Heatcheck: Week 5

Week 5 of Heatcheck Wednesday, a permanent feature here at Ballpark Frankness. The idea behind this post is to track the past week's Rays home games and wonder how tolerable they would have been, had they been played outdoors.

Five home games since last Wednesday (Four night games, one Sunday afternoon first pitch). I was in Washington D.C. from Friday through Monday, so I asked Times colleague Chris Tisch to fill in for me on the ratings up until Tuesday's game. Here's what he came up with -- Four "Take me out to the ball games." Even Sunday, Tisch said, was a nice afternoon for a game outdoors. On Tuesday, I rated the game with the Rangers "Take me out to the ball game" as well.

So after 29 homes games, 36 percent of the home schedule, here are our up-to-date standings:

How you feeling? Hot. Hot. Hot. ---- 0

Hot, but nothing a cold beverage couldn't cure. ---- 2

Take me out the ball game. ---- 27

There are five more games on this homestand for the Rays. After that, they don't come back to St. Petersburg until June 13. We're guessing the stats will start to turn then.

Comments

[Rick K]

YEP. We were at a Little League game in Seminole last night. The weather was PERFECT!

I was umpiring on the field, so I didn't have much interaction with the other adults in attendance. After the game, when I told a friend of mine who had spent the game in the bleachers that I thought it was a perfect night for a baseball game, he told me that he heard the exact same remark from practically everyone there.

So, far, 35% of the season is gone, and we've had wonderful outdoor baseball weather.

[Jay]

Umm Rick? It's only May, we're not even in rainy season yet. Did you forget that little teeeny tiny fact? Or did you omit that on purpose?

[Jay]

Here's what Rick K conveniently forgot to mention,

35% - outdoor baseball weather

65% - 90 degrees @ 7pm with thunderstorms and games called for lightning. Those primadonna players & umpires ain't gonna stand under a 300' tall lightning rod during an approaching t-storm, regardless of how well the sail keeps the rain out.

Funny, those percentages are likely going to be the result of the referendum, should this get that far. 65% against, 35% for. And I'm being VERY generous for the "fors"

[Rick K]

No Jay. I haven't found the thread about the "feels like" conditions at Al Lang in June, July and August.

Tell me where it is, and I will be happy to go there.

[Rick K]

Jay, keep right on making absurd predictions.

Any person who thinks that 65% of the home games would be called because of lightning is someone who cannot be taken seriously.

[Jay]

Rick, you say you live here but you don't know what it "feels like" outdoors in the afternoons in June, July & August? Seriously? You need hard numbers to help you understand that most people object to sitting outdoors in 90 degree heat & 100% humidity in the summer months (in the lightning capital of the WORLD) for more than a few minutes? REALLY??? LOL

[Jay]

Rick, now your approaching moronic levels of ignorance. I did not say all 65% of the games were going to be called for lightning. C'mon man, at least be truthful with yourself.

[Jay]

Oh and lest we forget the way in which this giant sailboat will be oriented to face the water to the east, the backside of the stands will block that glorious afternoon westerly seabreeze from benefitting the majority of the fans, if any actually show up. So yes, it will be stifling hot Rick, the thought reminds me of sitting in a sauna for 3 hours. I am a young man and I sweat, just like other normal human beings, you're going to need a shower and a change of clothes before you head downtown after the game to spend all that disposable income you have.

[Rick K]

I need to get some work done....

But Jay, this is what you said,

"65% - 90 degrees @ 7pm with thunderstorms and games called for lightning"

Okay.

This is what I know Jay. I and thousands of other Floridians attend outdoor baseball games in the Bay Area during June, July, August, and September.

I also know how many thunderstorms occur between 7 pm and 10 pm during those months.

I also know that the adult voters in St. Pete are perfectly capable of deciding for themselves if they think these proposals will be successful, DESPITE your efforts to PRETEND that the weather will be the ruination of these great plans!

[Jay]

No Rick, the weather won't get a chance to ruin those glorious plans of yours, the voters, the DEP, the TDC, and the BOCC, will take care to make sure I spend many years to come watching the Rays play in air conditioned comfort.

[Jay]

Oh and Rick, one more thing. Do some research on the term "gust-front". A term used to describe gail force winds that come in advance of an approaching supercell t-storm, the kind which we get here almost every day in the summer. The city will not be able to deploy the sail until after it's already pouring rain because the gust-front would tear the sail to shreds if left deployed. That would leave all the fans, and all the players fully exposed to the elements until the winds subsided enough to deploy the sail. Talk about poor planning.

[Ray F]

10,511 ??? What is this???

What is 10,511???

If they were dollars, you could buy a cheap car.

If they were years, they would be a speck in the grand sceme.

If they were bricks, they would stack higher than a 2000 foot building.

If they were days, I would be younger than them.

If they were pages, at 3 minutes per page, it would take you 146 days to read.

What is 10,511???

It's the number of heartbeats that watched the Tampa Bay Rays play at Tropicana Field last night.

Sad.

Embarrassing.

Insulting... to a team that has the best record in baseball.

In a day and age where it costs upwards of $50+ to take a family of four to the movies, a night at the park (with all the amenities offered at Tropicana field) would cost around $45.

$9 upper deck seats, free parking with a car of 4 or more people, and you can bring in your own food and capped water

You can tailgate before the games, which means you don't have to pay expensive beer prices inside. Half price beer after the game inside.
What more could you possibly need to get your tail in a seat to watch the most exciting team in baseball???

Tampa Bay has used the "they aren't winning. when they win, I'll go" excuse for long enough. The team has made good on it's bargain and typical Tampa Bay "fans" can't make good on their own. I'm a huge advocate for the new Waterfront Stadium downtown... now I don't know if that would even get more people in the stands. Maybe if there were a such thing as Super Duper 1st Place...

Sad.

[Carl]

Ray, perhaps all the bandwagon jumpers decided to boycott the Rays until they stop trying to destroy our waterfront. Ever think of that? I'm one of them.

[Ray F]

typical answer

[Chuck]

LOL @ Carl.

You're the only one.

[Carl]

typical answer from you as well, and no, I can assure you I am not alone.

[Chuck]

99.9% of people who oppose the waterfront stadium are interested in destroying organized athletics. POWW made their beliefs crystal clear when they elected Hamilton Hansen (who makes a Quaker look like a blood drinking satanite)as a public spokesperson.

Other Things Hamilton Hansen Despises:

Dancing
Music (all kinds)
Fast Walking
Winds in excess of 10mph
Golf Courses
Public Schools

Hamilton's interests:

The Stinky Bay
Ingrid Newkirk

[Ray F]

Carl,

Something possesses you to get on your computer and advocate squashing the idea of a new stadium on the waterfront. Would you be opposed to a new stadium at the ToyTown location? Or near Gandy?

[Chuck]

I should clarify....99.9% of people who oppose the stadium without rationale.

Here's an analogy that should clear things up:

POWW is to Communist Russia as Branch Davidians are to ________

a. The Rainbow Coalition
b. Abortion Clinic Bombers
c. The Black Panther Party
d. Randy Weaver @ Ruby Ridge
e. All of the above

[Lakeland Guy]

Wow. I don't live in St Pete so I don't have a say either way in the stadium issues, but watching both sides go back and forth the last two weeks I've come to witness that those against the stadium are very "conspiracy" driven in their comments and those for aren't much better, but they at least provide facts and do not resort to hypothetical situations and unrealistic calculations.

