http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/ba ... 9767.story

Guys. Pay for your own ballpark.

More accurately, it's other Cactus League teams' fans, not the teams.

Yeah that's a little ridiculous.

Hell yeah. Bitches gotta pay.

the height of arrogance and bullshit. Um, yeah pretty sure the dodgers and all the west coast teams bring a lot of fans too you retards.

Hell yeah, Jew them for as much as you can!

Damn straight. It is just solid business practices being carried out.

The mayor of Mesa responds to Reinsdorf's criticism:



http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/20 ... s-tax.html

Ad hominem. Reinsdorf's hypocrisy doesn't have shit to do with the Cubs and what they're trying to do

Damn you Tyrone and your street wise sensibility.

This article wouldn't exist if Jerry didn't decide to whine about it. Does such a move with ticket sales have precedence? That's what I want to know.

Again, just because he's a hypocrite doesn't mean what he's saying doesn't have any merit to it

Those tax payers get loads of business and tourism from a baseball team coming. Other baseball fans get what from the cubs being there? The Cactus league would disappear without the cubs? It's just a stupid argument. I shouldn't have to pay for the cubs being fucking retarded at contracts.

There is nothing you can do about it though, other than bitch on various forums.

Well yeah, kind of like the Bears' coaching situation, but still.

'Cubs tax' hot-button topic in Arizona
David Haugh
Spring training

He may be the best owner in Chicago sports history, but you don't have to travel far to find somebody who thinks Jerry Reinsdorf is a hypocrite. You do have to go a long way, however, to find someone to express that opinion as strongly as Scott Smith — all the way to Mesa, Ariz., where Smith is the mayor.

"Everyone out here shakes their heads and finds it incredibly ironic that Jerry Reinsdorf of the White Sox and the Arizona Diamondbacks, two teams that basically walked out on Tucson, left those taxpayers holding the bag to come up here to publicly financed stadiums, are now the ones screaming the loudest not even to give one inch back,'' Smith said over the phone. "There are a lot of jealousies and old rivalries. Reinsdorf and his lobbyists have taken the lead in fighting the concept of anything for the Cubs.''

It would be fun if Reinsdorf really opposed Arizona's proposed ticket surcharge for all Cactus League games to pay for the Cubs' new $84 million spring-training stadium out of spite for the Cubs. It would be wonderful theater if Reinsdorf viewed his opposition to the plan as a mild form of hazing, kind of a corporate swirly, to rookie Cubs owner Tom Ricketts.

Alas, we drama-seekers aren't that lucky.

Reinsdorf declined an interview request but, through a spokesman, made clear he actually hopes the Cubs stay in Arizona rather than bolt for Florida in 2013. He welcomes the extra business the Cubs provide by drawing, on average, at least 4,000 more fans to Cactus League games than the 14 other teams.

From here, Reinsdorf's refusal to play ball looks more like a matter of principle than anything personal and a smart move well within his rights as a shrewd businessman.

Until now the term "Cubs tax" best applied to the personal toll exacted from watching bad baseball, stuff that hurts hearts more than the wallets. Thanks to House Bill 2736 introduced last week in the Arizona Legislature proposing the surcharge, that definition has changed.

The so-called "Cubs tax,'' would add roughly $1 per ticket for all 15 Cactus League teams. That money and a state-imposed rental-car tax hike would help raise $59 million over 20 years to pay off bonds that would be issued by the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority for the Cubs to build their baseball Taj Mahal.

As a condition of the Memorandum of Understanding signed last month by the city of Mesa and the Cubs, a form of that legislation must pass within a year. If it doesn't, the door to Naples, Fla., swings back open for the Cubs.

"It's not just for the Cubs — the idea is to build that fund so it's there for every Cactus League team to take advantage of,'' Smith said.

Sure, but if, say, the Giants were the team asking 14 other teams to assess a ticket surcharge, the laughter would echo across the valley. It seems a bit disingenuous to call this a Cactus League fund when the threat of the Cubs leaving for Florida has created all the urgency.

On behalf of the Sox, Reinsdorf was among the first of all 14 teams to oppose the measure and it's easy to see why. As much as the Cubs benefit Cactus League baseball, why should one business raise its ticket prices to benefit a competitor more than itself? Why should anybody but the Cubs increase prices to help the Cubs build a new stadium?

