Anyone Know if this is true or not?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Nov 23, 2009 9:33 PM CST
Email
PrintI currently read this in a post about our stadium issues and what could possilby happen. Anyways take a look at this statement!
And if everything doesn't go according to plan? The usual, banal threats have been leveled as well. In the words of one team representative, the team, if not given a new stadium and lease expired, would become "a free agent".
Could our team really become free agents after the lease is up and we don't have a deal set for a new stadium?
And does "Free Agent" mean anyone could just sign the team at will? Could someone explain this to me!
This is another reason why we should push harder to get a new stadium. Some are not listening, but people this is a real problem in the Viking community! Do what ever you can to help. Even if you live outside of Minnesota just try! Well I hope this isn't true!
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
55 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Post Link:
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Nov 23, 2009 9:36 PM CST reply actions
Didn't Farve...
sign a two year contract? If so, I think I know what to make of this article.
"What is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women."
How about greedy scum politicians who didnt want him (Zigy) to build his own stadium because they couldnt get their cut?
"If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk."
"That is the craziest sonofabitch I ever saw, how many more like him do you think are up there?"
"We have clearance Clearance. Roger Rodger, what's our vector Victor?"
Commentary
The article you link to is more commentary than journalism, but yes after the Vikings Metrodome lease is up in 2011 the team is free to go wherever the owner wants to take it. Although, I’m guessing the league would want to sign-off on any decision that isn’t LA.
If you aren’t up to speed, stadium construction is about to begin in LA for a franchise to be named later. The Vikings, Bills, Rams and Jaguars are the front runners to move into it (Oakland dropped out because they renewed their lease).
A good coach makes his team better, he doesn’t wait for a better team to make him look good.
My money is on the bills
maybe the rams. The vikes will get a new stadium. Not sure about the Jags, but the rams would make the most sense since they play in the west anyways.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 24, 2009 7:40 AM CST up reply actions
new stadium's
THere is no way in hell anyone can build a stadium in less then a year. THis is at least a two year project, even the remodel of the existing structure would take that long.
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 23, 2009 11:39 PM CST reply actions
My thought is that the Vikings are wanting something in writing by the time the lease expires at the end of the 2011 season. Wilf knows along with us that the Vikings will more then likely have to play in TCF a few years. like what the Seahawks and Bears did a few years back. So there are still 2+ years to make a deal and then get this built. Get the ball rolling on the new stadium, more then likely, at best, no ground breaking for another year. But lets not drag the feet either.
"If you're gonna shoot, shoot, don't talk."
"That is the craziest sonofabitch I ever saw, how many more like him do you think are up there?"
"We have clearance Clearance. Roger Rodger, what's our vector Victor?"
Free agent
The Minnesota Vikings Football Club is owned by Zygi Wilf. There is currently a legally-binding lease held by the Club for use of the Metrodome. That lease runs through 2011. After that, the Club has no arrangements to play football anywhere. Technically speaking, Zygi can call in a fleet of Mayflower moving trucks at that point and move the Club wherever he feels like. Or not. He’s in control.
Practically speaking, if a stadium deal gets done in Minnesota, the Vikings will probably rent the Gopher’s TCF Bank stadium for a year while the new stadium is built.
If the Vikings must move away, Zygi has implied that he wouldn’t have the heart to move the team, but would sell them. If Ed Roski of Los Angeles bought the Vikings, the Vikings would move to southern California and play in the Rose Bowl for a year or two until the new stadium was constructed.
Thus, the choice. Either take Zygi’s $200 million investment in the new stadium and help him build the world-class new stadium envisioned in Minnesota, or watch as the Los Angeles Vikings break our hearts every football Sunday for the rest of our lives.
