urbanSTL

The Business Journal had a nice piece on a company I wasn't familiar with.
There's an Answers spin off called Gateway Media located in Clayton. They own several "click bait" sites such as Swifty, BrainJet, Minq, and OOla. 2014 revenue was 45 Million and they're targeting $60 million for 2015 with the new additions of former Charter CFO Jeff Sanders and former RFT Editor in Chief Chad Garrison. They currently have 40 employees.

No official article, however Charter has been rapidly expanding its Information Technology department here in Saint Louis with many new hires. They have also recently moved many IT functions out of the Des Peres location to Riverport.

Would this legislation as reported on by the Biz Journals be considered a day late and dollar short? As far as big companies making big investments I believe most companies from Amazon to Apple to Google, etc have made their big data center expansions already in such states as North Carolina, Iowa and Arizona. Or will this help to smaller projects off the ground. I was pleasantly surprised that this quietly made it to Gov Nixon. I believe past attempts to provide incentives got shot down whenever tax credit reform was discussed or pushed.

Expansion incentives: Data center legislation heads to Nixon’s desk

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... heads.html

The bill — Senate Bill 149 — would allow new or expanding data center operators avoid sales and use taxes on the purchase of equipment and materials. It now awaits Gov. Jay Nixon’s signature to become law

I'm confused by his comments, On one hand he makes it sound like no one wants to give up their short drive home or maybe it is his way of saying that the execs don't want the 1% earnings tax out of their paycheck or WWT isn't willing to make up the difference. On the other hand, is he essentially saying that a big chunk of the company has to pick up and move across the metro area if they pick Edwardsville! Why not meet halfway in the middle, like CORTEX.

Also, completely confused by the statements that they are still open but will decide in 30 days. They have been doing their homework by this time if a decision is made in 30 days.

As far a Silicon Valley feel. I don't know what that evens means. Yes, understand Twitter, Square, Salesforces in Bay Area have gone urban. However, Apple, Facebook and Google are scooping up suburban office parks and building out these huge suburban campuses. At the same time, none of them want to go across to the Bay because it is not trendy enough or something. Another way to put, you got yourself a mini Silicon Valley situation already happening with WWT. The problem is that they want to be more like Apple, Facebook and Googles of the world instead of Saleforce of the world (who will occupy a signature tower at Transbay Center - Think WWT One Center)

blzhrpmd2 wrote:Out of curiosity, what would hypothetical incentives look like to lure this company downtown vs. something like the public money potentially being offered for the new stadium? I realize that it's a totally different scenario but I am trying to better understand corporate incentives offered from the city and how they work. The comparison comes to mind because I feel the obvious enthusiasm for the good reputation that would be gained for downtown expressed in the above comments is how supporters of the stadium/Rams retention efforts feel about incentives for them to stay.

in terms of economic return i don't think there's any comparison between WWT employing several thousand employees downtown versus probably a few hundred employees at a new Ram's stadium, not to mention that the WWT employees would be downtown every day. and i'm guessing the average salary of a WWT employee would be substantially higher than that of a stadium employee. the funny part is that the state would never get behind an effort to lure a private company downtown, but everybody and their grandmother rallies to build a stadium for a privately-owned football team.

^ I wonder what and if there is any binding language when the County and City combined their respective development agency? Anyone with good understanding of the combined economic development agency? In other words, the development agency puts together an incentive package based on WWT's stated preference of where it wants to be in and the respective political entities are bound to that instead of being able to offer unilateral packages. Assume so, because what would be the point of combining the economic development agencies in the first point.
.
Still disappointing either way that WWT, as it seems at this point is and like many of the area's recent expansions, preferred plants revolve around the desire for another low rise campus instead of a signature tower or even putting people back into One Center. Maybe will be proved wrong in 30 days.

urban_dilettante wrote:
in terms of economic return i don't think there's any comparison between WWT employing several thousand employees downtown versus probably a few hundred employees at a new Ram's stadium, not to mention that the WWT employees would be downtown every day. and i'm guessing the average salary of a WWT employee would be substantially higher than that of a stadium employee. the funny part is that the state would never get behind an effort to lure a private company downtown, but everybody and their grandmother rallies to build a stadium for a privately-owned football team.

4000 x average salary $65,000= $2.6Million in earnings tax for the city...
Rams team salary is $145M (yes they play half of the road but when they are home the other teams salary is taxed, that doesn't count if there is MLS, other team employees, game day workers ect.

unknown to both is how much of a tax breaks in other areas they would get...tax abatement for property, tifs, ect....so thats really moot

2nd- 4000 people downtown x 252 work days = 1,008,000 cumulative total...will all 4000 eat lunch out? probably not...most wont and WWT probably would have a cafeteria.

