The Hamilton Tiger-Cats have some fun with numbers in their study of economic benefits associated with the football club and associated companies.
By Graham Crawford
Published September 16, 2010
Where to begin? Just when I thought they couldn't be any more brazen in their attempts to bamboozle City Council and the citizens of Hamilton, the Hamilton Tiger-Cats once again exceed all reasonable expectations.
Their newest work of fiction-dressed-as-fact has the somewhat clumsy title of Economic Benefits Associated with the Hamilton Tiger Cats Football Club and Associated Companies. Not my idea of a grabber, but maybe it's intended to bore rather than engage: chimera pitched as substance.
The problem is, many of our Councillors may be confused and think this newly published mystery justifies all the embarrassing contortions some of them have made to keep the Cats in Hamilton.
The slim volume begins 141 years ago when the then Hamilton Tigers got their start in Hamilton. It ends with a regurgitation of the absurd numbers concocted to prove the value of the Ticats to their apparently gullible fans, not to mention those of us who choose to support the Cats by offering them a $120 million stadium in the West Harbour.
It's the stuff in between that's equal parts fantasy and comedy. And oh, the laughs you'll have if you make your way through to the end. Just when you think you've got it figured out, there's a new and completely unexpected twist. Mystery fans, you're gonna love this one.
Here are some highlights, and I use the term loosely. No need for a spoiler alert in this review.
According to the authors, the Hamilton Tiger Cats related activities support as much as $1.7 billion. Impressive, eh? Oh, did I mention that's over a ten-year period?
Oh, and did I mention that it also includes the construction of the stadium that the Ticats didn't pay for - and based on their silence at the last COW meeting, won't contribute to either?
It gets better. The other Bob Young companies that have nothing to do with football, but everything to do with Bob Young trying to look meaningful in this novel, are included in the number. Lulu indeed!
The spin-off spending by spectators, visiting sports teams and other related visitors will support almost 6,000 person years of employment. I don't know about you, but I retired after working for 30 years. That was quite enough for me, but maybe the Ticats are thinking more along the lines of the ancient Egyptians? It took years to build the pyramids, you know!
Call me a cynic, but I think they might be including businesses that already exist. You know, like bars, restaurants, parking lots, Tim Horton's, panhandlers. I guess these businesses wouldn't have any non-Ticat customers whenever there wasn't a game?
There's a lot of BLOCK-CAP text in the book that features a lot of really big numbers extolling the remarkable contribution the Ticats will make. Not sure who their editor was, but he or she forgot to make it clear that these are ten-year numbers. Oops! I'm sure they didn't mean to confuse, inflate or over-state.
They talk a lot about direct, indirect and induced revenues. The language they use to define the terms is way over my pointy little head, but I think I can guess what induced means.
The stadium construction will generate nearly 1,900 person years of employment and over $190 million of GDP. Wow. I guess if I go to a game, I can say that I too generated a couple of thousand years of employment.
I love it when you really get engaged in a book. It's like you're right there on the pages with the central characters. And what characters they are!
There's a great part about halfway through the novel where the narrator says he will deliver two Grey Cups in 10 years. Holy mackerel, talk about your super hero. Eight teams. Ten years. Two Grey Cups. Those numbers are even more impressive than fifteen Councillors voting seven times for one location.
Not only that, but our super hero says these two Grey Cups will deliver almost 1,400 person years of employment. Wow. All those people finding meaningful employment from just two games in ten years.
Imagine what these guys could do if they ran a successful business 365 days a year. OK, maybe not 365 days a year. How about 10?
According to the author of this twisty little mystery, the Ticats will be directly responsible for supporting nearly 14,000 person years of employment. This raises one big question for me. Why didn't they tell US Steel about their magic powers when all of those steelworkers lost their jobs? Too busy working the play book, I guess.
There's a great line toward the end of the book that says, "Among the many intangible benefits that a community accrues from hosting professional sports teams include youth sports development, and, more generally a sense of well-being and community development."
Let me translate. Cats make you feel good. At least that was the idea, until it became clear that the only kind of community development they were interested in was our tax money and their revenue. Do you feel better? Has that Ticat sense of well-being come over you? Are you sitting on the floor with your legs crossed and purring like a cat?
By the way, you have to clean your own litter box. That is, unless you want to hire a few thousand people to do it for you over the next ten years.
