[Grumpypotpie]

Originally Posted by timothyaw

It is NOT a silly argument at all. Believe it or not, there is a breaking point for the average tourist. Can Las Vegas just live off the big whales that come? I would rather not find out.

If there is a breaking point, I'm quite certain $1 is not it.

[calisoccer99]

Originally Posted by timothyaw

It is NOT a silly argument at all. Believe it or not, there is a breaking point for the average tourist. Can Las Vegas just live off the big whales that come? I would rather not find out.

Won't have too, this stadium is going to bring in more tourist

[Grumpypotpie]

Originally Posted by calisoccer99

Won't have too, this stadium is going to bring in more tourist

This is something I tend to agree with some of the naysayers about. How many more tourists can Las Vegas possibly bring in, and will a vacant stadium draw them in? I tend to think no. A Super Bowl certainly would, as January and February are the slowest months for tourism, but that would only happen once maybe every 7 or 8 years.

[calisoccer99]

Originally Posted by Grumpypotpie

This is something I tend to agree with some of the naysayers about. How many more tourists can Las Vegas possibly bring in, and will a vacant stadium draw them in? I tend to think no. A Super Bowl certainly would, as January and February are the slowest months for tourism, but that would only happen once maybe every 7 or 8 years.

We have Resort World which could have up to 3000 rooms and Wynn's Paradise lagoon which will add another 1000 rooms. Those are going to need to be filled and the new events that are held at the stadium will help fill them. Yes I know 30 events or more won't fill the hotels every day but the stadium will bring in new money that wasn't here before.

[Grumpypotpie]

Originally Posted by calisoccer99

We have Resort World which could have up to 3000 rooms and Wynn's Paradise lagoon which will add another 1000 rooms. Those are going to need to be filled and the new events that are held at the stadium will help fill them. Yes I know 30 events or more won't fill the hotels every day but the stadium will bring in new money that wasn't here before.

Will it offset what it costs though? That's what a lot of the people against it ask. In my opinion there is a price worth paying for a stadium, because it raises the chances that UNLV can make it into a top-tier sports conference, and obviously having an NFL team in Las Vegas will change the city for sure. A lot of people don't realize what professional sports does for a community because Las Vegas has never had pro sports. As someone who is going to be relocating to Las Vegas in a couple weeks I'm pretty excited about it.

[calisoccer99]

Originally Posted by Grumpypotpie

Will it offset what it costs though? That's what a lot of the people against it ask. In my opinion there is a price worth paying for a stadium, because it raises the chances that UNLV can make it into a top-tier sports conference, and obviously having an NFL team in Las Vegas will change the city for sure. A lot of people don't realize what professional sports does for a community because Las Vegas has never had pro sports. As someone who is going to be relocating to Las Vegas in a couple weeks I'm pretty excited about it.

It will help offset the cost by bringing in people that have had no interest in Vegas before. It will also help keep money from leaving Vegas as well. Everyone I know out here has traveled to other states to go see their favorite team play, now they will be able to spend that money here.

[LasVegasPlayer]

Originally Posted by calisoccer99

It will help offset the cost by bringing in people that have had no interest in Vegas before. It will also help keep money from leaving Vegas as well. Everyone I know out here has traveled to other states to go see their favorite team play, now they will be able to spend that money here.

You're omitting fact that all of that money would go to Adelson and Raiders. That does not help the economy at all. They are even trying to get out of having to pay taxes on it to the state in the form of payroll or LET and dodge all future taxes. At least that is the one thing the committee did not give in on in the vote.

As for the rest, the number of people that will say "The Raiders are in Las Vegas. Now I have to go there for the first time/I don't hate Las Vegas anymore because it has an NFL team so I'm going to visit" is nil. To argue otherwise is absolutely ludicrous.

The special events you keep mentioning that are allegedly so great are money losers. Google "Indianapolis lost money on Super Bowl/Big 10 Championship/NCAA Final Four" and read about those debacles before trying to claim what a wonderful economic/tax benefit the events will have. You can replace Indianapolis with any other host city and find the same results but those are the most recent reports.

[calisoccer99]

Originally Posted by LasVegasPlayer

The special events you keep mentioning that are allegedly so great are money losers. Google "Indianapolis lost money on Super Bowl/Big 10 Championship/NCAA Final Four" and read about those debacles before trying to claim what a wonderful economic/tax benefit the events will have. You can replace Indianapolis with any other host city and find the same results but those are the most recent reports.

Sorry but you can't compare any other city to Las Vegas, so google won't give me the correct answer.

[timothyaw]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior

Or maybe 100 years, or maybe somewhere in between.

No, take a look at none other that Exhibit A: St. Louis, MO. I moved there in '95 when the Edward Jones Dome was built to much enthusiasm and celebration. Little over 20 years later, the Rams have left because they wanted a new stadium.

20 years, and this boondoggle will be dated and the Raiders will be wanting us to pay for a new stadium before the old one is paid for. The exact situation that Indianapolis is in. But Indy A.K.A Dumptown is flyover country, so they have nothing else going for them.

So when we balk about paying for ANOTHER stadium, they'll move back to Oakland. By that time Oakland will have gotten their act together and will have a stadium. The NFL sucks, they know they have a popular product that cities will pay through the nose for. It's sad really.

[Cold Warrior]

Originally Posted by timothyaw

No, take a look at none other that Exhibit A: St. Louis, MO. I moved there in '95 when the Edward Jones Dome was built to much enthusiasm and celebration. Little over 20 years later, the Rams have left because they wanted a new stadium.

20 years, and this boondoggle will be dated and the Raiders will be wanting us to pay for a new stadium before the old one is paid for. The exact situation that Indianapolis is in. But Indy A.K.A Dumptown is flyover country, so they have nothing else going for them.

So when we balk about paying for ANOTHER stadium, they'll move back to Oakland. By that time Oakland will have gotten their act together and will have a stadium. The NFL sucks, they know they have a popular product that cities will pay through the nose for. It's sad really.

Tsk. I made it simple for you. Just click the link.