Tom Benson wants a BILLION dollars to keep the Aints....

It doesn't make any sense.
However, it is essential for the city to keep the saints.

 

Good lord man, housing projects are being levelled left and right all over the place.
It would have a major economic impact on Canal Street, which has been a severe underperformer for 25 going on 30 years, in part because of that project. That place could be a great shopping district with some parking and especially with - dare I say it - RAIL.

 

As bad as those peoples living conditions are they gotta live someplace. I'm sure if they could afford it they would moved out of the projects on their own. So what happens to them? The govenment builds a replacement project that will be another drug and rat infested slum in a few years..

 

I love the folks who don't want to move out of Iberville. I heard one say that they had been there for three generations. NObody noted the IDIOCY of that statement and that that meant their family was a bunch of teet sucking LOSERS.

 

Back to the Saints topic...

I am sick and tired of underinformed people saying to get rid of the Saints.

Everyone needs a lesson in basic finance (this works on a personal level too) - If you have to spend $100 to get back $150, DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT HAVING TO SPEND THE $100!

All these Saints bashers are complaining about the INVESTMENT, and ignoring the RETURN. Same goes for the Hornets, or any other non-sports industry out there that generate jobs.

I believe that people see a rich owner (or business) and think "Why should we give them any money - they are already rich and our schools need money more" Well, back to my example - what is better for the schools - $100 now, or a steady source of income that will provide much more than the original $100?

The other group that is anti-saints are the people who don't care about football (wierd). The say "why should we spend anything on football? Its only sports/entertainment." You can't think about it in terms of entertainment, you have to think of it as an investment. You can't discount investments just because they do not directly affect you. I don't like Hondas. But if Honda was considering building a plant here I would not oppose investing in it because I don't like Hondas. I would welcome it because I know that the $$ we would pay Honda would be less than the $$$$ Honda would return to the area.

Basic finance - if the return is greater than the investment - do it.

Get it?

 

In direct dollars, I don't think a billion dollars Saints investment brings a return. Indirect, yes.
Further, it would be best for everyone if the government got out of the investment business - but that won't happen - EVERY government needs to get out of it for it to work.

 

TO ALL THOSE BASHING BENSON --

If you owned the Saints (and that was your ONLY business), what would you do?

Would you do it any differently? Wouldn't you try to get the best deal possible?

If you were the CEO of Fortune 1000 company and knew that states would bid for your locating to their area, wouldn't you feel that you had a fiduciary obligation to the shareholders to work out the best possible deal you could with ANY state?

 

I would be the Mark Cuban of NFL owners.

As important as I know the team is to locals, I would work to preserve my investment not milk it. I would also not talk out of my ass like Benson.

 

We would lose any possibility of hosting the superbowl, which has a major economic inpact.

 

" Basic finance - if the return is greater than the investment - do it."
I agree. I just think people should look at the effect on the entire state not just N.O., since it is state money or incentives being given. Any deal with state money would be great for N.O., but just make sure it is also good for the entire state.