KDKA revels Rendell Plan

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

KDKA revels Rendell Plan

Postby netwolf on Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:12 am

Slots license winner plus a 5% gaming tax woudl be used to secure a bond to finance the new arena. Pens would have to kick in a one-time $8 million payment and an annual payment of $3 million bucks.

Here's a link to their story: http://kdka.com/topstories/local_story_088224027.html
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,346
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby skullman80 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:14 am

If that is the case, and thats a big IF, that is actually better than what I was expecting.
skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,597
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: New Kensington, PA

Postby SportsFan on Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:17 am

As long tax payers money isn't included. I am still mad about Heinz and PNC.
SportsFan
 

Postby skullman80 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:21 am

SportsFan wrote:As long tax payers money isn't included. I am still mad about Heinz and PNC.


I think it would have to be partially funded by tax payer money. The 90 mill or so that was marked a while back.

So you don't want the IOC to win which would build a new arena for free, but you don't want Plan B either.

You can't have it both ways.
skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,597
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: New Kensington, PA

Postby netwolf on Thu Mar 30, 2006 12:23 am

I will admit, that is better than I expected to see. More answeres are needed though. For example:

Who owns the arena?
Who runs it?
Where does revenue from non-hockey events go?
How much say does the team have in the construction process?
For that matter, how much arena does this plan build? No total cost figure is given.

Hopefully, more answers are provided tomorrow and if they aren't, someone asks the questions. Until these and other questions are answered, I remain skeptical.
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,346
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby Pitts on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:01 am

SportsFan wrote:As long tax payers money isn't included. I am still mad about Heinz and PNC.

What do you think a 5% gaming tax is?
Pitts
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,357
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:22 am
Location: Working ....

Postby schreibdog on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:09 am

Pitts wrote:What do you think a 5% gaming tax is?

I was about to ask the same thing...
schreibdog
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,903
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:16 am
Location: South Park, PA

Postby skullman80 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:30 am

skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,597
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: New Kensington, PA

Postby Draftnik on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:30 am

If the $3M is an annual lease payment or is in lieu of a lease payment and the Pens get to control all revenue streams this deal is too good to be true. The devil is always in the details though, so it is too soon to declare victory.
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

Postby Kicksave on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:31 am

I still don't see how this plan is better than the plan that is giving us a free arena, where the state, city, county nor its residents would have to pay for it.

Image
Kicksave
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 20,572
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:53 am
Location: Feeling like I want to rage...right now.

Postby Henry Hank on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:35 am

Kicksave wrote:I still don't see how this plan is better than the plan that is giving us a free arena, where the state, city, county nor its residents would have to pay for it.

Image


Well, technically, it's not supposed to be. It's supposed to be a back-up plan. Whether or not that's really the case, well, we'll see. At first glance, it certainly sounds good.
Henry Hank
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,480
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Postby skullman80 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:36 am

Kicksave wrote:I still don't see how this plan is better than the plan that is giving us a free arena, where the state, city, county nor its residents would have to pay for it.

Image



I don't think anyone is saying it is. I think that everyone realizes that a Plan "B" is gonna have to at least be looked at with the way things are going.
skullman80
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 18,597
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:55 pm
Location: New Kensington, PA

Postby Jamie on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:10 am

The real question is why now? Rendell is political grandstanding. A plan like this could have been developed a year ago. If Rendell would have offered this plan a year ago, it would have been a building block to finalize things along an arena front. The details may have been bickered over, but it would have been a starting point. Now the fat slug comes up with it, knowing that the PENS can not agree to it at this time. Maybe a year ago, the PENS sign a binding agreement to remain in Pittsburgh under the pretext of this "Plan B". But fast Eddie thought he could push Harrahs plan through without much public backlash, and found out he was wrong-----dead wrong.

If he can come up with this plan now, he could have brain farted it a year or two ago, and the PENS should never have been put in the position they are in now.

I was watching Pittsburgh Sports tonight, and they had a hockey ablyst on from Toronto. Forgive me, I can't remeber his name right now for the life of me. THe guy basically said Mario has exhausted all means to come up with a local ownership to keep the Pens in Pittsburgh. THe guy went on to say, he expects other cities to make a serioud run at the PENS come summer time.

