OT: All-Purpose Expos Return Speculation Topic -- Part Deux

[Spring in Fialta]

I'm not sure how attractive how a team the Expos would be to players when they'd have to do a half and half between two cities.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

I'm not sure how attractive how a team the Expos would be to players when they'd have to do a half and half between two cities.

This is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Laurentide]

It's a f***ing LOAN.. a LOAN is meant to be refunded. That article from La Presse is tendentious, just like the rest of its contents. LOOK PEOPLE! BRONFMAN WANTS YOUR MONEY. btw he wants a loan.

It's not a loan, at least not the kind of loan you or I could ever get from a lender. The term used in the article says "forgivable loan", which means it's a loan that the borrower doesn't have to pay back.

And if someone takes out a loan that they don't have to pay back, what are the odds that the lender will ever see that money again?

This is just a fancy way of disguising a handout as a loan.

 

[Laurentide]

It's actually different. Quebec "needs" an arena not only for hockey but for events in general. Quebec is the 2nd largest metro area in the province and the Colisée was starting to show its age big time. Only way the situations would be comparable is if the new stadium would be made to host baseball as well as tennis and other summer sports making it a multipurpose stadium. If it's for baseball only then it's not comparable.

Quebec doesn't "need" any of that. A stadium meant to house professional sports and concerts is, as far as I'm concerned, private enterprise. So let private enterprise pay for it. It has zero to do with the taxpayers of Quebec and it sure as hell isn't anything approaching a priority. Fix some potholes and work on the homeless problem before you start spending public money on sports palaces for private citizens to make money in.

Even a multipurpose stadium has only one real purpose: to make money for whoever owns it. And make no mistake about this much: Bronfman may want the taxpayers to fund it but he's going to own it, not them.

 

[Laurentide]

You make good points, but i don't get all this huff and puff about stealing taxpayers money. You want to see stealing taxpayers money...how about all the multimillions lost when the quebec gov. invested in companies like Bombardier and Cirque de Soleil, only to see them bust or lose all their value. Or the millions upon million we pay to our so called department of justice and Upac only to see them lose every single high level case and not only that, then get sued in return by the very people they were trying to prosecute. Or the billions they spent on digitizing the health record ssytem, only for it to not work at all and then to have to start all over. Or the selling of land to developers at below market value only to see those very developers turn that land into million dollar cash cows. Funny how no one seems to scream bloody murder for things like that, but lending money to finance a project that will actually generate money for the province, and people are running and yelling with pitchforks in their hands.

First, because it won't generate money for the province, it will drain money from it. Read any independently commissioned economic impact study ever done on the subject and you will find that stadiums are a poor use of pubic money. They don't generate revenue, they merely redistribute existing money that would have been spent elsewhere. In this regard stadiums are a lot like casinos. The money people dump into slot machines goes nowhere but into the pocket of the casino. It's money that doesn't get spent in a grocery store, a restaurant or a cinema.

And let's not forget that Bombardier employs over 3000 Quebeckers in good paying jobs. That is a plausible reason for the government to invest in it and doing that makes much more sense than spending taxpayer money to secure a couple of hundred minimum wage seasonal jobs for peanut vendors at the new stadium. Having 3000 people employed in well paid full time jobs is a benefit to the province. Peanut and beer vendors, not so much. But even if both are a bad idea then there's no reason to compound mistakes. One Big O white elephant is enough for two lifetimes.

 

[Laurentide]

Agreed.........
If they are in that downtown area they have proposed, it would see more hotels built, more restaurants built, more taxes more jobs etc The building itself would generate taxes for the city/province....
Gov'ts can do far worse for their money...........and they have...

Read and learn.

The Economics of Sports Stadiums: Does public financing of sports stadiums create local economic growth, or just help billionaires improve their profit margin?

Sports, Jobs, & Taxes: Are New Stadiums Worth the Cost?

Economics Of Subsidizing Sports Stadiums | St. Louis Fed

Sports Stadiums Are a Bad Deal for Cities

And I can find many, many more. Inevitably the only "studies" you can find which conclude that public financing of stadiums is a good thing are those commissioned by team owners who are trying to get their hands on taxpayer money. Naturally those "studies" will reach the conclusions of the person(s) funding it and should not be trusted for that reason.

 

[Phil Parent]

Well, we'll see how teflon the gov feels they are for their next election, because this balloon was made of 100% pure LEAD. The shit did not leave the ground, it barely inflated.

 

[1909]

Baseball is dead in MTL. Too little and way too late. And I don't want one of my single dollar to be given for that.

