Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic - Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow

Wait, if the Sox are a cow, does that make them wife beaters?

Good for him. If you can get something fo nothing, why the fuck shouldn't he?

I doub't he took a taxi.

Obsessed.

Cubs= Owners of their park
Sox and Bears= tennants

If the Cubs want to become renters, I am sure the state would be more than willing to take ownership of Wrigley and fund some of the improvements. If not, the state is right to tell the Cubs to piss off.

Jerry doesn't own his park. The Cubs do. Until that changes, quit whining.

Jesus Fucking Christ. The "Jerry & the White Sox are tenants" argument is about as fucking stupid as it gets. So the MF'r gets handed a GOLDEN fucking lease.....doesn't have to pay any rent if his attendance is low....gets CONTINUED funds EVERY fucking year to "renovate" the stadium.....Gets to VETO, and does, any other potential events that might benefit the city, state and JOE TAX PAYER.....and all this is done on sweat and hard work and at a cost to each citizen of the state.....but there is nothing wrong with that because he is a "tenant"? So...Kudos to Jerry for the cheap fucking tight ass that he is...and for being able to bend over the state, bend over Joe Public, bend over the politicians and fuck them all in the ass.

So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right! :roll:

Because I deleted...

So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right! :roll:

I was always under the impression that the "tenant" thing was just a sweetheart deal to keep him from paying all the otherwise required taxes. He's not a tenant in the same sense that a renter of an apartment is a tenant. He keeps almost all of the money earned at Comiskey, and pays less in taxes because he's a tenant and not an owner. I don't see how that entitles him to further state funding.

Irish Boy wrote:

He's more like a tenant in a commercial storefront. The business owner keeps almost all of the money earned and simply pays a fee for rent.

walkrman5 wrote:

Paid for by the U.S. Cellular naming deal.

Maybe the Ricketts should sell the naming rights to Cadbury.

bigfan wrote:

Because I deleted...

Closer, but in this case, the storefront owner would be losing money. That's the problem. Being a tenant is better than being an owner to Reinsdorf. It's a "please don't throw me into the briar patch" situation.

I don't know the answer to this. Do you know how much money the White Sox received last year? Do you know how much they made the state?

Irish Boy wrote:

I don't know the answer to this. Do you know how much money the White Sox received last year? Do you know how much they made the state? How does the entertainment tax, which White Sox fans contributed to, factor in?

The Sox are a Tenant, holds some water, as I agree that Upkeep and maintenance on the building should be done by the state as to not let it fall apart, but If I leased a store and came back to the Landlord at the end of the year with my list of 'Improvements" they would shit.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:06 am ]
Post subject:	Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Bonds for the Cell will be paid off in 2021. Soldier Field bonds will be retired in 2031. If amusement tax growth is not great enough by then to retire the Wrigley bonds, the Cubs intend to borrow from the hotel tax and pay it back by extending the life of the bonds. That could force the city and state to forfeit amusement tax growth for even longer than 35 years. But here's the catch: If the Cubs move to the head of the line, the Bears and Sox could be deprived of the money they may need to complete stadium renovations. "They're assuming we won't need any major work at Soldier Field and U.S. Cellular Field. These are assets of the state and city that need to be upgraded," said a source familiar with the deal.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:22 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
For Frank, Because I deleted his ever witty image of the movie Obsessed, the above are not my comments. Fran Spielman, Sun Times

Author:	sjboyd0137 [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:23 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Wait, if the Sox are a cow, does that make them wife beaters?

Author:	Terry's Peeps [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:26 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
sjboyd0137 wrote: Wait, if the Sox are a cow, does that make them wife beaters? Fuckin' A.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:30 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
"Sox Chairman Jerry Reinsdorf opposed the Soldier Field deal until he got something out of it -- the right to sell naming rights of the former Comiskey Park to finance continued renovations. " http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/2890432,CST-NWS-wrigley13.article

Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=52821	Page 1 of 2

Author:	mel junior [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:35 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Never mind the fact that the White Sox (and Bears) are rent-paying tenants and the state is the landlord while the Chicago Cubs own their facility. IF the Ricketts Family want to cede ownership rights to the state .... "That would be f***ing golden!" Perhaps I can have the landlord of the apartment complex down the street from me pay for the new windows in my house. It would only be fair, right? Because if they don't, I might ..... ummm .....errr ....

