Voters could bring the MLS to St. Louis April 4th

[slufanskip]

Can you show me the return on investment for the money spent on the Zoo, Forest Park, Busch Stadium, etc ... Do any of these return any money on the tax payers investment?

Curious as to your opinion on the Zoo and Forest Park? Should the public fund them? Are you against all public funding of entertainment or just soccer because you don't like it?

[MusicCityBilliken]

Atlanta is having its inaugural season with its MLS team. The roll out has been very successful.

https://www.atlutd.com/post/2017/03/17/atlanta-united-sells-out-second-straight-home-match

Presently the United play home games at Bobby Dodd Stadium at Georgia Tech till when the Mercedes-Benz Stadium opens end of July (ready for the Atl Falcons season). Plans are to cut the seat capacity at the Mercedes-Benz to around 30,000, if they do that & interest remains, it would be hottest ticket in town. 

I think a MLS team in St Louis is long over due and a no brainer.

[Old guy]

No, and the tax should be repealed, followed by the zoo charging admission. The zoo does not want this because the admission will go down and the revenue for the zoo will also go down. All the taxpayers are doing is giving a subsidy to people from other counties, including IL counties, to come to the zoo for free. This means that you have to be there in good sunny days very early or else you will have to face clog and long line after clog and long line to get in with your kid or grandchild. Is this what we want or need? NO it is not. 

I am not against all public funding of entertainment but public funding should be done in a way that the users of the service pay for it, either upon admission or via taxes, rather than concentrate the taxes in a small spot and let hordes of people come in for free. And yes the hordes of people (certainly the truth as far as the zoo is concerned) will spend some money while they are there and there will be some gains from it. But the people that are paying the taxes will not get the level of enjoyment, for the price paid, at the same level as the people that are not paying the taxes. Unless you get all the counties and jurisdictions to participate in the tax, it is not a good thing. As long as everybody that uses the service pay equal amounts, and shares losses and earnings equally,  it is probably OK. Forrest Park and the Zoo are regional in terms of attendance, they should be paid for in a regional basis, if taxes are going to be the method used to pay for them.

Tarheel, the way they are doing in Atlanta is the correct way. It would be OK for me if we got the MLS franchise first and started playing at an already existing facility, and then build the stadium using public funds, after the success of the venture can be based upon actual attendance numbers. The part that is a brainless thing is to pass the tax and start the plans to build the stadium even before we get the MLS team. 

[JMM28]

I agree that STL taxpayers are subsidizing the zoo for others. Although I will say I know a lot of young families that will make a weekend out of going to the zoo in St Louis, which brings in hotel nights and other tax revenue which probably easily offsets the admission cost. 

 

As far as public stadium financing goes, it is never a good idea. St Louis was just burt by the Dome fiasco. The grand  hotel near it was another tax payer backed bust. There is usually a reason these deals don't get done from the private sector. 

[cheeseman]

47 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

I agree that STL taxpayers are subsidizing the zoo for others. Although I will say I know a lot of young families that will make a weekend out of going to the zoo in St Louis, which brings in hotel nights and other tax revenue which probably easily offsets the admission cost. 

 

As far as public stadium financing goes, it is never a good idea. St Louis was just burt by the Dome fiasco. The grand  hotel near it was another tax payer backed bust. There is usually a reason these deals don't get done from the private sector. 

So the 5 million SLU got for infra structure when building Chaifetz was a bad deal - the State does not get anything out of it?  

[MusicCityBilliken]

If you go to Disney in Orlando, Florida residents pay less then non-Florida residents for admission. I am sure Disney got all kind of state incentatives to open a park in Orlando.

Also they are very strict with this policy. When my parents lived in Bradenton, FL, I asked my dad to purchase tickets for us, can not do. If you use a Florida residents ticket they ask for proof of residency, like a drivers license.

Maybe the zoo should initiate a plan like this.

[HoosierPal]

For those against the MLS proposals, I am curious as to your thoughts on STL giving money to rehab both Scott Trade and the Dome.  Do we pump money into these two venues, or do we let them to continue to go downhill with an inevitable decrease in dollars coming into the city through conventions and sports dollars going elsewhere?

[slu72 fan]

First, I'm in favor of the soccer stadium, and, as a county resident, I think the county should be sharing the load, like the zoo and art museum district. 

The City owns those two buildings, so they better keep them up to date, which they are not. Otherwise, the return on their investment will only decline. As I've said before, this is the game they chose to be in. 

