Why Not Build a Stadium/Hotel Combo?

[ManCans]

Admittedly, I'm not very knowledgable regarding stadium issues. But I've always wondered why NFL teams don't build stadiums that can also be utilized as hotels to generate revenue year-round. The hotel rooms facing the field could double as luxury suites during gamedays, and the concourse could be utilized year-round as restaurants for guests of the hotel.

Logistically, the stadium/hotel could be built with special access for hotel guests to assure they don't get caught up in stadium traffic. The lower levels of the hotel facing the field (with limited window access because of bleacher seating) could be set aside for team usage (weight room, locker rooms, etc.).

Perhaps I'm naive, but if I were an NFL team owner, this is exactly the type of stadium I'd build.

[Fromthe3rdRow]

Admittedly, I'm not very knowledgable regarding stadium issues. But I've always wondered why NFL teams don't build stadiums that can also be utilized as hotels to generate revenue year-round. The hotel rooms facing the field could double as luxury suites during gamedays, and the concourse could be utilized year-round as restaurants for guests of the hotel.

Logistically, the stadium/hotel could be built with special access for hotel guests to assure they don't get caught up in stadium traffic. The lower levels of the hotel facing the field (with limited window access because of bleacher seating) could be set aside for team usage (weight room, locker rooms, etc.).

Perhaps I'm naive, but if I were an NFL team owner, this is exactly the type of stadium I'd build.Sounds cool - but add in a cigar bar - and now we're talking!!

[TheWiz]

Admittedly, I'm not very knowledgable regarding stadium issues. But I've always wondered why NFL teams don't build stadiums that can also be utilized as hotels to generate revenue year-round. The hotel rooms facing the field could double as luxury suites during gamedays, and the concourse could be utilized year-round as restaurants for guests of the hotel.

Logistically, the stadium/hotel could be built with special access for hotel guests to assure they don't get caught up in stadium traffic. The lower levels of the hotel facing the field (with limited window access because of bleacher seating) could be set aside for team usage (weight room, locker rooms, etc.).

Perhaps I'm naive, but if I were an NFL team owner, this is exactly the type of stadium I'd build.

A good idea financially but not in reality.

First of all, teams don't build hotels on site for the same reasons other sports don't. First of all you've got noise on any event night. If it's not noise, it's the bright lights that make venetian blinds pointless. If it's not the bright lights and noise, it's the fact that hotels are not a great investment. The team is populated by fans who are a 1-2 hour drive to home, at most. Very few fans come from afar, percentage-wise and those that do can afford taxis and prefer 'real' hotels.

We'd need to pay handsome amounts to build such a facility and all of the profits would go to the stadium authority. In the rare event a corporate sponsor/chain wanted to be involved, no profits would go to the team if they paid for construction. Either way, the team stands to gain nothing. The team is not in the hotel business, I doubt the city wants to own its own hotel either. Corporate sponsors easily will note a lack of location and even given its overall location, it's cheaper to build on a smaller plot for equal attractions.

Hotel suites are not luxury suites. A luxury suite for an NFL game involves seating facing the field, in-room stadium speakers and kitchens and easy access. There is no way to double as both without a vastly high-tech suite that would largely cost more than it could ever return in investment.

'Special access' would not be faster. Do you expect to build a VIP highway off-ramp? Any 'vip' still needs to brave the local highway traffic and no off-ramp investment would ever be cheap enough to be cost-effective. So the whole 30 seconds they'd save by using a special entrance is not going to be a big draw.

[ManCans]

A good idea financially but not in reality.

First of all, teams don't build hotels on site for the same reasons other sports don't. First of all you've got noise on any event night. If it's not noise, it's the bright lights that make venetian blinds pointless. If it's not the bright lights and noise, it's the fact that hotels are not a great investment. The team is populated by fans who are a 1-2 hour drive to home, at most. Very few fans come from afar, percentage-wise and those that do can afford taxis and prefer 'real' hotels.Yeah, I thought about that a little bit, and I think it could be avoided by not booking rooms for the 10 - 13 games per year (with the exception of gameday ticket holders, press members, home and visiting team personnel, etc.).

We'd need to pay handsome amounts to build such a facility and all of the profits would go to the stadium authority. In the rare event a corporate sponsor/chain wanted to be involved, no profits would go to the team if they paid for construction. Either way, the team stands to gain nothing. The team is not in the hotel business, I doubt the city wants to own its own hotel either. Corporate sponsors easily will note a lack of location and even given its overall location, it's cheaper to build on a smaller plot for equal attractions.Good point, but I'm thinking of a 100% private stadium, where all proceeds would go to the team (no government involvement, outside of permits, etc.) This is a hypothetical situation, not related to the Santa Clara site. In fact, it would probably be more beneficial to build such a stadium/hotel at Candlestick Point, close to the airport and the city.

Hotel suites are not luxury suites. A luxury suite for an NFL game involves seating facing the field, in-room stadium speakers and kitchens and easy access. There is no way to double as both without a vastly high-tech suite that would largely cost more than it could ever return in investment.I've actually thought of a room design that would maintain the bleacher-type seating facing the field, the kitchen, bathroom, etc., and also accomodate a guest with a hide-a-bed.

'Special access' would not be faster. Do you expect to build a VIP highway off-ramp? Any 'vip' still needs to brave the local highway traffic and no off-ramp investment would ever be cheap enough to be cost-effective. So the whole 30 seconds they'd save by using a special entrance is not going to be a big draw.This could be solved by not booking non-game related guests on gamedays (no need for special access).

Like I said, it's just a thought. I was wondering if there was some NFL rule or something preventing such a practice.

[ManCans]

Sounds cool - but add in a cigar bar - and now we're talking!!I thought all luxury suites came with free cigars... :D

[TheWiz]

I think the problems are that a lot of what you suggest is nice, hypothetically, but not all too realistic.

- It may sound neat, but a room that converts into a gameday suite not only sounds ridiculously more expensive to build than a standard gameday suite, but is almost too much of a gimmick. It's a dual ketchup and mustard bottle. Sure it's a good combo but really, isn't it easier to just use two separate bottles? The novelty wears off fast.

- There is a reason that the team is not looking for private ownership and why most teams don't. Because the team doesn't want the job of overseeing everything. The team is in the business of football, not football stadiums. We pay the city regularly for the usage of the stadium and it's maintained, booked, and controlled by that city. Any extra revenue we'd gain by owning the stadium would likely be lost in maintenance costs (which is where city profits will likely end up) and extra overhead costs like personnel. So generally either the team does the legwork of hiring and overseeing the stadium or for the same price (actually, it's more likely to be cheaper for the city to do it) they can do it for us.

- Who would be involved in the hotel? Any major or decent chain either already has airport and city area hotels in operation or would never want to invest a hotel they need to share. Not to mention they may be reluctant to get involve in such a venture, the reputation of the chain is always at stake. If you consider letting the team or a smaller business run it, why would anyone stay there? Why pay to sleep next to a stadium run by people with no hotel experience versus the Holiday Inn or the Hilton or the Doubletree?

- It's a lot more than 10 days a year. What if you want to book a monster truck rally or a Santana concert? You would attract some fans who show up, stay late, and like the convenience but drive away a lot of other people. It takes only "Sir, there will be a concert in the stadium starring a loud rock band until after 11 pm, did you plan on sleeping well?" to drive away a customer permanently.

Teams do often build hotels as part of deals. However, they are often built off site and run by a private company. They're also more common when your stadium is in a suburb and hotels in the area are scarce. So given that they assume no risk since they don't build the structure, most chains see many packed nights due to the stadium. But for good reason none of them exist at the stadium itself that comes to mind and for good reason. Teams have flirted and gone to lengths to include shopping malls and exclusive year-round restaurants but most pass on the idea of something like a fully functional hotel in the stadium.

[ManCans]

I think the problems are that a lot of what you suggest is nice, hypothetically, but not all too realistic.Thanks for taking the time to respond, Wiz.