I would like to see St Pete get the new stadium, but I hope the team ends up moving to Tampa so it's more convenient for me to attend. I've been studying the stadium issue as a whole and objectively listened to both point of views from POWW and the stadium supporters and feel that the opportunity to create jobs and additional tax revenue is legitimate.

I was living in Denver when Coors Field was being built and the stadium turned what was once the slums of Denver into a booming economic hub. The new stadium would do wonders for the restaurants and shops downtown in the same way Coors Field did for Denver.

I do feel for those living nearby that would have their view blocked by the stadium and they should be compensated if their property value drops.

[Carl]

Ray, I am a season ticket holder. My family & I love the Rays. But this paticular proposal stinks from every angle. And I refuse to support them in any way until they drop this plan to ruin the character of downtown St. Pete's historic waterfront with a gigantic building that less than 1% of the population will use on a regular basis.

I would wholly support the Rays building a stadium of their chosing @ Toytown, Gandy, Carillon, Gateway, or even Tampa. As long as the deal is up front, and explained in detail before allowing voters to decide. We need fans in the stands Ray, and downtown St. Pete just isn't a big enough market or draw to achieve that. The proof is in that 10,511 number you posted!!

[get-real]

Jay.. this just in.. The Threshers have cancelled the rest of their season.. They just realized they are outdoors and 65% of their games would be cancelled or unbearable... I vaguely remember going there all summer last year but there must have been a portal to Canada on US 19.

[Rick K]

Thank you to Lakeland Guy, for a nice contribution that differs from most of what is posted in these threads.

The ANTI's will say that Denver (and any other city you mention with a successful stadium project) is not a valid comparison, because the current downtown area is NOT a slum.

That they will miss the point that the shops and restaurants and bars around the new stadium site will all get a boost from the newly redesigned Al Lang field project and the many other cool public uses of the ampitheater and park, will escape them.

They will tell you that there is "near universal agreement" among economists that stadium deals actually HARM their local economies, even though calling down the Econ faculty roster at just about any university will disprove that myth.

And I love your proposal for compensation related to decreases in property value. The only properties that will be able to see less than they can currently see over Al Lang field are a few floors of the Hilton and a few floors of Signature Tower. I think your idea is BRILLIANT.

The Rays could gaurantee the purchasers of those few condos that will be impacted against decreases in property market value related to the stadium. Of course, there is such little liklihood of that actually happening, that I bet the developer of Signature Tower (who has publicly offered $100,000,000 for the Trop Field Site) would be willing to make that guarantee himself.

ANYWAY, thanks for a fresh post.

[Carl]

And may I say Ray, people like Chuck posting this nonsense about POWW is not helping your cause, just like people opposed (including POWW) posting nonsense doesn't help my views.

It turns everyone not tuned in to this discussion....off.

[Rick K]

I call "bull dung" on Carl's 12:06 PM.

I think he is being dishonest with us.

I PROPOSE we, the blog contributing community, weed out this sort of BS.

[Ray F]

Lakeland,

Thanks for the support, however, if the team moves, it won't be to Tampa.

That would be akin to moving a poor performing restaurant across the street in hopes of earning more business.

The Rays owners view this as a Regional Team. The fact that Pinellas County residents stuff RayJay with butts every Sunday and the Forum for hockey games 41 nights a year should serve as proof that it isn't too much to ask that Tampa Residents drive to St Pete and catch a game.

If they move, it'll be more than a simple 45 minute drive to enjoy a Major League Baseball game. And if you think it's hot here in September, go to a Marlins game. At least ours would be on the water.

[Jay]

Well then Rick, please recuse yourself from this blog, because you're the heaviest slinger of BS of all the posters here both for or against, COMBINED.

[Jay]

Ray F just answered his own dilemma with this gem;

"That would be akin to moving a poor performing restaurant across the street in hopes of earning more business."

So in essence, moving the team to Tampa is a ridiculous idea because it's more centrally located to the entire fan base, but you're OK with moving the stadium 16 blocks east, further away from said fan base? WOW WOW WOW

[Chuck]

What kind of nonsense am I posting? Are you trying to tell me that POWW ISN'T a domestic terrorist group?

[Lakeland Guy]

Rick K,
I make the drive from Lakeland to the Trop about 10 times a season to watch the Rays. I'd be a season ticket holder if the team was in Tampa and I agree with Carl that St Pete isn't the right location for the team, but I would like to see them stay local. The sail wouldn't keep me from attending games on rainy days as it's not the first of it's kind and appears to be doing it's job at other stadiums around the world.

[Ray F]

Carl,

How can you be "boycotting" the Rays if you are a season ticket holder? They probably counted your paid ticket in last nights attendance because to me, it didn't look like 10,511 people.

To sway back towards the positive side for a second, Saturday nights game for 2 outfield seats online are sold out. The closest available for 4 tix are section 124 row RR.

Obviously, the bandwagon will be selling that game out. You're wrong Carl, sorry.

[Leroy Jenkins]

Hey Jay!

40 games played between June, july, and August last year. 2 games would have been canceled. 3 would have been delayed 30 mins to an hour. Its not that hard to look up on the weatherchannel.com.

[Rick K]

Leroy, please stop doing easy research that makes Jay look like a fool.

It's like taking candy from a baby. Sure, the candy tastes good, but it's just not NICE!

[Thomas]

"I PROPOSE we, the blog contributing community, weed out this sort of BS." - Rick K

That is hilarious. Rick if we did that - you would be banned and we'd miss out on the comedy of errors and slander you post each day.

By the way, you still haven't corrected any of your inaccuracies over on the "I took a walk today..." thread.
It's all right there: you make a bunch of false accusations and out right errors. Then what did you do?

You ran away and start posting the same nonsense again in another thread.

It's time to update an old saying... He's "the village Rick".

[George]

Speaking of weeding out the BS, y'all better sit down for this one.....nice picture, Rick!!

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/details.aspx?MemberId=4393

[Rick K]

Y'all are funny.

Can't overcome my arguments, so you obsess over who you think I am.

Some say I am a paid shill for the Rays. Because I just showed up one day and had a lot to say.

Some say I am obviously someone who doesn't live in the area, since I went to Fergs and to Hooters and to the Wing House and to Fortunatos and Rays Games and Tyrone Mall and who knows what else.

Some say I am any number of other people who post here. I am Gary, I am Ray, I am Leroy. I am so many people, I can't keep them all straight.

Now comes george, who asserts I am a member of the State Legislature.

All this obsession over my identity makes me think of three words.

Hilarious.

Flattering.

Silly.

[Jay]

Rick K, that was a lightning fast denouncement of you being the person on that link, and how do you know George was even talking about you???

I think George just blew this entire blog wide open.

[Ray F]

Typical scare tactics. "oh no... I can't find facts, I better attack the person instead"

Is my last name Finkle???

[Thomas]

Come on now - I really doubt that Rick K is a Council Member or anyone of any significance.

I really know that he posts inaccurate information and when corrected, he runs away without being accountable.

So hearing him talk about weeding out "BS" is particularly comical.

[Don Mott]

LMAO, Nice shot George. Ray what facts have you presented? You want facts? Hereya go, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2877, http://www.news.uiuc.edu/news/04/1117stadiums.html http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/07/should-stadiums.http://www.dcwatch.com/govern/sports030612g.htmhtml http://www.stadiummouse.com/stadium/economic.html When you're done reading those let me know I've got more!

[Don Mott]

I am getting so tired of hearing that we opponents don't produce facts but when we provide links to facts they are ignored. Quit whining and talking and show me some links to reputable sites that say a MLB stadium is beneficial for the host city.

[NO NEW STADIUM]

Thomas said: "I really know that he posts inaccurate information and when corrected, he runs away without being accountable."