Although I got a few laughs and a few thrills from reading this slim volume, at the end of it I felt a bit dirty. Not only that, but as much as I love fantasy, this one left me cold. It was way over the top. I like my fantasies to be at least grounded in reality for at least part of the story. This one began in an unbelievable way and just went crazy from there.
Apparently the author is considering a sequel. Word on the street is that it's about a group of bulky guys with strange outfits visiting another planet where the inhabitants are really stupid and are overpowered by the aliens and end up giving them all of their food and water because they ask for it and the inhabitants end up dying because they have nothing left to sustain them.
Wild, eh? Can't wait. I've got Amazon bookmarked.
By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted September 16, 2010 at 07:49:13
Thanks for the chance to laugh first thing in the morning.
Well done, Graham.
By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 07:52:27
Good read Graham, I'm laughing too... hee,hee
By Robet D (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 08:58:13
My favourite part is that all the numbers are totals, no calculations. So we're left wondering how they estimated the spin off benefits from grey cups. My guess is: Not very well.
This seems like something that a marketing intern slapped together in short order.
By UrbanRenaissance (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:06:56
Another great read Graham! I too read this "report" and wondered why Bob's other companies were included with the totals. Is he making a vague threat that if he doesn't get his way for the Cats all of his companies will pull up shop? Or was it just a flimsy attempt at inflating the numbers? In any event, the complete lack of supporting information and citations makes this whole thing highly questionable in my eyes.
By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:07:44
Although Robet I do think the report is a notch higher than those extremely "detailed" articles we see so often written in the The Spectator and on other web sites. ;)
By another capitalist (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:11:32
Not anymore vague or laughable than all these other reports and statements from people making claims about the West Harbour, re: a stadium there.
Just as pie in the sky
By I Want to run away far, far, far away! (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:24:59
After my morning coffee and laugh (thanks to Graham) I got this sense of family shame & the need to disappear! I have this feeling that the city staff already have seen this way before Tuesdays meeting. I would also suggest the tigger kiddies are using it as a negotiation tool.
By seancb (registered) - website | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:50:39
Comment edited by seancb on 2010-09-16 08:51:06
By grahamofile (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:55:08
Graham for mayor.
By catspaw (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 09:57:28
Haven't read this 'novel' but I take your word for it that it reads the way you say. It can't be any more fantasy land than what's been said already. How many more times does council have to go back to the well before they know it's really dry. It's amazing how they can work figures to give them the answers they're looking for. Voting 7 times on what basically is the same issue is cruel and inhumane to flog a dead horse. I think there is an implied threat with BY to pull all his interests out of this area....are we in a plutocracy or democracy or is this strictly small town crass politics and unbecoming of a city?
By HamiltonFan (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 10:02:24
catspaw, I'm outraged and incensed you could write that! ;)
By trevorlikesbikes (registered) - website | Posted September 16, 2010 at 10:19:33
Graham Crawford for City Manager.
By jasonaallen (registered) - website | Posted September 16, 2010 at 10:48:21
What I love is the tiny one-off line that Bob et al are measuring the benefit over 10 years. So basically 140 million a year. Still way high, but I don't think Bob is being nearly ambitious enough. Why not amortize it over 50 years ($7 billion) or even 100 years? Ta-Da! The Ticats are a $14 Billion benefit to Hamilton! Hand them the keys!
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics." Mark Twain
"It has been proven by an M.I.T. look at statistical analysis techniques in their June 1996 Meta Study that 84.73% of statistics are basically made up on the spot." - Jason Allen
By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 11:01:30
A thing of beauty! Great work, Graham.
Although far from being an economics graduate, I immediately recognized this "report" as pure fantasy and so obviously unrealistic that, I would hope, even members of City Council could see through it.
If the Tiger-Cats had shared this analysis with Barack Obama PRIOR to the recession, he could have expanded the NFL by a team or two and avoided the whole sorry affair.
The Tiger-Cats have clearly stolen a few pages from the federal government's playbook. The first indicator is the use of "10 year" estimates to inflate not much into a paper perception of something. Memo to Bob Young: ten A cup bras won't get you into Playboy.
The second is the use of "person years" of employment. Real people care about steady, fulltime, jobs not a dozen or so days of work per year for 30 people. At the very least, the Tiger-Cat's could have been consistent and juxtaposed their 10 year economic forecasts with "person decades" of employment.
It's interesting that taxes are framed as "across all levels of government" and any mention of a "direct" benefit to Hamilton taxpayers (the people who are subsidizing Bob Young to the greatest degree) in the form of increased assessment, building permit fees, development charges, property taxes, rent, paying for police, concessions and HSR, etcetera is conspicuously absent. But don't worry, that's only because there isn't any.
