Teams pay for the taxes anyway. Don't think an owner does not include taxes in the rent.
Of course
ALL TAXES are ultimately paid by the end consumer no matter what dishonest politicians tell you. They lie about that all the time. "Corporate tax" is ultimately paid by the consumers and shareholders in the form of higher prices and lower dividends. Taxes on rental property are paid in effect by the tenant in higher rent.
I would assume that the Bears, since they went to the trouble of buying the AH property, would want to own and control whatever is on it such as hotels, restaurants, etc. They wouldn't be able to do that in a lakefront site and there isn't adequate space there anyway even to build them.
The original issue that seemed to tip the McCaskeys over the edge was the lack of response to the Bears approaching the Park District and the City over opening a legalized sports book as part of the Soldier Field property (link). So it looks like the City government decided to sit on it for about a year, without even having the courtesy of responding to/acknowledging the original communication.
Every municipality wants a robust tax base. And I have no issue with a local government having sufficient revenues to finance the services they provide to its constituents. But the government bodies collectively seem to have blind spots in their vision when it comes to allowing the business that provide a significant part of their revenues to have the flexibility to change and evolve their businesses to meet ever changing market environments.
ALL TAXES are ultimately paid by the end consumer no matter what dishonest politicians tell you. They lie about that all the time. "Corporate tax" is ultimately paid by the consumers and shareholders in the form of higher prices and lower dividends. Taxes on rental property are paid in effect by the tenant in higher rent.
I would assume that the Bears, since they went to the trouble of buying the AH property, would want to own and control whatever is on it such as hotels, restaurants, etc. They wouldn't be able to do that in a lakefront site and there isn't adequate space there anyway even to build them.
The original issue that seemed to tip the McCaskeys over the edge was the lack of response to the Bears approaching the Park District and the City over opening a legalized sports book as part of the Soldier Field property (link). So it looks like the City government decided to sit on it for about a year, without even having the courtesy of responding to/acknowledging the original communication.
Every municipality wants a robust tax base. And I have no issue with a local government having sufficient revenues to finance the services they provide to its constituents. But the government bodies collectively seem to have blind spots in their vision when it comes to allowing the business that provide a significant part of their revenues to have the flexibility to change and evolve their businesses to meet ever changing market environments.
Due to the nature of the NFL (revenue sharing, constant/growing market), none have really hit the decline phase. The closest in the NFL is when a team relocates.
So the pertinent ones are the first four. When the Bears move to AH (theoretically), they will be in their launch/startup phase. This is really not an exact correlation to a starting or launching business as the Bears have a healthy, running business and are just relocating..... but for illustrative purposes it will be a startup in AH and will be swallowing a lot of capital expenses and trying to get revenues to exceed those expenses. The Bears will be putting out a lot of money. They will also be looking to additional future expansion (growth) in order to fill out some of the additional activities surrounding the stadium. They can go with several different types of business structures and perhaps revenue sharing in order to bring down needed expenditures to launch these in a shorter time frame. But the essence is they will have heavy expenses, heavy future projected expenses and uncertain revenues due to a new location. I think revenues will grow, and I am sure they do also, but the fact is those are projections and revenues will be unknown. In that phase of the business, it is not a good idea to pay royalties or have other costs such as that (for the Bears, the equivalent would be taxes - again not a real equivalency since taxes are a fixed overhead expense but since this an illustration and I am MSUing as I go along, it will suffice). So they want this expense low in order to allow them to get to the growth phase.
The growth phase is normally after breakeven. Again, since it is a profitable business that is moving, this will happen VERY quickly. Possibly day one. During this period a company will have excess cash. Some of this (the part that the Halas family does not siphon off), be used to fund the growth around the stadium to further increase their revenues. Again, at this point taxes need to be moderated in order to help fund this growth which will increase revenues and ultimately taxes due.
The shake out phase is something that the NFL is kind of sheltered from. It happens when revenues level out due to a drop in demand (really does not happen in the NFL - at least to a significant degree) or an increase in competition. Again, they are pretty much shielded here. They now do have another league, but does anyone really consider them to be a threat? So they really have not gotten to this phase and so not beyond it either.
Going back to the growth phase, they will continue to invest in the surrounding infrastructure, increase revenues, and pay down debt. As this happens, they municipalities will cease their subsidies that allowed the team to grow and profit, but the team will also have larger revenues and profits. So the taxes will be much higher but the team will be able to afford it. The NFL is kind of unique - some of their capital expenses get subsidized by taxes and revenues continue to grow through TV, streaming and other growth. (not even including the new various revenue flows from the actual stadium like larger seating fees, food, etc, etc). And the teams not making as much get to have revenue sharing to be sure that no team really does awful, Not as good for the high earning teams, but the money is more than enough to deal with it.
So while every municipality wants a robust tax base, the best way to get it is to help the business become a robust business and allow them the help in early cash flow to get there.
Looks like a lot of people in Arlington Heights still want the Bears to come there.
Good. I hope that happens
IMO Warren has come to the conclusion that the AH site represents the best financial outcome for both the team and ownership. And he is just getting the local governmental organizations in the mindset that he will get the kind of agreement he needs.
My personal experience in doing negotiations showed me that if you're in a position of real advantage, you don't need to muscle the other party. All you do is keep the discussion going and the other side will cave.
IMO Warren has come to the conclusion that the AH site represents the best financial outcome for both the team and ownership. And he is just getting the local governmental organizations in the mindset that he will get the kind of agreement he needs.
My personal experience in doing negotiations showed me that if you're in a position of real advantage, you don't need to muscle the other party. All you do is keep the discussion going and the other side will cave.
Stuff like this is exactly why I was skeptical of all that "new stadium on the lakefront" hoopla recently.
Even if that's what Kevin Warren really prefers, there's just so many more obstacles and cons at a city site. The politics, red tape, and graft alone would scare me off for sure.
Just go to AH for cripes sake where you own the land and there's actually room for the type of facility and amenities they really want. Screw Chicago -- no matter what the mayor says, this is never gonna get done there.