And how is that any different from an attorney and former city council member??? LMFAO!!!

I'm contacting POWW, and let them do a little digging on this one, and see if there's any connection/motive.

[Ray F]

How about the fact that I've never stepped foot on Albert Whitted airport (along with 98% of St Pete residents) and I've lived here all my life.- waste of money

How about the fact that Salvador Dali was a lunatic but god forbid we don't give them land for a dollar to support his art work.- waste of money

How about the fact that St Pete was creaming over the idea of building an Olympic diving pool on your waterfront to lure the 2012 Olympics.- waste of money

How about the fact that more people will be focused on the Tampa Bay area during the 2 weeks before the next superbowl than have stepped on St Pete waterfont park land in the last 10 years.

Or how about the fact that St Pete earmarked $50-million for improvements on the Pier (that loses $1.5/year) starting in 2012

But those facts mean nothing because they come from me.

[Thomas]

Ok, but I think you're completely insane.

Rick is a lot of things (not credible, not accountable, not accurate, slanderous, unintentionally comical) but I really don't think he's some paid shill or an attorney masquerading on a message board.

Going on and on about this conspiracy theory is kind of dumb.

[Don Mott]

First of all those facts are backed only by your word. Secondly they have nothing whatsoever to do with the stadium proposal. Grabbing for straws are we?

[get-real]

I don't claim to know Rick's intentions.. but to those accusing him of being paid.. Do you honestly believe anyone would spend money to talk to a bunch of losers on a message board all day long? Theres like 5 people other than Rick that post 90% of the comments.. Wouldn't it just be easier to have those 5 people killed? They're already killing the view of the bay, the manatees, and St. Pete as we know it.. a few message board guys shouldn't be that hard to add to the list.

[ThomasStrokesDon]

If this doesn't get done St. Pete will find itself in 1980 when it was an even more forgettable city than it is now. Maybe that is what POWW wants. When a city is forgettable, housing is cheap and Wal-Marts are plentiful. Wake up and let those not from Tampa Bay do what is really best for an area full of lazy noncompetitive residents. Good luck Stu!!

[NO NEW STADIUM]

Ray F...your facts are not facts at all, they're distortions...

You are right, 98% never stepped foot on Albert Whitted, yet the voters by MORE than a 2-1 margin voted to save the airport. FACT (your opinion that it's a waste of money is just that, an opinion).

The Olympic diving pool, where is that? Oh, that's right, the citizens voted that down too, along with any commercialization on Ft. Desoto. There's your FACT.

The superbowl comment is absurd, since it has nothing to do with our downtown waterfront, again, just your OPINION, not FACT.

The Pier is a signature landmark of this city and again, the voters, through the city council demanded it be preserved and updated, there's your FACT.

So try again.

You're now a psychiatrist and can state for a fact that Dali was a lunatic??

[Ray F]

OK Don,

But your links are more credible??? Just because somebody who was always picked last on their kickball team writes an obscure article online, that makes them credible???

All information can be spun in whichever direction the person arguing for it wants. All that person has to do is spit rhettorical nonsense that bores the other side into submission. I don't produce facts (links to websites) because they don't change your opinion about the issue. All I do on here is profess my passion for keeping the Rays in the city of St Pete by building a beautiful, brand new baseball park on our waterfront.

All you "nays" do is find a website that has an article that supports your particular view and call it "factual" and that's fine. Never once have you claimed why you PERSONALLY don't want the stadium built. All you do is sit here and shoot down peoples O P I N I O N S.

And if you have an opinion about why it shouldn't be built, who am I to come here and tell you your opinion is wrong? Last time I checked, opinions aren't held down by the boundries of fact or fantasy. I think the Simpsons is one of the greatest television shows in history. Are you going to produce imperical evidence to disprove my opinion?

[Thomas]

There's nothing like outdoor night time baseball. We'll have a nice breeeze of the bay and enjoy relaxing evenings at the ballpark. Those should simply move out of Florida. LET'S BUILD THIS BALLPARK!

[Don Mott]

Ah Ray you don't think Phds and certified economists are credible? You don't believe that studies conducted over the last 20 or so years are credible? The reason you don't produce facts is that you have none. If you did I would gladly read them and if they were factual and convincing I would consider changing my opinion. Til then read em and weep as they say. I don't make judgements based on what anonymous people at a keyboard say.

[NO NEW STADIUM]

4:55 Thomas, there will be no breeze off the bay, the seabreeze comes from the west, which will be blocked by the grandstands that aren't going to be built. And game-time won't be at night, it doesn't get dark in the summer until almost 9 at night, after the t-storms roll through and pump up the humidity to 100%. Bring a change of clothes because you'll be soaked with sweat if you plan on blowing all your disposable income you have lying around in the clubs downtown, after the game (which you can already do now without the change of clothes)

[Thomas]

:) Ok - whatever you say slugger!

I guess you represent the high end intellect of the supporters.

Very impressive.

[Thomas]

Looks like it's time to check the scoreboard again:

Opponents: Factual, intelligent, professional, some times overly wordy.

Supporters: Juvenile, slanderous, obscene, impersonate others, opinionated without factual reference.

[Ray F]

Yet, Don, you keep typing. I don't aim to change your opinion with any sort of facts. Your opinion doesn't keep my nervous system functioning, allowing my brain to send the electrical impulses to my vital organs in order for my body to stay alive. Your opinion serves you and like I've said over and over- If we are allowed to vote and the nays take it, fine. Tomorrow's another day. The world will keep rotating, gas will still be $4 and Linus will still be waiting for the great pumpkin next Halloween.

All I can do is take my little heiny down to my mandated voting place and check "yes" for yes or "no" for no just like you.

[Rick K]

Don Mott is a funny man.

These papers he links too are opinions.

Granted, they are opinions (in the three links I have clicked on so far, first the heartland one, then the cato one and the one from DC watch) from educated economists, but they are still opinions.

But what Don either doesn't see or won't admit is that these opinions he links to are dressed up to make them look factual. They include footnotes (in the case of the heartland one, most of which are to newspaper articles), and references to famed economists (in the case of the Heartland link, some of whom WOULD NOT AGREE with the position of the paper's authors), but they are still just opinions.

Further, these opinions that Don links to are "supported" by incorrect or untrue assertions of fact. They report, for example, that there is near universal agreement among economists that public investment in stadiums not only fail to produce positive (net) economic benefits, but these invesments actually produce (net) NEGATIVE benefits.

This is an untrue claim.

Don cannot point to the study or survey that proves this claim.

Because there isn't one.

Instead, Don, and Judy Too and others of their ilk, point us to a whole host of studies that parrot the same false claim.

Don's links to opinions are NOT links to articles in professional journals that require peer review by economists who specialize in these fields.

Which is very revealing.

Academics who engage in valid research that they are confident will withstand scrutiny from their peers submit their work to review by a panel of educated professionals who critique the research methodology and the subsequent conclusions.

When people have produced studies that they fear will not stand up to this sort of rigorous examination, they skip the review stage and self publish. Often, they find a sponsor who likes their conclusions and ask the sponsor to publish their "research."

That is what has happened with the opinions Don links to.

He either doesn't know the difference, or he is trying to fool us.

There has been no survey of economists who specialize in analyzing development, urban economics, locational economics, or regional economics which backs up the claim that economists agree these types of stadium investments don't pay off for the public who invest in them.

There is no such study.

Although, there are many "studies" that assert the existence of such a fact.

The "fact" is fantasy.

Don links to reports that recite the fantasy as fact.

