Skip to content

Vikings embrace passage of stadium bill, but call it “not workable”

VikingsFans AP

The Vikings have clearly mixed feelings in the wake of Monday night’s passage of a long-awaited stadium bill.  The good news:  The Minnesota House of Representatives passed the vote by a tally of 73-58 (which could look like the typical final score of an NFL game by the time the venue is opened).  The bad news:  The House increased the Vikings’ proposed share by $105 million, from $427 million to $532 million.

That particular amendment is not workable,” Vikings V.P. of stadium wrangling Lester Bagley said, via the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “[But] I don’t want to take away from the moment.”

As the Star Tribune points out, Bagley didn’t say the deal won’t work with the Vikings and the league paying an extra $105 million.  The hope could be that the number is reduced via additional negotiations.

Let’s also not rule out the possibility that the Vikings and the NFL previously envisioned that, at some point, the House and/or the Senate would push the team’s proposed contribution even higher in order to pass the bill.  Thus, the team and the league possibly held back money in the event that this may happen.

Either way, the bill now moves on to the Senate on Tuesday morning at 9:00 a.m. CT, under a version of the proposal that still requires the Vikings and the NFL to pay $427 million.  If the Senate passes the bill without amendment, the two versions would have to be reconciled, possibly with the difference being split and the team and the league kicking in an extra $57.5 million.

Permalink 109 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
109 Responses to “Vikings embrace passage of stadium bill, but call it “not workable””
  1. Carl Gerbschmidt says: May 8, 2012 9:04 AM

    that’s a shame…

  2. tooz72 says: May 8, 2012 9:05 AM

    just move to LA already..sheesh

  3. warrenmoon says: May 8, 2012 9:06 AM

    Woah, woah… I got this

  4. peoplesrepublic0fdabayarea says: May 8, 2012 9:08 AM

    STILL GONNA MOVE TO L.A. LOL

  5. thankheavenfornumberseven says: May 8, 2012 9:10 AM

    No way the extra $105 million stays in the final bill. The Vikings will negotiate an extra $50 million or so and everyone will be happy. By Thursday, our long national nightmare will finally be over.

  6. kurmudge says: May 8, 2012 9:10 AM

    Let’s be real here.

    1) If the Vikings’ plan was solely to get $500 million from the city and state for a nearly $1 billion stadium, and any contingencies are an unrecoverable disaster, the team ownership/management is wildly incompetent.

    2) The Minnesota House handled this pretty well- what do they Vikings do? If they complain that $300 million from the public purse isn’t enough, and stamp their feet and whine unless it is $400 million, they come off as rent-seeking billionaires using crony lobbying to enrich themselves.

    They can build the functional structure and add the gilt-coated face brick later. Or they can find competent architects.

  7. bigwinintx says: May 8, 2012 9:12 AM

    Why they didn’t offer the proposal to the Vikings BEFORE they stuck it in the bill is beyond me.

    The mindset of tagging add-ons onto the bill is not something new in politics, but sticking the team with an additional tax is just plain dumb.

    If they’re trying to force the team to either put up or move, then the move to L.A. seems a lot more imminent.

  8. ninefingers9 says: May 8, 2012 9:12 AM

    The sun is just a little bit brighter this morning! :)

  9. zaggs says: May 8, 2012 9:12 AM

    Really sad when the team is bitching about paying more for its own stadium.

  10. francheyes says: May 8, 2012 9:13 AM

    Yawn…..

  11. AlohaMrHand says: May 8, 2012 9:17 AM

    and the Vikings can still say “screw you were taking our ball and moving west”.

  12. superjroch says: May 8, 2012 9:20 AM

    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.

  13. boswivel says: May 8, 2012 9:21 AM

    I have a wicked case of Vikings-Stadium-Story-Fatigue. Give me Tiki, Bounty, Tebow, RG3, Eavesdrop, McNabb Signing, Talented Cowboys, or other myths. No more Vikesbowl.

  14. skoobyfl says: May 8, 2012 9:21 AM

    and that’s how she rolls.

  15. pistolsmoke says: May 8, 2012 9:23 AM

    Before anyone else says: “Why can’t the Billionaire owner pay for the entire stadium!?” Give me at least 5 owners who paid for the ENTIRE stadium of their NFL team?……..Go on……I’ll wait…..

  16. kconlon89 says: May 8, 2012 9:25 AM

    What does the potential for economic loss for the surrounding area of the stadium look like?

    Shouldn’t that be the question that we all need to answer here? at least from the standpoint of the legislators?

    That said:
    I’m not from the Twin Cities, but I can imagine that things would change a lot for the city if it lost a major sports team such as the Vikings. I’m just using my Detroit Lions as an example — the downtown landscape would still change a lot if the Lions weren’t located downtown – and that’s with the Detroit Tigers literally across the street.

  17. knew8411 says: May 8, 2012 9:28 AM

    zaggs says:May 8, 2012 9:12 AM

    Really sad when the team is bitching about paying more for its own stadium.

