JTS Improvements - Want More

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,620
3,569
113
This was my worry. It doesn't pop as much as I hoped on the TV crowd shots. I was really hoping for more of a bowled effect. It still looks like an open entrance, albeit, much cleaner and eye pleasing.
Better than nothing, and better in person than on TV.

Given what we were spending north of the stadium to add to the football complex, while doing work on NEZ/Olsen area, I would have guess we could have figured out a way to cost-effectively enhance the NEZ.
 

ribsnwhiskey

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 6, 2009
9,064
4,277
113
80246
Better than nothing, and better in person than on TV.

Given what we were spending north of the stadium to add to the football complex, while doing work on NEZ/Olsen area, I would have guess we could have figured out a way to cost-effectively enhance the NEZ.


This is what CU built back in 2015. It was ~double the cost of our current project. They also have a nice sponsorship from UCHealth. I don't know what more we could've done without spending a ton more, and you know Pollard doesn't want to ever get rid of the hills.
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,620
3,569
113

This is what CU built back in 2015. It was ~double the cost of our current project. They also have a nice sponsorship from UCHealth. I don't know what more we could've done without spending a ton more, and you know Pollard doesn't want to ever get rid of the hills.
The hills have value in growing the local base, although so do cheap tickets in a better viewing experience imo. Never is a long time, but had we been doing nothing in the area, keep them.

Clemson's $68 million project is more of an example of what I am thinking of.

That area and land has some of the highest intrinsic value on campus/Ames if we make it that way. That is the foundation behind JP thinking the new Iowa State Center will work and has value (we are not going to foot all of that cost, or own/operate). That aspect rolled into this project gets you to the added cost imo. If unbundled and approached conventionally as just adding some seats in the NEZ, separate from adding the FB facility, separate from the tailgating/entertainment aspect, I agree with you. Imo, I don't think there was too much desire to get it done past what it was, due to the emotional attachment to the hills. I hope I am wrong, and this is just phase 1, and the entertainment district/ISC is very much coming to the NEZ to capitalize on the inherent value of those views, location, etc.
 

ribsnwhiskey

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 6, 2009
9,064
4,277
113
80246
The hills have value in growing the local base, although so do cheap tickets in a better viewing experience imo. Never is a long time, but had we been doing nothing in the area, keep them.

Clemson's $68 million project is more of an example of what I am thinking of.

That area and land has some of the highest intrinsic value on campus/Ames if we make it that way. That is the foundation behind JP thinking the new Iowa State Center will work and has value (we are not going to foot all of that cost, or own/operate). That aspect rolled into this project gets you to the added cost imo. If unbundled and approached conventionally as just adding some seats in the NEZ, separate from adding the FB facility, separate from the tailgating/entertainment aspect, I agree with you. Imo, I don't think there was too much desire to get it done past what it was, due to the emotional attachment to the hills. I hope I am wrong, and this is just phase 1, and the entertainment district/ISC is very much coming to the NEZ to capitalize on the inherent value of those views, location, etc.

I agree with what you are saying, but at this point, I don't think there will be much more done with JTS after the pedestrian bridge project is completed. Especially if we are stuck in the current Big 12 long term. We will need to pay off all the debt service for this and the SEZ, which is at least $10 million/year, as well as pay off the loan we took out for last year. If we take any kind of revenue hit over the next few years, we are ******. Nothing will get done, we will probably lose any successful coaches at that point, and we will be looking at life as a tier 2 athletic program. Anything that happens in regards to the ISC will need huge private investments. If Jamie can get a hotel built there, we may have something. I think until that happens, its just a concept.
 

WhoISthis

Well-Known Member
Oct 6, 2010
5,620
3,569
113
I agree with what you are saying, but at this point, I don't think there will be much more done with JTS after the pedestrian bridge project is completed. Especially if we are stuck in the current Big 12 long term. We will need to pay off all the debt service for this and the SEZ, which is at least $10 million/year, as well as pay off the loan we took out for last year. If we take any kind of revenue hit over the next few years, we are ******. Nothing will get done, we will probably lose any successful coaches at that point, and we will be looking at life as a tier 2 athletic program. Anything that happens in regards to the ISC will need huge private investments. If Jamie can get a hotel built there, we may have something. I think until that happens, its just a concept.

Largely agree with all this, which is why I am saying it should not have been viewed as conventional, funding of seats, funding of FB facility, etc.

Were the plans for the AD to fully (or mostly) finance the ISC/entertainment district? I didn't think that was the case, but maybe I was wrong. We need to shift more towards sponsor finance used by the corporate world in developing million dollar projects when cash is limited. Sure, we sell away some of the upside for a period of time (if not all in some cases), but that is ok imo. I'm sure others can speak at length and better on this, but conceptually, I believe an entity has cash and can monetize one of the most unique draws in Iowa. We don't, but that is what contracts are for.

I was very excited when the ISC was announced because it showed JP is not playing the old arms race game we cannot keep up with, and is monetizing the value of the real estate and inherent traffic flow. I realize this seems like day-dreaming, but there will be millions spent on campus on infrastructure , and millions more in Ames on commercial development. Shepherd (sponsor) that buildout to occur in that space.
 

2speedy1

Well-Known Member
Jan 4, 2014
6,634
7,486
113
Largely agree with all this, which is why I am saying it should not have been viewed as conventional, funding of seats, funding of FB facility, etc.

Were the plans for the AD to fully (or mostly) finance the ISC/entertainment district? I didn't think that was the case, but maybe I was wrong. We need to shift more towards sponsor finance used by the corporate world in developing million dollar projects when cash is limited. Sure, we sell away some of the upside for a period of time (if not all in some cases), but that is ok imo. I'm sure others can speak at length and better on this, but conceptually, I believe an entity has cash and can monetize one of the most unique draws in Iowa. We don't, but that is what contracts are for.

I was very excited when the ISC was announced because it showed JP is not playing the old arms race game we cannot keep up with, and is monetizing the value of the real estate and inherent traffic flow. I realize this seems like day-dreaming, but there will be millions spent on campus on infrastructure , and millions more in Ames on commercial development. Shepherd (sponsor) that buildout to occur in that space.

The way I understand it, the Pollard and Light district will be done in some form of a lease to a developer, in which there will be a contract as to what the development will be, then they developer will foot the bill and take the risk, but get the income from the development, while paying the University a yearly lease payment.

This takes the risk away from the University, while guaranteeing them a set payment schedule. This also means the University doesn't have to manage a district like this internally.

It also makes it possible on a much more accelerated timeline than if the University had to raise the capital themselves to develop this kind of project.
 

Aclone

Well-Known Member
Dec 14, 2007
26,870
23,380
113
Des Moines, Ia.
Simple fact.

Since we’re about to be the marquee program of the new Big XII, just gonna have to bump up the stadium capacity to 80K.

Yes, we can upgrade luxury seating as well.

(Heading out for my Powerball ticket now. And if you don’t like the sign for “Aclone Third Deck”, don’t look at it!)
 

NWICY

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2012
35,454
31,607
113
Gal scanning tickets when asked how things were going…. Not good. Bright sun trying to see people’s phones, people with paper tickets, people not being able to find their tickets on their phone (BIL didn’t realize the UNI game was the only ticket he didn’t have in his Apple Wallet til he got to the front of the line) had to be really frustrating.

Was there actually any problem with the paper tickets?