Jump to content

The Media Round-Up


BasesLoadedWalk
 Share

Recommended Posts

The big issue is what represents a material breach by the county (less likely) or city (more likely) that sets in motion, or causes a cost overrun outside of the scope of what the Marlins are indemnifying against.

 

(Ex. - half way through construction the City of Miami demands construction hours be limited to 10am-3pm M-F only because neighbors don't like the noise)

 

The Marlins' position would be this is a material change in what was agreed to and will cause a significant construction delay, enormous overruns and they should not be responsible for them not mention having to pay an additional year's rent at Dolphin Stadium.

 

That kind of issue and a hundred or more like it are the kinds of things being dealt with right now. It's "What If ??" time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More articles on the way...

 

More hurdles ahead for Miami mega-deal

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/460/story/349835.html

 

Miami-Dade vote backs Marlins stadium plan

 

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/conten...rlins_1219.html

 

Plan for Marlins ballpark gets support from Miami-Dade

 

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/sou...,0,851278.story

 

Marlins owners get huge Christmas gift; public gets coal

 

http://www.miamitodaynews.com/news/071220/...viewpoint.shtml

 

Commissioners Approve Miami Master Plan

 

http://www.local10.com/news/14887449/detail.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When's the day that they hammer out all those pesky details, like:

1. Who's going to get the naming right revenue? Or will it be split to some degree? And will it continue forever with whatever percentage they come up with, seeing as the city or county are the owners of the stadium.

2. Same question regarding concession revenue stream.

3. Same question concerning parking revenue stream

4. Have they agreed on setting or not setting a payroll minimum, and if so, what's the minimum, and for how long?

I could go on with more, but you get the point.

 

i believe most of those issues have been settled for years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest iFesta Touch

When's the day that they hammer out all those pesky details, like:

1. Who's going to get the naming right revenue? Or will it be split to some degree? And will it continue forever with whatever percentage they come up with, seeing as the city or county are the owners of the stadium.

2. Same question regarding concession revenue stream.

3. Same question concerning parking revenue stream

4. Have they agreed on setting or not setting a payroll minimum, and if so, what's the minimum, and for how long?

I could go on with more, but you get the point.

 

1-3 have already been worked out. The Marlins will control 100% of all revenues generated at the stadium by all baseball events. It's in the county's memo from last week. Page 11 http://media.miamiherald.com/smedia/2007/1...ffiliate.56.pdf

 

4 is never going to happen and I seriously doubt the city and county are requiring that to be in the lease.

 

You ask so many questions and have so many doubts. Just read the memo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As usual Sarah Talalay has the most right (which not to say she is wrong about anything, she's a damn good reporter) and people on the perifery have it the most wrong.

 

Micheal Lewis and Miami Today has been railing against the Marlins for five years or more, this is nothing new and it's also nothing new that Miami Today has most of their facts either wrong or so distorted they are hardly recognizable as facts. Channel 10, is well Channel 10. Ditto the Herald. They almost get it right. i remember the old days when there were actually copy editors and fact-checkers but they disappeared years ago as newspapers began their death spiral.

 

Sarah's work though is impeccable. People complain about my frustration with god-awful reporting in South Florida but in my mind there's Sarah's work, and then everyone else's. I don't think I can remember a story where she was either factually wrong or allowed her own point of view to sneak in. She plays it right down the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When's the day that they hammer out all those pesky details, like:

1. Who's going to get the naming right revenue? Or will it be split to some degree? And will it continue forever with whatever percentage they come up with, seeing as the city or county are the owners of the stadium.

2. Same question regarding concession revenue stream.

3. Same question concerning parking revenue stream

4. Have they agreed on setting or not setting a payroll minimum, and if so, what's the minimum, and for how long?

I could go on with more, but you get the point.

 

1-3 have already been worked out. The Marlins will control 100% of all revenues generated at the stadium by all baseball and non-baseball events. It's in the county's memo from last week.

 

4 is never going to happen and I seriously doubt the city and county are requiring that to be in the lease.

