What is the job title of the fellow who writes for the editorial page of the Times? To me “reporter” would be inappropriate, his articles seem to be arguments, often devoid of facts. Last Sunday he wrote about those of us that have a problem with how the ball park deal was done, that by the way includes our mayor. Scattered among the insults he made were several misstatements.
He wrote “the fact still remains that no property taxes will go toward ballpark construction”. As the lawyers say, that is a distinction looking for a difference. Money taken from sales tax revenue and service/permit fees is money that will have to be raised through other sources, property tax included. His argument is like saying that your spouse’s paycheck does not help pay the mortgage.
Then he wrote this: “They paid $20 million to purchase the Triple-A franchise of the San Diego Padres. They are not going to recoup $20 million anytime soon — probably never.” The fact is that the teams are bought and sold regularly for more money than our sports group paid. This quote from a Forbes article sets the record straight:
The most instructive transaction was the recent sale of the Las Vegas 51s (Pacific Coast League/AAA), the New York Mets‘ farm team that recently set a new baseline for Class AAA teams. The 51s ranked No. 48 in attendance last year, and only three AAA teams drew fewer fans. The Wall Street Journal profiled the team’s many troubles in June, noting that no MLB franchise wants to be affiliated with the team. And yet in May the Vegas team sold for $20 million, which has become the generally accepted minimum price for a AAA team.
Next he wrote “Nobody in their right mind would pay $20 million for a minor-league baseball team unless they were already so rich that $20 million isn’t the milk money”. Once again he is wrong. The article How billionaires like Warren Buffett profit from minor-league baseball ownership explains that owning a team is often a good investment. This quote from the article expains:
Someone that paid $22 million for a team earning $4 million is roughly getting an 18 percent pretax return on capital. Another example of the great return on investment is the owners’ ability to sell teams for much more than the original purchase price.
Then came “And, no, they’re not going to turn around and sell the franchise for $21 million to some family in another city that would be honored to have Triple-A baseball” another statement that has no foundation. Yes the contract with the Downtown Development Corporation requires the team to stay in our eventually to be built stadium for 20 years. That does not mean that the team cannot be sold. The value of the team will depend in large part upon attendance. The ownership group has not fared well publicity-wise. It is possible that they might want to get out of the deal eventually because of local public opinion.
“Perhaps the most ridiculous statements by math-challenged Livids is that the Foster-De La Vega built a new parking garage next to their renovated historic Mills Building so they could get back their part of the $20 million by soaking El Pasoans at the garage” was his next argument. I have no way of knowing the real number but I would not be surprised to learn that 74% of the voters don’t find the statement ridiculous at all, even with the grammatical error that our professional newspaperman had in his piece (statements … is).
Our writer then ventured into arithmetic, another subject that he sees differently from many of us. He wrote “And ridiculous statement No. 2 is that the Hunts and Foster-De la Vegas couldn’t even get us a winning team. Doiiink! Our franchise finished this past Pacific Coast League season 10 games over .500.” I am happy for the team, they did have a winning season this year. The facts, however, are:
The Tucson Padres played three years. Their record was 198/234, or 198 games won and 234 games lost over that three year period. The team unfortunately has a losing record.
I don’t know why this writer feels the need to insult us. He might argue that he was trying to be humorous. I don’t buy that. I think that he is writing what his bosses want him to write.
Ultimately the newspaper must make money. Subscriptions are a smaller part of its revenue stream. Advertising generates the majority of the income. However, advertising income is based on how many newspapers they sell. Personally, I am coming to close to voting with my wallet.
Then again, they never get the coyote.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
First problem: You read the El Paso Times and think that it is a viable source of reliable information. It is not.
Second problem: The EPT editorial board has it’s collective nose so far up the derrière of groups like the Mountain Star Sports, Paso Del Norte Group, and the so-called “progressives” that there is no way that they can be counted on for anything close to being fair and balanced.
Third Problem: El Diario needs a English language edition. There is no competition for the EPT, so there is no need for them to be anything other than slanted.
Fourth Problem: You still subscribe to the El Paso Times. Until people stop paying for the BS, they will keep producing it.
Fifth Problem: The media is not accountable in this town. The only people doing checks on the media are bloggers like yourself.
Sixth Problem: It appears that the collective English language media in town (ETP / KVIA/ El Paso Inc) are all in bed together. It is a small circle so inbreeding probably is inevitable. However, since they are all in cahoots, they produce a culture of positive feedback within themselves. No one challenges them other than said bloggers.
