Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47
  1. #21
    BadlandsVikings's Avatar
    BadlandsVikings is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    26,572

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Hurry up and build it, it doesn't sound good when they talk about them moving to L.A. during the game

  2. #22
    Formo's Avatar
    Formo is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,664

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081341
    Quote Originally Posted by "Erinnn" #1081328
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081326
    Quote Originally Posted by "NodakPaul" #1081153
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081127
    I find it interesting that a decade into this process the vikings have yet to name the official spot they want the thing to go. What the heck have they been doing all of this time. I think bagley should be shown the door.


    And any plan with a fold back roof should get the architect tarred, feathered and ran out of town. Either have it open or closed full time. They never have them open anyway so why even have the option?
    What?

    Have you not been following the stadium issue for the past 10 years? The Vikings have had several plans that they brought to the table, all of which have falled through. Since the Anoka plan fell through, they have been struggling to find a local partner, but even then it was planned to be on the Metrodome site. Last year they were shot down in the legislature primarily becuse they did not have a local partner. The intent this year is to go back to the legislature with a local partner in place, which means they have to explore their options again.

    I do agree about the roof though. Personally I think it should be a fixed roof. Cheaper, and still usable for events outside football.
    It's one thing to put a set of drawings on the table but it is a whole different thing to put ALL of the numbers down and HOW and WHO is going to be paying for all of them. I happen to know someone in the legislature who deals with the stadium issue and they have told me the Vikings have not put together anything more than a few picture presentations and a few rough numbers. If they are serious they will have a comprehensive package and stick to it rather than just throwing out a different location or idea every other year.

    And they need to make it cheaper with potential to expand in the future- the deficit just jumped again.
    Everyone is so focused on how to pay for it now and looking at the short term issues. They seem to ignore the amount of money the state will lose when the Vikings leave, both in money spent related to the Vikings, and also income tax collected from player and employee salaries, and the taxes paid by visiting players and teams.

    In 2008, the Metrodome alone generated $18+ million not counting money spent throughout the state on merchandise, food, and liquor sales related to the Vikings, or by visitors here for game day. A study by the U of M found that the playoff game against the Cowboys alone accounted for $9.1 million in sales, 113 jobs and $3.6 million in labor income for that one day. The Vikings are responsible for $166 million of the $319 million in taxes generated by the Metrodome from 1982-2009. While $304 million of that went directly to the state, which contributed $0 to building the Metrodome.

    The state will miss that money when they are still trying to dig themselves out of the hole they're in twenty years from now. The same legislators who drove MN into debt want to argue how to pay for a new stadium? Obviously they've been so good at spending taxpayer money up to this point.
    Oh, so you want to go there lol.


    Did you by chance happen to look up the operating costs of the dome and compare them to the revenue? Did you then also add the interest and principle on to the 1 billion dollar price tag ans see how much additional revenue they would need to float the boat?

    As a preliminary exercise I will provide a budget history for the current stadium from 2007-2009 and you can take those numbers, look at how revenue declined after the twins and gophers left, and use the revenue figures to determine how much they need to increase in oder to satisfy the new 1 billion dollar stadium. Then get back to me on what you come up with.


    http://www.msfc.com/images/dynImages/BUDGET.COVER.COMBINED.pdf

    After you turn in your homework I will post the Profit and Loss for the Metrodome over the past few years and you can show me how you are going to turn that around while increasing the debt service.
    Soo.. Your point is what exactly? That the state in fact WON'T miss the money the Vikings are bringing in for them? Really?

    Or are you just arguing semantics?
    Vegans are eating the rainforests. =(

  3. #23
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,473

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081341
    Quote Originally Posted by "Erinnn" #1081328
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081326
    Quote Originally Posted by "NodakPaul" #1081153
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081127
    I find it interesting that a decade into this process the vikings have yet to name the official spot they want the thing to go. What the heck have they been doing all of this time. I think bagley should be shown the door.


    And any plan with a fold back roof should get the architect tarred, feathered and ran out of town. Either have it open or closed full time. They never have them open anyway so why even have the option?
    What?

    Have you not been following the stadium issue for the past 10 years? The Vikings have had several plans that they brought to the table, all of which have falled through. Since the Anoka plan fell through, they have been struggling to find a local partner, but even then it was planned to be on the Metrodome site. Last year they were shot down in the legislature primarily becuse they did not have a local partner. The intent this year is to go back to the legislature with a local partner in place, which means they have to explore their options again.

