FIELD OF SCHEMES (website)

[Maitre D]

Anyone who's interested in stadium data, can check out this site.  It's pretty anti-stadium of course, but has good data:
http://fieldofschemes.com/

Here's what they say about the KC situation:

Neil, I hear rumors that the Chiefs are using a threat (real or implied) to move to Wyandotte County as a bargaining chip. I investigated the possibility a few months back and it doesn't seem likely they would move. Here are some thoughts on that probability. Wyandotte County has 1/5 the population and 1/5 the income as Jackson County, so they can't afford the Chiefs even if they wanted to.

The conservatives in Johnson County would oppose any attempt to import the Chiefs and their $5.5 million per year local subsidy. It would have to be financed entirely by the state. With Kansas currently $4 billion in debt, the over $1 billion cost (interest and principal) needed to satisfy the Chiefs represents 1/4 of that debt. I am convinced I can make a better case against the stadium than proponents can for a stadium. Dont forget that in the year 2000, Missouri income was $20 billion while Kansas could only muster $10 billion. There is not much economic benefit for western Kansas in an eastern border stadium. Also, 60 Kansas legislators signed the TABOR pledge. 58 Kansas legislators voted as fiscal conservatives over 80% of the time last year (fact from the Kansas Taxpayers Network). Some of these are the same people but it does indicate conservative consistency in money matters. Another factor is the Kansas Supreme Court who last year ordered the spending of $400 million for education in 2005, and another $400 million in 2006. A plan to repeal the business equipment tax would require cost $300 million. A stadium would cost another $1 billion. Kansas would have to find an extra $1.7 billion in an election year.

Look at it this way. If the Chiefs really want to move to Kansas (or elsewhere), what better way to set the stage than to insist on a tax they know will not pass. If, In November of 2006, Jackson County rejects the tax, they will go into default and the Chiefs could leave without penalty. Could it be that the Chiefs are not negotiating in good faith? Maybe it could be financed by a Bi-State tax. You know, a tax that leaves Missouri residents last in line for tickets. I estimate the chance of that happening somewhere between zero and none. The financial picture is very different when you are being asked to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax (Bi-State II) than when you are asked to increase your total state debt by $1 billion, plus add a yearly $8.5 million subsidy. For Kansas, it's a lose-lose situation.

The obvious solution is for Jackson County to ask voters for an $80 million tax (over 4 years) and tell the Chiefs, "Your tax won't pass. We are going for the $80 million to lock you in for 10 years and we'll talk to you about nine years from now." Think about it! Wayne Flaherty
Posted by: Wayne Flaherty at January 21, 2006 04:19 PM

http://demause.net/mt/sw/mt-search.cgi? ... ansas+city

[KCMax]

The obvious solution is for Jackson County to ask voters for an $80 million tax (over 4 years) and tell the Chiefs, "Your tax won't pass. We are going for the $80 million to lock you in for 10 years and we'll talk to you about nine years from now." Think about it! Wayne Flaherty

Wayne is a smart man, much smarter than anyone in any position of authority here I'm afraid.

[Maitre D]

This give credence to Terrance Nash's comments last election - where he charged Jacko of PURPOSELY defaulting on the lease agreement b/c they wanted JoCo to come in and start paying too.

Not sure if that's true or not, but it makes you wonder why they defaulted in the first place.  80M is a cheap solution.  The teams hold no bargaining power b/c of the lease they signed!  The County was in 100% cruise control on this whole deal, so why give that up?

The teams were bargaining from a position of weakness, and they came up with THIS PLAN!?!?  More like they were holdilng a gun to the county's heads than in the weak position.  Unreal what Jacko's leaders have done to them.

[KCMax]

Either they defaulted intentionally or they are grossly incompetent. Either is a possibility.

[BVC]

This give credence to Terrance Nash's comments last election - where he charged Jacko of PURPOSELY defaulting on the lease agreement b/c they wanted JoCo to come in and start paying too.

Not sure if that's true or not, but it makes you wonder why they defaulted in the first place.  80M is a cheap solution.  The teams hold no bargaining power b/c of the lease they signed!  The County was in 100% cruise control on this whole deal, so why give that up?

The teams were bargaining from a position of weakness, and they came up with THIS PLAN!?!?  More like they were holdilng a gun to the county's heads than in the weak position.  Unreal what Jacko's leaders have done to them.

Sounds like a Michael Moore cooked up conspiracy, but one that might not be far off.



Here's one big glaring ommission from this dude's take, naming rights.  For a NFL stadium naming rgihts fee, what are corporations paying?  I'm guessing the Sprint Center reeled in aboult half to a third of what a new football stadium could bring in.  So, we could conceivably expect naming rights over a 25 year period to go between $75 million to $150 million.  No matter what side built new, this would cover roughly 1/4 to 1/3 of construction costs.  So, a new state of the art Lamar Hunt Stadium by Sprint-Nextel would cost roughly the same what JaxCo is asking its residents to pay for renovations and a mobile airplane hangar.  Furthermore, I'd be willing to bet that through the NFL loan program, we'd see more contribution than we currently do for the rennovation  Let's call it $100 million.  So now we total $250 million towards a new, state-of-the-art, rolling roof stadium that for the sake of argument will run $500 million on the high side. 

So, now, are you telling me JoCo or JaxCo wouldn't find a way to get a $250 million tax contribution passed for a new, state-of-the-art, rolling roof stadium?  It would be a lot easier sell than people think and state money from either side would not be necessary to carry a $250 million tax burden.

That scenario could be win-win, not lose-lose.

[Maitre D]

For a NFL stadium naming rgihts fee, what are corporations paying? 

Guessing 60-80M.

I'm guessing the Sprint Center reeled in aboult half to a third of what a new football stadium could bring in.  So, we could conceivably expect naming rights over a 25 year period to go between $75 million to $150 million. 

Sprint is paying 40M.  It goes to 60M if an NBA or NHL team goes in.

No matter what side built new, this would cover roughly 1/4 to 1/3 of construction costs.  So, a new state of the art Lamar Hunt Stadium by Sprint-Nextel would cost roughly the same what JaxCo is asking its residents to pay for renovations and a mobile airplane hangar.  Furthermore, I'd be willing to bet that through the NFL loan program, we'd see more contribution than we currently do for the rennovation  Let's call it $100 million.  So now we total $250 million towards a new, state-of-the-art, rolling roof stadium that for the sake of argument will run $500 million on the high side. 

That's what they SHOULD do.  Build new for 500M and put the Super Bowl in there.  Get the shit-hole land by where Municipal once was (20th & Brooklyn or so) and do it new.

[kcdcchef]

That's what they SHOULD do.  Build new for 500M and put the Super Bowl in there.  Get the shit-hole land by where Municipal once was (20th & Brooklyn or so) and do it new.

don't see that happening, as they just built all new houses on that land where munie was. the only reminder of munie, is a park bench, and a sign, saying this is where the right field corner was.

[Maitre D]

I've always thought that was a cool area.

And Johnny JoCo can't be worried about crime down there.  It would be cleaned up, lots of parking would exist, and only usage would be on Sunday afternoons.  Remember: it's totally shut down after the regular season ends, so no January games most years.  LOL!