1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Goodell gives Miami an ultimatum...no soup for you!!

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by djphinfan, Mar 20, 2013.

  1. Joe Robbie

    Joe Robbie The Patriarch

    388
    253
    63
    Dec 24, 2008
    Miami Gardens
    They got some public finance when it was retrofitted for baseball.
     
  2. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,651
    67,543
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    from an energy standpoint, there isn't any worse...there isn't a field in relation to the stands in the NFL that's farther away, then at no life..
     
  3. CANDolphan

    CANDolphan Well-Known Member

    1,006
    546
    113
    Feb 18, 2012
    I'll ask you - what are the advantages, taking those articles and economic researcher reports into account?
     
  4. schmolioot

    schmolioot Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    26,254
    17,386
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Orlando
    It's not $200 million DJ, and that's the point. It's a lot more than that.

    The tourist tax increase and sales tax rebate won't generate $200 million dollars for at least 10 years, so what does the county do? They need the money now.

    So they sell bonds or finance the project in some other way. Regardless, interest is charged. And what happens when the bonds/loans come due and the tourist tax hasn't quite met expectations and there is a shortfall? Do you thin the banks and the bondholders just forget about it.

    No, the taxpayer (all taxpayers) cover that loss. It's why all stadium deals are complete and utter boondoggles that always cost far more than any economic benefit they provide. If we had no stadium at all, and were trying to attract a football team, then perhaps you could make a quality of life argument that some would find persusive, but that's not the issue here.

    We have a stadium that is adequate for the vast majority of the paying customers, who will also likely never get to go a Superbowl played in the stadium. What's the real benefit?

    I understand your arguments, and I appreciate your passion, but I think you're kidding yourself if you think that these renovations will guarantee sell outs or more raucous crowds even when the team is not winning. It won't happen.
     
    oakelmpine, bakedmatt and CANDolphan like this.
  5. Samphin

    Samphin Κακό σκυλί ψόφο δεν έχει

    For the record, a poll of players not too long ago had our stadium as second worst, only behind Oakland. Granted, this probably had more to do with both being the only baseball/football shared facilities, and that is now not the case with Miami, but the perception isn't very good for our stadium amongst players and fans alike.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  6. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    None of those analyses dealt with the economic effect of hosting SBs.

    In principle, I agree that simply subsidizing a stadium provides little benefit. But if that new stadium results in hosting SBs, then there is a benefit. Not to mention the benefit of having a team in general.
     
  7. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Was Miami going to pay out the $200M in a lump sum? I thought it would be over time?
     
  8. schmolioot

    schmolioot Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    26,254
    17,386
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Orlando
    http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/hcx/Matheson_SuperBowl09.pdf

    Study on economic impact of Super Bowls found that impact is a "fraction" of what NFL and host committees claim.
     
  9. schmolioot

    schmolioot Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    26,254
    17,386
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Orlando
    All costs have to be paid by the end of construction. Contractors and engineers don't wait ten years to get paid.

    this was the real problem with the Marlins stadium deal. What was supposed to be a $300 million dollar investment ballooned to over $400 million in real money and it's been estimated that it could cost the city a billion dollars by the time the inetrest and other debt service is paid off
     
    oakelmpine and bakedmatt like this.
  10. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    18,216
    23,519
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    I'm not at all impressed by any of those articles. And I think they are off point here where the issue is Super Bowls, as those articles discuss public financing for stadiums without mentioning Super Bowls and with focus on places that will never host a Super Bowl, e.g., Utah and Hawaii. Super Bowls are unique events. They are the biggest event and most televised event in the country every single year. They bring somewhere around 50,000 generally wealthy people (not to mention media, etc.) to the host city for several days of celebration and spending. If those 50,000 fans spend just $2000 per person here (and I'd venture to say the actual figure is much higher), that is $100 million right there. Yes, the many of the hotel rooms those people will occupy will be occupied by others if there was no super Bowl, but probably not all of them and not at the same rates. And the regular tourists don't spend like the SB-attending fat cats. There is also the horde of media and others that come to town with a SB. These are affects that are entirely separate from the effects of a new publicly financed stadium in Utah. And Miami is different from most places because it is not about getting a single SB as a token reward -- it is about getting one every few years. There are also the benefits of the spotlight that the Super Bowl puts on a city and the attendant publicity that generates.