It's both very funny, and a little sad.

[Don Mott]

Ray, intelligence is knowing the facts. Ignorance is blindly being led like sheep to slaughter. The course you choose is yours. I've presented facts which you probably have not read and I have many more but you continue to discount my facts without producing any of your own. That speaks well for you and the proponents!

[NO NEW STADIUM]

Actually Rick, once again it's the other way around. You dressed them up to fit your opinion. That's what lawyers do, right?

You go on to state "this is an untrue claim".....well...prove it's untrue. You can't just say it's an untrue claim without any factual basis for doing so. Where are your links to prove your argument?

It's all just spin, isn't it Rick? Then again, you learned the art of spin to a T from your years in "public service" and law school, haven't you?

[NO NEW STADIUM]

I think this bears repeating over and over and over.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Representatives/details.aspx?MemberId=4393

Whatcha gonna do Rick now that POWW is on to you?

NO NEW STADIUM has just as much free time to expose Rick K as he does to distort the truth, and I too have a law degree, so I say, game on!

You see, people opposed to this have no agenda. I repeat, no agenda. They stand no financial gain from defeating this. They stand no noteriety. They stand no political favors. Unlike many on the pro side of the debate. The ONLY agenda of the opposition is two simple things:

They don't want a stadium on the waterfront, and they don't want to pay for it.

Simple fact that the other side just can't argue about.

[Paul]

Rick, I don't know you, but man, you are kinda whacky dude. I mean anything and everything that gets posted that you don't agree with, you immediately come back with it being 'baseless', 'silly', 'opinion', 'false'... I mean, post a few posts, but many of your posts are kind of a pain to read because you don't even debate or try to counter point, it seems to me you just make crap up on the fly and shoot down any little thing that doesn't agree with your agenda. If you don't get paid to blog here, you are wasting alot of your time. And that is my opinion on that.

No new waterfront stadium. Work with the Trop. Our City does not have class envy of other cities. Progress is good, corporate welfare and extortion is unacceptable.

[Leroy Jenkins]

What is poww going to do? Put red signs in Rick's yard? I think its funny how scared you "anti's" are of Rick!

[get-real]

I have a question about the economics studies to whoever posted them before.. I remember someone on here talking about how the stadium isn't necessarily good for the economy because you are just substituting putting your money in the down town area rather some other business in St. Pete that you would have put the money into... My question is this... If I was more likely to go to games (I probably have been to about 15, would probably get season tickets if they built the new stadium), wouldn't I be putting more money into the St. Pete economy? When I don't go to the game, maybe I'll go to the movies.. maybe I'll go to a restaurant.. but often times I don't stay in St. Pete.. and people that live in Largo and Seminole.. they go to the movies there, they eat there.. so while you would be substituting money spent at the movies downtown near the bars.. wouldn't you also be substituting money spent in clearwater with money spent in St. Pete? If I'm a school teacher, or a fire fighter, living in St. Pete, wouldn't I want people that might otherwise go to the Undertow in St. Pete Beach, or a Threshers game, or BJ's, (I think that would be pinellas park) to spend their money in downtown St. Pete? Is it possible that the money noted in these studies relates to a city that might be bigger, and money is getting shifted around? It seems that in this case money from Clearwater, PP, Kenneth City, Seminole, St. Pete Beach, Tierre Verde, Treasure Island, Tampa etc.. would be shifted into St. Pete.. no?

[Don Mott]

Here's some more for ya, http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Selling+the+game:+estimating+the+economic+impact+of+professional...-a0174639675 http://news.research.ohiou.edu/perspectives/index.php?item=115&page=117 http://www.imakenews.com/cppa/e_article001083889.cfm Need More?

[get-real]

I have a question about the economics studies to whoever posted them before.. I remember someone on here talking about how the stadium isn't necessarily good for the economy because you are just substituting putting your money in the down town area rather some other business in St. Pete that you would have put the money into... My question is this... If I was more likely to go to games (I probably have been to about 15, would probably get season tickets if they built the new stadium), wouldn't I be putting more money into the St. Pete economy? When I don't go to the game, maybe I'll go to the movies.. maybe I'll go to a restaurant.. but often times I don't stay in St. Pete.. and people that live in Largo and Seminole.. they go to the movies there, they eat there.. so while you would be substituting money spent at the movies downtown near the bars.. wouldn't you also be substituting money spent in clearwater with money spent in St. Pete? If I'm a school teacher, or a fire fighter, living in St. Pete, wouldn't I want people that might otherwise go to the Undertow in St. Pete Beach, or a Threshers game, or BJ's, (I think that would be pinellas park) to spend their money in downtown St. Pete? Is it possible that the money noted in these studies relates to a city that might be bigger, and money is getting shifted around? It seems that in this case money from Clearwater, PP, Kenneth City, Seminole, St. Pete Beach, Tierre Verde, Treasure Island, Tampa etc.. would be shifted into St. Pete.. no?

[Don Mott]

Have you read the articles?

[Lee]

After the stadium is built, what fate awaits the airport?

[Paul]

Thanks Don for the links.

Do any of the pro stadium folks have any links they can share that show how moving a stadium 16 blocks will benefit our City? I'm not being sarcastic... I would like some papers on how this is a good thing for our waterfront.

[Don Mott]

I'm still waiting on that too Paul. I've been asking for a long time but haven't seen anything as yet.

[get-real]

I'm skimming through and am not sure I've found a specific answer to my question yet.. can you point me the the right study?

[Don Mott]

The basic premise is you are spending money at the stadium which enriches the team owners while not spending money at the communities other businesses. That's a quick summation. Maybe I don't fully understand what you're questioning.

[Bubba, Pinellas Park]

Whoever thinks that sittng outside in this heat for 3 hours is comfortable, man...I'd like to be taking whatever hormones you people are taking. It's hot, and I'm sweating my you-know-whats off. That new stadium will be one stinky place.

[get-real]

To me it would seem that if you are going to a stadium on the water that you have to walk to you would probably stop at one of the things to do either before or after the game (bars, shops, restaurants, etc.) A lot of the economic studies compare a city with professional sports to a city without.. we're already a city with.. we'd just be moving to a location that would induce more downtown expenditures (I don't have any studies to cite for that logic, but I know that when I get out of the trop, I have to get in my car.. and when I'm already in my car.. I go home.. if I was walking by the Moon Under on the way to my car, you can bet I'd be putting my money there). Parking is supposed to be a nightmare.. right? Wouldn't I want to get there early then? Maybe I'd even wander over to the pier, or stop at a shop downtown? I think its tough for the economists to "prove" their work because they are all isolated cases.. How many new mlb stadiums were built in the last 15 years? Isn't that a really small sample size with different circumstances for each?

[get-real]

So bubba, you don't go to any Threshers or Dunedin Blue Jays games? Or the beach on the weekend? Or the golf course during the summer? At first when I thought about the new stadium I said damn.. I'm going to sweat my nuts off.. but then I thought about the fact that I go to Mangrove Bay at noon on a Wednesday where I play a 5 hour round behind a foursome that I can only assume escaped from the nearest nursing home.. and then I think.. well.. I go outside for that and its okay..

[Don Mott]

"How many new mlb stadiums were built in the last 15 years?" Quite a few. Go to Google and find out. Most studies I have read indicate that the majority of fans go to the stadium, eat and drink in the stadium then go home. I'm sure there are exceptions but not enough to provide any noticeable effect on the local economy, at least according to the studies I have read.

