This is hard to understand. Maybe someone can enlighten me on why they would want to pay us that much not knowing the attendance. Maybe I read it wrong.

What do the 49ers get out of this????

oskidunker;842234872 said:

---

This is hard to understand. Maybe someone can enlighten me on why they would want to pay us that much not knowing the attendance. Maybe I read it wrong.

What do the 49ers get out of this????

---

The press release on Calbears.com says:

Quote:

---

The unique characteristics of playing the Cal-Oregon game at Levi's Stadium are expected to produce as much as a seven-figure dollar increase in incremental net revenue for the athletic department relative to a home game.

---

The "as much as" seems to indicate it will vary based on factors such as attendance.

This is also a great test run for them since they'll be hosting bowl games/weekday games/and potentially CFB playoff games.

Is a million dollars net, more than what Cal would make with a full Memorial?

1979bear;842234890 said:

---

Is a million dollars net, more than what Cal would make with a full Memorial?

---

They said as much as 7 figures above what Cal would make at Memorial.

Andy Buh problem solved

socaliganbear;842234892 said:

---

They said as much as 7 figures above what Cal would make at Memorial.

---

I'm kinda thinkin' that those 7 figures are relying a bit on those 100K south bay alumni that haven't ever had an opportunity to see the Bears in person.

However, I'm not sure it takes into consideration many of the regular 50K Bay Area fans that have and will elect to watch this one on TV.

I don't see how they can make "as much as a seven-figure dollar increase". Unless they effectively raise season ticket prices by charging the same price for 6 games at CMS, and charging extra for game at Santa Clara.

Is it really worth it for only $1,000,000.00 more? Not a helluva lot of money to dislodge season ticket holders and fans in general. And that's an optimistic estimate of what might be netted; it could be far less.

Bears2thDoc;842234899 said:

---

I'm kinda thinkin' that those 7 figures are relying a bit on those 100K south bay alumni that haven't ever had an opportunity to see the Bears in person.

However, I'm not sure it takes into consideration many of the regular 50K Bay Area fans that have and will elect to watch this one on TV.

---

They were going to stay home anyhow. The Oregon fans will make up the difference. It'll feel like an away game for our guys, but probably still worth it, given our chance of winning that game was somewhere around zero no matter where the game was going to be played. We could use the money.

Cal Geek;842234876 said:

---

The press release on Calbears.com says:

The "as much as" seems to indicate it will vary based on factors such as attendance.

---

+1

I would think they made this move based on reasonable data analysis (i.e., the number of Cal alum in the south bay, number season ticket holders, donations, duckies, etc.). They probably calculated with reasonable assumptions and then made a best/worst case scenario. My guess would be the seven figure number is with reality hitting their good to great projections, hence the "as much as."

Go Bears!!!

What if, 10,000 fans decide that Santa Clara is to far for them?
Say North-bay, Solano County, and Sacramento fans decide, not to deal with Friday night traffic?

That is $500-$600,000.00 in lost revenue?
And the AD is pissing us off.

If I had to guess, they are projecting we're both undefeated and it'll be a sellout. I think reality will be much different. This is typical for public finances though. Overestimate revenue, underestimate cost, revise numbers, the show must go on.

I think the AD just doesn't want to deal with the weeknight headache in Berkeley, which I can understand. Santa Clara wants to commission a traffic study for the impacts of a weeknight game so here we are. I fully expect consultants doing traffic counts and assessing impacts at the game and the 49ers will correct for the following year.

Ace4eVer;842234928 said:

---

Cal is projecting at least $1MM more than what they would take if UO came to Berkeley. If I had to guess, they are projecting we're both undefeated and it'll be a sellout. I think reality will be much different. This is typical for public finances though. Overestimate revenue, underestimate cost, revise numbers, the show must go on.

I think the AD just doesn't want to deal with the weeknight headache in Berkeley, which I can understand. Santa Clara wants to commission a traffic study for the impacts of a weeknight game so here we are. I fully expect consultants doing traffic counts and assessing impacts at the game and the 49ers will correct for the following year.

---

At the most a million. Not at least.

soefeil;842234931 said:

---

At the most a million. Not at least.

---

Oh thanks for the correction. I misread that. I''ll edit my post.

If Cal really pulls in $1mil and settles the weekday night game requirement, while keeping the university community and neighbors happy, that's a win-win. The losers, season ticket holders and people who want to see Cal vs. Oregon in CMS.

Honestly given how bad Cal should be next season, as a season ticket holder, I'm happy not to have to buy a ticket to a likely blow out, and not to have to drive to SC on a Friday evening. Now if the ATO doesn't prorate season tickets to account for the Oregon game, I won't be happy but it's yet to be seen what happens.

A lot of what comes out of the AD's office these days seems like bs. The phrasing of almost everything she writes is starting to sound like she knows the end is right around the corner from one more bad move.

Ace4eVer;842234928 said:

---

I think the AD just doesn't want to deal with the weeknight headache in Berkeley, which I can understand.