    If it is true (and I am not sure it's not just a bluff) that Miami will no longer get Super Bowls if it doesn't make the upgrades, then I think it is an easy decision. But it may be a bluff and it may not be necessary to make the upgrades just to get/keep Super Bowls.

    The arguments against tourist taxes that I have seen have been very weak. The number of people who make vacation/travel decisions based on the amount of tourist taxes is miniscule. Places like NYC and Chicago have the highest tourist taxes and, to the best of my knowledge, people continue to go there.
     
    Drowning and djphinfan like this.
  11. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Right, but what did they determine the impact to be? Even if it is just $50M for every SB, that still is a very attractive proposition.
     
  12. Joe Robbie

    Joe Robbie The Patriarch

    388
    253
    63
    Dec 24, 2008
    Miami Gardens
    Fine. But they stuck us with Loria, and his midget step son, in exchange for them giving the Expos to MLB. They should award us every all-star game after sticking us with those carpet baggers. Lol
     
    oakelmpine, bakedmatt and Gunner like this.
  13. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Further, the hotel industry in Miami supports the plan.
     
  14. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    18,216
    23,519
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    Another not-so-impressive study. It criticizes other studies and estimates and calls them lazy for not taking all of the factors into account, but it fails to do that too. It doesn't give an asnwer as to what the economic benefits are, other than to say they are a fraction of what the other estimates suggest. Gee thanks. 9/10 is a fraction. 4/5 is a fraction. Considering the estimates being criticized indicate a $500-700 million benefit from a single super Bowl, a fractional impact may still be hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single Super Bowl. If the fraction is 2/5 of a $500 million estimate, it is still a $200 million benefit. And in Miami's case, we are probably talking about 3-4 Super Bowls before another round of upgrades is needed.
     
    djphinfan and Stringer Bell like this.
  15. Gunner

    Gunner Rock Hunter

    4,250
    1,262
    0
    Jan 5, 2008
    Mobile, AL
    :D OK, you got me there
     
  16. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I'm fairly certain that a good portion of the subsidy is in the form of waiving sales taxes on stadium purchases.
     
  17. FinNasty

    FinNasty Alabama don’t want this... Staff Member Club Member

    24,217
    36,005
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Write them an email or something bro. Posting something hoping a beat writer may come on here, and then hoping he clicks on your thread, is quite remote.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  18. schmolioot

    schmolioot Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    26,254
    17,386
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Orlando
    Here's another article with links to other studies, proving that the NFL estimates on the economic impact of the Super Bowl is grossly overstated. There obviously is an impact, but it's usually not worth the money it costs to get the game

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57566434/as-economic-boost-super-bowl-underwhelms/

    Not only do we need to put up $200 million (before inetrest and other debt service) to upgrade the private proeprty of Mr. Ross, but the NFL then demands more extortion or they'll shoot the hostage

    In short, the NFL wants to be exempt from the very tourist tax increases that are being used to build the damn stadium, this is in addition to the fee you pay the NFL to host the game, plus the other perks they demand such as sweetheartd eals for convention space, etc.

    The above numbers are not estimate, they are real numbers. The NFL said hoston would generate more than $300 million from the Super Bowl. They officially clocked $129 million. If you subtract the bid fee and whatever other extortion the NFL threw in the number is likely lower than that.