Based on the Tiger-Cats' numbers, I'm suggesting that we immediately turn the HAAA grounds into a dirt track stock car facility and none of us should ever have to pay taxes again.
Comment edited by realfreeenterpriser on 2010-09-16 10:03:34
If Bob is including Lulu, why doesn't he put the Ticats store and a bookstore at the new stadium. Sell Lulu authored books there, espcially ones written by local writers. Make that business a part of this community if having it's office here is a benefit to our cities economics.
It's great that Bob has set up shop for all his ventures here, but make them part of this community. Not just a Lulu add at the top of the stadium or on the game-day programs. I self-published one short story on Lulu from the exposure of those adds, but my experience there wasn't enough to continue to use it.
Before hitting send, I did check out Lulu to see what has changed. It does look nicer and there is a better forum it seems. If anyone has used Smashwords or Sellaband, you know what I felt was missing from Lulu at the time.
Comment edited by lawrence on 2010-09-16 10:29:57
By lalalu (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 11:40:23
Gotta wonder though - where does LULU print their print-on-demand books?
I hear Mac has a nice little print-on-demand setup going on from someone in my writers group.
I have nothing worthy of using that service yet but hopefully I will one day.
I would also hope if they did set up a bookstore, printing would be done locally.
Comment edited by lawrence on 2010-09-16 10:44:14
By highwater (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 12:09:44
Graham. Marry me.
By GiveMeABreak (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 12:20:47
From the City Report; 2009 Tourism - 3.3 Million Visitors (6.5 visitors for every resident)
From the Ticat Study; 2008 Tourism - 1.6 Visitors for every resident in Hamilton (505,000 x 1.6 = 808,000)
Quite the difference! So who's juicing the number? I'm confident the City has inflated their number and the TiCats deflated their number. Funny how the two totally opposite moves provide each with benefit.
As mentioned above; Lies, Damn Lies & Statistics (though I thought it was said by Benjamin Disraeli, not Twain)
*Ticat Study; http://www.ticats.ca/uploads/assets/HAM/pages/TicatsEconomicImpactP4410September2010.pdf
*City's Accomplishment Report; http://www.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/61474A05-E35F-4E3D-9121-7D4F849AB4AF/0/2010_Accomplishments_Report.pdf
Also posted on The Hamiltonian; http://www.thehamiltonian.net/2010/09/progress-report-released.html#comments
By jason (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 13:05:55
Graham. Marry me.
By Henry and Joe (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 13:34:41
Speaking of outrageous and insulting, I am just reminded of something that occurred at the Labour Day game. Although I oppose public urination and illegal drug use, the most upsetting thing that I witnessed was on the Jumbotron. There was a sketch comparing the antics of Argo players with the homosexual behaviours that were depicted in a 1980s movie Police Academy. This was extemely insensitive and bordering on intolerant. I am all for poking fun at the oppostition, but do so in this way was unacceptable. I was both shocked and embarassed by this archaic and juvenile attempt at humour.
By Andrea (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 14:46:40
Curiousity got the best of me and I started to read it but can't get past the part where their economic impact is so hugely inflated by the d'irect production and jobs generated by expenditures on stadium construction'. The entire report is speculative and contingent on hosting 2 Grey Cups (which, in my opinion is never going to happen) in the next 10 years. I was hoping to see a real economic impact study based on fact and current conditions rather than 'projections'.
By rayfullerton (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 14:46:56
Graham ... you are a master wordsmith! Always enjoy your comments.
By jason (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 15:07:43
Graham, do you know if the city's contribution is soley from the future fund, or elsewhere? I don't want them spending the entire FF on this. The original plan called for $60 million from the FF to help develop the WH precinct including both the stadium and velodrome. The city MUST preserve a huge chunk of FF for the WH. There's no way council will want to come out of this mess having a stadium in the wrong location and with no money left for true city building at WH.
The FF allocation for the stadium was set originally at $45 million. The rest was for the velodrome and for land general land acquisition.
By Mr. Meister (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 15:50:37
Have you actually read the report? It is a projection of the economic impact of a new stadium over the first ten years. You may not like the numbers and maybe not even believe them that is your choice. If you have contradictory information I would love to see it.