    It’d be one thing, if it were “The Vikings Stadium”…but it isn’t. The state of MN will be using, and profitting form the building of this facility.

  18. touchdownroddywhite says: May 8, 2012 9:30 AM

    The difference is $52.5 million. Good guess though…

  19. edenprairieballer says: May 8, 2012 9:30 AM

    Oh give it up Lester. The Legendary MINNESOTA Vikings are here to stay. All of those with the LA Vikings talk can suck on my balls!!!

  20. chrisritch93 says: May 8, 2012 9:30 AM

    Just move and quit wasting the tax payers money on this crap.

  21. desertviking64 says: May 8, 2012 9:30 AM

    The first rule of negotiations is never put up your best offer the first round. I think this was an amendment that was put in to get more votes and it worked. 105 million over 30-40 years is not much, heck they pay that to a QB for 7 years these days.

  22. latchbeam says: May 8, 2012 9:30 AM

    Agree to pay the extra $100 million…Then make them sign a 50 year lease with a $100+ million bailout clause.

  23. cleminem757 says: May 8, 2012 9:31 AM

    Former Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke built FedEx with his own money. I think every team should do the same. Instead, the politicians enforce taxes on people that will never step foot into some stadiums. I was in Milwaukee when that whole thing went down. Selig promptly sold the team and ran with all the money, meanwhile people are still paying for that stadium.

  24. cliffcla says: May 8, 2012 9:31 AM

    Isn’t that the amendment where Minnesota wants half the naming rights revenue? And that half would go towards the states share of the building costs? If so they are not actually asking the Vikings to pay more… But to make less..
    Semantics I know.

  25. cliffcla says: May 8, 2012 9:35 AM

    “Build it and they will come”

  26. malkinrulez says: May 8, 2012 9:37 AM

    Wake
    Me when it is over!

  27. rdcameron says: May 8, 2012 9:38 AM

    Great news for life-long Minnesota Viking fans (like myself). There is still a few more hurdles to get past, but hopefully this will finally get done.

    In other related Viking news, I hope Cris Carter does not get fired for cursing on Mike and Mike just a few minutes ago. When asked about Terrell Owens and his financial troubles, Carter said, “The bigger your shovel, the more $hit you can get yourself into!”

  28. rugdog100 says: May 8, 2012 9:39 AM

    Bill passed House with an amendment attached calling for Vikings to pay an add’l $105 million. The main thing is that it passed… amendments are negotiated in conference prior to final voting. Bagley is setting the tone for future negotiations on the amendment(s), that’s all. People who make this a big deal, are ignorant of how politics works. It’s business as usual.

  29. gmen1987 says: May 8, 2012 9:40 AM

    Move the team. Other cities deserve NFL franchises more than the Twin Cities.

  30. fwippel says: May 8, 2012 9:40 AM

    superjroch says:
    May 8, 2012 9:20 AM
    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.

    ——————————–

    You may get your wish. There are cities (L.A. more prominently) that are willing to build a new stadium without any money from the ownership group.

    On the other hand, once the Vikings leave, and the economic impact is felt full force, the Twin Cities will be left footing the bill for the entire cost of a new stadium that’ll need to be built to land another NFL franchise.

    Cleveland, Houston, St.Louis, and Baltimore all learned this lesson the hard way. They thought they could live without an NFL franchise, and then they all reversed course. There’s no reason to believe things will be any different this time around.

  31. bearsfan4life says: May 8, 2012 9:41 AM

    This is the ultimate proof that they know their stadium is a boondoggle.

    Gifted nearly half a billion and whining that it isn’t enough.

    What is it these billionaires are hiding? What do they know? If the stadium was going to be profitable, venture capitalists would be lining up to make money.

    So who is it we can always count on to flush their money down the toilet? John Q. Taxpayer of course… he’ll believe anything we say as long as the one telling him is wearing a nice suit. Even easier to dupe if he sees it on teevee news.

  32. The Doctor says: May 8, 2012 9:42 AM

    I wonder what Ron Paul would say about this?

  33. ravenator says: May 8, 2012 9:45 AM

    It’s pretty obvious the front office of the Vikings are using this as leverage in order to give the appearance as if they had no choice but to move to LA.

    Minnesota should just stick to hockey, the state clearly views it as the primary sport. Sad though, the business of the NFL can be grimy.

  34. dumplingsrbrown says: May 8, 2012 9:45 AM

    The Vikings just got a good old fashioned pimp slap.

  35. trojan33sc says: May 8, 2012 9:47 AM

    Plenty of $$$ in Los Angeles, this is ridiculous !!

  36. hatesycophants says: May 8, 2012 9:48 AM

    Dear superjroch,

    You are astonishingly ignorant. You are the reason intelligent people hate Vikings fans and Minnesotans in general.

  37. urcrap says: May 8, 2012 9:49 AM

    I wonder if Red McCombs ever told Ziggy “I told you so”?

