Confusing Wants with Needs in the #Vikings Stadium Debate #wilfare
Christopher Gates at the Daily Norseman has done a good job showing how entitled Vikings season ticket holders are to other people’s money.
He begins:
I get that the legislature lacks the testicular fortitude to present any kind of a solution and, instead, offers nothing but criticism.
There have been a ton of solutions proposed. The senate had hearings where people came from all over the state to testify on both locations and financing options. In the end, none of those solutions proved viable since they ask far too much of the public.
Zygi Wilf continues to demand more money from the public than any other NFL franchise owner in the history of the league.
Fans continue to sit on their hands rather than digging out their checkbooks.
I get that there are a lot of anti-stadium crybabies out there that think Zygi should “build it himself” (even though they’d find a way to whine about that, too, what with Zygi being able to keep all the profits in that case).
Some people cry when their money is taken from them without their permission. Others just want a decent justification of why this is a good investment for the public. I don’t think you’d see many people complaining if Zygi built a stadium privately, paid taxes like most locally owned businesses do, paid property taxes rather than pretend that it’s good for the public to own the stadium, etc.
The only group that would end up whining about that would be Vikings fans, who would have sticker shock when they saw how much parking and tickets would cost if Wilf actually charged true market rates for games.
I get that the team wants to maximize their profit potential after years of getting screwed over by the Minneapolis Sports Facilities Commission.
The Vikings signed the lease. The MSFC hasn’t charged the Vikings rent for years. Yet the MSFC is screwing over the Vikings? Hardly.
What I don’t get, however, is that people fail to realize that something needs to get done.
Nope. Nothing “needs” to get done.
I don’t give a damn what the anti-stadium crybabies say about the Metrodome. . .it’s no longer a viable National Football League facility, and it hasn’t been for a very long time.
“Viable” means “doesn’t generate as much money for Zygi Wilf as a $1.1 billion stadium paid for with $650 million in public subsidies would generate for Zygi Wilf.” The Vikings franchise has increased in value by $200 million over the time Wilf has owned it. He just dropped $19 million on a new home. The guy is not hurting. And, even if he was, he’s running a private business.
In this case, all of these parties involved could learn a valuable lesson from Professors Woods, Watts, Richards, and Jagger.
You can’t make this up. Gates literally embeds a copy of the Rolling Stones “You can’t always get what you wan’t” into his post. Because, you see, spending $1.1 billion on a stadium fulfills his “need”.
Get something done. Stop screwing around and get something done.
Please, get something done that doesn’t involve Christopher Gates having to spend his own money! Please extract money from taxpayers without their permission to fulfill Christopher Gates’ entertainment needs and Zygi Wilf’s greed goals.
Has any other team in any other sport ever had this much trouble getting something done concerning a stadium?
Yes. Teams have chosen to relocate because fans were unwilling to support their local team. If Vikings fans aren’t willing to meet the Vikings’ Wilfare demands, it’s possible that they could leave too. If I was Christopher Gates, I would start asking fans to pool their money to meet Wilf’s ransom. But, asking taxpayers to borrow $650 million to subsidize Vikings season ticket holders’ tickets and Zygi Wilf’s greed is not justifiable.
February 12th, 2012 at 11:55 am
And the Vikings are not charging a “true market rate”??? Huh??
Viking tickets seem to me to be pretty expensive at the current Dome and the TV games barely escape blackouts. I think that the Wilf’s have come pretty close to maximizing what the market will bear. Perhaps a decent team might help.
Let’s say that the Vikes will have to double ticket current ticket prices in order to build a new stadium without public subsidy. Econ 101 tells me that an elastic price curve means there will be less demand for tickets at doubled prices. If 25% of the current fan base balks, I sure hope they build a lot smaller stadium because if they stadium is empty, TV fans will have to buy NFL pay TV or go liquored up at a bar to see home games. Good deal for bar-owners –I guess.
February 12th, 2012 at 12:23 pm
“Viking tickets seem to me to be pretty expensive at the current Dome and the TV games barely escape blackouts. I think that the Wilf’s have come pretty close to maximizing what the market will bear.”
This seems to describe a situation where the Vikings are at ‘peak’…therefore, wouldn’t logic dictate the new stadium by definition of costing exponentially more put the Vikings well past peak?
February 13th, 2012 at 11:08 am
@Rick, you nailed the problem. Fans are unwilling to pay for a new stadium through ticket prices that reflect the difference between what the Wilfs are willing to pay and what the Wilfs want to build. That gap is not the public’s problem. Wilf and fans should work together to decide what’s best for their team.
February 13th, 2012 at 11:41 am
@Ed Not sure here if I “may” have nailed the problem here or not.
But the “problem” I was addressing was your concept that this stadium issue could be solved by raising prices by seat licensing. In my view, it might be possible in a few rich markets like NYC and Dallas, but even the greediest of owners could not make it work in MN.
Are you dreaming about letting the “Vikes and the Fans work it out”? Go tell that to the Legislature, Governor and Minneapolis City Council!!!!
Also worth noting is your referral to “their” team. It appears that you have now declared yourself as a non-fan. Thanks for the clarity on that point.
February 19th, 2012 at 1:25 am
“Also worth noting is your referral to “their” team. It appears that you have now declared yourself as a non-fan. Thanks for the clarity on that point.”
Seriously? Ed’s posted literally a dozen articles with ways to keep the team here, while giving everyone a new stadium experience. Renovating the Dome is clearly the best solution, both logistically and financially. The BC Place renovation proves that we could have a modern, state-of-the-art facility in the existing footprint of the Dome at a fraction of the cost of building a new stadium. Also, considering it’s location to public transit and a main highway interchange we wouldn’t need to waste money on building new roads. We could improve our existing infrastructure.
Clearly, Ed is doing both the fans and the public a favor…