Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    135

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    Marrdro wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Or this guy knows that the Ziggy Ownership group has another venue in mind.
    San Antonio might still be interested, after the "owner who shall not be named" dangling that purple carrot in front of them. Between San Antonio and Austin, you could fill an NFL stadium pretty quickly, I'd imagine. Can't swing a dead cheesehead down there without hitting someone talking football.

  2. #12
    ultravikingfan's Avatar
    ultravikingfan is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    24,514

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    ConnecticutViking wrote:
    There is lots of talk about the Bills possibly moving to Toronto. Found this article in the Washington Post.

    NFL Gold in Canada?
    Buffalo's experiment with Canada will be watched closely around the NFL. The league is desperate to find new markets to expand into and Canada remains an untapped gold mine. Football is popular in Canada and Canadian fans not only watch the NFL on television they travel across the border from cities like Toronto and Vancouver to watch games in Buffalo and Seattle. Still, there remains a divide. Canada has its football league, while the U.S. has the NFL.
    By entering the mega metropolis of Toronto for a handful of games, the Bills not only can hold onto their local fans in upstate New York but they can begin to make serious inroads in Canada's biggest city. It also opens Canada as a potential market for the NFL which must find a way to expand its reach outside the United States or risk someday falling behind sports like baseball and basketball which have a huge global reach. As the NFL's efforts to build itself in Europe and Asia slowly chug along, Canada remains the best place for the league's initial growth.
    It remains to be seen whether Canada would support a fulltime team. Obviously moving the Bills permanently to Toronto is an appealing idea given the immense size of the Toronto market. Perhaps a better solution might be to have a Buffalo-Toronto franchise that plays half of its games in Buffalo and half in Toronto. The biggest problem with this is the same problem that has confounded other Canadian franchises in other sports -- the value of the dollar. For many years, Canada's dollar significantly trailed the US's. It meant Canadian teams were selling tickets and advertising in Canadian currency and yet paying players in American money. That, among other things, drove the NBA from Vancouver, baseball from Montreal and hockey from cities like Quebec City and Winnipeg.
    The NFL could probably not survive in Montreal or even Vancouver despite the great size of those cities. But it would have a chance in Toronto, especially if that franchise was marketed as the nation's team.
    And the NFL, which has seriously considered putting a team in England, has no choice but to try.
    By Les Carpenter | December 2, 2009; 11:43 AM ET | Category: Buffalo Bills
    Do not copy/paste articles. Brief quote with a link...need the link.

  3. #13
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,278

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Ziggy losing leverage is a good thing, when you consider he's trying to stuff a billion dollar stadium up our collective asshole.

  4. #14
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    jmcdon00 wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Ziggy losing leverage is a good thing, when you consider he's trying to stuff a billion dollar stadium up our collective asshole.
    Slightly inaccurate. The $250 million for a retractable roof is not the Vikings' choice.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  5. #15
    BloodyHorns82's Avatar
    BloodyHorns82 is offline Jersey Retired Feed The Frog Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    9,691

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    Zeus wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Ziggy losing leverage is a good thing, when you consider he's trying to stuff a billion dollar stadium up our collective asshole.
    Slightly inaccurate. The $250 million for a retractable roof is not the Vikings' choice.

    =Z=
    Not to mention the Vikings throwing out 250M. Oh my God!!! A professional sports franchise asking for public contributions!!! I mean, it's like never been heard of before!

    This Ziggy guy is a real grade A a-hole. My backside hurts just thinking of his evilness.

  6. #16
    NodakPaul's Avatar
    NodakPaul is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    West Fargo, ND
    Posts
    17,602
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    Zeus wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Ziggy losing leverage is a good thing, when you consider he's trying to stuff a billion dollar stadium up our collective asshole.
    Slightly inaccurate. The $250 million for a retractable roof is not the Vikings' choice.

    =Z=
    Actually it is grossly inacurrate. First of all, the Vikings are NOT the authors of the $954 million proposal OR the more current $870 million proposal. The MSFC proposed them.

    Also, neither of the proposals were for $1 billion dollar stadiums - I don't know if $130 million is chump change to you, but it seems pretty significant to me.

    Finally, Zygi has at least made a financial offer - he committed to a minimum $250 million of a new stadium.

    So let's at least keep facts straight. The $870 million proposal (not $1 billion) is the most current, was proposed by the MSFC, contains a $250 million roof that the Vikings don't want, and the Vikings committed to spending $250 million of their own money.