  38. dukemarc says: May 8, 2012 9:49 AM

    superjroch says:
    May 8, 2012 9:20 AM
    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.

    —————————-

    This is fine attitude to have, just don’t complain when the NFL doesn’t come back to Minnesota or it costs the taxpayers 3 times the money to do so. The Wilfs have a commodity – whether you like it or not – it’s one of 32 and they are the only ones that want to be in Minnesota right now. That “city that can’t afford it”, basically forced their way back into the negotiations after the Vikings had found a new home in the Suburbs. The best funding option(Racino) won’t even be considered because the Politicians are so far in the Native American Casino owner’s pockets it’s not even funny. Heck, even when another tribe(that doesn’t currently own a casino) tried to provide a funding option, they were laughed out of the State Capitol.

    Don’t blame the Vikings, blame the government officials who have strung this thing out over 10 years.

  39. dublindemonszfl says: May 8, 2012 9:51 AM

    superjroch says:
    May 8, 2012 9:20 AM
    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.
    ###################################
    Since when is $292 million, more than $400 million? Pretty sure teh rest of stats are also tweaked to your point of view.

  40. adsbad28 says: May 8, 2012 9:52 AM

    I’ve been supporting the Vikes 100% this entire time. with that said the Vikings and the NFL can for sure come up with more money for the stadium no doubt! Weather it be the 105 million or 50 they have it. I never in a hundred years thought I’d say this but kind of a good move by the house to put the ball back in the Vikings court for now!! C’mon everyone were so close lets get this done.

  41. airstreamtex says: May 8, 2012 9:52 AM

    f*ck the house and the senate – Wilf should buy the Arden Hills property, develop it with his own money and build an outdoor stadium with luxury suites etc…then keep all the profits (parking, retail shops, etc.) & lease the stadium at his will, owning the entire operation lock, stock and barrel. If the franchise leaves Minnesota, these legislatures will realize in hindsight that they seriously made a mistake. but whatever – i dont live in minnesota, i just want to see the vikings stay alive and get back outdoors where they belong.

  42. beedubyatoo says: May 8, 2012 9:53 AM

    superjroch says:
    May 8, 2012 9:20 AM
    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.
    =========================
    Hey Wilfie,

    Did you ever hear of PSL’s, increased ticket prices, stadium naming rights, etc., to enhance revenue? Call Mike Murphy in Green Bay to find out how he has made your arch-rivals so $$$ successful.

    The $105 Million will be made up in a hurry.

  43. mnvikes7897 says: May 8, 2012 9:53 AM

    Keep it going. There’s purple at the end of the tunnel

  44. tlippert says: May 8, 2012 9:54 AM

    My Minnesota math says that if the deal is split, ($105MM/2) it should mean the Vikings/league kick in $$52.5MM. Nice Florio…

  45. cereal blogger says: May 8, 2012 9:55 AM

    Dear Viks,,,,expect bad calls to come your way

  46. jefferee101 says: May 8, 2012 9:55 AM

    Way to go, Bagley. I didn’t think it was possible for you and your rich buddies to come across as an arrogant, greedy a-hole…..I stand corrected.

  47. tjacks7 says: May 8, 2012 9:56 AM

    Bye, Bye, Bye.

    - N’Sync and Ziggy Wilf

  48. bunjy96 says: May 8, 2012 10:01 AM

    When do the citizens file a lawsuit about not have a referendum?

  49. burgundyngold4evr says: May 8, 2012 10:01 AM

    For anyone that does not know, the new stadium will be owned not Mr Wilf, but by the city/state. The state of Minnesota is now trying to get the NLF and Zygi to put up an addition $105mil for a stadium that Zygi will have to rent from the city/state for the 10 games thaey play there a year (not including the playoffs). The state makes money off the sales taxes and a portion of tickets sales and keep all the profit from any other event that they hold at the new venue.

    How does this make any sense? If I were the Vikings I would be calling the Mayflower moving comany and leaving the Vikings name behind and heading WEST.

  50. shiftyshellshocked says: May 8, 2012 10:13 AM

    I’ll bet there’s other teams in the league that would love this deal. Minnesota Raiders, Rams, Bills, Jags, Chargers. If I’m Wilf I’m on the hotline to the commish getting this deal done. Up yours Packers. Skol.

  51. kansacity88 says: May 8, 2012 10:14 AM

    Okay, lemme get this straight…the House FINALLY passed the bill for the stadium, but says that the team ALSO needs to pay an extra $105 million to get this thing built and the Vikes are saying they can’t work with that? Considering they are in a really low sports market? Wow! Take your a$$e$ west then and GTFO of the division and put the Rams in the NFC North……until they move to London!

  52. pastabelly says: May 8, 2012 10:16 AM

    The NFL and Vikings owenership will be perceived as pigs if they refuse this generous offer. This is a joke. At this point, it’s a question of just how much cash Wilf wants to drain from the taxpayers. The government needs to come up with some sort of tax regime where public monies taken by NFL owners is taxed at 75%.

