Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest punch

Cleveland: Global Center for Health Innovation & Convention Center

Recommended Posts

seems more like they are angling for better deals on the privately owned land, while holding out for a bigger payout on the publicly owned land.  it's early, does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

seems more like they are angling for better deals on the privately owned land, while holding out for a bigger payout on the publicly owned land. it's early, does that make sense?

 

It does to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"?  Do you remember what use to be there and what Prospect use to look like before it was built?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know.  I don't understand why all these news outlets complain about Gateway.  If they didn't build it they would be complaining about not having major league teams in Cleveland, E4th & the Huron/Prospect area wouldn't be developed, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"?

 

Crunch the numbers. It's a give-a-way. We were taken to the cleaners. Same with the stadium. Same with the Rock Hall. Same with the Science Center. The devil is in the details. The devil will be in the detail on this deal too. It's not what we do. It's HOW we do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why exactly is Gateway a "farce"?

 

Crunch the numbers. It's a give-a-way. We were taken to the cleaners. Same with the stadium. Same with the Rock Hall. Same with the Science Center. The devil is in the details. The devil will be in the detail on this deal too. It's not what we do. It's HOW we do it.

 

Why don't you just tell us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I've been told by some very reputable sources that the Medical Mart folks flat-out dislike having to deal with Forest City Enterprises. If FCE owned or influenced the Flats East Bank site instead of Wolstein, the Medical Mart wouldn't consider that site either.

 

FCE has been a greater force pushing away the Medical Mart folks, not the assets/liabilities of a given site.


"Most of us have been conditioned to regard military combat as exciting and glamorous -- an opportunity for men to prove their competence and courage. Since armies are legal, we feel that war is acceptable; in general, nobody feels that that war is criminal or that accepting it is a criminal attitude. In fact, we have been brainwashed. War is neither glamorous nor attractive. It is monstrous. Its very nature is one of tragedy and suffering" --Dalai Lama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I've been told by some very reputable sources that the Medical Mart folks flat-out dislike having to deal with Forest City Enterprises. If FCE owned or influenced the Flats East Bank site instead of Wolstein, the Medical Mart wouldn't consider that site either.

 

FCE has been a greater force pushing away the Medical Mart folks, not the assets/liabilities of a given site.

 

That's what I figured.  Since the MM folks don't want to play in FCE sandbox, so FCE has decided to pickup the sand and sling mud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally.

 

While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally.

 

While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly.

 

Correct!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally.

 

While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly.

 

I believe there is actually a public meeting scheduled for this next Thursday now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful. The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me. Over a barrel? :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

 

And those revenue streams are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

 

And those revenue streams are?

 

More luxury suites, primarily.  At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them.  But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park.  They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that it's good that they've brought some of these issues to light, though, because it's opened up some of the planning process, which is good. I think the question of the current foundation's stability is valid. I think the question of how MMPI came to their selection is valid and should be answered openly, even though they claim they did their selection process legally.

 

While I fully support the current site as the location for the new convention center, I personally think that a project of this magnitude, paid for largely by taxpayers, should absolutely be done openly.

 

I believe there is actually a public meeting scheduled for this next Thursday now.

 

There is, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

 

And those revenue streams are?

 

More luxury suites, primarily.  At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them.  But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park.  They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business.

 

Is there a market for them? 

Who says they are needed?

 

There are plenty of luxury suites in the stadium, the question is who WANTS to buy them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The market for luxury suites is certainly a valid question these days.  The relative lack of them puts a cap on best-case revenues; it's a non-issue when the economy falls apart. 

 

My main point was about the land deal.  The public tends to lose on these deals, sometimes in outrageous fashion, and details are never forthcoming.  That's why I was hoping for a more open process on this thing.  You'd think the controversy over the sales tax would have put them on notice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to imagine that jacobs field and the Q were some of the best things that have happened to our downtown area in the past 30-40 years.  They are a source of pride, and everyone i talk to nationally thinks they are beautiful places to watch an event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have to imagine that jacobs field and the Q were some of the best things that have happened to our downtown area in the past 30-40 years. They are a source of pride, and everyone i talk to nationally thinks they are beautiful places to watch an event.