    Despite all this, I'd love for Sun Life to have the Super Bowl. But the NFL should award it to Miami on the merits, and not use it as a hostage for unnecessary corporate welfare.
     
    oakelmpine, bakedmatt and CANDolphan like this.
  19. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    18,216
    23,519
    113
    Jan 5, 2008


    But even a $129 million impact is significant. And Miami is a more expensive place to visit anyhow, so that number (even if accurate, which we don't know) would probably be bigger here. For Houston, they are saying that is "direct spending," which wouldn't include the publicity benefits, etc. While the Holy Cross article is correct that you can't fairly value 30-second shots of Miami during the game as if it were paid advertising during the Super Bowl, it certainly has real value. And we are talking about multiple Super Bowls for Miami, not just one. So even a $129 million economic impact would be paid back in two Super Bowls. And considering it would come from tourist taxes that are unlikely to have any measurable impact on actual tourism levels, and not from any existing pool of tax dollars, I think that is still a pretty solid investment.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  20. MikeHoncho

    MikeHoncho -=| Censored |=-

    52,652
    25,565
    113
    Nov 13, 2009
    Nice. Now the commissioner is going to try and strong-arm even the Miami voters.
     
    oakelmpine likes this.
  21. PhinishLine

    PhinishLine Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,276
    2,893
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Maryland
    The all-star game is in July. You can throw it anywhere. It's not the same thing as the SB which for the most part (with a few exceptions) rotates to the same fair-weather stadiums. Nobody except for the Saints has hosted as many SBs as Miami.
     
  22. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Right, and the actual stadium the game will be played in should be at the top of the list of merits.

    I'm not sure how generating $100M of revenue per SB doesn't make it worth it. Seems like a decent proposition.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  23. PhinishLine

    PhinishLine Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,276
    2,893
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Maryland
    I remember when the residents of DC were being pissy about a new stadium in DC for the Skins. Now they are begging to give money to the team. Redskins don't even practice in DC. They don't even get their jerseys washed in DC.
     
  24. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Only would vote for it, if Ross agreed to have this as a loan, otherwise, you own the stadium, you pay for it yourself Ross, because I have heard of no revenue sharing program in case we do pay for it. The ordinary taxpayer will get almost ZERO benefit from this, so its not worth it for the taxpayer. Its up to Ross, if he wants the revenue for hosting the SB then pay for it yourself, or agree to pay EVERY SINGLE PENNEY BACK PLUS INTEREST to to the taxpayers.

    Enough of the welfare for rich people on the backs of minimum wage poor people.
     
    shula_guy likes this.
  25. Joe Robbie

    Joe Robbie The Patriarch

    388
    253
    63
    Dec 24, 2008
    Miami Gardens
    The Dolphins technically don't practice in Miami, and play their home games basically teetering on the border of Broward County. If taxes must be paid, Broward should be on the hook, too.
     
    oakelmpine likes this.
  26. PhinishLine

    PhinishLine Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,276
    2,893
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Maryland
    I was under the impression that citizens from neither county would have to pay for anything as the tax is taken from hotel revenue. Unless you living in a hotel, I don't see how its applicable unless I'm misunderstanding the proposal.
     
  27. Joe Robbie

    Joe Robbie The Patriarch

    388
    253
    63
    Dec 24, 2008
    Miami Gardens
    Where else am I gonna bang random skanks without my significant other finding out? Lol. Citizens always end up paying one way or another.
     
    bigbucks24 and bakedmatt like this.
  28. CANDolphan

    CANDolphan Well-Known Member

    1,006
    546
    113
    Feb 18, 2012
    As already demonstrated, when those balances come due, and the revenue from taxation is not enough to cover it, the taxpayers are on the hook.
     
    oakelmpine likes this.
  29. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    18,216
    23,519
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    The "ordinary taxpayer" in this case is the tourist from Kalamazoo. No, he won't get any benefit from the stadium, but I don't care.
     
    Stringer Bell likes this.
  30. Fineas

    Fineas Club Member Luxury Box

    18,216
    23,519
    113
    Jan 5, 2008

    No, you haven't demonstrated that, nor have you shown any reason why the revenue from taxation won't be enough to cover it.
     