  53. conormacleod says: May 8, 2012 10:18 AM

    I would root for another team to leave their city like many of you do every day here. But then again, I’m not a miserable a-hole of a human being.

  54. jenniferxxx says: May 8, 2012 10:18 AM

    Can’t Zygi just use 20 dollar bills to light his cigars instead of hundreds? I know the rich have socialism … but can’t we temper it a little?

  55. ruvelligwebuike says: May 8, 2012 10:20 AM

    Wilf, Bagley, Goodell and everyone involved who is not familiar with Minnesota Nice are getting a full blast of it with these negotiations.

    Smile, nod, shake hands, remain pleasant, kindly wave…and then tack on that $105 million that was not agreed upon behind their back amongst a group where no one can be singled out. Most gutless people on Earth. Fargo wasn’t made by accident.

  56. cwmorga says: May 8, 2012 10:20 AM

    I believe the House also extended the stadium lease 10 years and wants half of the money made from the sale of the naming rights, which runs another 5-10 million annually. That could be another 150-200 million out of the Vike’s pocket over the course of the 40 year lease.

  57. scytherius says: May 8, 2012 10:22 AM

    This Packer fan has loved this rivalry for decades. The ppl in MINN need better than this. Sadly, just move out of MINN. It’s a shame MINN is stuck with such a myopic Legislature. What a loss.

  58. wludford says: May 8, 2012 10:22 AM

    Minnesotans: Go to vikings.com to contact your Senator in support of a new stadium! Keep the momentum going!

    Ultimately I think a compromise can be worked out between the State and Vikings to bridge the gap if each side gives in $50 million. Vikings can still have naming rights, State is not on the hook for cost overruns, and the deal is done.

    And all the vultures from LA can fly back to their perchs atop their empty stadiums and watch the tumbleweeds roll across the field…

  59. johnnyb216 says: May 8, 2012 10:23 AM

    So glad the packers don’t have this problem. Selling all that “meaningless” stock to fully fund their own construction project without putting the burden on the taxpayer works just fine for me!

  60. AlohaMrHand says: May 8, 2012 10:28 AM

    Has anyone considered if they do relocate it may not necessarily be to LA?Toronto wants a team(at least that’s what the NFL says) and regionally it would make more sense if the Vikings played in Toronto in the NFC north than in LA.I honestly don’t want them to move but in the modern day of sports it’s all about making a profit.Its not right but it is what it is.And LA I was led to believe the stadium deal was dead.

  61. bigperm33 says: May 8, 2012 10:29 AM

    Nothing angers me more in sports than these teams holding cities hostage over public financing for their stadiums. I don’t begrudge what players make. Make all you can. I don’t be grudge what the owners make. Same to you. BUt when you are part of a billion dollar business, and this new stadium will allow you to make even more money, then why does the public have to pay the bill? At all. I love sports as much as anyone, but especially now when things like education are being cut every day around the country, government workers are being let go or having salaries reduced to meet budgets, there is just something very ugly about this entire story. It is greed run amock. I always point to the patriots – Robert Kraft was doing something similar, and Massachusetts would not budge and give him what he wanted. He said it could not be done, it was unworkable. He even got Connecticut to put a very favorable stadium offer on the table. At the end of the day, though, he stayed put, and built the new stadium largely with his own money. Somehow, he was able to do it, and he turned one of the worst stadiums in the NFL into one of the best. Without massive public money like everyone else cries that they need. If it can be done in New England in the late 90s, it can be done anywhere else around the league.

  62. buffalomafia says: May 8, 2012 10:30 AM

    Now Buffalo will be next LA team?

  63. johnnyjagfan says: May 8, 2012 10:31 AM

    If you didn’t see this coming then you’ve just learned a lesson in legislation. The House had to take a whack at it “so” they could vote yes. That way, the Member runs for re-election by saying that they voted yes, but only after cutting spending. Great politics.

  64. purpleguy says: May 8, 2012 10:33 AM

    This issue is boring and reptitive as hell, but posters that are clueless about the process should remain silent and clueless. The $105M was added by a GOP contingent to tank the bill, but now that it’s passed, and likely will pass the Senate, each branch’s conference committee will hammer out a compromise bill that will satisfy everyone and this will be done.

  65. taintedsaints2009 says: May 8, 2012 10:37 AM

    bearsfan4life

    YES!

    thank god somebody gets it.

  66. NationalFlagFootballLeague says: May 8, 2012 10:40 AM

    I couldnt care less if the Vikings leave but i have to respond to the idiot retards who stupidly say that the NFL should pay for their own stadium…blah blah blah. Other cities would roll out the red carpet to entice the NFL to come to their town.
    Would any current NFL city like to lose this???
    ======

    A study released last month by Edgeworth Economics highlights the potential impact of a canceled NFL season. The study states that every city with an NFL franchise stands to lose about $160 million in revenue ($20 million per home game), $5 billion total, and an aggregate of 115,000 jobs. The study was commissioned by the NFLPA. Taking it a step further, Buffalo mayor Byron Brown has gone on the record stating that the city, by far one of the league’s smallest markets, would lose $140 million in economic benefits from a season-long NFL lockout.

