You can't be serious. You want them to sign a 30 year lease without even knowingt what the lease is??????
Laughable.
No, I said sell the team to a local buyer, and let them decide whether Plan B is palatable.
Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf
Crash wrote:imau2fan wrote:You can't be serious. You want them to sign a 30 year lease without even knowingt what the lease is??????
Laughable.
No, I said sell the team to a local buyer, and let them decide whether Plan B is palatable.
And again, what LOCAL buyer is out there?
I'm waiting.
Crash wrote:$90 million? That's $53 million less isn't it?
I would also bet the Pens didn't earmark naming rights money to go towards constuction also.
Rendell also said they had $90 million in state money waiting.
Where is it?
EVERYTHING Rendell is basing this on is from slots revenue/projections of slots revenue.
Well what if the casino fails?
What if Harrah's, as is their glorious history much more than IOC, threatens to close the casino unless payments are cancelled/changed?
How is the arena paid for then?
newarenanow wrote:Draftnik wrote:No owner will keep this team here if they have to pay $143 mil towards an arena. That's more than what they would pay for the team.
Guess what? They are already paying $90M in lease payments for 30 years under the IoC plan. Tquote]
Plan B is asking them to pay $53M more over 30 years for their plan. Also, the new owner will be taking $7-8M of losses on a two round playoff year for the next 3 years.
Add those two together, that is half of the potential selling price.
And KC has all of their suites sold and almost 12,000 season ticket holders for a team that does not exist already. Don't say they can't sell tickets.
Draftnik wrote:newarenanow wrote:Draftnik wrote:No owner will keep this team here if they have to pay $143 mil towards an arena. That's more than what they would pay for the team.
Guess what? They are already paying $90M in lease payments for 30 years under the IoC plan. Tquote]
Plan B is asking them to pay $53M more over 30 years for their plan. Also, the new owner will be taking $7-8M of losses on a two round playoff year for the next 3 years.
Add those two together, that is half of the potential selling price.
And KC has all of their suites sold and almost 12,000 season ticket holders for a team that does not exist already. Don't say they can't sell tickets.
When somebody says they are willing to negotiate that is an invitation to ask for a better deal. Rendell will give the Pens a better deal. I'm not sure where you get $53M more, I think it is closer to $41M, but either way that is negotiable according to Rendell and also $41M is not the % of the sale price you think it is because the sale price is based on present value $$$ while the unlikely $41M is future value. The present value of that would only be 60% to %70% (just a guess on the % it could be more or less, somebody with a link to a calculator could look it up if they care).
Do you understand the difference between a net loss/profit and an operating loss/profit and how the final figure can be manipulated with debt (principal & interest) and all kinds of accounting machinations. The $7M loss may or may not reflect the true operating profitability of the Pens based on their revenues and player payroll.
KC lost the Scouts and the Kings in the 70s in what was a state of the art arena at the time. KC has not experienced explosive growth like Denver to show their market has more potential. KC is not a hockey hotbed that lost a team because of a bad arena deal like Minneapolis/St. Paul. There is no logical reason to think it is a hockey hotbed. AEG invested $50M in Sprint because they want to make lots of $$$ by running the building and controlling all the revenue streams. They didn't invest $50M to get a measly $50M back. They will not offer the hockey and non-hockey revenue streams an NHL team could get with full control of an arena.
The guy from Toronto said KC still hadn't started to sell tickets yet. The goal is 12K. AEG has some deposits on suites. There is a reason no NBA or NHL team and/or prospective owners have been jumping on the KC bandwagon even though the arena has been in the works for a while now. With AEG running the show the profits their business model extracts will choke the major tenant. KC is not LA with 3 pro sports teams anchoring Staples. The margins they extract on KC sporting events have to be higher than LA because there will be significantly less sporting events held in the venue.
I could go on and on but we can just agree to disagree.
Draftnik wrote:newarenanow wrote:Draftnik wrote:No owner will keep this team here if they have to pay $143 mil towards an arena. That's more than what they would pay for the team.
Guess what? They are already paying $90M in lease payments for 30 years under the IoC plan. Tquote]
Plan B is asking them to pay $53M more over 30 years for their plan. Also, the new owner will be taking $7-8M of losses on a two round playoff year for the next 3 years.
Add those two together, that is half of the potential selling price.
And KC has all of their suites sold and almost 12,000 season ticket holders for a team that does not exist already. Don't say they can't sell tickets.
When somebody says they are willing to negotiate that is an invitation to ask for a better deal. Rendell will give the Pens a better deal. I'm not sure where you get $53M more, I think it is closer to $41M, but either way that is negotiable according to Rendell and also $41M is not the % of the sale price you think it is because the sale price is based on present value $$$ while the unlikely $41M is future value. The present value of that would only be 60% to %70% (just a guess on the % it could be more or less, somebody with a link to a calculator could look it up if they care).
Do you understand the difference between a net loss/profit and an operating loss/profit and how the final figure can be manipulated with debt (principal & interest) and all kinds of accounting machinations. The $7M loss may or may not reflect the true operating profitability of the Pens based on their revenues and player payroll.
KC lost the Scouts and the Kings in the 70s in what was a state of the art arena at the time. KC has not experienced explosive growth like Denver to show their market has more potential. KC is not a hockey hotbed that lost a team because of a bad arena deal like Minneapolis/St. Paul. There is no logical reason to think it is a hockey hotbed. AEG invested $50M in Sprint because they want to make lots of $$$ by running the building and controlling all the revenue streams. They didn't invest $50M to get a measly $50M back. They will not offer the hockey and non-hockey revenue streams an NHL team could get with full control of an arena.
The guy from Toronto said KC still hadn't started to sell tickets yet. The goal is 12K. AEG has some deposits on suites. There is a reason no NBA or NHL team and/or prospective owners have been jumping on the KC bandwagon even though the arena has been in the works for a while now. With AEG running the show the profits their business model extracts will choke the major tenant. KC is not LA with 3 pro sports teams anchoring Staples. The margins they extract on KC sporting events have to be higher than LA because there will be significantly less sporting events held in the venue.
I could go on and on but we can just agree to disagree.
skullman80 wrote:Crash wrote:imau2fan wrote:You can't be serious. You want them to sign a 30 year lease without even knowingt what the lease is??????
Laughable.
No, I said sell the team to a local buyer, and let them decide whether Plan B is palatable.
And again, what LOCAL buyer is out there?
I'm waiting.
The guy from Ohio has shown interest in keeping the team here, and I believe he has put down the 100,000 to look at the fiances(I could be wrong).
He may not be local, as in living in PA, but he wants to keep the team here.
NIN wrote:This city does'nt deserve a hockey team. It is too God damn dumb. Please vote for the democrats you mindless sheep. Vote for them to stay in office. It's all you know so vote out of fear and ignorance just like you have lived your lives forever.
Anyway, "U2 Fan" Abe just likes to come in here and trash the Penguins every once in a while so he can put it on his next annual review at Forest City. Next he'll demand that Lemieux sell the team to the gnomes who live under the ice at the arena, and then he'll demand that Lemieux sell the team for $4.67 to Donnie Iris to insure that the team never leaves, because if Lemieux really cared about the city he would want to sell the team for 0.0000003% of its market value.
Your comparing Mario the player to the situation. If he left the team for a few more million, and left on bad terms like Jagr, then screw him.
When asked about Fingold’s proposal, Penguins owner Mario Lemieux told reporters, “I’m going to do what has to be done to protect my investment, no matter what the options are from now on.â€￾
So when I see folks say, "Well, I'd hate to see the Pens leave, but I support Mario's efforts to get the maximum sale price possible, by whatever means necessary," it has the same odd smell to it.
imau2fan wrote:So when I see folks say, "Well, I'd hate to see the Pens leave, but I support Mario's efforts to get the maximum sale price possible, by whatever means necessary," it has the same odd smell to it.
I just find it interesting. Whenever a big-name, free-agent Steeler or Pirate (or any other Pen for that matter) leaves for more money, they often raked over the coals for being disloyal and caring only about the money. And those players are ultimately replaceable.
[/quote]pfim wrote:So when I see folks say, "Well, I'd hate to see the Pens leave, but I support Mario's efforts to get the maximum sale price possible, by whatever means necessary," it has the same odd smell to it.
I'm not sure who is "supporting" his efforts to get the maximum price, it's more that a lot of us live in the real world and understand that the Pens won't be undersold to a fictitious local investor, and that 8 years after the Pens were taken out of bankruptcy, there is still no arena. And for the 50 bazillionth time, Mario doesn't even own 50% of the team.
Also, this situation is not comparable to Barry Bonds or Plaxico Burress leaving no matter how you look at it. Neither had a financial stake in the team. Neither spent 8 years working to keep their respective teams in Pittsburgh. It's ridiculous to even suggest that the situations are similar in any way.
HomerPenguin wrote:imau2fan wrote:So when I see folks say, "Well, I'd hate to see the Pens leave, but I support Mario's efforts to get the maximum sale price possible, by whatever means necessary," it has the same odd smell to it.
I just find it interesting. Whenever a big-name, free-agent Steeler or Pirate (or any other Pen for that matter) leaves for more money, they often raked over the coals for being disloyal and caring only about the money. And those players are ultimately replaceable.
I think the fact that you'd put Lemieux on no different footing than Barry Bonds, Plaxico Burress, and the like shows where you're coming from. None of them tied their financial well-being into an investment that was then continually spat upon by the political leadership. Lemieux has tried to make it financially viable for the team to stay here, whether you agree with his efforts or not. He didn't just up and walk away like Bonds, et al.
But for the record, I've never raked any pro athlete over the coals for leaving Pittsburgh when a better deal was to be had elsewhere. It's silly no matter who does it. You griping about Lemieux selling the team to out of town interests for a few extra million isn't any less silly than the folks who whine about Bonds and Burress and Jagr (though he didn't leave as a free agent).
More to the point, as pfim already said, nobody here is rooting for Lemieux to reap gigantic profits from this transaction at the cost of the team leaving the city, and for you to suggest otherwise shows either a lack of understanding or a willingness to distort. Most folks are trying to be realistic and accept that he's not going to sell the team for $.70 on the dollar just to keep the team where it is. Would he? I don't know, and frankly neither do you.
newarenanow wrote:First off, yes I do understand operating and net gains and losses. I'm a CPA. I work on large clients all year.
Second off, the Pens announced over a year ago that all of their debt from the bankruptcy has been paid off. That leaves normal debt that the current ownership and new ownership will have to assume. The only amount that affects the earnings is the interest, which yes, will go down every year as debt is paid, but not significantly enough to make a dent in the Pens losses. The principal only affects cash flow as they are both balance sheet items.
Third, I agree the Pens can negotiate Plan B, but how much? Where is the other money going to come from? The slots applicants will not pay anymore, and the ony other source of payment is from the tax fund from the slots license that Rendell said he will contribute $7M a year. If you start dipping into that more, all hell will break lose. And don't say parking taxes and other entertainment taxes because those are high enough here in Pittsburgh and people won't stand for that.
Finally, the guy that interviewed Fingold was on Savran yesterday and he said that Fingold's goal is to own a hockey team. If the IOC wins, he will still buy the team and keep them in the burgh per the IOC agreement. Second, he will look at Plan 'B' and see if it's feasible, but he is not too keen on it. Third, KC is in negotiations with him and may strike a deal that is rent free at the new arena. They may not control all profits, but they won't be paying anything either, so I don't know where you are getting your $3M a year fee to play at KC.
We can agree to disagree, and I know we both want the Pens to stay in Pittsburgh. I hope the day will come when we can just talk about what players are in the system and argue about that. But until then, this will be a huge roller coaster. I'm just not as optimistic as you.
As for netwolf, we are all using pretty much the same figures. Draftnik has a positive spin. Others have a negative spin or are playing devils advocate. No one knows all of the facts, and I'm sure we won't until the final outcome. There is a lot going behind the scenes that we don't know on both sides.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests