Peter S Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 If I can make two, highly un-iformed comments, but which I myself think: 1. I don't think the voters of BC will be swayed one way or the other by the roof. The Whitecaps/Province/City will have to make arguments in terms of jobs created, economic stimulus, etc., and not saving the franchise. 2. MLS will not revoke the franchise over a roof delay. Before it was awarded, back when the US economy was strong, one could certainly worry whether they'd want another Canadian team. Now that they are over that hurdle, and have a market which will obviously be strong, which took how many deposits in a record time, which has good rivalries with Seattle, Portland, Toronto, etc, and an excellent soccer history, and now that the US economy is poor, they won't do an about-face. Having said those two things, the Whitecaps will have to decide at some point whether they think the roof will go ahead, and then whather they want to play at BC Place without a new roof if that happens, or if this accelerates the projects of a new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masster Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 quote:Originally posted by mike_desare And they haven't been able to get back to Miami for 8 years, even though MLS wants to go back to Miami and the Florida market: http://web.mlsnet.com/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20090303&content_id=221343 Which has nothing to do with stadiums at all. So what exactly is your point again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 No clarity yet on BC Place Roof project VICTORIA/CKNW AM 980 Sean Leslie | Email news tips to Sean 8/27/2009 Still no word what the provincial government will do about the roof on B-C Place. Plans for a state of the art, retractable roof now seem to be in jeopardy, potentially a victim of the severe economic downturn. Tourism Minister Kevin Krueger revealed today the bids on the 360 million dollar project came in over-budget. He says due diligence is being done. The NDP says the roof upgrade is dead. Krueger now says an announcement might not come until next week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vancouversoccerman Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Although I have doubts that MLS is in danger here, the one thing that isn't good for the Whitecaps is the public uncertainty all of these stadium rumours are causing. They just kicked off their MLS deposit campaign for current Season Ticket holders, and now people aren't sure what they're buying into. And regardless of what the government has planned, I know they are not currently talking with the Whitecaps or being up front with the public. It's particularly clouded with Miro Cernetig's talk of a new P3 stadium development in today's Sun. I'm going to write something on this on the FoS site later today, and will be distributing to the media. If you do decide to write the BC government (and it's probably not a bad idea right now), I suggest you emphasize the importance of the MLS team, the benefits, and the uncertainty they're causing by not being clear and up front with the Whitecaps and the public. A little heat could at least shed some light on what's going on behind the scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 When was the last time the Gordon Campbell party was up front with the electorate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Wow listening to the callers that called in, not one was supportive of the Retractable. Most seemed happy with just tearing down the place. I hate to say it but it appears the majority of the public is against this given the costs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownbear Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 quote:Originally posted by spiral Wow listening to the callers that called in, not one was supportive of the Retractable. Most seemed happy with just tearing down the place. I hate to say it but it appears the majority of the public is against this given the costs [sarcasm]Yes, because it's an empirically verified fact that those calling into a radio show to complain are always representative of the population at large.[/sarcasm] I used to work in the restaurant industry and one of the things I remember clearly is that while, when someone has a good experience at a restaurant s/he tells an average of one other person about the experience, whereas those who have bad experiences tell an average of 13 other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltdownman Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 ^not just that but the people that called in seemed like "casual callers", not people that really knew the topic or had much to say. People yelling that we should tear it down and give the money to welfare actually help the roof more than hurt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltdownman Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 ^not just that but the people that called in seemed like "casual callers", not people that really knew the topic or had much to say. People yelling that we should tear it down and give the money to welfare actually help the roof more than hurt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Did you hear that Unisystems boss Cyril Silberman on CKNW? He still feels the roof is a go. Certainly he has a financial interest as Unisystems filed a bid for the retraction equipment. But he would be quite close to the situation. However he admitted he wasn't so sure about the "local economy" out here as he's based in Minneapolis. He's just waiting for that phone call. No Press conference today? I think something is going to explode Monday morning in Victoria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiral Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 Listen to Tom Mayenecht's The Sport Market tommorow Saturday morning on Team 1040 at 9 a.m. He has the month end round table with G&M Matt Sekeris (he breaks a lot of stories) and Bob Mackin from 24 Hrs. I'd expect the roof situation to be talked about in detail as it's very much a business story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snake Posted August 28, 2009 Share Posted August 28, 2009 like duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masster Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Vancouversoccerman Although I have doubts that MLS is in