The CFL commissioner has stated that if Hamilton builds a new 45,000 seat stadium that it would host the Grey Cup twice within the first 10 years. Why is that so hard to believe? I think Hamilton would be a great and very capable site with a reasonable stadium.
By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 16:10:45
I have no reason to believe a nice new stadium would not bring a GC or two to our city (you can argue the inflated numbers of course). I think a 45,000 seat stadium is crazy big though.
By highwater (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 16:12:17
Meister, the Ticats won't even pony up to upgrade the stadium to 25,000 seats. Where in flaming hell are 45,000 seats supposed to come from?
Temporary seating would be added each time we wanted to host the Grey Cup, like we did in the west end zones at Ivor Wynne before the videoboard was built there.
It is a report on the economic impact of stadium construction and the Bob Young Group of companies, which include the Ti-Cats, over a ten year period. Just like it says in the report. Just like I said in my review.
The key problem I have with their approach is that they include the stadium construction and Bob Young's other companies in the report. If Bob Young is looking to sell the Ti-Cats and his other businesses to the highest bidder, this is a good business approach to take.
If you're trying to convince taxpayers to pony up a great deal of money to build a stadium for your football team, for me this approach is a bit much. It might work for you, but it doesn't for me.
By jason (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 18:12:36
thanks for the info Graham. I will be livid if we approve anything that doesn't include some serious WH redevelopment. That's what made it the best stadium choice in the first place. With or without the stadium, it's still the best public investment choice by a country mile.
The Cats have their precious highway-side location now. When will DeLuca Roofing or Primus pony up the big bucks for naming rights? Where is all this private money that was supposed to just flow in like water if we abandoned the hidden, secretive, middle of nowhere, invisible WH site in favour of a highway site??
By Mary (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 19:17:41
I'm from Guelph. Nustadia convinced the city (meaning the taxpayers) to build them a hockey stadium downtown. Very few businesses derive any money from these crowds. The fans roll in from the burbs or farther, go directly to the game and leave directly after. What does happen is that during games it makes it harder for downtown restaurant, shops and bar customers to find parking.
Graham you may find Dave Zirin's Edge of Sports column and books up your alley. Zirin is huge sports fan but one who constantly takes aim at the "industrial-sports complex" that sees taxpayers funding private business.
By RenaissanceWatcher (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 19:56:18
A very poignant send up, Graham. Well done.
One also needs to look at the Tiger-Cats' projected net economic impact on the City of Hamilton over the next ten years. The positive economic impact must be weighed any negative economic impact of the Tiger-Cats on the City of Hamilton over the past next ten years.
During the past seven months, the Tiger-Cats have demanded the removal of the stadium track after the Pan Am Games and a stadium location further away from the proposed GO train platform near the James Street North station. This resulted in the forfeiture of the Pan Am athletics stadium to York University and the following projected future economic losses for the City of Hamilton:
Four to five days of Pan Am soccer events instead of seven days of Pan Am athletics events;
Approximately two hundred Pan Am soccer players and their families visiting Hamilton during the Pan Am Games instead of a thousand or more Pan Am track and field athletes and their families visiting Hamilton;
Losing the unique opportunity to promote Hamilton’s reclaimed waterfront and the Royal Botanical Gardens to a national and international audience during the running of the Pan Am men’s and women’s marathons;
The loss of a long-term legacy relationship with Athletics Canada for a high performance training centre in Hamilton for the next ten years and beyond;
Lost opportunities for national and international track and field competitions in Hamilton for the next ten years and beyond.
It would be quite useful if someone like Marvin Ryder could place a value on these negative economic impacts to determine the net economic impact of the Tiger-Cats on the City of Hamilton over the next ten years.
And then, there are the intangibles. The anti-west harbour stadium campaign launched by the Tiger-Cats with the assistance of Bill Kelly of CHML seven months ago has created divisions between people and areas of the City of Hamilton that had never existed so deeply in the history of this city as they do now. The resulting move of the Pan Am athletics stadium to York University will be nationally and internationally embarrassing to the City of Hamilton for the next five to ten years. And the recent national media blitz by Bob Young, Scott Mitchell and Ron Foxcroft to pitch the east mountain stadium site while ignoring or denigrating the west harbour site selected by Hamilton city council mocked and sullied the local Hamilton democratic process. These intangible detriments to the City of Hamilton can only be healed through time, not dollars.
Comment edited by RenaissanceWatcher on 2010-09-16 18:56:55
By -Hammer- (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 21:13:11
I won't dispute the inflated nature of the report that the Ti-Cats have produced. That I do not question, as I have serious doubts that a CFL and NASL franchise are capable of generating impacts of that degree, even with two Grey Cups.
However, I personally feel this poor attempt of satire is unworthy of this website. This article comes off as a direct vitriolic rant against the sport's team who despite this poorly published report, are an asset to the city. The Cats consistently raise thousands for local charities each game, hold countless community outreach programs, are an icon of civic pride and cultural identity for all of Hamilton.
I would have much preferred an article supported by solid sourcing and good points highlighting the flaws, inaccuracies and misleading elements of the report, facts debunking the calculations contained therein and a modicum of respect for fans of the team, of whom many even agree with West Harbor location and the need for the Cats to not get a free ride funded by taxpayer dollars.
This article fills me with indignation and disgust. I would expect arguments of this nature and tone to come from the type of people who would deem the football's team report as flawlessly accurate and impartial, not from a non-partisan group who seeks to revitalize the city for all it's citizens.
By cityfan (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 23:10:10
Looks like the Ticats have ROBINS as well! ...thanks for your input fellas!
BTW try being registered instead of anonymous because RTH welcomes the debate.
Comment edited by cityfan on 2010-09-16 22:15:25
By adrian (registered) | Posted September 16, 2010 at 23:14:06
Overshadowing the debate over a location for the Pan Am stadium has been the ballooning price tag for the facility.
Billygears, who are you quoting - yourself?
By Robbie K (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 00:01:07
I would not surprize me to learn the cost of the WH has increased. It would be foolish to assume that the EM cost would not have similarly increased. To what degree is impossible to tell, but projects running over budget are the norm rather then the exception. Remember these are just preliminary numbers.
By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 00:08:57
Memo to Billygears: it's not the quotation marks around "Billygears is an idiot" that make it true.
By JeffTessier (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 01:02:23
What's the source of that amazing quote? Google searches on 4 phrases from the quote turned up nothing, yet you present it like a copy/paste quote from an authoritative source, which would presumably be available online. So that seems odd.
Is it from some pamphlet you found under the bleachers, and you transcribed it? Because that's what it reads like.
By Eureka (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 09:39:14
I got an idea. Why not put the stadium in the West Harbour but this time don't let donothing Fred champion the cause. He will surely blow it. Let's let someone else do it like Ryan McGreal...I'm sure he will be ablt to do it for sure.
By realfreeenterpriser (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 10:21:40
yoyo said (in a compelling, well-documented, but nevertheless succinct response) "Hey morons, the numbers have all been verified by 3 independent sources"
And there would have been more, but Sneezy, Bashful, Grumpy and Doc are still working on the Tiger-Cats' report on why the WH won't work.
I bet Larry DiIanni's accountant could move this along.
By z jones (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 17:31:33
the ti-cats , hostco and now finally the city has admitted as such.
Nice try. The Ticats say the West Harbour won't work, after saying that it would work, but they still refuse to show any analysis proving it won't work. HostCo only says it won't work without the Ticats, not that it won't work period. And the City only says it won't work without HostCo, who only say it won't work without the Ticats.
See? It's Ticats all the way down. There's no other reason it won't work, and the Ticats won't actually show us their reason, they just say trust their "experts".
And by the way, it's spelled "immature". Oh, was that immature?
By z jones (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 17:50:13
Comment edited by z jones on 2010-09-17 16:50:46
By race_to_the_bottom (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 17:58:48
Stop perpetuating the truth z jones, you're making some 'special' Ticat fans uncomfortable.
By Andrea (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 18:06:12
The Bay Observer is located at 1 Jarvis Street. Same office as Ticats head office. That's all I have to say about that.
By highwater (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 18:23:18
There's no byline on the article. Who wrote it? What is their background and bias? Is this a ticat press release Mitchell handed John Best by the Jarvis St. water cooler? And this is no 'update', Billygears. That would imply that staff updated their numbers, when in fact this is a very selective spin of the bad numbers for EM written by, well, who knows? Mitchell from the sounds of it. How much do you want to bet that 'dr. fromdass' is John Best or Peggy Chapman?
Thank goodness you're strong enough to make up your own mind and continue to look at, and even comment on RTH! That's what I call independent thinking. We need more of your kind in Hamilton. Thanks though for the heads up.
By Be T (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 22:00:07
Andrea you are so right they are in the same building so you know what that means of course!!! You go girl!!!
