make WWAY your homepage  Become a fan on facebook  Follow us on twitter  Receive RSS Newsfeeds  MEMBERS: Register | Login

Different paths to Election Day in ballpark bond battle

READ MORE:

WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) -- Election Day is inching closer, and so is the deciding vote in whether the City of Wilmington will build a ballpark.

You've probably seen the yard signs, bumper stickers, social media messages and even commercials, but how are the campaigns continuing to get the word out?

We reached out to "Vote Yes" campaign spokesman Terry Spencer to see how they will continue to reach out to voters, but he was too busy to do an interview.

"Vote No Stadium Tax" spokesman Scott Harry says his group is handing out yard signs and reaching out to voters through a grass roots effort. Harry says he believes the "Vote Yes" group will ramp up its efforts before election day, but he says it may be too late.

"It's not over until it's over, but when I was in line to vote saturday, everybody in line around me was against it. When one of my employees was in line to vote opening day of early voting, everybody in line around him was against it," Harry said.

The "Vote Yes" group's campaign slogan is "Get the Facts." Harry believes to really do that, voters need to read the proposal between the city and Mandalay Baseball and the Atlanta Braves. That proposal details where the $37 million in bond money would go and other aspects of ballpark plan.

Disclaimer: Comments posted on this, or any story are opinions of those people posting them, and not the views or opinions of WWAY NewsChannel 3, its management or employees. You can view our comment policy here.

»

Here's what scares me

About this MOU:

http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/Portals/0/documents/City%20Manager/Baseball/...

5. Capital Maintenance Fund. The City shall establish a Capital
Maintenance Fund for capital repairs, maintenance and improvements at the Ballpark (the “Fund”). The City shall be responsible for all capital maintenance, repair and improvements of the Ballpark. All monies for the Fund shall be contributed by the City. The City shall submit for approval to the North Carolina Local Government Commission the proposal for financing the project through the issuance of bonds, and the Operator will have reasonable input into that submission, including reasonable input into the determination of what items will be considered items of capital maintenance. The City shall meet with the Operator at least annually to discuss in good faith with the Operator what capital maintenance, repair and improvement items are
desired or necessary, and the priority of such items. However, the City shall control and manage the Fund and shall make expenditures from the Fund as the City deems necessary or appropriate in its reasonable discretion after considering in good faith all reasonable input from the Operator. The City acknowledges its commitments set forth in this Section 5 are a material inducement to ANLBC agreeing to its commitments set forth in Section 7 below. The Parties agree to negotiate and include in the final documents the specific details of which expenditures are eligible to be paid from the Capital Maintenance Fund."

Why does this scare me? Well consider how poorly this MOU was negotiated - it's totally one-sided.
What does NSS sday about Capital funds?

http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/Portals/0/documents/City%20Manager/Baseball/...

Chapter 8 pg 103:
Industry standards recommend that a capital reserve be established to fund future major capital repairs or improvements beyond routine maintenance and repairs.  It is recommended that a reserve be established in the amount of 0.5 percent of project costs in the initial year of operations, with annual contributions increasing
three percent annually thereafter.    Assuming a ballpark project cost (excluding land and offsite infrastructure) of $35 million, it is estimated that a capital reserve would need to be funded in the amount of $175,000 per year."
***************************************************

Think about it
MOU says the City shall be responsible for ALL funding of the capital repairs.
NSS said that they assume it would cost:
"it is estimated that a capital reserve would need to be funded in the amount of $175,000 per year."

So - am I mistaken here? Or did the city just agree to pay $175,000 per year into a fund for capital repairs?

SC Tom? Rick? Anyone?
$175,000 per year? Needed or not?

Vog

Good Deal???

Mandalay has worked this agreement so that they are covered no matter what. This whole deal is a dream come true for them. They receive, and receive, and receive, and the Wilmington tax payers get to pay, and pay, and pay. When you read this agreement you look around to see if you are on candid camera...........and when you realize it is not a joke, you just get sick that people that are "supposed to represent the people" would sign something as one sided as this. If stupidity was a crime, everyone supporting this would get life without parole.......

Wow

Of course the final agreement will contain the actual figures.
But I'm stunned by the audacity of this deal !!
Assume NSS is right.
Over the next 20 years The City of Wilmington - OUR city will pay:
20 X $175,000 or $3,500,000

Which Mandalay can tap into if they just sit down and talk to our hard bargaining leaders (being facetious there folks) for capital projects.

"Hey we need golden faucets in the executive suite"?
No problem, call it a capital project and the city pays !!!

