Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-05-2013, 10:14 AM
 
26 posts, read 39,288 times
Reputation: 27

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
Exactly. The renovation cost were enormous, and the city LOST the team.

Unreal, really. A very bone headed move by the city of Oakland.

Let's not even talk about the Raider's deal. It's all sickening.
Oakland can't do anything right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2013, 11:47 AM
 
1,018 posts, read 1,852,774 times
Reputation: 761
Maybe I'm missing something, but this thread seems to me to pure unadulterated Oakland bashing with little point. Yes, the city and county made a very bad decision in 1995. I thought so at the time. Can they escape it now? No. If they tried to stop paying, the Raiders would sue them, and almost certainly win (plus extract a bunch of lawyers' fees). So it's something the city is stuck with--and what's the point of this thread?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 01:26 PM
 
1,018 posts, read 1,852,774 times
Reputation: 761
mod cut
So how, precisely, would you propose to unwind the Raiders deal?

Last edited by Sam I Am; 01-05-2013 at 02:16 PM.. Reason: orphaned
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 04:25 PM
 
Location: East Bay Area
1,986 posts, read 3,602,301 times
Reputation: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlite View Post
Maybe I'm missing something, but this thread seems to me to pure unadulterated Oakland bashing with little point. Yes, the city and county made a very bad decision in 1995. I thought so at the time. Can they escape it now? No. If they tried to stop paying, the Raiders would sue them, and almost certainly win (plus extract a bunch of lawyers' fees). So it's something the city is stuck with--and what's the point of this thread?
You are right, The point of this thread is to bash Oakland.

The figure does not include revenue flowing back into the city, or team payments.

If the Raiders were to leave, the city of Oakland would be stuck with $145 million worth of debt.

Anyways....this would be a great opportunity to advantage of their retail market worth a potential $5 billion, 12th best in the nation, as well as revitalize a section of East Oakland.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 04:43 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 4,013,759 times
Reputation: 624
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlite View Post
mod cut
So how, precisely, would you propose to unwind the Raiders deal?
In Oakland, it's about changing a mindset more than anything else.

Right now, Oakland politicians are coming up with ways to keep sports teams in the city, including trying to get private funding for a new stadium.

Oakland should focus on other things. Like trying to get the port to actually deliver more revenue to the city, or maybe investing money into getting more cops in the streets, or bringing back after school programs that were cut to "balance the budget". Oakland could spend their money more wisely, than trying to keep sports teams in the city that don't want to be there anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 05:18 PM
 
1,018 posts, read 1,852,774 times
Reputation: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
In Oakland, it's about changing a mindset more than anything else.

Right now, Oakland politicians are coming up with ways to keep sports teams in the city, including trying to get private funding for a new stadium.

Oakland should focus on other things. Like trying to get the port to actually deliver more revenue to the city, or maybe investing money into getting more cops in the streets, or bringing back after school programs that were cut to "balance the budget". Oakland could spend their money more wisely, than trying to keep sports teams in the city that don't want to be there anyway.
I'd pretty much agree with that, though I don't think anyone is talking about putting public funds into keeping the A's. I think then Mayor Jerry Brown made a wise call when he said that Uptown should be about housing and restaurants and entertainment, not a sports stadium. That decision has paid off many times over.
But whatever the Mayor and Council do going forward is not going to undo the Raiders deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 05:22 PM
 
Location: Lafayette, CA
2,518 posts, read 4,013,759 times
Reputation: 624
No but it shows that they haven't learned their lesson, and IMO, there's a lot more pain in Oakland's future because they think "sports teams" are the ticket to turning the city around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 05:30 PM
 
26 posts, read 39,288 times
Reputation: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
No but it shows that they haven't learned their lesson, and IMO, there's a lot more pain in Oakland's future because they think "sports teams" are the ticket to turning the city around.
Exactly
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 10:05 PM
 
Location: East Bay Area
1,986 posts, read 3,602,301 times
Reputation: 911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil306 View Post
He had a blank, POS stare on his face. I sited the idiot and towed his car. MOST of the MORON's who "play ball" for the Raiders are arrorgant POS. They believe the world owes them everything and yet, can't even read the morning newspaper.
I disagree.

But then again, that's the rich for ya.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2013, 10:50 PM
 
1,018 posts, read 1,852,774 times
Reputation: 761
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocGoldstein View Post
No but it shows that they haven't learned their lesson, and IMO, there's a lot more pain in Oakland's future because they think "sports teams" are the ticket to turning the city around.
So you're dumping on Oakland and a decision that long gone leadership made because you're worried about the decision they'll make next. That seems neither logical nor likely to be effective. I don't think folks in Oakland will be very swayed by people who seem to despise them and their city no matter what.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2022 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:52 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top