Comment 58713

By Simon (registered) - website | Posted January 29, 2011 at 17:08:10

For a moment - I will accept that the TiCats lose money every year, and realistically are not in a position to invest actual money into their own stadium

However, I do not accept that the TiCats will lose money forever - which is pretty much the only reason left to justify spending public money on building them a stadium.

At this point the TiCats are 100% dependent on the City, Provence and Fed to put up all of the actual money required for their stadium. (I do not accept a portion of naming rights,or a ticket tax as actual money being invested by the TiCats - both are pretend money).

So why the hell have the TiCats been able to negotiate (if you can call it that) such an overwhelmingly one sided lease agreement!!!??

Even Scott Mitchell is familiar with performance clauses being added to players contracts - and that I exactly what the TiCats lease agreement needs - a performance clause.

I suggest 50% of any TiCat profits generated within the next 20 years go towards repaying the City, Province and Feds. This would allow the TiCats to be "sustainable" and would at least provide the taxpayer some hope of return on investment.

A fair deal has the potential for risk and reward for all parties. The current deal only has risk for taxpayers and reward for the TigerCats.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds