Makes me wonder

Now that the NFL has rewarded Ziggy for extorting a new stadium what other publicly financed projects can we pay for?

We know all the freeways between the airport and downtown will need to be redone.

More strip clubs will need to be built.

The homeless will need to be shuttled out of town.

The guys on the corners with the signs will need to be paid so they disappear for a couple of weeks.

We should have additional skyways built so nobody needs to go outside.

HCMC should have a addition or two added in case a player or owner has a medical problem.

Of course the police will need all kinds of high tech gizmo’s to keep the VIP’s safe.

Can you think of anything else the taxpayers can help the NFL out with?

A little extreme don’t you think? Yes Ziggy held us fans hostage for a new stadium but in reality a SB coming here is HUGE for the economy for Mpls/St Paul…

Heck, sounds good to me. We need better freeways since ours are falling apart. More strip clubs? Competition will drive the price of a lap dance down to where you can really get something for your money.

If they pay the homeless enough to get out of town, I might just jump on a corner for a day or so to get the bonus money. More doctors? Can’t hurt.

Now, the fuzz have enough toys already. THAT we don’t need, but I suspect we’ll be stuck with more of that Super Bowl or not.

Every group that wants publicity will be out talking to the press. Recall that for last years game, the anti-trafficking folks were claiming that 250,000 hookers and pimps would be piling into town to take advantage of the tourists. That would be two hookers for every ticket sold. Stupid, sure, but they got a ton of publicity.

On the other hand, houses were renting for thousands for the week. If I play my cards right, I can get sent on vacation with the other homeless and rent my place for big coin. Then, I can afford to buy a honkin big tv and watch the game from a nice warm bar.

My guess is we’ll be hosting Cleveland vs. Detroit in a blizzard. Lowest ratings ever.

then maybe MPLS/ST. Paul should have footed the whole bill.

It’s huge for…..

Ziggy
NFL
Huberts
Deja vu
Hennipin county
Hotel W

How far down the list do the taxpayers show up? Granted the city will collect some tax dollars. How will that compare to what they spend?

As time goes on you will hear what the city and our politicians gave up to have the NFL come to town.

It’s really not as huge as you might think. Just Google it. The projections the NFL and government our way over stated. And there is minimal lasting effect.

Considering the public money thrown at the stadiums this is the LEAST the NFL could…should do. The real winners here are still the NFL, Zigmund and the government.

Being the NFL is tax exempt there will ne no tax revenue from the sale of tickets for the game. The NFL controls all tickets for the Super Bowl. Ziggy gets nothing in regards to tickets.

Its a big shell game. The NFL kicked in money for the stadium, right? So Zigmund gets $$ for a stadium to make money off of from the NFL. The NFL is reimbursed by using his stadium to hold a Super Bowl.

Aren’t they building a new down-town around the stadium since the real one is too far away for our honored guests?

Quote:

---

Being the NFL is tax exempt there will ne no tax revenue from the sale of tickets for the game. The NFL controls all tickets for the Super Bowl. Ziggy gets nothing in regards to tickets.

---

It this true? I know the players pay income taxes. I thought the teams were all sole proprieterships or partnerships and the owners paid tax on any income they draw from the team. I also assumed owners would pay capital gains on the sale of a team.

Quote:

---

Being the NFL is tax exempt there will ne no tax revenue from the sale of tickets for the game. The NFL controls all tickets for the Super Bowl. Ziggy gets nothing in regards to tickets.

---

Yes, the NFL is considered a non profit via Section 501(c)6, same code that orgs like Chambers of Commerce use:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomwatson/2014/01/30/the-real-super-bowl-question-should-the-nfl-be-a-nonprofit/

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9342479/examining-nfl-tax-exempt-status-challenged-us-senator-tom-coburn

Quote:

---

Its a big shell game. The NFL kicked in money for the stadium, right? So Zigmund gets $$ for a stadium to make money off of from the NFL. The NFL is reimbursed by using his stadium to hold a Super Bowl.

