Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Diet_Coke t1_j9qsqyt wrote

The MLB has multiple billionaire owners who could peel off $3.5M and not even notice it, where are they?

7

Safe-Radio-3336 t1_j9rdc2m wrote

That’s not really how it works. There is some revenue sharing within the league, but that mainly goes to player’s salaries. It’s more helpful to think of each team as its own franchise. They control their own facility and its operations.

19

Diet_Coke t1_j9rgm6w wrote

Just the owner of the SF Giants is worth $6.1B. If he financed the stadium all on his own he'd still be worth $6.1B. It's the equivalent of someone with $10k in the bank spending $5.75ish.

9

Safe-Radio-3336 t1_j9rhc73 wrote

Would be great but that’s just not going to happen. The deal is that we provide the park and the team provides the jobs and economic benefits. The Giants/squirrels will go to the next best city in a heartbeat of we don’t keep up our end of the bargain

8

Diet_Coke t1_j9rhok1 wrote

What kind of jobs are they providing? The place is open for a few hours a week and I can't imagine there's a lot of salaried employees there.

−2

zstansberries t1_j9rmn6e wrote

The front office is open year round and a quick check of their page on the MiLB website shows about 34 employees who would beg to differ. You don't just whip up 4-5 months worth of events, food, beverage, and entertainment the month before the season starts. Plus all the directors and managers of the different aspects of the ballpark help support jobs of the vendors that supply all the things necessary to have a functioning park. Plussss that doesn't include the part time staff that support the diamond for the whole spring/summer, nor does it also include the roster of players, trainers, coaches who are still employed by the squirrels that spend the off season playing in international leagues.

13

Diet_Coke t1_j9rohvv wrote

Now think about the benefit $3.5M could provide to schools in the same terms

7

zstansberries t1_j9rpqof wrote

Correct. Schools do deserve $3.5M too. It should be both/and, not either/or.

13

Diet_Coke t1_j9rr28x wrote

Unfortunately the city's not an endless supply of money. The franchisee should pay for it, it's not like people who live here get free tickets to the games. If McDonalds was going to close the store on Broad and 18th St unless they spent $3.5M in renovations would you support the city giving them the money too?

−1

zstansberries t1_j9rv3ih wrote

The city did not come to an agreement with a single McDonald's to maintain a specific standard of operating, but they did however come to that agreement with the SF Giants when they agreed for their affiliate team to play here. I'm arguing that the city should pay for the fees they agreed to pay for, while agreeing with your hypothetical unrelated point about public schools at the same time.

Moreover, the diamond and our baseball team are a significant driver of tourism and revenue for the city that warrants reinvestment. Why would they be actively planning to redevelop that entire area as "the diamond district" if it was not. The flying squirrels are arguably one of the most popular minor league teams, leading the league in overall attendance season after season. It would objectively be a horrible decision to lose them by not investing money that the city already knew it would have to invest.

17

Diet_Coke t1_j9rvw2b wrote

I don't think a ton of people are traveling to Richmond, staying in hotels, going to restaurants because of the Squirrels. It's mostly people from the surrounding counties (whose tax dollars wouldn't be going to the team) and they eat at the stadium and go home afterwards. That piece of land is being developed no matter what, it's right next to Scott's Addition and is a very obviously underutilized piece of real estate. They're calling it the diamond district for marketing, but it could be called anything and developers would be drooling over it.

−5

LharDrol t1_j9tjbgx wrote

This narrative that all money should go to schools, and that they would somehow all of a sudden produce much better results if only they had more money, is a joke. Tell me how the $3.5mm will be allocated to actually produce better academic results. There already have been many tax increases in the city "for the schools."

1

Diet_Coke t1_j9tk5j8 wrote

You could hire more teachers or pay existing teachers more to retain them. You could provide after school programs that will keep kids out of trouble in those crucial hours between when school lets out and when their parents get home. Enhance the lunch programs so that we're providing healthy, good food. All kinds of things.

3

Safe-Radio-3336 t1_j9tipus wrote

You are misinformed on this whole thing.

3

lineber t1_j9usut8 wrote

The Squirrels have better attendance than a lot of other events in Richmond. The attendees need to be taxed, not the residents of the city. It's crazy how the ticket prices have gone up without any benefit. Is it ticketmasters fault? I paid a hefty price the last time I went, but to be fair it was on the 4th of July and the fireworks show was better than usual. I remember getting decent seats for 16 dollars a few years ago.

The area does benefit having the games, I'm sure the nearby restaurants are packed before and after games.

4

Diet_Coke t1_j9tjwa3 wrote

I don't think so, I just think it's ridiculous to give a billionaire money for his toys while people in the city go without. I guess you have a different opinion and you're welcome to it.

−1

Safe-Radio-3336 t1_j9tl4yo wrote

We are not writing a check to a billionaire, you know it’s not that simple. This agreement and business between MiLB and the city is mutually beneficial, they would not engage in it if it were not. Keeping up our end of the bargain is the least shitty thing we could go in order to keep reaping the benefits of this agreement. You keep reducing the whole thing to some slogan about “fuck the rich” which is ignoring the ground rules (pun sorry) that were set out when the franchise came to Richmond

8

Diet_Coke t1_j9tod4g wrote

It is that simple, the Squirrels are a feeder team for the SF Giants and the SF Giants owner is worth ~$6,100,000,000. We are going to give them money, with no clear direct benefit to the city, and they're still going to charge us to come see the games and overcharge us for the hotdogs and beers we get there. It's a for profit enterprise.

​

>This agreement and business between MiLB and the city is mutually beneficial, they would not engage in it if it were not.

You have a lot of faith in the same city government administration that brought us the Commanders Training Camp, which was a boondoggle from start to finish and never produced the results they said it would.

​

>You keep reducing the whole thing to some slogan about “fuck the rich”

Weird, when I ctrl + f for "fuck the rich" the only time I see that is your post.

−7

flexi_boy t1_j9rrngp wrote

That’s not really how net worth works… “estimated net worth” just means appraised value of all properties and assets. Wealthy people do not usually keep a whole lot in the way of liquid assets (cash, gold, etc). Whatever is liquid, is likely slated to be spent on upcoming bills/payrolls/cost of living expenses. Very rich people tend to live on “relatively” tight budgets.

Yes, he could easily mortgage a property or something but I’m just trying to say it’s not necessarily that cut and dry. Charles Johnson doesn’t have 6.1 billion sitting in the bank.

4

chihuahua001 t1_j9t4e6r wrote

Billionaires use SBLOCs to buy whatever they want. The idea that they’re illiquid and incapable of spending a few million dollars whenever they want is a myth they perpetuate to avoid being held accountable for how they’re all terrible leeches on the rest of us.

1

flexi_boy t1_j9tcmmm wrote

Hmm, TIL. Thanks, that does make sense they would have a way to leverage assets without liquidating..and makes sense they would want to conceal it.

0

laborpool t1_j9tcrcw wrote

Actually players in the minor leagues make really crappy wages, most need a second job to cover rent. The owners don’t pay the players and get the cities and states to cover all their costs. Fuck that noice and fuck MLB

4

Safe-Radio-3336 t1_j9tihwd wrote

Yeah it gets pretty convoluted since the squirrels are in the minors. I did mean that the revenue sharing goes to paying salaries in the majors. Minor leaguers do make jack shit.

1

hoyboy2 t1_j9t8977 wrote

but I don't like sports ball, so therefore investment bad. stupid NIMBY.

0

LoveiseverywhereXOXO t1_j9v71cq wrote

I’d rather help the children of my city than give money away to private business that doesn’t even pay its players fairly.

1