    I do agree about the roof though. Personally I think it should be a fixed roof. Cheaper, and still usable for events outside football.
    It's one thing to put a set of drawings on the table but it is a whole different thing to put ALL of the numbers down and HOW and WHO is going to be paying for all of them. I happen to know someone in the legislature who deals with the stadium issue and they have told me the Vikings have not put together anything more than a few picture presentations and a few rough numbers. If they are serious they will have a comprehensive package and stick to it rather than just throwing out a different location or idea every other year.

    And they need to make it cheaper with potential to expand in the future- the deficit just jumped again.
    Everyone is so focused on how to pay for it now and looking at the short term issues. They seem to ignore the amount of money the state will lose when the Vikings leave, both in money spent related to the Vikings, and also income tax collected from player and employee salaries, and the taxes paid by visiting players and teams.

    In 2008, the Metrodome alone generated $18+ million not counting money spent throughout the state on merchandise, food, and liquor sales related to the Vikings, or by visitors here for game day. A study by the U of M found that the playoff game against the Cowboys alone accounted for $9.1 million in sales, 113 jobs and $3.6 million in labor income for that one day. The Vikings are responsible for $166 million of the $319 million in taxes generated by the Metrodome from 1982-2009. While $304 million of that went directly to the state, which contributed $0 to building the Metrodome.

    The state will miss that money when they are still trying to dig themselves out of the hole they're in twenty years from now. The same legislators who drove MN into debt want to argue how to pay for a new stadium? Obviously they've been so good at spending taxpayer money up to this point.
    Oh, so you want to go there lol.


    Did you by chance happen to look up the operating costs of the dome and compare them to the revenue? Did you then also add the interest and principle on to the 1 billion dollar price tag ans see how much additional revenue they would need to float the boat?

    As a preliminary exercise I will provide a budget history for the current stadium from 2007-2009 and you can take those numbers, look at how revenue declined after the twins and gophers left, and use the revenue figures to determine how much they need to increase in oder to satisfy the new 1 billion dollar stadium. Then get back to me on what you come up with.


    http://www.msfc.com/images/dynImages/BUDGET.COVER.COMBINED.pdf

    After you turn in your homework I will post the Profit and Loss for the Metrodome over the past few years and you can show me how you are going to turn that around while increasing the debt service.
    So formo, after reading this post it sounds as if you do not care if the Vikings leave Minnesota, so long as you do not have to pay $20 extra in taxes to keep them home. No wonder the Vikings can't get a stadium built.
    How is it MILWAUKEE, WI can build a retractable stadium and Minneapolis/St. Paul cannot?
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  4. #24
    Formo's Avatar
    Formo is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    2,664

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "marshallvike" #1081514
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081341
    Quote Originally Posted by "Erinnn" #1081328
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081326
    Quote Originally Posted by "NodakPaul" #1081153
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081127
    I find it interesting that a decade into this process the vikings have yet to name the official spot they want the thing to go. What the heck have they been doing all of this time. I think bagley should be shown the door.


    And any plan with a fold back roof should get the architect tarred, feathered and ran out of town. Either have it open or closed full time. They never have them open anyway so why even have the option?
    What?

    Have you not been following the stadium issue for the past 10 years? The Vikings have had several plans that they brought to the table, all of which have falled through. Since the Anoka plan fell through, they have been struggling to find a local partner, but even then it was planned to be on the Metrodome site. Last year they were shot down in the legislature primarily becuse they did not have a local partner. The intent this year is to go back to the legislature with a local partner in place, which means they have to explore their options again.

    I do agree about the roof though. Personally I think it should be a fixed roof. Cheaper, and still usable for events outside football.
    It's one thing to put a set of drawings on the table but it is a whole different thing to put ALL of the numbers down and HOW and WHO is going to be paying for all of them. I happen to know someone in the legislature who deals with the stadium issue and they have told me the Vikings have not put together anything more than a few picture presentations and a few rough numbers. If they are serious they will have a comprehensive package and stick to it rather than just throwing out a different location or idea every other year.

    And they need to make it cheaper with potential to expand in the future- the deficit just jumped again.
    Everyone is so focused on how to pay for it now and looking at the short term issues. They seem to ignore the amount of money the state will lose when the Vikings leave, both in money spent related to the Vikings, and also income tax collected from player and employee salaries, and the taxes paid by visiting players and teams.

