Page 18 of 19
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:39 pm
by Maitre D
shaffe wrote:
kcdc, i know you can do better than that.
I wouldn't be so sure.....
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:44 pm
by GRID
pittsburghparoyal wrote:
No, it was about $250M including land acquisition. Busted again, loser!
Land "acquisition"? That would be like acquiring parking lot C at the TSC. Downtown KC would add 100 million plus for land acquisition, clean up etc.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:46 pm
by Maitre D
GRID wrote:
Land "acquisition"? That would be like acquiring parking lot C at the TSC. Downtown KC would add 100 million plus for land acquisition, clean up etc.
Explain how Pittsburgh did it then? Their downtown is far more compact than ours is. Teach us, oh wise one.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:49 pm
by GRID
jesus, do you know where the park is located?
Still you are right. The Sprint Center is going to cost 300 million, a building 3-4 times its size would cost...about the same (5 years later). yea right.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:52 pm
by Maitre D
GRID wrote:
jesus, do you know where the park is located?
Yes. What is your point, now?
Still you are right. The Sprint Center is going to cost 300 million, a building 3-4 times its size would cost...about the same. yea right.
How come PIttsburgh can do a ballpark for $250M and they want an arena for $250M+? Kinda destroys your comparison, doesn't it?
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:25 pm
by kcdcchef
pittsburghparoyal wrote:
How come PIttsburgh can do a ballpark for $250M and they want an arena for $250M+?  Kinda destroys your comparison, doesn't it?
[/quote
because pittsburgh did not do one for 250 m. they made it appear as though they did, it was part of a 1b two stadium package, and the numbers at the end, said 250m out of the 1b was to build pnc.
but the land was free
clearing it was free
infrastructure was free
call ANY RADIO OR TV OUTLET IN PITTSBURGH, ppa'ass, and tell them it cost 250m, they will laugh at you.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 10:10 am
by kard
Good article about state money going to the stadium project in the
Stl Post-Dispatch.
Apparently the state's $50 million is on. It's similar to a benefit the Card's got for their new stadium. They say it's the largest such credit ever for a single project. But it also points out that Mo is still paying half of the $360 million for the Ed Dome for the Lambs.
I doubt Pratt will be able to pull it off, but I thought this bit was interesting:
Rep. Bryan Pratt, R-Blue Springs, wants to ensure that taxpayers get some tangible rewards.
He plans to file a bill this week that would require the teams to offer playoff tickets to Jackson County residents for two days and then Missouri residents for two days before opening sales to others.
He also wants the teams to let anyone with a valid Missouri license plate park at the games for $5.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:37 pm
by aknowledgeableperson
Kard wrote:
Good article about state money going to the stadium project in the
Stl Post-Dispatch.Â
Rep. Bryan Pratt, R-Blue Springs, wants to ensure that taxpayers get some tangible rewards.
He plans to file a bill this week that would require the teams to offer playoff tickets to Jackson County residents for two days and then Missouri residents for two days before opening sales to others.
He better come up with something else for the people of Jackson County and Missouri. Worthless benefit since the Chiefs do not make it to the playoffs.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 1:59 am
by shaffe
i call BS if that includes screwing the season ticket holders too. just because i'm a season ticket holder who lives in platte county, i shouldn't get screwed by 2 days if i can't get tickets when the royals pull the miracle of all time and make the playoffs.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:01 pm
by Maitre D
I'm still trying to figure out how that proposal affects the owners.
It doesn't. So let's try this again: Owners! You owe more as a contribution than what you're giving. And no, we're not taking "season tix preferences" in lieu of cash, you swine!
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2006 11:03 pm
by kard
pittsburghparoyal wrote:
I'm still trying to figure out how that proposal affects the owners.
It doesn't. So let's try this again: Owners! You owe more as a contribution than what you're giving. And no, we're not taking "season tix preferences" in lieu of cash, you swine!
