Arlington NASCAR track dead?

John Stricker wrote:

You'd have to ask Unka Bob about it more than me, but the issue with the
renovation is complicated. I'm sure he's one that will agree that the
complex has been an economic boon for the area but I bet he voted against
the tax issue.

For one thing, there has been a 30 year rivalry between KC, KS and KC, MO
over the complex. Brawls have broken out over the fact that KC, MO
residents get first shot at season tickets since it's on the MO side of the
river. MO residents have always felt like the KS side, where a lot of KC
residents prefer to live due to lower taxes, especially the wealthier ones,
have taken a free ride on the backs of the MO citizens since they bear the
brunt of the taxes for the complex and the tax issue was, again, on the MO
side of the river.

OTOH, the new KS Speedway is on the KS side of the city and the MO residents
didn't pay for any of that. Right now, it's making some money. We'll see
if it's half as successful as the Truman sports complex in 30 years.

Making money in what way? Most analyses I've seen of sports complexes
show that while they may make money at the operations level, they never
return the initial capital investment made by the taxpayers. Why do you
think that more private investors don't build sports stadiums? Trust
me, if they REALLY made money, it wouldn't require government support to
build them.


Matt

On 25 Nov 2004 15:50:29 GMT, osite (RobertR237)
wrote:



We have all heard of the Trickle down theory of economics but when it comes to
sports stadiums and sports complexes, the correct name if "Trickle Up
Economics". That means that everybody in the community will by way of
increased taxes to build and support the complex will have their money trickle
up to the super rich owners of the teams and are the only benefactors of the
centers. The worst part of it all is that people seem to ignore all the facts
in some mistaken loyality to these sports enterprises. I have watched all this
crap occur three separate times in the last 10 years in Houston and couldn't
believe my eyes. Now I have seen it occur again in Arlington Texas, as those
people who were already paying through the nose for the Texas Rangers, voted to
tax their asses off to get the Dallas Cowboys Football team. And NO, they
Cowboys don't intend to change their name either.

While a few people in each community receive great benefits from these sports
stadiums, that benefit is always at the cost of the tax paying citizens, not
from outside the community. Even though Houston claims to have received
millions in economic benefit from hosting the Superbowl, the reality was that
it cost even more millions for the city to host it. The taxpayers paid for the
stadium, paid for the preparations, paid for the thousands of hours of police
overtime to provide security, and paid for the cleanup after all the drunken
fans left tons of trash littering the city.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

You are absolutely correct.

I lived in Arlington for 32 years and have had my business there for
27 years. It is only a half mile from Ameriquest Field, formerly the
Ballpark at Arlington. The traffic on game day is horrific. When the
Ballpark deal was on the ballot, they promised all sorts of
development around it. The only new businesses I know of are sports
stores in the stadium.

They promised the same thing for the new Cowboy stadium. My question
is why there hasn't been all this development around Texas Stadium
(their current home). The only businesses near there are freight
companies.

I'm surprised there was not an uprising of Texas Eastern Star and Free
Mason members over this. It will literally be in the backyard of the
state Eastern Star retirement home.

I'm looking for a suitable location to move my business. Their loss?
Only about $30,000 annual sales tax revenue plus inventory and
personal property tax.

We have all heard of the Trickle down theory of economics but when it comes
to
sports stadiums and sports complexes, the correct name if "Trickle Up
Economics". That means that everybody in the community will by way of
increased taxes to build and support the complex will have their money
trickle
up to the super rich owners of the teams and are the only benefactors of the
centers. The worst part of it all is that people seem to ignore all the
facts
in some mistaken loyality to these sports enterprises. I have watched all
this
crap occur three separate times in the last 10 years in Houston and couldn't
believe my eyes. Now I have seen it occur again in Arlington Texas, as
those
people who were already paying through the nose for the Texas Rangers, voted
to
tax their asses off to get the Dallas Cowboys Football team. And NO, they
Cowboys don't intend to change their name either.

