If TV revenues are so lucrative, let THEM pay for a stadium.
As for my statement that the economics of baseball and Mineapolis are not compatible - my words were "They are VERY LIKELY not compatible anymore." Which is a statement of theory and opinion not facts.
Since you demand factual support from me I want to see the books that show that Minneapolis economy benefits from Twins activity. I keep asking, I don't see them.
E
On Friday, July 12, 2002, at 07:05 AM, James E Jacobsen wrote:
�
������� Ref�a century ago, when players had day jobs,�there�wasn't�television then -yielding $80 million a year and broadcasting the game all over.�
���������In spite of those that are negative, In whatever time period required, the stadium -without extra taxes-�would not only pay for itself it will contribute greatly to the community, in that it does bring in people, and it provides additional use and patronage to the already built parking ramps, hotels, bars and restaurants in the area, not to mention theatres and etc.��
�������� And without the Twins, there would be a heavier burden on�tax payers to make up the loss of revenues on parking ramps and�for the lessor tax collections in all categories.� �
���������I would like to know on what factual basis the economics of baseball and of Minneapolis are 'very likely' not compatible now.����
������� James E Jacobsen // Whittier
