Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[HomerSPC]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

This is the type of response you get when your entire personal worth is measured by support for a sport.

By sport. In general. Because the Riders are just one tenant of the new stadium. They may be the primary tenant, but the facility is a community facility for use by everyone.

[bomberjet]

Originally Posted by Stormer

Gary Lawless of TSN tweet:

The stadium in Winnipeg is awesome. The stadium in Regina is on a different level. that is already obvious

https://twitter.com/garylawless/status/844281943608872961

Let's reign in the Gary Lawless train for a second here. NMS is super nice, and nicer than Winnipeg, of course.

But Gary is the biggest f'in 🞵🞵🞵🞵 there is. Says whatever his boss wants him to say. Lets just stop talking about Gary.

[jigglysquishy]

People keep saying that, but it's going to be the Riders and weddings.

The likelihood is that no new tenants are added in the transition from old stadium to new.

[BigDGoRiders]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

This is the type of response you get when your entire personal worth is measured by support for a sport.

Nice strawman.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by BigDGoRiders

Nice strawman.

I don't think that you get to make any comments like that based on your ridiculous ad-hominem screed.

[aberrant]

The Saskatchewan Craft Brewers Association will be speaking at Regina City Council on Monday night to discuss local craft beer options in regards to the Food & Beverage Budget for New Mosaic Stadium on the agenda.

https://www.facebook.com/rebellionbrewin...741828.582220358521811/1231833480227159/

[BigDGoRiders]

Originally Posted by BrutallyDishonest2

I don't think that you get to make any comments like that based on your ridiculous ad-hominem screed.

Calling you out on your B.S. is not ad hominem. You actually existed under the intellectually bankrupt delusion that the public taxpayer doesn't bear any responsibility for contributing to pieces of infrastructure like a stadium when they in fact DO. Civilizations have and will always use public resources to help fund cultural and recreational projects. This type of project is exactly what the public DOES have a responsibility to participate in. Whether you like it or not. ESPECIALLY when the cost sharing model is as fair and balanced as it is.

"HURRRRRRRRR DURRR THEY CAN AFFORD TO OUTFIT THEIR AREA DURRRRRRR ME MAD BECUZ THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO AFFORD IT BECUZ TAXPAYERZ SHOULDN'T BE PAYING ANYTHING DURRRRRRR."

How about you pick your knuckles up off the ground and stop being a troglodyte?

Stuff costs money, infrastructure that is impossible to fund without public money NEEDS to be paid for by the public regardless of whatever B.S. made up reality that exists in your head, and the primary tenant needs to be able to afford to take care of their own responsibilities.

Like outfitting their own area. Saying they can only afford nice things because of public money paying for the other areas (which is literally only half true given how much of the bill the Riders are on the hook for) strongly implies that you think the Riders need to be squeezed to the point of only being able to afford bargain basement in order for John Q Taxpayer to think like he's being treated fairly.

Me turning around and saying you're a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 person with low character isn't ad hominem, it's a simple statement of fact.

[jigglysquishy]

Wanting taxpayer money to subsidize a professional sports team makes you a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

[BrutallyDishonest2]

Originally Posted by BigDGoRiders

Me turning around and saying you're a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 person with low character isn't ad hominem, it's a simple statement of fact.

Lol. Ok, BigDGoRiders.

[Migs]

Very good column by Terry Jones

New Mosaic Stadium gets rave reviews during CFL Week!

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/footba...s-rave-reviews-during-cfl-week-in-regina

[Treesplease]

Originally Posted by Migs

Very good column by Terry Jones

New Mosaic Stadium gets rave reviews during CFL Week!

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/footba...s-rave-reviews-during-cfl-week-in-regina

Good article. Funny how Edmonton people will use a story about a stadium in Regina to stick it to Calgary.
Jiggly and BDH2 can take comfort in the fact that Calgary's 2026 Olympic bid is designed to attract significant canadian taxpayer dollars for new stadiums for not one but two professional sports teams (privately owned sports teams). When you file your federal taxes this spring just think to yourself "I love Calgary....I love Calgary....I love Calgary".

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

Good article. Funny how Edmonton people will use a story about a stadium in Regina to stick it to Calgary.
Jiggly and BDH2 can take comfort in the fact that Calgary's 2026 Olympic bid is designed to attract significant canadian taxpayer dollars for new stadiums for not one but two professional sports teams (privately owned sports teams). When you file your federal taxes this spring just think to yourself "I love Calgary....I love Calgary....I love Calgary".

Funny how there is basically unlimited funding if you have an international event that lasts for a couple weeks, but nothing for domestic leagues that have been around for a century...

In any case, feels like this thread could use a break... Turned a little aggressive over the last while...

[BigDGoRiders]

Originally Posted by jigglysquishy

Wanting taxpayer money to subsidize a professional sports team makes you a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

Except the public isn't subsidizing the Riders.

Anybody who thinks the public DOES subsidize the Riders is a stupid person.

Tens of thousands of people use the stadium.

Stadiums do not pull in enough revenues to pay for themselves.

Ergo the public has a civic responsibility the participate in funding a piece of infrastructure that is clearly used by many and that is IMPOSSIBLE without public funds. Period.

You thinking that means the public is "subsidizing the Riders" is a made up reality and therefore irrelevant.

You have the ideology of a simpleton.

Cry harder. We won and you lost.

[youngregina]

Originally Posted by BigDGoRiders

Except the public isn't subsidizing the Riders.

Anybody who thinks the public DOES subsidize the Riders is a stupid person.

