Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
US Cell Deal Highlights https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=100404 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | bigfan [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:45 am ] |
Post subject: | US Cell Deal Highlights |
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-sox-cell-funding-isfa-met-20160521-story.html Though the ballpark has now been paid for, a variety of taxes continue to underwrite millions of dollars' worth of renovations for a facility economists say has limited economic impact on Chicago. "The return of investment is really low, maybe negative" for the public, University of Chicago sports economist Allen Sanderson said. Payments for bonds funding the stadium's construction were completed six years ago. But the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, the public agency that owns and operates the Cell, has other responsibilities: nearly $430 million in debt related to renovations at the ballpark and a major overhaul of Soldier Field, including $36 million in payments owed this year. Then-Gov. Jim Thompson worked the floors of the General Assembly to pass a law creating the facilities authority in order to build a new ballpark. (Thompson later served as the authority's board chairman.) The clock on the House floor was turned off in order to meet a midnight deadline. the deal requires any nonbaseball events to be approved by the Sox, which some have said deprives the authority of the opportunity to book concerts and other lucrative activities. the authority paid nearly $7 million to build a 10,000-square-foot restaurant outside the stadium, now called the ChiSox Bar & Grill. The team pitched in $1 million, but the authority agreed to forgo any profits at Reinsdorf's request.???????????? Under the deal, the Sox didn't have to pay a fee for use of the stadium until 2008. In 2015, that fee amounted to about $1.6 million. The Sox also must pay a fee on each ticket sold in excess of 1.93 million in paid attendance. Since 2008, the Sox have paid that fee only in 2010, when games drew 2.2 million fans. However, the Sox were allowed to apply a credit based on the taxes the team paid that year, reducing the ticket fee payment from $455,974 to $95,531. Despite leading its division this season, the Sox have the second-worst total attendance in baseball. In 2001, state lawmakers passed legislation so the authority could issue bonds for renovations at Soldier Field — changes that then-Mayor Richard Daley and others said were needed to keep the Bears in Chicago. (AKA The NO DOME DEAL) And MY FAVORITE PART!!!!!!!! [b]Sox spokesman Scott Reifert defended the arrangement with the authority and said the Sox turned down a "better" deal to stay in Chicago.[/b] |
Author: | donspiracy [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
The Havana White Sox keeps sounding better everyday. |
Author: | bigfan [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:52 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
donspiracy wrote: The Havana White Sox keeps sounding better everyday. 2029 Will come, Jerry will be gone, none of his kids have the stones to get the deal he did, unless another Daley gets the Throne, that could be the end. By then Vegas wont want them, they will have a pro team. San Antonio White Sox. Hmmmm? |
Author: | Hussra [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:54 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
bigfan wrote: And MY FAVORITE PART!!!!!!!! [b]Sox spokesman Scott Reifert defended the arrangement with the authority and said the Sox turned down a "better" deal to stay in Chicago.[/b] if you repeat a lie enough, you might start to believe it yourself. |
Author: | stats [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:54 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Charlotte. When not if. |
Author: | donspiracy [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
If the Sox literally go in that direction, it would be to Monterey or Mexico City. Think bigger Biggie! |
Author: | Hussra [ Sat May 21, 2016 9:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Mexico City, Montreal will be the next 2. Maybe Vancouver any expansion teams in the US will likely come at the expense of relatively popular AAA franchises nashvegas/charlotte/austin/portland |
Author: | America [ Sat May 21, 2016 10:02 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Why would the most popular team in the countries' third largest city go anywhere? |
Author: | America [ Sat May 21, 2016 10:04 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Hussra wrote: Mexico City, Montreal will be the next 2. Maybe Vancouver any expansion teams in the US will likely come at the expense of relatively popular AAA franchises nashvegas/charlotte/austin/portland Yea the immensely popular Portland AAA team that doesn't exist. |
Author: | bigfan [ Sat May 21, 2016 11:04 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
donspiracy wrote: If the Sox literally go in that direction, it would be to Monterey or Mexico City. Think bigger Biggie! I have always thought MLB should have a Mexico city team. I know it has been on the radar for MLB for quite some time, but I also know they have some reservations about Mexico on many levels. Security issue of building a 100,000 seat facility of mostly bleachers, altitude of Mexico city (higher than Denver) and where the money for the teams REALLY comes from...Yeah, those cartel guys. Besides that....Play ball! |
Author: | Hussra [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:04 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Last time I was in PDX they had a team. Didn't know they lost it. I thought it was appropriately named given the prevalence of crunchy granola grrls in that town. |
Author: | THE INQUISITOR [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:16 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
America wrote: Why would the most popular team in the countries' third largest city go anywhere? The Astros aren't going anywhere.... http://wgntv.com/2015/09/14/houston-to-surpass-chicago-as-3rd-largest-city-in-us-within-10-years-report/ |
Author: | Kirkwood [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
The only reason Sox haven't moved to Charlotte, Nashville or Vegas has to be the sweet Cell lease deal, right? I wonder if Charlotte/Vegas comes knocking with sweetheart deal who says take it first? IL/Chicago or the Sox. |
Author: | Chet Coppock's Fur Coat [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
I would think that the risk of kidnapping would be sufficient to keep many non-Mexican free agents from playing in Mexico City. Hell, having to learn French supposedly was an issue for the Expos' recruiting efforts. |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:24 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
*yawn |
Author: | THE INQUISITOR [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Frank Coztansa wrote: *yawn up late watching The Jakemeister" get lit or bored watching a NL reject dominate your sock? |
