Paulson puts kibosh on Lents; what now for baseball and soccer?
Friday was a bad day for fans of bringing major league soccer to Portland. The O has the best summary:
Team owner Merritt Paulson's decision to scrap Lents as a site for a new Portland Beavers baseball stadium has thrown the sharpest curveball yet into the increasingly messy attempts to deliver Major League Soccer to Portland.Friday's developments shifted by the hour. After Paulson announced he was pulling out of Lents, city Commissioner Randy Leonard issued an ultimatum: Unless Paulson reconsiders, he'll vote against a resolution calling for the city to pursue negotiations for Major League Soccer.
Mayor Sam Adams said he'll continue to push for soccer. But he acknowledged that the Beavers probably will become a regional team, not a Portland team.
And the head of Major League Soccer said if Portland wants a team, city officials need to pick up the pace to meet a Sept. 1 deadline.
Lots more developments in the O story, so be sure to read the rest.
I'm fairly well agnostic on this whole mess, but I do have one question to kick off the discussion:
We have a minor league baseball stadium. We want a major league soccer stadium and a minor league baseball stadium. So, why not just build a major league soccer stadium? Why are we talking about converting PGE Park into a soccer stadium and then building a new baseball stadium? Why do two projects when one will do?
OK, a second question: Why aren't we talking about the other major sites that have been discussed in the past - the PPS HQ across from the Rose Garden, the downtown post office (that the neighbors hate), Delta Park, etc.?
Discuss.
|
June 20, 2009 |
Kari Chisholm | Comments (111 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: Jim H | Jun 20, 2009 11:06:44 AM
Good question Kari.
My wife has been complaining to me constantly about this, so I'll throw her idea out here so others can hear it as well. There's all this space around Cascade Station. Why not put a park/stadium out there? It could be another Delta Park.
She has played on several recreational soccer teams over the years, so we know from personal experience that the area could use more soccer fields.
Posted by: Jim H | Jun 20, 2009 11:13:37 AM
btw, I agree with Kurt.
If PGE Park is good enough for the World Cup then it's good enough for MLS. Until more than 2% of Americans know what the MLS championship game is called; can name even 1 MLS player (other than Beckham - is he still playing?); hell, can name even 1 TEAM! then they have no business demanding any sort of stadium standards. The NFL or NBA they are not.
Wait and see how many paying fans there actually are before committing to an upgrade of their stadium.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 12:19:31 PM
The root of the problem with PGE is that the MLS economic model is predicated upon its stadia being soccer-centric, and with its baseball dimensioned stands and cut outs/dirt in its turf, PGE is currently a venue of convenience when soccer is played there rather than the "downtown" showcase it could be.
Another detail that prevents the "just build a soccer stadium somewhere else" scenario is that PGE has another tenant that really makes the PDX Beavers the odd sport out, namely the Portland State Vikings. A stadium remodeled to serve the Timbers and Vikings makes more sense for the site long term than continuing to also serve baseball there.
Those two issues are what is driving a new home for the Beavers.
The Portland market for professional soccer is repeatedly proven both by the more or less continual presence of the TImbers and their ability to draw being among the best in the USL as well as the support demonstrated for the national men's and women's teams.
Ultimately though, when filled, PGE is a bad venue to catch a match because the seating is designed around the contours of baseball. PGE as configured would not long support full houses for crummy views. With remodeled stands however, the TImbers could easily draw between 10k-12k fans per contest.
Besides, if there was ever a professional sports owner the city should be giving the benefit of the doubt, that person is Mr. Paulson. He's a class act.
Posted by: Patrick Story | Jun 20, 2009 12:46:56 PM
Merritt Paulson is a class act? His billion-dollar family is certainly in a class by itself. Would Portland be in all this turmoil about the private use of public funds if his name was, say, Merritt Jones?
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 1:04:43 PM
What a snarky comment. Merritt Paulsen has been the consummate professional when it comes to owning the Timbers and the Beavers. What his family has or hasn't done is irrelevant to his exemplary civic conduct while a Portlander. Professional sports is chock-full of scumbag owners and Merritt Paulsen has certainly not been anywhere close to membership in that class.
Posted by: Sid Leader | Jun 20, 2009 1:52:43 PM
You can beat City Hall!
Even if you live on the poor side of town.
Posted by: PortlandLover | Jun 20, 2009 2:16:46 PM
The most cost-effective solution that satisfies all parties is for the Beavers and Timbers to continue to share PGE Park as they have done for the last nine seasons. The Paulson family makes money from this arrangement, and they will continue to do so into the future.
The Beavers generate revenue for the city's Spectator Facilities Fund. This Fund is used to pay for the existing debt incurred by the PGE Park renovations in 2001. Those renovations were contingent on attracting AAA baseball back to Portland, which is what happened. The Beavers play 72 games per season. This generates a lot of revenue for the city.
The city should spend money to upgrade the amenities of PGE Park. We can widen the concourse, fix up the bathroom, and add more concessions. We can also use a portable grand stand on the east side, similar to what was used for the Women's World Cup in 2003: http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/9594/pgeeastend.jpg
This will satisfy the needs of MLS. They are concerned with accommodating capacity crowds, providing comfortable amenities, and looking good on TV. The east side grand stand will not look any differently on TV if it is permanent or portable.
This also benefits the city as it will retain the 72 revenue-generating game dates provided by the Beavers. This helps make the new upgrades for the MLS pencil out. How can justify paying for new upgrades while simultaneously deleting 72 revenue-generating game dates from the Spectator Facilities Fund? And remember, we still have the debt from the 2001 upgrades.