Tens of thousands of people use the stadium.

Stadiums do not pull in enough revenues to pay for themselves.

Ergo the public has a civic responsibility the participate in funding a piece of infrastructure that is clearly used by many and that is IMPOSSIBLE without public funds. Period.

You thinking that means the public is "subsidizing the Riders" is a made up reality and therefore irrelevant.

You have the ideology of a simpleton.

Cry harder. We won and you lost.

I'm neither here nor there on the debate about whether a subsidy is right or wrong. However, the act of subsidy is not an ideology - and a subsidy in its most literal sense is providing direct funding for something that can't support or sustain itself on its own. Taxpayers (Saskatchewanians and Reginan's more specifically) do in fact subsidize the operation of the stadium - I would think of the initial capital funding as more of an 'investment'. You refer to the stadium as being 'impossible' without public funds, yet also say that anyone who thinks providing civic money directly for the purpose of supporting a sports team (this is a subsidy) is a 'stupid person'. I just can't help but wonder if you're the simpleton...

[BigDGoRiders]

Originally Posted by youngregina

I'm neither here nor there on the debate about whether a subsidy is right or wrong. However, the act of subsidy is not an ideology - and a subsidy in its most literal sense is providing direct funding for something that can't support or sustain itself on its own. Taxpayers (Saskatchewanians and Reginan's more specifically) do in fact subsidize the operation of the stadium - I would think of the initial capital funding as more of an 'investment'. You refer to the stadium as being 'impossible' without public funds, yet also say that anyone who thinks providing civic money directly for the purpose of supporting a sports team (this is a subsidy) is a 'stupid person'. I just can't help but wonder if you're the simpleton...

The operation of the stadium is not the team. Subsidizing the stadium - which is PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE - is not subsidizing the team itself. The team itself subsists off of its own revenues.

The public uses the facility ergo the public has to participate in the paying for it.

[BigDGoRiders]

Lemme put it this way: How much PST do you think the province of Saskatchewan has collected off of ticket and merchandise sales since the inception of the PST? How much revenue in liquor taxes?

How much economic activity has the presence of the Roughriders generated for the City of Regina over the years? Also from Grey Cup festivals held in the City?

The taxpayer doesn't subsidize the Riders. If anything the Riders subsidize the taxpayer.

Expecting the public to participate in a new stadium - which gets used by community groups NOT named 'Saskatchewan Roughriders' on a regular basis - every 80 or so years is not too much to ask, nor is it a subsidy when the team is paying for a significant portion of the build ASIDE from their own leasehold improvements.

IN FACT the Riders have the greatest share. Last I checked $100 million is more than $73 million or $80 million.

And not only that, but since becoming profitable the Roughriders have been big time givers to the community. They've given away hundreds of thousands, if not over a million dollars to various groups in the last decade. The money invested in extra endzone seats and a big new scoreboard - things not making the trek to the new stadium - weren't sold off to recoup any of that investment. No, those were given away. By the Riders. At their expense.

The Roughriders have done more for the taxpayer over the years than the taxpayer has done for the Roughriders. Fact.

Another fact? The City owns old Mosaic. All of it. Which means that the City actually DOES have the moral and ethical responsibility to make sure that such a piece of infrastructure exists. You know, given the defined need for a stadium and all?

The City and its taxpayers are getting a world class facility for a $2 million yearly loan payment.

So boo fuggin' hoo.

[yveseluj]

Originally Posted by BigDGoRiders

Cry harder. We won and you lost.

And that's really the crux of the issue, isn't it. You seem lovely.

[PhotoJim]

It seems the ship has sailed. Either you love the stadium, and it's finished; you hate the stadium, but it's too late, because it's finished; or you're more or less indifferent to the stadium, in which you don't care that it's finished.

[Migs]

Originally Posted by BigDGoRiders

Except the public isn't subsidizing the Riders.

Anybody who thinks the public DOES subsidize the Riders is a stupid person.

Tens of thousands of people use the stadium.

Stadiums do not pull in enough revenues to pay for themselves.

Ergo the public has a civic responsibility the participate in funding a piece of infrastructure that is clearly used by many and that is IMPOSSIBLE without public funds. Period.

You thinking that means the public is "subsidizing the Riders" is a made up reality and therefore irrelevant.

You have the ideology of a simpleton.

Cry harder. We won and you lost.

Post more often. :-)

[blueandgoldguy]

Originally Posted by youngregina

I'm neither here nor there on the debate about whether a subsidy is right or wrong. However, the act of subsidy is not an ideology - and a subsidy in its most literal sense is providing direct funding for something that can't support or sustain itself on its own. Taxpayers (Saskatchewanians and Reginan's more specifically) do in fact subsidize the operation of the stadium - I would think of the initial capital funding as more of an 'investment'. You refer to the stadium as being 'impossible' without public funds, yet also say that anyone who thinks providing civic money directly for the purpose of supporting a sports team (this is a subsidy) is a 'stupid person'. I just can't help but wonder if you're the simpleton...

Yes, clearly it is a subsidy. I don't know how anyone can argue that.

As far as tens of thousands of people using it, that is also true, but the vast majority of them will have to pay a not so insignificant price for the privilege of using it and also at designated times. It's not like a park (people can go at any time for free or a public school (free education) in that sense.

With that said, the finances of a CFL team (even the Riders) are not compatible with a 100% privately funded stadium. Public financing is pretty much a requirement.

I think the only 100% privately financed stadiums tend to be in very large cities (ie. New York, LA) and even those may come with strings attached (ie free land, tax exemption).