Author: | Curious Hair [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Hussra wrote: Last time I was in PDX they had a team. Didn't know they lost it. I thought it was appropriately named given the prevalence of crunchy granola grrls in that town. I think what happened was the Beavers', by cracky, ballpark was retrofitted into a new soccer stadium that wouldn't accommodate baseball anymore. Portland chose soccer over baseball and the team moved to, I want to say El Paso or Tucson or somewhere in the Southwest. Oregon's only baseball now is Single A and I think they're fine with that. |
Author: | America [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
THE INQUISITOR wrote: America wrote: Why would the most popular team in the countries' third largest city go anywhere? The Astros aren't going anywhere.... http://wgntv.com/2015/09/14/houston-to-surpass-chicago-as-3rd-largest-city-in-us-within-10-years-report/ Reading comprehension has Cubs Nation running in circles. |
Author: | America [ Sat May 21, 2016 12:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
They have a team again, but it's in the burbs. They play at some dump indistinguishable from a high school ballpark. It's not ML affiliated baseball anymore, probably never will be. I saw a game at this horrid shopping mall just off I-5 in Kiezer (northern reaches of Salem) and it sucked. Nobody knows the first thing about baseball in that state, they either lord their EPL fandom over you or incessantly bitch about the Ducks. The Beavers fans are OK, Corvallis is an underrated town. |
Author: | FavreFan [ Sat May 21, 2016 1:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
I could root for the Mexico City White Sox. That'd be alright. Fuck Nashville and Charlotte. |
Author: | Curious Hair [ Sat May 21, 2016 8:25 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
America wrote: They have a team again, but it's in the burbs. They play at some dump indistinguishable from a high school ballpark. It's not ML affiliated baseball anymore, probably never will be. The Hillsboro Hops? They're short-season A, which is affiliated, but barely. It's a step above indie college wood-bat. Quote: I saw a game at this horrid shopping mall just off I-5 in Kiezer (northern reaches of Salem) and it sucked. Nobody knows the first thing about baseball in that state, they either lord their EPL fandom over you or incessantly bitch about the Ducks. The Beavers fans are OK, Corvallis is an underrated town. Apparently that team and the one in Eugene are all short-season A. |
Author: | BeerFan [ Sun May 22, 2016 9:26 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Habana White Sox. What a great idea. Makes way more sense than Mexico City or Monterey as fans would not have to worry about being beheaded by Los Zetas if in Habana. Also, would fuck that bullshit owner of Miami team. Also would fill up the cheap seats with local fans every day. How many Mexican playas in MLB? Castro's not gonna live much longer and new guys will love them some USA cash. Also Ozzie could help continue the warm Cuba-Venezuela partnership. Mark Cuban as owner if he doesn't get the nod from Hillary. Minoso Estadio and Casino has real smooth sound. |
Author: | bigfan [ Sun May 22, 2016 9:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Many elements of that deal work. Then Keny can go back to bragging about the White Sox superior Latin culture, because nothing says LATINO like a guy named VENTURA! |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Sun May 22, 2016 10:11 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
bigfan wrote: because nothing says LATINO like a guy named VENTURA! |
Author: | THE INQUISITOR [ Sun May 22, 2016 10:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
this is the full 400 + page agreement: http://www.isfauthority.com/assets/management-agreement-with-all-amendments2.pdf here are the highlights on how long they are here: Section 2.05. Length of Term. The "Original Term" of this Agreement shall end on November 30 following the end of the twentieth (20th) full Season following the Completion Date. Upon determination of the last day of the Original Term, the parties shall execute a supplement to this Agreement setting forth the Completion Date, the Commencement Date and the last day of the Original Term. so they were there for 20 years starting in 1991 so that makes 2011 Section 2.06. Extension Options. Team shall have the right to extend the Term of this Agreement for four (4) successive five-year periods ("Extension Terms"), such right to be exercised separately with respect to each such five-year period by notice given on or before July 1 prior to the end of the Original Term or Extension Term in progress, as the case may be, and to be exercisable only so long as Team is not in Default hereunder either at the time of the exercise thereof or at the commencement of such Extension Term. The terms and conditions applicable during each Extension Term shall be as set forth herein, except that in no event shall the operation of this Section result in the Original Term being extended for more than twenty (20) years. Failure by Team to exercise its option with respect to any such five-year period shall automatically terminate its options(s) for any succeeding five-year period(s). The Original Term and any Extension Terms are sometimes herein referred to collectively as the "Term". and can stay for another 20 so that means 2031 with opt outs after 2016,2021 and 2026 “Team shall not enter into any contract or agreement of any kind to transfer the Team’s franchise to a location other than the stadium unless” there is a major or other default by Authority or the Term of this Agreement has expired. –pg. 72 so they can not move unless they do not renew the agreement every 5 years or the state defaults Do if you are Jerry do you renew in 2016 ? |
Author: | bigfan [ Sun May 22, 2016 12:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Frank Coztansa wrote: *yawn Always boring when the class is too hard to understand. |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Sun May 22, 2016 2:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Yep. It's impossible to understand why someone who now lives out of state continues to take shot at the Sox, and then claim they do not care or are not obsessed. |
Author: | RFDC [ Sun May 22, 2016 2:21 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Frank, so if you moved out of state you would stop taking shots at the Cubs? Come on man, who you crappin? |
Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Sun May 22, 2016 2:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
Bigfan starts WAY more Sox threads than I do Cubs threads. |
Author: | Curious Hair [ Sun May 22, 2016 2:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: US Cell Deal Highlights |
America wrote: Why would the most popular team in the countries' third largest city go anywhere? With the Braves and Rangers deciding they need new ballparks already, I wouldn't be surprised if the White Sox did the same in the near future, making the same phony "we don't play where our fans live" argument the Braves made and hightailing it to the south/southwest burbs. |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |