Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
That analogy might carry some weight, if a city's parks and bike trails cost $1 billion or more and required a "public contribution" of $750 million or more (i.e. what is being asked of the public in Las Vegas).
If Las Vegas or San Diego asked their voters to approve $750 million for bike trails, anyone with common sense could predict the outcome of such a vote.
|
|
08-30-2016 06:09 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
You might be surprised what it would cost to build the whole parks and trails system from scratch, in a major city. Same thing.
Or put another way: it is (and should be) a huge sense of pride that your city can afford to build and own something as nice as a billion dollar stadium. Not many cities can. And of course, Vegas is in a very lucky situation with tourism footing the bill.
They should and probably will vote yes.
Send the Clippers to LV, while you're at it.
(This post was last modified: 08-30-2016 07:14 PM by MplsBison.)
|
|
08-30-2016 07:14 PM |
|
Brookes Owl
Heisman
Posts: 7,965
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(08-30-2016 06:09 PM)Wedge Wrote: That analogy might carry some weight, if a city's parks and bike trails cost $1 billion or more and required a "public contribution" of $750 million or more (i.e. what is being asked of the public in Las Vegas).
If Las Vegas or San Diego asked their voters to approve $750 million for bike trails, anyone with common sense could predict the outcome of such a vote.
Of course the other part missing from the analogy is that Bill Gates gets the concession to operate the trails, and gets to charge whatever he thinks he can get away with.
|
|
08-30-2016 07:59 PM |
|
vandiver49
Heisman
Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(08-30-2016 04:31 PM)MplsBison Wrote: Huh??
The Davis family isn't going to own this stadium. No more than US Bank stadium is owned by the Wilfs. It's going to be publicly owned. How can you have a publicly owned stadium with no public contribution??
Do parks or bike trails improve the local economy?? No. But they're nice to have. People want them.
It's dependent on the contract. The Wilfs might not collect on anything outside of Vikings games, but Blank in Atlanta gets to bank Peach Bowls, SEC Championships and CFP games in MB Stadium.
Based on Davis' financial constraints, I think he will try to leverage control of concessions, parking and gate receipts to events outside of Raider games. Improving his finances is one legitimate reason some of the older owners might oppose the move as they've been trying to squeeze Davis out for some time.
|
|
08-31-2016 07:03 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
Nonetheless, it's a publicly owned facility. The taxpayers own it. Just like the taxpayers own parks and trails, neither of which is improving the economy.
But they're nice things, that (some) people want and are willing to vote for.
|
|
09-01-2016 04:02 PM |
|
vandiver49
Heisman
Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
|
Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(09-01-2016 04:02 PM)MplsBison Wrote: Nonetheless, it's a publicly owned facility. The taxpayers own it. Just like the taxpayers own parks and trails, neither of which is improving the economy.
But they're nice things, that (some) people want and are willing to vote for.
Taxpayers have full access to those facilities versus US Bank Stadium, which has limited open dates and charges a premium for taxpayer use
|
|
09-03-2016 09:19 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
Not full access by any means. They have closed hours. And certain activities (drinking, camping - depending on the facility) are prohibited.
You say that's not the same. I say it is. I think I'm right, you think you're right.
|
|
09-08-2016 08:48 AM |
|
Brookes Owl
Heisman
Posts: 7,965
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
It's not about being right; it's about values. You appear to believe civic pride is sufficient reason to take money from middle class folks and give it to a billionaire. It's ok for you to believe that but it makes me sad.
|
|
09-08-2016 02:25 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
Of course I don't believe that. Because that statement is absurd, and has nothing to do with the discussion.
We're talking about taxpayers voting to spend public money to build a public facility. Then charge rent to a private team for occupying that facility periodically.
And isn't it the dream of those like you who worship markets and capital to always have competition drive the "best" outcome? Well, here you go. If Las Vegas doesn't build a public stadium, then some other city will. Because that's competition for a scare resource.
(This post was last modified: 09-08-2016 03:32 PM by MplsBison.)
|
|
09-08-2016 03:29 PM |
|
Brookes Owl
Heisman
Posts: 7,965
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 165
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
Good gravy - that's not a competitive market! It's exactly the opposite. The government is giving a boost to a selected business and choosing its preferred winner. NFL to Los Angeles - that was much more of an open market solution. Government breaks were not given. Competitive bids from teams who went against each other with only their own resources.
|
|
09-08-2016 03:51 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
Uh oh. That "G" word! Gub'ment. Oogity boogity!!
