Exactly. Quality of life is the play not pure this makes KC money.
They definitely do take out loans for their portion, they just don't want to take out more than they have to.
Exactly. Quality of life is the play not pure this makes KC money.
There are studies that show there is not a benefit. I don't believe them - nor should anyone. Most of them are prepared by libertarian groups like the Show Me institute that oppose any public-private project like a baseball stadium. They recently produced a document showing how the streetcar hurts Kansas City's economy.
No doubt stadiums and streetcars shift momentum and wealth within the city but I don't think any study can conclusively say that pro sports don't result in sustained general increase in economic activity metro wide. There's just far too many intangible variables to consider to make that statement conclusively. The necessary data to come to that conclusion just doesn't exist. What would KC be today without being placed on the radar by baseball and particularly by the NFL over the last 60 years? There's no way to really answer that question. It's far more complicated than saying the stadiums cost X and the amount of visits from out of town generate X. Like I said, pro sports certainly influenced (it wasn't the only selling point) my decision to retire here and all the money I spend nearly 365 days per year and the taxes that generates. Pro-sports contributes to the overall quality of life which further impacts decisions on where to live and that has to be evaluated on a city by city basis.CrossroadsUrbanApts wrote: ↑Sun Mar 17, 2024 1:32 pm I am only semi-educated on this subject, but my understanding is that the most relevant economic studies are pretty conclusive that pro sports stadiums don't seem to result in any sustained general increase in economic activity region-wide. But it does shift the distribution of that economic activity within that region. In other words, money spent at or near the ballpark would likely have been spent elsewhere in the metro. If someone spends $250 downtown in or around the ballpark instead of spending that at Lenexa City Center, that seems like a win to me. But I admit to being terrifically biased towards downtown and its environs.
One reason I was so supportive of the streetcar, beyond any transportation benefits, was that I think it was effective in attracting development specifically to the streetcar route. In a sense, it helped solve a collective action problem by incentivizing development to cluster in a specific area. It may be the case that most of the projects built along the streetcar route may have still been built - just elsewhere in the metro area. But I think the city is better off in the long run (from a fiscal sustainability standpoint) to have that development as clustered as possible rather than dispersed across a larger area. Clustered development also benefits from the positive spillover effects of increased density.
My heartburn with the Crossroads stadium location site is in part due to the expected shift in distribution of economic activity I spoke about in the first paragraph. Some businesses will very likely come out way ahead (breweries, restaurants, etc.) as economic activity shifts from other areas of towns towards them; while other businesses will likely be hurt as the ballpark shifts their customer base away towards other areas of the city. Now, I don't believe any neighborhood can be encased in amber. The Crossroads of 2024 is already very different than the Crossroads of 2014. But to my estimation the Crossroads was already experiencing a general increase in economic activity without the ballpark. Same couldn't be said about inside the loop, especially on the eastern side. Which is why East Village (or maybe Vine District) seemed like better options to absorb a significant influx of economic activity with less dislocation.
Because it cost 1/10th of what a new MLB stadium will cost. If they could build a new MlB stadium for under 150m I’m sure they’d not ask for a penny.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 4:45 pm KC Current: zero incentives from city, county or state. Sold out the entire season and ticket prices starting at $150/ea. someone explain to me how $1.7B in incentives for the new Royals is a better deal than lowly women’s soccer?
and I'm guessing the Current's P&L is even less than 1/10th of the royals.DColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:08 amBecause it cost 1/10th of what a new MLB stadium will cost. If they could build a new MlB stadium for under 150m I’m sure they’d not ask for a penny.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 4:45 pm KC Current: zero incentives from city, county or state. Sold out the entire season and ticket prices starting at $150/ea. someone explain to me how $1.7B in incentives for the new Royals is a better deal than lowly women’s soccer?
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:10 amand I'm guessing the Current's P&L is even less than 1/10th of the royals.DColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:08 amBecause it cost 1/10th of what a new MLB stadium will cost. If they could build a new MlB stadium for under 150m I’m sure they’d not ask for a penny.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 4:45 pm KC Current: zero incentives from city, county or state. Sold out the entire season and ticket prices starting at $150/ea. someone explain to me how $1.7B in incentives for the new Royals is a better deal than lowly women’s soccer?
The [NWSL] salary cap for the 2024 season will be $2,750,000 per team, up nearly 40% from a cap of $1,375,000 plus $600,000 in allocation money available to each team in 2023. Relatedly, teams can no longer purchase new allocation money and must use any remaining funds by the end of 2026.