[get-real]

Don.. the last study you cited compares cities with no team to cities with a team.. not sure how that is relevant at all? Another study, published in the Journal of Sports Economics, agrees that a sports franchise will not help the local economy.. it also says that the studies that prove this do not take into consideration inflation, causality, overall economy, specific characteristics of local areas, and events age. My question before was regarding the specific characteristics of our area (lots of areas surrounding us that aren't considered St. Pete)... The study you cited, that compares cities with franchises to cities without, concludes that while the economic impact is minimal, economic growth CAN COME from people that travel from outside the area.. Do the characteristics of our area lead to a greater number of people that travel from outside our "metro area" (as said in the study)? I would think our metro area is smaller than say, philly... no?

[Bubba, Pinellas Park]

No, in fact I don't go to the Threshers or Dunedin Jays, I don't golf, and I only will go to the beach in the mornings up to about 11am...it gets too freakin hot!!! Don't you get it? Everyone is different, I am just stating how I feel. I have gone to the Trop because it is inside and comfortable, I will go to the movies, or other indoor venues. I will not spend one dime to sit outside, I was born and raised here, and if it wasn't for air-conditioning, I wouldn't live here. Thank You.

[Don Mott]

Judging by fan attendance numbers I would venture to say not too many people are coming from outside of Pinellas County.

[get-real]

Right.. I agree with what you are saying in your last post.. but since fans are already eating and drinking then going home.. (very easy to do at the trop), wouldn't it be better for the area to have a stadium not nearly as conducive to eating and drinking then going home? Like I said.. not data to back it up but it would seem that if you were walking to the stadium as opposed to parking in the lot, you'd do a lot more things in the area.. Also.. I'll admit I haven't read every single one of your studies.. and you said that quite a few stadiums were build in the past 15 years.. is there a study that directly compares how the city is doing after and before the new stadium? If there's not, comparing a city with a team to a city without a team is apples to oranges I would say.

[get-real]

Ok.. (I may be totally ignorant on this.. I'm 26 just got out of school 2 years ago, so I'm getting my feet wet on where all the tax money, etc. goes..).. but... does it matter if it comes from Pinellas? We're voting as a city right? Does tax money that goes to teachers, firefighters, etc, come from county taxes, or city? In other words.. if I spend 50 bucks in Largo.. does that tax money go to help government funded things in the county? or in Largo? I guess what I'm trying to argue is money that would be spent in Largo that is spent in St. Pete would be better off going to St. Pete.. but if it goes to the county, and not the city, then I'm wrong.. Granted.. giving more money in taxes to elected officials is no guarantee that it will get anywhere worth going (I am old enough to realize that)

[Mike]

Here's my take on the weather. Seems the Rays are in a pickle, because most MLB games are played during the day. 4-8pm is the absolute WORST time of day to be outside around here from June through September. Thunderstorms come in and then it gets MUGGY, and the temp stays in the high 80's. Feels-like temp nearing 100, in the shade. If the Rays played during the day, when the retractable sail would block the direct sun and before the rains come & humidity rises, fans would actually be more comfortable. But they can't park the crowd during the day.

And I've been to a Friday Clearwater Threshers game. In a county of a million people, there were 200 people in attendence. And it was freaking miserable.

[get-smart]

get-real

I believe you are talking about discretionary spending. If I have $30 a week to blow on entertainment and I go to the ball game, I'll spend the $30 at the ball park. I will go home after the game. I am tapped out. If I didn't go to the game than I may have spent the $30 on a movie or dinner. The point is the downtown is only getting 30 bucks out of me.

Let me ask you this. The Rays are playing tonight. They will have a crowd of 20,000 fans. When the game is over do you think the city streets, bars and restaurants will be flooded by game goer? The answer is no. They are tapped out and they will go home.

So if some one comes from Largo or Seminole that's fine. That will just balances someone from St. Pete going to Largo.

Outside money is needed. That what the museums bring. The Pier. The Dali, Frescos, Saturday Market, The Triathlon, The Vinoy, the beautiful parks and waterfront.

A stadium is self contained. There is no reason to go outside it. A downtown stadium will suck the life out of the downtown.

Research other stadiums. You will find that they are build on the same grounds that the old one is on. Look at map you will find that they are isolated by interstate or RR tracks. Let the Rays move. their new stadium will be by the airport and interstate.

If they start looking to move just think of the blogging opportunity.

[get-real]

Judging by the amount of people at the beach on memorial day, at amusement parks in the summer, at the games I mention, on the golf course, you're in the minority Bubba, not the majority.. not that thats a bad thing!

[Don Mott]

" is there a study that directly compares how the city is doing after and before the new stadium?" As I recall there are a few. If you read what I have provided and can't find your answer do a Google.

[get-real]

Get-smart.. then wouldn't the new location be better than the trop? I disagree that its a lack of money as far as not going downtown.. Ferg's is the only place within walking distance and its freaking PACKED after the game.. I would argue that the reason people don't stick around is because after the game they go to their car in the parking lot.. Once in their car.. they go to where they normally go, wherever they live.. If they had to walk passed a bunch of nightlife.. isn't there at least a decent chance they would stop there? You seem to be assuming that the vast majority of people go straight home after the game.. I usually go out after.. and its not downtown because, like I said.. I'm already in my car.. I don't want to have to find a place to park.. if I was already parked before the game.. and i could leave my car there, I'd be a lot more inclined to go somewhere there.

[get-real]

Don.. no answer to my 7:36 point.. I thought I raised a decent question there?

[Don Mott]

Read me at 7:42

[Thomas]

GET-REAL,

I was the one who posted regarding the substitution effect.

A couple of quick points:

- "If I don't go to games then I won't come into St. Pete" In this case, you absolutely would be new dollars for the city. Same money for the county, but new money for the city.
However, the check/balance for that is how many people will avoid St. Pete specifically because there is a game. This is most commonly depicted by "major event" sales receipts. The Super Bowl gets a positive connotation for being an economic boom - but in reality it completely disrupts the normal pattern of spending by citizens and hence, becomes a net sum zero effect. Each Rays game is that same principle, just on a much smaller scale.

- "To me it would seem that if you are going to a stadium on the water that you have to walk to you would probably stop at one of the things to do either before or after the game". Or you might be maxed out by tickets, parking, and in game concessions and go directly to the game, watch, then leave, without ever visiting any thing but the stadium.

- " How many new mlb stadiums were built in the last 15 years? Isn't that a really small sample size with different circumstances for each?" The circumstances vary greatly. But there have been quite a few stadiums built in the last two decades. None of them can boast any impact on the economy. Most cannot boast any impact on the neighborhood they're built in, unless that neighborhood already had a massive re-development going on that the stadium became part of. (See - Phoenix, Cleveland for examples of stadiums that made no impact. See Baltimore, Denver for stadiums that were part of massive redevelopment plans)

On a purely economically level, it makes no sense to build a stadium with public money. And we haven't even started talking about "leakage" yet.

That's the economic principle that shows that of all the money that goes to the Rays, most of it gets pulled out of the local economy (owners from NY, players from out of state, etc)

Where as if you spent your money at the local sports bar, that money would be recirculated in St. Pete.

I mean there are 1,000s of economic reasons to kill this plan.

[gary grooms]

To kill this plan for economic reasons flies in the face of history regarding big time sports. Regardless, of how one "economist" or another looks at sports / stadiums. The simple facts are cities all over the US are willing to support MLB, the NFL, the NBA etc. with public dollars.

20 years ago St. Petersburg decided that having MLB was so desirable that we built a stadium...... without having a team.