I truly believe before this is over, the dirty politics are going to get worse.
Jamie
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,062
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:04 pm
Location: Here or there

Postby Guido on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:21 am

say the Pens really do want this to happen....can they simply opt out of the IoC plan?

BIGGEST QUESTION>>>>Will this plan still be on the table IF IoC is not awarded the license. If so, then the Pens are pretty much in Pittsburgh for at least the next 30 years. If not, the situation is gloomy.
Guido
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,738
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: PA

Postby Henry Hank on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:25 am

Will this plan still be on the table IF IoC is not awarded the license. If so, then the Pens are pretty much in Pittsburgh for at least the next 30 years. If not, the situation is gloomy.


That's the whole point of the plan. It's a back-up in the case that IoC doesn't get the license.
Henry Hank
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,480
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 2:31 pm

Postby pens9192 on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:42 am

I'm assuming if IoC gets the license, this Plan B is off the table.

It was better than I expected, also.
pens9192
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:27 pm

Postby ExPatriatePen on Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:24 am

Leave it to a Pennsylvania democrat / politician to come up with a new tax to solve a problem instead of letting the private sector handle it.

You've taxed this state to death and pushed out so many major corporations, now you create a new industry and the first thing you do is tax the heck out of it too?

Ohio is on the verge of legalizing slots, I'll bet *they* don't put a 5% tax on their slots.

Of course, he's just given FC / Harrahs a perfect excuse why their $564.10 number won't be met!
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,719
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Postby DayWalker on Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:10 am

Rendell's plan may actually be palatable to all parties involved...

...except for FCE/Harrah's when they actually win the license.

Absent a stautory requirement-i.e. change in the slots legislation-how exactly will FCE/Harrah's be required to finance a new arena? FCE/Harrah's can just as easily tell Rendell to go pound salt. Afterall, unless required by statute (does the Gaming Commission have any authority to demand of any gambling entity X millions of dollars to help finance an arena?), FCE/Harrah's isn't required to do jack squat...
DayWalker
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,744
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:35 pm
Location: Parts Unknown

Postby dboss on Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:37 pm

ExPatriatePen wrote:Leave it to a Pennsylvania democrat / politician to come up with a new tax to solve a problem instead of letting the private sector handle it.

You've taxed this state to death and pushed out so many major corporations, now you create a new industry and the first thing you do is tax the heck out of it too?

Ohio is on the verge of legalizing slots, I'll bet *they* don't put a 5% tax on their slots.

Of course, he's just given FC / Harrahs a perfect excuse why their $564.10 number won't be met!


EPP, I'm not positive but I believe the 5% tax they speak of is an already existing tax on the gaming revenues. Meaning of the 54% tax on gaming, 5% of that tax would go towards the financing of this arena. Its actually a VERY clever plan politically. It sounds like all they are doing is taking money from the slots license winner and the Pens. What is not mentioned is that 5% tax could go to some other purposes, like additional prop. tax relief. IMO it will be tough for the Pens to disparage this plan. They can't bring up the point I just made, because what if they actually need to USE this plan. Also, its much harder for them to tout the IoC plan's private funding because then people are going to say (as they already have) that the Pens don't want to pay their 'fair share'.
dboss
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 540
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:33 am
Location: McCandless Twp, PA

Postby HomerPenguin on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:13 pm

dboss wrote:IMO it will be tough for the Pens to disparage this plan. They can't bring up the point I just made, because what if they actually need to USE this plan. Also, its much harder for them to tout the IoC plan's private funding because then people are going to say (as they already have) that the Pens don't want to pay their 'fair share'.


I don't imagine they will disparage it. They'll let the slots process play out, sell the team to new ownership, and the new owner can be the one to say "Why in blue hell should I fork over $8 million now and $3 million per year until the end of time when I can go field my team in Kansas City for free? So long, folks."
HomerPenguin
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 10,884
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:50 pm
Location: ...