[JMM28]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

So the 5 million SLU got for infra structure when building Chaifetz was a bad deal - the State does not get anything out of it?  

Well it's hard to say without knowing the specifics of the tif and everything associated with the deal. I'd also say 5 million for infrastructure related improvements is a far cry from actually financing significant chunks of the entire project. 

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, HoosierPal said:

For those against the MLS proposals, I am curious as to your thoughts on STL giving money to rehab both Scott Trade and the Dome.  Do we pump money into these two venues, or do we let them to continue to go downhill with an inevitable decrease in dollars coming into the city through conventions and sports dollars going elsewhere?

Scott Trade is owned by the City.  The Dome is owned by the Convention Group which is also owned by the public ultimately.  Letting both go downhill would be like letting your house go without keeping your investment in good condition. - makes no sense economically.  Sorry 72 fan did not see your post.

[cheeseman]

31 minutes ago, JMM28 said:

Well it's hard to say without knowing the specifics of the tif and everything associated with the deal. I'd also say 5 million for infrastructure related improvements is a far cry from actually financing significant chunks of the entire project. 

The theory is still the same - either it is a good idea to use public money for these projects or not - I do think in the long run all benefit as long as the whole 9 yards is not given away.

[RiseOfTheBillikens]

Younger generation moving back into the city will support a soccer team. It's also about more than just money.  Soccer is definitely growing and St. Louis AND SURROUNDING AREAS have plenty of soccer fans. I will be very dissapointed if the vote doesn't pass personally.

[STL Hoops Insider]

Maybe we can do both. Kansas City the Chiefs, Royals, Sporting KC, and the Missouri Mavericks. St. Louis is a similar Arnett, same state, so Cardinals, Blues, MLS, and NBA D League seems feasible 

[brianstl]

1 hour ago, slu72 fan said:

First, I'm in favor of the soccer stadium, and, as a county resident, I think the county should be sharing the load, like the zoo and art museum district. 

The City owns those two buildings, so they better keep them up to date, which they are not. Otherwise, the return on their investment will only decline. As I've said before, this is the game they chose to be in. 

The only reason the City owns Scottrade is due to tax reasons and so bonds could be sold to construct it.  It was done to save the team's owners money. The city has no actual control over the building and makes no real money off the lease.

[brianstl]

55 minutes ago, cheeseman said:

The theory is still the same - either it is a good idea to use public money for these projects or not - I do think in the long run all benefit as long as the whole 9 yards is not given away.

The big difference between the zoo/Forest Park and a stadium/arena is that public funding for a zoo/park isn't going to help a private entity make money.  

[Old guy]

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

The theory is still the same - either it is a good idea to use public money for these projects or not - I do think in the long run all benefit as long as the whole 9 yards is not given away.

The theory is not the same any way you look at it. We are already stuck with Scottrade and the Convention Dome, they are there, they have to be paid for whatever we do with them. So, once you have the white elephant around your neck you are forced to keep on paying to make the place give some returns instead of allowing it to become a derelict property. The issue with the MLS is why do you want to build yet another (the third) white elephant in the city that whatever happens you will be required to keep maintaining. 

For example, look at Crestwood mall, it was flourishing once, then it got into bad times, then it went under. They tried to re purpose the mall and it did not work and eventually they just razed it and tore it down. Besides, to talk about the point brought by JMM if families come to St. Louis to spend a weekend in the zoo with their kids, what tells you that they stay in hotels within city limits? They are free to choose and wherever they stay they can get to the zoo relatively easily. 

Why build a third white elephant that becomes ours forever. It would be different if the plan was to convert the Convention Dome into a soccer stadium, that would be re purposing an already existing white elephant. Once you use public money for such projects you are stuck with them, even after the project goes down the drain and there is nothing left but another big, used, empty building in need of repairs.

[Old guy]

2 hours ago, slu72 fan said:

First, I'm in favor of the soccer stadium, and, as a county resident, I think the county should be sharing the load, like the zoo and art museum district. 

The City owns those two buildings, so they better keep them up to date, which they are not. Otherwise, the return on their investment will only decline. As I've said before, this is the game they chose to be in. 

SLU72 lives in the county and of course he supports the soccer stadium, it is not going to be paid for in any way shape or manner by the County. He has nothing to lose, and perhaps something to gain from this.