  67. TSizzleBallSoHard says: May 8, 2012 10:41 AM

    Maybe the problem isn’t that the owner can’t pay that much but it’s that he doesn’t have to pay that much. If Minnesota was his only option then I’m sure he’d agree to it and pay, but if L.A. is offering a better deal then why pay an extra $100 mil. when you don’t have to?

  68. indywilson40 says: May 8, 2012 10:51 AM

    The Vikings and Lakers reunite.

  69. glac1 says: May 8, 2012 10:53 AM

    Nothing unusual happened in the process. They had to work out a compromise to get the votes needed to assure passage. This happens with most legislation.

  70. drexelvol says: May 8, 2012 10:55 AM

    The NFL should allow the Vikings to sell “shares” in the team like the Packers do. I know it’s not allowed anymore, but if there was a case for an exception, this would be it.

    Either that, or happy trails to L.A. where there will be no fans and the team will move again in five years.

  71. sevensixtwonato says: May 8, 2012 10:56 AM

    bunjy96 says:
    May 8, 2012 10:01 AM
    When do the citizens file a lawsuit about not have a referendum?

    ————————————————

    Because there are no new taxes, I don’t think they can.

  72. cowboysfaninpatriotsland says: May 8, 2012 11:03 AM

    Advice to Ziggy:
    Make arrangements with Ralph Wilson to purchase a minority stake in the Bills with rights of first refusal to purchase the remaining stake. Then, sell the Vikings to AEG, they’ll move them to LA.

    Let the Minnesota Republican Party explain to the people how they lost their football team.

  73. ninefingers9 says: May 8, 2012 11:08 AM

    NationalFlagFootballLeague says:
    May 8, 2012 10:40 AM

    ————–
    Next time you quote somebody else…give credit to the author. Or at least, dont use an exact quote! ; )

    http://www.inc.com/articles/201103/what-an-nfl-lockout-would-mean-to-small-business.html

  74. fmlizard says: May 8, 2012 11:11 AM

    Minnesota state budget for FY 2012 was $37.3B.

    Assuming a 30Y economic life of the stadium and 3% annual budget growth, the average state budget over the life of the stadium works out to $52.46B

    That means the state will spend approximately $1.574T over the life of the new stadium, and the amount in question is .006% of the state budget.

    So incredibly small that Google expresses it in exponents. Get it done, please.

  75. buffaloviking says: May 8, 2012 11:31 AM

    superjroch says:
    May 8, 2012 9:20 AM
    Dear Mr. Wilf: You’re part of an industry that has annual revenue of $9 Billion, and you’re being given a gift of over $400 Million by a state government that shut down a year ago and by a city that can’t afford it. If that’s not workable, then leave. Please. Yesterday.

    SUPERJROCH, why should Ziggy help bail out the State, when he leaves it will shut down again, maybe you can give your job to the person that loses his/her job when the Vikes leave, and oh by the way, you can help fund the 520million hole in revenue,

  76. catman72 says: May 8, 2012 11:35 AM

    I’m sorry, but why should the NFL give Minnesota a hometown discount when LA is begging for a team?

    The overwhelming response to keeping the Vikings in Minnesota has been “meh” so why not move them to a place where they would be appreciated?

  77. thankheavenfornumberseven says: May 8, 2012 11:36 AM

    Maybe the Vikings will agree to paying more upfront but cut down on the $13 million a year they pledged for operating costs.

  78. kevpft says: May 8, 2012 11:46 AM

    Ah, the art of haggling. The theater that allows everyone to save face and deflect criticism while still getting most of what they want. Compromise.

    Part of me wishes that a retractable-roof stadium was possible – it’d be great to unleash Minnesota winters on demand – but if this keeps the Vikes where they belong, then the football fan in me that’s not thinking about all the larger societal implications of this approves.

  79. dcbronco says: May 8, 2012 11:51 AM

    A study released last month by Edgeworth Economics highlights the potential impact of a canceled NFL season. The study states that every city with an NFL franchise stands to lose about $160 million in revenue ($20 million per home game), $5 billion total, and an aggregate of 115,000 jobs. The study was commissioned by the NFLPA. Taking it a step further, Buffalo mayor Byron Brown has gone on the record stating that the city, by far one of the league’s smallest markets, would lose $140 million in economic benefits from a season-long NFL lockout.

    ========

    Another study says people should pay their own way(I am the one that did that study and was the only person that answered). It’s amazing that the owners want cities to pay for their stadiums and that some are willing to do it. It’s also amazing that while cities pay the majority of the cost, the owners use “new” as an excuse for major ticket hikes.