- It may sound neat, but a room that converts into a gameday suite not only sounds ridiculously more expensive to build than a standard gameday suite, but is almost too much of a gimmick. It's a dual ketchup and mustard bottle. Sure it's a good combo but really, isn't it easier to just use two separate bottles? The novelty wears off fast.Well actually, the design of the rooms would serve a functional purpose. The rooms would be designed like most modern luxury hotel rooms, with the exception that the living room area would be replaced by bleacher-style seating (divided by a half-wall and access point) facing the field. During football games, the bed could be folded up to accommodate more guests. When the room is used as a guest room, the curtains could be drawn overlooking the field, and the seating area could be used as a miniature theater (most modern luxury suites already have a large plasma screen mounted near the field viewing area). Granted, there wouldn't be a couch or lounge chairs, but the kitchen, dining area, closets, bathroom, and dressers would be the same. I see the quirkiness as an advantageous niche, not a detraction. The cost would be about the same as building a standard luxury suite, with the added benefit of being able to lease the room out beyond gameday (the only addition would be a hideaway bed).

- There is a reason that the team is not looking for private ownership and why most teams don't. Because the team doesn't want the job of overseeing everything. The team is in the business of football, not football stadiums. We pay the city regularly for the usage of the stadium and it's maintained, booked, and controlled by that city. Any extra revenue we'd gain by owning the stadium would likely be lost in maintenance costs (which is where city profits will likely end up) and extra overhead costs like personnel. So generally either the team does the legwork of hiring and overseeing the stadium or for the same price (actually, it's more likely to be cheaper for the city to do it) they can do it for us.The team doesn't necessarily have to run the hotel. They could lease it out to a major hotel chain. In fact, the team could have the option to lease out both the naming rights to the stadium and the hotel separately. Yes, the team would be responsible for maintenance costs, but that would be offset because they wouldn't be leasing the stadium from the city. It may be a bit pricey while paying off the mortgage, but that's where leasing the hotel and restaurant spaces would offset the cost. However, once the mortgage is paid off, the hotel/stadium would be a cash cow.

- Who would be involved in the hotel? Any major or decent chain either already has airport and city area hotels in operation or would never want to invest a hotel they need to share. Not to mention they may be reluctant to get involve in such a venture, the reputation of the chain is always at stake. If you consider letting the team or a smaller business run it, why would anyone stay there? Why pay to sleep next to a stadium run by people with no hotel experience versus the Holiday Inn or the Hilton or the Doubletree? Why do corporations purchase the naming rights to stadiums? What major hotel chain wouldn't want the advertising exposure associated with regional and national football games?

- It's a lot more than 10 days a year. What if you want to book a monster truck rally or a Santana concert? You would attract some fans who show up, stay late, and like the convenience but drive away a lot of other people. It takes only "Sir, there will be a concert in the stadium starring a loud rock band until after 11 pm, did you plan on sleeping well?" to drive away a customer permanently.The revenue generated from leasing the hotel and restaurant spaces would far outweigh any mid-level event such as a monster truck pull. Major events (such as concerts) could be handled the same as a football game (only book guests associated with the concert), where the revenue of the event outweighs the revenue from the hotel.

Teams do often build hotels as part of deals. However, they are often built off site and run by a private company. They're also more common when your stadium is in a suburb and hotels in the area are scarce. So given that they assume no risk since they don't build the structure, most chains see many packed nights due to the stadium. But for good reason none of them exist at the stadium itself that comes to mind and for good reason. Teams have flirted and gone to lengths to include shopping malls and exclusive year-round restaurants but most pass on the idea of something like a fully functional hotel in the stadium.Obviously, this would be a niche market, aimed at the very large sports' fan demographic. I think it would be tremendously successful, attracting sports' fan business travelers from around the country, as well as vacationing fans and their families. I agree that, typically, revenue generating hotels and resaurants are built separately. But we're talking about the Bay Area here. Building space is extremely limited.

[TheWiz]

Well actually, the design of the rooms would serve a functional purpose. The rooms would be designed like most modern luxury hotel rooms, with the exception that the living room area would be replaced by bleacher-style seating (divided by a half-wall and access point) facing the field. During football games, the bed could be folded up to accommodate more guests. When the room is used as a guest room, the curtains could be drawn overlooking the field, and the seating area could be used as a miniature theater (most modern luxury suites already have a large plasma screen mounted near the field viewing area). Granted, there wouldn't be a couch or lounge chairs, but the kitchen, dining area, closets, bathroom, and dressers would be the same. I see the quirkiness as an advantageous niche, not a detraction. The cost would be about the same as building a standard luxury suite, with the added benefit of being able to lease the room out beyond gameday (the only addition would be a hideaway bed).