Ed Roski
Wants to own controlling interest in any Team that moves into his Stadium,so there is a chance that Zygi sells if nothing gets rolling.There was a Tour of the Metro-dump and the Twins new Stadium today,asking questions can the Dump be Renovated.If the Vikes leave there is no way the upkeep can be afforded,it costs between 6-8 mill a year alone.Talk was if a deal could be arranged,they would play at TCF,Vikes are at the point they dont care if New Stadium is built where Metro-dump sits as long as something gets done.Bad thing is if the Vikes just only make it to the Big dance it ups the chances of somone wanting them even more.You guys are forgetting that Red found that loop-hole where as the last 2 years can be bought out without a penalty to the Team.Ed Roski has deep pockets and makes Zygi look like a poster child for Welfare,he can afford to buy the Vikes,pay the penalty, and the Moving Vans.
part of the problem
I very much would like to see the Vikings stay in MN and have been a fan since the early 70’s. But it must be considered in a big picture kind of way how you spend 700 million dollars. What do the tax payers get out of it, how will they be repaid etc. Does anyone have the numbers on what the Dome brought in revenues back to the tax payers. Did it pay for its self, did the other revenue streams compensate the taxpayers for the first stadium. It is more then just tax money, local business, retail shops and so on make a lot of money due to sports teams. I think that the non sports people of the state would feel better if the poeple who make the money off the team had to put something in to it.
Just some thoughts
Skol Vikings
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 24, 2009 12:10 AM CST reply actions
700 mill would bring
The way Zygi has portrayed it ,is he wants year round stores outside of the New Stadium,he wants to be able to compete for Hosting S.B..The Economy just sucks everywhere,but it brings a reduction in prices of building materials right now,plus building it alone would no doubt employ a min. of lets say 3,500 people for the next 2 years.
I think your question would be better answered as to what Would Minny lose if the Vikes left.Most players rent places in the Twin Cities,so theres money lost.they eat,shop,buy clothing etc.theres money lost,All those players pay income tax,wonder what the State gets lets say just out of Favres 12 mill for this year,theres money lost.All those bars,resturants,hotels,parking lots,cabs make money when Vikes play at home,theres money lost.
The City of Minny gets a pretty good cut from having the Vikes in town,if they leave who do you think is going to help replace that lost money.Avg. Joe Tax payer is who,cause they will raise taxes to make up the Diff, its pay now for a Stadium or pay later for no Team and Stadium.Kind of like a poison pill.
Your right speedlod
I live in Iowa, hence the name iowaron & I usually get up their with a couple of buddies every year for a Vikes & Twins game. I’m not alone my friends. Its usually a couple hundred a piece for all of us. Tickets, hotel, gas, food, beer, beer, beer, munchies. It all goes to the great state of Minnesota. Thousands of people from Iowa & the Dakotas love the Vikes & we spend our money on them also. No team No money it all goes away. I was born & raised in St.Paul so I’m a homer but my best buddies are Vikes fans also & they have no ties to Minnesota. We all got the T-shirts & sweatshirts, hats, chips, dips, chains & whips. We all bleed purple & we want this team left right where they are in Minnesota where they belong.
all I am saying
is that the numbers need to be presented to the public so they can feel sure that this is a reasonable thing to do not just giving millions to the rich. The debate, and there should be one, should cover all of the benefits so Joe Tax Payer know why this is a good idea. If you want to sell this thing you will need every angle. People have a big problem with giving millions to those that make millions, the total benefit to everyone, not just fans must be stated.
I think things like: making sure the construction company is a MN based company would be a good start…. to win this and win over the people think in the broader sense.
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 24, 2009 11:22 AM CST up reply actions
it’s my understanding that the wilfs wanted to go it alone and pay for their own stadium but the state wouldn’t let them because they want their share of the pie.
if that’s the case, then the politicians are saying you can’t have it and we’re not going to give it to you now so you’ll just have to wait.
i understand the argument about ‘corporate welfare’ and it’s a legit argument but at the same time, a professional sports team brings a lot more than just dollars to a city. this is the same way that an art museum brings a lot more than just dollars to a city.
by iseepurplepeople on Nov 24, 2009 3:33 PM CST up reply actions
+1
I was not aware of that but it does not surpise me at all. Used car salesman, elected officials, so on….