Sam Adams was quoted in The Oregonian thusly: "We intend to be hard bargainers and negotiate a really good, prudent deal." http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/06/lents_stadium_plan_off_the_tab.html Sam is not bargaining hard at all by allowing settling for the MLS's extreme position during this negotiation process. He should understand that sharing is the most prudent deal. It will retain revenue needed to pay for the new upgrades, and it has the feel-good solution of keeping the Beavers in Portland, at a downtown location no less.
Posted by: Mike | Jun 20, 2009 2:41:15 PM
Kari,
I think (but am not positive) that the reason for not building a soccer specific stadium is two-fold: one, we can't get one done in time for the start of the 2011 MLS season (when the Timbers would join the MLS), and two, contrary to the old belief that the attendees of soccer games are soccer moms and their kids, it's young, urban men who above all attend the games. PGE Park is a prime location to attract that kind of audience, as compared to a field out in SE. I'm not sure what the plan is for the Beavers until their stadium is done. I assume they're going to have to play at a college field in the interim, but I really don't know.
Lastly, it is important to understand that you simply can't share a baseball stadium. Baseball stadiums do not have the appropriate shape for other sports, such as soccer, football, track and field, rugby, field hockey, and lacrosse. If you build one rectangular field, you can play all those sports there. Build one baseball stadium, and you're basically stuck with baseball and softball (and yes, you *can* play those other sports there, but neither the teams nor the fans will be happy with the layout).
Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jun 20, 2009 2:52:12 PM
Boats:
Besides, if there was ever a professional sports owner the city should be giving the benefit of the doubt, that person is Mr. Paulson. He's a class act.
Bob T:
Not if he tried (and is trying) to get tax dollars to build a stadium for his team.
Bob Tiernan
Portland
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 2:54:36 PM
What is really amusing is all of the abuse Merritt Paulsen took from the kooks in Lents when it is Randy Leonard trying to ram a AAA ballpark down their throats.
And there folks you have "blue oregon" in a nutshell. Anti-growth kooks who live in a drug infested slum objecting to progress unless the progress is in lifting a noise ordinance for bongo playing. An incompetent drama queen attempting to rape his own constituents out of their urban renewal funds who won't take "no" for an answer, all led by a remorseless and shameless child molester for whom parks are merely a place to get blown in the bushes.
It's amazing that anyone of means attempts to do business with such a menagerie of total morons.
It's also not too amazing that Merritt Paulsen has the sense to live in Lake Oswego.
Posted by: Bob Tiernan | Jun 20, 2009 2:56:37 PM
Boats:
Ultimately though, when filled, PGE is a bad venue to catch a match because the seating is designed around the contours of baseball.
Bob T:
Well, there ya go. Answered your own question. This is why it's better for baseball to stay at PGE Park and Paulson to build his own privately funded soccer stadium somewhere else (with voluntary transactions - no use of eminent domain).
If he pulls the Beavers out of the city, it'll be due to spite. We'd then see a return of AA or A ball because Portland's too big an urban center for any team to not want to relocate here in the absence of a AAA team.
Bob Tiernan
Portland
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 3:16:38 PM
If the numbers make sense, there is no serious case to be made against the public financing of a stadium. As bad as a credit risk the Oregon State University Athletic Department is, they received public financing to expand Reser Stadium, a venue used the least of any major stadium/arena in the state. The legislature has rightfully given the OSU Beavers the benefit of the doubt that they will repay their construction bonds over time. It's only public money that is fronted if the going concern has to pay it back with interest.
Merritt Paulson is putting up $35 million in franchise fees to bring the Timbers up to MLS. He will be bearing the brunt of upgrading the payroll for the increased talent level the Timbers will have to carry to be competitive. The MLS requires a dedicated soccer facility as a precondition to having a franchise, or barring that, sharing with a football program that already can use a similarly dimensioned stadium. That partner is the PSU Vikings.
The Beavers have to move, primarily because a remodel for the TImbers and Vikings makes more sense than keeping an oversized baseball park for the AAA Beavers. The questions are where and how the Beavers go.
If the upgrading of the Timbers were free, it would be reasonable to tell MP to foot the entire bill for renovations at PGE and build a AAA ballpark himself, but that is not the way it is. From siting inside the UGB, to traffic impacts, to myriad other details, MP has little choice but to work closely with the city.
Since even MP does not have the cash flow to renovate a public stadium while building a private one somewhere else in Portland for the baseball club, while paying a franchise fee and upgraded payroll, it is reasonable to ask the City to help get the deal to work. However, from the get go the City has displayed incompetence, cowardice, or both at the same time. Paulsen didn't target Lents, Randy Leonard did. Paulsen didn't get chickenshit on redeveloping Memorial or telling the once bankrupted over the Rose Garden Paul Allen to suck it up and that a ballpark was going to replace the Memorial Coliseum eyesore.
Then again, what is to be expected of a city that cannot, after decades, get all of the asphalt and concrete put down across the entirety of southeast? "The CIty That Works" is more punch line than reality.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 3:37:55 PM
Well Mr. Tiernan, why should the public continue to subsidize the Portland Beavers at the expense of the Portland Timbers and PSU Vikings? They are all tenants of the same facility, but two have needs in common and possess way more upside as revenue generators for the owners of the park (the public) than the baseball team does.
It's not news that Civic, nee PGE, has been a pretty poor AAA baseball venue for decades now. Leaders with vision would redevelop it for the interests that are better suited to it long term and that would be college football and professional soccer.
It is not inconceivable that one day Portland State could evolve to play at the highest level of collegiate football or even become a perennial power in their current division and draw 15k fans to a rectangularly reconfigured PGE. It is also currently conceivable that a renovated PGE with the Timbers as the main tenant will draw not only larger crowds to their contests, but will also draw traveling fans from Seattle and Vancouver BC as well, something the Beavers never do.
AAA baseball is the logical candidate for removal from PGE Park. Baseball at that location has no upside. It cannot be expanded for some pie in the sky MLB proposal. AAA baseball has no growth prospects comparable to MLS or NCAA football. A renovated PGE Park could easily become a future venue for a World Cup round, or even a site for more mundane soccer events such a qualifiers, tournament matches and national team exhibition matches, all of which far overshadow anything the Beavers can bring.
AAA baseball is also perfect for a shrunken stadium sited elsewhere in Portland or the surrounding environs, primarily because AAA is not so dependent on fan support or television rights to survive. Payroll is fronted by the parent MLB franchise, and so a rather modest park will allow the Beavers to thrive just fine while clearing the way for a better dedicated use of the current downtown PGE Park location.
Posted by: Jim | Jun 20, 2009 4:48:54 PM
Thank the christ this bullshit is over with. Boats, you are right about Paulsen being the consummate professional as it seems all professional owners think the public should pay for their stadiums. Want a publicly financed stadium? Then we own the team, simple as that. Keep the definition of public consistent.
Posted by: John Calhoun | Jun 20, 2009 4:59:38 PM
I'm with Kurt Chapman. The city council has no business investing in a start-up unproven enterprise (MLS)with our tax dollars. Does any team in the league make money? Why do I not see the games, even the playoffs, on network television? The only soccer I see on TV is taking place in Europe.
It is nonsense that major league anything will do well in Portland if only the city will spend millions of our dollars to support rich owners. The city's role should be working on zoning and transportation issues, not becoming an investor in the business, especially one that is not proven like MLS. After we spend millions and MLS collapses because it doesn't make money will we be asked to spend another round to convert into a MLB stadium?
Posted by: Steve | Jun 20, 2009 5:20:22 PM
"If the numbers make sense, there is no serious case to be made against the public financing of a stadium."
OK, $65M into a new stadium at 6% = $4.7M/yr in pmts over 30 years. Take 15 games a year, that means $300K/game. If last night's attendance of 8200 is any indicator, then $40/person/game in payments. What was the ticket price again? Don't forget salaries Paulson has to pay and the desire to make a profit or he is gone.
This thing is no where near making sense. Realize we still have $30M in debt for the last PFE deal at PGE Park also. Plus the way CoP budgets it will be 2x $65M. The only reason this deal is alive is because Paulson took Randy to NY to meet Mr Big Deal Garber. So now what, NASL was supposed to be pro and you really believe MLS is even close?
Think a little about the schools, potholes, closed police precincts and Sellwood bridge before you make statements like this.
Posted by: Greg D. | Jun 20, 2009 5:22:39 PM
Baseball is played, mostly, by Americans and for an American audience. (Yes I know about Cuba, the Dominican league, etc.) Soccer is played, mostly, by foreign players and - historically at least - has appealed to a mainly foreign audience.
Thinking out loud here, but perhaps the fact that globalization plus immigration from South America, Central America and Mexico is making soccer more popular in the US is making some folks uncomfortable. Maybe it is time to dump baseball as "America's Pastime" and admit that in ten years our national slogan may be switched from "Baseball, Apple Pie and Chevrolets" to "Soccer, Tortillas, and Kias".
Not suggesting that overt racism has anything to do with the baseball vs. soccer discussion, but the thought has crossed my mind.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 6:11:29 PM
Your math is all off but that won't stop you from being where you are so it hardly matters. Portland is destined to forever be a small time city because its denizens are navel gazing losers who reflexively reject commerce, stymie development, and elect utter morons to offices high and low over and over again.
Posted by: Steve | Jun 20, 2009 6:21:50 PM
"Portland is destined to forever be a small time city because its denizens are navel gazing losers"
Details, maybe we shoudl join the big leagues and be like Detroit (4 pro teams), Cleveland (3), Indianapolis (2).
Hate to break it to you, but places w/o pro sports like Austin (0 sports teams) are the fastest growing for jobs in the country.
Let me know where I am off math-wise and I'd love to correct it.
Posted by: Harada | Jun 20, 2009 6:28:21 PM
"Portland is destined to forever be a small time city because its denizens are navel gazing losers who reflexively reject commerce, stymie development, and elect utter morons to offices high and low over and over again."
Yet we keep getting voted as one of the most popular cities in America, even with no major sports team (worth mentioning). It seems a whole lot of people don't give a rat's ass about big expensive spectator sports, and are sick of being shoved deeper into debt erecting monuments to people like the Paulsons.
Thanks for visiting, Boats. Now leave. I've got a kickball game to get to.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Jun 20, 2009 6:36:02 PM
Boats,
It wasn't easy but I narrowed your comments down to the most ridiculous one. First, though, the way you started with such a measured, reasonable tone and then flipped the cranky switch was priceless.
Take the beginning:
"The root of the problem with PGE is that the MLS economic model is predicated upon its stadia being soccer-centric..."
Nice. That sounds like a college thesis, for God's sake. You go on to talk about how classy Merritt is, but then a comment pushes your button and we're right into this:
"...all led by a remorseless and shameless child molester for whom parks are merely a place to get blown in the bushes."
I love the classy use of "whom" with that. This is great stuff full of irony. The person you're toughest on is Randy Leonard, yet you heat up at a Randy Leonard-like rate yourself. Very entertaining.