    In 2008, the Metrodome alone generated $18+ million not counting money spent throughout the state on merchandise, food, and liquor sales related to the Vikings, or by visitors here for game day. A study by the U of M found that the playoff game against the Cowboys alone accounted for $9.1 million in sales, 113 jobs and $3.6 million in labor income for that one day. The Vikings are responsible for $166 million of the $319 million in taxes generated by the Metrodome from 1982-2009. While $304 million of that went directly to the state, which contributed $0 to building the Metrodome.

    The state will miss that money when they are still trying to dig themselves out of the hole they're in twenty years from now. The same legislators who drove MN into debt want to argue how to pay for a new stadium? Obviously they've been so good at spending taxpayer money up to this point.
    Oh, so you want to go there lol.


    Did you by chance happen to look up the operating costs of the dome and compare them to the revenue? Did you then also add the interest and principle on to the 1 billion dollar price tag ans see how much additional revenue they would need to float the boat?

    As a preliminary exercise I will provide a budget history for the current stadium from 2007-2009 and you can take those numbers, look at how revenue declined after the twins and gophers left, and use the revenue figures to determine how much they need to increase in oder to satisfy the new 1 billion dollar stadium. Then get back to me on what you come up with.


    http://www.msfc.com/images/dynImages/BUDGET.COVER.COMBINED.pdf

    After you turn in your homework I will post the Profit and Loss for the Metrodome over the past few years and you can show me how you are going to turn that around while increasing the debt service.
    So formo, after reading this post it sounds as if you do not care if the Vikings leave Minnesota, so long as you do not have to pay $20 extra in taxes to keep them home. No wonder the Vikings can't get a stadium built.
    How is it MILWAUKEE, WI can build a retractable stadium and Minneapolis/St. Paul cannot?
    I haven't opined in this thread on how I feel this should be done, so I don't know where you got that thought.

    My post was an honest question for Floyd(UffDa?). That's all. I'm not 100% sure what his point was.

    My opinion on the stadium? While I do NOT condone more taxes, I would be willing to make that sacrifice to keep the Vikes in MN. But, fortunately for me and my political beliefs, there has been more than one option that has and/or will hit the legislature that doesn't involve additional taxes that I have been in full support off. With the Racino thing, I even sent letters to my constituents in support of it. And now with the idea of the current taxes going to pay off the Minneapolis Convention Center being moved from that once it's paid off, to being moved to help fund a new stadium.. I am in full support of that.

    Bottom line, I'll take anything as long as the Vikes stay in MN, but those are the two that I feel are absolutely win-win.
    Vegans are eating the rainforests. =(

  5. #25
    ILLvike is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    78

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Serious question, is there anything preventing them from extending the lease on the dome?

    also, is there anything that bad about playing in the dome (I really don't know, I've only been to a twins game there)

    The other thing is... Zygi's day job is being a REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER... he should know how to pull this crap off with ease if he actually wants a stadium.

    Heck, If he personally owned the stadium and the team, and developed the property in the area, what kind of bottom line would he end up with? I bet it would be a huge asset to own both stadium and team? does anyone know?

    I love the Vikings, and if they leave Minnesota, I will probably stop following the NFL, i'm sure there's more people that feel that way. How many fans would the NFL gain from the LA Vikings? would it be enough to offset the drop? IMHO probably not, fans of the LA vikings would not be by-and-large new football fans, but a combination of old vikings fans, raiders, chargers, and niners fans.
    None

  6. #26
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "JFormo" #1081436
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081341
    Quote Originally Posted by "Erinnn" #1081328
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081326
    Quote Originally Posted by "NodakPaul" #1081153
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081127
    I find it interesting that a decade into this process the vikings have yet to name the official spot they want the thing to go. What the heck have they been doing all of this time. I think bagley should be shown the door.


    And any plan with a fold back roof should get the architect tarred, feathered and ran out of town. Either have it open or closed full time. They never have them open anyway so why even have the option?
    What?

    Have you not been following the stadium issue for the past 10 years? The Vikings have had several plans that they brought to the table, all of which have falled through. Since the Anoka plan fell through, they have been struggling to find a local partner, but even then it was planned to be on the Metrodome site. Last year they were shot down in the legislature primarily becuse they did not have a local partner. The intent this year is to go back to the legislature with a local partner in place, which means they have to explore their options again.