 

[EXPOS123]

First, because it won't generate money for the province, it will drain money from it. Read any independently commissioned economic impact study ever done on the subject and you will find that stadiums are a poor use of pubic money. They don't generate revenue, they merely redistribute existing money that would have been spent elsewhere. In this regard stadiums are a lot like casinos. The money people dump into slot machines goes nowhere but into the pocket of the casino. It's money that doesn't get spent in a grocery store, a restaurant or a cinema.

And let's not forget that Bombardier employs over 3000 Quebeckers in good paying jobs. That is a plausible reason for the government to invest in it and doing that makes much more sense than spending taxpayer money to secure a couple of hundred minimum wage seasonal jobs for peanut vendors at the new stadium. Having 3000 people employed in well paid full time jobs is a benefit to the province. Peanut and beer vendors, not so much. But even if both are a bad idea then there's no reason to compound mistakes. One Big O white elephant is enough for two lifetimes.

Let's not get into the Big Owe - that was a mistake of massive proportion all due to incompetent planning, vision and corruption. I get what you are saying, but to say it doesn't generate money for the government? What about increased traffic to the area where it will be built? More traffic to bars, restaurants, hotels...developments of new businesses around that area. Do players not pay taxes too? And if the team is successful, do they not send more in taxes to the government as well? Bombardier is social welfare at its worst...the government dishing money for people to have jobs. I don't have the time, but I can list hundreds of more projects and business that the gov. gave money to in subsidies, grants and loans only for the recipients to take the money and go bankrupt and/or sell out to a competitor and having jobs leave here.

I think it's a win win....not saying the money should be given away free on a silver platter, but a loan with reasonable repayment conditions makes sense.

 

[Laurentide]

Let's not get into the Big Owe - that was a mistake of massive proportion all due to incompetent planning, vision and corruption. I get what you are saying, but to say it doesn't generate money for the government? What about increased traffic to the area where it will be built? More traffic to bars, restaurants, hotels...developments of new businesses around that area. Do players not pay taxes too? And if the team is successful, do they not send more in taxes to the government as well? Bombardier is social welfare at its worst...the government dishing money for people to have jobs. I don't have the time, but I can list hundreds of more projects and business that the gov. gave money to in subsidies, grants and loans only for the recipients to take the money and go bankrupt and/or sell out to a competitor and having jobs leave here.

I think it's a win win....not saying the money should be given away free on a silver platter, but a loan with reasonable repayment conditions makes sense.

You increase traffic to one area of the city and it takes traffic away from other areas. You're just robbing Peter to pay Paul. The economic spinoff theory and the multiplier theory about how every dollar spent on the stadium returns x number of dollars in ancillary spending have been thoroughly debunked years ago.

Say what you want about Bombardier but it's a huge business compared with a baseball team and a stadium. What Bronfman is asking is for the government to invest a comparable amount of money in a business that in real terms of how many people are employed is no bigger than a mid sized department store. And like a department store the vast majority of the employees in that ballpark are not just selling peanuts, they're earning peanuts, and not even full time because the jobs are seasonal and part time. The biggest amount of tax revenue generated by the Expos 2.0 would be from player salaries. But they only have 40 guys on the roster and only a handful make huge money. Plus, these players are only in town half the season (or a quarter of it if the two city concept were to come true) so the tax revenue from them isn't much in the grand scheme of things.

And players also don't stick around. They move cities with regularity and I guarantee you that NONE of them will be putting down roots in Quebec. They will rent condos during the season and they will bugger off back to wherever they came from the day after the season ends. They won't be pumping huge sums of their paychecks into the local economy. With stadium schemes, the projected economic benefits never live up to the hype.

Read any or all of the articles I posted above. It's a scam. The only ones making money are the team owners. The taxpayers get screwed every time.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

 

[Runner77]

Tampa is clearly just using this sham two-city set up to cut their losses and buy time until they build their I-bore new stadium.

Montreal execs better wake up and pass on this contraption since there will not be a transition to a full fledged Expos identity in a Montreal venue as the sole home stadium. Unless our homegrown profiteers are in on it for other reasons.

Tampa is not going to build a new stadium just to host a part-time team, makes no sense. The whole concept was supposed to result into a Montreal transition and the reason they couldn’t do it now, was how apparently the team being tied down on account of its coercive stadium lease.

There is only one reason Bronfman and co. are pushing this — they want to develop all the land that is adjacent to a future Expos stadium, from which they’ll rake regardless of whether or not the team actually ends up in Montreal.

You can’t have two cities both building new stadiums for the same team. Someone end this massive farce, it’s a sham and I don’t want the govts, nor any taxpayer money going into the venture, in any form.

 

[BLONG7]

Tampa is clearly just using this sham two-city set up to cut their losses and buy time until they build their I-bore new stadium.