    PhinishLine likes this.
  31. PhinishLine

    PhinishLine Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    4,276
    2,893
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Maryland
    Im no conservative, but im pretty sure minimum wage people don't pay a large percentage of the taxes to accomplish something "on your backs"

    Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
     
  32. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    That's what we heard about the Marlins stadium and that turned out to be a lie. True the general revenue fund is not paying the Marlins boondoggle. But in order to have the tourist tax pay for the Marlins stadium, they had to divert funds already paying for another county boondoggle, the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Perfoming Arts (which cost twice as much as it was supposed to cost) [ http://www.arshtcenter.org/ ]. So we've heard this BS before. Now general funds are paying for that damn ballet & concert venue (that no real taxpayers go to - only old, and I mean REALLY OLD snooty folks for stupid concerts that no one cares about) instead of the tourist tax. It was a bait & switch and the taxpayers are not about to see this happen again.

    Ross needs to see this is a lost cause, cut his losses, and decide if his PRIVATELY OWNED stadium needs to be renovated or sell the team and stadium to someone willing to do it, or be prepared to not host any Super Bowls. It's really up to him, not the taxpayers because I can guarantee its not going to pass. This is a time waster, and also another screw on the taxpayers to pay for a special election that EVERYONE KNOWS will not pass. This special election will cost the tax payers of Miami-Dade over $ 4 million just to tell Ross to stick it up his ***. All because Ross is a selfish a-hole who can't see the writing on the wall. It's very typical of very rich people, who are so ****ing self-absorbed and can't see how they are hurting other people. The $ 4 million could pay the salaries of 88 school teachers, or 75 policemen, yet this rich bastard wants to waste that money so he can be told something we already know.
     
  33. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Well I already have stated that tourist funds weren't enough to cover the costs of the Arsht Center and Marlins Park so the taxpayer is already paying for one of them. Unless you get some new hotels built quickly on Miami Beach, then how in the world are they going to pay for this ?
     
  34. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    See the Adrienne Arsht Center please...... [ http://www.arshtcenter.org/ ]
     
  35. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Even if they pay a penny for renovating a stadium that is PRIVATELY OWNED its too much. This is Ross' property, and he stands to benefit, not some joe blow that lives in Little Haiti or Overtown, or Allapatah. They work hard for their wages, and sometimes even work 2 jobs. Many of them can't already afford to pay for tickets to the games, and its insulting to take money that the county could be putting into resources to help their lives, instead of the PRIVATELY OWNED stadium owned by a freaking billionaire.
     
  36. CANDolphan

    CANDolphan Well-Known Member

    1,006
    546
    113
    Feb 18, 2012
    Edit: I misread. Nevermind, my bad.
     
  37. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    These people don't benefit from having a football team in s. Fla?
     
  38. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Not really. Unless you are one of the 1,000 or so who work at the stadium, your life is unaffected by it. Most, if not all of the players, team officials, and office workers, live and spend money in Broward County, not Miami-Dade. The only time they step foot in Miami-Dade is on game day.
     
  39. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I'm pretty sure people enjoy having a team in their market. Having a hometown team to root for is a luxury to many people. A lot of cities that would love to have a football team.
     
  40. oakelmpine

    oakelmpine New Member

    3,328
    339
    0
    Oct 16, 2012
    Sure we love having the team. But this is about MONEY. Of which the owner has BILLIONS - enough to pay for it himself instead of asking ordinary working people to pay for it. The tourist tax already can't pay for the Arsht Center & Marlins Park, so how is it going to pay for this ? It can't and in the end, the taxpayer will end up paying for it.

    Ross just needs to give this up, and pay for it himself. If he doesn't want to, then accept reality, and just sell the team & stadium. It's not the taxpayers fault he over spent by $ 300 or $ 400 million to buy the team, so why should we have to pay for his mistake ? If he hadn't been such a fool, and acted like a more responsible business man then he'd have the money right now to pay for it himself.
     

Share This Page