KCRag Forum

kcdcchef wrote:you are so fucking full of shit. st louis built the edward jones dome for the rams, and you built that dump the savvis center for the blues. the cardinals have owners who are willing to do this and can afford it. they are in the minority, right now, 6 owners combined in mlb and nfl have done that. 6, out of 62. big deal.

Those were mistakes of the past.  We have learned form them. Apparently you have not.  You must not have read the saveourowners.com website, they explain it all in simple and comical terms.

CGOCPFTF wrote: Those were mistakes of the past.  We have learned form them. Apparently you have not.  You must not have read the saveourowners.com website, they explain it all in simple and comical terms.

yeah, chef, I think you need to read the saveourowners.com website. It will explain everything to you.

Moving forward as a society, we need to move away from this culture of corporate welfare.

mean wrote: Moving forward as a society, we need to move away from this culture of corporate welfare.

good idea mean, we should not give money to dunn, or hr block or cordish either. screw all of them, the greedy bastards. i mean, this corporate welfare we give to je dunn just to anchor the east village, or the corporate welfare we give to h and r block to anchor the entertainment district, or the tax breaks we gave to the halls for 40 years now, so, those greedy bastards would spend 400m of their own money to build crown center....................man, this has to stop. damn corporate welfare.

you know, when hunt moved the dallas texans here, and mr kauffman wanted to bring us the royals, we should have told them both, right then, and right there, fuck you, we are not building you stadiums.

greedy bastards.

kcdcchef wrote: you know, when hunt moved the dallas texans here, and mr kauffman wanted to bring us the royals, we should have told them both, right then, and right there, fuck you, we are not building you stadiums.

When Hunt moved here and Kauffman bought the Royals they paid RENT.  Now they pay pennies per year in rent and we pay them "management fees" five times what they pay us in rent.

The only justification for paying teams to play in your city is that if you don't someone else will.  But it is increasinly looking as if cities are refusing to be blackmailed.  If all cities refused to build stadiums the owners would build them and make a little less profit and pay the players a little less and the fans would still get exactly the same product.

jerry12 wrote: When Hunt moved here and Kauffman bought the Royals they paid RENT.  Now they pay pennies per year in rent and we pay them "management fees" five times what they pay us in rent.

The only justification for paying teams to play in your city is that if you don't someone else will.  But it is increasinly looking as if cities are refusing to be blackmailed.  If all cities refused to build stadiums the owners would build them and make a little less profit and pay the players a little less and the fans would still get exactly the same product.

i love this talk of increasing numbers of cities are saying screw you, yet, the mayor of las vegas and their city council have made it clear, come on with open arms, anyone who wants to, and san antonio earmarked 200m for a stadium and earmarked 100m in state money too, but, yeah, mlb has NO place to go, sure.

hunt and kauffman paid the city pennies too, dont kid yourself.

kcdcchef wrote: ihunt and kauffman paid the city pennies too, dont kid yourself.

Jackson County built and paid for two stadiums without a sales tax.  Now they can't remodel them without one.  The teams paid real rent to pay off the bonds.  Since then teams learned they don't need to pay rent.  And the players and owners keep getting richer off the taxpayer.

jerry12 wrote: Jackson County built and paid for two stadiums without a sales tax.  Now they can't remodel them without one.  The teams paid real rent to pay off the bonds.  Since then teams learned they don't need to pay rent.  And the players and owners keep getting richer off the taxpayer.

the players get rich off advertising, endorsements, tv, and internet. the ticket prices and us remodeling are small potatoes.

kcdcchef wrote: ...and san antonio earmarked 200m for a stadium and earmarked 100m in state money too

Funny, it's IMPOSSIBLE to build a stadium for under $1B.  You can read all about it at saveourowners.com.  You should check it out.

beautyfromashes wrote: Funny, it's IMPOSSIBLE to build a stadium for under $1B.  You can read all about it at saveourowners.com.  You should check it out.

i will not waste my time reading soo.com. sorry. either way, it sure as hell is not possible to build a new stadium for the 225m we are renovating kauffman for. period.

kcdcchef wrote:
you are so fucking full of shit. st louis built the edward jones dome for the rams, and you built that dump the savvis center for the blues. the cardinals have owners who are willing to do this and can afford it. they are in the minority, right now, 6 owners combined in mlb and nfl have done that. 6, out of 62. big deal.

