COTA Austin - construction and infrastructure

[Hail22]

It shows who is in charge, the money finds its way to the top of the food chain.

Which is a damn shame, I really don't think this Grand Prix will take flight.

Someone said earlier China Erected at hotel in two weeks.

They do not adhere to the EHS/OHS legislation that most of the developed world follows, no reporting of injuries or deaths, payment is peanuts and workers are desperate.

Where as with Austin there is EHS, OHS protocols that must be adhered to in order to avoid a work safety audit resulting in quite severe penalties and fines.

So hence why i said earlier Austin will be lucky to scrape by the line in August.

Remember an audit must be carried it out before allowing it to run, Delhi and China do not have to conform to such strict quality, safety controls.

[bhall]

I think we're just used to being raped by sports here in the States. We have four "major" sports leagues, and nearly every one of their teams plays in a building funded by taxpayers; that's likely well over 70 very xpensive venues.

The team owners claim they benefit the local economy. Economists claim they benefit the owners' purses. Politicians don't rock the boat, lest they be seen by the electorate as culpable if the beloved home team relocates to a city that's willing to pay.

(Hey, the genesis of FOM's business practices just dawned on me.)

Matters are so warped with regard to the NFL that unless a game is completely sold out, it cannot be broadcast in the home teams' market. So, even though tax dollars are used to pay for both the stadiums and the airwaves on which games are broadcast, there's no guarantee the taxpayer will be allowed to enjoy the fruits of those expenditures unless they're willing to spend even more money on an exorbitantly-priced ticket, or, in many cases, a retardedly-priced PSL.

All of this is to say that somebody owes us dinner.

EDIT: I forgot that basketball and hockey teams most often share facilities.

[donskar]

...
IF it's a good idea,,,IF it's a money maker. then there should be plenty of private funding available.

Guess I have to return the courtesy, THAT is xactly my point and argument.

And THAT is why Bernie's 3rd world (or is it 4th world?) races must depend on government backing? It makes my brain hurt. If only that vicious old &!@%#$! Enzo was still alive. A couple calls and a badda bing a badda boom. No more Bernie.

[Hail22]

...
IF it's a good idea,,,IF it's a money maker. then there should be plenty of private funding available.

Guess I have to return the courtesy, THAT is xactly my point and argument.

And THAT is why Bernie's 3rd world (or is it 4th world?) races must depend on government backing? It makes my brain hurt. If only that vicious old &!@%#$! Enzo was still alive. A couple calls and a badda bing a badda boom. No more Bernie.

There is a Concorde contract yet to be signed yet, who knows if Gaddafi can be overthrown so can Bernie Fartlestone.

We'll wait and see but this circuit for now in my eyes is a lemon.

[bhall]

[...] badda bing a badda boom [...]

That could easily be the first reference made here to someone being whacked.

Well done.

[xpensive]

The way I see things, the man first to whack is MrM, who sold F1's commercial rights to MrE for a plate of beans.

[Pup]

...
I won't support the Alice in Wonderland financial lunacy that is F1.

What bothers me the most is this systematic looting of the taxpayers' money, it's truly revolting.

The METF works by taking a portion of the city/county sales tax and reserving it to reimburse the city for event costs. The idea is that the increased taxes the area receives from the event don't all go directly into the state's coffers, but remain at home. In theory, it doesn't cost anyone any money, though how it works in practice I don't know. But I assume that if the state pays out $25 million and the race only brings in ten in taxes, then the next year's funding won't be near so generous.

[WhiteBlue]

...
I won't support the Alice in Wonderland financial lunacy that is F1.

What bothers me the most is this systematic looting of the taxpayers' money, it's truly revolting.

If you apply it to Australia I would understand your criticism. That really is looting the tax payer. But the Austin scheme is supposed to get only the taxes that they will be generating if the investment is successful. If it is not it will not generate taxes and the tax payer is no dollar poorer. That is a fair deal as far as I can see. The comptroller can take it and make money after five or six years (depending how long the F1 contract will run) or she leaves the deal and the venture will probably fail due to under capitalization. Then there will be no tax money after six years either.

[Pup]

The money has to be applied for every year.

[WhiteBlue]

The money has to be applied for every year.

It would be strange if they do not have a blanket application for a certain period (the F1 contract duration). Then it would also make sense to have to demonstrate the economic impact every year. But a new application would not make sense as the money is meant to help attract the event, not to run it. Attracting the event is done only one time (at the closing of the F1 contract).

[bhall]

What you've just said, WB, makes perfect sense. And that's exactly why the reality of it is entirely different.

Around these parts*, we simply don't do things that add up. That would be too easy.



* I don't just mean Texas.

[WhiteBlue]

What you've just said, WB, makes perfect sense. And that's exactly why the reality of it is entirely different. Around these parts*, we simply don't do things that add up. That would be too easy.

* I don't just mean Texas.

I'm afraid you and Pup are both not reporting correctly. Please compare subsections (r) and (s) of the statutes that were quoted by Pup previously.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... tm#5190.14

There is a clear definition that a major event generating taxes in excess of $15m can be sponsored under one contract and if it is repeated the maximum duration of the sponsorship may be 10 years. The condition for ongoing sponsorship of such events is that there may not be a gap of more than 18 months between repeated occurrences of such an event. Pup's previous assertion that the regulation does not recognize contracts like the one reported between COTA, the comptroller and Travis county is also contradicted in that subsections. One must assume that Hellmund indeed had a valid contract binding the comptroller and Travis county to his ten year version of the F1 contract. Naturally this contract expired when Ecclestone voided the contract due to COTA not performing the duties. And why COTA failed to perform was also discussed in great detail. The investors failed to raise the money they were contracted to do.

[bhall]

Those sections place caps on all agreements; they don't otherwise define them.

Further, section (v) states: The comptroller may adopt rules necessary to implement this section.

It's not a slight against you or anyone else when I say that this situation is going to be as complicated as possible. That's simply how things are done here. We looooooove red tape.

[xpensive]

...
I won't support the Alice in Wonderland financial lunacy that is F1.

What bothers me the most is this systematic looting of the taxpayers' money, it's truly revolting.

The METF works by taking a portion of the city/county sales tax and reserving it to reimburse the city for event costs. The idea is that the increased taxes the area receives from the event don't all go directly into the state's coffers, but remain at home. In theory, it doesn't cost anyone any money, though how it works in practice I don't know. But I assume that if the state pays out $25 million and the race only brings in ten in taxes, then the next year's funding won't be near so generous.

Right, in theory, but if you start singling out each and every "tax generating" activity and pay them "their money" back,
it won't be much resources left for what people in most civilized countries would describe as common good, such as schools,
health care, infrastructure, judicial system, defense and so on.

[WhiteBlue]

But you will not do it to just every activity, if you carefully read the statues. It must be a new event which cannot be started other than by that help. And COTA is in good company with other start ups that are receiving tax breaks. I would object much more strongly to the investment banks or automotive bail outs that American tax payers undertook on behalves of their sometimes misguided governments.

You seem to be quite indiscriminating in your criticism despite much explanation given in this thread. Is this because you have decided in your own capacity that Austin should not have that kind of facility that is now being build?