Questions for Cards fans

[Stronso]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Cards fans

Originally posted by Dback Jon
Boston/New York - all the same

Please don't lump Beantown in with the Big Apple! That is an insult!

 

[RLakin]

Originally posted by kerouac9
Not to mention that the Cards aren't asking for "new money" (damages, interest, legal fees, etc.). They're asking for the money they are owed, but was illegally withheld.

The Cards are asking for damages.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Cards fans

Originally posted by Stronso
Please don't lump Beantown in with the Big Apple! That is an insult!

Agreed! New Yorkers could never come up with a beer as good as Samual Adams!

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Questions for Cards fans

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
Agreed! New Yorkers could never come up with a beer as good as Samual Adams!

Yeah but nothing competes with New York State Moonshine!

Ye! Haw!

 

[JeffGollin]

How will you personally benefit if the Cards win the lawsuit and a high damage award?
The Cards will be more competitive if allowed to operate within the financial parameters that include monies currently owed to them.

If you believe that the team will improve, please show me an example.
With the monies due them, the Cards will be able to be in a more stable financial position and can afford to be more flexible and creative negotiating free agent and rookie contracts.

Do you believe it is ethical for a for-profit entity to sue a not-for-profit entity simply to increase profits?
You've set up several false premises. First, it is ethical for any party to sue to recover monies due them - whether they come from Standard Oil or Mother Theresa. And not-for-profit entities (of which I serve on 3 boards) are as much financially run "businesses" as for-profits - with Exec Directors typically earning in the six figures annually.

(NED)
Do you believe it is ethical to sue a public entity after the public votes to give the for-profit company a $350M stadium?
Once again - you're setting up a tilted field for debate. There are two different entities - (1) ASU and (2) the citizens of Arizona (some of whom are ASU alums and many who are not). The two are NOT one and the same. The first entity is welching on an agreement. The second entity approved the financing of a multi-purpose stadium/recreation package which included the Cards. Two different entites/two totally separate decision-makers.

(NED)
Do you believe that the Cardinals have been 'good-faith' bargainers with regard to the stadium? With their first round draft picks? With anyone?
Sure. At least they haven't welched on any agreements. And they worked something out with their first round picks.

Please list those with whom you believe the Cardinals have bargained in good faith.
Right at the top of the list is the fact that they didn't cut and run to LA or San Antonio when a stadium initiative - which the community PROMISED to the team - stalled more than once. Instead, they exercised considerable patience, and the fans in AZ will finally be able to attend Cardinal football games in early fall without melting.

(NED)
How will it personally hurt you should the Cards lose the suit? How will it hurt the Cards?
They'll be less competitive with other NFL teams. As a fan, I find that Mondays are far more enjoyable when the team I root for (and spend money on in the form of TV royalties and merchandise) wins.

Do you believe that profits for a for-profit entertainment company should come at the expense of scholar athletes and their coaches? Should Bidwills bottom line be increased by cutting scholarships for swimmers, divers, soccer players, wrestlers, gymnasts, track and field competitors, and the firing of their coaches and support staff?
Another false premise. The Bidwills do not control the ASU budget and items on the expense side of the ledger (unless, of course, there's a line item on the revenue side -right below Tuition called "Screw the Bidwills out of money we owe them.")

I detect in your questions, the whining chords of "We're entitled. You owe us!" It doesn't work that way. As soon as you forget that you exist but for the good will of government, private industry and the public - and forget that every day you have to justify your existance, you are going to be in a heap of trouble cutting it financially.

One thing I've learned being the Devlopment Chair of one not-for-profit and actively involved in 2 others - The government doesn't owe you anything. The private sector doesn't owe you anything. The public doesn't owe you anything - unless you prove to all of them that it's worthwhile for them to part with money they may or may not have available.

As soon as you start grousing about "how come they don't just cut us a break", you'll stop focusing on bringing in revenue the old fashioned way and your sources of revenue will dry up.

 

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
How will you personally benefit if the Cards win the lawsuit and a high damage award?
The Cards will be more competitive if allowed to operate within the financial parameters that include monies currently owed to them.

If you believe that the team will improve, please show me an example.
With the monies due them, the Cards will be able to be in a more stable financial position and can afford to be more flexible and creative negotiating free agent and rookie contracts.

Do you believe it is ethical for a for-profit entity to sue a not-for-profit entity simply to increase profits?
You've set up several false premises. First, it is ethical for any party to sue to recover monies due them - whether they come from Standard Oil or Mother Theresa. And not-for-profit entities (of which I serve on 3 boards) are as much financially run "businesses" as for-profits - with Exec Directors typically earning in the six figures annually.

(NED)
Do you believe it is ethical to sue a public entity after the public votes to give the for-profit company a $350M stadium?
Once again - you're setting up a tilted field for debate. There are two different entities - (1) ASU and (2) the citizens of Arizona (some of whom are ASU alums and many who are not). The two are NOT one and the same. The first entity is welching on an agreement. The second entity approved the financing of a multi-purpose stadium/recreation package which included the Cards. Two different entites/two totally separate decision-makers.

(NED)
Do you believe that the Cardinals have been 'good-faith' bargainers with regard to the stadium? With their first round draft picks? With anyone?
Sure. At least they haven't welched on any agreements. And they worked something out with their first round picks.

Please list those with whom you believe the Cardinals have bargained in good faith.
Right at the top of the list is the fact that they didn't cut and run to LA or San Antonio when a stadium initiative - which the community PROMISED to the team - stalled more than once. Instead, they exercised considerable patience, and the fans in AZ will finally be able to attend Cardinal football games in early fall without melting.

(NED)
How will it personally hurt you should the Cards lose the suit? How will it hurt the Cards?
They'll be less competitive with other NFL teams. As a fan, I find that Mondays are far more enjoyable when the team I root for (and spend money on in the form of TV royalties and merchandise) wins.

Do you believe that profits for a for-profit entertainment company should come at the expense of scholar athletes and their coaches? Should Bidwills bottom line be increased by cutting scholarships for swimmers, divers, soccer players, wrestlers, gymnasts, track and field competitors, and the firing of their coaches and support staff?
Another false premise. The Bidwills do not control the ASU budget and items on the expense side of the ledger (unless, of course, there's a line item on the revenue side -right below Tuition called "Screw the Bidwills out of money we owe them.")

I detect in your questions, the whining chords of "We're entitled. You owe us!" It doesn't work that way. As soon as you forget that you exist but for the good will of government, private industry and the public - and forget that every day you have to justify your existance, you are going to be in a heap of trouble cutting it financially.

One thing I've learned being the Devlopment Chair of one not-for-profit and actively involved in 2 others - The government doesn't owe you anything. The private sector doesn't owe you anything. The public doesn't owe you anything - unless you prove to all of them that it's worthwhile for them to part with money they may or may not have available.

As soon as you start grousing about "how come they don't just cut us a break", you'll stop focusing on bringing in revenue the old fashioned way and your sources of revenue will dry up.

Just in case you hadn't noticed, Jeff: SENATORS WIN!!! SENATORS WIN!!!

 

[JeffGollin]

Just in case you hadn't noticed, Jeff: SENATORS WIN!!! SENATORS WIN!!!
Thanks for the inflammation.

Due credit to the Sens. They were one step quicker to the puck and won roughly 80% of all loose puck battles. They deserved the win and, if nothing changes, will deserve to play in the Stanley Cup Finals.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Re: Re: Re: Questions for Cards fans

Originally posted by sundevilfan99
I notice you ignored pretty much all of my post. Congrats on sticking your head in the sand.

It's true that ASU has had to trim the budget and sports before, but that was due to title IX compliance and money issues.

I am now talking about the very real result of what would happen should the Cardinals be awarded what they claim their damages are.

Please address the issue...

SDF99 (aka NED)

well, let's see, if asu is let out of its LEGAL contract obligations I suppose that I could be hurt in the future if this particular case was used as precedent for allowing any flailing institution to renege on it's LEGAL CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. in fact, i dare say that everyone on this board, nay, everyone in this state, nay, everyone in the united states (if the case were upheld through each round of appeals - which will never happen 'cuz there is no way in hell that even the AZ supreme court will grant certiorari to hear such a ludricous case) will be affected in the negative. we'll lose capitalism.

the rest of your arguments are all emotion based. there is no room for emotion in business. asu should become a better businessman (entity). next you're going to cry that as a public institution it should be above being held to the same business standards as regular, for-profit businesses. if that's based on ethics it's inane and has no place in a capitalist society. so you must be a commie. go home red ned, go home you *****! WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! (ah, first one in a long while, feels good to let it out again)