Here is the problem. First of all, if a person wants a penthouse or luxury, they're vastly more likely to go to a 'real' hotel instead of a gimmick room like that one. Common people don't spend thousands on a luxury room and higher tiered clients are certainly not going to flock to the gimmick room. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. Sure, maybe it will sell on game days more out of necessity than anything else. But if I really want luxury, I will be at a chain hotel and not next to a stadium in a room with a foldaway bed.


The team doesn't necessarily have to run the hotel. They could lease it out to a major hotel chain. In fact, the team could have the option to lease out both the naming rights to the stadium and the hotel separately. Yes, the team would be responsible for maintenance costs, but that would be offset because they wouldn't be leasing the stadium from the city. It may be a bit pricey while paying off the mortgage, but that's where leasing the hotel and restaurant spaces would offset the cost. However, once the mortgage is paid off, the hotel/stadium would be a cash cow.

What I'm saying is no hotel chain in their mind would agree to it. Any major chain already has multiple Bay Area facilities and I personally think it's not worth the risk. You're pitching the hotel idea to bring profits to the team and yet you want a major hotel chain to lease the space for operation? So, they'd gain no profit, pay for use of the space as well, and all they get is to have their name attached to it? Sure, big corporations pay for naming rights but hotels won't pay that premium. All a Hilton or Radisson needs is a highway billboard and it sells itself. Meanwhile, any hotel chain with a good enough name to draw people to an out of the way, in-stadium hotel doesn't need the advertising.


Why do corporations purchase the naming rights to stadiums? What major hotel chain wouldn't want the advertising exposure associated with regional and national football games?

Corporations purchase naming rights for only 2 reasons. Bragging rights and because it is a rare advertising opportunity.

Take a look at a lot of the names: FedEx, Lincoln Financial, Qwest, Bank of America, Gilette, Ford, Monster, University of Phoenix, Alltel, LP, RCA, Reliant, Invesco, McAfee, Qualcomm, Heinz, M&T Bank, and even Lucas Oil. First off let's discount Ford since they're also the (terrible) owners. Now, the large number of remaining fields fall into 2 categories: Technology/Internet or Financial. Technology/Internet companies include: Qwest, Monster, University of Pheonix, Alltel, RCA, McAfee, and Qualcomm. Financial companies include: Bank of America, Invesco, M&T Bank, and Lincoln Financial. The outliers include: Gilette, LP, Reliant, Heinz and Lucas Oil. Now Reliant and Lucas Oil are both energy. LP bought the naming rights for only 3M/year after Adelphia, a financial company, hit bankruptcy.

Now, tech companies generally do not have a product to sell or have a defined market. When was the last time you saw a Qualcomm, Monster, Alltel, or Qwest add? They really lack a specific consumer product. They sell to other businesses, not consumers. Financial companies are the same. They do their best business with companies, loans, and investing, not with John Q bank customers. Any hotel chain who can afford similar deals doesn't need the name recognition, simple as that.


The revenue generated from leasing the hotel and restaurant spaces would far outweigh any mid-level event such as a monster truck pull. Major events (such as concerts) could be handled the same as a football game (only book guests associated with the concert), where the revenue of the event outweighs the revenue from the hotel.

Says who? First of all, as I suggested, every day clients are very unlikely to have you high on their list if they know they may not be able to get a room. I also don't see how a Monster Truck Rally type of event won't be beneficial. Any hotel built next to the stadium is not going to be a large hotel. People like luxury boxes for the privacy, shelter, and ammenities. If you have them 10stories high to where the players are ants they may as well watch on an HDTV at home and pay less to get it catered, they can afford it. Also, the bigger the hotel the more space it eats up. Also, won't hotel patrons get to park next to the hotel? So now you'd be losing parking spot revenue and you can bet people won't buy hotel rooms just to get a tailgate spot.


Obviously, this would be a niche market, aimed at the very large sports' fan demographic. I think it would be tremendously successful, attracting sports' fan business travelers from around the country, as well as vacationing fans and their families. I agree that, typically, revenue generating hotels and resaurants are built separately. But we're talking about the Bay Area here. Building space is extremely limited.

I have got to disagree. It's a ridiculously small Niche. Non-area 49ers fans are more likely to stay at a traditional hotel than try to navigate a city and the crazy local freeways to find a 49er hotel. Concerts and events often draw local residents who also don't need a hotel room. You'd just have empty rooms for those events and pray for a few stragglers. Business travelers want easy access and you can bet a dozen or so cheap/easy/no-hassle options exist closer to the airport than the 49ers one.

