caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 1 hour ago, ron883 said: The guy could be looking at a presidential run in 2028 if he wants. A governor (Dem) with national ambitions (if forced to choose) would side with the Bears over the White Sox simply from a popularity/pragmatic standpoint of alienating the least amount of voters. A traditional Republican would or should choose neither. But defining Republican values on both a state local and Federal level is absolutely anyone's guess at this point. (Of course a certain former leader's modus operandi was that any government benefit or tax handout that benefitted him in any way was fair game and 100% written and codified there by legislators in order to be fully exploited by the billionaire class.) But I believe in the end, with Sox vs. Bears, we're well beyond the traditional perspectives of politics on this one. And the Bears did get the last handout...if we are looking at this objectively. Edited February 24 by caulfield12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 8 hours ago, Lightly Folded said: The Allen Brothers who owned the team from 1961 to 1975 were the worst owners I ever witnessed. Actually John Allen screwed his brother out of his shares and took sole ownership from 1969 until the end in 1975. Sorry I called you a Cubs fan. Obviously your not. Allyn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 7 hours ago, Lip Man 1 said: History lesson time: First off the Sox had eight winning seasons (including back-to-back-back seasons from 63-65 with 90+ wins) and a .500 season under their watch. Second John Allyn TWICE saved the franchise from being moved. Art had a handshake agreement with (Proud To Be Your) "Bud" Selig who was moving them to Milwaukee. John insisted that if Art wanted to do this he'd have to bring it up and get approval from the Artnell Company Board of Directors. Art decided not to do that (who knows why) and sold the team to him. Then instead of selling the club to Seattle interests, who were going to move the franchise so that MLB would have the lawsuits settled from Washington State, King County and the city of Seattle over the Pilots move, he kept the club and sold it to Bill Veeck instead. The original MLB plan was for the Sox to move to Seattle and Charlie Finley was bringing the A's to Chicago. The Allyn's had their faults but they were far from the worst owners. Art Allyn wanted to build a new White Sox stadium in 1967 at Roosevelt and Clark. He was going to pay for it. The City of Chicago (Mayor Daley) wouldn't give him the permits to build the stadium. s 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 In our forthcoming Brookings book, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes, we and 15 collaborators examine the local economic development argument from all angles: case studies of the effect of specific facilities, as well as comparisons among cities and even neighborhoods that have and have not sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into sports development. In every case, the conclusions are the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus. As noted, a stadium can spur economic growth if sports is a significant export industry—that is, if it attracts outsiders to buy the local product and if it results in the sale of certain rights (broadcasting, product licensing) to national firms. But, in reality, sports has little effect on regional net exports. Sports facilities attract neither tourists nor new industry. Probably the most successful export facility is Oriole Park, where about a third of the crowd at every game comes from outside the Baltimore area. (Baltimore’s baseball exports are enhanced because it is 40 miles from the nation’s capital, which has no major league baseball team.) Even so, the net gain to Baltimore’s economy in terms of new jobs and incremental tax revenues is only about $3 million a year—not much of a return on a $200 million investment. This was from a Brookings Institute study from the late 90’s…after the first wave of new stadiums around the country. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/#:~:text=In every case%2C the conclusions,a reasonable return on investment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) Public funds used for a stadium or arena can generate new revenues for a city only if one of the following situations occurs: 1) the funds generate new spending by people from outside the area who otherwise would not have come to town; 2) the funds cause area residents to spend money locally that would not have been spent there otherwise (opportunity cost) or 3) the funds keep turning over locally, thereby "creating" new spending. Very little evidence exists to suggest that sporting events are better at attracting tourism dollars to a city than other activities. More often than not, tourists who attend a baseball or hockey game, for example, are in town on business or are visiting family and would have spent the money on another activity if the sports outlet were not otherwise made available. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities#:~:text=Public funds used for a,that would not have been Scholarly econometric studies on the impact of professional sports stadiums are almost unanimous in their conclusion that they do not promote employment or per capita income growth (see here and here). Econofact Edited February 24 by caulfield12 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 So in the end we’re left with very hard to quantify ideas like “value to the city of Chicago…regional pride…being a two team market” along with NY, Balt/Washington, LA and SF/Oakland. Balta’s arguments are more about utilizing the property itself…how that would benefit the City of Chicago and South Loop area more than the negative externality of a deserted or torn down stadium at 35th and Shields/Bridgeport and how those areas taken up by parking lots could be repurposed. Chicago Fire to GRF has to be part of that. We’ve seen articles about the massive costs involved with tearing down facilities being greater than the original construction, for example. Lawrence Holmes keeps arguing about new traffic problems as well as lack of adequate parking/tailgating at the proposed location and damage to the Bridgeport area itself…which has 50% already been accomplished by Reinsdorf and Family diminishing the fanbase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Hit Men Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 8 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: Public funds used for a stadium or arena can generate new revenues for a city only if one of the following situations occurs: 1) the funds generate new spending by people from outside the area who otherwise would not have come to town; 2) the funds cause area residents to spend money locally that would not have been spent there otherwise (opportunity cost) or 3) the funds keep turning over locally, thereby "creating" new spending. Very little evidence exists to suggest that sporting events are better at attracting tourism dollars to a city than other activities. More often than not, tourists who attend a baseball or hockey game, for example, are in town on business or are visiting family and would have spent the money on another activity if the sports outlet were not otherwise made available. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities#:~:text=Public funds used for a,that would not have been Scholarly econometric studies on the impact of professional sports stadiums are almost unanimous in their conclusion that they do not promote employment or per capita income growth (see here and here). Econofact Same with those repulsive casinos in seemingly every suburban grocery store, barber shop and beef stand, or the large casinos. Money that would be spent on other entertainment options are siphoned into a machine one twenty or c-note at a time. My favorite beef place and Italian grocery store put machines in this month (in neighboring Harwood Heights). Potterville in It's a Wonderful Life seems so quaint. People need to shift their economic activity from these worldwide corporations to local shops, businesses, banks and credit unions, etc. I don't have or use an app for anything beyond downloading for a plane ticket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliSoxFanViaSWside Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 16 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said: I didn’t realize that this many Sox fans care more about Jerry losing than the organization actually winning. That's part of the problem. All of a sudden after being Chairman/Owner of the Sox for over 40 years NOW he's worried about his legacy ? He's already had a long time to build his legacy , after all he's the one who created it. Oh you poor ,dear Sox fans, you're going to lose your franchise unless Uncle Jerry saves you. Let me translate that . I'm worried that my heirs will not be able to eventually sell the team for a massive profit unless they get a sweetheart deal which not only includes a new ball park but a whole White Sox based tourist attraction. I've driven away most Sox fans so the only ones left to exploit are tourists. No Sox fan trusts Reinsdorf to actually deliver on any promise he makes that he says will make the Sox more competitive. He's been in the easiest division to win for 4 decades and couldn't figure out how to do it. Oh in my declining years I've been visited by 3 ghosts like Ebenezer Scrooge that said there was still time to change my legacy. God bless us every one ! Thank you Jerry Reinsdorf ! Thank you ! 2 1 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 25 minutes ago, CaliSoxFanViaSWside said: That's part of the problem. All of a sudden after being Chairman/Owner of the Sox for over 40 years NOW he's worried about his legacy ? He's already had a long time to build his legacy , after all he's the one who created it. Oh you poor ,dear Sox fans, you're going to lose your franchise unless Uncle Jerry saves you. Let me translate that . I'm worried that my heirs will not be able to eventually sell the team for a massive profit unless they get a sweetheart deal which not only includes a new ball park but a whole White Sox based tourist attraction. I've driven away most Sox fans so the only ones left to exploit are tourists. No Sox fan trusts Reinsdorf to actually deliver on any promise he makes that he says will make the Sox more competitive. He's been in the easiest division to win for 4 decades and couldn't figure out how to do it. Oh in my declining years I've been visited by 3 ghosts like Ebenezer Scrooge that said there was still time to change my legacy. God bless us every one ! Thank you Jerry Reinsdorf ! Thank you ! The best one is that three million in attendance will somehow magically make Ohtani and Yamamoto deals a realistic possibility…well, that’s just dumb because the Bulls are historically Top 3 in attendance and have signed how many true superstars since the Dynasty was disbanded? Zach LaVine’s the only guy (internally) signed to a massive deal and that’s already turned into an albatross contract. They let Butler go instead of paying him. Rose and Ball eliminated themselves with injuries. D-Wade is the closest but that was already too late in his career…like numerous HoF guys the White Sox have brought in during their final 2-3 seasons. Edited February 24 by caulfield12 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panerista Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 30 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: The best one is that three million in attendance will somehow magically make Ohtani and Yamamoto deals a realistic possibility…well, that’s just dumb because the Bulls are historically Top 3 in attendance and have signed how many true superstars since the Dynasty was disbanded? Zach LaVine’s the only guy (internally) signed to a massive deal and that’s already turned into an albatross contract. They let Butler go instead of paying him. Rose and Ball eliminated themselves with injuries. D-Wade is the closest but that was already too late in his career…like numerous HoF guys the White Sox have brought in during their final 2-3 seasons. Well said. Most Reinsdorf money is dumb money even when he does spend. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBWSF Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 The owners of the Rays agreed to pay over $600 million towards their new stadium. The owners of the A's agreed to pay over $400 million towards their new Vegas stadium. I would think by spending that much money they would be part owners of those stadiums. If JR gives millions of dollars towards the South Loop stadium I would like to think the stadium will be built. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 8 minutes ago, WBWSF said: The owners of the Rays agreed to pay over $600 million towards their new stadium. The owners of the A's agreed to pay over $400 million towards their new Vegas stadium. I would think by spending that much money they would be part owners of those stadiums. If JR gives millions of dollars towards the South Loop stadium I would like to think the stadium will be built. Right, the Rays are one of the poorest teams but smartest with how to maximize resources allocated. $650 million and $650 million public and Rays’ split. That’s noteworthy since it is currently the biggest government subsidy for any baseball team…in a market where they’ve struggled but consistently produced winners. Some combination of Lowe, Rosario, Paredes, Taylor Walls and Curtis Mead…will somehow end up replacing a supposed generational SS in Wander Franco. Eventually Junior Caminero (acquired from fellow low budget Cleveland) might even make everyone forget about Franco, his countryman, even. The beat goes on. If the White Sox had Robert or Montgomery removed from their organization (with no return/compensation)…they would be TOTALLY dead in the water, if they aren't already. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 JR said the team will be worth more moving out of state.How does moving from one rental to another increase the teams worth if you don’t own anything? The ask is $4 billion. JR doesn’t just want the state to build him a ballpark, he needs them to build him a hotel and bars and restaurants which will all be rent free and he will be in charge of the cash registers. Hopefully, after that, others will want to fill the rest of the 78 up. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 5 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: JR said the team will be worth more moving out of state.How does moving from one rental to another increase the teams worth if you don’t own anything? The ask is $4 billion. JR doesn’t just want the state to build him a ballpark, he needs them to build him a hotel and bars and restaurants which will all be rent free and he will be in charge of the cash registers. Hopefully, after that, others will want to fill the rest of the 78 up. Where did he ask for $4B? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: Where did he ask for $4B? 2 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: Where did he ask for $4B? In Springfield for phase one. Ballpark, infrastructure, hotel and bars and restaurants. Reinsdorf, who met with lawmakers during a visit to Springfield this week, says that the total cost of the first phase of the ballpark project in the South Loop could hit $4 billion, and that the Sox would seek public funding to complete the project, according to the interview. Edited February 24 by Dick Allen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 Just now, Dick Allen said: In Springfield for phase one. Ballpark, infrastructure, hotel and bars and restaurants. Didn’t he say that was the total cost of the first phase of development? I’m pretty sure he’s only asking for funding for the park itself and infrastructure for the general area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 “There’s just not a lot of money to be made with investments like this … I’ve always looked at the ownership of a baseball franchise as a public trust, maybe even a charitable thing, I’m serious about that. I never did forgive Walter O’Malley for moving the Dodgers from Brooklyn to Los Angeles.” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 19 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: In Springfield for phase one. Ballpark, infrastructure, hotel and bars and restaurants. Reinsdorf, who met with lawmakers during a visit to Springfield this week, says that the total cost of the first phase of the ballpark project in the South Loop could hit $4 billion, and that the Sox would seek public funding to complete the project, according to the interview. That does not suggest he’s looking for them to cover the full $4B 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan18 Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 12 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: That does not suggest he’s looking for them to cover the full $4B Not in the slightest. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 14 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said: That does not suggest he’s looking for them to cover the full $4B Yes, but if we keep repeating that it's a $4B handout directly to Jerry Reinsdorf, then it becomes true, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 Just now, 77 Hitmen said: Yes, but if we keep repeating that it's a $4B handout directly to Jerry Reinsdorf, then it becomes true, right? Just wait and see. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 (edited) 2 hours ago, Dick Allen said: Just wait and see. A large amount of the money beyond the $1B for the stadium will go for infrastructure at the site. The big ticket items I've heard of are a Red Line subway stop at 15th and Clark, building a Riverwalk to connect the site to downtown, and realignment of the Rock Island tracks. So, it's not just running utilities through there. Those items alone will cost a ton of money (hundreds of millions I'm guessing), but will make the land more valuable for development regardless of whether the site includes a ballpark. IMO, realignment of the train tracks is a must if they ever want to fully realize the value of that property (even without a ballpark). Right now, you really can't access it from Clark St. due to the train line running right along the Clark St. edge of the 78 property. Moving and lowering the grade of those Metra tracks will be costly. Edited February 24 by 77 Hitmen 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Hitmen Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 One of the things that makes fans and tax payers angry out building a publicly-funded ballpark at the 78 is that it will significantly boost the value of the Sox franchise, thus enriching JR's family and the other co-owners to the tune of hundreds of millions when the team is sold after his passing. I'm just spitballing here, but could a potential finance deal include a provision that any proceeds from a future team sale above the current franchise value (with perhaps a modest bump up) goes back to the state to pay off part of the ISFA debt? The Orioles just sold for $1.7 if I'm not mistaken. I have no idea if this scheme is even feasible and is a totally ridiculous idea, but it could be a way for the state to recover some of the cost for this project while preventing this from purely lining the pockets of JR's heirs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightly Folded Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 For all who despise Jerry, which of these two infamous takers does he most remind you of?W Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightly Folded Posted February 24 Share Posted February 24 1 minute ago, Lightly Folded said: For all who despise Jerry, which of these two infamous takers does he most remind you of?W Ooos…, the other picture was of Al Capone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.