Virginia is for Suckers: VA leg looking to spend $1B to lure Washington Commanders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:$1B giveaway from Republicans to a billionaire. You can’t make this sh#t up.

Still mad about CRT you dumb dumbs?

Um....yes?? What do the two have to do with each other? Weirdo

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

Public financing of football stadiums is a complete waste of taxpayer money. $1B for 8-10 games a year, at 100,000 at max attendance. 1 Million in total attendance. Yes, there may be a few extra events a year, but some of those are simply events that would be held elsewhere. In contrast, many MLB teams draw 2M plus in attendance over a year, excluding playoff games. Basketball/hockey arenas draw perhaps 1.5 Million a year. Moreover, NFL teams are richer and can afford to pay their own way.

You can have your own personal opinions re whether an NFL team should pay to build its own stadium but it doesn’t represent your knowledge of public finance. The projected numbers must be there for future revenue stream to get underwriting and bond ratings. I believe this is a form of TIF or sales tax pledge. This is normal for stadiums. DC does TIFs all the time. Maybe read up more on public finance before you make generalized statements that show no understanding. I’m not a football fan whatsoever so I could care less of Virginia gets the stadium but this is exactly how this sort of deal works.

The idea that these projects will not require any state money is contradicted by plenty of history. I have few issues with Nats Park or Verizon Center, as they are far easier to justify. Football stadiums are merely a waste of taxpayer money. Yes, I understand how public finance works. Building a brand new stadium at, say, RFK brings nothing to DC except 10 Sundays a year.

[Anonymous]

Remember that the team already operates out of Ashburn and that is where its practice facility is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

FedEx Field is NOT publicly financed. It was built and is owned by the WFT/Commanders.

Actually, it seems Maryland's taxpayers were on the hook for about $128 million in today's dollars.

Still, that's a much better deal than Youngkin is offering. I thought these private-sector businessmen were supposed to be shrewd negotiators and good financial stewards? I guess Republicans only abhor public spending when it goes towards making government more functional or improving peoples' lives.

That’s false. The State and PG County contributed about $70 million which was only for roads. State and local governments due the same for major developers. The team paid for the land and 100% of construction costs. They own and operate the stadium outright.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remember that the team already operates out of Ashburn and that is where its practice facility is.

It’s pretty clear that the “Commanders” name and military uniform style was specifically to appeal to Virginia lawmakers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

FedEx Field is NOT publicly financed. It was built and is owned by the WFT/Commanders.

Actually, it seems Maryland's taxpayers were on the hook for about $128 million in today's dollars.

Still, that's a much better deal than Youngkin is offering. I thought these private-sector businessmen were supposed to be shrewd negotiators and good financial stewards? I guess Republicans only abhor public spending when it goes towards making government more functional or improving peoples' lives.

That’s false. The State and PG County contributed about $70 million which was only for roads. State and local governments due the same for major developers. The team paid for the land and 100% of construction costs. They own and operate the stadium outright.

+1 There’s a dedicated Beltway exit and Metro station for FedEx Field, that’s what taxpayers paid for. Jack Kent Cooke ponied up all the other money himself and everyone should make Snyder do that, too. Or wait a while because the other owners might boot him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

FedEx Field is NOT publicly financed. It was built and is owned by the WFT/Commanders.

Actually, it seems Maryland's taxpayers were on the hook for about $128 million in today's dollars.

Still, that's a much better deal than Youngkin is offering. I thought these private-sector businessmen were supposed to be shrewd negotiators and good financial stewards? I guess Republicans only abhor public spending when it goes towards making government more functional or improving peoples' lives.

I didn't see Youngkin's name in the article. You might want to stop drinking this early in the day.

Who do you think signed the bill?

Again, stop drinking. You are starting to hallucinate. No one has signed any bill. Note who introduced this bill:

The bill, introduced by Sen. Richard Saslaw (D) of Fairfax, ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

FedEx Field is NOT publicly financed. It was built and is owned by the WFT/Commanders.

Actually, it seems Maryland's taxpayers were on the hook for about $128 million in today's dollars.

Still, that's a much better deal than Youngkin is offering. I thought these private-sector businessmen were supposed to be shrewd negotiators and good financial stewards? I guess Republicans only abhor public spending when it goes towards making government more functional or improving peoples' lives.

I didn't see Youngkin's name in the article. You might want to stop drinking this early in the day.

Wow. You’re really dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

FedEx Field is NOT publicly financed. It was built and is owned by the WFT/Commanders.

Actually, it seems Maryland's taxpayers were on the hook for about $128 million in today's dollars.

Still, that's a much better deal than Youngkin is offering. I thought these private-sector businessmen were supposed to be shrewd negotiators and good financial stewards? I guess Republicans only abhor public spending when it goes towards making government more functional or improving peoples' lives.

I didn't see Youngkin's name in the article. You might want to stop drinking this early in the day.

Wow. You’re really dumb.

So are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:$1B giveaway from Republicans to a billionaire. You can’t make this sh#t up.

Still mad about CRT you dumb dumbs?

Hmm...

Buttheads Nationals park, ravens stadium, Camden yards, Ron John stadium
RFK none in Virginia.

Keep your disease across the river

[Anonymous]

Republicans love bread and circuses.

[Anonymous]

Given how much the team struggles to get people into the the stadium now, I don’t see a move to Loudoun or Prince William helping that. I certainly hope all of those revenue projections are premised on the stadium only filling 25% for football games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Republicans love bread and circuses.

The legislation was proposed by a Democrat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:$1B giveaway from Republicans to a billionaire. You can’t make this sh#t up.

Still mad about CRT you dumb dumbs?

Talk about dumb dumbs - did you even read your link? JFC you are stupid. A DEMOCRAT introduced this bill.

The financial details of SB 727, which would establish the Virginia Football Stadium Authority, were released during a Senate Finance and Appropriations committee hearing Thursday night. The bill, introduced by Sen. Richard Saslaw (D) of Fairfax, was approved by the Finance and Appropriations Committee 14-2 with one abstention. It now moves to the full legislature for approval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure you understand how public finance works. Why wouldn’t Virginia bid on getting the new stadium? How do you think Maryland got FedEx from DC’s RFK?

That’s how these kind of projects are built, via public finance through bonds in which the future collected taxes (property or sales) are pledged for future debt payment. I worked on the deal for Nats Park (which almost went to Virginia in Pentagon City) and the Ravens stadium for example.

This proposal of how the state would pay for the stadium is completely normal.

Public financing of football stadiums is a complete waste of taxpayer money. $1B for 8-10 games a year, at 100,000 at max attendance. 1 Million in total attendance. Yes, there may be a few extra events a year, but some of those are simply events that would be held elsewhere. In contrast, many MLB teams draw 2M plus in attendance over a year, excluding playoff games. Basketball/hockey arenas draw perhaps 1.5 Million a year. Moreover, NFL teams are richer and can afford to pay their own way.

Again - did you even bother to read the link? Taxpayers aren't footing the bill.

George Perry, a business professor at George Mason University spoke to WUSA9 about the legislation by phone. Perry, who worked as a sports marketing executive for 23 years (including more than one year with the Commanders) said on its surface, the legislation does not authorize a taxpayer funded stadium deal.

“It doesn’t appear so,” Perry said shortly after details of the legislation were released Thursday night. “It’s a creative way to finance a stadium without using direct taxpayer money.”