Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout
Maybe it's that I haven't slept in 4 days, but I'm failing to see why the city can't contribute a percentage of the building cost and then recoup that as as percentage of revenues from the building until the original payment is repaid.
IE: Arena costs $800million, city pays $200million. That's 25%.
Have an independent auditor check the books and assess fair market value for rent to the Flames, Hitmen, Roughnecks combined with any private rentals (concerts, conventions, etc) then take either 25% of profits of the year or something like 10% of revenues and repay the city until the $200million is repaid. Economic spinoff would equate payment of interest not payment of interest and principle.
Billionaires get their new arena, city gets repaid, economy gets a boost, everyone wins.
|
I don't think sports owners have ever made this type of arrangement and i think they want to keep it that way. They would be setting a revenue sharing precedent that other cities would try to copy. They would be forced to open their books for public scrutiny. They would have to make up that shortfall with the league who takes a percentage of certain profits.