Not to be argumentative. I'm really just trying to understand the timing, and what's going to happen now, tomorrow, and in the future. Now, you say the language states that the Marlins will "control" the revenue streams for 1-3. But does control mean keep 100%, manage 100%, bank 100%......or something else. And on the naming rights revenue, is that a baseball or non-baseball event? Seems to me like it's neither. If I was the county, I wouldn't want to give the Marlins the revenue from naming rights into perpetuity, when they only have a 30 year lease? At the least, it's seems to be something to negotiate. And you say blithely, "they've been worked out already". Have they really? Say the Marlins manage the concessions. And it's a non-baseball event. Is it a done deal already that the Marlins would get 100% of the revenue, or the county/city get 100%, or is there some split already worked out. It seems to me like the only thing worked out is the main framework, which is obviously the key starting point. I'm thinking of the details. I mentioned 4, but there are hundreds, as Marlins2003 points out. And he raises the point about cost over-runs. A key point, but this is something I believe the Marlins have verbally pledged to cover. The definition of what's a material breach I would think would be something that's already got a legal definition, and thus not a key point. Does anybody really know the answers to these questions, or are we all just speculating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When's the day that they hammer out all those pesky details, like:

1. Who's going to get the naming right revenue? Or will it be split to some degree? And will it continue forever with whatever percentage they come up with, seeing as the city or county are the owners of the stadium.

2. Same question regarding concession revenue stream.

3. Same question concerning parking revenue stream

4. Have they agreed on setting or not setting a payroll minimum, and if so, what's the minimum, and for how long?

I could go on with more, but you get the point.

 

1-3 have already been worked out. The Marlins will control 100% of all revenues generated at the stadium by all baseball and non-baseball events. It's in the county's memo from last week.

 

4 is never going to happen and I seriously doubt the city and county are requiring that to be in the lease.

Not to be argumentative. I'm really just trying to understand the timing, and what's going to happen now, tomorrow, and in the future. Now, you say the language states that the Marlins will "control" the revenue streams for 1-3. But does control mean keep 100%, manage 100%, bank 100%......or something else. And on the naming rights revenue, is that a baseball or non-baseball event? Seems to me like it's neither. If I was the county, I wouldn't want to give the Marlins the revenue from naming rights into perpetuity, when they only have a 30 year lease? At the least, it's seems to be something to negotiate. And you say blithely, "they've been worked out already". Have they really? Say the Marlins manage the concessions. And it's a non-baseball event. Is it a done deal already that the Marlins would get 100% of the revenue, or the county/city get 100%, or is there some split already worked out. It seems to me like the only thing worked out is the main framework, which is obviously the key starting point. I'm thinking of the details. I mentioned 4, but there are hundreds, as Marlins2003 points out. And he raises the point about cost over-runs. A key point, but this is something I believe the Marlins have verbally pledged to cover. The definition of what's a material breach I would think would be something that's already got a legal definition, and thus not a key point. Does anybody really know the answers to these questions, or are we all just speculating?

 

use some logic: would the county give stadium naming rights to the team into perpetuity if the lease is for 30 years????????? it would be for the term of the lease!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Festa. I read the memo that you provided the link for after I made my last post. Things are quite a bit clearer now. Is there a link to this memo on Cape's site, or was a link provided here in the last few days, and I missed it? And can you really find fault with me having doubts, after years of frustration. And in this case, it wasn't so much doubts that I had....it was further clarity....which that memo provided. Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, no mention of this on the radio. f***ers. i can't stand them.

 

can someone please tell 790 to fire sid and move him to nyc. sid is so obviously a new yorker, and all he does is concentrate on new york sh*t. i am sick of it.

 

 

 

 

 

The Dolphins won don't you know????!!!!!!!! Who cares if the Marlins are on the verge of getting a stadium?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Downtown megaplan: Cautious or risky?

 

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/miami_dade/story/354740.html

 

Dade County asks state to fund $250 million in projects

 

http://www.miamitodaynews.com/news/080104/story5.shtml

 

Crosswinds loss wouldn't kill other projects

 

http://www.miamitodaynews.com/news/080104/story4.shtml

 

Don't sign blank check now for incomplete stadium deal

 

http://www.miamitodaynews.com/news/080104/...viewpoint.shtml

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...