    That means that there is about $370 million that the Vikings are asking the state to absorb through their nether orifice, not $1 billion. BTW, have we mentioned that the Vikings are estimated to bring in $500 million in direct tax revenue to the state in the next 20 years? Why wouldn't people want to spend $370 million to make $500? The lack of business sense kills me sometimes.
    Zeus wrote:
    When are you going to realize that picking out the 20 bad throws this year and ignoring the 300 good ones does not make your point?

    =Z=

  7. #17
    BloodyHorns82's Avatar
    BloodyHorns82 is offline Jersey Retired Feed The Frog Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    9,691

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    NodakPaul wrote:
    Zeus wrote:
    jmcdon00 wrote:
    marshallvike wrote:
    Good news, although Ziggy just lost some leverage.
    Ziggy losing leverage is a good thing, when you consider he's trying to stuff a billion dollar stadium up our collective asshole.
    Slightly inaccurate. The $250 million for a retractable roof is not the Vikings' choice.

    =Z=
    Actually it is grossly inacurrate. First of all, the Vikings are NOT the authors of the $954 million proposal OR the more current $870 million proposal. The MSFC proposed them.

    Also, neither of the proposals were for $1 billion dollar stadiums - I don't know if $130 million is chump change to you, but it seems pretty significant to me.

    Finally, Zygi has at least made a financial offer - he committed to a minimum $250 million of a new stadium.

    So let's at least keep facts straight. The $870 million proposal (not $1 billion) is the most current, was proposed by the MSFC, contains a $250 million roof that the Vikings don't want, and the Vikings committed to spending $250 million of their own money.

    That means that there is about $370 million that the Vikings are asking the state to absorb through their nether orifice, not $1 billion. BTW, have we mentioned that the Vikings are estimated to bring in $500 million in direct tax revenue to the state in the next 20 years? Why wouldn't people want to spend $370 million to make $500? The lack of business sense kills me sometimes.
    I have come to the conclusion that many/most of the people against it are more against it because of their own personal principles than anything else.

    In my opinion, many people simplify it as "giving public money to a rich guy" and refuse to look any deeper than that, or are blinded by their own ideology. Looking at it in a different light is inconvenient and damaging, regardless of any benefit.

  8. #18
    Prophet's Avatar
    Prophet is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    17,388

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    BloodyHorns82 wrote:
    ...refuse to look any deeper than that, or are blinded by their own ideology. Looking at it in a different light is inconvenient and damaging, regardless of any benefit.
    Isn't that a prerequisite for being a member of pp.o?
    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  9. #19
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    Prophet wrote:
    BloodyHorns82 wrote:
    ...refuse to look any deeper than that, or are blinded by their own ideology. Looking at it in a different light is inconvenient and damaging, regardless of any benefit.
    Isn't that a prerequisite for being a member of pp.o?
    I checked that box on my application.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  10. #20
    BleedinPandG is offline Coach
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    969

    Re:LA Stadium Builder will NOT attempt to move Vikes

    NodakPaul wrote:
    That means that there is about $370 million that the Vikings are asking the state to absorb through their nether orifice, not $1 billion. BTW, have we mentioned that the Vikings are estimated to bring in $500 million in direct tax revenue to the state in the next 20 years? Why wouldn't people want to spend $370 million to make $500? The lack of business sense kills me sometimes.[/quote]

    NP... if you give me $370M and ask for $500M back 20 years from today, you're a fool... that's a horrible investment... 30% growth in 20 years? That's 1.5% per year WITHOUT compounding... inflation will run about 3.5% compounded.

    While I believe there is a simple business case to be made for using the public funds (don't forget all those MN jobs this money will create), you didn't make it with the numbers you provided.
    The true measure of a man is what he'd do knowing he'd never be found out.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stadium issue to move forward in 2009 as economic stimulus
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 430
    Last Post: 03-10-2009, 07:19 PM
  2. Vikings stadium plans move forward
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 88
    Last Post: 07-04-2008, 02:27 PM
  3. NFL Teams Don't Move Unless They Have Issues With Their Stadium
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-28-2008, 11:55 AM
  4. Vikes have the value to move up to #5
    By slinkey in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 99
    Last Post: 03-19-2006, 01:33 AM
  5. If Vikes move from MN will you still be a fan
    By RK. in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 12-14-2004, 07:58 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
  •