JUGGERNAUT

Is the parking going up too?

I've made the assumption that the White Sox are as adept as the Cub at hiding revenue. So I assume team reported revenue is that which they can't hide: revenue derived from admissions. That would include parking.

Simply put the White Sox averaged $57.19 in revenue per patron in 2001. The Cub averaged $47.13. If not parking revenue then what else explains that disparity? More evidence there is no 3rd party company. iit.edu/~parking/student.html If there was a 3rd party involved they would have been mentioned. This is a deal worked between the White Sox & the school.

Wrong again. She corrected her figure based on her assumption that the White Sox are getting at most 50% of that revenue. That's her belief & she has been able to offer ZERO proof to back it up. In contrast I used reported revenue & attendance figures from both teams to show that the White Sox have a higher per patron revenue figure than the Cubs. This can only be explained with a revenue source the White Sox benefit greatly from that the Cubs do not have. That narrows it down to parking revenue.

Gay-marriage issue: The government should get out of marriage altogether. Whether a community decides to recognize your marriage & offer you perks for it should be up to the community. It shoudn't be a federal or state mandate. The marriage tax credit? Do away with it. It's was past it's date of retirement. The vast majority of childless marriages are two income households. Why do they need a tax credit? Instead of the marriage tax credit, double up the credit for claiming a dependant in the household. As for insurance .. well you know my stance on that. Do away with blood & marriage relations being the basis for who is & is not coverable. Friends should be able to insure one another. Intelligent Design issue: I have thought long & hard on this issue & believe it should not be considered taboo to separate that which remains a mystery from that which is considered a sound scientific theory. What remains a mystery is whether are Universe is the result of chaos converging into order or a creator. There are many people who can argue both sides of that debate including myself. There is no right answer & there is no mathematical basis to choose one over the other. In the end what you belief is predominantly based on faith. What you choose to believe. No government or educational body should create a position that denegrades or exalts either side. So where this debate should be leading is that school's have an obligation to inform students at what mysteries & questions remain in science with respect to biology. It's fine to mention God, aliens or what not but inform children that such topics are not covered in the biology class. Such topics will simply be treated as mysteries & nothing more. There is nothing wrong with pointing out the weaknesses in evolution & recent scientific findings relating to them.

I've read it & read about the hydrino before. It's bunk. The way the article reads you get the impression that they've actually measured or observed the electron being that close. They have not. His proof that he's done that lies in his mathematical equations which as you have read above are severely flawed. This reminds me of Einstein's first mention of cold fusion. It too included flawed mathematics. I'm pretty open-minded so maybe there is some supernatural force at work here. Maybe that's why some think he's on to something. I can accept within reason that supernatural forces would work outside of our current day realm of mathematics. But if it's strictly a natural force the equations better add up. It reminds me of the guy that continues to write books believing he has discovered the GUT. His mathematics don't hold up either. The quest for the GUT continues.

1910??? That's an OLLLLLLLD house.

How easily some of you are mislead: Robertson: "If there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city." Yet somehow you translate that to Robertson wanting disaster to fall upon that city. The absence of logic drives the people to insanity. See France.

Says who? As long as it's bigger than us there's nothing we can't out-think & destroy. It's the smaller stuff that gets the better of us. If not for a handful of miraculous people in our history we would have become extinct long ago.

This is not a heckle. It might do the DNC a wealth of good to actually develop some ideas that appeal to campaign contributors. The unions & lawyers don't seem to be enough any more.

Talk about bulking up? This guy was so juiced if you pinched him you could fill a glass!

Are all the concessions going up as well? Did Boston or LAA do this after won? What about the Marlins?

I know it's my fault for reading what you write but I'm not surprised that you have digressed down to personal attacks. As for proving me wrong, well let's see: 1) You have never provided a shred of evidence that a 3rd party company is getting the lion's share of parking revenue. 2) If we assume that the White Sox are getting the lion's share then your own math has proven it's an 8 figure revenue stream. Unit wise that represents 10's of millions. Recall: 1's, 10's, 100's .. etc. 3) You are completely befuddled by how ISFA bonds work. Yep. You sure did prove me wrong

If Frank doesn't resign with the World Champions he will sign with a team OUTSIDE of the ALC. This is a no-brainer. They have more money than the White Sox. If Frank is healthy enough just about any contender with $ to spend will look at him: BAL, TOR, SEA, TEX, & OAK. Frank won't settle for a non-contender. My guess is that it will come down to BAL & CWS for Frank again & he will choose the CWS. As for the rest I am wondering where he thinks BOS became the NYY's. Signing both PK & Damon at inflated prices (BOS will have to pay above market prices) will cost BOS about $120M. For 2006 it will add probably $25M to their payroll & that will likely be the lowest cost for these two guys in that contract. Unless Manny is shopped there is no way this is happening. In reference to the Cub, they are bidding against just about everyone for Giles. I don't see them as the victors in that. As for Furcal it's possible. I don't think the big spenders are interested in adding him at SS & I don't think he's willing to convert to CF just to play for the NYY. Then again I don't see too many teams willing to spend $50M on a mid 700 OPS player. So if the NYY's are the only one he might make that switch. Looking into my crystal ball I see Furcal signing with the A's. Once the reality of his value sets in with him & his agent I think the A's will look like a nice fit for him.