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 24, 2009 7:00 PM CST up reply actions
Not quite
it’s my understanding that the wilfs wanted to go it alone and pay for their own stadium but the state wouldn’t let them because they want their share of the pie.
Wilf never seriously entertained paying for all of it himself. He advocated an open air facility in Anoka County, which is cheaper, and he would have footed the bill for about half of that stadium, but still needed the state to pay for road infrastructure upgrades. When Wilf kept flirting with Hennepin County, Anoka County pulled out and Wilf has been advocating the ‘Metrodome Next’ concept.
the politicians are saying you can’t have it and we’re not going to give it to you now so you’ll just have to wait.
No, the politicians are saying no to a stadium, period. It seems like a non-starter for the 2010 Legislative session. I really think the only thing that will get the politician’s attention is Wilf announcing that he is putting the team up for sale.
"We're used to Favre-a-palooza now. We're engulfed in Favre-a-palooza. It's not even Favre-a-palooza anymore. He's family now."
--Vikings TE Visanthe Shiancoe, on Brett Favre
Zygi is investing $200 million plus
The Vikings just want a stadium. An open air one would cost about $400 million. Zygi would pay half or more of that. That is new money coming to Minnesota.
The MSFC has demanded a retractable roof facility. This is something the Vikings would like, too, but realistically, the additional revenue will be enjoyed by the MSFC not the Vikings. Thus, the MSFC would have to come up with $700 million. Even then Zygi would still invest $200 million in new money into the stadium.
Zygi also has plans for other investments. The whole area around the new stadium will be built up and become an attractive spot for people to go and hang out, like in Cleveland or Baltimore.
by medicineball on Nov 24, 2009 11:19 AM CST up reply actions
that seems fair
if the wilfs are willing to pony up half the cost of a new stadium that would be shared with the state and the nfl would kick in some as well, then i don’t think that’s asking too much at all for the state of minnesota to spend $150mil on an open air stadium of which they would collect 70% of the revenue. that seems like a real deal for the state.
if they’re the ones demanding a closed or optionally closed stadium, then they should be the ones paying the extra for it.
by iseepurplepeople on Nov 24, 2009 3:36 PM CST up reply actions
Why don't the vikes put out an add for public donations
from fans for a new MN stadium? I would chip in $200 or so. Small price to pay over a 20 year period to watch a local team on TV. There is ALOT of money that could be had from that avenue that would make whatever was contributed by the state much more palatable.
by TheEvilProfessor on Nov 24, 2009 7:46 AM CST reply actions
Public Financing of Stadiums not an economic decision
Here is a link to an article that dispels the myth that Stadiums are a financial Boon to a community.
http://www.faegre.com/webfiles/Homefield%20Economics.pdf
However as the article points out this is a quality of Life issue. The State needs to determine if having the Vikings in Minnesota is worth 750 Million or not. ITS THAT SIMPLE.
There is no reason to sugarcoat the decision. Just straight up decide “Do you want the Vikings or not?”
+1964
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Nov 24, 2009 8:16 AM CST up reply actions
Those studies are flawed
The new stadium would not just be a sports stadium. This is especially true for the retractable roof facility. It would be used for a lot of events around the year. There would be soccer, basketball tournaments like the Final Four, etc. There would be community events, conventions, and it is used by the National Guard for drilling during the winter.
Plus, this is not just a stadium. The whole area around the stadium will be built up and made into an attractive spot for businesses. There will be museums.
Overall, it will be an economic benefit.
by medicineball on Nov 24, 2009 11:23 AM CST up reply actions
Prove it
I suspect this is much more of a zero sum game than you seem to think. Downtown Minneapolis does not need additional high-level retail, dining or entertainment options. Nor is it in need of “museums.” In fact, in comparison to most similarly sized cities, Minne is very close to maximizing its downtown’s revenue generation capacity already, given the size of the metro population, its general sprawl, and having St. Paul as an urban next-door neighbor. This is not Baltimore or Cleveland or Detroit, in desperate need of an injection of capital to get new inbuilding into a blighted urban landscape. The Metrodome already hosts things like the Final Four and soccer tournaments and conventions. Building a stadium in Blaine or wherever would only suck business and money out of downtown.