 

Absolutely, and I think the MM/CC will be too.  Maybe not quite as much of a sure thing though.  I'm not bringing this stuff up to argue against the project, I'm bringing it up in favor of a more open process.  Paying too much for a good thing can really mitigate your benefit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

 

And those revenue streams are?

 

More luxury suites, primarily.  At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them.  But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park.  They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business.

 

Actually jacobs field / progressive has more luxury suites than just about any park in baseball.  People I know within the organization almost consider them a noose.  They are extremely expensive and hard to move.  That's why so many are empty.  Most parks actually have fewer now.  I think texas is the next closest to us, and we have significantly more...

 

at any rate...  Yes, we need to make sure we get a "good deal".  At the same time, let's try not to let this thread turn into a disection of the gateway deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm under the impression that we'll start to get more tax income from gateway.

 

I was told that the Jacobs Field deal in particular was awful.  The awful part won't come to fruition for several more years, when the lease on the land underneath it runs out and the city (county?) will be over a barrel.

 

That doesn't make sense to me.  Over a barrel?  :wtf:

 

Over a barrel as in they can be charged whatever the lot's owner desires, with no recourse.  By that time the park will be aging if not due for replacement.  It already can't generate the revenues some of the newer parks can.

 

And those revenue streams are?

 

More luxury suites, primarily.  At the time it was built it had an impressive number of them.  But since then it's been an arms race to put more suites into each new park.  They're the high-profit SUV's of the sports business.

 

Actually jacobs field / progressive has more luxury suites than just about any park in baseball.  People I know within the organization almost consider them a noose.  They are extremely expensive and hard to move.  That's why so many are empty.  Most parks actually have fewer now.  I think texas is the next closest to us, and we have significantly more...

 

at any rate...  Yes, we need to make sure we get a "good deal".  At the same time, let's try not to let this thread turn into a disection of the gateway deal.

 

 

I'm sorry, but the last word on luxury suites cannot be that they're not en vogue anymore.  Anyone who knows anything about the economics of ticket sales knows that luxury suites are here to stay.

 

http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/24/suites-sport-luxury-forbeslife-cx_ls_0325sports.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if there will be any last wording it will be from a moderator.  :)

 

i never said luxury suites weren't here to stay.  They are an absolutely necessary part of sport revenue.  But to say our baseball park lacks them is folly.  The indians have something like 92 or 93 suites.  Currently the next closest team is Texas with somewhere around 60. I believe the new yankee park will have 65.  They may be revenue generators but only if you can sell them all out, and unless you are in a market with a lot of businesses with a lot of money to burn they can be very hard to move.  Most of the newer parks have between 40-50 suites. The indians have 90+, which as you might guess is too many... and many go unused.  I got this directly from someone in their advertising and sales department.  There's the last word.  Back to medical marts and convention centers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attend several games every year in these suites and can tell from first hand experience that many last year went unsold.  In fact, the Indians turned a couple into areas where we could grab and pay for food for those people staying in suites that were un-catered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found some recent articles that show I was wrong about the suites (not that I didn't believe you, McCleveland  :-)).  My point about the land lease came from a pretty reliable source though, and it seems relevant to this project.  When it's a decision that affects everyone, everyone should at least be able to evaluate it.  Not just the county's crack team.  That way we can all make an informed decision how to vote next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cuyahoga County commissioners to hold hearing on medical mart

Posted by Jim Nichols/Plain Dealer Reporter February 04, 2009 21:55PM

Next Thursday, taxpayers finally will get the answers they've been waiting for about why Cuyahoga County commissioners want to build a convention center and medical mart on the downtown Cleveland mall.

 

The Cleveland City Council will hold a hearing Thursday in which Medical Mart Properties Inc., the county's partner in the project, will explain why it prefers the mall site over any other.