Here's the sentence I think is the most ridiculous:
"With remodeled stands however, the TImbers could easily draw between 10k-12k fans per contest."
I read that PGE Park's capacity for soccer and baseball is 19,566 right now. So we're going to go through all this hassle and money just to improve the view from thousands of empty seats?
We have a stadium that currently holds soccer and baseball games. Neither team is drawing that well, but the stadium is downtown and looks adequate. Why should we spend over 100 million dollars to try and change that during the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression?
Why aren't we focusing on helping the people who are being ground up by this economy?
There are many examples of rich sons of important men who have visions. Some start newspapers during the end of the age of newspapers. Some start the war in Iraq. Our rich son, Merritt, takes Daddy's money and announces that his vision of another stadium will lead to certain results.
What if they don't? Why gamble this much money NOW to see if Merritt is the exception to the rule of the rich son of an important man who is trying to set out on his own with a vision?
It all ties together so well: George W Bush has to prove that he's a tough guy on a war footing with the Commander Jumpsuit routine. Before he's done he's practically ruined the country.
He brings in Henry Paulson for a huge taxpayer bailout, and now we have Henry's son out here wanting to put us on an international soccer footing. What if Merritt's scheme is as good for Portland as George W's was for America?
Why take that chance? I repeat: We have baseball and soccer teams playing in PGE Park right now. Tell the MLS people to deal with it. They are in no position to throw their weight around.
A close second for your most ridiculous point was bringing up the TV revenue as a reason soccer needs to expel minor league baseball. Here's a glimpse at that from USA Today:
"The 2007 MLS season was the first season, however, for which television rights were sold to networks at a profit. Previously, MLS paid networks to broadcast its games. It is estimated MLS will receive about $30 million from TV revenue alone within the next eight years."
If those numbers are accurate, why should we spend 3 times the combined TV revenue of the entire league for 8 years out to make a pretty shot for the cameras? Do you even believe in soccer's TV future when hit TV shows and whole networks are in trouble because of falling ad money? This is a country that pays the NFL billions over the years for TV. Do you think soccer will put a dent into that? Why hasn't it happened already then? Remember, this league started in 1993. We had a World Cup here. Every possible chance for MLS to catch on big on TV was right there and it didn't happen. If MLS were a TV show it would be long gone - and in this economy it could easily go still.
Let's use this money in a way that we KNOW will help or better yet, save it in case we face a real emergency like a big earthquake. Buying more toys for millionaires is not an emergency.
This is different from other times. The margins for error are not there. As much as it must pain the politicians in charge of Portland, we just can't afford to be stupid right now.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 7:17:35 PM
Seeing empty MAX trains going to and fro from Hillsboro or next to no one getting off of it at the Oregon Zoo, it seems there has been plenty of margin for being stupid in the past.
8200 souls as an attendance projection for the MLS Timbers is a deliberate understatement. Someone already gave the Sounders' leap in attendance. Even if it doesn't hold at 20+k in three years, it will still be a five fold jump over when the Sounders were at the same level as the Timbers. A draw of 12-15k here, sustained going forward is not radical math. The MLS may be "unproven" but the TImbers are not really. Portland has always had the fanbase to support a professional soccer franchise as long as there were nearby rivalries to promote.
The empty seats at Civic/PGE have always been empty save for certain high level sporting events that sell the place out regardless of crappy views. PGE is too big for the Beavers and the wrong configuration for any other sport. As it is exceedingly unlikely that dysfunctional Portland will ever draw a ML baseball franchise, PGE should be configured to generate maximum revenues from the aspiring Timbers and the eternal tenant PSU Vikings rather than be lightly and reluctantly used most of the time.
Why do it now? Why not use the silly argument of the Obama Administration regarding its exceedingly pork laden and wasteful stimulus bill-- "It will create some local jobs--how can we afford to NOT do it?"
There, everyone onboard already? That shitty argument already worked once for the hope and change mob.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 7:27:08 PM
One more thing: Portlanders are small timers to the arts community too. The lack of a creative and energetic civic spirit is telling across nearly every Portland endeavor.
Put up the tram between OHSU sites and see someone print out "FUCK YOU" on their roof. Propose a baseball park to help renovate one of the absolute worst parts of the city and the hairy armpit set breaks out their megaphones to chant. Homeless punks litter the city, cops get nasty on their cell phones, the politicians are public and private embarrassments, but dammit, some magazine editor somewhere likes Portland in the abstract.
You should be so proud.
Posted by: PortlandLover | Jun 20, 2009 7:36:14 PM
Bill McDonald, you are correct to be worried about us losing our shirts over this deal. However, I believe we can afford to pay for the MLS upgrades if we keep the Beavers at PGE Park. The Spectator Facilities Fund will benefit from a full schedule of events, and this Fund can be used to pay for the upgrades. Only people who are attending games will contribute to this Fund by buying tickets and concession items.
The risk is that the Spectator Facilities Fund will not have enough future revenue to pay off the debt incurred by the new upgrades. If this occurs, then the general fund will be tapped, and we need to avoid that like the plague. That is why it is paramount that the Beavers remain at PGE Park for this to work.
You are also correct that the city should not be overly concerned with how the games look on TV. That is the MLS's business. The city should be primarily concerned with sustaining high enough overall attendance among all events (soccer, baseball, and whatever else) that the Spectator Facilities Fund is robust enough to pay off PGE Park's debt. However, the city can still accommodate MLS's needs by using a portable grand stand in the east side. This will look just as nice on TV as a permanent grand stand. And it will allow the Beavers to remain at PGE Park.
