Thursday, August 20, 2015

Franchise Owners Still Rich; Taxpayers Still Supporting Them

I've enjoyed reading Joe Brown's occasional stadium columns in the Tampa Tribune, like today's "Taxpayers being held for no gain":
The NFL is awash in money from its television contracts, and with a salary cap it’s nearly impossible for a team to lose money, even if no one shows up at home games. Still, some owners want to fleece taxpayers for newer stadiums to host games that most never will go to see.

In football terms, owners are prolific scorers while taxpayers are being held for no gain. On second thought, being sacked for a loss might be more appropriate.
It's not a new topic, but it's one worth printing in Tampa Bay newspapers every single day.

That's because the Tampa Sports Authority is still negotiating with the Buccaneers on how many of your tax dollars they'll get for Raymond James Stadium improvements.

Hopefully you've already read "The Glazers' Sweetheart Deal Keeps Getting Sweeter."

Here's another story you should bookmark and read too: "Why Taxpayers Are Getting Shut Out Of Stadium Debates."  It's about the way leagues and politicians work together to avoid putting half-billion-dollar expenditures before the voters.

It's a real possibility, Tampa Bay - Commissioner Ken Hagan has already pointed to the Braves' super-fast, secret, not-so-great, potentially illegal stadium deal with Cobb County as a model deal Hillsborough County could follow.

And in case you had sympathy for those baseball owners whose franchises are worth half of what their NFL counterparts' franchises are worth....they're about to top $10 billion in revenue too.





FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook

19 comments:

  1. One request - if you're going to post, please leave your name so subsequent commenters can identify whom they are replying to.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Noah - thanks. I don't see any new information/updates/stories re Ray's stadium efforts here

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This blog is covering a wider range of topics than just the Rays stadium saga/stories. Bottom line, the main topic is why/how private sports teams can/cannot use public funding for infrastructure for their business.

      I do agree that this wider approach is a good one, because examples elsewhere can influence positively or negatively what is happening in St-Pete.

      Delete
    2. Pat, sorry, but this blog doesn't cover a "wider range", and/or how/can, it's a one-sided, small picture, mostly negative blog...

      Delete
    3. And when something can be a "positive" for our community, NO'ah words things like, "It's a real possibility"?!

      Delete
  3. What a one-sided title to this post! Yes, taxpayers are greedy, it's part of how they got so rich. But, taxpayers can be hypocritical & selfish as well. They don't want their tax money spent on roads, UNTIL they need theirs paved...
    If sports always lost $ for a city then there won't be sports, duh!
    NO'ah, we would love for once you to do some real research & "investigate" on how sports can help benefit a city. DOn't be one of those bad reporters like on FoxNews that has claimed everything Obama has done been bad & if it was Rep. that done it that it would of been good, stay classy NO'ah...

    It's $ cycle from sports works in Jax... http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2015-08-19/story/notre-dame-navy-football-game-scores-125000-hotel-bed-tax-grant

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sports can totally help a city - especially when the city doesn't have to pay the costs without receiving any direct revenues!

      Delete
    2. "especially when", well duh! Newsflash, it works even when the city INVEST in sports, like in Jax or, well, Tampa...
      I guess we'll never convince people like you that the sky is blue & grass is green... lol

      Delete
  4. It's starting to sound like NO'ah is just jealous of these owners then wanting to have a real blog of cons & PROS of stadiums, the hate must stem from how little John Henry paid him when he work for the Red Sucks... lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Dufala - I think Noah is doing the best he can given the situation in Tampa. Having said that, I agree that this blog really is about the Rays and their stadium saga with other stories about stadiums and public financing thrown in for back-up.

      Personally, I think the writing is on the wall for the Rays in this area - I'd be happy to be wrong but I just can't see a stadium working out in downtown Tampa given the traffic mess that exists today, let alone out near Clearwater or anywhere in St Pete. The Trop is definitely out as far as the Rays go - they want out. So, it's Tampa (Ybor or nearby) or Montreal at this point.

      St Pete council just don't see the value of the team staying in the Tampa area while they get to revitalize the Trop land.

      The longer they drag their feet, the less land options will exist in Tampa for a new stadium and the less they make from the Trop redevelopment and any "buy-out" money from the Rays from leaving. All the while giving Stu more and more reason to head north.

      Delete
    2. Stu said that he will not be the one moving the team. So at some point, if the the "Perfect Pitch" site and financing plan are not possible, he will sell partially or totally to new owner(s) that will move the team in 2028, at the latest.

      Of course, Montreal/Canadian investors are ready to make such move but even in NY, the interest of investing in a MLB team in Montreal is high, very high (from a reliable source).

      Delete
    3. Hopefully our dollar tanking won't slow things down. Certainly didn't help in the late 90s.

      With regards to Stu selling the team, or anybody waiting until 2028 to find a new home, I just can't see MLB leaving it that long. Yes, the lease is always a factor, but if $50 million or so is all it will take, why wouldn't Stu sign the cheque if it meant taxpayers somewhere buying him a shiny new park?

      I'm not crazy about tax dollars going to the various leagues, but hey, its not like they ask me where they want to spend it anyway. Maybe not the best greatest attitude, but progress on this issue would be nice, regardless of who pays. And while on the subject, has Stu ever released a plan for how a new stadium would be financed, wherever the "Pitch Perfect" location is...Tampa...Ybor...Montreal?

      Delete
    4. During the Bud STEALig era, 21 new ball parks were built - all but two with significant public funding and no MLB team ever had to open their books to get their huge welfare checks! How truly spineless are these elected officials that give billiionaires gobs of public money and don't even have the guts to determine if they need it and/or will be worthy of investment?

      I am looking for the day when I can go to bank and get a couple million of dollars given to me with the bank doing no investigation into my need for the money nor my financial stability. That will be SWEET!

      Delete
    5. Congress should have taken away MLB's anti-trust exemption...


      http://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/february/antitrust-baseball-court-022415.html

      Delete
    6. @ Matt: Hard to release a plan like that when you can't even talk to other areas outside of St. Pete. How is he supposed to know how it will be funded when he can't talk to the local governments or business owners?

      Delete
    7. Fair enough. I'd just hate for them to finally get out from under this contract, only to wait another dozen years while financing is lined up.

      Delete
    8. Com'on man! Yinz really think the Rays & Tampa is sitting back not talking & planning because St. Pete says they can't? lol

      Delete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Video of the District 7 St Petersburg primary winners and their stance on the Rays. https://youtu.be/R5i2-P9SvSo

    ReplyDelete