If the residents of Las Vegas don't want to use public money to build a public facility, they can choose to vote it down. And some other city will pick up the gold bar that LV would have let slip between its fingers.
But that's never stopped ideologues from cutting the nose off ...
|
|
09-08-2016 08:21 PM |
|
vandiver49
Heisman
Posts: 8,589
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 315
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(09-08-2016 08:48 AM)MplsBison Wrote: Not full access by any means. They have closed hours. And certain activities (drinking, camping - depending on the facility) are prohibited.
You say that's not the same. I say it is. I think I'm right, you think you're right.
Your city is replacing a facility that was over 35 years old that had structural issues. My city is replacing two perfectly serviceable stadiums to simply get better deals for the respective owners. You contend your city held a vote, while in Atlanta no such thing took place. That IMO probably accounts for the difference in our perspective.
|
|
09-11-2016 04:01 PM |
|
MplsBison
Banned
Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...egislature
Quote:The Nevada Legislature has signed off on a plan that would use $750 million in public money to build an NFL stadium in Las Vegas, despite opposition to a project partly funded by billionaire casino mogul Sheldon Adelson.
A cadre of lobbyists for the project worked hard to firm up enough of the shaky votes to meet the necessary two-thirds threshold and scraped by with the minimum amount of support Friday when lawmakers called for a quick vote without the customary speeches. Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval, who's been supportive of the project, is expected to sign the deal Monday in Las Vegas.
Now just have to see if Owners politics will allow it.
|
|
10-15-2016 02:47 PM |
|
Transic_nyc
1st String
Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
|
|
11-30-2016 04:35 AM |
|
goofus
All American
Posts: 4,285
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 148
I Root For: Iowa
Location: chicago suburbs
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(11-30-2016 04:35 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: Outline emerges of Oakland stadium deal to keep Raiders
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ros...o-11871023
Too little too late.
Las Vegas and Nevada have approved $750M in public funds. Where is the commitment in public funds from Oakland.
The Raiders are gone. This is just posturing at this point to make it seem like the city of Oakland and NFL owners tried their best to keep the Raiders in Oakland. But just like the last minute plan that the city of St. Louis put together, it won't matter.
|
|
12-01-2016 12:37 PM |
|
Wedge
Moderator
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
(12-01-2016 12:37 PM)goofus Wrote: (11-30-2016 04:35 AM)Transic_nyc Wrote: Outline emerges of Oakland stadium deal to keep Raiders
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/matier-ros...o-11871023
Too little too late.
Las Vegas and Nevada have approved $750M in public funds. Where is the commitment in public funds from Oakland.
The Raiders are gone. This is just posturing at this point to make it seem like the city of Oakland and NFL owners tried their best to keep the Raiders in Oakland. But just like the last minute plan that the city of St. Louis put together, it won't matter.
The Lott plan is much stronger than what St. Louis offered last fall. The Lott group has $600 million in private investors' money behind it, in addition to $200 million of public money. The sticking point is not in the offer itself but in the silent assumption that they could get the A's to just vacate the Coliseum site, when as a practical matter the A's would extort more public money toward a new ballpark of their own in exchange for letting the city/county out of the last several years of the A's Coliseum lease.
I agree that the NFL owners will approve the Las Vegas move, if their review shows that all of the stadium financing is legit, because the owners love the "precedent" of Nevada coughing up $750 million of public money, and will want to use that figure to demand at least as much from every other city/state the next time an NFL owner wants a new stadium. Think of every NFL team that might want a new stadium - Bills, Chiefs, Saints, Jags, probably others - every one of those owners is a yes vote for Las Vegas and that magic $750 million in tax money.
|
|
12-01-2016 02:10 PM |
|
Transic_nyc
1st String
Posts: 2,401
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 194
I Root For: Return To Stability
Location:
|
RE: Las Vegas Raiders closer to reality?
http://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/colu...-las-vegas
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl.../95452180/
Quote:It sounds more and more like March, not January, could be the time for NFL owners to consider the Oakland Raiders’ expected application for relocation to Las Vegas.
While NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell spoke highly of the evolution of the Las Vegas market at the league meetings Wednesday, the league is still in the process of completing market studies and other work that began in earnest after Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval signed a bill in October that committed $750 million in public funding towards the nearly $2 billion stadium project.
“We’ll have a lot of work to do once they make their application,” Pittsburgh Steelers president Art Rooney II said. “If they apply after the season, then we’ll have a lot of work to do, probably between then and March.”
|
|
12-15-2016 12:42 AM |
|