urbanMSP

Hopefully the law is fully repealed next session.

I'll make two points here:

1) Has anyone noticed in all the updates about e-pulltab projections that, along with the revenue obviously being very low, the actual number of places that have the iPads is like waaaaay below what they were projecting? Like, less than ten percent of the projection? I'm no scientist and certainly no journalist, but that seems like something worth exploring. It's one thing to yell "SEE THE NUMBERS WERE BAD" in a vacuum, but there's a cause and effect there. I would *certainly* throw five bucks at an e-pulltab iPad if I saw it after four beers at Burrito Loco or Republic. Why have they not been adopted more widely?

2) That said, these numbers have just been spectacularly wrong. I always dirtbaggedly said that the numbers were obviously incorrect, but that it would work out, back while the bill was being debated, but the numbers are just really, really wrong. Shockingly wrong.

Two potential reasons I've heard are that people would rather a) play regular pull tabs and b) support local causes like a school or youth sports league.

Has anyone noticed in all the updates about e-pulltab projections that, along with the revenue obviously being very low, the actual number of places that have the iPads is like waaaaay below what they were projecting? Like, less than ten percent of the projection?

That's true. Apparently the rollout has been badly mismanaged. But also the per device revenue numbers are way below projections. So most of the ipads already out are not doing well.

I would *certainly* throw five bucks at an e-pulltab iPad if I saw it after four beers at Burrito Loco or Republic. Why have they not been adopted more widely?

Some bars are pulltab bars and some aren't. I think for a lot of bars it's just not worth the trouble or staff time. Many establishments probably don't want to muck up there atmosphere with gambling screen zombies. It'd be different if they got to keep the gambling revenue like in states that allow slots in bars.

If a bar is already busy, messing with the ipads is just a distraction. In establishments where pulltabs are likely to draw people in and keep them there, the rollout has been more successful, but these places have historically sold paper pulltabs. Just getting people to switch from paper to electronic gets the stadium nothing. The stadium only gets the net increase in total pulltab profits, which is everything over $35M I think.

http://www.startribune.com/local/minnea ... y#continue

More disturbing is the revenue coming in doesn't appear to be from people throwing five bucks down for the cause. It looks like the bright spots are from whales, as in gambling addicts fucking up their lives.

http://www.startribune.com/local/207071421.html

Can anyone remember the one other example of this type of financing discussed when they passed this? I thought it was in Iowa, but can't find it. Anyway, it failed miserably too.

My contention has always been, where's the logic in handing out $300 dollar devices @ a bar? Seems like there is plenty of risk involved there for someone.

Gettin' interesting. http://www.startribune.com/politics/sta ... 26061.html

http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_24896 ... le-delayed

Any prolonged delays guarantee cost overruns which mean cuts to amenities at the new stadium.

According to who?

Just to be sure, unless I completely missed it, the story within that link gives no indication that amenities are at risk.

Gettin' interesting. http://www.startribune.com/politics/sta ... 26061.html

Really makes you think, about how fragile life can be. One minute you're getting millions in a public subsidy windfall, next minute the shady legislation is challenged.

I welcome a municipal referendum. If the vote was today I would probably vote no, but I would be open to switch if there was a compelling reason to vote yes.

Yeah, I'd definately vote no. Giving this crook tax dollars really bugs me.

A semi-clever trick to sabotage this project and The Ryan development, however, I doubt it will work. This legal challenge is utter stupidity. What's at stake is losing thousands of good paying construction jobs, and a golden opportunity to create a vibrant urban district downtown that will create a large new tax base for the city. It's a threat to the economic health of our city's future.

I would be interested to test that hypothesis. Minneapolis is already committing a good chunk of non-MSFA change on the parking ramp that's the supposed lynch-pin of the Ryan development. That seems to be the only connection (beyond a shiny, brand-new stadium in place of an old one) between the Vikings funding and the Ryan dev. My gut tells me that the city could feasibly come up with more money to subsidize the garage and Ryan/WF would still go through with their plan.

A semi-clever trick to sabotage this project and The Ryan development, however, I doubt it will work. This legal challenge is utter stupidity. What's at stake is losing thousands of good paying construction jobs, and a golden opportunity to create a vibrant urban district downtown that will create a large new tax base for the city. It's a threat to the economic health of our city's future.

You kinda flipped things around there, didn't you John? The clever trick was pretending like contributing $150M to the stadium didn't violate Minneapolis' Charter.

In no way do I expect this stadium to be halted or even delayed. I'm not saying doing so would be good for the city or Downtown East. But this stadium will never live down the shady legislation that created it or the lies told to get it passed. You're going to have to live with that, just like I'm going to have to live with the reality the public was hustled and the stadium is a done deal.

who cares, the stadium is being built and these self loathing morons lost.

pathetic lawsuits. attention seekers who can never be elected to public office despite numerous attempts. doug mann is a joke. paul ostrow should just move to anoka. will never be mayor of the city he purports to love.

Pathetic is the perfect description Mullen. Now we can move on to watch the exciting construction of this fantastic project for our city.

Like Target Field, the new indoor stadium, I predict will be a jewel for Minneapolis, the region and the state. Having it anchor the eastern section of downtown has already proven itself a catalyst for future development. Following the Wells Fargo project, I think it's only a matter of time before a major sky-rise hotel development takes root - a glistening vertical entertainment engine, drawing tens of thousands of annual visitors to area.

Kudos to the Minnesota Supreme Court for quickly reviewing and dismissing the frivolous lawsuits that had threatened to drive up costs of this project and potentially scuttle the Wells Fargo/The Yard developments.

Ah yes, lets hurry up and give this convicted crook hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars

Seriously people?

I think it's only a matter of time before a major sky-rise hotel development takes root - a glistening vertical entertainment engine, drawing tens of thousands of annual visitors to area.

My goodness...

"This lawsuit is without legal merit because I would like the stadium to be built."