Posted by: OregonScot | Jun 20, 2009 7:39:47 PM
Boats..Im liberal..but you really speak sense.
A new PGE Park and a MLS team would draw revenue to Portland and a new stadium for the Beavers would be a boon to small business in Lents.
But we cant have that can we? Dirty capitalists.
If this falls thru it is the end for Portland in major sports.
NOne of us like useing government money , but this can pay back in a few years.
Posted by: marv | Jun 20, 2009 7:42:21 PM
There is a solution here and that is that Mr. Boats should
join with Mr. Paulson in a business venture with their own
money...Boatsy has convinced himself what a great business
proposition the MLS/Beavers/etc. is.
Even more important he is in the same league as Mr. P. So
pony up Boatsy. Use your own millions. Buy a share in
Paulson's company. OOOPS. Not for sale?
Guess when it comes down to it Grandpa's orchard pissed
Boatsy off for a lifetime.
Posted by: OregonScot | Jun 20, 2009 7:47:08 PM
Jesus such a bunch of small minded people here in PDX.
I moved here..I thought this place had energy..but it is the same small town mentality in a big city.
PDX is bound to fail this way..same morons who would tax micro-breweries to death for "the needy".
Sickening.
WE should be aiming for a world city..a metropolic on the Pacific Rim, instead we are vast village filled with nothing.
Seattlke moves ahead..we fail as usual..but we can still say we are pure.
Bollocks.
Posted by: PortlandLover | Jun 20, 2009 7:50:57 PM
Boats, I don't believe that the experience of the Sounders will necessarily translate to the Timbers.
From what I understand of the situation, the Sounders in the USL were not marketed very well and were nearly invisible on the Seattle sporting landscape. They weren't able to break into the fold along with the Seahawks, Mariners, and Sonics. Not to mention the Storm and Thunderbirds.
Contrast that with the Timbers who are treated like one of the major teams in the city. They aren't up there with the Blazers, but overall the sporting landscape is pretty barren compared to Seattle. Thus, the Timbers get a lot of noteriety in the city, even among non-soccer fans.
Another thing that has really helped the Sounders is that the Seahawks are now part owners. They did not own the team in the USL. They have used their season ticket list to market the Sounders to football fans, as well as just having an overall stellar marketing aptitude. They have managed to turn the Sounders into a city-wide phenomenon. Also, the Sonics recently left town and left a huge void. Not to mention that last year Seattle sports teams were pretty awful, so a change of pace with a brand new team (and sport) was probably attractive to a lot of people.
Contrast that with the Timbers who won't have a strong marketing partner such as the Seahawks. The Blazers aren't going to lend a hand. I also don't see how the Timbers will be able to generate a sense of "newness" the way the Sounders were. Everyone already knows about the Timbers. What will change when they become an MLS team? Will that really increase attendance from 8,500 to 20,000? I have my doubts. There is also the unfortunate animosity that is growing between baseball and soccer fans. Too many soccer fans are licking their chops at pushing baseball out of the city, and too many baseball fans are getting defensive about that. That is going to hurt the Timbers ability to become a city-wide phenomenon the way the Sounders are in Seattle.
I have been going to Timbers games since 1975, and I believe we have a vibrant soccer community here. However, from a business standpoint, I am not sure if the Timbers are really the cash cow that some of my fellow fans believe they will be. Timbers fans are understandably emotional about the team and want to portray the Timbers in the best possible light. We have to be careful not to get caught up in that.
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 7:52:00 PM
My grandfather's orchard pissed him off. To me it's merely a cautionary tale about the excesses of government. Loaning public cash to a stadium endeavor that will result in repayment is far better than pissing it away on "essential services" for the next to worthless in perpetuity.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Jun 20, 2009 7:54:07 PM
Boats,
There it is. You have stated exactly what's wrong with your whole argument in that one phrase: "...it seems there has been plenty of margin for being stupid in the past."
Now check this sentence out:
"In just about one short year (March 2008 - March 2009), the bailouts managed to spend far in excess of nearly every major one time expenditure of the USA, including World Wars 1&2, the moon shot, the New Deal, total NASA budgets, Iraq, Viet Nam and Korean wars — COMBINED."
Times have changed, Boats. That's the point.
One other thing that may or may not bother you: One of the people who blew up the economic universe? Well, his money is buying this MLS franchise through his son Merritt. Now, why would you want to assist someone like this when we face true economic peril? I mean how many times does this family ask for more and how many times are we dumb enough to give them more? I say enough.
There is nothing "classy" about what has happened to America's economic security - whether you are aware of the magnitude or not.
Posted by: Greg D. | Jun 20, 2009 7:55:11 PM
If you want Portland to have more major league sports teams, Paulson is currently the only game in town. Phil Knight seems disinterested. Paul Allen was once rumored to be looking to buy and move an NHL team to Portland, but lately the most common rumor about Allen is that he wants to move the Blazers to Seattle. Vera Katz was working to bring Major League Baseball to Portland, but that effort seems dead. The NFL will come to Portland just about the same time that Tre' Arrow becomes a partner at Stoel Rives.
Wondering about the demographics of this web site vs. the listeners to 95.5 "The Game" or AM 1080. My gut is that those sports radio stations have 1000 - 10,000 times more listeners and followers than this web site but that is only a wild guess.
If I cared, I would care. But I don't.
Posted by: marv | Jun 20, 2009 8:10:45 PM
The Shipwreck says: "Loaning public cash to a stadium
endeavor that will result in repayment is far better than
pissing it away on 'essential services' for the next to
worthless in perpetuity."
Name a few of those services.