---

That's how I see this also. I think the main reason for this game being moved is to appease the various groups who complained about the Friday night game last year.

The justification in the press release that reads "...it also gives the campus and new Chancellor Nicholas Dirks more time to fully engage with faculty, students, staff and the surrounding community on how best to manage weeknight games in Berkeley" sounds like BS to me. If moving the game was a better financial opportunity, why even make this statement? I'm sure the Chancellor has more important things on his plate than this.

I'm betting the local businesses absolutely hate this. They're missing out on a bunch of business.

After so many bad mistakes, I honestly don't trust any financial predictions coming from this AD. An empty stadium in Santa Clara is not going to make us any money.

I could be wrong though...a broken clock is right twice a day.

I bet the expected payment at levis stadium (whatever they guarantee which includes some up front + % of ticket sales) will be greater than what the gate + concessions would be at CMS by the amount specified. But remember seat donations are fixed, ESP payments are fixed, and if this game puts people over the edge and they give up the donor season tickets or ESP seats, that could easily negate the gain.

But it's going to be VERY hard to quantify. As much as people will claim it's things like BS Friday game in Santa Clara, I'd sure 99% of those who drop tickets and claim the SC game are really dropping due to 1-11 and the fact Cal football will likley be uninteresting. Do this same move after a 10-2 season, and the place sells fast and the money rolls in. Then again, jack up home season ticket prices at CMS, and the money rolls in after a 10-2 season....

They can't pull this too many times IMO because it will affect season ticket sales. A one time deal will be fun. But pull it every year for a big conference game, and people will be pissed and drop out of ESP or donating.

"As much as" is the key qualifier here.

It's like the store ads that read, "Save as much as 50% this weekend!" This translates to ONE crappy item in the store being 50% off. The rest of the merchandise either isn't on sale, or at MUCH less than 50% off. Cheesy advertising gimmick.

And the AD's decision to play a formerly home game in Santa Clara is equally cheesy. There's NO WAY Cal can make MORE money leaving its own stadium empty - with all the concessionaires included - and playing in someone else's BILLION dollar stadium that just so happens to hold about the same number of attendees. "Gee, if we sell each ticked for $800 each, think how much we'll make in a sell-out?!!!!" Problem is, your never going to get a sell out with high ticket prices. Diminishing returns as the ticket price increases hoping to hit pay dirt.

And given the total and complete lack of financial comparison between playing at Memorial versus Santa Clara, this is a financial disaster in the making. If it penciled out so clearly, Sandy would have provided some numbers. In hindsight, if it DID pencil out so clearly, Sandy would have created a new firestorm: Why did we renovate Memorial for a third a billion if we could make a million more in revenue per game playing in someone else's stadium?

Add that to the fact that we've just given away home field advantage to the Ducks, and we're soon to be the laughing stock of the Pac 12.

Oops, too late!

Thanks Sandy for starting NEXT season on the wrong foot!

Cal fans, you aren't thinking long term here. You're thinking with 1-11, bad team blinders on. Wait until we're challenging for the conference title; you want to give away home field advantage for all the future weeknight Cal home games? I sure don't.

Doing this next year sets a precedence. If it somehow DOES net more revenue, say goodbye one or two home field advantage games for Cal football. And if it eases weeknight congestion in Berkeley, you think we'll EVER be playing in Berkeley again on a weeknight? We caved to the idiot hill people (The ones who CHOSE to purchase a house near a huge football stadium, and then complained about that very same stadium being there.) about not hosting other events in Memorial. The revenue from those events could have prevented the stadium financial crisis we're now in. Moving weeknight games out of Berkeley is another concession I don't want to see made.

Sorry, but we can't let the AD sell out the Cal community so easily. As I posted earlier, how would we feel if the Ducks moved their home game with us out of Autzen? We'd be thrilled! How awesome would that be if the Ducks were so stupid as to give up their home field advantage when we come to town? (It'll never happen, so don't get too excited.)

Are we really that stupid?

TandemBear;842235016 said:

---

Why did we renovate Memorial for a third a billion if we could make a million more in revenue per game playing in someone else's stadium?

---

I do have to wonder what the decision would be now regarding the CMS rebuild with Levi's Stadium actually being built - in 2006 neither the Raiders or 49ers were anywhere near getting a stadium deal done, but this does seem to be an admission by Sandy that there are a lot of advantages to sharing pro stadium - nicer seats, TONS of luxury boxes, but since we cannot reap the MAIN ADVANTAGE OF NO BOND PAYMENTS, this better be a one time deal and I sure hope it's not some kind of slippery slope where we need to have weeknight games played off campus.

I think it will be fun, so I'll go. But an AD better not sell out homefield away in a year we are actually going to be competitive. It might be OK to use Levi's as a draw for a nice OOC series, where the opponent can be lured by the NFL stadium too and where we get out of a return game on their campus as well.

It seemed pretty clear the BYU game was added because Sandy and the department thought the Furd game @ Levis was a done deal... we did not need another higher profile home game in 2014 (BYU travels well). Seems like they had one to many games and had to dump one.