Rams 10 games x 64,000= 640,000 + MLS 20 games x 15,000 = 300,000 + 7 other events x 30,000 people average per event = 210,000

640,000+300,000+210,000 = 1 ,150,000 over the course of the year...+ 100,000-200,000 or so that will now be able to use to Dome for conventions because the Rams aren't clogging up the fall schedule..... +$350,000,000 from the state that we wouldnt get otherwise.

ill take the stadium, all day everyday and twice on Sundays...

^ Just a couple quick things.... 1) Unlike the State, the City collects very little earnings tax on the salaries 2) very few of stadium attendees actually support established businesses -- the hit rate is very low -- unless you want to include private parking operators; sure it is good for a few shifts for bartenders and waitresses but that's about it 3) Near Northside stadium does nothing for office occupancy or property taxes whereas 4,000 or so workers would represent nearly a million square feet in positive absorption of office space driving up property values and taxes (See One ATT Center for an example) 4) 4,000 employees would be a boon for downtown establishments and have a high hit rate of patronage, even with a cafeteria. 5) hasan1 tweeted he overheard on a downtown street a child say, "mommy, where are all the people at?"

Until people understand point 5, that we need people activating the streets on weekdays and not just when there is a game or special event we will continue to have a struggling downtown. CBDs need workers and residents as job 1.

To me, the only way for all the energy expended on the stadium effort to truly pay off is if is it tied in with a much more comprehensive development plan like what Cincy is undertaking with the Banks, yet I have not seen a single serious indication that is even under consideration.

Charter Communications to Buy Bright House Networks in $10 Billion Deal
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/01/busin ... .html?_r=0

Figured I would share this as Charter is already aggressively expanding in Saint Louis, as they have already moved a large presence of Information Technology workers to office space in Riverport. Even with the loss of the executive staff moving to Stamford, CT there are still several large departments which are still based within Saint Louis, I think we will continue to see much more growth..... Now if we could only get them to expand their operations downtown or within Cortex for their IT Operations.

dbInSouthCity wrote:

urban_dilettante wrote:
in terms of economic return i don't think there's any comparison between WWT employing several thousand employees downtown versus probably a few hundred employees at a new Ram's stadium, not to mention that the WWT employees would be downtown every day. and i'm guessing the average salary of a WWT employee would be substantially higher than that of a stadium employee. the funny part is that the state would never get behind an effort to lure a private company downtown, but everybody and their grandmother rallies to build a stadium for a privately-owned football team.

4000 x average salary $65,000= $2.6Million in earnings tax for the city...
Rams team salary is $145M (yes they play half of the road but when they are home the other teams salary is taxed, that doesn't count if there is MLS, other team employees, game day workers ect.

unknown to both is how much of a tax breaks in other areas they would get...tax abatement for property, tifs, ect....so thats really moot

2nd- 4000 people downtown x 252 work days = 1,008,000 cumulative total...will all 4000 eat lunch out? probably not...most wont and WWT probably would have a cafeteria.

Rams 10 games x 64,000= 640,000 + MLS 20 games x 15,000 = 300,000 + 7 other events x 30,000 people average per event = 210,000

640,000+300,000+210,000 = 1 ,150,000 over the course of the year...+ 100,000-200,000 or so that will now be able to use to Dome for conventions because the Rams aren't clogging up the fall schedule..... +$350,000,000 from the state that we wouldnt get otherwise.

ill take the stadium, all day everyday and twice on Sundays...

I agree with this. Sure it would be better to have streets filled during the week and not just weekends, but getting rid of the stadium and emptying the streets on weekends will not bring folks during the week. I go to most Rams games, and a lot of people form the county that come to those game see all the progress downtown and come back to eat on Washington street. Just the discussions I overhear walking in -- a lot of those fans seem surprised at downtown progress.

Lots of cities similar to ours have gone to great extremes to keep their teams. The Missouri Economic Development Department has already shown that just income taxes alone from the team and others who earn money from having a team more than pay back the state cost. So it is no wonder other cities try desperately to keep or get a team.

Just like nearly all Rams fans, we eat downtown before the game -- if not in a local establishment, then inside the stadium. Does eating and drinking beer INSIDE the stadium count? That employs a lot of people. Al that income tax money also goes into state and city income and earnings tax money. All that goes away if the team leaves. By the way -- what does the state get from Kroenke taxes for his profits from the Rams. He must have made some money, since the value has more than quadrupled since they moved. Does the state tax that huge pot of TV money Kroenke gets?

I know there are studies that say a stadium is not an economic engine. Tell Oklahoma City that -- they decided to build a 21,000 seat arena only about 15 years after they built, and now abandoned a 13,000 seat arena right next door, which seemed more appropriate for a city their size back then. With the new arena, the OKC Thunder moved in and the rest is history. Now all mid-size cities are doing the same thing. Omaha, Tulsa, Louisville, etc. I'm guessing all of those cities may try the same thing with a football stadium very soon to try to lure the NFL. And they will do it without getting $450M gift from the NFL and owner. They do see getting major league teams as worth the cost, and Oklahoma City is the poster child showing they are right. But for us, it doesn't even have to be an economic engine -- we break even or better if it does nothing more than maintain what we already have. But I believe it will do better than break-even.