It has been the sales pitch of those trying to get public funding for sports stadiums for going on two decades now that building them is a slam dunk net win from an accounting standpoint. The above poster is correct in that that sales pitch has been debunked thoroughly, by numerous studies. You’re right that there are a lot of variables in play, but most of the research takes those into account. The profit center vision of modern stadiums is simply a myth, especially in well-established markets. Any predictions of economic gains to Minneapolis or Minnesota from investing funds in another new stadium are subject to either or both of significant discounts or significant unpredictability. That’s not to say that the stadium cost is a sunk, unrecoverable amount, of course, but that it’s an investment that may or may not pay off in purely fiscal terms. The question of whether or not to invest public money in a new Vikings stadium, therefore, should revolve around two analyses:
1. What is the real likelihood of the team leaving without a new stadium?
2. What price does the state put on keeping the team, from a purely karmic/solidarity/state identity standpoint? In other words, what’s it worth to the goodwill and psychic health of Minnesotans to be able to rally around an NFL team, and how much money are you willing to put at risk to maintain that?
If you think there’s a significant chance on the first, then the question is simply whether or not it’s worth betting $100 from every citizen in the state to keep the team. I suspect the answer is probably “yes.” Then you move onto identifying revenue sources.
Studies
Those studies do not take those external variables into account.
Besides, your point is so well supported by the incredible economic boom Baltimore enjoyed after the Colts left. Balitmore was the most prosperous city in the US until they built those new stadiums. Now they are poor again.
by medicineball on Nov 24, 2009 2:37 PM CST up reply actions
There is almost unanimous consensus among economists who have studied this issue. You seem to want to disbelieve that consensus, yet you provide no evidence or support for the contrary.
Incidentally, what really doesn’t account for external variables very well are the pitches for financing stadiums through public funds, which almost invariably fail to specify from where their fantasy revenue is going to materialize, other than to cite disproven multiplier effects and tax base increases that haven’t panned out in other scenarios.
I mentioned Baltimore and others as the poster children for the urban redevelopment by stadium building trend of the ‘90s, when it became conventional wisdom that new stadiums had a magical ability to increase a city’s revenue base. The fact that B-more is still as crummy a place 20 years after Camden Yards, and downtown Cleveland is actually worse now than before the Jake came along, actually bolster my argument. Which is that stadium building is no guarantee of economic growth. If top-of-the-line stadiums like those can’t bring more businesses and investment into crumbling industrial cities with huge capital flight and growth potential, how are we to make an assumption that they’ll do anything significant in an already thriving downtown? Other than sap other revenue streams?
I’m not sure I fully understand your Colts comment. You’re obviously being sarcastic, but the unabated economic decline of Baltimore over the last 50 years has continued on pretty much the same arc through the Colts leaving town in the middle of the night, through the Orioles getting a new downtown stadium, and through the Ravens coming to town and actually making Superbowls. The presence and success of sports teams there has demonstratively, then, had no effect on the city’s economy.
You ever been to Baltimore?! Asking sports teams to turn an entire city’s economy around is a bit much, I don’t think that’s a typical American city by any means.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
Yes, I’ve been there. It’s not terribly distinguishable for me from other failing or failed post-industrial American cities like Cleveland, Detroit or Hartford. Other than the fact that The Wire was set there. And you’re right, asking sports teams to turn an entire city’s economy around is a bit much. By the same token, however, so is foretelling economic disaster if a sports team leaves.
I certainly don’t want the Vikes to leave the Twin Cities, but somewhere in the back of my mind, a tiny little part of me would get a great sense of satisfaction if the city/region/state didn’t blink and went on doing their thing without them. Minneapolis is a model mid-sized city; thriving arts scene that frequently competes with the largest cities in America; huge musical output; far better dining than a town its size should have; extremely solid, diversified economic base that’s led to a very high per capita income and standard of living. Doesn’t a little bit of each of us from there kind of want to give the Sports Industrial Complex the finger and show the world we don’t need it? We don’t actually need it. You can be a major league city without four professional sports franchises.