[Glorydays2013]

St. Louis has a lot of soccer history. There was a time where a large portion comparatively of the national team had a connection with stl in the past decade or so. St. Louis soccer will bring in a lot of the county an drew surrounding areas. With a proposed 17,000 arena, it won't be hard to sell out every game. A Stl-Kc rivalry would be great for the city. 

Look at footage of Orlandos first game. Insane soccer fans, and looks super fun to be a fan. 

[MusicCityBilliken]

1 minute ago, Glorydays2013 said:

 

Look at footage of Orlandos first game. Insane soccer fans, and looks super fun to be a fan. 

This should be St Louis.

https://www.atlutd.com/tickets/founders-club

[Franchise_08]

27 minutes ago, tarheelbilliken said:

This should be St Louis.

https://www.atlutd.com/tickets/founders-club

At least. ATL is considered one of the worst sports cities in the country.

[MusicCityBilliken]

35 minutes ago, Franchise_08 said:

At least. ATL is considered one of the worst sports cities in the country.

Still peeved over the loss of the Hawks.

Atlanta is funny kind of city with ex-pats out numbering natives. Go to a Braves or Falcons games and the opposition has more fans. With its large immigrant population I think soccer will go over real well. I have tickets for opening day at the new Mercedes Benz Stadium (want to see the stadium-it's kind of unique) against Orlando City, I'll find out what kind of crowd they draw.

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, Old guy said:

The theory is not the same any way you look at it. We are already stuck with Scottrade and the Convention Dome, they are there, they have to be paid for whatever we do with them. So, once you have the white elephant around your neck you are forced to keep on paying to make the place give some returns instead of allowing it to become a derelict property. The issue with the MLS is why do you want to build yet another (the third) white elephant in the city that whatever happens you will be required to keep maintaining. 

For example, look at Crestwood mall, it was flourishing once, then it got into bad times, then it went under. They tried to re purpose the mall and it did not work and eventually they just razed it and tore it down. Besides, to talk about the point brought by JMM if families come to St. Louis to spend a weekend in the zoo with their kids, what tells you that they stay in hotels within city limits? They are free to choose and wherever they stay they can get to the zoo relatively easily. 

Why build a third white elephant that becomes ours forever. It would be different if the plan was to convert the Convention Dome into a soccer stadium, that would be re purposing an already existing white elephant. Once you use public money for such projects you are stuck with them, even after the project goes down the drain and there is nothing left but another big, used, empty building in need of repairs.

I am sorry, comparing a publically owned stadium to an old privately owned mall is apple to oranges. Lots of reasons that Crestwood failed - more competition is what did it in just like it did Northwest Plaza.  No other soccer team or hockey team will be competing.  Well I never said anything about the Zoo MuseumTax - that is another apples and oranges comparison.  The Dome is a convention center and it can easily be used full time for that - some improvements to be sure but not a white elephant.  Right now neither Scott Trade nor the Dome is going unused and down the drain.

[cheeseman]

1 hour ago, Old guy said:

SLU72 lives in the county and of course he supports the soccer stadium, it is not going to be paid for in any way shape or manner by the County. He has nothing to lose, and perhaps something to gain from this.

If you shop in the City then you pay sales tax so you would be paying for it - this is not a property tax.  Also, if you go to a game the entertainment tax you pay will also being paying for it.  

[Glorydays2013]

The St. Louis metropolitan area is the 20th largest in the United States with a population of 2.8 million. The bi-state metropolitan area includes seven counties in Missouri and eight in Illinois, for a total of 15 counties.

The largest crowd at Busch Stadium in the #1 baseball city, was a soccer match

There is the forgotten about Bosnian population as well.

There is no reason St. Louis should not have an MLS team with its large market. Some people don't realize how big STL will be for MLS. Maybe still butthurt from the Rams but for a city who has some of the best fans for Baseball and Hockey, being a soccer fan in what used to be soccer city USA wont be hard

[cheeseman]

22 minutes ago, Glorydays2013 said:

The St. Louis metropolitan area is the 20th largest in the United States with a population of 2.8 million. The bi-state metropolitan area includes seven counties in Missouri and eight in Illinois, for a total of 15 counties.

The largest crowd at Busch Stadium in the #1 baseball city, was a soccer match

There is the forgotten about Bosnian population as well.

There is no reason St. Louis should not have an MLS team with its large market. Some people don't realize how big STL will be for MLS. Maybe still butthurt from the Rams but for a city who has some of the best fans for Baseball and Hockey, being a soccer fan in what used to be soccer city USA wont be hard

I have to agree with you 100% on your post.