CSNbbs
Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - Printable Version

+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Big12bbs (/forum-260.html)
+---- Forum: Big 12 Team Talk (/forum-783.html)
+----- Forum: The Gregory A. Ruehlmann Sr. Memorial Cincinnati Board (/forum-404.html)
+----- Thread: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight (/thread-810171.html)



RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - BearcatMan - 11-16-2017 11:26 PM

(11-16-2017 10:57 PM)The T-Shirt Wrote:  
(11-16-2017 10:00 PM)InspectorHound Wrote:  Berding on today's Cunningham show

"If the county forks over the $75M and builds a garage for you, are you willing to let them take the revenue from the garage?"

"Absolutely not. It's non-negotiable for us to give up parking revenue on gameday."

Who the f is he kidding

I edited in the rest of the quote in bold, for those who didn't actually listen.

Just wanted to be accurate.

Gotta love parsing quotes.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - Ash_UCATS - 11-16-2017 11:52 PM

The city should keep the parking revenue from that garage build until the cost to build it is paid off imo. But I don't pay taxes in Cincinnati.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - TubaCat - 11-17-2017 01:10 AM

(11-16-2017 11:52 PM)Ash_UCATS Wrote:  The city should keep the parking revenue from that garage build until the cost to build it is paid off imo. But I don't pay taxes in Cincinnati.

I'm inclined to agree. Hope things are going well for you! Haven't seen you around here in awhile.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - bearcatdp - 11-17-2017 08:34 AM

After building it, the city should sell it at market value to the team. They spent the time and money to build it - if the team wants the revenues, they should either build it or buy it. I have a feeling, if the team (a private entity) built it, it would be done better than if the city (a government entity) built it.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - Ahhhorsepoo - 11-17-2017 08:48 AM

simply put the deal FCC presented to the county is the most city/county friendly deal in all of major sports. Not a single other franchise in major pro sports(if FCC gets to MLS) will have ever financed their own stadium 100% privately. It is maddening that the city/county thinks paying for the road upgrades, which Oakley needs largely already, is something they don't want to do. It isn't being put in a part of town that is barren and we are hoping to build a neighborhood around it.. ala Columbus' stadium, or Chicago Fire to name a few.. it is going into a populated area that simply needs a few infrastructure changes to help promote people actually enjoying the area year round. Let's be honest, by helping build up the Oakley area and make it more accessible(already a current need on most weekends) seems like a great investment at $15-$30 million dollars, when the public infrastructure cost for the banks is over $160 million last I heard and no one batted an eye at that public kickstart for the private investment that continues to occur down there..

If the city/county can't get their heads out of their butts and see that this is as sweetheart a deal as anyone in the history of stadiums has ever been given, then I simply will welcome a Newport stadium.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - rath v2.0 - 11-17-2017 08:50 AM

Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - JackieTreehorn - 11-17-2017 09:01 AM

(11-17-2017 08:48 AM)Ahhhorsepoo Wrote:  simply put the deal FCC presented to the county is the most city/county friendly deal in all of major sports. Not a single other franchise in major pro sports(if FCC gets to MLS) will have ever financed their own stadium 100% privately. It is maddening that the city/county thinks paying for the road upgrades, which Oakley needs largely already, is something they don't want to do. It isn't being put in a part of town that is barren and we are hoping to build a neighborhood around it.. ala Columbus' stadium, or Chicago Fire to name a few.. it is going into a populated area that simply needs a few infrastructure changes to help promote people actually enjoying the area year round. Let's be honest, by helping build up the Oakley area and make it more accessible(already a current need on most weekends) seems like a great investment at $15-$30 million dollars, when the public infrastructure cost for the banks is over $160 million last I heard and no one batted an eye at that public kickstart for the private investment that continues to occur down there..

If the city/county can't get their heads out of their butts and see that this is as sweetheart a deal as anyone in the history of stadiums has ever been given, then I simply will welcome a Newport stadium.