    And if a multi-billion dollar corporation like the NFL can’t pay for it’s own houses. How is the general public expected to pay for a home, school and a car. Add the tax breaks, tax credits and right-offs the NFL will get on top of the price hike and getting new stadiums are an opportunity for profit. GE made over 10 billion in profits and received a refund of almost 4 billion even though they paid no taxes. Trust me, the NFL has some of the same tax lawyers or some just as good.

    Not to mention the favors those box seats get them from our representatives. Let them pay for their own stadiums. Don’t be fooled into believing they don’t make a lot of money.

  80. dcbronco says: May 8, 2012 11:55 AM

    Also, I’m guessing Minnesota has had to make cuts to things like education and police. I think if they have hundreds of millions for a stadium, they should consider other things first.

    Plus small businesses are responsible for the vast majority of the jobs in the US. Loan them the money instead of giving it to a billionaire.

  81. moondog7 says: May 8, 2012 11:55 AM

    When did it become the norm to build Billion dollar stadiums? You telling me you can’t build an open air place for 300 – 500 mil

  82. racksie says: May 8, 2012 11:56 AM

    Geez give a billionaire what he wants, an he still whines. Now, why would I be bothered by that kind of attitude? I think Zygi wants to take his ball and go home. Or the west coast. What a greedy pig. TAKE OUR MONEY, PLEASE? We have to beg the guy nopw? Idiot.

  83. jenniferxxx says: May 8, 2012 11:58 AM

    How can anyone believe that 8 home games and a couple pre-season ones employ 115,000 people? Takes a special kind of person to swallow that tale.

  84. thankheavenfornumberseven says: May 8, 2012 12:00 PM

    dcbronco says:May 8, 2012 11:51 AM
    And if a multi-billion dollar corporation like the NFL can’t pay for it’s own houses. How is the general public expected to pay for a home, school and a car. Add the tax breaks, tax credits and right-offs the NFL will get on top of the price hike and getting new stadiums are an opportunity for profit. GE made over 10 billion in profits and received a refund of almost 4 billion even though they paid no taxes. Trust me, the NFL has some of the same tax lawyers or some just as good.
    __________

    The only way the NFL can get those GE tax breaks is if they power the stadium with windmills.

  85. dcbronco says: May 8, 2012 12:03 PM

    Moondog7 I hear you. But it is Minnesota. I’m sure they hope to get a Super Bowl one day and it ain’t happening in a cold weather city in an outdoor stadium.

    And for those who mention the jobs created. The vast majority are less than part-time jobs. Cleaners and vendors for the handful of events at the stadium. And for every event outside of football that they stadium manages to get, they are most likely just taking it away from another city venue.

  86. wludford says: May 8, 2012 12:04 PM

    To those commenting that the Vikings should sell stock, etc. like the Packers do:

    One legislator proposed as part of the stadium deal that if the Vikings are sold, the State should have the right of first refusal in buying the team, creating a publically-owned team like the Packers.

    The NFL has ruled out any more publically-owned franchises, however, so the amendment was defeated. So, for now there really isn’t anything that can be done about it unless/until the NFL changes it rules on public ownership.

  87. commishroger says: May 8, 2012 12:08 PM

    50 years ago an organization that practiced extortion, gambling, and violence, was known as the Mafia. Today it is known as the National Football League.

    Extortion: Threatening to leave an area that has supported and added value to the franchise for over 50 years, without any recognition of the value-added by the state and local community when demanding a new facility.

    Gambling: Funding state bonds entirely by gambling revenue-at least theoretically. The NFL draws arbitrary lines in the sand when it comes to gambling on “game outcomes”, but is happy to acquiesce to penny-anny schemes like this one. This would be a joke if it were not for the fact that the shortfalls will be paid for Minnesota income-taxpayers.

    Violence: What else have we been talking about the last year? A violent sport, at the pro level, fueled by illicit drugs, supported by illicit money, and now, approved by another governmental authority.

    This is a very, very, very sad day for everyone who still dreams that one day we can have integrity in our politics and fairness in our society.

  88. desertviking64 says: May 8, 2012 12:12 PM

    When the stadium site was moved from Arden Hills to Minneapolis, the Vikings also said that it was an “unworkable” site.

  89. superjroch says: May 8, 2012 12:14 PM

    >>>Since when is $292 million, more than $400 million? Pretty sure teh rest of stats are also tweaked to your point of view.

    —-

    Um, pretty sure you didn’t (or can’t?) read my post fully. I said the > $400M was a gift by the state AND the city, which is chipping in another $125M. I’ll let you get your calculator and do the math, sir.

    The Vikings were never going to move. The Vikings are VERY profitable in the metrodome, just not as profitable as they would be in a new billion dollar stadium. The relocation fee in the NFL is $250M. Do you think Wilf would pay that? The NFL desperately wants to expand to LA, not move there. Expansion is where the money is. If they expand to LA, the owners split $800M. See, $800M > $250M.

    So let’s stop with the childish scare tactics about the Vikings moving. They aren’t. They never were.

    Are you aware of the economic impact of the last 30 stadiums for pro sports teams built for the communities that paid for them? 27 of those communities showed no economic gain and 3 had economic loss. This is from an article in The Nation. Check it out.

    Minnesota is a geographically large state, with the vast majority of representatives outside of the metro area. Take a look at the breakdown of the votes from last night. Nearly all of the metro representatives (R and D) voted No.

    Finally, you will see with the Vikings what you are now seeing with the Twins. Once they get their palace, the last incentive for fielding a winner is now gone. The Twins are projected to lose 110 games this season, they are well on their way. Ticket sales are plummeting, down about 5000 per game so far. The Twins really don’t care. They are fielding a minor league team in a major league city and laughing all the way to Wells Fargo.

  90. superjroch says: May 8, 2012 12:18 PM

    catman72, yeah Los Angeles cared so much for the teams they had that they are both now gone. Los Angeles has no interest in football. Too many other distractions. History tells us that, learn it.

  91. rollteal says: May 8, 2012 12:18 PM

    Just to make it clear, the Lakers relocated to Los Angeles in 1960 and the Expansion Vikings didn’t take the field until 1961. So they were never in Minnesota at the same time.

  92. rightwingguy says: May 8, 2012 12:26 PM

    Wow the stupidity if some of you is mind numbing. The team is effectivly paying for little over half the cost as it is and over half the cost of operations every year for a stadium that they will use 10 times a year. Seems pretty damn fair already to me.
    They will not be the only ones using the stadium, the state is being selfish and trying to take advantage of the best owner we have had in Minnesota.
    Why should the team pay for the whole thing when they are not the ones who will being using it the vast majority of the time? Seems just a little stupid to me.

  93. NationalFlagFootballLeague says: May 8, 2012 12:39 PM

    ninefingers9 says: May 8, 2012 11:08 AM

    NationalFlagFootballLeague says:
    May 8, 2012 10:40 AM

    ————–
    Next time you quote somebody else…give credit to the author. Or at least, dont use an exact quote! ; )

    ===========
    Oh God, get over yourself dude

  94. ruvelligwebuike says: May 8, 2012 12:41 PM

    “Finally, you will see with the Vikings what you are now seeing with the Twins. Once they get their palace, the last incentive for fielding a winner is now gone. The Twins are projected to lose 110 games this season, they are well on their way. Ticket sales are plummeting, down about 5000 per game so far. The Twins really don’t care.”
    ————————-

    Finally, you will see an admission (see above) that when Minnesota teams aren’t winning, the fans won’t show.

  95. mdd913 says: May 8, 2012 12:56 PM

    Please just get this team out of Minnesota already. I can’t think of a more deserving group of “fans” that should lose their team.

  96. chris6523 says: May 8, 2012 12:57 PM

    I was in Milwaukee when that whole thing went down. Selig promptly sold the team and ran with all the money, meanwhile people are still paying for that stadium.

    __________________________________

    Yeah, the 46″ TV I just bought cost me $788.28. Without the damn tax for Miller Park, it would have only cost me $787.49. I had to work an extra minute and a half this week to cover that.

  97. thankheavenfornumberseven says: May 8, 2012 1:08 PM

    ruvelligwebuike says:May 8, 2012 12:41 PM

    “Finally, you will see with the Vikings what you are now seeing with the Twins. Once they get their palace, the last incentive for fielding a winner is now gone. The Twins are projected to lose 110 games this season, they are well on their way. Ticket sales are plummeting, down about 5000 per game so far. The Twins really don’t care.”
    ————————-

    Finally, you will see an admission (see above) that when Minnesota teams aren’t winning, the fans won’t show.
    ____________

    Ruvell, the Twins are 7-21, which projects to 40-122. They’re averaging 33,259 fans per game. Last year, they were 63-99 and averaged 39,112. I’d hardly say that the fans aren’t showing.

  98. dukemarc says: May 8, 2012 1:18 PM

    @superjroch

    You’re right, the Wilfs won’t move the team – but that doesn’t mean they won’t sell it to someone who will.

  99. sevensixtwonato says: May 8, 2012 1:22 PM

    superjroch you think the Twins stink because they have a new stadium? It would have nothing to do with the bottom of the lineup or the fact that they have no starting pitching….its ALL the new stadium.

    Because every team that gets a new stadium then justs puts crap product on the field, every single one, its just one big Fleecing on the American public.

    Do this, grab your mouse and go Start>Shut Down>Turn off Computer

    Thanks

  100. PriorKnowledge says: May 8, 2012 1:42 PM

    That is the way to do business… Agree to a deal, delay the negotiations till the last minute, then change the deal.

    This is why Minnesota will never get a big business to come there. Beside being too cold, there is no stable government to negotiate deals with.

