Levi's Stadium pics and info...

Originally posted by Eli_23:

$56k bike lane FTW!

Originally posted by Rubberneck36:

Originally posted by Beeker:

Originally posted by CRUD:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
This, has no knowledge of anything 49ers and the Bay Area

Easy to tell once I read that he said that the owners weren't from the Bay Area ....probably doesnt even live in CA

Ohio buddy. Ohio. The Yorks are from Ohio. Other than that I think San Francisco County, Alameda County, Contra Costa County and Solano County have more people than 'San Jose Metro'. More 49er fans. It would've been ideal to have the new stadium centralized, as I said, in the Bay Area. I read an article which quoted the Yorks saying their loyalties are in Ohio, in regards to having loyalty to the city of San Fransisco. I'm not all full of hot air you know. I live in CA, Oakland.

You continue to prove your ignorance and bias. You are obviously NOT a 49ers fan. Where you live has absolutely NOTHING to do with it.

The 49ers went through their ticket base to see where the majority of season ticket holders were from. Guess where that is? That's right - SOUTH BAY. San Francisco had less than 5% of the season ticket holders. Sacramento had a higher percentage. (And no, I don't have a link, but I'm sure Marvin can give you even better details).

We all get it. You don't like the new stadium. You don't like the location. You're very much misinformed as to the details of why the new stadium was built in Santa Clara. I suggest you step back, take a deep breath,pull your head out and do more research before you spout off anymore of your CRUD.

This stadium is about more than JUST the 49ers. 47 Super Bowls, ONE held in the Bay area, and where was that? Oh, that's right - PALO ALTO. Candlestick has been deteriorating for about 25 years, give or take. When the NCAA decides that the only SF/OAK area stadium worthy of hosting a bowl game is AT&T park, that should tell you something. A BASEBALL stadium. Not Candlestick. Not O.co or whatever crap name that stadium has now.

The A's are desperate to move out of Oakland. The owner wants to move to SAN JOSE. He originally wanted to move to FREMONT. Hmmm.

The Warriors want to move back to SF. Hmm.

The Raiders are struggling to field a team in Oakland. They are looking to move elsewhere rather than take a half-baked politician driven plan for a new stadium in Oakland. Hmmm.

Oakland is broke. Rats leaving a sinking ship. San Francisco is a world cultural center, and most decidedly a baseball town. AT&T park is a beautiful facility for baseball. There are very few places IN SF that a stadium could be built. And if you try to argue the Hunters Point plan with me, you're going to lose. That's a superfund site. It would not have been built any time soon. It's going to take probably anther 10-15 years for that area to be fully federal compliant with the clean up. The Bayview/Hunters Point/Candlestick plans on the table right now are VERY long term plans. We're talking 30 years. Would you rather have a world clas state-of-the-art stadium in Santa Clara, or another 30 years of Candlestick??

Good post bro.

Another 30 years of the Stick!

Originally posted by xtm059:
It's pretty ignorant to think that in this day and age a lower income level specifically denotes a lower level of intelligence, or being a "trouble-making a*****e," or being a loser, who fails at life.

Are you f**king kidding?

Especially with the unemployment rate of 18-25 year olds being over 20% ?

Get real.

I am real...

SF's most violent area's are the Tenderloin and Hunters Point... that is undisputed.

T-loin's avg household income is $16,000
HP's avg household income is $17-20k

Some Districts in Richmond are $32,000
East Oakland $15,000-$25,000

Look at the Palo Alto (low violent crime) $150,000+

To think there isnt a connection would be ignorant. The safest areas are the most affluent. Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Danville, Tiburon, San Ramon, Alameda, Los Altos, etc the most dangerous East Oakland, Vallejo, Hayward. There is a direct link to money and crime. Usually these places receive poor education funding and support. There is also a link between education and violence. I dont see why you are so offended?

You know violent crime is typically committed by 18-25 year olds... I dont see your point.

this is not a blanket statement lol... there are exceptions to everything. I'm not saying the vast majority of poor people commit violent crimes (I would consider a lot of them stupid though, but not violent) but I do believe the vast majority of people who commit violent crimes are in fact poor and mostly retarded.

Originally posted by modninerfan:
I am real...

SF's most violent area's are the Tenderloin and Hunters Point... that is undisputed.

T-loin's avg household income is $16,000
HP's avg household income is $17-20k

Some Districts in Richmond are $32,000
East Oakland $15,000-$25,000

Look at the Palo Alto (low violent crime) $150,000+

To think there isnt a connection would be ignorant. The safest areas are the most affluent. Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Danville, Tiburon, San Ramon, Alameda, Los Altos, etc the most dangerous East Oakland, Vallejo, Hayward. There is a direct link to money and crime. Usually these places receive poor education funding and support. There is also a link between education and violence. I dont see why you are so offended?

You know violent crime is typically committed by 18-25 year olds... I dont see your point.

this is not a blanket statement lol... there are exceptions to everything. I'm not saying the vast majority of poor people commit violent crimes (I would consider a lot of them stupid though, but not violent) but I do believe the vast majority of people who commit violent crimes are in fact poor and mostly retarded.

So ignorant I had to highlight it. Not going to respond so don't bother replying.

Originally posted by modninerfan:
I am real...