ColoradoBear1;842235039 said:

---

I do have to wonder what the decision would be now regarding the CMS rebuild with Levi's Stadium actually being built - in 2006 neither the Raiders or 49ers were anywhere near getting a stadium deal done, but this does seem to be an admission by Sandy that there are a lot of advantages to sharing pro stadium - nicer seats, TONS of luxury boxes, but since we cannot reap the MAIN ADVANTAGE OF NO BOND PAYMENTS, this better be a one time deal and I sure hope it's not some kind of slippery slope where we need to have weeknight games played off campus.

I think it will be fun, so I'll go. But an AD better not sell out homefield away in a year we are actually going to be competitive. It might be OK to use Levi's as a draw for a nice OOC series, where the opponent can be lured by the NFL stadium too and where we get out of a return game on their campus as well.

It seemed pretty clear the BYU game was added because Sandy and the department thought the Furd game @ Levis was a done deal... we did not need another higher profile home game in 2014 (BYU travels well). Seems like they had one to many games and had to dump one.

---

I thought we just needed another OOC game. Why would Furd @ Levi's influence what our OOC opponents that year would be?

Hard to believe that the Niners would "guarantee" Cal at least $1,000,000 in additional revenue for this game. That's especially true given that our record going into that game might well be 1-5, with our only victory being over Sacramento State. Fans will stay away in droves if that's the case. I'll be surprised if the attendance is over 40,000. Stadium capacity is 68,500.

6bear6;842234905 said:

---

Is it really worth it for only $1,000,000.00 more? Not a helluva lot of money to dislodge season ticket holders and fans in general. And that's an optimistic estimate of what might be netted; it could be far less.

---

Yeah, this is a high-risk move for Barbour. If we have a 1-5 record going into this game, attendance will be severely impacted. And loyal fans could be really pissed off at her for moving the game to Santa Clara. I'm an ESP seat holder and I'm not at all happy about having to trek to Santa Clara for the game.

If Cal is better next season, this might be a smart move. A good crowd and a good performance by the Bears at the new stadium might add to revenue, avoid negatives from a traffic nightmare in Berkeley, and look good on national TV. Another rout in a 1/2 empty stadium miles away from campus might signal the end for Sonny and Sandy. It is a big gamble but it may have both short and long term advantages and/or disadvantage depending on the outcome and one's perspective. Oregon looks more vulnerable than they did earlier in the year.:gobears:

CalGB94;842234967 said:

---

That's how I see this also. I think the main reason for this game being moved is to appease the various groups who complained about the Friday night game last year.

The justification in the press release that reads "...it also gives the campus and new Chancellor Nicholas Dirks more time to fully engage with faculty, students, staff and the surrounding community on how best to manage weeknight games in Berkeley" sounds like BS to me. If moving the game was a better financial opportunity, why even make this statement? I'm sure the Chancellor has more important things on his plate than this.

---

The place is just dying for some leadership - here's how you "engage" the faculty, students, staff and community." We just spent a gazillion dollars on CMS and every two years we are playing a weeknight game there because our tv contracts require us to do so. " End of discussion.

StillNoStanfurdium;842235044 said:

---

I thought we just needed another OOC game. Why would Furd @ Levi's influence what our OOC opponents that year would be?

---

Well, we could have played a team on the road next year and gotten a return in a odd year when it's harder to sell season tickets due to the mismatch of our even/odd schedule. Or we could have played a lower 2 for 1 type opponent at home or on the road.

Removing furd (or Oregon) removes a selling point from the ticket package. That's easier to do when OOC isn't fcs and Toledo or whatever.

Ace4eVer;842234928 said:

---

Santa Clara wants to commission a traffic study for the impacts of a weeknight game so here we are. I fully expect consultants doing traffic counts and assessing impacts at the game and the 49ers will correct for the following year.

---

They could get the same results if the study was done Christmas eve.....

The only Bay Area venue that is easy to get to for a weeknight game is O.Co.
Seriously doubt anybody would consider that a plus. No way I'm driving thru Friday commute traffic to the south bay for a TV game. Especially one likely to be a one-sided blowout in the wrong direction.

GBMARIN;842235067 said:

---

The only Bay Area venue that is easy to get to for a weeknight game is O.Co.
Seriously doubt anybody would consider that a plus. No way I'm driving thru Friday commute traffic to the south bay for a TV game. Especially one likely to be a one-sided blowout in the wrong direction.

---

Was wondering why O.Co wasn't considered. It's a lot closer to Berkeley, and students would not need buses. More central for folks to travel to. And of course it's at a BART station.

The best part of this is reading the upset furd trolls posts. Love it.

Cal Geek;842235073 said:

---

Was wondering why O.Co wasn't considered. It's a lot closer to Berkeley, and students would not need buses. More central for folks to travel to. And of course it's at a BART

It's too close to make sense. Plus like Candlestick it is known and not loved . She thinks a new pro stadium adds glitter and market appeal