That little voice...
And you’re right, asking sports teams to turn an entire city’s economy around is a bit much. By the same token, however, so is foretelling economic disaster if a sports team leaves.
I wasn’t suggesting that the city will suffer economic disaster without the Vikings. I do think that the loss of income, brand-recognition, and perhaps even pride, will make something of an impact. Certainly, I see no reason for the NFL to believe that Minnesota will need another football team any decade soon.
Doesn’t a little bit of each of us from there kind of want to give the Sports Industrial Complex the finger and show the world we don’t need it? We don’t actually need it. You can be a major league city without four professional sports franchises.
Perhaps so… and perhaps, Minnesota will fade into the same relative obscurity as South Dakota when the rest of nation of considering places of consequence and value in the USA. If NFL football is ‘Americas Sport’, with the biggest audiences and the biggest annual climax event, then there’s a lot of state brand value to being part of that exclusive club. If Minnesota drops off that radar, Minnesota will cease to exist for many Americans, and perhaps there are those in Minnesota who want that. Those who want Minnesota to become the backwater mid-western edition of Oregon. If so, just remember that there are consequences to this.
I certainly don’t want the Vikes to leave the Twin Cities, but somewhere in the back of my mind, a tiny little part of me would get a great sense of satisfaction if the city/region/state didn’t blink and went on doing their thing without them.
I don’t want to see the Vikings move either. Maybe I’m just set in my ways, but the Minnesota Vikings are one of the landmarks in my life and consciousness. At this point, I’m hearing a little voice in the back of the mind too. Only in my mind, it’s telling me that Minnesota may no longer deserve to host the Vikings.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
what you say is true and i agree for the most part but this sticks out:
The Metrodome already hosts things like the Final Four and soccer tournaments and conventions.
to this i say first, what about a superbowl. hosting one superbowl brings in millions to the host city, and that’s only the fiscal aspect. and a brand new stadium stands a good chance of getting more than one superbowl. the current situation is not going to get a superbowl.
secondly, how much longer can the metrodome sustain itself without the vikings? you mentioned the final four, how many more years can the dome host a final four as it gets older and older and has to compete against increasingly more modern facilities in other states? yes the dome will still be used for purposes other than football, but those uses will bring in less and less revenue at more and more maintenance costs every year.
so the vikings leave, the dome deteriorates and the state of minnesota at some future date, will have to build a new facility. now true most people may be okay with that because of the current economy, but it will never be any cheaper to build something of that magnitude again. so 5 years from now the state has to pony up $2 billion for a new stadium that they could have had for $700mil. and they won’t have a consistent reliable customer to share costs with.
by iseepurplepeople on Nov 24, 2009 3:50 PM CST up reply actions
Fair enough, and good point that the cost analysis changes over time. I think we’re on the same page, anyway, which is that we should do a new stadium. The main thrust of my point is that the economic benefits of just the stadium shouldn’t be the focus. That includes possible Superbowls and Final Fours, which bring in some money that typically has no lasting impact on the local economy, and are far from guaranteed gets (especially since the NFL has shown a decided preference for staying south in February lately, so I wouldn’t exactly put that down in the “assured new revenue” column just yet).
It’s the less measurable benefits of having a team or not that should be the focus.
LA Vikings
You guys better believe it. Laker colors! Second largest market in the country! Even if the Building isn’t completed they could play in the @ USC’s house for a year. 100k seats. The Vikings are a very attractive target ! The buildings owner will want a winner coming in to get the ball rolling and the Viking will be coming off 3 straight winning seasons, they may also offer a great 1st time lease!
Man thats scary but very true!
Why Do People Question The Vikings' Status?
by UnBannedVikingholic on Nov 24, 2009 10:43 AM CST up reply actions
Noooo.... Minnesota colors!
Where do you think a team like the “Lakers” came from…..?
There’s unfortunately some precedent here.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
Minnesota is the 15th largest T.V market.
True its not L.A. but the league doesn’t want to lose #15 either. As a whole they would rather lose Jacksonville. Won’t matter though. No stadium means to the NFL that they have to keep putting money into the franchise. Either Minnesota wants the Vikes or they don’t. Its the only question.
by lifelongvike on Nov 24, 2009 12:20 PM CST up reply actions
Doesn't matter
The LA TV market is the 2nd largest market, but it is still something like 8 times bigger than the Minnesota market.
by medicineball on Nov 24, 2009 2:38 PM CST up reply actions
Numbers
Ok, so I’m not an accountant, but this is what I think I’m seeing;
Total cost: $900,000,000
Wilfs pay: $200,000,000
Leaving the state to pay $700,000,000
Minnesota has about 5.220m people, of which 24% are under the age 18
Subtracting 24% leaves you with 3,967,499 people over the age of 18 – Taxpayers
$700,000,000 divided by 3,967,499 taxpayers looks like about $176 each in additional tax burden.
$176, spread over a few years, doesn’t seem like a particularly onerous burden.
Particularly when you’re getting some of the value for it, something that will bring jobs, publicity, and events to the state.
Am I missing something here?
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
It's not the practical cost
It’s the idea of raising taxes to pay for a billionaire’s stadium, which is how stadium opponents have framed the argument. If proponents could change the argument to show how beneficial, both in terms of money and prestige an NFL team provides, they might make some headway.
As long as stadium proponents let the opposition frame the argument as ‘corporate welfare for billionaires’, there’s no way a liberal bastion like Minnesota will get any stadium passed.
"We're used to Favre-a-palooza now. We're engulfed in Favre-a-palooza. It's not even Favre-a-palooza anymore. He's family now."
--Vikings TE Visanthe Shiancoe, on Brett Favre
Boils Down to
2 Things,you want an NFL team or ya dont,cause money talks in this world and it aint going to sit and wait 2 years for Minny to make up its mind.Ed Roski wants a team and moved everything to get a Stadium built where He wanted ,how He wanted and do you really think he wants to bring in a losing Team.Hell no,get a grip quick cause the cards are in Zygis favor,he holds the pat hand in all this.If the Vikes make it to the S.B. this year and no deal is done,Zygi can name his price and Roski will pay it.
You think Roski is building a Stadium to bring the Bills in,no he wants a proven winner,he aint building a Stadium to lose money.They even re-zoned so he could build,any idea how hard that is,theres movers and shakers in this world and Roski is one of those movers,Zygi is a Shaker just not in the same class as Roski.
I live in Billings,MT one of our surrounding city,town, built a multi- million dollar prison,trained guards and it has sat empty,nary a prisoner since it was built.Roski doesnt seem like the kind of person thats going let that happen to His new Stadium.Minny needs to wake up either fund a Stadium,or watch the Moving Vans come with Cali tags,cause think about it peeps the Vikes are gathering National attention.Fox even went as far as to name the Def,we never got that when Moss and Carter prowled our end zones.And put yourself in Roskis shoes for 1 minute and ask yourself what Team would you go after if you had unlimited funds.
hey
I live in the Bulls and work in Billings
Small world
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Nov 24, 2009 10:52 PM CST up reply actions
Actually
I live in that no where land between Billings and Laurel,we haul our own water,have dial up,but wouldnt trade it for the city no how.But tell ya what if Vikes get into playoffs lets get together,root our team on.We got 6 weeks plan,and see what happens.