I think it would be a disaster and the fact that it has NOT been done is evidence of that. Hotels could more easily buy land near the stadium and reap the profits themselves, many do. Any such hotel could not be big and would lose a lot of space to expensive luxury rooms that it won't sell most of the year.

[Nevyn]

Admittedly, I'm not very knowledgable regarding stadium issues. But I've always wondered why NFL teams don't build stadiums that can also be utilized as hotels to generate revenue year-round. The hotel rooms facing the field could double as luxury suites during gamedays, and the concourse could be utilized year-round as restaurants for guests of the hotel.

Logistically, the stadium/hotel could be built with special access for hotel guests to assure they don't get caught up in stadium traffic. The lower levels of the hotel facing the field (with limited window access because of bleacher seating) could be set aside for team usage (weight room, locker rooms, etc.).

Perhaps I'm naive, but if I were an NFL team owner, this is exactly the type of stadium I'd build.

I think its a pretty bad idea. The Blue Jays and Argonauts tried this in Toronto and I wouldn't say it has worked out. Going to a game there (baseball or football) I'd rather just have tickets as the view isn't great. When there is no game or concert, you have a hotel whose view is an empty stadium.

And bear in mind this is a stadium/ballpark right downtown (a good place for a hotel) and for 2 sports, including one that has 81 home games. Most football stadiums are NOT downtown, so you'd mainly only have business on game days. And nfl teams have 8 home game days per year.

[jmichura]

I think its a pretty bad idea. The Blue Jays and Argonauts tried this in Toronto and I wouldn't say it has worked out. Going to a game there (baseball or football) I'd rather just have tickets as the view isn't great. When there is no game or concert, you have a hotel whose view is an empty stadium.

And bear in mind this is a stadium/ballpark right downtown (a good place for a hotel) and for 2 sports, including one that has 81 home games. Most football stadiums are NOT downtown, so you'd mainly only have business on game days. And nfl teams have 8 home game days per year.

Well, part of the reason it doesn't work is because you would have to watch the Jays or the Argos. :)

[ManCans]

Here is the problem. First of all, if a person wants a penthouse or luxury, they're vastly more likely to go to a 'real' hotel instead of a gimmick room like that one. Common people don't spend thousands on a luxury room and higher tiered clients are certainly not going to flock to the gimmick room. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. Sure, maybe it will sell on game days more out of necessity than anything else. But if I really want luxury, I will be at a chain hotel and not next to a stadium in a room with a foldaway bed.Meh. Hard to determine what 'gimick' will or will not sell. When I was a child, our family traveled across country. One night, we stayed at a hotel where one side of the hotel overlooked a drive-in theater. The management made a deal with the drive-in to provide theater sound to those rooms facing the drive-in. It became the most popular hotel in town.
What I'm saying is no hotel chain in their mind would agree to it. Any major chain already has multiple Bay Area facilities and I personally think it's not worth the risk. You're pitching the hotel idea to bring profits to the team and yet you want a major hotel chain to lease the space for operation? So, they'd gain no profit, pay for use of the space as well, and all they get is to have their name attached to it? Sure, big corporations pay for naming rights but hotels won't pay that premium. All a Hilton or Radisson needs is a highway billboard and it sells itself. Meanwhile, any hotel chain with a good enough name to draw people to an out of the way, in-stadium hotel doesn't need the advertising.With all due respect, that's a terrible assertion. Hotel chains are extremely competitive, and their target demographic is almost identical to corporations paying for stadium naming rights. I know this, because I am their target demographic. Hotel chains strike deals all the time with corporations to provide service for their business travelers. Believe me, almost every hotel chain would jump at the opportunity to gain an advertising advantage, and a billboard is not even close to the advertising clout of a national football game.
Corporations purchase naming rights for only 2 reasons. Bragging rights and because it is a rare advertising opportunity.