While a few people in each community receive great benefits from these
sports
stadiums, that benefit is always at the cost of the tax paying citizens, not
from outside the community. Even though Houston claims to have received
millions in economic benefit from hosting the Superbowl, the reality was
that
it cost even more millions for the city to host it. The taxpayers paid for
the
stadium, paid for the preparations, paid for the thousands of hours of
police
overtime to provide security, and paid for the cleanup after all the drunken
fans left tons of trash littering the city.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

You are absolutely correct.

I lived in Arlington for 32 years and have had my business there for
27 years. It is only a half mile from Ameriquest Field, formerly the
Ballpark at Arlington. The traffic on game day is horrific. When the
Ballpark deal was on the ballot, they promised all sorts of
development around it. The only new businesses I know of are sports
stores in the stadium.

They promised the same thing for the new Cowboy stadium. My question
is why there hasn't been all this development around Texas Stadium
(their current home). The only businesses near there are freight
companies.

I'm surprised there was not an uprising of Texas Eastern Star and Free
Mason members over this. It will literally be in the backyard of the
state Eastern Star retirement home.

I'm looking for a suitable location to move my business. Their loss?
Only about $30,000 annual sales tax revenue plus inventory and
personal property tax.


I checked on the property tax for homes in the Arlington area and what has all
the big stadiums and such done for property tax, make them higher than other
areas of Dallas. Now, they will have higher sales taxes as well. Yes, the
area around Irving Stadium has been a total loss and nothing has developed
around it, at least not because of it.

I am looking at the Garland or Rockwall area but still haven't made a decision
yet.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message If you'd stay upwind it wouldn't be so
bad...

You definitely want Bob to stay downwind of you.

D.

Depends on the time frame.

In KC's case, the complex has been hosting games for 32 years, both baseball
and football, at the same location with two stadiums. This kept the land
acquisition costs down, relatively speaking, and shared parking and other
facilities. The architect of the Truman complex was really ingenious in how
little it actually cost, although at the time everyone was screaming
extravagance. The cost of the stadium when completed, including both the
football and baseball stadiums, as well as all parking and support
requirements was $43 million dollars. In today's dollars, that is about
$195 million, for TWO stadiums, so when I say the architect was an ingenious
fellow, I'm not kidding.

Fast forward now to 2004. 32 seasons of professional football and baseball.
Untold numbers of concerts and other special events. Look at the
development in the area of hotels/motels and other ancillary businesses. On
gameday in KC, you can't find a hotel room within 10 miles of the stadium
for Saturday and Sunday nights. Figure the room tax revenue on that for 32
years. Figure the amount the stadium pays annually for utilities. Salaries
(and their accompanying withholdings) for 32 years for about 100 games per
season of professional sports. Think all that food and beer sold there is
just made there? Hardly.

The problems I see with stadiums and other high capital endeavors is that
many areas don't keep them for 30+ years so that they can actually recoup
the massive investment required. In addition, by building it in the late
60's/early 70's, construction costs were a pittance compared to today's
prices. If you don't keep, and use, a massive capital expenditure long
enough to recoup it's initial investment, you're a fool, and that's true of
anything from new cars to sports stadiums.

You also have to consider the very real and tangible issue of community
pride and use. Libraries and museums will never make their money back,
EVER. But we still expect the governments to help build and maintain them.
You could even carry the argument to municipal utilities. Why have the
government involved in them when we have to pay for their use? Why not just
let private enterprise do it? Simple, the capital outlay is so high for
something that the public (through a vote) may (or may not) deem as "the
public good" that private enterprise, in having to finance through
conventional means, could never make a financial go of it.

I'm not speaking in favor of or against new sports complexes, if ever there
is a local issue, that's it and I'm pretty sure that Milberger isn't going
to be home to any professional sports teams in the near future. All I did
was point out in answer to the question of "I wonder if there is a community
anywhere that has actually had a net economic benefit from a sports
stadium?" that yes, I'm quite certain that over the last 32 years KC has had
a major net economic benefit from the Truman Sports Complex.