Seventh Problem: See the first problem.
LikeLike
Excellent
LikeLike
It was an editorial, which means it’s an opinion piece. Conjecture is allowed, if not the very foundation of an opinion piece.
There’s plenty of reporting to pick on at the Times. You don’t have to go after opinion section to try and make your points. It devalues your analysis.
LikeLike
Brutus devalues his analysis by questioning the accuracy and integrity of an “opinion piece”? Au contraire mon frere. Just because Muench’s piece is his opinion, doesn’t mean that his thinking isn’t faulty and that his “facts” aren’t wrong. Even in an opinion piece, the writer has an obligation to make it clear which things are fact and which things are fiction — or as you call it, conjecture.
LikeLike
Enough already,
you’d have as hard of a time proving the opposite of what muench claims as muench would having proving his claims. You are on equal footing.
LikeLike
David K, you’re right (did I actually say that?). The “reporting” at the EP Times is a joke. I quit reading Muench years ago. He’s a clown. His column would never make it in a first-class newspaper. Most of what the Times prints should be considered opinion, not fact.
LikeLike
Since today’s topic is reporting and editorials, it’s important to note that most, if not all, of the reporting and editorial pieces about the ballpark has represented or inferred that the future income from Mountainstar is predictable and will be sufficient to service the debt, except for perhaps “the first few years”.
As an example, on August 2nd, Cindy Ramriez wrote: “Hotel taxes, lease payments, ticket surcharges and parking revenues will pay for the ballpark construction and debt…”. Note the use of the words “will pay for” rather than, for example, “are expected to pay for”. That language has been used over and over again by the Times reporters. Not even a reference to a possible shortfall in the early years.
In Muench’s Sunday column, he wrote: “For some reason, the Livids have never believed that Hotel Occupancy Tax money, MountainStar lease money and money from parking and ticket surcharges will pay for the ballpark. If the Livids get anything to rightfully cry about, it’s that the city has agreed to help cover the debt payments the first few years with some sales-tax and service-tax money until the hotel tax and lease money kicks into full gear.”
So Muench now fancies himself as an economist and can say with certainty that any shortfall would just be for the first few years?
Ramirez’s so-called reporting and Muench’s thinking totally disregard the reality that attendance might not meet projections much less “kick into full gear”, which would cause ticket surcharges and parking revenues to be less than projected. Muench, too, glosses right over the fact that certain “lease” monies (his term) are contingent fees.
Neither Muench nor the Times reporters ever questioned what might happen if hotel visits/taxes decline. My guess is that the shortfall can potentially can be far greater than we might think because the downside was never discussed or reported.
“For some reason, the Livids have never believed [the revenue estimates]” Muench wrote. Maybe that’s partly because the revenue projections were developed and presented by the same Mountainstar owners and city managers who developed the construction cost estimates, which have now proven to be far from accurate. Maybe it’s also because our local news organizations have been cheerleading all along rather than asking important questions and doing real reporting.
LikeLike
The City should stick to the terms of the bond indenture that pledges HOT increment, lease and fees to pay off the bonds. If those are not adequate to cover the debt payments at any time, well the bondholders can wait until the revenues are adequate. They took a risk, too, and might have been dumb enough to listen to people like Mr. Muench and accept the City’s projections that have so far been 100% wrong.
It is not the stadium cost so much that concerns me as a senior citizen property owner faced with ever-increasing taxes; it is the other expenses forced upon the City by the destruction of City Hall, namely the Times building, Luther remodel and Texas Avenue building. These millions of expenditures will hit the tax payer sooner than later and can be considered a resultant cost of the stadium. The total true cost is yet to be determined.
The poor performance of El Paso to attract or create private sector jobs cannot help but be influenced by these impending tax increases, unless you count the “hot dog” jobs that the AAA team will employ. In the rush to secure the team, the prior council seems to have “bought the demo” from MountainStar and now the City has to live with its reality. Let’s just hope the Padres (or is it the Aardvarks?) keep winning.
LikeLike
wow! your article presents real facts on every aspect that you covered, I’m impressed
LikeLike
In a real newspaper, Muench would have been fired for writing the same pro stadium dribble every third week. He’s almost as ridiculous as the closing of the I-10 and Copia exit (9pm-?) that occurred Wednesday night for “repairs.” They closed that exit down about two months ago for “repairs.” Truly a stupid town, or as Muench would probably say, ‘doiiink!’
LikeLike