Dolphins bash Florida Legislature for failing to pass stadium bill | Page 4 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Dolphins bash Florida Legislature for failing to pass stadium bill

dlockz said:
In reality there are not a ton of cities that want to take on the cost of luring an NFl team there. Hell LA how long they been talking about a new stadium. Chicago supposedly wants another NFL team and build a new stadium but although the taxpayers are still taking a huge hit on paying for 2003 renovations

At the time, the agency provided more than $400 million toward the $600 million project, which included some money for work at U.S. Cellular Field. The ISFA increased its debt, but the city agreed to cough up the extra money if hotel tax revenue fell short. Soldier Field reopened in 2003, but cost overruns made the total for the entire project about $690 million and a Tribune analysis showed the public portion was actually $432 million.
Click to expand...
You would be surprised bro. Miami is a very well traveled team as I see that here in San Diego and when we went to Arizona several years ago. That fan that comes in to the city spends on hotels, entertainment and eats in the restaurants.
 
Fin Fan in Cali said:
If that is a concern then you put it back on the Dolphins for any over runs as a concession to get this done as a win for the community and the team.
Click to expand...

That's my point. There has been no talk of that. What's not agreed to in writing will not be the responsibility of the owner. There has been zero talk of who will be responsible for cost overruns. That's how other deals in Miami have been done before and the city gets screwed.
 
dlockz said:
I wish that people would heed that advice, thanks for putting that out there .
Click to expand...
Bro it is all good. If we, you, I or anyone else is hitting a nerve with someone, please take a break from it rather than to continue to persist in a heated or a thread that is close to the heart. We are here to keep the peace and enjoying respectful debate between brothers.
 
dlockz said:
Here are two papers on super bowl and stadium financing impact by someone with no stake in game

http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/hcx/Matheson_SuperBowl09.pdf

His finding The Super Bowl is America‟s premier sporting event. This paper details basic economic
facts about the game as examines the controversy surrounding the purported economic impact of
the game on host communities. While the league and sports boosters claim that the game brings
up to a $500 million economic impact to host cities, a review of the literature suggests that the
true economic impact is a fraction of this amount.

http://college.holycross.edu/RePEc/hcx/Matheson-Baade_FinancingSports.pdf

Interesting paper on financing of stadium.

Also isnt the same group that estimated economic impact for the marlins the ones that came up with the numbers for the dolphins. I have heard this no exact proof though.

Also on economic impac
PricewaterhouseCoopers has estimated the economic impact of multiple Super Bowls. According to its analysis, direct visitor spending has ranged from a low of close to $120 million in Detroit in 2006, to high of about $200 million in Dallas/Fort Worth in 2011. The firm (which wasn’t paid by the Host Committee) projected $185 million in economic impact for the New Orleans Super Bowl held earlier this year.
Click to expand...

So D ... keep in mind that I'm in NC and all I know is what I read AND I'm not a big government/private venture guy. Nor am I a wealth envy or rich basher guy.

With the info you're giving us ... do you believe there is a number that the local government could provide to Ross that would be more acceptable as a partnership? I mean, like PBO is fond of saying that everyone should have "skin in the game" ... should Miami-Dade have any skin in the game at all in your estimation? Is there a tipping point in the possible partnership where you would see a true benefit to the tax payer and the team?
 
Fin Fan in Cali said:
If that is a concern then you put it back on the Dolphins for any over runs as a concession to get this done as a win for the community and the team.
Click to expand...

The issue is not dead its just dead for this session.
Im serious here because I respect you as a poster. Dont you think it would have been more prudent to start addressing this issue futher in advance. THis issue didnt just come up. San Francisco had been working on their deal for a while, Houston which just built their stadium in 2000 have played in it only a decade had to renovate their scoreboards and have already got that set up. Why did Ross wait till a few months before NFL decision on a super bowl. Not sure how pointing that out makes me a bad fan
 
dlockz said:
The issue is not dead its just dead for this session.
Im serious here because I respect you as a poster. Dont you think it would have been more prudent to start addressing this issue futher in advance. THis issue didnt just come up. San Francisco had been working on their deal for a while, Houston which just built their stadium in 2000 have played in it only a decade had to renovate their scoreboards and have already got that set up. Why did Ross wait till a few months before NFL decision on a super bowl. Not sure how pointing that out makes me a bad fan
Click to expand...
Bro I understand the short sided timing on this, and I don't know Mr. Ross' side of this, but yes it would be more beneficial if there were more time. You also got to question the legislature as if they had questions why didn't they set up a meeting with the Dolphin representatives to get this out in the open and answer any questions there may be. I don't want to see Miami be like San Diego is now, not a chance to host a Super Bowl until a new Stadium is done.

We must be careful to not think Miami won't move. Chicago is looking for a second team for a new stadium deal, the LA opportunity is still there for a possible SD/Mia two team stadium, and yes San Antonio wants a team as well.
 
dlockz said:
The issue is not dead its just dead for this session.
Im serious here because I respect you as a poster. Dont you think it would have been more prudent to start addressing this issue futher in advance. THis issue didnt just come up. San Francisco had been working on their deal for a while, Houston which just built their stadium in 2000 have played in it only a decade had to renovate their scoreboards and have already got that set up. Why did Ross wait till a few months before NFL decision on a super bowl. Not sure how pointing that out makes me a bad fan
Click to expand...