Montreal execs better wake up and pass on this contraption since there will not be a transition to a full fledged Expos identity in a Montreal venue as the sole home stadium. Unless our homegrown profiteers are in on it for other reasons.

Tampa is not going to build a new stadium just to host a part-time team, makes no sense. The whole concept was supposed to result into a Montreal transition and the reason they couldn’t do it now, was how apparently the team being tied down on account of its coercive stadium lease.

There is only one reason Bronfman and co. are pushing this — they want to develop all the land that is adjacent to a future Expos stadium, from which they’ll rake regardless of whether or not the team actually ends up in Montreal.

You can’t have two cities both building new stadiums for the same team. Someone end this massive farce, it’s a sham and I don’t want the govts, nor any taxpayer money going into the venture, in any form.

The Bronfman crowd have enough of their own money............if they are serious, they will pony up, and the city can look to give them a break on their taxes, similar to what they did for the habs, when Uncle George owned the team.
No way, in Canada can you have provincial and federal money to help a billionaire and millionaire athletes....

 

[Runner77]

The Bronfman crowd have enough of their own money............if they are serious, they will pony up, and the city can look to give them a break on their taxes, similar to what they did for the habs, when Uncle George owned the team.
No way, in Canada can you have provincial and federal money to help a billionaire and millionaire athletes....

I might have supported the project if the team was solely in Montreal and if govts would not get gouged.

But, as it stands, Tampa is projecting to build a new stadium. This whole thing is a giant waste of time.

 

[Canadiens Ghost]

Tampa is clearly just using this sham two-city set up to cut their losses and buy time until they build their I-bore new stadium.

Montreal execs better wake up and pass on this contraption since there will not be a transition to a full fledged Expos identity in a Montreal venue as the sole home stadium. Unless our homegrown profiteers are in on it for other reasons.

Tampa is not going to build a new stadium just to host a part-time team, makes no sense. The whole concept was supposed to result into a Montreal transition and the reason they couldn’t do it now, was how apparently the team being tied down on account of its coercive stadium lease.

There is only one reason Bronfman and co. are pushing this — they want to develop all the land that is adjacent to a future Expos stadium, from which they’ll rake regardless of whether or not the team actually ends up in Montreal.

You can’t have two cities both building new stadiums for the same team. Someone end this massive farce, it’s a sham and I don’t want the govts, nor any taxpayer money going into the venture, in any form.

Agreed it's a sham and another reason is the players will never agree to play home games in 2 different cities especially in two different countries. Might be feasible for a season or two but never long term. It's a big effin' joke.

 

[Scriptor]

You increase traffic to one area of the city and it takes traffic away from other areas. You're just robbing Peter to pay Paul. The economic spinoff theory and the multiplier theory about how every dollar spent on the stadium returns x number of dollars in ancillary spending have been thoroughly debunked years ago.

Say what you want about Bombardier but it's a huge business compared with a baseball team and a stadium. What Bronfman is asking is for the government to invest a comparable amount of money in a business that in real terms of how many people are employed is no bigger than a mid sized department store. And like a department store the vast majority of the employees in that ballpark are not just selling peanuts, they're earning peanuts, and not even full time because the jobs are seasonal and part time. The biggest amount of tax revenue generated by the Expos 2.0 would be from player salaries. But they only have 40 guys on the roster and only a handful make huge money. Plus, these players are only in town half the season (or a quarter of it if the two city concept were to come true) so the tax revenue from them isn't much in the grand scheme of things.

And players also don't stick around. They move cities with regularity and I guarantee you that NONE of them will be putting down roots in Quebec. They will rent condos during the season and they will bugger off back to wherever they came from the day after the season ends. They won't be pumping huge sums of their paychecks into the local economy. With stadium schemes, the projected economic benefits never live up to the hype.

Read any or all of the articles I posted above. It's a scam. The only ones making money are the team owners. The taxpayers get screwed every time.

The real money generated is from tourism that would not have come if not for the games and rivalries between neighbouring teams (relatively neighbouring), especially if Montreal were to fall in the American East. There'sa bt from the player salaries, the team and its employées, of which some are peanut and beer vendors some pricks are fond of ridiculizing.

The point is seeing if having a team is a loss leader , or at least a break-even proposition. Then, beyond, that, the visibility created for the City will compound the benefits.

The 67 Expo gave Montreal precious visibility, as did the 76 Olympics. The positive financial fallout was not marginal, although hard to pinpoint when quantifying.

Of course, the Legacy of the Big Owe was an unforeseen error.

 

[Scriptor]

Have to admit it's a win-win for the Bronfman group if Claridge develops all the land, condor, etc. and they aren't on the hook for the stadium.

If the team leaves, they give the stadium (and the upkeep costs) to the City or, more likely, use it for concerts, riding on public goodwill for local amateur sport teams when the stadium is not otherwise occupied.

Like with the Habs, the real money win come from the entertainment part of the business not tied to professional sports (Evenko).

I still think that the development project, overall, is welcome and needed, even with a stadium throw in, but there is tons of profit to be made and I wonder if sticking out a hat for public money is truly warranted?

Would still like to get behind the X-Rays.

 

[salbutera]

The real money generated is from tourism that would not have come if not for the games and rivalries between neighbouring teams (relatively neighbouring), especially if Montreal were to fall in the American East. There'sa bt from the player salaries, the team and its employées, of which some are peanut and beer vendors some pricks are fond of ridiculizing.

The point is seeing if having a team is a loss leader , or at least a break-even proposition. Then, beyond, that, the visibility created for the City will compound the benefits.

The 67 Expo gave Montreal precious visibility, as did the 76 Olympics. The positive financial fallout was not marginal, although hard to pinpoint when quantifying.

Of course, the Legacy of the Big Owe was an unforeseen error.

I miss Jean Drapeau, Mtl’s never had anyone who could sell the city like he could since…

 

[dcyhabs]

The big O was typical '70s Montreal business/politics. Total theft.

The idea that a team will play in two cities is crazy. There could be some logic to it due to climate but who'd watch a team that will never play playoff games in the city? Several commentators have suggested the two city idea is an attempt to get a bidding war going and see who will give them more government money and not a real attempt to play in both.

I'd be happy to see the expos back but I'd be very annoyed to see significant government money spent. I suppose that means that I'm fine with them not coming back as MLB won't come back without a major payoff.

The league, Brochu, and Loria conspired to get the team out of Montreal last time. Loria never even put up money and MLB gave him two teams. Brochu was handed the team with the goal of protecting it and all he ever did was extract the money it was worth, he didn't do anything positive at all. I wouldn't ever trust MLB after that debacle.

 

[RC51]

I dont want baseball back with the same structure as before. The big teams still have all the advantage. NO cap, no even playing field at all.
all we ever want is an equal chance to win. Yes some years you dont have great players so wont will it all. You work to build or rebuild to get a good team. Thats fine, BUT if the big teams use the BIG MONEY every year to get your players YOU NEVER WIN, what you are is a farm team to the big guys. WHen we had the expos we complained over and over about this and what did MLB say to us all, just hang in there we will fix all this just keep buying tickets. We did and after a few years we did NOT. tickets was way down, we simply DID NOT BELIEVE ALL THE LIES ANYMORE. SO after 16 years you would think MLB has fixed the imbalance. NO NO NO. So what do I think about a new baseball team again in MTL= NONONO.

 

[Laurentide]

The real story is the comments section of that tweet. People in Tampa ain't buying. In fact, a good number of the replies talk about boycotting the businesses owned by the people who signed that open letter. They're on to the con.

Precisely no one believes that a 2 city plan is workable or desirable except in the extremely short term (like one or two seasons at most) This is all just a squeeze play in which Tampa is played off against Montreal while Sternberg and Bronfman wait to see which city blinks first. The first city to commit taxpayer money toward the construction of a stadium gets the Rays full time. My bet is that by 2028 after the lease with Tropicana Field has expired, the Rays will be playing in Charlotte, Nashville, Vegas or Portland. They won't be playing in Montreal because the taxpayers there will never sign off on having public money used on a stadium. Thanks to the Big O debacle any such scheme is dead on arrival.

 

[dinodebino]

Told you a long time ago. Bronfman-Claridge is using this to suck up money for his billion dollar dev project. Let him rot. He’ll develop it anyway.

 

[Runner77]

Told you a long time ago. Bronfman-Claridge is using this to suck up money for his billion dollar dev project. Let him rot. He’ll develop it anyway.

Doesn’t a new stadium in Tampa completely negate the whole idea for which Montreal was supposed to be in a two-city set up for a few years? I understood that it was two-city contraption toward a transition to a full time team in Montreal.

I don’t get how there could be a new stadium in Montreal if Tampa itself is pushing for a new stadium. Doesn’t add up.

 

[dinodebino]

Doesn’t a new stadium in Tampa completely negate the whole idea for which Montreal was supposed to be in a two-city set up for a few years? I understood that it was two-city contraption toward a transition to a full time team in Montreal.

I don’t get how there could be a new stadium in Montreal if Tampa itself is pushing for a new stadium. Doesn’t add up.

Because it’s a scam from the get go. Une chimère.

 

[Runner77]

Because it’s a scam from the get go. Une chimère.

It was but now it’s been exposed further.