^dude, FYI, the savvis center was built with private money!  and believe me, it's not a dump.

kman wrote: ^dude, FYI, the savvis center was built with private money!  and believe me, it's not a dump.

no, it is.

City contributed $34.5 million for site preparation

and guaranteed $98 million in construction loans.

right off the ballparks.com site. man, i hate it when they lie.

kcdcchef wrote: no, it is.

City contributed $34.5 million for site preparation

and guaranteed $98 million in construction loans.

right off the ballparks.com site. man, i hate it when they lie.

...I thought the Blues carried a lot of the Savvis Center debt?  I remember hearing that in the team sale discussions.

kcdcchef wrote: good idea mean, we should not give money to dunn, or hr block or cordish either. screw all of them, the greedy bastards. i mean, this corporate welfare we give to je dunn just to anchor the east village, or the corporate welfare we give to h and r block to anchor the entertainment district, or the tax breaks we gave to the halls for 40 years now, so, those greedy bastards would spend 400m of their own money to build crown center....................man, this has to stop. damn corporate welfare.

Yeah, pretty much...what are you trying to say? I'm not saying stop it all immediately, I'm saying we need to move away from it and back toward a culture where people who want to build something pay for it. If you disagree with this, I suggest taking some economics classes. It is not a sustainable development model for the long term, PERIOD, and it was never meant to be. But it's turning into one, and most people, like you, don't even realize why it's a problem.

mean wrote: Yeah, pretty much...what are you trying to say? I'm not saying stop it all immediately, I'm saying we need to move away from it and back toward a culture where people who want to build something pay for it. If you disagree with this, I suggest taking some economics classes. It is not a sustainable development model for the long term, PERIOD, and it was never meant to be. But it's turning into one, and most people, like you, don't even realize why it's a problem.

dude, you dont know me, so, stop the madness, do not say stupid horses ass shit like people like you, that is very incorrect, you have no idea. with regards to this, if we are going to say stop corporate welfare, downtown kansas city, and all other metros in the country, would be ghost towns. corporate welfare, produced all the new construction in kc in the past 10 years, muehlbach, kemper, sprint, hr block, pl district, crown center, it is all corporate welfare in one form or another.

and if you disagree with doing what 29 other markets our size have done for their teams, then, i suggest you take the same ecenomics class with me. hell, we can car pool if you want.

there's a difference between coporate welfare and corporate assistance.

offering tax breaks and financing to build a building that will provide at least some tangible return on the investment: corporate assistance.

paying 85% of a renovation cost which will provide little return on the investment:  corporate welfare.

shaffe wrote: there's a difference between coporate welfare and corporate assistance.

offering tax breaks and financing to build a building that will provide at least some tangible return on the investment: corporate assistance.

paying 85% of a renovation cost which will provide little return on the investment:  corporate welfare.

yeah, all those people coming to this region every year spending millions, that sure is little return.

god knows the tens of millions we give dunn to build in the east village will get a lot of return...........

dont get me wrong, i support both, actually.

those people are coming now as it is.  in order for it to be a return on the investment, the dollars have to be gained because of said investment.  in this case, renovating stadiums isn't going to get people to come see the royals or chiefs any more than they already do.

and yes, east village will give the city a return on it's investment.  for starters, it's hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars less, and it will provide housing and commercial options that were not there previousely.

shaffe wrote:
and yes, east village will give the city a return on it's investment.  for starters, it's hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars less, and it will provide housing and commercial options that were not there previousely.

just like stadium investments, they have return.

shaffe wrote: those people are coming now as it is. in order for it to be a return on the investment, the dollars have to be gained because of said investment. in this case, renovating stadiums isn't going to get people to come see the royals or chiefs any more than they already do.

bullshit. take away pro sports, these people will go elsewhere.

shaffe wrote: there's a difference between coporate welfare and corporate assistance.

offering tax breaks and financing to build a building that will provide at least some tangible return on the investment: corporate assistance.

paying 85% of a renovation cost which will provide little return on the investment:  corporate welfare.

"Welfare".  "Assistance".  Different words but you get the same effect.  Providing funds to another entity.  Besides, since the City's General Fund is providing $25M to make up the revenue shortfalls on the TIF and Super TIF projects the taxpayer "assistance" becomes "welfare".
Besides, your usage of the words "provide at least some tangible return" could very easily mean "provide little return".