The answer is no. I'm not sacrificing defense at CF for more pop in the lineup.

Frank turned down more $ from BAL to stay with the CWS. I'm sure BAL will outbid MIN for his services again. Odds are if Frank is healthy enough to play he is going to turn down BAL again to stay with the CWS.

It does look like corp Chicago is stepping up to the plate. I think the suites & other high priced admissions are even more important than individual ticket sales. But I am surprised that they chose to go the general route rather than the premium route. They still play in the ALC & they are still going to struggle to draw against the Tiggers & Roys. I think it might have been a better strategy to raise prices for premium games such as BOS, NYY, STL, & the CUB. They play the NLC next year & I think they could have charged exorbant prices for these games if they wanted to. The revenue they could have generated from these games would have exceeded what they will get from their entire home schedule against either the Roys or the Tiggers. Any word on 2 for 1 Tuesdays?

As merchandise goes I've got to get my hands on that cookie jar. I hope there are dish towels, napkin holders, & other such kitchen amenities available. It would be cool to deck the whole kitchen out in Sox stuff.

Bonds 101: A company issues a bond to raise cash. The bond is a debt service. A promise to pay a rate of return when the maturity rate is reached on each level of the bond. That rate of return is determined by the colladeral backing the bond. Obviously the higher the rate of return the greater the appeal of the bond. The previous bonds for New Comiskey park were backed by new taxes & tax revenues. This new bond is backed by a reduction in expenditures for the ISFA. Originally the White Sox did attempt to raise the money themselves. But the best they could get on the basis of their own & US Cellular's credit rating was $30M. This would not cover the cost of the renovations. So the ISFA stepped in & issued a new bond that raised $42.5M. That more than covered the cost of renovations. No new taxes or sources of tax revenue were used to secure that bond. The promise to pay the rate of return on those bonds as they mature has been backed primarily from the reduction in expenditures for the ISFA by eliminating the fee to the White Sox for park maintenance. The only risk that is involved is if the White Sox should become insolvent & the ISFA can not find a new tenant that would continue to absorb that cost. I do not believe the ISFA will issue yet another bond for any future renovations such as RF porch. With the franchise value of the White Sox now pegged at $300M the credit rating of the team has greatly improved. They should be able to raise the funds themselves.

This is also gives both the ISFA & CWS room to renegotiate as the CWS are worth much more now than they were in 2003. The CWS might be willing to pay more rent in exchange for re-couping the maintenance fees. The ISFA might be willing to re-instate that expense in exchange for getting a bigger pc of post-season action.

I have all the details now thanks to Crain's: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/mag...003-04-05&rel=1 Under the agreement, ISFA will service the debt on the bonds with money saved on annual maintenance fees it formerly paid the White Sox. So here's how it adds up: The $1.24M the Sox are paying thru 2007 is paying for the first first phases of the renovations. Those renovations were paid for thru a different bond issuance. Marc Ganis of SportsCorp Ltd., a Chicago consulting firm: "There's no question (ISFA) is a major reason the team is viable. They're also the reason the team isn't in St. Petersburg. That's why (ISFA) exists." The White Sox extended it's stadium lease from 2011 thru 2026 as part of the financing agreement. The 2004 ISFA report states it's 2029. Bringing this up to date to 2005: It looks like the Bond proceeds came to $42.5M. It looks like the park maintenance fee came to $3.7M in 2004. It looks like the CWS was responsible for park maintenance all this time. The cost for the latest renovations will probably be in the 2005 report. This expenditure will likely be removed from that report. That fee was worth $2.7M in 2002 so it's probably worth over $4M in 2005. That appears to be how the CWS are paying for the cost of renovations. The ISFA would then recoup the bond cost in 2015-2016. They will have doubled their savings prior to the least expiring in 2029.

It's a good question & I don't have the answer. US Cellular doesn't show up any where in the ledgers. Nor does this money show up as revenue coming from the White Sox. There is this: In 2003, the Authority and the Team agreed that the Team could license to United StatesCellular Corporation the naming rights for the New Comiskey Park. In turn, the Authority and the Team reached agreement on certain changes and modifications including the extension of the term of the Management Agreement from 2010 until 2029, a plan and project list for construction, and the method for financing the improvements via a bond issuance and a corresponding maintenance subsidy reduction to cover the debt service. The way I'm reading this is that the licensing revenue is going to the White Sox & the $1.24M the Sox now owe each year has been extended through 2029. That total comes to $34.72M. That's very close to the asset value they are listing for stadium improvements to date. The ledger entries referring to the bond issuance support this. But for 2005 I believe that the corresponding maintenance subsidy is going to show the bulk of the added expenses.

Page 4 The Authority managed $60M in rennovations (financed in large part with funds made available from the renaming of the facility).

Steff, I'm not sure how they are doing the accounting of it but they do have the total value of the improvements listed in the long-term assets: $35,865,159. I'll open the pdf & see if I can find where it adds up.

I don't know what your referring to put there are at least two references to renovations in the report. 1 is a charge of $1.24M from 2001 to 2007. The other is up front in the Message from the Chairman. It doesn't even mention the White Sox. It mentions 83 new jobs & the project being completed within budget. It's common knowledge the White Sox are paying for the renovations from the money being paid by US Cellular for naming rights.