sixrings said:
I can’t understand being too cheap to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox in payroll but be willing to spend close to a billion dollars on a stadium and land if the government doesn’t pitch in
Click to expand...
Let's be real, they won't spend that much on a stadium if government doesn't pitch in. No way they don't try and force as much taxpayer dollars out of the government as possible, that's what pretty much every sports team does these days. Which in this case particularly is ridiculous given they already got an amazing deal on the current stadium. We should not buy Rogers another one just because they demand it.
 
TossYourJacket said:
Let's be real, they won't spend that much on a stadium if government doesn't pitch in. No way they don't try and force as much taxpayer dollars out of the government as possible, that's what pretty much every sports team does these days. Which in this case particularly is ridiculous given they already got an amazing deal on the current stadium. We should not buy Rogers another one just because they demand it.
Click to expand...
When building a new stadium in the next few years was on the table, there was zero suggestion it would be publicly funded. Plenty of reports that it would be paid for by Rogers, who would recoup some of that money by making it part of a larger real estate play.
 
JMSRead said:
When building a new stadium in the next few years was on the table, there was zero suggestion it would be publicly funded. Plenty of reports that it would be paid for by Rogers, who would recoup some of that money by making it part of a larger real estate play.
Click to expand...
Fair. Problem is Rogers does not own the land the stadium is built on. It's leased from Canada Lands. It's also zoned exclusively for a stadium, which is part of why Rogers got the stadium for so little money. So either they get the government to rezone the land, or they have to find alternate funding. If Rogers gets the government to rezone the land for condos, etc that is basically the government massively increasing the value of crown-owned land for the benefit of a corporation. So unless Rogers pays for the value of the rezoned land, it would still be effectively corporate welfare.
 
TossYourJacket said:
Fair. Problem is Rogers does not own the land the stadium is built on. It's leased from Canada Lands. It's also zoned exclusively for a stadium, which is part of why Rogers got the stadium for so little money. So either they get the government to rezone the land, or they have to find alternate funding. If Rogers gets the government to rezone the land for condos, etc that is basically the government massively increasing the value of crown-owned land for the benefit of a corporation. So unless Rogers pays for the value of the rezoned land, it would still be effectively corporate welfare.
Click to expand...


I don't think getting the land rezoned would be that big of an issue, and I believe that was the plan/idea.
 
C-mac said:
I don't think getting the land rezoned would be that big of an issue, and I believe that was the plan/idea.
Click to expand...
That may have been the plan at Rogers, but there's no reason the government should go along with it. The land is a public asset and rezoning it to provide a windfall to the lessee doesn't strike me as in the interest of the public.
 
max said:
That may have been the plan at Rogers, but there's no reason the government should go along with it. The land is a public asset and rezoning it to provide a windfall to the lessee doesn't strike me as in the interest of the public.
Click to expand...

Nothing a big bag of cash can't handle.
 
Some interesting comments by Mark Shapiro in this article: https://theathletic.com/3220823/202...ectations-rogers-centre-renovations-and-more/

Couple of summarised points:
- It's not true that this renovation is in place of a new stadium. Figuring out a stadium is incredibly complicated, and this renovation just buys them time to figure out a long term plan.
- This renovation will create more premium seating (which they have third least of in baseball), improve player facilities, improve concourses, and give more entertainment options in the park.
- This renovation is a midterm solution, and will just focus on the lower bowl and outfield. If at some point they decide a Rogers Centre renovation is the long term solution, then they would address the entirety of the stadium and it would probably involve some massive reconfiguration. They would look to make it a 'ballpark that closes' rather than a 'dome that opens'.
- It would be incredibly hard to walk away from this location, but if they do rebuild on site they will have to figure out what that means for interruption of play and where they play.
 
I swore there was a friendly conversation by me and someone on this thread at maybe six am. Yet I can’t find it anywhere. Maybe it was my early morning dream.
 
T.E.C.II said:
Has some posts been removed? Someone last night posted a fairly interesting post, but it's now gone.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of posts about “views” got removed. I do find it interesting that there has been lots of “new members” in this thread and they all like “views”. It was an interesting post and responded nicely I thought since they were new. I disagreed but that doesn’t mean that they were rude and I didn’t think I was rude either. But an extra five minute able bodied walk isn’t something to dismiss or we wouldn’t be complaining about the large walking distances between these new subway stations.
 
Hazel Mae posted a photo of the new videoboard via Twitter, the other day:
FPVEWReWUAEA59o.jpg
 
Not to mention, the middle part doesn't look any bigger or different then the old jumbotron. Waste of money.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top