---

This is 100% correct IMO. Quid pro quo. As mentioned, certain things will be upgraded, some unnecessarily, in order to appease the League and make MN look good. We’ll throw a big party and everyone from NY and Hollywood will pretend they’re not cold and then I’ll watch the game from my couch as I usually do. By all means, please keep spending my tax money for me…

MOA will benefit… Maybe we could add a non-resident tax to all sales at the Mall for a 2 week period and use it to build a Bass Pro Shops next to IKEA?

That’s another thing. Where does this “2 weeks” come from? Who will be here for two weeks? Players? No. Owners? No. Fans? No. Who then? The games on Sunday, everybody will fly in Friday and out Monday.

The players pay income tax, and it is based on the location of each game. So the Superbowl means that the salary for both teams for that event are MN tax events. That still ends up less than the public forked over for taxes. Studies have shown in the regular season most of the money spent by people attending games is money they would have spent closer to home on recreation. So the primary affect is money that would have been spent in bars/resturants/etc in the suburbs is being spent in the downtown area instead. From a MN State point of view, the way they come ahead is when people from out of state come to MN to attend a game. So, from a MN state point if view, it is actually a GOOD thing when the stadium is full of Packer/Bear/etc fans.

The income tax might be collected on regular season games but player salaries are based on 16 games /weeks. So there are no taxes on play-offs or the Super Bowl unless it is listed as a bonus of some sort.

But that isn’t the point anyway. The original point was how much more tax dollars will be spent just to host the Super Bowl? Will the revenue generated exceed the dollars spent?

Can you think of anything else the taxpayers can help the NFL out with?

Hotel rooms by the hour, many hookers need a place to lay.

From what I have read, the NFL office itself is tax exempt. But the NFL passes its revenue through to the teams and THEY are taxed on the earnings.

I just hope that when they up date the roads to get to the new stadium they make a through fair so us in south Minnesota have a straight shot to up north. A freeway above all the B.S. on the ground. I could care less about that dam stadium and the football teams that will play in it. I hope the Minnesota weather will be at it’s worst when the SB is here.

Gundy

Quote:

---

MOA will benefit… Maybe we could add a non-resident tax to all sales at the Mall for a 2 week period and use it to build a Bass Pro Shops next to IKEA?

---

Your dreams already can true man…
http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CFPage?storeId=10151&catalogId=10051&langId=-1&appID=94&storeID=68

Quote:

---

That’s another thing. Where does this “2 weeks” come from? Who will be here for two weeks? Players? No. Owners? No. Fans? No. Who then? The games on Sunday, everybody will fly in Friday and out Monday.

---

Teams and media will be here for at least a week.

let me ask this, the cost of the stadium is 1 billion, the tax payers are on the hook for 498 million were does the rest of the money come from?

Jeez… I wouldn’t argue that the system you’re complaining about is perfect, but I think it’s pretty tough to argue that getting the Super Bowl in the new stadium (which was going to be build regardless) is a bad thing.

City of Mpls
Hennipin county
State of Mn.
NFL & Ziggy

Quote:

---

City of Mpls
Hennipin county
State of Mn.
NFL & Ziggy

---

aren’t three of those four tax dollars? or am I missing something?

You missed nothing.

Quote:

---

Jeez… I wouldn’t argue that the system you’re complaining about is perfect, but I think it’s pretty tough to argue that getting the Super Bowl in the new stadium (which was going to be build regardless) is a bad thing.

---

Yes, I agree. The stadium ship has already sailed. I don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t use it to get Minnesota on the big stage.

As far as the economics of a stadium, I thought that everyone understood that best case scenario is a break even. That’s best case. Every major study of sports economics has shown that “how good of a deal” a new stadium is depends on what you count and how you estimate it. The bottom line being generally they don’t make a profit in any conventional sense of the word.

I like what Tim Pawlenty said about the issue: You can’t have a winning pitch that MN is a great business climate by saying, hey move your business here, it’s butt cold, it snows a lot, taxes are high, and there’s nothing to do. Government sometimes has to spend money on fun because nobody’s really that attracted to misery.

The hospitality industry will get a big bounce from the Superbowl. Weather or not that equals “making a profit” depends on what else you choose to count as expenses.