"Oh I want different wall colors".
No problem, call it a capital project and the city pays !!!

Do you know how BAD this is when you respond to your OWN posts ??!!

I just get so mad..........

Vog

Vog

that appears to be a bottom line, if I read correctly. According to the agreement, Mandalanta is to have imput into the amounts required for deposit; and is to have an annual meeting to determine if the amount needs to increase.

One would think the number will increase annually as the facility ends.

I could see $175,000 as a first year number; but would not be surprised at much higher numbers after 5 or 10 years.

Hey Rick

Think about this for a minute.
The city pays $3,5M into a fund over 20 years that Mandalay controls for all intent and purposes.
We give them $2.9M upfront for furniture

If cost over runs happen, WE put out $500,000 and Mandalay pays us back their half in $25,000 increments over 10 years.
And we pay for any hurricane damages separate from regular maintenance, and separate from capital maintenance.
$3.5M
$2.9M
$0.5M

$6.9M
So if there's cost over runs this year AND we get hit by a hurricane during or right after its completed we could be out an awful lot of money......

Vog

Another NSS lie exposed

One of the arguments the pro side uses for the stadium is that it’s a multi-use facility. In scouring NSS (that “professionally done” study) Chapter 6 pg 75 I noted that they looked at 10 comparable ballparks to generate a number that would indicate an average non MiLB use for this multi-use facility.

http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/Portals/0/documents/City%20Manager/Baseball/...

But then I noticed the aberration, the Fort Wayne (Ind) Tincaps who came in with 383 non-tenant uses for their stadium. Good for them, no great for them – but this one figure is almost 4 times the nearest team’s number. So in order to get a better picture I eliminated them.
This caused a more realistic number to appear for average non-tenant use - 40.5. I will be kind to the PRO side and round up to 41. Then I reviewed the surveys NSS conducted to see how the ILM estimate was established and I found that NSS used “Interest” as a means to justify estimates.
This is total unmitigated bunk.
So, lets look even closer at what NSS says ILM will host: Pg 80
68 braves home games
4 college games (I will give them this in the hope that it comes true (but Marc Lashley will disagree I’m sure)
10 high school games ? Nope – cost prohibitive according to the coaches interviewed. This would double busing costs as now both teams would then have to travel to this stadium
2 other sports. Sorry this also goes to 0. Hammerheads are out, as are the Sharks
1 concert. OK this is a wish but I will leave it in.
45 Miscellaneous. Oh this is a big error. Taking out Fort Wayne, the average for miscellaneous events drops to 21 events.
NSS came up with 130 events that includes 68 Braves home games. The number should have been closer to 89
My figures are 91 total events or 91 – 68 = 23 non tenant uses !!!
I totally missed this when I read, and re-read, the NSS survey. The Fort Wayne Tincap numbers totally skewed the average results. By talking them out, I got a more realistic view of what we could expect. Sure Azalea festival will add a couple to this list but I do not see HS graduations outdoors in May/June.
One final note. Remember the substitution effect for spending? All of these non tenant uses are events that would happen whether the stadium was here, or not. Heck they already exist !!! So the economic impact of these non-tenant events is ZERO on the city. The ONLY event that is new, at this stadium, would be the Braves games themselves.
Sorry but the numbers contained within NSS are becoming less and less reliable.
Because of this the "economic benefit" is disappearing ! If we have to rely on the ballgames ONLY - we LOSE !!!! Lynchburg is poorly attended, and we, historically,have not supported the Roosters, or the Waves.
Remember, as Chuck (Duke) spews his bile about all the "multi" uses for this facility? Well THAT other use is about 21 events.
God help us if this passes

Vog

VOG

which side gets the non baseball revenue?

The city, to help service the debt and maintenance expenses?

Or Mandalanta?

Tom

Mandalay:
From the MOU which we are(have) voted on:

http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/Portals/0/documents/City%20Manager/Baseball/...

pg 4-5:

"Except as provided in Section 4(e) below, during the Term (as defined below) the
Operator shall receive all revenues from the management, operation, and use of the Ballpark including, but not limited to, revenues generated by:
(1) ticket sales for events held by the Operator;
(2) the sale of “club seats” and “box seats,” seat licenses to home games, private club
memberships, and suites;
(3) the sale of food, beverages, and merchandise;
(4) the sale of pouring rights;
(5) the sale of broadcasting rights for home games played and for other events at the Ballpark;
(6) the sale of naming rights for the Ballpark (subject to Section 6 below) ; and
(7) the sale of advertising, signage, and sponsorships.

**********************************************
Naming right are 100% Mandalay's UNLESS they go over a certain amount
pg 6:
"the Operator shall share with the City fifty percent (50%) of the annual net revenue from naming rights for the Ballpark to the extent they exceed three hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars ($325,000)."
So if the naming rights go for $325,001 the city gets 50 cents. How much can we expect?
Naming rights for comparable ballparks is NSS Chap 8 pg 99

http://www.wilmingtonnc.gov/Portals/0/documents/City%20Manager/Baseball/...

"Overall, the average comparable ballpark naming rights agreement was for an average of 13 years with an annual value of $252,857.    Several of the most recent naming rights deals at comparable venues have an annual value of $300,000."  
**********************************
A big fat ZERO - ZILCH - NADA
the deal is written so that not only does Mandalay keep ANY profits inside the park they also won't GIVE the city anything because the deal is structured so they don't have to. !!!!!  

This is, far and away the WORST deal in MiLB ball field development

Vog

I knew that

but I think everyone needs to be aware of just how one sided this deal is for the city of Wilmington.

Every time one of the dashing duo states how the deal is getting sweeter and sweeter, what they really mean is sweeter for Mandalanta.

If the city voters somehow pass this referendum, then the city deserves Saffo and his cronies.

I wonder, how many games can you attend at a brownfield site before you either glow in the dark or begin to lose body parts?

Vote NO

But think of all the money

But think of all the money the city will save during night games!!!! THey wont have to pay for lighting, everyone will just glow in the dark!!!

Fellini

Renters beware

As with everything else in this world when costs increase they get passed down to the low man on the totem pole. You can bet when the landlord has to pay more in property tax that he is going to make up for it by making you pay. So, it is in your best interest to vote against this taxpayer funded stadium. There are options out there that are better for Wilmington.

Ah Wilmington.....

Stadium build? Capped at $37M the Pro side Struts around like a peacock claiming how "sweet" this deal has become.
Now we learn the bond referendum over 20 years will cost taxpayers
$67M to $75M because our illustrious "leaders" decided to "pad" the stadium bond with extra funds they could use as O'Grady said "for other purposes" - but that's a story for another blog.
Mayor Saffo claims the ballpark, with interest, will cost $54M.

This is kinda like that financial services ad that plays on TV. A women, obviously American Indian, claims that "so and so" financial services can put $10,000 in your checking account tomorrow. She ends the ad by saying "it's not for everyone".
Read the fine print while the ads playing and you see that interest rate is effectively 89.98%
Yeah - no wonder it's not "for everyone"
What we are doing here is allowing the city to conduct loan sharking for Billionaires. "Just pay da tax bill you lousy whiny taxpayers, or Rocco comes over to yer houze with da baseball bat - get it"?
Taking on $54M so that Mandalay can pay back $10M (and make money while doing it)

You don't say "No"
To a man named Rocco

Vog

So I guess You mean?

That the No Tax Stadium commercial that claims 75 million dollars is being given to a billion dollar baseball team is wrong and deceiving?
Your claim is that the Stadium cost is 54 million with interest and that the citizens of Wilmington will own the facility and Mandalay will pay back 10 million over 20 years.
I can only assume you agree that the price of the stadium and land is 37 million and the 24 million is the interest. The 20 million dollar difference would be a excellent question from members of both sides and what would you bet that it will be addressed Thursday night.
I posted last week on this blog and that post got quite a bit of attention. I appreciate your support for the correctness of that post. I also got a little finger happy with some undesirable name calling which I regret in my effort to support a position which was not required since the deception of the ad, speaks for itself.

Balancing the human equation

So .... Let me see if I have this right ...

- This is the first time you've EVER come close to apologizing for some "undesirable" name calling.
- The reason you're apologizing is because, in this particular case, it wasn't necessary ... because ... you were right and the point you were disputing (the add) was actually wrong.

So ... To balance out the human equation ...

- In all of those many, many other times where you NEVER came close to apologizing for some "undesirable" name calling ...
- The reason you didn't apologize is because, in those particular cases, it was necessary ... because ... you were wrong and the points you were disputing were actually right.

So ... Here's what you can lean from this ...

- The problem with choosing to embrace a marketing strategy based essentially on ego and untruthfulness is that ... sooner or later ... when you think you've finally found an opportunity to prove you're right ... you'll have become so surrounded by your own faux pas that no one will be able to see past them enough to even bother to take you seriously.