Take a look at a lot of the names: FedEx, Lincoln Financial, Qwest, Bank of America, Gilette, Ford, Monster, University of Phoenix, Alltel, LP, RCA, Reliant, Invesco, McAfee, Qualcomm, Heinz, M&T Bank, and even Lucas Oil. First off let's discount Ford since they're also the (terrible) owners. Now, the large number of remaining fields fall into 2 categories: Technology/Internet or Financial. Technology/Internet companies include: Qwest, Monster, University of Pheonix, Alltel, RCA, McAfee, and Qualcomm. Financial companies include: Bank of America, Invesco, M&T Bank, and Lincoln Financial. The outliers include: Gilette, LP, Reliant, Heinz and Lucas Oil. Now Reliant and Lucas Oil are both energy. LP bought the naming rights for only 3M/year after Adelphia, a financial company, hit bankruptcy.

Now, tech companies generally do not have a product to sell or have a defined market. When was the last time you saw a Qualcomm, Monster, Alltel, or Qwest add? They really lack a specific consumer product. They sell to other businesses, not consumers. Financial companies are the same. They do their best business with companies, loans, and investing, not with John Q bank customers. Any hotel chain who can afford similar deals doesn't need the name recognition, simple as that.Again, I think you're way off on your assertion. Major hotel chains' main target demographic are the lucrative business traveler. Vacationers are their secondary demographic.
I have got to disagree. It's a ridiculously small Niche. Non-area 49ers fans are more likely to stay at a traditional hotel than try to navigate a city and the crazy local freeways to find a 49er hotel. Concerts and events often draw local residents who also don't need a hotel room. You'd just have empty rooms for those events and pray for a few stragglers. Business travelers want easy access and you can bet a dozen or so cheap/easy/no-hassle options exist closer to the airport than the 49ers one.:thud: The sports' fan market is ridiculously small??? We're not talking about just 49er fans. National football games gain national exposure. When I travel to Seattle, I try to sleep and eat near Qwest Field because I'm a sports' fan, and it's something I'm familiar with. It's the same for most of my colleagues in every major city we travel to.
I think it would be a disaster and the fact that it has NOT been done is evidence of that. Hotels could more easily buy land near the stadium and reap the profits themselves, many do. Any such hotel could not be big and would lose a lot of space to expensive luxury rooms that it won't sell most of the year.The concept of an NFL owner building and operating a hotel close to their stadium is not a new idea (i.e. Robert Kraft, most recently). Usually it's part of a development designed around the stadium. All I'm proposing is making the development part of the stadium. I think it's useless to argue against the benefits of a hotel affiliated with a stadium, because it's already a popular concept amongst owners. I just wonder why the buildings can't be combined instead of across the street from each other.

[ManCans]

I think its a pretty bad idea. The Blue Jays and Argonauts tried this in Toronto and I wouldn't say it has worked out. Going to a game there (baseball or football) I'd rather just have tickets as the view isn't great. When there is no game or concert, you have a hotel whose view is an empty stadium. Actually, as a sports' fan, I think that would be a pretty cool view. Better than looking out over San Bruno...

[LilLazy650]

As long as its North of Daly City

[Niner Jan]

In the Santa Clara area, there are several HUGE hotels already within one block of the proposed stadium: the Hilton, the Hyatt, while the Marriott is a few blocks down the street at the 101 conjuction. So, there is no NEED for another hotel in that area.

[kavaholic]

Or we can build a new stadium/hotel/theme park. How cool is that?!

[SC9erFan]

In the Santa Clara area, there are several HUGE hotels already within one block of the proposed stadium: the Hilton, the Hyatt, while the Marriott is a few blocks down the street at the 101 conjuction. So, there is no NEED for another hotel in that area.

That's definitely not true - as far as hotel facilities, the area is impacted despite the number of hotels. I held a convention at the Santa Clara Marriott this past april with about 500 attendees - we had to sign a contract over a year in advance to even get the Marriott, which was our 3rd choice.

Over a year in advance, the Hyatt, Hilton and the entire convention center were already booked out. We ended up paying a premium for the Marriott (about 50% more than we expected to) because the location was so competitive that, if we gave it up, it would be booked up by someone else on the wait list instantaneously.

From talking with our rep from the visitors bureau, this is commonplace for high end hotels in the area. It's a hotspot for conventions and conferences year round, and gets even more impacted during the spring and summer by tourists.

The area could definitely make use of another high end hotel.

[ethanh]

The area could definitely make use of another high end hotel.

Well, there is no room so you can't!