    I do agree about the roof though. Personally I think it should be a fixed roof. Cheaper, and still usable for events outside football.
    It's one thing to put a set of drawings on the table but it is a whole different thing to put ALL of the numbers down and HOW and WHO is going to be paying for all of them. I happen to know someone in the legislature who deals with the stadium issue and they have told me the Vikings have not put together anything more than a few picture presentations and a few rough numbers. If they are serious they will have a comprehensive package and stick to it rather than just throwing out a different location or idea every other year.

    And they need to make it cheaper with potential to expand in the future- the deficit just jumped again.
    Everyone is so focused on how to pay for it now and looking at the short term issues. They seem to ignore the amount of money the state will lose when the Vikings leave, both in money spent related to the Vikings, and also income tax collected from player and employee salaries, and the taxes paid by visiting players and teams.

    In 2008, the Metrodome alone generated $18+ million not counting money spent throughout the state on merchandise, food, and liquor sales related to the Vikings, or by visitors here for game day. A study by the U of M found that the playoff game against the Cowboys alone accounted for $9.1 million in sales, 113 jobs and $3.6 million in labor income for that one day. The Vikings are responsible for $166 million of the $319 million in taxes generated by the Metrodome from 1982-2009. While $304 million of that went directly to the state, which contributed $0 to building the Metrodome.

    The state will miss that money when they are still trying to dig themselves out of the hole they're in twenty years from now. The same legislators who drove MN into debt want to argue how to pay for a new stadium? Obviously they've been so good at spending taxpayer money up to this point.
    Oh, so you want to go there lol.


    Did you by chance happen to look up the operating costs of the dome and compare them to the revenue? Did you then also add the interest and principle on to the 1 billion dollar price tag ans see how much additional revenue they would need to float the boat?

    As a preliminary exercise I will provide a budget history for the current stadium from 2007-2009 and you can take those numbers, look at how revenue declined after the twins and gophers left, and use the revenue figures to determine how much they need to increase in oder to satisfy the new 1 billion dollar stadium. Then get back to me on what you come up with.


    http://www.msfc.com/images/dynImages/BUDGET.COVER.COMBINED.pdf

    After you turn in your homework I will post the Profit and Loss for the Metrodome over the past few years and you can show me how you are going to turn that around while increasing the debt service.
    Soo.. Your point is what exactly? That the state in fact WON'T miss the money the Vikings are bringing in for them? Really?

    Or are you just arguing semantics?
    My point is simply that the current building that is paid for is not able to sustain itself with the current revenue and having the Vikings as the only tenant so I am looking for anyone to provide a business plan that would show how a new ballpark like they want to build will be able to do any better.

    Do I want the Vikings to stay? Sure. Do I want a new stadium? Sure, if they design and build one that can generate enough revenue to sustain itself and not need to be supported by those who might not feel the same way as the hard core fans. So far that part of the equation has never been addressed. I know some people are so excited to get a new facility that they would vote for anything no matter what the financial consequences are but I am not one of them. I just want to see a plan that is realistic and reasonable.

  7. #27
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,473

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "JFormo" #1081538
    Quote Originally Posted by "marshallvike" #1081514
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081341
    Quote Originally Posted by "Erinnn" #1081328
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081326
    Quote Originally Posted by "NodakPaul" #1081153
    Quote Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1081127
    I find it interesting that a decade into this process the vikings have yet to name the official spot they want the thing to go. What the heck have they been doing all of this time. I think bagley should be shown the door.


    And any plan with a fold back roof should get the architect tarred, feathered and ran out of town. Either have it open or closed full time. They never have them open anyway so why even have the option?
    What?

    Have you not been following the stadium issue for the past 10 years? The Vikings have had several plans that they brought to the table, all of which have falled through. Since the Anoka plan fell through, they have been struggling to find a local partner, but even then it was planned to be on the Metrodome site. Last year they were shot down in the legislature primarily becuse they did not have a local partner. The intent this year is to go back to the legislature with a local partner in place, which means they have to explore their options again.

    I do agree about the roof though. Personally I think it should be a fixed roof. Cheaper, and still usable for events outside football.
    It's one thing to put a set of drawings on the table but it is a whole different thing to put ALL of the numbers down and HOW and WHO is going to be paying for all of them. I happen to know someone in the legislature who deals with the stadium issue and they have told me the Vikings have not put together anything more than a few picture presentations and a few rough numbers. If they are serious they will have a comprehensive package and stick to it rather than just throwing out a different location or idea every other year.