So, the answer to your question is, YES.

John Stricker

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
John Stricker wrote:



Making money in what way? Most analyses I've seen of sports complexes
show that while they may make money at the operations level, they never
return the initial capital investment made by the taxpayers. Why do you
think that more private investors don't build sports stadiums? Trust me,
if they REALLY made money, it wouldn't require government support to build
them.


Matt

Unk,

What, is the senile dementia creeping in? Didn't we just talk on the phone
for a couple of hours the last day or two?? 8-)

(then again, it could be MY senile dementia, so who am I to cast stones?)

BTW- I STILL have that $50 we have set aside to buy
steaks...............when you coming?

John Stricker

"Barnyard BOb -" wrote in message
...


Absolutely. Just not recently since construction costs have soared. Ask
the people in KC if the Truman Sports Complex has had a net economic
benefit
over the past 30 years. Then ask them if they approved the tax issue on
improvements this last election.

(answers: yes and no)

John Stricker
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Say, Steakbreath...
Where the H__ have you been?
Herding heifers in the Kansass heat?


Barnyard BOb - too klose to KC for komfort

Depends on the time frame.

In KC's case, the complex has been hosting games for 32 years, both baseball
and football, at the same location with two stadiums. This kept the land
acquisition costs down, relatively speaking, and shared parking and other
facilities. The architect of the Truman complex was really ingenious in how
little it actually cost, although at the time everyone was screaming
extravagance. The cost of the stadium when completed, including both the
football and baseball stadiums, as well as all parking and support
requirements was $43 million dollars. In today's dollars, that is about
$195 million, for TWO stadiums, so when I say the architect was an ingenious
fellow, I'm not kidding.

Fast forward now to 2004. 32 seasons of professional football and baseball.
Untold numbers of concerts and other special events. Look at the
development in the area of hotels/motels and other ancillary businesses. On
gameday in KC, you can't find a hotel room within 10 miles of the stadium
for Saturday and Sunday nights. Figure the room tax revenue on that for 32
years. Figure the amount the stadium pays annually for utilities. Salaries
(and their accompanying withholdings) for 32 years for about 100 games per
season of professional sports. Think all that food and beer sold there is
just made there? Hardly.

The problems I see with stadiums and other high capital endeavors is that
many areas don't keep them for 30+ years so that they can actually recoup
the massive investment required. In addition, by building it in the late
60's/early 70's, construction costs were a pittance compared to today's
prices. If you don't keep, and use, a massive capital expenditure long
enough to recoup it's initial investment, you're a fool, and that's true of
anything from new cars to sports stadiums.

You also have to consider the very real and tangible issue of community
pride and use. Libraries and museums will never make their money back,
EVER. But we still expect the governments to help build and maintain them.
You could even carry the argument to municipal utilities. Why have the
government involved in them when we have to pay for their use? Why not just
let private enterprise do it? Simple, the capital outlay is so high for
something that the public (through a vote) may (or may not) deem as "the
public good" that private enterprise, in having to finance through
conventional means, could never make a financial go of it.

I'm not speaking in favor of or against new sports complexes, if ever there
is a local issue, that's it and I'm pretty sure that Milberger isn't going
to be home to any professional sports teams in the near future. All I did
was point out in answer to the question of "I wonder if there is a community
anywhere that has actually had a net economic benefit from a sports
stadium?" that yes, I'm quite certain that over the last 32 years KC has had
a major net economic benefit from the Truman Sports Complex.

So, the answer to your question is, YES.

John Stricker

For some facilities, the answer might just barely be YES but for the majority
the answer, if not a major drain on the tax payers, is at best break even.
Even when the answer is YES,, it is a drain on the entire tax base to benefit a
very few. I would say that the original Astrodome would have qualified as a
major benefit to the Houston community when it was built back in 1965. The
Mayor of Houston at that time had a vision of his community and the dome was a
major part of that vision. Yes, he was flamboyant and rich but he also loved
Houston and spent most of his efforts in building the city. The Astrodome was
visionary at the time and designed as both an indoor stadium and a mixed use
stadium. It served as a home for NFL Football, College Football, ML Baseball,
convention space, rodeo, and a multitude of other sports events.