I thought I would throw this out there in regards to the city earnings tax. I spent a week this past summer shadowing Mr. Mckee, and ended up spending a fair amount of time with Dick Fleming and he told me that in his time working at attracting new business ton the city only 1 firm raised a red flag at the 1% earnings tax.

dbInSouthCity wrote:

urban_dilettante wrote:
in terms of economic return i don't think there's any comparison between WWT employing several thousand employees downtown versus probably a few hundred employees at a new Ram's stadium, not to mention that the WWT employees would be downtown every day. and i'm guessing the average salary of a WWT employee would be substantially higher than that of a stadium employee. the funny part is that the state would never get behind an effort to lure a private company downtown, but everybody and their grandmother rallies to build a stadium for a privately-owned football team.

4000 x average salary $65,000= $2.6Million in earnings tax for the city...
Rams team salary is $145M (yes they play half of the road but when they are home the other teams salary is taxed, that doesn't count if there is MLS, other team employees, game day workers ect.

unknown to both is how much of a tax breaks in other areas they would get...tax abatement for property, tifs, ect....so thats really moot

2nd- 4000 people downtown x 252 work days = 1,008,000 cumulative total...will all 4000 eat lunch out? probably not...most wont and WWT probably would have a cafeteria.

Rams 10 games x 64,000= 640,000 + MLS 20 games x 15,000 = 300,000 + 7 other events x 30,000 people average per event = 210,000

640,000+300,000+210,000 = 1 ,150,000 over the course of the year...+ 100,000-200,000 or so that will now be able to use to Dome for conventions because the Rams aren't clogging up the fall schedule..... +$350,000,000 from the state that we wouldnt get otherwise.

ill take the stadium, all day everyday and twice on Sundays...

DBinSouthCity, I think you posted some good thought out stats but there is a multiplier effect that 4000 new jobs would have on downtown, that a new football stadium wouldn’t. More businesses would open, more people would be looking to live downtown, more need for services like a drug store and shopping, the sidewalks would be more active making it safer, would be a friendlier place to visit, and may cause a few other companies to make the move as well.

I think the North Riverfront will eventually develop without the new stadium. The main positive of building the new stadium is that the dome will be free for conventions.

dbInSouthCity wrote:2nd- 4000 people downtown x 252 work days = 1,008,000 cumulative total...will all 4000 eat lunch out? probably not...most wont and WWT probably would have a cafeteria.

Rams 10 games x 64,000= 640,000 + MLS 20 games x 15,000 = 300,000 + 7 other events x 30,000 people average per event = 210,000

640,000+300,000+210,000 = 1 ,150,000 over the course of the year...+ 100,000-200,000 or so that will now be able to use to Dome for conventions because the Rams aren't clogging up the fall schedule..... +$350,000,000 from the state that we wouldnt get otherwise.

you're making a ton of assumptions here: 64,000 at every game? an MLS team? 4000 WWT employees "probably" won't eat lunch out every day but all the stadium attendees will eat out? and that doesn't even take into account those employees that would choose to live downtown and pay property taxes. and we should dispense with the "if the the new stadium gets built the dome will be free for conventions" line because that'll happen even if the stadium isn't built and the Rams leave. i also don't buy into the "well if we don't build the stadium we won't get $350 million" reasoning. it's not like that $350 millions is gonna go toward anything important like non-sports-related infrastructure. And, again, the 30-year MO Eco. Devo. projections for the new stadium are pathetic, particularly given that precedent indicates the stadium won't even be in use for 30 years. Meanwhile, we get another permanently-dead chunk of downtown/riverfront.

i suppose it's possible that income taxes collected from the Rams could exceed that of 4000 middle-class (on average) employees since football players are paid far more than they're worth. but as others have noted, having WWT downtown would do far more to attract further investment than a peripheral Rams stadium which, as we've seen over the last 20 years, does nothing.

^ At this point the city might very well lose out on a NFL team (doesn't help that Gov. Nixon is making a political bet that the county won't be supportive in a stadium deal) and NGA, 3,000 employees!!, let alone the fact that WWT has not expressed any desire to be in the city from what I read. At this point, I think it is very clear what the city needs to do. Try everything it can to keep both NFL and NGA and hope that Nixon and Dave Peacock continue the good fight for stadium IMO.
.
Could be that Gov Nixon, County Exec and Mayor Slay wake up one day with NFL in LA, NGA and WWT in Metro East and no one to blame but themselves