SF's most violent area's are the Tenderloin and Hunters Point... that is undisputed.

T-loin's avg household income is $16,000
HP's avg household income is $17-20k

Some Districts in Richmond are $32,000
East Oakland $15,000-$25,000

Look at the Palo Alto (low violent crime) $150,000+

To think there isnt a connection would be ignorant. The safest areas are the most affluent. Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Danville, Tiburon, San Ramon, Alameda, Los Altos, etc the most dangerous East Oakland, Vallejo, Hayward. There is a direct link to money and crime. Usually these places receive poor education funding and support. There is also a link between education and violence. I dont see why you are so offended?

You know violent crime is typically committed by 18-25 year olds... I dont see your point.

this is not a blanket statement lol... there are exceptions to everything. I'm not saying the vast majority of poor people commit violent crimes (I would consider a lot of them stupid though, but not violent) but I do believe the vast majority of people who commit violent crimes are in fact poor and mostly retarded.

There are plenty of areas in Europe where there are low incomes but little crime. That's because the people aren't desperate. They have tons of programs for people for drug abuse, financial hardship etc, in many European countries. In the USA, not so much. Obviously, low incomes are more likely to create desperation here. When people are desperate, they do desperate things. So if they weren't desperate, it wouldn't matter how educated they are. When rich/educated people are desperate, they can be equally violent.

Haven't you ever seen Trading Places?

Originally posted by modninerfan:

Originally posted by xtm059:
It's pretty ignorant to think that in this day and age a lower income level specifically denotes a lower level of intelligence, or being a "trouble-making a*****e," or being a loser, who fails at life.

Are you f**king kidding?

Especially with the unemployment rate of 18-25 year olds being over 20% ?

Get real.

I am really stupid...

SF's most violent area's are the Tenderloin and Hunters Point... that is undisputed.

T-loin's avg household income is $16,000
HP's avg household income is $17-20k

Some Districts in Richmond are $32,000
East Oakland $15,000-$25,000

Look at the Palo Alto (low violent crime) $150,000+

To think there isnt a connection would be ignorant. The safest areas are the most affluent. Menlo Park, Palo Alto, Danville, Tiburon, San Ramon, Alameda, Los Altos, etc the most dangerous East Oakland, Vallejo, Hayward. There is a direct link to money and crime. Usually these places receive poor education funding and support. There is also a link between education and violence. I dont see why you are so offended?

You know violent crime is typically committed by 18-25 year olds... I dont see your point.

this is not a blanket statement lol... there are exceptions to everything. I'm not saying the vast majority of poor people commit violent crimes (I would consider a lot of them stupid though, but not violent) but I do believe the vast majority of people who commit violent crimes are in fact poor and mostly retarded.

fixed

average income for a family of four in 2011
50k

Below poverty, right? Cool.

So the average family of four must be violent and retarded by your logic

Originally posted by xtm059:

fixed

average income for a family of four in 2011
50k

Below poverty, right? Cool.

So the average family of four must be violent and retarded by your logic

In the bay, that would be a low-middle class... Where I live that would be middle class. And my examples were $15-$25k... I never said 50k was below poverty or prone to violence lol

BrianGO touched it, a lot of it is desperation, or growing up in a culture of desperation that taught them to react a particular way. Keep calling me ignorant but you haven't proven me wrong... Care to explain why low income neighborhoods are WAY more violent since you have such a better understanding?

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I was driving in Fremont and realized I could see the stadium from there:

That's a pretty sweet pic. I just hope they name this thing soon. I want to know what to call it already.

why is this getting so off topic post pics or add info this aint the place for your socio-economic-politico rants. If you looking for that can I direct you to :

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/parking-lot/

Originally posted by GorefullBore:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I was driving in Fremont and realized I could see the stadium from there:

That's a pretty sweet pic. I just hope they name this thing soon. I want to know what to call it already.

the house that Kaep built

Originally posted by Need4Speed:
why is this getting so off topic post pics or add info this aint the place for your socio-economic-politico rants. If you looking for that can I direct you to :

http://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/parking-lot/

haha yeah man.

wtf this is the new stadium thread.

Sorry if already posted, but I think they are booking tours of the new stadium.

http://newsantaclarastadium.com/

Per KTVU tonight:

49ers to make statement to Tomorrow about naming rights. Levi's is front runner.

How "fitting." San Francisco-based company. Levi Straiss made clothing for the 49ers, now the company that bears his name might grace the 49ers new stadium.

Originally posted by DonJulio:
Per KTVU tonight:

49ers to make statement to Tomorrow about naming rights. Levi's is front runner.

How "fitting." San Francisco-based company. Levi Straiss made clothing for the 49ers, now the company that bears his name might grace the 49ers new stadium.

Also seen this

Originally posted by StOnEy333:
I was driving in Fremont and realized I could see the stadium from there:

Nice zoom. That picture must have been taken at least 6 miles away.

Originally posted by BrianGO:

Originally posted by StOnEy333:

I was driving in Fremont and realized I could see the stadium from there:

Nice zoom. That picture must have been taken at least 6 miles away.

It's a very high tech system I have. I take the binoculars I have in my truck that I take into the games and hold it up to the lens on my iphone. Then I zoomed the pic and screenshot it. lol