danger here, the one thing that isn't good for the Whitecaps is the public uncertainty all of these stadium rumours are causing. Quoted for truth. This whole MLS business was off to a flying start, and despite the outcome of the stadium situation, all of this talk has put a damper on things and is making the Whitecaps look bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted August 29, 2009 Share Posted August 29, 2009 Not that the Whitecaps really have any control over recent events, they are merely yet another victim of the Gordon Campbell Party's inability/unwillingness to keep their word. Witness the HST, at election time it was no to HST and hey presto, once they're elected here comes the HST. Guess Campbell takes his cue from his co-conservative Stevie Harper who vowed he would never appoint any senators because he was ideologically opposed to the unelected nature of the senate.... No wonder people are disillusioned with politics and politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_desare Posted August 29, 2009 Author Share Posted August 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Vancouversoccerman If you do decide to write the BC government (and it's probably not a bad idea right now), I suggest you emphasize the importance of the MLS team, the benefits, and the uncertainty they're causing by not being clear and up front with the Whitecaps and the public. A little heat could at least shed some light on what's going on behind the scenes. Yes, I would hope those that read this thread send a simple e-mail to the e-mail addresses listed above. Takes you less than 5 minutes. Should the retractable roof & renovations be cancelled, there is nothing we can do at that point. We have more influence over Campbell and the Liberal party than we do over Garber & MLS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_desare Posted August 29, 2009 Author Share Posted August 29, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Richard It will still be a much improved BC Place and one of the better stadiums within MLS so I really can't see Don Garber pulling Vancouver's MLS franchise because of the roof issue despite the noise the media is making. You have to be kidding me. We will have one of the worst stadiums in the MLS for soccer without the post-Olympic renovations and retractable roof. Even if we got the retractable roof & post-Olympic renovations, the Whitecaps have repeatedly said they still want a soccer specific stadium and that BC Place was for temporary use only. If BC Place is one of the "better stadiums within MLS," why would the Whitecaps want to get out of there and build their own SSS? Explain that one Einstien. (Don't even bother trying to explain that BC Place is better than any SSS in the MLS because it's not and never will be). Seeing that I have ripped your logic apart, here is some logic for you - Don Garber has kicked San Jose out in the past because their stadium was deemed insufficient. BC Place, without the retractable roof & post-Olympic renovations, will be one of the worst stadiums for soccer in the league. If Garber gives us the San Jose treatment, there is sufficient ground for him to review our candidacy for MLS. Now add in Montreal, who already have a SSS ready and simply need the $25 million in upgrades, and Garber & the MLS have a no brainer city to replace Vancouver with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted August 31, 2009 Share Posted August 31, 2009 So .. as the feds spend millions on Van 2010, and the IOC comes to the rescue of the Olympics with a cash infusion to do the last details that are most visible to the tourists.. how does the government of the day pay for the looming debt after the Whistler Games ? The tax burden is going to grow in BC, I doubt the feds are going to do a major transfer to a liberal run province. Its tough times looming. You may need a deep pocketed Kerfoot to finally build a stadium somewhere to keep the MLS dream alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnie Monster Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 As I pointed out earlier, the BC Liberals are not associated with the Federal Liberals. BC Libs are significantly right-leaning, which puts them on good footing with Harper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Johnnie Monster As I pointed out earlier, the BC Liberals are not associated with the Federal Liberals. BC Libs are significantly right-leaning, which puts them on good footing with Harper. Laughs.. mmm so Liberal equal conservatives in BC ? and where is the Social Credit legacy now ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownbear Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Trillium Laughs.. mmm so Liberal equal conservatives in BC ? and where is the Social Credit legacy now ? I was going to mention this as well. The "Liberal" party in British Columbia is the reconstructed Social Credit Party, which was to the right ideologically of Harper's Conservatives. After the Social Credit brand had been tarnished, and the government thrased in the elections in the 1991 provincial election (went from governing with a majority (47 seats in total) to "Bolivian"--as Mike Tyson would say--7 seats!), they began to filter into the Gordon Wilson-led BC Liberal Party, which did have ties to the federal Libs and were certainly ideological soul-mates to the Libs in Ottawa. BC politics is, and always has been, its own special circle of hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 The BC NDP is much closer ideologically to the federal Liberals than the BC Liberal Party which is not Liberal in any way, shape or form. As Brownbear says, the BC Liberal Party shares much more ideology with Harper's Conservative Party than the federal Liberals. It takes a while for outsiders to figure this out... even some BC'ers don't seem to get it. The Gordon Campbell Liberal Party makes the most of its Liberal camouflage. Yet another example of political shenanigans by power hungry, grasping politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnie Monster Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Have you seen the BC Green party? Not a single green-skinned martian among them! Lying bastards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piltdownman Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 BC Green party? Never heard of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.