I will second that motion with my "no" vote in April.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:26 am
by kcdcchef
javascript:void(setPlayMedia('2006/open/teams06/kca/mlbr/021706_sisco_andy.wma'%2C'custom_context/radio/generic.jsp'));
a nice link to a mlb radio network interview with andy sisco, and BOTH ANALYSTS were talking to sisco about how beautiful and amazing kauffman stadium is. what else is new.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:13 am
by GRID
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:31 am
by kcdcchef
i especially liked reading the words
I fail to see what would be gained by pulling a tarp over
Kaufmann stadium, one of the nicest parks in baseball. In addition, Kaufmann stadium is so open, that a simple roof would do little to keep rain out
i love how people in other cities agree on this.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:12 am
by WSPanic
OK Chef, now I'm confused. You say we're supposed to listen to what other cities think. You say it here and you claimed it before (in all caps I believe) and you spew crap like "so sad that we think that we are smarter then the OVERWHELMING majority."
But, the OVERWHELIMING (we all have a caps lock, we just don't use it as much as you) majority of cities are building new parks DOWNTOWN because it's the right thing to do. So, I guess my question is, will you always be around to tell us when we are supposed to follow other cities and when we're not?
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:38 pm
by kcdcchef
WSPanic wrote:
OK Chef, now I'm confused. You say we're supposed to listen to what other cities think. You say it here and you claimed it before (in all caps I believe) and you spew crap like "so sad that we think that we are smarter then the OVERWHELMING majority."
But, the OVERWHELIMING (we all have a caps lock, we just don't use it as much as you) majority of cities are building new parks DOWNTOWN because it's the right thing to do. So, I guess my question is, will you always be around to tell us when we are supposed to follow other cities and when we're not?
ok, so follow minnesotta, and build nothing. and renovate nothing.
or do what i asked in that quote, and listen to the comments of other people OUTSIDE the forum, and OUTSIDE kc, and hear what they say about kauffman. they say it is great. and it seems to be a consensus amongst most baseball people.
hell, i was in the worlds of fun forum for a few minutes last night, their site moderators, a husband and wife team, were both saying that jackson county citzens own the ballparks, and should do their duties and pass these taxes to pay for upkeep on the stadium.
as usual, i will keep bringing the outside opinions here, for everyone to ignore, all the while, slapping yourselves high fives and patting one another on the back saying "hell, what do any of them, mostly kcdc know, we are right, not the majority"
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:48 pm
by lock+load
kcdcchef wrote:
hell, i was in the worlds of fun forum for a few minutes last night, their site moderators, a husband and wife team, were both saying that jackson county citzens own the ballparks, and should do their duties and pass these taxes to pay for upkeep on the stadium.
That is great, but that is no more important than a couple of forumers here wanting to blow the place up and start over. Everyone has an opinion. Jackson County's duty is $60-80 million in upgrades to keep the leases current through 2015. It is NOT the $1/2 billion boondoggle on the ballot now.
Some pepole are so easily confused.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:54 pm
by kcdcchef
lock&load wrote:
That is great, but that is no more important than a couple of forumers here wanting to blow the place up and start over. Everyone has an opinion.  Jackson County's duty is $60-80 million in upgrades to keep the leases current through 2015. It is NOT the $1/2 billion boondoggle on the ballot now.
Some pepole are so easily confused.
ahhhhh, the ignoring of others continues. at least you were objective in ignoring it lockandload. good for you.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:54 pm
by voltopt
keeping baseball at Truman Sports Complex is an emotional decision.
it is remote by most standards (despite being inbetween independence, kansas city, and raytown)
the history that occured on the field, the memories of fans who have attended games there, and an espn.com ranking in the top 5 two years ago are the only reasons to keep this facility where it is presently located.
these are emotional responses to an issue that could be about a. baseball or b. kansas city as a regional center.
and if the issue is about a. baseball and only baseball (memories/history) then renovate it, keep it where it is
if the issue is about b. kansas city as a regional center then blow it up and move the use downtown where it will become part of a greater regional center and a "face" for our city.
if its about BOTH baseball and kansas city as a regional center, then that can arguably be accomlished best with a new stadium downtown integrated into a neighborhood/dining/lodging/entertainment area.
it would change the "Face" of Kansas City in a way that all of the sports memories of Kauffman can't accomplish.
Re: Dec. 22 Press Conference
Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 4:56 pm
by lock+load
kcdcchef wrote:
ahhhhh, the ignoring of others continues. at least you were objective in ignoring it lockandload. good for you.
I didn't ignore, I took it for what it was...the opinions of two people--nothing more