Sports Field Development

Looking for help pressure-testing a niche real estate idea before I go too far down the rabbit hole.

Concept is simple: develop 4–6 lighted turf sports fields in a dense suburb of LA/OC/IE on a long-term ground lease. Total project cost would likely be $2.5–3.0MM all-in. I’d target ~55–60% LTC floating-rate construction debt and raise the remaining equity (probably structured as pref equity) from friends/family. Stabilize, then refinance 2–3 years post-construction.

If the deal pencils to roughly a 9.5–11% yield on cost and trades around an 8.5% cap, it seems like there’s a refinance path that returns a chunk of equity relatively quickly.

Before getting lost in revenue assumptions, I’m trying to validate the structure of this:

  • Is this something lenders would actually treat like real estate, or would it get underwritten more like an operating business?
  • Is 55–60% LTC realistic on a ground lease for a ~$3MM specialty asset?
  • Does an 8.5% exit cap feel reasonable for a stabilized, single-site sports facility?
  • What am I missing?

Goal would be to prove one site and then replicate. Would appreciate blunt feedback from anyone who’s financed or invested in niche/experiential assets.

7 Comments
 

Based on the most helpful WSO content, here are some insights and considerations for your sports field development concept:

  1. Lender Treatment: Real Estate vs. Operating Business

    • Lenders may treat this more like an operating business than traditional real estate, given the niche nature of the asset and the reliance on revenue from operations (e.g., field rentals, events). This could impact underwriting, as lenders might focus heavily on projected cash flows and operational risk rather than just the real estate value.
    • To mitigate this, you could emphasize the long-term ground lease structure and stable revenue potential, which might help position it closer to real estate in the lender's eyes.
  2. 55–60% LTC on a Ground Lease

    • Achieving 55–60% LTC on a ground lease for a specialty asset is possible but may be challenging. Ground leases often introduce additional risk for lenders, especially if the lease terms are not favorable (e.g., short duration, high escalations).
    • To improve your chances, ensure the ground lease terms are lender-friendly (e.g., long-term, minimal escalations, and clear rights for the lender in case of default). Some developers have pushed LTC to 65% in other niche real estate projects, but this depends on the lender's risk appetite and the strength of your business plan.
  3. 8.5% Exit Cap for a Stabilized Sports Facility

    • An 8.5% exit cap seems reasonable for a stabilized, single-site sports facility, but it depends on the market and investor appetite for niche assets. Sports facilities are not as liquid or widely traded as traditional real estate, so you may face a limited pool of buyers.
    • To justify this cap rate, you’ll need to demonstrate strong, predictable cash flows and a proven demand for the facility. Highlighting the replicability of the model could also attract buyers looking for scalable opportunities.
  4. What You Might Be Missing

    • Revenue Assumptions: While you’re holding off on diving into revenue assumptions, lenders and investors will scrutinize these heavily. Be prepared to validate demand for field rentals, pricing, and utilization rates.
    • Lifecycle Costs: Turf fields have significant maintenance and replacement costs over time. Ensure these are factored into your pro forma to avoid surprises.
    • Competition and Market Demand: Conduct a thorough market analysis to confirm demand for sports fields in your target area. Overestimating demand or underestimating competition could derail the project.
    • Refinance Risk: Stabilizing and refinancing within 2–3 years is ambitious. Ensure you have contingency plans if the refinance timeline is delayed or if interest rates rise.
    • Specialty Asset Risk: Niche assets like this can be harder to finance and sell. Consider how you’ll mitigate this risk for both lenders and equity investors.
  5. Replication Potential

    • Proving the concept with one site is a smart approach. If successful, you could attract institutional capital or JV partners for future projects. However, scalability will depend on the replicability of demand and the ability to secure similar ground leases in other locations.

Bluntly, this is a creative idea with potential, but the niche nature of the asset and reliance on operational performance will make financing and execution more challenging than traditional real estate. Focus on de-risking the project as much as possible to attract both lenders and investors.

Sources: Modeling ground lease payments into a pro forma, Debt and Structured Finance Brokerage Exit Opps, Student Housing Model, Sports Private Equity, Ground up negotiations - LP side

I'm an AI bot trained on the most helpful WSO content across 17+ years.
 
Most Helpful

I want to get lost in revenue assumptions, namely, where are you getting the revenue from? Local school districts? Club sports? the Little League equivalent for soccer? I think if you can prove a reasonable ability to secure revenue then you'd be ok. 10% yield on cost implies $300k/yr in NOI, or $25k/mo. Assuming costs are negligible, how are you getting someone to pay $25k/mo. for this? If you can get 5 fields, that's $5k a field a month. It just seems hard to justify that kind of revenue, but I don't really know. Maybe schools will pay up for it since there is a lack of open space in a lot of LA. 

I imagine it would still be looked at like real estate, the collateral backing the loan is still a piece of dirt with improvements (or a ground lease giving access to the aforementioned). No idea about LTVs. And is an 8.5% cap reasonable? You'll have to be more specific about where in SoCal lol. IE? Doubtful. LA? Probably. OC? Maybe?. 

 

jarstar1

I want to get lost in revenue assumptions, namely, where are you getting the revenue from? Local school districts? Club sports? the Little League equivalent for soccer? I think if you can prove a reasonable ability to secure revenue then you'd be ok. 10% yield on cost implies $300k/yr in NOI, or $25k/mo. Assuming costs are negligible, how are you getting someone to pay $25k/mo. for this? If you can get 5 fields, that's $5k a field a month. It just seems hard to justify that kind of revenue, but I don't really know. Maybe schools will pay up for it since there is a lack of open space in a lot of LA. 

I imagine it would still be looked at like real estate, the collateral backing the loan is still a piece of dirt with improvements (or a ground lease giving access to the aforementioned). No idea about LTVs. And is an 8.5% cap reasonable? You'll have to be more specific about where in SoCal lol. IE? Doubtful. LA? Probably. OC? Maybe?. 

The school districts can finance this sorta thing tax-exempt based on their institutional credit rating. Or you see a city / county finance these (also tax-exempt) and then lease to the local school districts, clubs, little leagues, etc. The money is in developing and building or operating for a government but not owning yourself. Know a few developers who have done similar (not in LA). 0 own the asset and all used public funding. Oh and they also tend to find a way to generate their own demand (ie. develop and operate the asset for the City, leasing some to the local High School for, and then also manage a major youth soccer program).

If you do this privately, your biggest risk is the local government just builds their own in 5 years once they decide they don't need to pay you to do something they can do better.

 

There is money in the private development portion as well, and I can get into the details off the forum. It would be 4-6 5v5 / 7v7 small turf soccer fields side by side. Revenue would be driven by multiple sources: youth soccer, private training, field rentals, adult leagues, etc

There is opportunity to do pickleball as well, but I dont believe in it as much 

 

Enim iste aliquid omnis voluptatem fugit ducimus. Sunt quisquam molestiae dolor. Vel laudantium reiciendis et eos.

Career Advancement Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Evercore 01 99.4%
  • Moelis & Company 01 98.8%
  • JPMorgan 01 98.2%
  • Guggenheim Partners 01 97.7%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Morgan Stanley 01 98.8%
  • Evercore 01 98.2%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.6%
  • Banco Santander 01 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Moelis & Company No 99.4%
  • Evercore No 98.8%
  • Morgan Stanley 05 98.2%
  • JPMorgan No 97.7%
  • BMO Capital Markets 12 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

June 2026 Investment Banking

  • Vice President (14) $434
  • Associates (43) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (8) $210
  • 2nd Year Analyst (22) $179
  • Intern/Summer Associate (13) $156
  • 1st Year Analyst (75) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (67) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”