I think that might have to do with Ross still getting his feet wet as an owner. I have this sneaky feeling that his lingering football ignorance is a residual effect from placing to much faith in football operations in Parcells and overestimating how much influence Parcells had with the league.
 
finomenal said:
I would love that but it's not as important to me as burdening the city of Miami with yet another debt due to a publicly funded stadium.
Click to expand...
They need to work through this. I don't think the Dolphins will do a deal like Marlins did. At the end of the day both sides can say they really gave it all they could. If the team were to be sold and leaves, then nothing wasn't left on the table that could of avoided that.
 
NCFINFAN13 said:
So D ... keep in mind that I'm in NC and all I know is what I read AND I'm not a big government/private venture guy. Nor am I a wealth envy or rich basher guy.

With the info you're giving us ... do you believe there is a number that the local government could provide to Ross that would be more acceptable as a partnership? I mean, like PBO is fond of saying that everyone should have "skin in the game" ... should Miami-Dade have any skin in the game at all in your estimation? Is there a tipping point in the possible partnership where you would see a true benefit to the tax payer and the team?
Click to expand...

I have never said there is not a benefit. I do believe its more of a quality of life thing to have an NFL team and that provides value also. super Bowls do have very good economic impact among the best but it is a two week impact. The BCS Bowl thing I dont even factor because Miami has always been a player in a major bowl and the way the system is will get its share of Championship games that wont really change either way. I have always said a 33 percent relationship. Now the Dolphins claimed they were paying 70 percent but none of the numbers have added up . Ross's numbers never seem to add up anyway.
quote by ross showing how he tends to not have his facts straight
I've spent more on professional sports teams than anybody else in the United States," Ross said at the conference, where he was joined by officials from the University of Miami, the Orange Bowl and the Super Bowl Host Committee

Actually The Los Angeles Dodgers ownership spent much more than he did, basically twice as much.
 
NCFINFAN13 said:
I think that might have to do with Ross still getting his feet wet as an owner. I have this sneaky feeling that his lingering football ignorance is a residual effect from placing to much faith in football operations in Parcells and overestimating how much influence Parcells had with the league.
Click to expand...

He is a big time businessman he knows how legislation works. We cannot keep blaming PArcells for everything.
 
Fin Fan in Cali said:
Bro I understand the short sided timing on this, and I don't know Mr. Ross' side of this, but yes it would be more beneficial if there were more time. You also got to question the legislature as if they had questions why didn't they set up a meeting with the Dolphin representatives to get this out in the open and answer any questions there may be. I don't want to see Miami be like San Diego is now, not a chance to host a Super Bowl until a new Stadium is done.

We must be careful to not think Miami won't move. Chicago is looking for a second team for a new stadium deal, the LA opportunity is still there for a possible SD/Mia two team stadium, and yes San Antonio wants a team as well.
Click to expand...
Chicago is still hurting from renovating their one stadium and taxpayers are not going to pay for another stadium right now esp with their bed tax having shortfalls that the taxpayer is making up at first without them even knowing.
LA hasnt supported any football team and speaking of economic crunch they are having to renovate the Dodgers stadium and how long have they talked about building this stadium.
As for San Antonio they have to renovate that stadium if they get an NFL team . So lets see move to a new city then have to renovate the stadium for about 200 million plus im pretty sure that San Antonio is not just going to give away all profit from stadium to a new owner like the deal that an owner has in Miami.

In all these scenarios Ross will either be paying out more money or taking a hit for selling a team to an owner that will move them paying for a stadium he will never use.

So next city

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:02 PM ----------

Here are the exact numbers as I under stand them

ow much would the county pay?

Miami-Dade would pay the Dolphins a maximum of about $289 million over 26 years, in monthly payments. The Dolphins have also asked state lawmakers for an additional $90 million over 30 years, as an annual $3 million sales-tax rebate. Since the 1990s, Sun Life has received an annual $2 million state sales-tax subsidy to retrofit the facilities for baseball. The Marlins left the stadium in 2011, and the subsidy ends in 2023.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/04/13/3342759/a-breakdown-of-the-miami-dolphins.html#storylink=cpy

Then there is the 150 million loan from nfl. Where did this 70 percent number come from
 
dlockz said:
I have never said there is not a benefit. I do believe its more of a quality of life thing to have an NFL team and that provides value also. super Bowls do have very good economic impact among the best but it is a two week impact. The BCS Bowl thing I dont even factor because Miami has always been a player in a major bowl and the way the system is will get its share of Championship games that wont really change either way. I have always said a 33 percent relationship. Now the Dolphins claimed they were paying 70 percent but none of the numbers have added up . Ross's numbers never seem to add up anyway.
quote by ross showing how he tends to not have his facts straight
I've spent more on professional sports teams than anybody else in the United States," Ross said at the conference, where he was joined by officials from the University of Miami, the Orange Bowl and the Super Bowl Host Committee

Actually The Los Angeles Dodgers ownership spent much more than he did, basically twice as much.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I have a better understanding of your position now. I'll give him a pass on the snafu with the Dodger ownership though ... I mean if he's top two or three, that's not too shabby.

So if his numbers were at or close to that 67% or his claimed 70% in reality, this would be a different issue for you. I understand your concern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom