Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote 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.

  2. #12
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,258

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote 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.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  3. #13
    marstc09's Avatar
    marstc09 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona
    Posts
    23,179

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote 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.

  4. #14
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,258

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1106189
    Quote 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?

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  5. #15
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1106158
    Quote 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.

  6. #16
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    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.

  7. #17
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote 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.

  8. #18
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re: Packers: Lambeau expansion will cost taxpayers no

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1106208
    Quote 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

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Illegal third challenge should've cost Green Bay Packers
    By Marrdro in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-17-2009, 09:43 AM
  2. Taxpayers eat $7 million government lunch tab
    By BadlandsVikings in forum Post Wasteland
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-29-2007, 11:03 AM
  3. We can beat the packers in lambeau but
    By vikingsalltheway in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-02-2005, 09:19 PM
  4. Expansion for LA?
    By pepper 0n moss in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-06-2004, 04:13 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •