Thread: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

Originally Posted by "vikinggreg" #1106157

and I think at some point some nonvoting shares have been issued.

that must be what I was thinking of. It's basically a certificate saying you gave the Packers money.

Originally Posted by "vikinggreg" #1106157

One of the interesting things I've heard about the Packers shares that have been more recently sold is the voting rights are not on par with original shares, you now have to buy more to have a vote, and I think at some point some nonvoting shares have been issued.

I'm guessing one needs to have a shit-load of shares before they have enough voting shares to even matter & even with that I'm assuming those voting shares sold to the public, in aggregate, don't ever amount to be the majority of the vote.

Originally Posted by "singersp" #1106143

Ah the old "we'll sell stock" ploy. Hungry fans eat that shit up & throw money at the team actually thinking they personally own part of it.

They have a piece of paper that says so, but I highly doubt any fan has ever received a dividend check from that stock. And make no mistake about it, the Packers make millions of dollars each year.

At least their fans care about their team and your government only cares about themselves. It is a said state for Minnesota.

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1106189

Originally Posted by "singersp" #1106143

Ah the old "we'll sell stock" ploy. Hungry fans eat that shit up & throw money at the team actually thinking they personally own part of it.

They have a piece of paper that says so, but I highly doubt any fan has ever received a dividend check from that stock. And make no mistake about it, the Packers make millions of dollars each year.

At least their fans care about their team and your government only cares about themselves. It is a said state for Minnesota.

Pssst. I said that.

The one thing I do admire about Packer fans is that no matter how shitty of a season they have, they always fill their stadium.

BTW, MY government is the WI government. Did you forget I live in WI just as you did?

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1106158

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1106147

Doesn't matter. At least they are raising the cash themselves. I am sure Ziggy could also do some sort of stock sale that he could do the same thing with. Large corporations do it all of the time to raise cash.

I still give them props for not holding the taxpayers over the barrel to fund the project

Your argument points are Marrdro-esque. You ignore plain facts while trying to enforce your claim that the Vikings are a team of yutz's.

NFL teams can not be publically owned. They can not sell shares. the Packers are the ONLY team allowed. Old teams get certain benefits grandfathered in from the old days. I forget the exact details, but the way the Steelers are run is also not allowed in todays NFL rules, but they were grandfathered in.

The Packers are having a stock sale because they are the ONLY team in the league with the ability to do that. You can bet if the Vikings could sell stocks in order to fund part of the stadium, they would. How many here would buy a $100 stock to help fund the stadiuM? I'd bet a fair number. Now through the state of Minnesota, quite a bit more. They'd make decent coin, but they can't. Something you seem to be forgetting.

Yeah, that was a little tongue in cheek and I understand that they cannot sell stock as in a normal corporation. The whole point is there is a team who has found a way to improve their facility without resorting to extortion. And yes, I understand that nobody in the state of Minnesota or the Vikings organization are smart enough to come up with alternative ways to fund the damn thing so the extortion route is the one and only way to get the thing built. I understand that fully but it doesn't mean I need to blindly accept it like many others do.

No, tax hikes aren't ideal, but what are your bright ideas?

a half percent tax hike means instead of paying $5 for a pop, chips and a bar, you pay $5.02.

It means for a $30,000 car you pay $30,150


Now ways to do it by lottery, casinos, etc. would be the way to go, problem is that the NFL seems to have a problem associating themselves with gambling, and it requires work by the state, who last I checked is ran by a group of complete morons.

The Vikings missed out by not doing this earlier. Packers can afford to do more because they upgraded their old stadium to a state of the art stadium with all the amenities back when construction was cheap, labour was cheap and the US dollar was worth alot more. Now to add bathroom signs is a million dollar project. If they coudl do this in the Red era, get private suites, get the facilities they need to be profitiable, they'd have been fine, and could probably afford to cover most of any future upgrades. Unfortunately, they stuck their thumbs in their asses and did nothing, resulting in the clusterfuck that is now known as the Vikings stadium situation.

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1106203

No, tax hikes aren't ideal, but what are your bright ideas?

a half percent tax hike means instead of paying $5 for a pop, chips and a bar, you pay $5.02.

It means for a $30,000 car you pay $30,150


Now ways to do it by lottery, casinos, etc. would be the way to go, problem is that the NFL seems to have a problem associating themselves with gambling, and it requires work by the state, who last I checked is ran by a group of complete morons.

The Vikings missed out by not doing this earlier. Packers can afford to do more because they upgraded their old stadium to a state of the art stadium with all the amenities back when construction was cheap, labour was cheap and the US dollar was worth alot more. Now to add bathroom signs is a million dollar project. If they coudl do this in the Red era, get private suites, get the facilities they need to be profitiable, they'd have been fine, and could probably afford to cover most of any future upgrades. Unfortunately, they stuck their thumbs in their asses and did nothing, resulting in the clusterfuck that is now known as the Vikings stadium situation.

Red could have built it himself for less that the Vikings are putting forward now and saved all of us over a decade of a clusterfuck but the team seems to have a pathological need to have the state bend over the barrel in order to be happy.But go ahead and bring up the past.

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1106208

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1106203

No, tax hikes aren't ideal, but what are your bright ideas?

a half percent tax hike means instead of paying $5 for a pop, chips and a bar, you pay $5.02.

It means for a $30,000 car you pay $30,150


Now ways to do it by lottery, casinos, etc. would be the way to go, problem is that the NFL seems to have a problem associating themselves with gambling, and it requires work by the state, who last I checked is ran by a group of complete morons.

The Vikings missed out by not doing this earlier. Packers can afford to do more because they upgraded their old stadium to a state of the art stadium with all the amenities back when construction was cheap, labour was cheap and the US dollar was worth alot more. Now to add bathroom signs is a million dollar project. If they coudl do this in the Red era, get private suites, get the facilities they need to be profitiable, they'd have been fine, and could probably afford to cover most of any future upgrades. Unfortunately, they stuck their thumbs in their asses and did nothing, resulting in the clusterfuck that is now known as the Vikings stadium situation.

Red could have built it himself for less that the Vikings are putting forward now and saved all of us over a decade of a clusterfuck but the team seems to have a pathological need to have the state bend over the barrel in order to be happy.But go ahead and bring up the past.

Sure, Red *blows goats* McCombs COULD have done it...but he was too cheap to sign players or coaches. He certainly wasn't going to imp[rove the stadium.

Zygi could probably do it too - with the help of his ownership group - but he won't because the precedent has been set repeatedly that public financing is available and tax payers will pay.

Do I LIKE it? Nope. But that's how it works now.

But to compare our situation to Green Bay's and laud them for being able to draw from revenue streams we are unable to is silly. "Yay!!!! The Packers get to cheat!!! They're so clever!!!".

If the NFL were to eliminate all the individual team "perks", Green Bay would simply be another team in a very SMALL market. Chances are, despite their alleged popularity, financial requirements would force them to move to a larger market.

Think about it this way: Back in the day, the Packers were so broke and so pathetic that the NFL had to create special rules just to keep them in the league. Not much has changed since...

Caine