Home

Join

Main Menu



blog advertising is good for you

Links

Payback Is a You-Know-What

Indiana lawmakers are scrambling behind the scenes this morning looking for a way to deal with the news that the Colts have no desire to contribute to the Capital Improvement Board shortfall.  As one lawmaker put it, the Colts are dealing with us like they do players; driving a hard bargain.   While they look for a solution, I have a suggestion they may want to look at.

As hard as may sound to believe, I think the city of Indianapolis and State of Indiana should pay the Indianapolis Colts $100 million.  That’s right.  Write the Colts a check for a cool $100 million.  They should pool their resources, float bonds, do whatever is necessary and give the Colts $100 million.  Why?  Because by giving the Colts $100 million, they will have back their initial “investment” on Lucas Oil Stadium and the city and state can collect all the proceeds.  CIB funding shortfall solved.

I thought about this from Jim Irsay’s quote in Sunday’s Indianapolis Star.

“People don’t want to look at the facts,” Irsay said. “Look, (former Mayor) Bart Peterson and (former CIB head) Fred Glass came to me and said we need a new stadium to go with the convention center. Will you guys take this risk? We did. It was all on our risk. If someone can show me someone else who put a hundred million into a building and doesn’t own it … that’s what I don’t understand.”

If the Colts never asked for a new stadium and since they keep harping on their $100 million “investment” and the $250,000 in annual expenses they pay (which is offset by game day revenue which they get to keep and the $3.6 million in non-Colts events they get to pocket as well) then giving them their money back should solve everything.

Of course by giving them “back” their $100 million, the city and state get to keep all the cash from Lucas Oil, naming rights, game day revenue, non-Colts events, parking, concessions, the whole nine yards.  They don’t get a refund on the $250,000 in annual payments they’ve already made.

If the Colts never wanted a new stadium, then a simple $100 million “refund” should be enough to settle this matter, right?  And please don’t give me that, “a deal is a deal” from my studying of the Colts history that line only works when the deal is working in their favor.

  • Taxpayer 834512

    Unemployment, forclosures, public safety, education, sewers, plant closings and now the swine flu…..
    .
    The Colts are not that big a deal in life. Here are some of their sponsors I’m going to avoid as much as possible. You do as you please: Lucas Oil products, Marsh, Vectren, Anthem, RCA, Herff Jones, Edy’s Ice Cream, Channel 8- WISH-TV (carries the Bill Polian Show AND Jim Shella), WFNI-1070 AM carries the Colt’s radio broadcasts.
    .
    More coming.

  • varangianguard

    Clever, Abdul. ;)

  • MissouriDemocrat

    How about a special NFL Payers Payroll Tax? Get into the players pocketbooks and you get in Irsay’s.

  • http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com Paul K. Ogden

    MissouriDemocrat, that’s already been proposed several times and was proposed originally and the Colts shot it down.

    There is something in the lease about “discriminatory taxes” as I recall that I think bans this. I’d be all for it though…anything to turn the screws on Irsay.

    I like Abdul’s proposal, although I don’t think legally it would work like that. But from a standpoint of showing what a lie Irsay is telling, it’s a perfect proposal. The Colts did not take any “risk.”

  • John Howard

    What exactly was the Colts ‘risk’ in this deal?

    What was the team valuation boost from having a new stadium? I saw the number once – was it $300M? I think so but am not sure.

    For an asset purchased for $19M, that ain’t bad. Certainly doesn’t appear to be much of a risky venture.

blog comments powered by Disqus