SoFi Stadium Ownership Shapes the 2026 Rams-Chargers Deal
The Los Angeles Rams will host the Los Angeles Chargers at SoFi Stadium on Oct. 30, 2026, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. The Rams’ side received approximately 85% of luxury-suite and sponsorship revenue in 2024, compared with 15% for the Chargers.
SoFi Stadium ownership gives Kroenke’s enterprise control of the venue’s business operations, while the Chargers receive access under different commercial terms.
The arrangement also separates the teams’ positions in the stadium’s broader entertainment business, which produces revenue from non-NFL events for the enterprise controlled by Rams owner Stan Kroenke.
Key Takeaways
- Stan Kroenke’s enterprise controls the business operation behind SoFi Stadium and receives revenue from the venue’s non-NFL events.
- CNBC reported that the Rams’ side received approximately 85% of luxury-suite and sponsorship revenue in 2024, compared with 15% for the Chargers.
- CNBC estimated 2025 revenue at approximately $950 million for the Rams and $630 million for the Chargers.
Why SoFi Stadium ownership favors the Rams
The NFL approved Kroenke’s Inglewood stadium project in January 2016 and gave the Chargers the first option to join the Rams at the new stadium, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
The Chargers played in Carson for three seasons while SoFi Stadium was constructed, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. The teams later shared the completed venue, but the commercial structure placed the stadium’s business enterprise under Kroenke’s control.
The arrangement gave the Chargers a Los Angeles home while allowing the Rams’ ownership group to operate the venue and participate in its broader revenue activity. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the Chargers’ access came under separate commercial terms.
The Rams Chargers stadium deal in numbers
CNBC reported the 2024 commercial revenue split and estimated the teams’ 2025 revenue at different levels. Sports Business Journal reported that the Chargers’ projected personal seat-license proceeds fell from $400 million to $150 million after the team priced more than 26,000 licenses at $100.
| Measure | Rams | Chargers | Period and attribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Luxury-suite and sponsorship revenue share | Approximately 85% | 15% | 2024, reported by CNBC |
| Team revenue | Approximately $950 million | Approximately $630 million | 2025 estimates reported by CNBC |
| Projected personal seat-license proceeds | Not stated | Fell from $400 million to $150 million | Reported by Sports Business Journal |
Sports Business Journal reported that the Chargers’ projected personal seat-license proceeds fell after the team priced more than 26,000 licenses at $100. The figures were projections tied to the Chargers’ seat-license program, while the Rams’ lowest seat-license price was reported at $1,000 by the San Diego Union-Tribune.
CNBC’s 2025 estimates placed the Rams approximately $320 million ahead of the Chargers in team revenue. The difference cannot be assigned solely to stadium economics based on the figures reported by CNBC.
SoFi Stadium’s business extends beyond football
SoFi Stadium generates revenue from non-NFL events in addition to hosting Rams and Chargers games. The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the Rams’ side receives revenue from that part of the venue’s business.
The non-football revenue stream adds a separate commercial dimension to the teams’ shared home. The Rams’ position is tied to the enterprise controlled by Kroenke, while the Chargers operate within the venue under their separate arrangement.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the Giants and Jets share control of MetLife Stadium’s operations and revenue, unlike the Rams and Chargers at SoFi Stadium.
The business dispute beyond football
Kroenke’s Hollywood Park companies are seeking approximately $448 million from Inglewood for infrastructure and public-service costs they say the city must reimburse under a 2015 development agreement, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. The claim places the stadium development and its public reimbursement arrangements at the center of a separate legal dispute.
On Sept. 1, an Inglewood Superior Court judge ruled the reimbursement agreement void and unenforceable, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. The ruling concerns the claim made by Kroenke’s Hollywood Park companies.
The reimbursement dispute is now moving through an appeal while Kroenke’s Hollywood Park companies seek approximately $448 million from Inglewood, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported.