I've asked these questions before:

1. There are 26 other cities with a MLB team. Is it your position that all 26 cities are wrong and that you are right?

2. Do you really believe that the macro-economics of the combined entity of all MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL cities would be improved if all the major sports leagues disappeared?

[get-real]

Don.. Reread both posts.. I mentioned people coming from inside Pinellas.. not sure how you answered my question

[get-real]

Get-Smart..

Are you arguing that more people will avoid downtown then go downtown because a baseball game is going on?

Are you saying that no one has money to spend after the game? How do the people in those other cities you talked about manage to put money into the bars around the stadium.. Why do I, and as many people as it can fit, go to Ferg's after the games?

You said there is only positive economic impact when there is a redevelopment project going on.. like the one that would be at the top and likely parts of south st. pete? Isn't the redevelopment going along with the building of the stadium? Are you arguing for or against the stadium here? It seems your point is more for...

[get-real]

Sorry.. Thomas, not get-smart.. force of habit.. ha!

[get-real]

And furthermore! Don, I point out that the studies you've listed apply to cities that didn't have a franchise before.. and I'm supposed to try and find studies that verify YOUR point? Shouldn't you be finding those, since your studies apply to a totally different situation that can't be applied here? Just wondering. Sometimes the nays do the exact same stuff crazy Rick is accused of.

[get-smart]

gary grooms

1- If there are 26 cities with teams and the Rays go to another city without a team, there would still be 26 cities with a team. If they go to a city that already has a team then there will be 25 cities with teams.

Mr. Grooms, apparently, you are willing to let the greedy Goldman Sachs criminals hold you hostage for a team. These people are manipulating you. I know you will deny it now, but you will see I'm right. For some reason you internalize it as your fault, your failure. It isn't your fault. Besides they are locked into a contract.

2- The major sports leagues would not disappear. They won't be making as much money if they paid their own way like all other business'. The big revenues come from advertisers. They can always be shown on cable. The discretionary dollars would be spent on different entertainment. In fact it may improve a local downtown scene.

[gary grooms]

Get Smart -

You didn't answer either question. I realize question 2 is hypothetical.

Try again - both questions are simple yes or no.

1. There are 26 other cities with a MLB team. Is it your position that all 26 cities are wrong and that you are right?

2. Do you really believe that the macro-economics of the combined entity of all MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL cities would be improved if all the major sports leagues disappeared?

[gary grooms]

Much of the discussion regarding economic impact seems to be revolving around restaurants and bars. Look at the list of restaurants and bars that support of the stadium because based on their experience the stadium will improve their business.
• > Bangkok Thai
• > Beef O'Brady's on 4th
• > Bishop Tavern
• > Cafe Alma
• > Ceviche
• > City's Cafe & Market
• > City Subs
• > Courigan's Irish Pub
• > D & J Cafe
• > De Santo/ Push Lounge
• > Ferg's Sports Bar
• > Gratzzi Ristorante
• > Hammerheads Island Grill & Raw Bar
• > Johnny Rockets, Baywalk,
• > L'Olivier Bistro
• > Lucky Dill Deli
• > Lymey's Pub & Eatery
• > Midtown Sundries
• > Moon Under Water
• > Parkshore Grill
• > Pelican Pub
• > Tamiami Bar
• > Tanglin's
• > The Table Restaurant
• > Z Grille
• > Zapata's Mexican Restaurant

Some people make the unbelievably silly point that the downtown restaurants will suffer because no one will be able to find a place to park. If I’m running a bar or restaurant downtown and every parking place within a half a mile is occupied I will be doing a tremendous business…… unless all those cars showed up by themselves without any people inside them. The quick math is if I have a 150 seat restaurant in downtown I probably need to do at least $2 million a year to make ends meet. If every space around me is full 81 nights a year I should easily do $1 million on those 81 nights combined. That leaves me only 284 nights / days to generate the other $1 million.

Again my question is a simple yes or no.

Is it your position that you know better than all these experienced restaurant operators?

[Don Mott]

I guess you haven't read them thoroughly, some were new teams and some were new stadiums for existing teams. Here's another one for ya, http://www.newcolonist.com/stadium.html The difference between us and Rick is we provide facts to back our words, something he has yet to do!

[get-smart]

gary grooms

You got me on all this stuff. You win!

The Rays and Marlins will be in the Superbowl of Baseball this year!

Would you consider this a mixed metaphor?

[gary grooms]

Don,

Your link is not to a series of facts - but to a reasoned opinion. That does not make Mr. Keating wrong.

The facts are:

There are 26 other cities with MLB teams and none of them are throwing them out because they are hurting their economies.

There are several other cities that would take a MLB team right now.

My reasoned opinion is that most of the cities hoping to land a MLB team would build a stadium at no cost to the team.

Seeing that every city with a team (except maybe us) wants to keep their team and this is a fact.

Is it also a fact that you believe you know better than all 26 other cities?

Yes or No?

[gary grooms]

Get Smart

Does this mean I get to answer questions 1 and 2 for you?

I'll fill in "No" for both.

[gary grooms]

I'm old and done typing for the night. You all banter about as you wish. I 'll look in the morning to see if anyone can answer the simple "Yes or No" questions.

[Don Mott]

26 other cities can't afford to throw their teams out since they have so much invested. Tell me how many 'voters' in those 26 cities would throw the team out if they had the opportunity? I guess since I have posted 8 or 10 links which all say the same thing they mean nothing huh? I can find more if you'd like. Do I know better than 26 cities? Who should I know better than? The politicians or the poor citizens who got suckered in without a vote. If some city wants to build a MLB stadium on the backs of their taxpayers let them have at it.

[get-real]

DON! I thought you were better than this.. The study you sent me is ridiculous!

Here are its 3 main points..

1. Substitution effect.. We already talked about this.. Saying substitution effect in this situation doesn't really make sense for reasons I've talked about in great detail.. If the stadium was in the new location there would be a lot more bars / businesses that would get foot traffic.. you're right about the substitution effect.. money spent in largo after the people drove home from the game would be substituted with money spent downtown... I think gary listed the businesses that are for the substitution effect.

The second point is that the government is taking money from the taxpayers.. and this money isn't accounted for in studies.. It states that the money that is spent to fund the stadium through taxes will be taken from the economy.. Since we're already paying for the trop.. and no extra money is going to the new stadium.. I'm not sure how this applies.. Unless you're talking about 2017.. but if you honestly think the trop is a good place to play baseball for 9 more years, you're delusional.

The third point is higher taxes will reduce consumer spending.. The stadiums the study talks about are funded by increases in sales tax.. which is not the situation here!!!

At least get passed the title before you post the link on here.. it would be really nice if you read the freaking study you are using to say the stadium shouldn't be built.. you keep comparing apples to oranges and claiming victory.. Research involves more than reading the title of a study that says Baseline Welfare Cases: Stadium and passing it off as a compelling argument against the stadium.. At least Rick, the crazy SOB, while he may not list specific research and studies, doesn't list specific research and studies that a 3rd grader could figure out don't apply.

[get-real]

Don please keep pulling studies.. sooner or later one of them will be a realistic comparison of this situation.. at least i HOPE.

[get-smart]

gary grooms

I think the corporate welfare is over for ML teams. The only exception might be basketball if the city needs and can use a multi functional arena.

The opposition today doesn't need to spend days researching info at the library and then making photocopies to hand out. Making a 1000 phone calls. All the info is a mouse click away and email. I would say most of us (me included) on this blog wouldn't have a clue of the shenanigans the city is pulling without the internet. And we are going to defeat the forces of greed and evil.

If the team tries to relocate we can blog the other city. We can join their opposition and keep the team here. If that's what you want.