To me, this is a great chance to showcase the state and show what a great place this is. Weather is always a major knock against MN, so it’s good for us to take every Big Stage opportunity to show everyone that things don’t stop here in the winter and, heck, you can even have fun.

I hate this crap where a bunch of crabby old men beat down every major event because it “doesn’t make money”. I love the irony of a bunch of fishermen saying that something sporting related somehow should pay its own way.

Here’s a money making idea for you: Fishing should be outlawed in this state. Why? Fact: Fishing is a money loser. So we should ban it, right?

The state pays out WAY more to keep fishing going than it collects in revenue from fishing. So dig up the public accesses, sell them off, and ban all fishing, right? It’d be cheaper.

Grouse

Quote:

---

Here’s a money making idea for you: Fishing should be outlawed in this state. Why? Fact: Fishing is a money loser. So we should ban it, right?

The state pays out WAY more to keep fishing going than it collects in revenue from fishing. So dig up the public accesses, sell them off, and ban all fishing, right? It’d be cheaper.

Grouse

---

I’m not so sure.

http://news.dnr.state.mn.us/2011/05/05/fishing-creates-43000-minnesota-jobs-28-billion-in-retail-spending/

“Though often perceived as a pleasant pastime, fishing is more than that,” explained Dirk Peterson, fisheries chief of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). “It’s an economic engine that supports 43,000 Minnesota jobs, generates $2.8 billion in direct annual expenditures and contributes more than $640 million a year in tax revenues to the treasuries of our state and federal government.”

Has the pace of spending on fishing stayed steady from 2011 to the present? I’d say that is likely.

http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/aboutdnr/budget/fy14-15/budget_from.pdf

The DNR’s total budget for 2014 and 2015 is 890 million of which $103.1 million of that budget goes towards fisheries (Game & Fish), per year.

Based on the numbers available it sure looks like a money maker to me. Point me in the right direction if I overlooked something.

it seems kind of funny during the hole process of approving the stadium deal it was referred to as “THE PEOPLES STADIUM” and as soon as it was done it became the “VIKINGS” stadium. which I find ironic seeing as the Vikings will have no ownership in the stadium. even thou they are paying for half of it. and have to pay rent the 8 Sundays a year they get to use it, ya they get money from naming rights, ticket sales to there games, concessions ect. ect. but they are a business that has a pay role in excess of 200 million a year.
the other 46 weeks a year all revenue generated goes to the state. I don’t know, maybe it’s just me but that sounds like a good deal for the people.

Quote:

---

From what I have read, the NFL office itself is tax exempt. But the NFL passes its revenue through to the teams and THEY are taxed on the earnings.

---

This is correct. The NFL as an entity still gets some advantages of a non-profit (ie salaries to their executives) but a lot of the money the NFL makes is taxed at the team level. I’m sure each team uses plenty of its own creative accounting but that wouldn’t make them different than any other multimillion dollar business.

And then, if you figure in hunting, which we should since that economic activity should be attributed as a result of the Game and Fish expenditures by the DNR….

http://huntingworksformn.com/economic-data/

Now I’ll give you this is a very “pro hunting” source and likely shouldn’t be considered the final say on anything but you get the picture. There’s a lot more money coming in than going out.

Economic Data

HUNTING IS PART OF MINNESOTA’S CULTURE

477,000 people hunt in Minnesota each year.
5.5 million days are spent hunting in Minnesota.

HUNTING SUPPORTS MINNESOTA’S ECONOMY

Hunters support over 12,400 jobs in Minnesota.
Hunting generates $417 million in salaries and wages.
Yearly spending by hunters in Minnesota is $733 million.
The average Minnesota hunter spends $1,500 each year.

HUNTING IS A KEY SOURCE OF TAX REVENUE

Hunters generate $93 million in taxes for the State of Minnesota.
Minnesota hunters pay $106 million in federal taxes.

MINNESOTA HUNTING: THE BOTTOM LINE

The total ripple effect from hunting in Minnesota is $1.3 BILLION.