    And they need to make it cheaper with potential to expand in the future- the deficit just jumped again.
    Everyone is so focused on how to pay for it now and looking at the short term issues. They seem to ignore the amount of money the state will lose when the Vikings leave, both in money spent related to the Vikings, and also income tax collected from player and employee salaries, and the taxes paid by visiting players and teams.

    In 2008, the Metrodome alone generated $18+ million not counting money spent throughout the state on merchandise, food, and liquor sales related to the Vikings, or by visitors here for game day. A study by the U of M found that the playoff game against the Cowboys alone accounted for $9.1 million in sales, 113 jobs and $3.6 million in labor income for that one day. The Vikings are responsible for $166 million of the $319 million in taxes generated by the Metrodome from 1982-2009. While $304 million of that went directly to the state, which contributed $0 to building the Metrodome.

    The state will miss that money when they are still trying to dig themselves out of the hole they're in twenty years from now. The same legislators who drove MN into debt want to argue how to pay for a new stadium? Obviously they've been so good at spending taxpayer money up to this point.
    Oh, so you want to go there lol.


    Did you by chance happen to look up the operating costs of the dome and compare them to the revenue? Did you then also add the interest and principle on to the 1 billion dollar price tag ans see how much additional revenue they would need to float the boat?

    As a preliminary exercise I will provide a budget history for the current stadium from 2007-2009 and you can take those numbers, look at how revenue declined after the twins and gophers left, and use the revenue figures to determine how much they need to increase in oder to satisfy the new 1 billion dollar stadium. Then get back to me on what you come up with.


    http://www.msfc.com/images/dynImages/BUDGET.COVER.COMBINED.pdf

    After you turn in your homework I will post the Profit and Loss for the Metrodome over the past few years and you can show me how you are going to turn that around while increasing the debt service.
    So formo, after reading this post it sounds as if you do not care if the Vikings leave Minnesota, so long as you do not have to pay $20 extra in taxes to keep them home. No wonder the Vikings can't get a stadium built.
    How is it MILWAUKEE, WI can build a retractable stadium and Minneapolis/St. Paul cannot?
    I haven't opined in this thread on how I feel this should be done, so I don't know where you got that thought.

    My post was an honest question for Floyd(UffDa?). That's all. I'm not 100% sure what his point was.

    My opinion on the stadium? While I do NOT condone more taxes, I would be willing to make that sacrifice to keep the Vikes in MN. But, fortunately for me and my political beliefs, there has been more than one option that has and/or will hit the legislature that doesn't involve additional taxes that I have been in full support off. With the Racino thing, I even sent letters to my constituents in support of it. And now with the idea of the current taxes going to pay off the Minneapolis Convention Center being moved from that once it's paid off, to being moved to help fund a new stadium.. I am in full support of that.

    Bottom line, I'll take anything as long as the Vikes stay in MN, but those are the two that I feel are absolutely win-win.
    Guess I misunderstood your post. It sounded like an argument against a stadium.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

  8. #28
    RK.'s Avatar
    RK.
    RK. is offline Ring of Fame Rally Cross II Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4,461

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Did anyone catch the comment during the game today about there being two offers from different LA groups trying to bring the Vikes to LA? You guys in MN better get it done or you won't have a team after next year. Wilf will run out of offers to the state pretty soon.

    WWBGD

  9. #29
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    Quote Originally Posted by "RK." #1081592
    Did anyone catch the comment during the game today about there being two offers from different LA groups trying to bring the Vikes to LA? You guys in MN better get it done or you won't have a team after next year. Wilf will run out of offers to the state pretty soon.
    We've been talking about that for about a week. There's a thread about it.

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

  10. #30
    RK.'s Avatar
    RK.
    RK. is offline Ring of Fame Rally Cross II Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4,461

    Re: Vikings working on plan for publicly owned stadium

    LOL I missed that one I guess. So many threads so little time.

    WWBGD

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. allow more publicly owned teams
    By Reverend Conehead in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 02-21-2011, 03:31 PM
  2. Stadium commission spins Vikings plan around the state
    By NodakPaul in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-23-2007, 10:21 PM
  3. A damper on Vikings stadium plan in Blaine
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 07-22-2006, 12:47 PM
  4. The First Stadium To Be Publicly-Financed?
    By Benet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-23-2006, 09:56 PM
  5. Vikings, Anoka County ready to announce stadium plan
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-20-2005, 05:19 AM

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
  •