The Minnesota Vikings, via their fake grassroots organization Twitter account, explained how they would like to see a replacement stadium funded:
Frankly, they don’t seem to care how money is extracted from the public on Zygi Wilf’s behalf. What’s important is that money is redistributed from the public to Zygi Wilf.
And, what was @MNMomentum agreeing with Fox 9’s Seth Kaplan about? This statement:
Confusing, eh? A guy who makes a living off revenue generated from advertising running on broadcast television is complaining about viewers getting a free ride. Yet, somehow, he gets a paycheck. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but it certainly seems like FOX 9 and the Minnesota Vikings do quite well when 35% of the state’s televisions are tuned in to watch a game (along with the ads).
If that’s not good enough for the Vikings, the Vikings could pull their games from FOX 9 and put them on pay per view instead. No more ad-supported revenue generating broadcast TV games.
What this really comes down to is confusing fans who are fanatic enough to tune in to watch a Vikings game from the comfort of their own home, and fans who are willing to pay for a new stadium. While their is some overlap, it’s not nearly as great as @MNMomentum or Seth Kaplan seem to believe. Recent polling by the StarTribune touched on this when it showed that the majority of Minnesotans don’t want the Vikings to leave, yet don’t support public stadium financing (Wilfare).
Watching a TV shows does not obligate the public to subsidize TV shows’ sets. We don’t publicly subsidize the American Idol’s theater, Sterling Cooper’s office space, or the Central Perk coffee shop.
Yet, somehow, some (but not all) NFL team owners seem to think it’s acceptable to demand hundreds of millions of dollars of subsidies for their TV show sets used for filming their shows in front of a live audience.
Time is money, Seth. How exactly does the public benefit from TV timeouts?