 

The decision has raised a lot of questions, some of which have answers and some of which don't. Here's a breakdown on where we stand:...

 

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/02/cuyahoga_county_commissioners_3.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad they're having a meeting.  I hope they post the reports somewhere.  Those arguments about TC being enclosed are good ones.  But they want us to trade restoration and new development for some winter conventions.  It doesn't sound like a great tradeoff. 

 

How is that disasterous if it's only in the winter?  Conventions here in this weather will be rare regardless of the site.  They do this for a living.  I wouldn't expect many bookings at TC when they could put people somewhere else where outside isn't an issue.  They weren't talking about either site vs Las Vegas or Miami right now. 

 

Also no mention of the new train station, linking the mall site with the lake.  I hope that's being considered part of the overall plan.  Then the mall is also linked indoors via train to TC, and the flats, and the airport.  Everybody gets everything they want.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cuyahoga County commissioners to hold hearing on medical mart

Posted by Jim Nichols/Plain Dealer Reporter February 04, 2009 21:55PM

 

 

I thought Jim wrote a great article, even with the quotes from the convention-business guys.  It lays out a lot of the facts and unanswered questions in a very clear and simple manner.  Something that we rarely see out of the PD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cuyahoga County commissioners to hold hearing on medical mart

Posted by Jim Nichols/Plain Dealer Reporter February 04, 2009 21:55PM

 

 

I thought Jim wrote a great article, even with the quotes from the convention-business guys.  It lays out a lot of the facts and unanswered questions in a very clear and simple manner.  Something that we rarely see out of the PD.

 

Except they always seem to leave out the same issues (that should be issues) every time. 

Wheres the question about the cost of not choosing the mall site (for maintaining the current facilities) or what to do with it? 

Where are the opinions of the Urban Planning experts (interesting that they quote the convention people about why the mall site is bad, but not their own Steven Litt about why the mall site is good but tower city is bad)? 

 

Why is there never any mention of why it might be good to build on Cleveland's (past and impressive) assets.... as opposed to disregarding and abandoning them....?       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People leave those issues out, because they aren't as future-oriented as urban planners. Politicians will tend to focus on the cost, event planners will focus on logistics, and downtown stakeholders will do everything they can to maximize their own share of revenue potential.

 

I have always been an advocate for the mall site, because I believe it will satisfy everyone in the end and prove to be a superior site selection. However, until the findings about the cost comparison, the strongest argument for the mall site was from a future-oriented urban planning perspective.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Forest City own the Plain Dealer?

 

Look at past friendships between the PD's former publisher and the Ratners/Millers. Even though Alex Machaskee's 20+ year reign at the PD has ended, he is still "there." Terry Egger, the new president/publisher of the PD also has some connections with the Ratners. He is on the board of the Greater Cleveland Partnership which is heavily influenced by Forest City Enterprises.


"Most of us have been conditioned to regard military combat as exciting and glamorous -- an opportunity for men to prove their competence and courage. Since armies are legal, we feel that war is acceptable; in general, nobody feels that that war is criminal or that accepting it is a criminal attitude. In fact, we have been brainwashed. War is neither glamorous nor attractive. It is monstrous. Its very nature is one of tragedy and suffering" --Dalai Lama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wouldn't it be a HUGE conflict of interest to have the publisher of a news paper on the board of an organization such as the GCP?  How exactly can you be impartial if you are trying to look out for the interests (as any board member should) of a particular organization.  PARTICUARLY, an organization composed of select business groups.  Dear lord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a small town, there aren't enough people they could ask to be on these boards.  That's why the 10-15 capable individuals who live around Cleveland have to wear many hats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you could make a conflict of interest argument for any individual who serves on a board. It isn't really a big deal. Thats how boards work.

 

You would want the publisher of the Plain Dealer on the board of the GCP, becuase it makes the PD leadership more aware of the goals and workings of the GCP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...