What we really need in a new stadium...

[GoSU96]

Why would someone put up a hundred mil to operate the place if they didn't expect big payments later?

Where do you get payments from the City government out of that?

 

[Millhouse]

Where do you get payments from the City government out of that?

It's gotta come from somewhere. Pay a hundred million to operate the dome? I'm suspicious

 

[CuseOnly]

It's gotta come from somewhere. Pay a hundred million to operate the dome? I'm suspicious

The city can't pay to fix potholes and will be bankrupt in 3 years supposedly. They don't have a pot to tick in.

The advantage for the private party is that they will now own a government subsidized building worth 500 mil that they only had to take $100 mil out of pocket for. They will also benefit from all of the revenue generated by such building.

If I wanted to buy a house and the state and county came to me and said, we will give you 80% of the money and I hold the title and just pay the taxes, how many of you would say no thanks. Answer...nobody.

 

[Millhouse]

The city can't pay to fix potholes and will be bankrupt in 3 years supposedly. They don't have a pot to tick in.

The advantage for the private party is that they will now own a government subsidized building worth 500 mil that they only had to take $100 mil out of pocket for. They will also benefit from all of the revenue generated by such building.

If I wanted to buy a house and the state and county came to me and said, we will give you 80% of the money and I hold the title and just pay the taxes, how many of you would say no thanks. Answer...nobody.

I'm saying putting up 100 million in exchange for revenues from operating the building is such a terrible deal, no one would do it without some sort of guarantee. I'm lazy but maybe I'll do an npv to back into the cash flows necessary to justify an investment that big. I just don't think it's plausible without subsidies that haven't been spelled out yet

I think people have lost their heads here because they're so excited.

 

[CuseOnly]

I'm saying putting up 100 million in exchange for revenues from operating the building is such a terrible deal, no one would do it without some sort of guarantee. I'm lazy but maybe I'll do an npv to back into the cash flows necessary to justify an investment that big. I just don't think it's plausible without subsidies that haven't been spelled out yet

I think people have lost their heads here because they're so excited.

I was excited, then I heard it was going to be only 44K with no pee troughs and thought it was a waste of time and money.

 

[GoSU96]

I'm saying putting up 100 million in exchange for revenues from operating the building is such a terrible deal, no one would do it without some sort of guarantee. .

Why in the world would you make that assumption?

 

[RMH44]

I'm saying putting up 100 million in exchange for revenues from operating the building is such a terrible deal, no one would do it without some sort of guarantee. I'm lazy but maybe I'll do an npv to back into the cash flows necessary to justify an investment that big. I just don't think it's plausible without subsidies that haven't been spelled out yet

I think people have lost their heads here because they're so excited.

It's not simply revenue generated from tenants...have you forgotten about the potential equity earned without additional out of pocket expense?

 

[Millhouse]

It's not simply revenue generated from tenants...have you forgotten about the potential equity earned without additional out of pocket expense?

What are the cash flows?

 

[Millhouse]

Why in the world would you make that assumption?

Common sense. Make the case why someone would pay 100 million for that

 

[RMH44]

What are the cash flows?

Any you suggesting that the prearranged contractual agreements with tenants wouldn't generate enough revenue to cover the private investor's 100 million dollar note over time? That's not counting special events scheduled yearly.

Besides...upon completion, the property would be worth significantly more than the initial hundred million dollar investment.

 

[Millhouse]

Any you suggesting that the prearranged contractual agreements with tenants wouldn't generate enough revenue to cover the private investor's million dollar note over time? That's not counting special events scheduled yearly. Besides...upon completion, the property would be worth significantly more than the initial one million dollar investment.

The developer is putting in 100 million, right?

 

[RMH44]

The developer is putting in 100 million, right?

Correct...typo on my part.

 

[alphaorange]

My first preference was "native".

How about "locals"?

 

[CuseOnly]

I'm saying putting up 100 million in exchange for revenues from operating the building is such a terrible deal, no one would do it without some sort of guarantee. I'm lazy but maybe I'll do an npv to back into the cash flows necessary to justify an investment that big. I just don't think it's plausible without subsidies that haven't been spelled out yet

I think people have lost their heads here because they're so excited.

You are forgetting that the private developer would OWN the building worth 500 mil and only have to put up 100 mil. Seems like a good value don't you think? With a guaranteed tenant in SU.

 

[Crusty]

Any you suggesting that the prearranged contractual agreements with tenants wouldn't generate enough revenue to cover the private investor's 100 million dollar note over time? That's not counting special events scheduled yearly.

Besides...upon completion, the property would be worth significantly more than the initial hundred million dollar investment.

How so? Who are the buyers for such a property? There is n o way that there is a windfall hiding in there somewhere. If there was SU would not play the sucker.

 

[GoSU96]

Common sense. Make the case why someone would pay 100 million for that

Common sense? Pay for what?

 

[RMH44]

How so? Who are the buyers for such a property? There is n o way that there is a windfall hiding in there somewhere. If there was SU would not play the sucker.

You are forgetting that the private developer would OWN the building worth 500 mil and only have to put up 100 mil. Seems like a good value don't you think? With a guaranteed tenant in SU.

Admittedly, I have no idea what the assessment would be on the completed venue. But, even if local real estate tanked and the property was only worth half of construction costs (250 million), it would still be a huge return on investment.

 

[Crusty]

Admittedly, I have no idea what the assessment would be on the completed venue. But, even if local real estate tanked and it was only worth half of construction costs (250 million), it would still be a huge return on investment.

You are assuming that the state's share is a gift and I don't know what the details are but I am sure that he can't sell it and keep the state's share.

 

[CuseOnly]

You are assuming that the state's share is a gift and I don't know what the details are but I am sure that he can't sell it and keep the state's share.

I never heard of anyone paying back a state grant...unless of course they never spent the money on a project that was proposed and greenlighted. Have you?

 

[Millhouse]

You are forgetting that the private developer would OWN the building worth 500 mil and only have to put up 100 mil. Seems like a good value don't you think? With a guaranteed tenant in SU.

Just because they spend 500 mil doesn't mean it's worth 500 mil. If it really were, they wouldn't need public money

 

[CuseOnly]

Just because they spend 500 mil doesn't mean it's worth 500 mil. If it really were, they wouldn't need public money

Understood, but it most assuredly is worth far more that the 100 mil they are putting up. Along with the revenue and profit it will generate, it's a sweetheart deal for them.

 

[Millhouse]

Understood, but it most assuredly is worth far more that the 100 mil they are putting up. Along with the revenue and profit it will generate, it's a sweetheart deal for them.

Not most assuredly worth more than that. What are your assumptions for cash flows? Who pays them?

 

[CuseOnly]

Not most assuredly worth more than that. What are your assumptions for cash flows? Who pays them?

As far as value of the structure, definitely worth more than 100 mil. Are you serious?

Simple math... if I build a house and spend 500K is it worth more than 100K after it is built. Come on man, are you really questioning this?

 

[Millhouse]

As far as value of the structure, definitely worth more than 100 mil. Are you serious? Simple math... if I build a house and spend 500K is it worth more than 100K after it is built. Come on man, are you really questioning this?

This isn't a house. There is a market for houses. The government overspending doesn't change then present value of the future cash flows. I'd love to know what the dome pays in rent and what the expenses are

 

[Millhouse]

This isn't a house. There is a market for houses. The government overspending doesn't change then present value of the future cash flows. I'd love to know what the dome pays in rent and what the expenses are

Sorry phone typos. Change the present vale , not then. Also, love to know what SU pays in rent for the dome and what the dome expenses are