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:46 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Obsessed. Cubs= Owners of their park Sox and Bears= tennants If the Cubs want to become renters, I am sure the state would be more than willing to take ownership of Wrigley and fund some of the improvements. If not, the state is right to tell the Cubs to piss off.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Terry's Peeps wrote: Good for him. If you can get something fo nothing, why the fuck shouldn't he? Yeah, Jerry just popped into the General Assembly one day and asked, they said OK and Jerry jumped back in his awaiting taxi.

Author:	Terry's Peeps [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:00 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
I doub't he took a taxi.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:15 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Terry's Peeps wrote: I doub't he took a taxi. You would be surprised.

Author:	whistler [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Frank Coztansa wrote: Obsessed. Cubs= Owners of their park Sox and Bears= tennants If the Cubs want to become renters, I am sure the state would be more than willing to take ownership of Wrigley and fund some of the improvements. If not, the state is right to tell the Cubs to piss off. exactly

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Frank Coztansa wrote: Obsessed. Cubs= Owners of their park Sox and Bears= tennants If the Cubs want to become renters, I am sure the state would be more than willing to take ownership of Wrigley and fund some of the improvements. If not, the state is right to tell the Cubs to piss off. So it's good business when Jerry gets the handout and its wrong when the Cubs ask for it? fyi, the Cubs are using Jerry's guy to try and get this done...Madigan

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Jerry doesn't own his park. The Cubs do. Until that changes, quit whining.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Frank Coztansa wrote: Jerry doesn't own his park. The Cubs do. Until that changes, quit whining. JERRY doesn't own HIS park. Some great operative words. He owns that park more than you know Frank. Please remember, you are agreeing with Whistler in this thread? "I am on that show, but it's not my show"

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Let me spell it out for your, since you seem to either want to ignore it or just not admit that you are talking about 2 different things. White Sox rent the park they play in Cubs own the park the play in. But of course, "I AM AGAINST THIS TAX" right?

Author:	walkrman5 [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Jesus Fucking Christ. The "Jerry & the White Sox are tenants" argument is about as fucking stupid as it gets. So the MF'r gets handed a GOLDEN fucking lease.....doesn't have to pay any rent if his attendance is low....gets CONTINUED funds EVERY fucking year to "renovate" the stadium.....Gets to VETO, and does, any other potential events that might benefit the city, state and JOE TAX PAYER.....and all this is done on sweat and hard work and at a cost to each citizen of the state.....but there is nothing wrong with that because he is a "tenant"? So...Kudos to Jerry for the cheap fucking tight ass that he is...and for being able to bend over the state, bend over Joe Public, bend over the politicians and fuck them all in the ass. So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right!

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:53 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
walkrman5 wrote: Jesus Fucking Christ. The "Jerry & the White Sox are tenants" argument is about as fucking stupid as it gets. So the MF'r gets handed a GOLDEN fucking lease.....doesn't have to pay any rent if his attendance is low....gets CONTINUED funds EVERY fucking year to "renovate" the stadium.....Gets to VETO, and does, any other potential events that might benefit the city, state and JOE TAX PAYER.....and all this is done on sweat and hard work and at a cost to each citizen of the state.....but there is nothing wrong with that because he is a "tenant"? So...Kudos to Jerry for the cheap fucking tight ass that he is...and for being able to bend over the state, bend over Joe Public, bend over the politicians and fuck them all in the ass. So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right! He is a Tenant that gets to re-write his own lease as he sees fit. The Sox are a Tenant, holds some water, as I agree that Upkeep and maintenance on the building should be done by the state as to not let it fall apart, but If I leased a store and came back to the Landlord at the end of the year with my list of 'Improvements" they would shit.

Author:	Irish Boy [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
I was always under the impression that the "tenant" thing was just a sweetheart deal to keep him from paying all the otherwise required taxes. He's not a tenant in the same sense that a renter of an apartment is a tenant. He keeps almost all of the money earned at Comiskey, and pays less in taxes because he's a tenant and not an owner. I don't see how that entitles him to further state funding.

Author:	Krazy Ivan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
bigfan wrote: Because I deleted...

Author:	mel junior [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 3:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
walkrman5 wrote: So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right! Paid for by the U.S. Cellular naming deal. Maybe the Ricketts should sell the naming rights to Cadbury.