Postby Gunnerfan on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:13 pm

I think after looking at this plan, fast Eddie did a good job here. Pen already made the statement in the past that they wouold be willing to pay about 3 mill. a year, so that is even.

I am still in favor of the IOC plan, but I have to admit, this ain't bad as a back up.
Gunnerfan
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:34 pm
Location: Greensburg,PA

Postby HomerPenguin on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:19 pm

dboss wrote:IMO it will be tough for the Pens to disparage this plan. They can't bring up the point I just made, because what if they actually need to USE this plan. Also, its much harder for them to tout the IoC plan's private funding because then people are going to say (as they already have) that the Pens don't want to pay their 'fair share'.


Anyway, if I were going to disparage this plan as the Penguins, I think I would focus my attention on the fact that there's a deal on the table to pump $1 billion into maybe the most blighted community in the city, to reconnect the once-vibrant uptown to downtown, and Fast Eddie wants to ignore that so his political backers can further clog up Carson Street and avoid dealing with a serious community development issue.
HomerPenguin
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 10,884
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:50 pm
Location: ...

Postby netwolf on Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:24 pm

HomerPenguin wrote:
dboss wrote:IMO it will be tough for the Pens to disparage this plan. They can't bring up the point I just made, because what if they actually need to USE this plan. Also, its much harder for them to tout the IoC plan's private funding because then people are going to say (as they already have) that the Pens don't want to pay their 'fair share'.


I don't imagine they will disparage it. They'll let the slots process play out, sell the team to new ownership, and the new owner can be the one to say "Why in blue hell should I fork over $8 million now and $3 million per year until the end of time when I can go field my team in Kansas City for free? So long, folks."


I don't they will tear it down because on the surface it seems to be a decent proposal. Again, more information is needed before a final determination has been made.

I expect to hear nothing from the Penguins at first, other than a cursory reiteration their previous comments about "we have the best plan already and people should support it" and "we were told there was no money availble and to find a way to get it done ourselves and we did."

I would guess that after a couple days of reviewing it, they will find ways to show how theirs is better. This may hinge largely on the answers to the questions I posed in my original post. Unless we find out that those answers are highly unsatifactory or even unknown, I doubt the team will attempt to tear down the backup option.

Even if they hear all of the detail and are secrtertly exchanging high-fives in the conference rooms, you won't hear them make any positive statements about it though. They are committed to IoC for one, and for two, while the backup plan is (on the surface) good, the IoC doesn't call for the Pens to kick in any money. Free aalways beats almost free. :wink:
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,346
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Postby Draftnik on Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:37 am

HomerPenguin wrote:I don't imagine they will disparage it. They'll let the slots process play out, sell the team to new ownership, and the new owner can be the one to say "Why in blue hell should I fork over $8 million now and $3 million per year until the end of time when I can go field my team in Kansas City for free? So long, folks."


Learn about who put up $50M cash for the KC arena for the rights to run it and profit off all the events there. Do you know who AEG is? KC will not be the cash cow for an NHL team that running a Pittsburgh arena would be.

Did you know the Pens would pay the SEA $3M annually in the IoC plan? Did you know the Pens would run a Pittsburgh arena and profit off of all events under the IoC plan. Did you know it is possible that Rendell's plan may give the Pens the same rights for only $1.1M more per year?
Draftnik
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,011
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 1:52 pm
Location: Peters Twp.

Postby netwolf on Fri Mar 31, 2006 1:05 am

Draftnik wrote:Did you know the Pens would pay the SEA $3M annually in the IoC plan? Did you know the Pens would run a Pittsburgh arena and profit off of all events under the IoC plan. Did you know it is possible that Rendell's plan may give the Pens the same rights for only $1.1M more per year?


This plays into what I've been talking about since KDKA leaked details last night. These and other questions need concrete answers before the insurance plan can be accurately judged. Words like could, might, or may have no place in those answers.

With the information currently availble, there's no way to dismiss it as Rendell's personal CYA policy or to feel relieved that the Pens future is settled.
netwolf
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,346
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:04 am

Next

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dagny and 3 guests

e-mail