There you go Again!!

Check your records, I think you may have me confused with someone else?
I don't recall ever offering a marketing strategy. A marketing strategy involves putting fans and customers in the seats and all the attraction and concessions associated. What has bent you and most others out of shape is that I understand Economic Development projects and how they evolve between various parties. During the process, I called every move and was on the right side of every issue.
The fact that stadiums attract other development projects in many other cities can't be questioned. Some areas get more and some less,that's why the river site is important to Wilmington as these sites offer greater potential for re-development projects and greater chances of enhanced property value to the city. You might reference a recent Star News editorial which indicated the value of a stadium to many example cities one being Greensboro. Former Mayor and accomplished business executive Jim Melvin stated the Greensboro stadium was an excellent investment. The Greensboro stadium has already paid itself out.
You will also find if you care to look that I have never taken a position on any form of finance options private or public. This along with revenue projections is the responsibility of the city and its consultants. As best I can remember those projections provided ample revenue to cost out the project?
The only thing you and your gang has been right about as it relates to me is that I support the Stadium and believe it will be good for Wilmington.
VOTE YES FOR THE STADIUM!!!

There you go again

"You will also find if you care to look that I have never taken a position on any form of finance options private or public"

Really? REALLY?
Here's one for yah Terry:

• Could !
• Submitted by MrT (not verified) on Wed, 06/27/2012 - 4:55pm.
• You may have missed the word could( it's used several times in the watch dog blog) in your haste to write another essay. You like many others need only to hold your horses just a few more days and let the deal come forward.
If I had a crystal ball it might say.
• 1. They will take some of the special features out of the stadium proposal similar to what Greensboro and Winston Salem did and lower to over-all cost.

WRONG - this is one of the most expensive projects Hunt Construction will have undertaken - it ranks #2 on the list of ballparks referenced in he building projections NSS survey on a per seat basis.

2. Mandalay/Braves will up the ante by increasing the lease years or payment schedule.

Wrong the MOU does NEITHER

3. The city will get the advertising and naming rights for the stadium.

Wrong TWICE - according to the MOU the city gets NONE OF THAT!!

4. The city will get $1 per ticket tax.

Wrong - the city gets no revenues from ticket sales

5. The finances will come from either .5% food and beverage or about 1.5 cent on $100 dollar evaluation General Revenue Bonds.

Wrong twice - no beverage taxes and much more than 1.5 cents

I also predict that if the issue makes it to a vote, the citizens of Wilmington will support It and the stadium will be built in the downtown area.
Now Vog, whats your little crystal ball say?
*********************************************************

There you go "MR Right predictions"
One post with 7 missed predictions and one more prediction still up in the air.
Still want to say you've been right all along ?

Your credibility just jumped in the dirty water of the Cape Fear River.

Vog

Reality Check 101

-- Confused you with someone else: You’ve said so many outlandish things that by now, you may be the one who no longer knows who you are. Everyone else does. I wouldn't worry about it. After the election, it won't matter who you are.
-- Marketing strategy: The act of advocating a political point of view for the purpose of achieving a particular voting result is a marketing strategy, just like putting fans in a stadium is.
-- What has bent you and most others out of shape is that I understand Economic Development projects and how they evolve: Do you ever listen to yourself? Most others don't understand, just you. Perhaps your attitude may be a contributing factor to this whole "bent" thing. That and your deliberate inaccuracies.
-- Was on the right side of every issue: In order for that to be correct, more, instead of less people, would have to agree with you. That, and also the business of your talking points being correct. That hasn’t been the case (just like in this post).
-- Never taken a position on any form of finance options private or public: Advocating a YES vote is to advocate for taxpayer (as in public) financing of a stadium.
-- Revenue projections are the responsibility of the city and its consultants: An interesting way of saying that you, personally, have no revenue projections with which to justify your position.
-- Those projections provided ample revenue to cost out the project: Are you kidding me? Even Mandalay admits that the city’s highly touted “consultants” presented the city with a seriously flawed feasibility study. After that it really started to go down hill.

Strike seven! You're out 2 1/3 times!

What?

"The fact that stadiums attract other development projects in many other cities can't be questioned."

Why not?
Because you said so?

The academic studies indicate looking back at actual stadium builds indicate that 90% of them have little to no impact.

Look no further than Gwinette County Georgia. that AAA level ball field and club promised the world and gave the county nothing
In fact the county has had to raise taxes in other areas to help fund the stadium build because the promised development did not take place.