Just got back from vacation
I work Sundays, which sucks bad so I do not get to watch many games. Thanks for the invite!
it is better to be thought of as dumb then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Ben Franklin
by montana vikes fan on Dec 5, 2009 10:25 AM CST up reply actions
It’s the idea of raising taxes to pay for a billionaire’s stadium, which is how stadium opponents have framed the argument
What a shame… when the state pays the majority cost, they’re the majority shareholder, it would be Minnesota’s stadium. This whole class-hostility thing is just freaky, it makes no sense to me. Probably a sign that I’m an old fart, I grew up with the understanding that you can’t get something, for nothing.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
msfc...
the state would do the majority of the funding for the stadium, thus the they would be the primary shareholder and the vikings would lease the stadium from the msfc, so to say that the state is funding a billionaires playground is bullshit. if that was true, the vikings wouldn’t have to lease the facility like they do the metrodome. that whole argument is complete sh!t and it would be nice if they would stop acting like the wilfs are trying to pull a fast one.
I piss people off on a fairly regular basis. I cherish my right to speak my mind, whether I sound like an uneducated savage or not. I've never been accused of keeping what I think a secret, nor will I ever. Don't like it? I don't care.
by IABerserker1 on Nov 27, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions
amounts to 6 bucks
Per taxable person over 30 yrs.Hell ask us Vike fans from out of state and ill gladly send a check for 10 a year easy,and I wont benifit from it except to see the Vikes stay.Maybe thats what we need to do send checks and a letter stating we are donating to a New Stadium and not to cash the check unless its funding it.
+10
Maybe if they held a drawing amongst the donors for use of a luxury box each week Viking game, with 10 free passes, and say, for every $10 you donate, you get a ticket placed in the spinner…. Put some incentive out there, but give us a piece of the action :)
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
k
Feel ya on that, be our spokesman eh,holler out,your the one in DC eh,lol
Don't think I won't if the opportunity arises
Bachman is here in town and she likes to help folks be heard on the Hill. If I see her, I will most definitely let her know that the Vikings have supporters outside of the Land of a Thousand Lakes.
Ah, ah,
We come from the land of the ice and snow,
From the midnight sun where the hot springs blow.
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new lands,
To fight the horde, singing and crying: Valhalla, I am coming!
SKOL!
To answer your questions
Could our team really become free agents after the lease is up and we don’t have a deal set for a new stadium?
Yes. The VIkings are legally obligated to play in the Metrodome until 2011. After that, if someone has a better stadium deal in a different city for more money, yes, they can move. As long as 75% of the current NFL owners approve the team’s relocation. Which they will, since the owners will get more money from the new city the Vikes will relocate to, and will not have to pay as much to support the VIkings with revenue sharing money.
"We're used to Favre-a-palooza now. We're engulfed in Favre-a-palooza. It's not even Favre-a-palooza anymore. He's family now."
--Vikings TE Visanthe Shiancoe, on Brett Favre
no
They are not legally obligated to play in the Dome till 2011,they are obligated to make reparations in lost revenue that the Dome would lose if the Vikes move.You guys are forgetting Reds loop-hole they found concerning last 2 years of lease.
K peeps
Lets say Zygi is worth 1 billion dollars,he spent 600 mill buying the Vikes,he is willing to put 200 mill in to the Stadium,leaves him about 200 mill.Yea.would change our lives,but 200 mill aint shit in the world Zygi plays in.Zygi is putting everything that he owns on the line with this team.
Tell ya what,Zygi hasnt milked this team dry like Red did,he has tried to field the best possible team he could.What does he get for his effort,a kick in the teeth.
5yrs he has owned this team,pumping millions of dollars never asking the public to help,turning this franchise of a sinking sex scandel into a S.B. contender if not this year then next.
He comes to the very public and says help me make the Vikings S.B. contenders for years to come,we can do this together.Whats the public say,not my problem your the billonaire,you build your own Stadium.Reminds me of a time long ago,public choice was asked,free a person convicticted of murder,or condemn Jesus.
Los Angeles Vikings
I’m all 4 the Vikings staying in Minnesota…there is the history for one and the team name “Vikings” makes a lot more sense in a Scandinavians rich state. Unfortunately, "Lakers: made a lot more sense in Minnesota too. What it comes down to, is that if the people of Minnesota can’t or wont come up with a new stadium, we will all be watching the Los Angeles Vikings as soon as the new stadium in LA is built. And it is about to be built.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