Posted by: Pedro | Jun 20, 2009 8:10:49 PM
Kari's suggestion to leave the Beavers and Civic Stadium as is makes sense. That simplifies the equation and requires MLS Soccer to stand on it's own.
I still have a hard time spending public money during a serious recession on an enterprise that is owned by the son of one of the Bush henchmen who is responsible for recession in the first place. If Merritt and his spouse want a new soccer only stadium in Portland then they can pay for it.
Posted by: PortlandLover | Jun 20, 2009 8:24:06 PM
Henry Paulson is officially has a 20% ownership stake in the Timbers. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/jan/14/henry-paulson-portland-sports
"In Portland, Merritt Paulson, the 35-year-old son of the US Treasury secretary, is 80% owner of the Portland Timbers – a second-division professional soccer team that has its sights set on Major League Soccer – and the Portland Beavers, a Triple-A baseball team. His father, who's reportedly worth $700m himself, owns the other 20% of the two teams."
Henry Paulson also provided $50 million to his son for the MLS proposal, which includes the $35 million franchise fee (reduced from $40 million). http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aiY0Dfcik.8s
"Paulson is using $50 million of his father’s fortune for the $129 million project. The problem is that Paulson wants the city to sell $65 million of bonds to turn the downtown home of his Portland Beavers minor league baseball team into a soccer stadium that meets major league requirements, and erect a brand new park for the Beavers.
Building two new stadiums for the son of a millionaire is a tough sell in a town hit hard by a recession that deepened in part because Henry Paulson’s efforts to stave it off at the U.S. Treasury were unsuccessful. Oregon’s unemployment rate hit 10.8 percent in February, third-highest in the nation after Michigan and South Carolina, according to the U.S. Labor Department."
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 8:51:35 PM
Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel and a whole host of other Democratic "graytards" have more responsibility for the current economy than does either Paulson. Neither of the latter were making possible the underwriting of, or defending the underwriters of, the sub-prime mortgage industry that overheated the housing market into a speculative bubble.
Nevertheless, Portland wastes a lot of money:
$650k for an "Office of Human Relations." Must be awaiting first contact or something.
About $24 million for a slush fund called "Special Appropriations."
About $47 million for BHCD
About $12 million for the Children's Investment Fund.
Nearly $80 million annually right there alone.
Posted by: Mike Miller | Jun 20, 2009 9:12:01 PM
Boats and all:
I don't think bringing Major League Soccer to Portland is such a great deal for Paulson or for Portland. The league is not in great financial shape. What success it has had is based on keeping player salaries low. A city the size of Portland might be able to average 15,000 paying customers a game, but the league only plays 30 games a season (not counting playoff games), and only half of those are at home. [Average attendance in Salt Lake City was 16,179 in 2008; Columbus 14,622; Kansas City 10,686; Colorado 13,659; San Jose 13,713. Most of these metro areas are bigger than Portland. I deliberately left out the biggest markets.]
Do the numbers. Soccer might generate 225,000 paying customers. But AAA baseball already generates about 400,000 paying customers. And really, Boats, if you think Portlanders will continue to support an MLS team here after the initial love affair is over when (as you say) ticket prices will be about $40 per game, I think you're fooling yourself. I wouldn't pay that much to see a game -- think about how much it would cost to take a family of four to see just one game. There's nothing major about MLS. The major leagues are in Europe.
I'm not opposed to spending public money on sporting venues, but it has to make sense. In the middle of the worst recession since WW II, committing public money for a soccer-centric venue seems ill advised to me.
A more far-sighted approach would be for the city to invest in a state-of-the-art stadium designed principally for football (like Qwest Field) that would also work for soccer. Admittedly, the possibility of Portland attracting an NFL team seems remote, but how much riskier is this approach than the one Adams is trying to get us to make, all in an effort to attract a minor sport franchise to Portland? Put another way, I think the odds of MLS thriving in Portland are as long as us getting an NFL franchise.
Posted by: CK | Jun 20, 2009 9:40:34 PM
You can't compare Portland to Salt Lake City or markets that haven't worked. Better to compare them to recent markets like Seattle or Toronto who have taken to the sport better. Portland will likely be similar to them and draw 20,000 per game. Seattle is drawing 30,000 and Toronto 20,000 with no sign of slipping.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Jun 20, 2009 9:53:36 PM
Boats,
You're wrong again. Yes, there are others on the list of culprits including Bill Clinton.
But it was the Wall Street firms who are most to blame, and the problem wasn't the initial mortgages. If that's all it was, we could have paid them off long ago.
It was the derivatives - a financial instrument that exposed the world to....brace yourself....
600 trillion dollars worth of exposure should they start to unravel which they did.
Firms like Goldman Sachs, AIG,etc...turned the economic security of the globe into a giant casino that made a bubble...brace yourself again....10 times bigger than the entire economy of planet earth.
Henry Paulson then hopped from Wall Street down to Washington where he asked for and got billions to spread among his buddies while offloading the toxic assets onto us. We provided the money but he refused to tell us where it went.
Now he wants us to bailout this baseball team by moving them so his son can play with his new MLS toy.
I say let both teams remain in PGE Park.
By the way, they keep saying the baseball experience of a smaller park is what makes it more successful. The fuckin' team isn't going to be any better.
So if we provide this experience by spending millions on a park, aren't we subsidizing Paulson's profits directly? I mean, if the product is the intimate experience and we're building the intimate setting, isn't it our product too?
Sure it is, but when it comes to making the profits suddenly it's not about selling the intimate experience. He provides the guys playing baseball so he gets all the money.
No thanks. It sounds too much like TARP.
Posted by: torridjoe | Jun 20, 2009 9:56:49 PM
Why are we talking about converting PGE Park into a soccer stadium and then building a new baseball stadium? Why do two projects when one will do?OK, a second question: Why aren't we talking about the other major sites that have been discussed in the past - the PPS HQ across from the Rose Garden, the downtown post office (that the neighbors hate), Delta Park, etc.?"
One won't do. Baseball won't survive at PGE Park; either it goes somewhere else in the area, or it will move/fold. The place is too cavernous for the team. And why build a new soccer stadium when PGE will do just fine for renovations? Build a new soccer stadium and you still have to do something with PGE, and it won't be baseball after a while.
Second question is much easier: PPS needs a purchase, post office needs a long tussle with federal officials, Delta Park--can't remember the problem with it, but believe me, they've gone over and over it looking for a space.
I don't blame Lents. I blame the architects who had been badmouthing MC (justly IMO) for being a dinosaur, then suddenly began trumpeting it as a jewel of Portland. There was a URA with available funds already there, it could have been worked in with the rest of the development plans there, and would have been perfectly situated. But nooooo.
Other points/concerns:
" The stadium we buy for them."
The stadium we buy for ourselves, and charge guaranteed rent to use, you mean.
My God, Boats and I are nearly in perfect parallel on this one.
"The most cost-effective solution that satisfies all parties is for the Beavers and Timbers to continue to share PGE Park as they have done for the last nine seasons. "
The author of this has been all over the net this weekend, repeatedly and blithely writing this complete nonsense. Cost effective it MAY be, but it's also 100% impossible. The franchise award is conditional on a soccer-specific venue. The City Attorney has verified this. They will NOT award if a baseball team is going to play there. So stop. Please.
"Want a publicly financed stadium? Then we own the team, simple as that."
How about we just own the stadium?
"OK, $65M into a new stadium at 6% = $4.7M/yr in pmts over 30 years. Take 15 games a year, that means $300K/game. If last night's attendance of 8200 is any indicator, then $40/person/game in payments. What was the ticket price again? Don't forget salaries Paulson has to pay and the desire to make a profit or he is gone."
The URA proposal for PGE renovations was $15mil. There was other financing predicated on success Paulson has in Salem, which he's had--although there might be trouble at Mahonia. $65 mil was for PGE + Beavers at MC. No longer coupled, the deal should likely still be the combo of sources to include a new URA and $15mil of tax increment financing.
As long as the 8,200 number was thrown out, the empirical data on teams going from USL to MSL has been a doubling and tripling of attendance. There's retrenchment of course, but that's still about 15,000 heads a game at the low end estimate after a few years.
"Realize we still have $30M in debt for the last PFE deal at PGE Park also. Plus the way CoP budgets it will be 2x $65M."
There are two very important points to make here. Number one, that $28mil left on the last renovation is being paid by the Timbers and Beavers. If the MLS deal falls through, the Timbers will fold for lack of nearby competition, and the Beavers cannot sustain PGE and will fold/leave with them.
So guess who will be on the hook for that previous poorly written agreement? The taxpayers of Portland, for it will have to be paid from the general fund.
Which makes for a very interesting pair of outcomes: use tax increment bonds of $15million, that couldn't go to public services anyway, and upgrade the soccer team and stadium?; or reject the soccer team, lose both it and baseball, leave PGE empty except for Vikings games, and foot $28mil at the expense of public services?
The way CoP budgeted this deal, Paulson agreed to cover all but a tiny upfront potential overage. So the cost as previously agreed would be highly defined, fixed, and not subject to any substantial overrun that the City would be responsible for.
"Think a little about the schools, potholes, closed police precincts and Sellwood bridge before you make statements like this."
Why should we do that? The state and county pay for schools, you don't fill potholes out of URA money (certainly not by PGE), neither police precincts (which were closing anyway, with or without this deal), and the city doesn't pay for the Sellwood either (although actually it has agreed to, basically out of pity).
"Let's use this money in a way that we KNOW will help or better yet, save it in case we face a real emergency like a big earthquake. Buying more toys for millionaires is not an emergency."
The money doesn't exist. That's how URA financing works. You bond it, and then pay it back on increased property values, either by normal inflation, and/or development as a result of the economic spur resulting from the bond usage. So without the deal, there's no URA, no money to use or save.
Posted by: Steve | Jun 20, 2009 10:02:56 PM
"A draw of 12-15k here, sustained going forward is not radical math."
So outside of Seattle, the other 12 or so team are losing money and their attendance is down, so what'r your point, that we will beat the odds?
"Loaning public cash to a stadium endeavor that will result in repayment is far better than pissing it away on "essential services" for the next to worthless in perpetuity."
Huh? Why is throwing money away on soccer justified becuase we bleew it on something else? I'm still waiting for you to disprove my math. We have no idea if Paulson will be here in 30 years. Heck, the "pro" NASL was here 30 years ago for about 5 years.
Garber is putting together MLS with smake and mirrors and the entire league is losing money with the exception of about 3 teams, none of which is in NY, Dallas or LAX.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Jun 20, 2009 10:07:46 PM
Torrid Joe,
I'm calling bullshit on this:
"Baseball won't survive at PGE Park; either it goes somewhere else in the area, or it will move/fold. The place is too cavernous for the team."
To quote Dwight Jaynes, who knows a little something about sports in this town:
"People in Portland refuse to come to grips with the fact that minor-league baseball is successful, financially, just about everywhere and is here, too. Paulson’s made more money off the Beavers than he’s ever made off soccer."
So the only thing that's too cavernous is the hole in your argument.