KC Royals estimated payroll 2024 - Total, $110,675,000Major League Baseball (MLB) does not have a hard salary cap, but it does use the Competitive Balance Tax (CBT), also known as the luxury tax, to limit big spenders. Clubs that exceed a predetermined payroll threshold are taxed on each dollar above the threshold. The tax rate increases based on the number of consecutive years a club has exceeded the threshold. In 2023, the threshold was $233 million. In 2024, the Dodgers are estimated to be over the fourth and highest threshold of $297 million
Meanwhile, over on Fox News: Chiefs president says 'leaving Kansas City' is an 'option' amid stadium tax voteDColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 11:56 am I was on a call this morning with someone at the top of this. He feels like it’s trending to be a winning vote. However he also said there are other ways to get this done without the vote if they needed to pull that lever. Was adamant that Kansas City would not being losing either team. This is the site and they’re all committed to making it happen.
Yeah I think he is implying the Kansas side or leaving KCMO.Sani wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 12:05 pmMeanwhile, over on Fox News: Chiefs president says 'leaving Kansas City' is an 'option' amid stadium tax voteDColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 11:56 am I was on a call this morning with someone at the top of this. He feels like it’s trending to be a winning vote. However he also said there are other ways to get this done without the vote if they needed to pull that lever. Was adamant that Kansas City would not being losing either team. This is the site and they’re all committed to making it happen.
I'm not giving Fox News my email address to read the whole article, so maybe — probably? — it's clickbait taken wildly out of context. But it has folks in r/StLouis talking.
Not to mention the higher salaries of coaches and the cost of a good general manager. The Royals and the Current are two scales with orders of magnitude different $$ values on payroll, stadium cost, operating costs and management.alejandro46 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:16 amKCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:10 amand I'm guessing the Current's P&L is even less than 1/10th of the royals.The [NWSL] salary cap for the 2024 season will be $2,750,000 per team, up nearly 40% from a cap of $1,375,000 plus $600,000 in allocation money available to each team in 2023. Relatedly, teams can no longer purchase new allocation money and must use any remaining funds by the end of 2026.KC Royals estimated payroll 2024 - Total, $110,675,000Major League Baseball (MLB) does not have a hard salary cap, but it does use the Competitive Balance Tax (CBT), also known as the luxury tax, to limit big spenders. Clubs that exceed a predetermined payroll threshold are taxed on each dollar above the threshold. The tax rate increases based on the number of consecutive years a club has exceeded the threshold. In 2023, the threshold was $233 million. In 2024, the Dodgers are estimated to be over the fourth and highest threshold of $297 million
Right now, I’m not even sure if the Royals are going to contribute as much for their stadium as the KC Current spent on theirs.DColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:08 amBecause it cost 1/10th of what a new MLB stadium will cost. If they could build a new MlB stadium for under 150m I’m sure they’d not ask for a penny.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 4:45 pm KC Current: zero incentives from city, county or state. Sold out the entire season and ticket prices starting at $150/ea. someone explain to me how $1.7B in incentives for the new Royals is a better deal than lowly women’s soccer?
Not to mention the Current is rolling high off the “first” this and first that. People are rightfully excited but will it last or will it quickly be mostly determined based on wins vs loses?
They’ve committed to buying the land and giving that to the county. They’ve committed to spending a billion dollars on the village portion.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 1:38 pmRight now, I’m not even sure if the Royals are going to contribute as much for their stadium as the KC Current spent on theirs.DColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 10:08 amBecause it cost 1/10th of what a new MLB stadium will cost. If they could build a new MlB stadium for under 150m I’m sure they’d not ask for a penny.beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sat Mar 16, 2024 4:45 pm KC Current: zero incentives from city, county or state. Sold out the entire season and ticket prices starting at $150/ea. someone explain to me how $1.7B in incentives for the new Royals is a better deal than lowly women’s soccer?
Not to mention the Current is rolling high off the “first” this and first that. People are rightfully excited but will it last or will it quickly be mostly determined based on wins vs loses?
Yeah…… it’s part of the negotiation process before any kind of development agreement is reached. I know you all know this but you’re being very pessimistic. What do you want? A signed agreement they will spend a billion dollars before they even know how the stadium is going to be funded?
I didn't say they should have it signed now but let's not give them too much credit before it's actually done deal especially when you are trying to talk down to an actually built stadium that the owners put money behind w/o incentives. We have no idea if that "billion dollars" will ever actually show itself and in what form.DColeKC wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 3:34 pmYeah…… it’s part of the negotiation process before any kind of development agreement is reached. I know you all know this but you’re being very pessimistic. What do you want? A signed agreement they will spend a billion dollars before they even know how the stadium is going to be funded?
I understand the frustration with them but god damn.
Can't make it work = don't want to make it work IMOUMKCroo wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 12:20 pm During a conversation with Populous, I was told that while the current plan includes closing Oak, they are looking at several different options. I get the feeling they don't see it working without closing Oak though. Interesting news to me however, they claim Oak will remain open to pedestrians, including during games. I pushed them on that for clarification and they confirmed. Was this everyones assumption? Guess I missed that. Makes this way more palatable to me. I still have concerns about streetcar, but really there is just so much capacity. I think traffic ends up a non-issue as well.