If this is the friendliest deal in all of major sports, it's a sad statement on how cities and counties get routinely snookered to allow billionaires to socialize costs and privatize profits. If the Lindners whine about anything, it ought to be the absurd franchise fee of $100 million to get into a league where the entire yearly tv package is only $90 million. It is indeed a Ponzi scheme.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - CliftonAve - 11-17-2017 09:18 AM

Is it just me or does Chris Seelbach look like a young Randy Quaid?

[Image: B9320131014Z.1_20151216114957_000_G3DCSPQMQ.1-0.jpg]


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - BearcatMan - 11-17-2017 10:01 AM

(11-17-2017 08:50 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.

Isn't it funny how the deal they requested from UC (alterations to the stadium paid back via concessions) is so similar to the issue presented to them by the county (parking structure paid back using revenues), and yet they're up in arms? Goes to show you just how ****** that deal was for UC.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - levydl - 11-17-2017 10:15 AM

(11-17-2017 08:48 AM)Ahhhorsepoo Wrote:  simply put the deal FCC presented to the county is the most city/county friendly deal in all of major sports. Not a single other franchise in major pro sports(if FCC gets to MLS) will have ever financed their own stadium 100% privately.

You have lowered the bar so much to try to make this awful thing look good by comparison. But it's still awful.

Carl Lindner's son wants taxpayers to pay for his soccer stadium. In fact, he's indignant that it's even up for debate! How can anyone be on HIS side?


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - rath v2.0 - 11-17-2017 10:19 AM

(11-17-2017 10:15 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:48 AM)Ahhhorsepoo Wrote:  simply put the deal FCC presented to the county is the most city/county friendly deal in all of major sports. Not a single other franchise in major pro sports(if FCC gets to MLS) will have ever financed their own stadium 100% privately.

You have lowered the bar so much to try to make this awful thing look good by comparison. But it's still awful.

Carl Lindner's son wants taxpayers to pay for his soccer stadium. In fact, he's indignant that it's even up for debate! How can anyone be on HIS side?

As I stated earlier pro sports and their billionaire owners make otherwise intelligent people justify unconscionable financial decisions.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - BearcatsUC - 11-17-2017 10:26 AM

(11-17-2017 10:01 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:50 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.

Isn't it funny how the deal they requested from UC (alterations to the stadium paid back via concessions) is so similar to the issue presented to them by the county (parking structure paid back using revenues), and yet they're up in arms? Goes to show you just how ****** that deal was for UC.

Actually, the parking garage is even worse. With Nippert, FCC paid for the notches and UC will pay them back. With the parking garage, the taxpayer pays for the structure but FCC wants the revenues. How is that even
legal?


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - rath v2.0 - 11-17-2017 10:33 AM

Lindner has spent his corporate career in the boardrooms of companies that make money off of other people's money. It's how he do.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - BearcatMan - 11-17-2017 10:35 AM

(11-17-2017 10:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 10:01 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:50 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.

Isn't it funny how the deal they requested from UC (alterations to the stadium paid back via concessions) is so similar to the issue presented to them by the county (parking structure paid back using revenues), and yet they're up in arms? Goes to show you just how ****** that deal was for UC.

Actually, the parking garage is even worse. With Nippert, FCC paid for the notches and UC will pay them back. With the parking garage, the taxpayer pays for the structure but FCC wants the revenues. How is that even
legal?

To be fair, in this scenario the taxpayers aren't paying as a collective, only those who attend games/use the lot. It's coming from parking revenues, not taxation...but I get the sentiment.

FCC will argue that those revenues are theirs due to them being the reason why the structure exists and receives revenue...despite them not owning to the fact that the ACTUAL reason anything exists over there would be if the county signs off on it.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - JackieTreehorn - 11-17-2017 10:37 AM

Yep, as someone mentioned a while back during the Lindner/UC Nippert negotiations, they are very skilled at making yours into theirs, and then spinning it to make it look like you're the one getting a great deal.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - BearcatMan - 11-17-2017 10:38 AM

(11-17-2017 10:33 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner has spent his corporate career in the boardrooms of companies that make money off of other people's money. It's how he do.

