Thread: Angry Vikings blast stadium commission resolution - Will not renew lease

"dfosterf" wrote:

I would just like to take this opportunity to speak on behalf of all Puker fans everywhere.
When the Vikings move to LA, we feel it would be inappropriate for them to stay in the NFC North.


We feel that there are two logical destinations for the Minnesota Vikings as regards the various divisions.

The best option would be to place the Vikings in the NFC West Division.
Kindly forward the St. Louis Rams to the NFC North.

The second option would be the AFC West Division.
The Kansas City Chiefs shall make a nice addition to the NFC North.

For the most part, we Puker fans have enjoyed your stay in our division, but feel that you have overstayed your welcome as of late, and want to go on record as stating that your organization simply cannot be bullied by these commissions and the lack of an economically viable facility.

We Puker fans would also like to volunteer our services to help your organization pack up and move to California.


;D

Anyone notice how our good friend is now using PUKER when he references his team and fans.
;D

Absolutely ridiculous if they let the Vikes go.
If you publicly fund a stadium the portion that you fund will be paid back and usually with interset.
Then you keep a team and a facility that generates taxes for your community.
What could they possibly be thinking?
I can't imagine how much money a team generates-you have real estate taxes, business tax & personal tax on MILLIONARES!
Not to mention JOBS & other events that generate money for that community!!
I just don't get what the legislature could be thinking; its not like you are building the Vikings a stadium and giving it to them like a Christmas gift, wake up before it is too late!!

Carrot and stick is just kinder version of blackmail.
Especially when the carrot isn't even enough to keep the Vikes competitive.
I have to agree with the Vikes that the proposal is nothing short of insulting.
The Wilf's haven't been like Red who came in threatening and played it cheap driving the Vikes into the gutter, only to be risen by the Wilfs.

Stupid stupid stupid.

Hello LA!

Having lived in the DC/Baltimore area when the Ravens & Redskins got their stadiums, and then in Arizona when the Cards got theirs, I know for a fact publicly funding a stadium is an invest in the local economy that pays off, bigtime.

I covered it here http://vikingsmix.com/2009/10/behind...ger-enemy.html a while back. But barely scratched the surface on how important it is for the Minnesota taxpayers to keep the Vikings in town.

It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone could possibly see what the Arizona TSA did, and the payoff it brought the local economy, then think it's a bad idea to do the same here. When Phoenix was reeling from economic sinkholes that left a significant chunk of the valley's population unemployed, the Superbowl came to town and dumped MILLIONS into local businesses, which trickled down to everyone in one way or another. Hotel owners to waitresses, cab drivers to personal security firms and anything in between saw a business boom for the weeks leading up to and immediately following the Bowl.

That right there paid the public back for the funds invested. If it wasn't such a good thing, why would LA STILL be chomping at the bit to bring an NFL team back to an area where local fans really don't care?

"Mike" wrote:

Having lived in the DC/Baltimore area when the Ravens & Redskins got their stadiums, and then in Arizona when the Cards got theirs, I know for a fact publicly funding a stadium is an invest in the local economy that pays off, bigtime.

I covered it here http://vikingsmix.com/2009/10/behind...ger-enemy.html a while back. But barely scratched the surface on how important it is for the Minnesota taxpayers to keep the Vikings in town.

It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone could possibly see what the Arizona TSA did, and the payoff it brought the local economy, then think it's a bad idea to do the same here. When Phoenix was reeling from economic sinkholes that left a significant chunk of the valley's population unemployed, the Superbowl came to town and dumped MILLIONS into local businesses, which trickled down to everyone in one way or another. Hotel owners to waitresses, cab drivers to personal security firms and anything in between saw a business boom for the weeks leading up to and immediately following the Bowl.

That right there paid the public back for the funds invested. If it wasn't such a good thing, why would LA STILL be chomping at the bit to bring an NFL team back to an area where local fans really don't care?

AMEN TO THAT!!

"Mike" wrote:

Having lived in the DC/Baltimore area when the Ravens & Redskins got their stadiums, and then in Arizona when the Cards got theirs, I know for a fact publicly funding a stadium is an invest in the local economy that pays off, bigtime.