See - You have the power

[Don Mott]

By the way if you care to read some of the links I posted there are several where the populace was against the stadium but the politicians went ahead with the plan anyway. Democracy in action I guess. We the pols know better than you lowly taxpayers. What I would really like to see is how many still hold political positions in the same city. If I find time I may look that up. In the meantime none of that really matters because if it ever gets that far we have a vote.

[get-real]

Ugh.. so apparently you read the titles on Don's studies? get-smart maybe you should get-reading?

[get-real]

Don fantastic change of topic.. Are you Rick's brother, separated at birth from him? you for the nays? You guys do the same annoying stuff you accuse each other of.

[Thomas]

Get-Real…

“Are you arguing that more people will avoid downtown then go downtown because a baseball game is going on?”

Not at all, I’m saying there is a net zero effect.

“Are you saying that no one has money to spend after the game?”

Not at all. You’re talking in absolutes when there is huge variation.

“How do the people in those other cities you talked about manage to put money into the bars around the stadium. Why do I, and as many people as it can fit, go to Ferg's after the games?”

My guess is that you enjoy Ferg’s. However, the point is that the Rays represent 81 events per year – that’s about 22% of the days of the year. Ferg’s does not exist solely for those 81 events. When you and the Rays fans are there, regulars from the other 78% of the year aren’t.

“Are you arguing for or against the stadium here? It seems your point is more for... “

I’m not arguing anything. I’m offering some basic economic principles that have been proved time and time again with stadiums.

Personally, I’m a huge Rays and MLB fan but I do not support this plan. I would vote against it.

[get-smart]

Don - That is why Hometown Democracy is important. All major projects get voted on. It eliminates the back room deal and payoff.

How big of a payoff do you think Baker will get if he can pull it off? His political career is over. He can retire on all the pay backs and deals.

[Don Mott]

Baker destroyed his reputation a long time ago by having closed door meetings regards Albert Whitted. Just one more reason to be real skeptical of this deal.

[Thomas]

Mr. Grooms,

“The simple facts are cities all over the US are willing to support MLB, the NFL, the NBA etc. with public dollars. “

Right, and the simple facts are that cities all over the US used to burn people alive as witches and force people into slavery. Your attempt to support this as “everybody’s doing it” is beyond weak.

“20 years ago St. Petersburg decided that having MLB was so desirable that we built a stadium...... without having a team.”

How’d that work out? Seriously. Let’s take a good long look at the debt still remaining on that plan. Let’s take an even longer look at the neighborhood around the Trop. Let’s talk to the citizens that were promised a new and better life with MLB. Again, you’re presenting a very weak supportive argument.

“1. There are 26 other cities with a MLB team. Is it your position that all 26 cities are wrong and that you are right? “

No my position is that stadiums/arenas are a poor investment for public funds. I have a wealth of data to support that conclusion. I don’t think you are willing or able to acknowledge that data though.

“2. Do you really believe that the macro-economics of the combined entity of all MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL cities would be improved if all the major sports leagues disappeared?”

No. I believe the economic conditions of cities could be greatly improved by allowing pro-sports to pay their own bills. The subsidy to benefit ratio is way out of proportion.

If your business requires massive public subsidies to be viable, then perhaps your business model is not very good.

This isn’t MicroSoft or Boeing you’re subsidizing. You’re not generating quality jobs from the public investment. You’re using public dollars to make sure Carl Crawford makes $8M next season and the owners of a team that draws 17,000 to the game can clear their margins.

It’s actually not very difficult economics.

[get-real]

Thomas.. why are all the business' gary listed for the stadium? There's no effect on business whatsoever.. right? Would Ferg's make just as much money if the stadium wasn't next to it? Or might some of that money funnel into areas outside of St. Pete, if people weren't coming from the game?

[get-real]

Thomas.. you said the trop deal is working out terribly.. would you rather baseball never came here? You love the rays but you at the same time wish they never came here. And if you say no, I want them here, and the team to pay for it.. I would say good luck.. its not going to happen.

[get-real]

Would you say this is the longest semi-mature debate ever on this site? Usually name calling accompanied by a boatload of sarcasm would have been in order by now. Someone call Aaron.. he'd be proud.

[Don in St. Pete]

Hey Gary, the San Francisco Giants built their Stadium with private money and it is the most successful in the country. Go figure. I guess they had to be creative and work for a living since they weren't corporate welfare pigs dining at the public trough. Even Yankee Stadium at $1.7 Billion dollars is using $900 Mil in private money about $900 Mil more than the Rays plan on spending. I wouldn't give up thos box seats at the Trop yet.

[Mike]

I must say, there are about 5 - 6 people that consistently blog on this site, from both sides.

I've been observing. Gary Grooms is head and shoulders above everyone. He makes sense, he is reasonable, he doesn't jab people. He, without question, displays the most logic.

[Thomas]

“You love the rays but you at the same time wish they never came here.”

I think the lack of semi-mature debate has hardened us to the point where we might not capture the meaning of other posters.

I never said that I wished the Rays never came. I said that the promises of giant economic impact and revitalization of the area were vastly over stated. Aside from the unfortunate Saunders injuries, it’s been great times with the Rays – even though their record has not been so good.

[Will Ferrell]

This thread needs more cowbell.

[Thomas]

“There's no effect on business whatsoever.. right?”

You’re being silly. Of course business with proximity advantages to event centers benefit. I never claimed they didn’t. I simply said that their benefit comes at the detriment of someone else.

Think about your spending habits. I think you said you went to about 15 games per year. How is your entertainment budget changed when you go to a game? Do you still go to all the same places the week before/after you go to a game? (These are rhetorical questions, I don’t need an actual answer)

“Would Ferg's make just as much money if the stadium wasn't next to it? Or might some of that money funnel into areas outside of St. Pete, if people weren't coming from the game?”

Of course not. But we’re talking about the big picture. You need to accelerate the spending exponentially to get back the $450M you’re paying in.

Again rhetorically, if you gave $450M to build a corporate headquarters on that same site, you’d get thousands of quality jobs, restaurants packed for lunch and happy hour, more new home sales, more new car sales, etc, etc.

Think about it.

Sports are just a bad investment for the amount the public pays in compared to what they get back.

[make a deal]

How is it possible some St. Pete residents think that the Rays did not have a substantial pull in our recent boom in downtown development? They opened for business in 1998 and things have only improved.

More people watched the games on national T.V than did they watch any art gallery or festival and more people bought ball tickets, beer, and hot dogs than purchased P. Buckley Moss art.

[Curious...]

Don Mott,

Why is it that POWW is afraid of a vote in November? Why don't they let the city decide what THEY want? I think it is extremely unfair that POWW and its supporters are vying for a non vote to kill the proposal. Why not let the city and its citizens decide? For the record I am for it and upset that 35 people may ruin this for the whole city because we ruin their view or replace a baseball stadium with a BASEBALL STADIUM!!!!!!!!

[Curious...]

Or other opponents can answer the above. But Don seems to have all the answers.

[get-smart]

Thomas -

No one can argue with your research and conclusion. The pro forces just want a stadium downtown for whatever reason. They just act dumb to you logic.

Buying is a habit. When the non-stadium downtown goers have a hard time finding a parking spot to their favorite restaurant because of the crush of cars. They will find a new restaurant to go to in Gulfport or on the beach. Once their buying habit changes the downtown has lost them forever. It is very difficult and costly to replace an existing customer.

[get-smart]

Curious

By keeping the new stadium a secret, the mayor and city deprived us of an important issue that needed to be aired for our election of our new city council members. I guess the mayor and friends didn't want to take a chance that any of the city council candidates declare themselves opposed to the stadium and God Forbid win.