Posted by: rw | Jun 20, 2009 10:17:11 PM
Boats, I am fast running out of any desire to chuck your fat little face under its sweaty, angry, red little chin and wish you well.
Give it a damned rest. Who cares if this Dem or that did this or that? That will not take any shine of Paulson and son's tarnished little nickel.
It just makes you look like an absolute fool.
Posted by: rw | Jun 20, 2009 10:20:05 PM
Ok TJ, lemme guess: you are a sports fan. You don't really see it as a choice between dealing with infrastructure woes and social services and basic services woes... you really do not perceive a choice. Just a big, fat, shiney stadium.
Ok. I get it.
This is not about reason or purpose.
It's the mountain and you just gotta.
Sigh.
Posted by: Steve | Jun 20, 2009 10:26:14 PM
"The place is too cavernous for the team."
So what happens when MLS draws like now - 8000/game?
"Why should we do that?"
Because we will use up the CoP credit card (bonding authority) to pay for this. This means that much less to pay for potholes or sewers or police.
"You bond it, and then pay it back on increased property values,"
YOu pay it back by hoping Paulson pays it back. Property values will increase with or withour the Timbers.
"The franchise award is conditional on a soccer-specific venue."
The offer is conditioned on Garber jerking around the small minds in Portland. I believe MLS plays in a lot of non-soccer specific venues.
"The stadium we buy for ourselves, and charge guaranteed rent to use, you mean."
If you are going to tell me MLS will be her for 30 years, I'd have a hard time believing it. We've only been told soccer is the next big thing since the NASL blew into town.
"Number one, that $28mil left on the last renovation is being paid by the Timbers and Beavers."
Thru gate receipts. Paulson has only committed to paying for the upgrades from here on out. However, CoP will still see about $80M total debt left on PGE Park that CoP must pay.
"Paulson agreed to cover all but a tiny upfront potential overage."
Final point - Paulson has signed NOTHING and Paulson is smarter than Randy. We'll get stuck like we always do after the Timbers die off after 5-6 years.
Posted by: rw | Jun 20, 2009 10:33:04 PM
I gawked in amaze as Leonard told the cameras, bluntly and with complete lack of self-awareness that he was being this transparent: since he broke the deal we made behind the scenes, I am breaking my part of the deal.
It was a deal. And has nothing to do with Randy really believing in this on principle, thus, being creatively and longterm invested. It was all about a broker, a handshake, a deal that was struck.
When you are simply doing politics and backscratching, fallings-out go just like this. But when you are truly working on something from a higher principal, you do not stand in front of cameras and point at the other guy who did not hang in for the bargain you struck.
I"m not sure I"m being clear about what I observed, but it was pretty craven to watch. Randy, transparent. No face to save.
Posted by: Bill McDonald | Jun 20, 2009 10:40:37 PM
Torrid Joe,
I also don't sense the brilliance in your paragraph about keeping both teams in PGE Park:
"Cost effective it MAY be, but it's also 100% impossible. The franchise award is conditional on a soccer-specific venue. The City Attorney has verified this. They will NOT award if a baseball team is going to play there. So stop. Please."
Not just impossible, but 100% impossible....Oooo! How about "Double Secret Probation" Impossible?
And, if that's not enough, "The City Attorney has verified this."
It's a negotiation. We ask for what we want and they ask for what they want. MLS would be crazy to turn back now over the presence of the Beavers. As David Sarasohn wrote in the Oregonian, ..."MLS could share with baseball, as it does in several other cities."
But even if they won't, what about the situation as it stands now led you to believe negotiations were done? Did you really think the city attorney thing would impress anybody?
And have you ever considered that just maybe the MLS demand is a bluff carried off by people who want something to happen a certain way?
Posted by: alcatross | Jun 20, 2009 10:42:03 PM
CK says: You can't compare Portland to Salt Lake City or markets that haven't worked. Better to compare them to recent markets like Seattle or Toronto who have taken to the sport better. Portland will likely be similar to them and draw 20,000 per game. Seattle is drawing 30,000 and Toronto 20,000 with no sign of slipping.
Like Kari, I'm agnostic about this whole thing but... why can't we compare Portland to similarly-sized markets with one major sports franchise?
Why is it 'better' to compare Portland (metro pop. ~2M) to larger markets like Seattle (metro pop. 3.2M) and Toronto (metro pop. 5.5M)?
Better why? Better for who and/or for what purpose?
Posted by: Boats | Jun 20, 2009 10:42:08 PM
I guess having a virtual stalker is not as exciting as it is cracked up to be.
If people are out there running around actually thinking of all jackasses in power as virtuous, that depth of naivete is unplumbed by most folks.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Kurt Chapman | Jun 20, 2009 10:20:22 AM
Kari, the other point not asked is:
Why should public (Urban Renewal) money be put up for any of the above?
I'm not generally in favor of either. Portland and Paulson should be able to tell MLS to stuff it. Numerous other soccer entities have had no problems in PGE stadium. I elicit several exhibition matches feature EPL and European teams, Women's World Cup and college soccer.
MLS needs Portland at least as much as Portland seems to want a LS team. (Note I refrain from calling MLS 'Major League') In the old days of the NASL there existed this wonderful three-way rivalry between Portland, Seattle and Vancouver. With a resurgent Seattle Sounders and Vancouver ready to join MLS, the Portland market is something MLS needs to tap - especially with the foundering Galaxy and New York franchises.
The best approach in my opinion is to tell Paulson that the city will consider support for a new stadium in 2015. By then we will know if MLS is still around and the Portland market is flourishing.