I covered it here http://vikingsmix.com/2009/10/behind...ger-enemy.html a while back. But barely scratched the surface on how important it is for the Minnesota taxpayers to keep the Vikings in town.

It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone could possibly see what the Arizona TSA did, and the payoff it brought the local economy, then think it's a bad idea to do the same here. When Phoenix was reeling from economic sinkholes that left a significant chunk of the valley's population unemployed, the Superbowl came to town and dumped MILLIONS into local businesses, which trickled down to everyone in one way or another. Hotel owners to waitresses, cab drivers to personal security firms and anything in between saw a business boom for the weeks leading up to and immediately following the Bowl.

That right there paid the public back for the funds invested. If it wasn't such a good thing, why would LA STILL be chomping at the bit to bring an NFL team back to an area where local fans really don't care?

Has anyone told you yet that you create some great posts?
Just bumped you a couple of columns on the spreadsheet.

Top shelf my friend. Top shelf indeed.

"Marrdro" wrote:

Has anyone told you yet that you create some great posts?

Yes. A gentleman in purple by the name of Marrdo pointed that out once.

"Mike" wrote:

"Marrdro" wrote:

Has anyone told you yet that you create some great posts?

Yes. A gentleman in purple by the name of Marrdo pointed that out once.

Keep em coming.
Rumor has it that cat loves to read stuff like this.

"Mike" wrote:

Having lived in the DC/Baltimore area when the Ravens & Redskins got their stadiums, and then in Arizona when the Cards got theirs, I know for a fact publicly funding a stadium is an invest in the local economy that pays off, bigtime.

I covered it here http://vikingsmix.com/2009/10/behind...ger-enemy.html a while back. But barely scratched the surface on how important it is for the Minnesota taxpayers to keep the Vikings in town.

It's absolutely ridiculous that anyone could possibly see what the Arizona TSA did, and the payoff it brought the local economy, then think it's a bad idea to do the same here. When Phoenix was reeling from economic sinkholes that left a significant chunk of the valley's population unemployed, the Superbowl came to town and dumped MILLIONS into local businesses, which trickled down to everyone in one way or another. Hotel owners to waitresses, cab drivers to personal security firms and anything in between saw a business boom for the weeks leading up to and immediately following the Bowl.

That right there paid the public back for the funds invested. If it wasn't such a good thing, why would LA STILL be chomping at the bit to bring an NFL team back to an area where local fans really don't care?

LA is not committing a single penny of public money, that stadium is being paid for completely privately. This tells me that LA is not willing to invest public money, if they were any investor would be willing to take it.

I think the MSFC(a group that I generally don't agree with), is doing the best they can. They know the Vikings won't get a stadium until the economy rebounds. So they offer the Vikings the dome rent free and allow them to keep all the money from the playoff games. That must add up to a few million a year, not exactly chump change.

I also understand why the Vikings rejected the offer. They hold all the cards and know they will get a better offer.

Some of my favorite stats:
http://www.minnesotamomentum.com/getthefacts.csp

The economic activity from a new stadium will generate over $32 million per year in tax revenue, which includes the $18 million annually generated by the Vikings.

Minnesota Vikings Paid More Than $18 Million In Taxes In 2008

Direct Fiscal Impact To Minnesota (2008)
Taxes
* Property Tax - $240,000
* State Tax Withholding on Players and Staff - $10,857,000
* Sales Tax on Tickets and Merchandise - $2,755,000
* Admission Tax – MSFC - $4,305,000
SubTotal -- $18,157,000 ^

Even if we JUST take the $18 million in direct fiscal impact to Minnesota, that would be enough to pay for a $250 million loan at 5.5% interest over 25 years.
I don't see why the state can't commit to that kind of amount, since it is money they LITERALLY would not have if the Vikings left.
And let's face it, as the salary cap continues to go up (as it has every single year since it was introduced), the direct financial impact will only get larger.
If we used the $32 million figure, that equates to a $450 million loan over 25 years.


Take the roof off from it to save $200 million (with an option to put one on later), and split the cost evenly between the Vikings and the State.
It is the fairest way to pay for it IMHO.