By Be T (anonymous) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 22:01:56
race_to_the_bottom you are right! Those pesky ticat fans and the truth are not wanted here!
By z jones (registered) | Posted September 17, 2010 at 22:45:45
Those pesky ticat fans and the truth are not wanted here!
So did Bob Young say, or did he not say, "We will make it work, whatever the site"? Just wondering where an obvious Ticat fan comes down on the truth here.
Or you could keep ignoring me and keep posting your empty, one sentence seagull splat comments.
By TnT (registered) | Posted September 18, 2010 at 09:00:01
Great commentary. As a lifelong Hamiltonian I am starting to let the Hammerdepresion sink in over this issue. We've seemed to try everything to not sink into it: sarcasm, ridicule, rage, outrage, enrage, and even (gasp) rational thought. Yet the darkness keeps growing.
By Cityjoe (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2010 at 01:05:16
Thanks Graham for the chuckles!
This dead horse is getting tired of being flogged, but I'm sure that's the intent of BY. Just keep on flogging away, wearing things down, & sooner or later people will get huge migraines & leave the field to the more persistent.
Coming Next: "The Undead Horse".
(I picked up the Saturday Spec., & honestly I can't stand the thought of looking at any more of this & I'm sure that's exactly how some people want us all to feel. Saturated, exhausted, & fed up. I will read it though, & continue to read RTH for balanced opinion.)
By Be T (anonymous) | Posted September 19, 2010 at 08:37:53
"continue to read RTH for balanced opinion"
Cityjoe you made me pee my pants! Thank you for the comedy!
By allantaylor97 (registered) | Posted September 20, 2010 at 09:38:15
No surprise here. You don't want to hear the truth. This study has lots of truth in it even tho its exaggerated like all such studies by corporations and governments alike. Lying to prove it inaccurate is not only unseemly its unwise. In short if you misrepresent the truth in your rebuttal ALL of your argument is trash and won't be listened to by those you are trying to reach
By mrjanitor (registered) | Posted September 20, 2010 at 12:35:41
I noticed last week Bob Young in the Spectator saying something about how 'the west harbour was not the place to run a SPORTS MARKETING BUSINESS'. Notice how Bob is not interested at all in running a football team, he has another agenda for OUR stadium.
The truth is precisely what I want, as do most people. Problem is, none of us are getting it from the Ti-Cat organization. They commissioned this report. They signed off on its 10-year, everything included parameters. Making something like this clear is easy. It's much harder to do what they've done and spin this report so it lacks credibility. It's a misguided puff piece, just like Mac Professor Marvin Ryder said in the Spec.
The fact that I couldn't bring myself to offer a serious assessment of such a piece of crap shouldn't elicit such criticism from you. Why don't you read it and write your own assessment and share it with the rest of us if you thik the truth is in there? Saying that everybody else writes crap like this doesn't mean The Caretaker had to write it this way. But he did.
At least the Ti-Cats have been consistent in their efforts to snow the people of Hamilton. Their fans. Their investors. Their future. Smart. Real smart.
It's a snow job that started with the "we'll make any location work" promise, all the way to this multi-billion dollar impact bs. I, for one, am sick of it. I don't trust them anymore. You might want to review their track record of distortion. You may reach a similar conclusion.
By PeterF (registered) | Posted September 21, 2010 at 00:13:18
Unfortunately the truth will never come out about this stadium soap opera. Even at the East Mountain location, the stadium size would have only been 15,000. Where is the money for the extra seats? do the Cats expect the city to make up the shortfall, then take oownership of the stadium and reap all the benefits? Of course they do. I supported the WH and am a lifelong Ticat fan. When the CP site came to light, I actually supported it reluctantly. I assumed it met most of the city and Ticat needs. Bob just lost my support with his last veiled threat that he may still need to move the team. For a smart man, he certainly lacks in the PR department. I am also tired of the arguement that he saved the team from extinction and the city is treating him unjustly. US Steel saved Stelco, should we just bend over and let them screw the pensioners? I guess Mayor Fred was right, the cats are tenants. Unfortunately HOSTCO has given them a VETO. Sorry about the rant.
By Cityjoe (anonymous) | Posted September 24, 2010 at 00:54:48
Quote from Be T "continue to read RTH for balanced opinion"
Cityjoe you made me pee my pants! Thank you for the comedy."
No problem, Be! Anytime. Whatever floats yer boat, or sinks yer cake. :D
You must be logged in to comment.
There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?