So, at east you agree that the Ripken deal along the river with a privately paid for stadium would be good for Wilmington and offers the best chance of enhanced development for the city. This shows your not a totally lost cause

Vog

Yeah

We could only hope to be like Greensboro:

http://www.news-record.com/blog/55771/entry/149632

Ballpark signed, sealed and delivered
The Greensboro Grasshoppers have offiicially completed their purchase of New Bridge Bank Park for nearly $13 million.

That means they own it and directly will profit from the revenues the downtown stadium raises.

This ballpark has been a rock-solid proposition for the city since it was built -- exclusively with private funds.

That means taxpayers didn't pay a dime for its construction and won't ever have to worry about its maintenance or upkeep.

It's hard to believe now, but a lot of people fought hard to stop the new ballpark
*****************************************************

You seem to forget Terry the argument is how its paid for.
I would LOVE for us to be JUST LIKE Greensboro

Vog
It's hard for me to remember why now. And probably for them, too.

Terry-

And the deception you espouse also speaks for itself. Taxpayers WILL pay back the bond, in full which will be in excess of $75M. This is what it will cost US.
"Cost to taxpayers" is not the same as $37M, far from it, and the fact that you want to use the smaller number exposes your fraudulent argument because that is what yo want it to be, an argument about numbers.
If the stadium tax were for only the stadium the tax rate could have been lowered to 2 cents - yet no one on the "pro" side picked up on this and railed against city hall for "killing" the bond through greed. I guess since the bond (If passed) gives you what you want - makes this money grab OK. Correct?
OK try this
$54M JUST for the stadium. If RE doubles in the 20 year length of the bond and the city revaluates every 5 years as has been their history (more or less), how much will that $54M bond cost in total? Get the picture?
The problems associated with this bond are two fold
First the bond over reaches on revenues. This is not PCB's fault but your continued silence on this is a tacit approval of this money grab.
Second - the bond payback is tied to RE valuations. In the last 50 years how many times has real estate fallen in value in this area? You could say 2008, 2009, 2010, and possibly 2011. But other than that you would be hard pressed to come up with another annual drop in valuation.

That being said I would hope that don't mistake my saying the stadium cost is $37M is somehow making you think I support your post - far from it. Construction costs and selling price are always different. Purchase price and payment price are also different.
The COST to taxpayers, which is the thrust of the ad, is $75M at a minimum. To cast this as anything different is in fact, a lie. Just like your website saying we'd get "X" amount of economic benefit without using the terms "estimated" is implying some sort of guaranteed return. You cannot in good conscience make that claim.
But considering your past posts and your silence on the excess revenues, I would gather you have no conscience.

Vog

Can't you READ ?

or do you just interpret words any way you wish? I made no question about the 75 million. That may be accurate and as I said it would be a fair question for the debate on Thursday. I said again and again that your ad states that 75 million dollars is being given to a billion dollar Baseball Team. This is not only incorrect, it's deceiving! Atlanta nor Mandalay are to be given a dime. They like any tennant will pay rent for the right to occupy. The Stadium will be the property of Wilmington and it's citizens. You and your crowd may not like the terms but those are the terms and your ads should reflect that. You can write essays until you turn blue but those are the terms. I would also inform you that this council and future have the right to base tax rates and adjust rates to compensate for re-evaluation vs.operation cost. The revenue bond holder has one priority, The debt gets paid!
Yours and other references to Terry are also as wrong as you are mostly wrong in general.
I don't even know who Terry is!!
If he's for Baseball in Wilmington, my guess is he's a fine person.
VOTE YES FOR THE STADIUM!!!

And now for today's most humorous quote:

(Wait, let's change that to the most humorous quote of the entire stadium debate!)

"I don't even know who Terry is!!
If he's for Baseball in Wilmington, my guess is he's a fine person."

Terry

Here's the deception from your own post:

"They like any tennant will pay rent for the right to occupy."
Now finish the thought
And operate a 'for profit' business

The city did not build Verizon. They did not build PPD nor GE nor Corning. The city collects NO RENT for the privilege to occupy those facilities.
So why should this be any different?
THEY help the city prosper by paying property taxes and employing not tens of people, but thousands of people.
As for city parks and other recreational things the city pays for them so that ALL citizens can use those facilities - for free or for nominal fees without regard to profitability or not.

In this case the city has far exceeded it's function in regards to business operations. They didn't offer incentives they're offering to build a for profit business facility which will have cost the taxpayers a guaranteed loss of $44M after the bond is paid, while Mandalay and Atlanta profit from it
If that's NOT "giving" Mandalanta something, I don't know what is.
We are absorbing $44M of costs for them so they can maintain profits.