  101. ruvelligwebuike says: May 8, 2012 2:11 PM

    “Ruvell, the Twins are 7-21, which projects to 40-122. They’re averaging 33,259 fans per game. Last year, they were 63-99 and averaged 39,112. I’d hardly say that the fans aren’t showing.”
    —————–

    Right, but in the inaugural year of Target Field (2 years ago) it was the toughest ticket in town. “It’s just great to be a Twins fan!”

    Halfway through the season last year I couldn’t give tickets away.

    Granted, they are horrible. Hopefully Morneau gets over his eyelash getting into his eye, Mauer returns to form, and they get at least one pitcher in the starting rotation that would qualify as a number 3 starter in any other rotation in baseball.

  102. urcrap says: May 8, 2012 2:14 PM

    I hope the $105 million gets sorted out but I won’t blame Wilf and the other investors for walking away from the whole thing. For all of you who think losing the venue is going to improve your roads, education, other government services, your drinking the wrong colored kool aid. Like our elders used to say. Be careful what you ask for. You might just get it.

  103. sevensixtwonato says: May 8, 2012 2:18 PM

    PriorKnowledge says:
    May 8, 2012 1:42 PM
    That is the way to do business… Agree to a deal, delay the negotiations till the last minute, then change the deal.

    This is why Minnesota will never get a big business to come there. Beside being too cold, there is no stable government to negotiate deals with.

    ————————————————–
    3M, Mayo, Target, SPX, Best Buy, IBM.

  104. bluefan204 says: May 8, 2012 2:57 PM

    And in other news, the sun rose in the east this morning…

  105. dukemarc says: May 8, 2012 3:01 PM

    sevensixtwonato says:
    May 8, 2012 2:18 PM
    PriorKnowledge says:
    May 8, 2012 1:42 PM
    That is the way to do business… Agree to a deal, delay the negotiations till the last minute, then change the deal.

    This is why Minnesota will never get a big business to come there. Beside being too cold, there is no stable government to negotiate deals with.

    ————————————————–
    3M, Mayo, Target, SPX, Best Buy, IBM.

    —————————————–

    I believe you just listed local/homegrown companies and PriorKnowledge was referencing new or relocated companies to the Twin Cities – much like Atlanta did in the 90s. The Twin Cities has done a very poor job of of attracting businesses over the past two decades.

  106. Carl Gerbschmidt says: May 8, 2012 3:22 PM

    thankheavenfornumberseven says:May 8, 2012 1:08 PM

    ruvelligwebuike says:May 8, 2012 12:41 PM

    “Finally, you will see with the Vikings what you are now seeing with the Twins. Once they get their palace, the last incentive for fielding a winner is now gone. The Twins are projected to lose 110 games this season, they are well on their way. Ticket sales are plummeting, down about 5000 per game so far. The Twins really don’t care.”
    ————————-

    Finally, you will see an admission (see above) that when Minnesota teams aren’t winning, the fans won’t show.
    ____________

    Ruvell, the Twins are 7-21, which projects to 40-122. They’re averaging 33,259 fans per game. Last year, they were 63-99 and averaged 39,112. I’d hardly say that the fans aren’t showing.
    ——–

    Actually, according to your post, I’d say about 5,583 fewer fans are showing per game. Which is consistent (albeith a bit higher) than Revell’s estimate. Seriously, what is your job? Do you get paid to twist statistics around to suit your own purposes? Cuz, you’re pretty good at it.

  107. skinningcats says: May 8, 2012 3:32 PM

    Just a small problem here……

    It appears this bill requires a contribution from the CITY of Minneapolis of $150 million dollars. The City Charter of Minneapolis CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY demands a city referendum on that contribution. Any attempt to circumvent that referendum will be met with taxpayer lawsuits. LOTS of them. Tea Party types. OWS types. Democracy loving types.

    And most likely they will win those suits.

    This thing is a LONG LONG way from over. Of course the City could just do what the Charter requires and have the referendum without being forced to by a court..but they know a bailout for billionaires giveaway will never pass.

  108. sevensixtwonato says: May 8, 2012 3:34 PM

    Best Buy moved from the east coast….

  109. dcbronco says: May 9, 2012 9:34 AM

    thankheavenfornumberseven,

    You should pay closer attention to what happens in this country. Alternative energy is one form of tax break. That one is available to many of us. Not to the extent is is for GE since they make money for selling windmills and receive money from the government. We would just get a small break.

    But major corporations get tons of breaks that have nothing to do with energy. It’s just free money. Coca-Cola used to(and probably still does) get over 400 million a year to advertise overseas. A multi-billion dollar company can afford it’s own advertising. The oil companies get billions each year in free money to look for oil. Where’s my free money to get me to go to work.

    Many major corporations get tax credits per employee. Sometimes as much as $40,000 each. Corn growers are paid millions not to grow corn. A recent survey showed many Fortune 500 companies don’t pay any taxes. Not all of them dealt with alternative energy.

    The American public just doesn’t have sense enough to demand equal treatment. If corporations are “people”, treat them like everyone else.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!