Post by dachuckster on Jun 6, 2024 17:15:29 GMT -6
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. One of the articles I was reading this morning was talking about this being the dance they do before a deal is made. I have to figure that if the McCaskey's are really going to pony up $2-billion dollars, then that money would go further and return more on their investment in Arlington Heights where they already own the property. And they would have a higher return on their investment with the land holdings they would own around that new sports complex. In contrast, in Chicago where they would be renters again, there would be no 350 acres of land to be developed like in AH. The AH real estate would be a gold mine for the family... and they'd own it.
I have been going to games at Soldier Field for many years now. There is zero that attracts me to that location. It is a pain to drive there, park there - and everything is horribly overpriced. The crime (yes, even in that area) is an issue too (and I'm a retired 30-year police officer, and even I don't want to be in that area). The fact that it is lakefront does nothing for me... I go to watch football, not watch the waterfront. In recent years I quit going to home games. I go to away games just so I don't have to deal with the Chicago issues that just don't make the experience enjoyable at all for me or my family.
I'm not saying it is this alternative over what you just posted. Just that there are a lot of issues and nuances at either of the two locations.