Author:	Brick [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:00 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Irish Boy wrote: I was always under the impression that the "tenant" thing was just a sweetheart deal to keep him from paying all the otherwise required taxes. He's not a tenant in the same sense that a renter of an apartment is a tenant. He keeps almost all of the money earned at Comiskey, and pays less in taxes because he's a tenant and not an owner. I don't see how that entitles him to further state funding. He's more like a tenant in a commercial storefront. The business owner keeps almost all of the money earned and simply pays a fee for rent.

Author:	Irish Boy [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Irish Boy wrote: I was always under the impression that the "tenant" thing was just a sweetheart deal to keep him from paying all the otherwise required taxes. He's not a tenant in the same sense that a renter of an apartment is a tenant. He keeps almost all of the money earned at Comiskey, and pays less in taxes because he's a tenant and not an owner. I don't see how that entitles him to further state funding. He's more like a tenant in a commercial storefront. The business owner keeps almost all of the money earned and simply pays a fee for rent. Closer, but in this case, the storefront owner would be losing money. That's the problem. Being a tenant is better than being an owner to Reinsdorf. It's a "please don't throw me into the briar patch" situation. Then, on top of that, being a tenant is used as an excuse for further state funding.

Author:	bigfan [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
mel junior wrote: walkrman5 wrote: So because he is a tenant, this is all ok? How many times are they going to rebuild the stadium? Maybe they should put blue seats back in. Maybe they should move the walls back. Maybe they should take that new roof off and add more seats to the upper deck. Yeah...yeah...lets all cheer for Jerry because he is only a tenant and rebuilding & remodeling the stadium year after year after year doesn't cost Joe Public or Joe Tqax Payer anything right? Right! Paid for by the U.S. Cellular naming deal. Maybe the Ricketts should sell the naming rights to Cadbury. That US Cell money was spent in one season when they redid the upper deck, but being that Jerry didnt have the right to sell the name of the Park and the State did, wouldn't that have been nice for the State to make some money on the deal? I do think Fran Spielman got it totally wrong about US Cell naming rights in exchange for the Bears new facility. I think they were in two totally different time periods. However, Jerry did get $35 Mill when the bears renovated Soldier field, from a deal he first rejected. Funny how that worked out

Author:	Free Ajent [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:19 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Krazy Ivan wrote: bigfan wrote: Because I deleted... Exactly! Pretty soon you'll be gone too!

Author:	Brick [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Irish Boy wrote: Closer, but in this case, the storefront owner would be losing money. That's the problem. Being a tenant is better than being an owner to Reinsdorf. It's a "please don't throw me into the briar patch" situation. I don't know the answer to this. Do you know how much money the White Sox received last year? Do you know how much they made the state? How does the entertainment tax, which White Sox fans contributed to, factor in?

Author:	Frank Coztansa [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Boilermaker Rick wrote: I don't know the answer to this. Do you know how much money the White Sox received last year? Do you know how much they made the state? And here come the attendance quips...

Author:	Irish Boy [ Tue Nov 16, 2010 4:41 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
Boilermaker Rick wrote: Irish Boy wrote: Closer, but in this case, the storefront owner would be losing money. That's the problem. Being a tenant is better than being an owner to Reinsdorf. It's a "please don't throw me into the briar patch" situation. I don't know the answer to this. Do you know how much money the White Sox received last year? Do you know how much they made the state? How does the entertainment tax, which White Sox fans contributed to, factor in? I'm not sure whether there is any way of knowing without going into the books. I'm positive the White Sox did not net any money for the state, though they certainly paid tax on something. My only point is that ownership is a bundle of good things and bad things. Not being an owner makes you a tenant, but that could mean a whole bunch of different things. The White Sox tenantship at Comiskey leaves Reinsdorf with all the good things that come from ownership and takes away quite a few of the bad ones. Using that tenantship as a reason Reinsdorf should get even more state money ignores that the state is already doing Reinsdorf a favor by granting him that peculiar status as tenant, since within a private system he would never have been able to arrange such a beneficial state of affairs.

Author:	Zippy-The-Pinhead [ Thu Nov 18, 2010 1:54 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Those Incomplete Improvements- The ongoing cash cow
bigfan wrote: The Sox are a Tenant, holds some water, as I agree that Upkeep and maintenance on the building should be done by the state as to not let it fall apart, but If I leased a store and came back to the Landlord at the end of the year with my list of 'Improvements" they would shit. How about if you bought a cash cow of a ballpark with well-known limitations and in less than a year asked the public to finance a major expansion?