In other words the mayor has already voted for you last year!

So it is our turn to crush the deceit and lies!

-

[Don Mott]

Curious, how and why do you assume I am affiliated with POWW? I have nothing to do with POWW I simply don't like taxpayers money enriching those who are already quite wealthy. If you feel comfortable doing that by all means do it. I am not anti-vote since I believe the people have enough sense to realize that this is not in the best interests of taxpayers. Personally though it is looking less and less likely that it will get to a vote.

[Curious...]

Wow you guys do sound like a bunch of hippie government conspirators. But still, the council is like what 10 votes? Whoever is on there doesnt matter why not let the other 250,000 citizens of St Pete decide on the matter. We hear your view but why kill it and not let other voice theirs in "yes" or "no"? Is that fair to the rest of the city?

[make a deal]

get-smart~

You are so extreme with your thoughts.
It's all bad if St. Pete builds a new waterfront stadium.
It's all good if the MLB leaves St. Pete.

How can you come to that conclusion with all the reading of the blogs you do?
All day and night in front of your screen knowing it all.
Yet you can find not one good thing with St. Pete building and owning a waterfront stadium?
Nor have you uncovered one negative with MLB leaving this area?

Are you really the guy we should listen too?
Absolutely NO!!

[Curious...]

I said POWW and its supporters.

[Thomas]

“No one can argue with your research and conclusion.”

That is just an economic conclusion. There are quality of life issues, civic pride, and entertainment option conclusions that favor being a partner with the Rays in building a new stadium.

I’d like to see the Rays step up and present a fair offer; an offer that makes sense for both the team and the city.

However, they have yet to do that. Instead they’ve offered this garbage proposal with the public footing the entire bill. Save me your “$150M in rent up front” posts. The plan is a joke. Call it what it is.

“When the non-stadium downtown goers have a hard time finding a parking spot to their favorite restaurant because of the crush of cars.”

From my experience, people will deal with parking or any other generally negative aspect of an overall enjoyable experience. For example, have you ever waited in line to get something you really wanted? Of course you have. And you’ll do it again.

Parking is not the problem with the Rays plan.

Don’t get me wrong, statistics absolutely show that regular customers will not bother with game day. But they’ll be back the other 78% of the year.

[Don Mott]

I agree Thomas, if the Rays think this is such an economical bonanza why are they not putting some personal funds into the mix? They want all of the profits and none of the risks, that is why.

[get-smart]

make a deal

1 -No Waterfront Stadium Period!

2 - Build the stadium on the Trop site or Toytown - No Tax dollars Period.

3 - I will not let them hold me hostage because they threaten to move.

I will call their bluff. There is no city today that is going to hand over $500M to these Goldman Sachs criminals.

They destroyed the 90 year tradition of St Pete spring training. They are greedy beyond belief. They are criminals! And you support them! I know you got your excuses.

If they move to another city and they pay 100%, they will be put next to the airport by the interstate. Not on top of Big Sur overlooking the Pacific!

See! - I am reasonable, grasshopper

-

[make a deal]

Don Mott and Thomas ~

Obviously you are not in the negotiating world.
The Rays gave us their best case scenario.
Now it is our turn to ask for more yet keep the rights of the stadium in future sale. And negotiate other benefits.

That is where we are suppose to be right now - negotiating a deal! Not in an emotional state of mind that gets us nothing.

St. Pete has some leveraging powers here. We have what they desire most a waterfront and a fast growing demographic.

[make a deal]

get-smart ~

you rub me so the wrong way.

[Don Mott]

We don't have the power to negotiate, only the local governments have that. I doubt the city lapdogs will do much but I am curious to see what the county does. But once again if it gets that far the voters have the ultimate say.

[Thomas]

Um, yeah, it's getting late so I guess this is to be expected.

The Rays aren't asking to negotiate. They are putting a plan in front of the Council - with the anticipation that the Council will rubber stamp it to the voters.

There is no "negotiating". It's a "yes" or "no" with the threat of the team relocating in the background.

I think you're the one who lacks understanding and experience.

This is not a negotiation - it's a hostile takeover and the taxpayers are the mark.

I'm going to bed - see you all later.

[Who here actually lives in St. Pete]

Don Mott, Emerald Lane, LARGO, right.

I'm curious, why is someone that isn't a St. Pete resident taking such a stance on every segment of this project when they don't have vote or a intimate connection to St. Petersburg. Do you spend any time in downtown or go to ball games. Do you use our parks or follow our city government. Largo is suburban sprawl and is a completely different environment from a true walker friendly downtown. Having a stadium that is walking distance to the 6000 plus downtown residents is also a plus and not taken into account in any attendance projections. A full winning season and a playoff appearance will bring sustainable attendance no mater where it's played. The same was true with every other professional team around here. You once could buy Bucs Tickets at the gate on game days. Not anymore.

Back to my original concern that we have out of towner's trying to help settle St. Pete's future. If you loved St. Pete so much you would probably live here.

[make a deal]

City council can negotiate.
It's Rick Mussits(? spelling) job.
I have talked to each of our city council members and most say it's up to Rick. They will do whatever he tells them to.
They have so much on their plates that going through mounds of paper work working out the bond status of city parking and it's future revenues and area traffic flows - yeah just let Rick handle it.

[make a deal]

I want this for St. Pete!
I can see a bigger city 50 years from now even without baseball. I just like having it all.
And unless every city will agree to not help organized sports build stadiums then some tax money will undoubtedly be used to facilitate them.
But like all investments - it's about the return. And I believe in an even greater return than what the Trop has delivered to date.
Life will go on and on and on and to have generations grow unified under a national team is priceless.

[get-real]

Get Smart.. I understand you being upset there is no more spring training.. but what kind of sense does it make to have spring training in the same city you play? How are you expanding the fan base? Doesn't make any sense, never did.

[gary grooms]

Well I see that Thomas actually answered one of my yes or no questions.

In response to:

2. Do you really believe that the macro-economics of the combined entity of all MLB, NFL, NBA, and NHL cities would be improved if all the major sports leagues disappeared?”

Thomas said:

"No. I believe the economic conditions of cities could be greatly improved by allowing pro-sports to pay their own bills."

You can't argue that point. Obviously, if cities could receive the benefits of having a MLB team without having to build stadiums for them to play in it would put a lot of money in the city coffers. Unfortunately, the reality is that MLB teams are a tightly controlled commodity and it puts cities in the position of "bidding" on having a team. We do the same thing to lure manufacturing facilities etc. Some people call it corporate welfare or subsidies others would call it business incentives.

The Facts

No city in the US is asking their MLB to leave due to the “financial drain”

People in opposition to the waterfront stadium in St. Petersburg believe every city is wrong and they are right.

Two different expert parking consulting firms concluded there was enough parking to handle the stadium.

People in opposition to the waterfront stadium in St. Petersburg believe the professional consulting firms are wrong and they are right.

The climate experts that worked on the cooling technologies involving the sail, louvers and fans for the new stadium believe that it would be the 4th hottest stadium in MLB.

People in opposition to the waterfront stadium in St. Petersburg believe those experts are wrong and they are right.

The downtown businesses in general, and the bars and restaurants in particular believe based on their experience with spring training games, the IRL race etc, that the new stadium would be very beneficial to their businesses.

People in opposition to the waterfront stadium in St. Petersburg believe those restaurant experts are wrong and they are right.

The manatee data for the man-made harbor where the sea wall would have to be extended to fi