Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago

$43 million in unexpected financing costs.


That is a nice little euphemism for "exorbitant interest rates levied by skittish investors wanting to ensure they get something -- anything -- back on their money."
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago
By the way, Shawn, thanks for the excellent article. It solidly busts the myth that stadiums are good for the economy. These studies that seem to demonstrate the benefits of stadiums are commissioned by the people wanting to build the stadium and are thus sunnily optimistic at best, downright self-serving at worst.

Sure, you might create a few jobs, but the jobs you create tend to be shitty, while the real money flows to the overpaid athletes who maintain their true domiciles in other areas and spend the bare minimum time possible in the team's home city. People love to side with the athletes against the fat cats, but the reality is a lot of the athletes make more from playing than the owners make for owning, which is why the owners do everything possible to pass on on the risk inherent in their wastefulness onto taxpayers.

Like I said, extravagantly expensive hobbies. Little more than vehicles for rich men to show off their wealth and have a little fun on the side.

I don't begrudge any man his chance to make an opulent paycheck, but I do resent being forced to fork over my own cash to facilitate that opportunity for him. I don't think the taxpayers should function as an insurance service for risky corporate ventures.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
12 years ago
I didn't think you'd have a response Rourke. Good work!
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago
What are you talking about?
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
12 years ago

What are you talking about?

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



[sarcasm]
UserPostedImage
Formo
  • Formo
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
12 years ago

To the contrary, it is 100 percent reasonable and in fact should be a firm prerequisite to purchasing an NFL franchise. If you can't fund your own stadium, tough: you either live without or you don't receive the franchise.

The reason why these team owners ask for state funds is because they know full well that the return on investment is abysmal on these things -- below the rate of inflation. It is a form of fraud as far as I am concerned. These men won't invest their own money, and they can't find any private investors to finance their projects, because they are fully aware what an irresponsible, counterproductive use of the money it is; so they foist it off on gullible taxpayers. What so many fans fail to grasp is that sports teams are nothing more than extravagantly expensive, low-profit-margin hobbies for billionaires. A couple of years ago they leaked the Cowboys' profit/loss statements. That team netted a deplorable $10 million on a nearly $1 billion annual budget. In any other industry, that would be grounds for immediate termination of -- at the very least -- the CEO. It would probably result in a whole-scale bloodletting among the executives.

It gets worse. For all the talk about the taxpayers getting back their investment, a significant proportion of stadiums -- in all sports -- are shuttered before the mortgages are even paid off. Not only do these stadiums not turn a profit, they don't even break even. It is almost impossible to fill them with events other than games (if they even sell out for the games), and the rest of the time they sit empty, a fixed cost that returns no revenue. There is a reason why most civic centers and arenas are owned by municipalities: no private corporation is silly enough to build and maintain one. It requires the coercive power of government to get them built.

And yes, all of this applies to the Green Bay Packers too. The reason why they resorted to their bogus novelty stock sale was because obtaining other sorts of funding was impossible or unreasonably expensive. So they settled on handing out worthless trinkets with no cash value in exchange for donations. I actually have no problem with this. In my opinion, if you aren't willing to risk your own money, you can't fool a private investor into funding your project, and you can't even cajole your fans into making donations to the building fund, you have no business compelling millions of taxpayers, many of whom may have no interest in your team whatsoever, to cough up the cash for you. At least the Packers had the integrity (this time, anyway) to limit the damage to people with an active rooting interest in the team. I still think the people of Brown County were silly for letting themselves get taxed in exchange for tickets only 8000 of them will be able to win.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Exactly. Why would we, taxpayers, expect a owner to build something that A) he most likely isn't liquid enough to afford and 😎 knows it will put him in the meat-grinder financially? Especially when the norm in this instance is public funds almost always go towards these castles. This is what I meant by reasonable, and Wade is probably right, realistic would maybe be the better term.

Lets not forget supply and demand here.. The NFL is a hot ticket and there are many markets that want a franchise. I would be interested to see how much public money from those markets would go towards a new stadium? Obviously MN 'leaders' (and I use that term loosely) don't want an NFL franchise, or at least take that 'privilege' for granted.

And of course, we are talking in broad generalizations. In this case, there wasn't much, if any, general fund public money going towards a new stadium. Gambling profit percentages and reworking a current MPLS tax were the 'public' money being asked for.

I agree with your last paragraph 100%, though. Sports memorabilia tax statewide would be the ideal tax/public money for the stadium. It taxes those vistors from out of state/country and it taxes those who choose to be taxed and those that would care for the team as you already said. But, alas, this is the MN legislature we are talking about here.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Zero2Cool
12 years ago
I think the Packers did the right thing with making Lambeau Field a year round attraction. The Packers are "publicly" owned, so I'm fine with us taxpayers chipping in. Then again, how about if they got all the shareholders together to pitch in to renovate the stadium? lol

I wonder if it would be possible for the Vikings owner to build a stadium and then lease it out to Minnesota year around for attractions when the Vikings are not using it? It seems silly to have a stadium that costs so much to be used less than a dozen times per year. There has to be better options available.

BTW, I do agree, the owner/s of a team should finance the stadium... after all I can't ask Green Bay (reasonably) to finance a portion of the costs to replace the transmission in my car. Granted, the Packers offer an bring a lot to Green Bay, far more than my car, ... you get the point.

Edit,10 things to know about the Vikings stadium situation
 

UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
12 years ago
good read Zero.

While I would prefer the Vikings to stay in MN I can see the benefits to the franchise if they pick up and move to LA. If I recall there are a couple of groups vying to a franchise out there. I think one of them was willing to privately fund their new stadium plus play the huge fee to get the new team.

LA, 2nd largest, at 3.7 million has a lot more muscle than Minneapolis, # 48, at 382,000.
Metroplex difference is even greater. 13 million people vs 3.3 million.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
12 years ago
Los Angeles lost the Rams and Raiders, why bring another team there?

At least when the Minnesota North Stars moved to Dallas the name was a better fit than the Los Angeles Lakers or what seems to be inevitable, the Los Angeles Vikings. Hey, the Vikings and Lakers will have similar color schemes in the same city!!!
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
12 years ago

That is a nice little euphemism for "exorbitant interest rates levied by skittish investors wanting to ensure they get something -- anything -- back on their money."

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Hehe...my first thought was something different: lawyer and CPA costs. "Billable hours" can be a wonderful thing....if you don't have to write the checks.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (3h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (3h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (5h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (5h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (5h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (5h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (5h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (5h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (5h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (6h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (7h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (7h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (7h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (7h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (7h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (8h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (8h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (8h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (9h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (9h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (9h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (11h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (11h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (12h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (12h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (12h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (12h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (12h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (12h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (12h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (12h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (12h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (12h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (12h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (12h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (12h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (12h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (12h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (12h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (12h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (12h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (13h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

11h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.