Its a pity your website does not reflect what we are indeed "giving" them.

Vog

Vog 46

Maybe you could provide your wisdom as to why so many cities across America own or have some ownership in so many sports stadiums. These facilities are rented to for profit enterprises. Maybe there is something in your business knowledge vastness that could prove how stupid these investment are. Many of us would love for you to share some of that info!

Actually

I don't need to Mr T
Do you know why?
Because anyone with any sort of math knowledge will know that Ripken offers a far better deal for this city.
Here let me simplify it for you.
Mandalay involved? The taxpayers pay $54M
Ripken involved? The taxpayers pay NOTHING.

Even YOU can understand that

Vog

Mr T otherwise known as Mr Prediction

A blast from your past: June - yeah June I will interject the results of your predictions:

Could !
Submitted by MrT (not verified) on Wed, 06/27/2012 - 4:55pm.
You may have missed the word could( it's used several times in the watch dog blog) in your haste to write another essay. You like many others need only to hold your horses just a few more days and let the deal come forward.
If I had a crystal ball it might say.
1. They will take some of the special features out of the stadium proposal similar to what Greensboro and Winston Salem did and lower to over-all cost.

Thats #1 - the ILM stdium ranks #2 on hte list of the last 10 stadium builds as MOST expensive

2. Mandalay/Braves will up the ante by increasing the lease years or payment schedule

Thats #2 - there is no ramping up

3. The city will get the advertising and naming rights for the stadium.

Thats #3 and #4 as the city get neither according to the MOU (you're bating 1.000 right now)

4. The city will get $1 per ticket tax.

Thats #5 - no ticket surcharge

5. The finances will come from either .5% food and beverage or about 1.5 cent on $100 dollar evaluation General Revenue Bonds.

Thats #6 and #7 - no beverage tax and a lot more than 1.5 cents

I also predict that if the issue makes it to a vote, the citizens of Wilmington will support It and the stadium will be built in the downtown area.
Now Vog, whats your little crystal ball say?
***************************************************
I'm sorry but your crystal ball seemed to have cracked Terry. In just 1 post you made 7 FAILED predictions with the 8th just around the corner.

Your credibility seems to be slipping

Vog

T-Ball's Crystall Ball ............

On Sat, 7/21/2012 T-Ball said about his crystal ball: "my crystal Ball is a diversion for simple minded people".

A reversed page right out of the Dale Carnegie's book "How to win friends and influence people".

Don't Know???

The fact that there is another option out there that gives this area a stadium without tax payer funding should end the discussion for the current deal. Any economic benefit the area receives from a stadium happens immediately if there is not millions of dollars in loans that have to be paid off first.

Would care to comment on the above statement? If you will look in a mirror with your Halloween mask removed........you will find Terry Spencer........If you still dispute this, prove me wrong and sign your name.........If I was in favor of a public con like this stadium, I would be too ashamed to sign my name also. Does the deal look better from your cyber space foxhole?

Ricky-Ricky-Ricky

Would it be too much to ask for definite proof that another option exist? We read the news that one commissioner has said he met with a person, who claimed Cal Ripken had investors, but that story went down faster than the Titanic. We haven't heard another word on that deal since that slow curve thrown. Don't you think the City would have even if through back channels explored a better deal? What a shame, to go through life and trust no one but yourself!!

Hey Mr T

Back in june you were predicting Ripken would be involved

CatBird Seat
Submitted by MrT (not verified) on Thu, 06/21/2012 - 1:25pm.
For those of you that live in the shadows and only see the dark side, you may not recognize it but the City of Wilmington just jumped into the Cat Bird seat related to dealing with Mandalay. You may not know it but Mandalay knows it! The NSS report is gold to the city. Mandalay and the Braves assumed Wilmington was good for baseball, now they know it and want more than ever to get in here. Naturally Mandalay/Braves want as much control as possible but the city now gets much more control over terms. The NSS report is public information and offers the city great power to recruit baseball to Wilmington. Investors now have real statistics to gauge, other teams and management companies now have the same. Who knows Cal Ripkins name might again pop up? Remember this deal doesn't have to set March 2014 as it's deadline it just needs to be done to create a better Wilmington. Something to think about while our boys are in panic mode with the Robo call system full of lies about stadium and funding as per WECT today.
********************************************************

Going back on this prediction too?

Vog