As with most people who dictate and legislate nowadays. Very few people who actually have HAD to work for it are making decisions in the public sector, and that's the saddest thing of all.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - JackieTreehorn - 11-17-2017 10:40 AM

(11-17-2017 10:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 10:01 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:50 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.

Isn't it funny how the deal they requested from UC (alterations to the stadium paid back via concessions) is so similar to the issue presented to them by the county (parking structure paid back using revenues), and yet they're up in arms? Goes to show you just how ****** that deal was for UC.

Actually, the parking garage is even worse. With Nippert, FCC paid for the notches and UC will pay them back. With the parking garage, the taxpayer pays for the structure but FCC wants the revenues. How is that even
legal?

I'm still trying to figure out why UC should pay them back for the notches at all. It only benefits FCC and diminishes the stadium capacity and appearance for the primary tenant and owner.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - rath v2.0 - 11-17-2017 10:44 AM

(11-17-2017 10:40 AM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 10:26 AM)BearcatsUC Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 10:01 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:50 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Lindner wants the infrastructure and parking free with the revenue it generates. Not to mention the millionsnin tax breaks and incentives. Of course he is magnanimous enough to allow the County to pay him $2.8 million a year for 30 year on a payment plan for what he is owed.

Cranley will bend over. He has a statewide campaign to fund the next time around.

Isn't it funny how the deal they requested from UC (alterations to the stadium paid back via concessions) is so similar to the issue presented to them by the county (parking structure paid back using revenues), and yet they're up in arms? Goes to show you just how ****** that deal was for UC.

Actually, the parking garage is even worse. With Nippert, FCC paid for the notches and UC will pay them back. With the parking garage, the taxpayer pays for the structure but FCC wants the revenues. How is that even
legal?

I'm still trying to figure out why UC should pay them back for the notches at all. It only benefits FCC and diminishes the stadium capacity and appearance for the primary tenant and owner.

Because they drove the bus on that agreement due to the fact that there's a new business school with his name on it going up.

I think they believe they drive the bus on this one too. Perhaps they do because a lot of these politicians want to get reelected or get new jobs and we all know what family and their corporations writes a lot of large campaign contribution checks in this county.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - Bearhawkeye - 11-17-2017 10:50 AM

(11-17-2017 10:15 AM)levydl Wrote:  
(11-17-2017 08:48 AM)Ahhhorsepoo Wrote:  simply put the deal FCC presented to the county is the most city/county friendly deal in all of major sports. Not a single other franchise in major pro sports(if FCC gets to MLS) will have ever financed their own stadium 100% privately.

You have lowered the bar so much to try to make this awful thing look good by comparison. But it's still awful.

Carl Lindner's son wants taxpayers to pay for his soccer stadium. In fact, he's indignant that it's even up for debate! How can anyone be on HIS side?

Some of you guys act like this is something unique to Lindner or even sports. Amazon is currently worth $550B (yes that's Billion) and Morgan Stanley among others thinks they could reach $1T by the end of next year which would probably make them the richest company in the world. They're currently sorting through the 238 offers to host their 2nd HQ and cities are offering a bonanza of financial incentives and beyond including at least one proposal to rename their city "Amazon".

Hate Lindners despite their being huge UC benefactors if you want, but they didn't invent the game. We call it competition. You can refuse to play if you want to, but don't expect the world to wait around while you sit pat. There are risks either way.


RE: Nippert Defilement - Saw it Tonight - TubaCat - 11-17-2017 10:50 AM

Whoa whoa whoa, didn't UC front the cost for the notches with FCC paying them back with concessions revenue over time? That's the opposite of what is being said now.

And isn't there a stipulation in the contract that if FCC moves, they are required to pay for returning the stadium to its previous configuration?