But then enter the era of rich egos who each wanted their own special stadium
and suddenly the Astrodome just wasn't good enough for them. The Oilers owner
Bud Adams didn't think he was getting enough money from the dome and demanded
200 million be spent to upgrade and add more executive suites. Then just a
couple of years after we paid the blackmail money to Adams, he returns wanting
even more with a new stadium just for the Oilers. The voters told him to go
screw and he moves the team to Tenn. So then, the Astros owner decides to do
the same thing, and demands a new stadium too or he would move the Astros
elsewhere. This time, the voters caved in and spent 300 million for a new
downtown stadium that has fewer seats, closable roof that looks like ****, and
no parking in a part of town that I won't visit in daylight much less after
dark. Oh yes, I almost forgot that now the tickets cost double what they did
and parking can cost $20 or more.

Next, we manage to pay hundreds of millions to get a new expansion football
team out of the NFL on the provision that the taxpayers spend close to 1/2
billion dollars for another football only stadium right next to the Astrodome
which is now setting unused and being allowed to fall into disrepair. The big
promise to Houston was that we would get a superbowl from the deal. Once
again, the taxpayers were convinced by multimillion dollar media campaigns paid
for by the only people who really stand to gain from the stadiums that it was
the only way to go. (OH, least I forget, the stadium is used for the annual
rodeo and concerts but everyone that I have talked with says it is horrible and
would rather be back in the dome.)

Not to be outdone by the Astros or the Texans, now comes the Houston Rockets
Basketball team with the same demands. Their stadium, which wasn't that old to
begin with, suddenly was not upto the standards of the NBA and if we didn't do
something quick, the NBA and the Rockets would leave town as soon as their
lease was up. So yet again, the voters of Houston caved in to the blackmail
and built another super venue for the Rockets. The total cost to the taxpayers
of Houston and Harris County is over $1 billion dollars. Oh, but it doesn't
stop there. That figure only includes the costs of construction and doesn't
include the ongoing costs to support those facilities and the infrastructure
changes which have also had to be made to accompany them. The downtown parks
have resulted in millions more required to handle the traffic and other
problems from the stadiums. The security issues of the stadiums have been a
nightmare which only grows worse. And to add insult to the injury, we are
still paying for the hundreds of millions spent on the Astrodome which now sets
empty and unused.

The worst part of all of this is that not only do all the taxpayers have to pay
for these facilities but the ticket prices have gotten so high that the average
person can no longer afford to attend any of the events.




Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

"John Stricker" wrote:

.... I bet he voted against
the tax issue.
=======================================

Of course, I voted against it, dearest nefoo.
In my shoes, only a total dummy would do otherwise.

I'm weary of wealthy Kansass freeloaders sucking up
stadium air and entertainment duty free, while this
poor overburdened taxpaying dupe never gets so
much as an invite. Let the stadium gates close, I say.
Let the Kansass folks take their turn in the barrel and
let the Missouri fans off the hook for the next 30 years,
if they care to be so burdened.

In all honesty, I think the Chiefs and Royals need to move on.
Sports is very big money now and KC is small potatoes. Perhaps
it's time for the billionaire owners and millionaire players to move
on to pillage the cities that can better afford them.

KC is a cow town.
Bring back the cows and stockyards.
I miss 'em.


Barnyard BOb - Moooooooooooo

BTW- I STILL have that $50 we have set aside to buy
steaks...............when you coming?

John Stricker
=============================

How 'bout when the Chiefs build their new
stadium in Kansass on your dime/dollar. g


Unk

On 26 Nov 2004 01:42:10 GMT, osite (RobertR237)
wrote:



I am looking at the Garland or Rockwall area but still haven't made a decision
yet.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

In what area will you be working? Kids in school? I'm familiar with
most areas of the Metroplex. Plus traffic arteries.