The city of Mesa released a report estimating the area would lose $138 million a year in economic activity and nearly 1,600 jobs if the Cubs were to leave Arizona. In the Cactus League, Smith estimated the Cubs provide "30 percent of the economic impact.''

I asked Allen Sanderson, a noted sports economics expert from the University of Chicago, if those economic Armageddon estimates sounded accurate.

"I'm sure the Cubs have a disproportionate influence in relation to the other teams in the Cactus League,'' Sanderson said. "It's just not four times everybody else.''

Much of Mesa's wrath over Reinsdorf's opposition stems from the Sox's decision to leave Tucson for a $121 million, publicly funded complex in Glendale — paid for with more taxpayer money ($90 million) than any other Cactus League facility. When the Sox left Tucson after 2008, Pima County taxpayers still owed $24 million on the facility. It also has been pointed out that Reinsdorf's Sox play in a publicly funded stadium at U.S. Cellular Field.

But deals are like snowflakes. No two are alike.

"There's nothing that says (Reinsdorf) is right or he's wrong on this. It's what he can negotiate,'' Sanderson said.

Conveniently, the Cubs are letting the Arizona Legislature take its course and are not commenting publicly. They have agreed to donate the land for the complex and operate the new stadium. If approval comes in the next year for a new stadium to be built, that is.

And if it doesn't?

"If at any point we fail to meet our agreement, it doesn't kill the deal in Mesa but it frees the Cubs to negotiate with Florida,'' Smith said. "Sure, there's pressure.''

Without his side compromising, the pressure only will mount in the desert.

That was a pretty reasonable, bullshit-free article.

Does Reinsdorf have a history of landing sweet deals (usually with public financing?) Yes. Reinsdorf can be called a lot of things, but I really don't think "bad businessman" is one of them.

Does this make Reinsdorf a hypocrite? Depends on who you ask, but yeah, pretty much.

Is he the only one opposing this? Not at all, and therefore him being hypocritical is irrelevant.

Do the Cubs have a point? Yeah, they probably do, but it'd be pretty naive of them if they thought they weren't going to get resistance to the idea of asking other businesses (i.e. other teams) to foot the bill so they can benefit.

But don't the Cubs have to pay for their own stadium Lost, never mind that the Sox didn't? But I guess it's the height of arrogance and bullshit that the Cubs brokered a deal to exclusively negotiate with AZ for a new stadium and they come up with a plan to fund it.

Again, besides Reinsdorf being one of 14 Cactus League owners that oppose it, what do the Sox have to do with this?

Anyway the compromise that's on the table right now is pretty reasonable, surcharges for the teams when they play the Cubs.

Given you're a Sox fan, I'd figure I'd point that out. Why do the Cubs have to pay for their own stadium when I know of at least two Cactus teams, the 'Backs and the Sox, that have publicly funded stadiums?

I guess it's easy to bitch about the Cubs, and as a Cubs fan I'm used to it if it's warranted, but this really isn't. It's business of usual.

Hey, if you want to post an article with Reinsdorf throwing stones at the Cubs that's great, but don't complain and keep saying Yes he's a hypocrite but we're talking about the Cubs here.

I fucking said that, dude. I'd re-iterate it again but you'll just come back to the Sox so I won't bother. I'm not "bitching" about the Cubs. Just stating pretty simple facts. The Cubs want everyone else to pay for their new ST stadium, I think the plan as it was in the original link was bullshit. Reinsdorf is a red herring.

Oh and public financing (which is pretty common, how many teams have publicly-financed stadiums?) is different from basically having other teams finance it.

And you say the "Cubs" want everyone else to pay for this, who penned the bill? Did Jim Hendry sit down with whatever committee decides this and suggest this proposal?

out of curiosity, do any of you know where the Florida Marlins and Tampa Bay Lightning do their spring training? I mean do they even have to go anywhere?

?

The Cubs openly supported it and made a case that it was fair (I said this already too). How is this minor detail relevant? What are you getting at? I get the impression you're just shitting in your hand so you can throw it at the wall and hope it sticks...?

Marlins are in Florida I think, I dunno about Tampa Bay (Devil Rays not Lightning, lol). Either way, they'd have to be near some other Spring Training league to play the other teams.