adding Rush Ent from New Braunfels).

The F500/1000 list is a good resource to get some insight as to what other city's economies are like and what areas like Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa and Jacksonville have to offer (most recent new cities to get teams).

Not necessarily, New Braunfels is now over 50,000, and probably will be close to 100K within the next 10-15 years. Comal county is booming, with housing going in by the thousands. New Braunfels is meeting up with Schertz/Cibolo, which is also growing by leaps and bounds.

[kornbread]

Originally Posted by NBTX11

Not necessarily, New Braunfels is now over 50,000, and probably will be close to 100K within the next 10-15 years. Comal county is booming, with housing going in by the thousands. New Braunfels is meeting up with Schertz/Cibolo, which is also growing by leaps and bounds.

New Braunfels is definately the exception and you're right about the Schertz area. I could see nearby towns growing faster than the city at some point. Although the city is pretty aggressive about extending itself.

[Schertz1]

Originally Posted by kornbread

SA is fairly well represented there, especially when you throw in HEB (over 11 billion in sales). But dig a little deeper.

The site actually lists the F1000 by state. Also, it only lists by city proper. So include the metro area to get a better idea of comparative cities. For example the Charlotte area has 13 and the Nashville area has 12 in the F1000.

San Antonio's outlying communities are fairly small as suburban communities are many times annexed by the city. SA has 6 in F1000 (adding Rush Ent from New Braunfels).

The F500/1000 list is a good resource to get some insight as to what other city's economies are like and what areas like Nashville, Charlotte, Tampa and Jacksonville have to offer (most recent new cities to get teams).

The point is there are NFL cities with less corporate presence than San Antonio. There is also a big difference between a F500 company and a F900 company. Many of the cities you mention may have more F1000 companies, but the majority of them are in the F700-F1000 range. These companies are not buying naming rights or Superbowl/playoff spots. Again, Austin is very close to San Antonio and they have about five F1000 companies.